And to add to benroetig’s point of view, you will need a whole slew
of proprietary satellites ( or bandwidth from commercial ones in
serious amount, i.e. £/$ ) for a full-UCAV force.
If we added JTACs to our way of delivering AtG armament,
there is no way we would cut the human from the bomber
UCAV, Either a link has to be joining the drone to a “pilot”
in Palmsdale, Marham or Mont-de-Marsan or a JTAC in contact/control.
Although rarely discussed, this problematic point is even plaguing
the U.S. as we write and future needs have not been adressed yet!
Good day all, Tay.
@ Sanem
I’m not sure that Taranis coop makes sense, ( nEUROn ? ).
However, the Mantis is quite the buzz in French mili affairs
when expounding on Franco-British developments.
In a nutshell, we have an upcoming choice between :
-More Harfang, SIDM based on the IAI Heron
-Predator/Reaper bought off the shelf to fill a gap;
-Patroller from Sagem:
-Talarion with all its smell of big, clumsy euro-program
-Mantis in a joint venture between Dassault and BAE.
Why not the Mantis indeed, seeing it just made capabilities
demonstrations and is to be fully developed yet?
What’s more, France seems to be thinking seriously thinking
about arming its UAV/UCAVs, a rather new vision and one
that brings us closer.
Here’s something I posted on another thread of this good forum :
I would like to remind Arrows of a missing option in his proposal,
namely cooperation/joint venture!
Bad examples of such collaborative efforts abound, agreed but…
one of your examples of success is Franco-British, the Lynx, that is!Let’s picture a proper associative process to be built on the basis of
present furthering of entente so often brought forth by the papers.A- What either can or want to build alone should be excluded from
even basic consideration. [ Thinktanks can muse and wishwash all
they want but real planning shouldn’t. ]B- No overseers playing amateur cooks during cooking. [ No f.ck.ng
Nahema/Occar or such mumbo jumbo; award contracts to main and
secondary firms of repute and let them do their darn jobs, for Pete’s
sake. ]C- There are at the very least three possible ways of efficiently main-
taining cooperation and they should be used in conjunction for best
results.
1- Creative endeavours where top companies go for broke
trying to create the best possible, sharing knowledge along the way,
Concorde comes to mind!
2- Main to second expertise downfall [ generally to produce a
“classic” weapon at lower cost ].
3- Trading programs for lower costs throughout the service life
of the equipment where you buy my big machine gun and I procure your
snappy night goggles to my troops.
Just a starter, feel free to expand on any perceived advantage
or disadvantage.
I am not sure that my sig is quite big enough for some :
To all my British friends, whenever there is a serious thread about this matter,
like some posts here show to be feasible, I’ll join with glee.:D
Thanks to those trying to maintain sanity, Tay.
P.S, @ Snow monkey, i really doubt that nukes sharing would be easy.
News are in France that we might reconfigure some SNLE/SSBN missiles
for non-nuclear heads. I also got whiffs of doctrine inclusion of “tactical”
nuke strikes still being possible although most probably by way of Rafale B.
@ ALL : I would also extend a call for infomation on proper joint deployment
of our carriers if it happens. There are nuke missiles on the CDG ( Yes, yes, I
understand that some of you consider those land-based, snif, sad! ) and the
legal aspects of this might be probitive to hasssle=free mili use.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Helice_HS_54H60-77.JPG
An old one like this?
Thanks, Spitfire9, I wasn’t up to date on that; I’ll check.
Which only points to the F-18 or possibly Gripen then.
Good day all, Tay.
And in order to give numerical credence to Good Vibs’ post,
here are the culprits heights with some neighbors’ ones too
for proper comparison :
UH-60 : 4.4
MI-17 : 4.76
Puma : 4.92
Dauphin : 4.06 but smaller, great for small frigate use
MI-38 : 5.13
NH-90 : 5.23
Chinook : 5.77
Merlin : 6.6, great balls of fire! ( or By Jove if you prefer )
Having them side by side makes it easier.
Good day all, Tay.
^^^^ Interesting.
Because in Loke’s excerpt, there was this sentence :
Of course it would be useful if the vendor selected for the M-MRCA also gives assistance in incorporating the necessary improvements in the LCA to improve upon it.
So that since, if i’m not mistaken, Eurojet is up front for the TEJAS’
engine design/prod completion, they would also get an edge in MMRCA
as was also notable here :
http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/eurojet-pips-ge-in-lca-engine-bid/408579/
in this quote, for instance :
At stake here is far more than a few hundred million dollars. Industry experts say India’s choice of engine for the Tejas would significantly shape the choice of a medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA), an $11-billion contract for which the Indian Air Force is evaluating six fighters. Of these, the Eurofighter has twin EJ-200 engines, while GE F-414 engines power the US-built F/A-18 and Sweden’s Gripen NG fighters.
At the very least, winning the MMRCA, would allow the Typhoon to
finally fly skies that are proper grounds for its name original owner.
;):rolleyes::cool:
Good day all, Tay.
Read again, press, it was a tongue in cheek statement from
your resident jokester, A.K.A. yours truly.;)
Thanks for answering/correcting me in any case.
Good night all, Tay.
BTW, MSphere, would that be a Tibetan Mi-17 by any chance?
I am just guessing ’cause they seem to have forgotten a
praying monk on the ramp.
Then again it’s rather far so it could be an Indian yogi too.
:rolleyes:
OK, so the markings are Iraki, doesn’t mean a thing, LOL.
Good day all, Tay.
not an easy search but here you go :
a comparison sim 
and the real things http://www.defence.pk/gallery/data/597/ArmyHelicopterMI-1717.jpg
in Pakistan but with a heat blur on your background Mi. [ Click to supersize of course. ]
In the short term, MSphere has it licked, i believe!
Thnx for the challenge, mate.
Also think of noting any and all markings or inscriptions found on
your propeller and adding them to your post.
You’d be surprised how many old databases from all sorts of firms
carry infos even about discontinued product lines.
Precise location of plant even without your father’s name could help too.
As an example, Caribous built by DeHavilland Canada had propellers made
in Connecticut by Hamilton Standard named 43D50 and if that was it, it
would be found here : http://www.notplanejane.com/hamiltonstd.htm
Good day all, Tay.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Already is,:D since november 2009 in that desert.
All my sympathy to the British military.:(
As happen often, the worst dangers to armed forces
stem from their government rather than the enemy.:mad:
At least, i now understand Obama/America’s reaction earlier.
Heartfelt grief to all British mates here, ppp in particular.
Very nice pics; thanks mate.
Those that show tigers and non-tigers are particularly swell, like that last one with the Tornado.:)