You can never be too careful with them Peterhead fishermen, and surely the whole point of HMS Clyde is to single handedly fight off any possible Argentine aggression? 😀 :diablo:
Good fun though :diablo:
No, you prove to me a dirigible cannot fly at supersonic speeds? Indeed how do you know no dirigible ever achieved supersonic speeds? Everybody knows the dirigible is a shape of extraordinary dynamic efficiency and fabric skin is better than stressed skin metal or composites, therefore it is my opinion that a dirigible broke the sound barrier but a conspiracy of silence has surrounded the event ever since.
How do you know they can’t? Dirigibles hail from a more civilised age of taste and discerning travellers where quality was valued more than speed. However, I’ve no doubt we’d see dirigible SST’s if that’s what people wanted.
Only second biggest? Who is biggest? Does this add more proof to the fact America is the world leader in weapons technology?
Pah, hot air balloons could take off vertically long before the Harrier, so could dirigibles and helicopters :diablo: There hasn’t been any real aircraft since some looney decided to change from fabric or corrugated sheet to stressed skin, that was the beginin of the end for true aircraft.
kind od rewards that no one are ready to accept, exepted no chance relic as eurofighter!
Rafale will get real clients that paye and not be payed to get a deal!
Right and we all know France never uses political pressure and bribes to get orders :rolleyes:
Why do Rafale fans always claim the Rafale is some sort of super plane better than any other lesser machines like the Typhoon, Gripen, F16 etc., but when the F35 or F22 is mentioned all of a sudden better performance is meaningless? :confused:
Gotta say, I really question the wisdom of arming the Saudi’s up with such equipment. I guess the only positive point is that without the foreign ground crew and pilots they’d be useless anyway, and they’ll do a quick bolt if/when the Saudi royal family falls in a revolution.
They’ve all got wings and engines, so where is the real innovation? :confused: And don’t say jet engine, old Charlie Parsons knew about bolting a rotary compressor on the end of a turbine in the 19th. century :diablo:
I can’t understand how anybody could seriously think any of these nicer than a Farman F222 or TB-3 😡 Since there hasn’t been any real innovation in aviation since 1937 nothing built after that date qualifies as both beautiful and innovative.
Well, I have to admit I was saddened to realise the River class OPV’s were delivered without a 96 cell Mk.41 VLS, Goalkeeper CIWS, ASW torpedo tubes, a medium callibre gun and Tomahawk missiles, I’m really worried that these dreadful defficiencies will limit their suitability for fisheries protection and Police duties 😀 :diablo:
Most beautiful bomber of all time is the Farmann F222 followed by the Tupolev TB-3 and Vickers Wellington. Best looking fighter is the Blackburn Roc, followed by the Brewster Buffalo and Commonwealth Boomerang. There hasn’t been a good looking aircraft built since 1953 so nothing since then is beautiful.
Given the ever rising costs of high end warships and a defence budget that is nowhere near keeping pace with the price inflation of major aquisition programs then some sort of high/low mix is inevitable if the RN wants to maintain a decent number of hulls in service. Be interesting to see how they approach the T23 replacement as they’re already talking about a much reduced number of high spec figates/destroyers along with a class of corvettes/large OPV’s to maintain hull numbers.
Welcome to planet Euro joint venture! 😀
So far the Meteor test program is basically all around the JAS39 as the four EF members have not provided the funds to progress integrating the Meteor, apparentley everybody apart from politicians and bean counters is royally pissed about it.