dark light

Tempest414

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 406 through 420 (of 930 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Nose Art 1970's – Present??? #2283839
    Tempest414
    Participant

    http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/ii120/Duggy009/AandA/F-22flagshipforthe192ndFighterWing.jpg

    is this a air-frame of the 352nd if so its good to see

    in reply to: Nose Art 1970's – Present??? #2283998
    Tempest414
    Participant

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]221530[/ATTACH]

    Royal Navy Lynx’s RIAT 2013

    in reply to: Nose Art 1970's – Present??? #2284002
    Tempest414
    Participant

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]221528[/ATTACH]
    RAF GR-7 2003

    in reply to: Nose Art 1970's – Present??? #2284022
    Tempest414
    Participant

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]221516[/ATTACH]
    [ATTACH=CONFIG]221517[/ATTACH]
    [ATTACH=CONFIG]221518[/ATTACH]
    [ATTACH=CONFIG]221519[/ATTACH]
    [ATTACH=CONFIG]221520[/ATTACH]
    [ATTACH=CONFIG]221521[/ATTACH]

    RAF 1991

    Tempest414
    Participant

    The Argentine navy own the Super Etendard and they have plenty of life in them. The F1M are going to the airforce to replace the MirageIII.

    Now they just need to get their hands on the F-1M simulator to give the pilots as much training with out using up air-frame time.

    in reply to: IRIAF 2020? #2285257
    Tempest414
    Participant

    For me the best place to start now would be jumping in with China on an engine program something in the 20-25000lbs of thrust market which could be built in house this would open the door to other programs such as JF-17 Block 3 – J-31 and in house projects

    It seems to me that China would sell JF-17 to Iran if it could sort out the engine issue

    in reply to: QEC Construction #2037276
    Tempest414
    Participant

    809’s crest is the Naval strike wing rising from the ashes

    in reply to: Should the UK revive its transport industries? #2235336
    Tempest414
    Participant

    Overseas aid is not just giveaway money.

    It is used as a foreign affairs tool of influence, and often comes back in some shape or another.

    On the topic, of course Britain could develop it’s own aircraft, but they would be silly to do so.

    There are big players out there who would have a domestic order for an indigineous programme that would be far larger than the UK’s. This gives economy of scale to export orders, and in that regard, you are playing with the US, Russia, and up and coming China.

    And it’s not just Britain. European countries collaborate because it makes economic sense to do so, as each nation will have a relatively small requirement numberswise, but often the same sort of requirment capability wise.

    Pelambangs clumsy way of putting it does contain a kernel of truth.

    The UK slips down the GDP rankings. This is not abnormal, but rather a function of being a relatively small country and not having all the resources of the Empire anymore to enrich oneself with, or captive markets, as well as the requirements that go with that with regards to airframe numbers

    My point was if the UK wanted to it could and it could afford to do so as over seas aid @ 9.1 billion pounds = 0.57 of national income

    in reply to: Should the UK revive its transport industries? #2235494
    Tempest414
    Participant

    If the UK needed to build a transport on its own it could and it could afford it. In 2010-2011 the UK gave up 7.9 billion pounds per year in over seas aid and in 2012-2013 it was 9.1 billion pounds per year and it set to be 9.1 billion pounds in 2014 which works out to be 43 billion pounds or 68.8 billion dollars and this dose not include the 160 billion pounds the UK has set aside for the next 10 years

    When we put this in to context A400m has cost 20 billion Euros Boeing’s 787 cost’s 32 billion dollars KC-390 has cost 12-14 billion dollars so far

    It is also important to point out that that the UK paid China 2.5 billion pounds and India 1.25 billion pounds in Aid in this time and in the same time these countries have spent billion’s on arms

    in reply to: USAF could scrap KC-10, F-15C, and A-10??? #2236127
    Tempest414
    Participant

    good question and well presented however Europe can not and should not expect the US to make up the short full. A European tanker force is badly needed and all I am saying is if the US drop the KC-10 fleet it could hold the key to a European tanker unit

    in reply to: USAF could scrap KC-10, F-15C, and A-10??? #2236182
    Tempest414
    Participant

    There is only 1 US air refuelling squadron based permanently in Europe – 351st of 100ARW at RAF Middenhall in UK.

    The talk was for new NATO air refuelling squadrons.

    French are going MRTT route.

    that is right 15 air-frames full time in Europe and more deploy as needed from time to time so the removal of these air-frames would need to be covered also most of us know that Europe is short of tankers even with the 351st’s air-frames

    in reply to: QEC Construction #2037364
    Tempest414
    Participant

    that’s the way it goes 809 is a long standing unit from WW2 to the Falklands and as I said back in April after a visit to RAF Northolt there was talk of 809 then but at the time it was to be the second of 3 units the Navy hoped for

    in reply to: QEC Construction #2037374
    Tempest414
    Participant

    So 809 will be the first F-35 unit for the Navy to operate from the QE2 Class along side 617 for the RAF

    in reply to: USAF could scrap KC-10, F-15C, and A-10??? #2237241
    Tempest414
    Participant

    I don’t the Euros will cough up cash for NATO tanker fleet, despite the requirement.

    They’re slashing their militaries wholesale.

    again I agree but one way the US maybe able to push this is by offering the KC-10’s free of charge and stating they are pulling there tanker fleet from Europe to support US and PACAF ops

    and this may happen anyway if they drop KC-10 as they will need adjust there requirements

    in reply to: USAF could scrap KC-10, F-15C, and A-10??? #2238129
    Tempest414
    Participant

    in the long term I would agree however if US KC-10 ops were to stop in mid 2014 and the aircraft moved to Europe a European tanker force could be up and running as soon as the end of 2014 as the KC-10 is already cleared for NATO types and could run until 2025 by which time European air forces would have a clearer idea of operations post F-35 entering service

Viewing 15 posts - 406 through 420 (of 930 total)