Further from that here is a quote from a local to Nepal helicopter training company:

WHAT A STEAMING PILE OF SELF INTERESTED BOLLARDS! Sorry for the rant but what the hell does he think the RAF has been doing with the Chinook in Afghanistan???!!! They were the most suited helicopters to operations in the mountains after the Mi17 so I don’t quite see how he draws that conclusion beyond self interest. The Osprey has still done sterling work in Nepal over the last week or so even with restrictions.

“useless in the Himalayas” – bollards indeed.

The Gnat was more of a success than people realise. OK so India only received a few from the UK but they were impressed enough by them that theybuilt them under licence as the Hindustan Aircraft Industries (HAL) Ajeet.

It was also successful in combat with the IAF too.

Has the USAF ordered this radar for the B-1B? How long will they continue to operate the B-1B?

Edit: just looked further into the article:

The development of SABR-GS took place under a $21 million risk reduction contract awarded in 2011 by the Air Force B-1 Systems Program Office. Northrop Grumman has demonstrated in flight, the advanced B-1 AESA and advanced sensor and fusion processing, readying the radar for the engineering, manufacturing and development phase.

It may not be quite as bad as it first appears if these are supposed to be the equivalent of say, the YF-22 or F-22 and the X-35 not F-35.

Or somewhere in between.

But yes, applying concurrent practices and assuming these are early edition service aircraft rather than prototypes, the program is at a snail’s pace.

Although the Russians may have seen just how much trouble concurrency caused with F-35 and are avoiding it.

Historically all Soviet and Russian aircraft development programmes continued at a ‘snail’s pace’. Just look at the painfully slow development and entry into service of the Su-27 and the Il-86 airliner.

The F-35, for all its problems, seems to be running smoother than the Sukhoi T-50.

These composite bodies are going to make crash investigation forensics nearly impossible. Almost nothing left.

In what way? Surely the most important source of post-crash data is from the cockpit and fright-data recorders these days?

USAF is going to deactivate F-16 squadrons instead of A-10 squadrons. That will free up manpower for F-35 and funding for A-10.

Seriously, they’re going to get rid of some F-16s – which is an even more useful combat aircraft, maybe even a more useful CAS aircraft than the A-10 – in order to save A-10? Doesn’t sound very sensible to me…

Hmm, I got no idea but you surely do.. so tell me, what do they know?

Why should I know, I didn’t criticise the Slovaks’ procurement decision, you did. If you have got ‘no idea’ why comment?

It clearly does and makes your theory about invulnerability completely invalid.
More evidence is hardly required as you, too, have provided none, in the first place.

No SR-71 has ever been shot down by a MiG-25/31, and until such an event occurs the onus is on you to provide evidence that the MiG can indeed shoot down the Lockheed.

Remarkable claims always call for remarkable evidence.

Intruders violating their airspace. That was, finally, the primary mission of the MiG-31..

Since when was the Soviet air defence system a deterrence to USAF B-52, B-2, B1B – as and when the appropriate time and circumstances should come?

All MiG-25s were able to fly at M2.8. Painting an Iraqi flag on them does not make them any less capable.

The potential maximum dash speed – not its cruise speed like the 3.2 Mach of the SR-71

They were not rejected by the opposing side. That is quite a lot more credible than a kill claim for which the opponent does not miss any aircraft.

BTW, I’m not claiming the Iranian AF did shoot down the MiG-25 (but the USAF did). I just want to know why the SR-71 is so vulnerable to intercept by MiG, while the MiG-25RB can safely escape F-14A.