What relevance does the pilot of the aircraft have to whether you buy an aircraft or not?

I haven’t the foggiest idea mate you brought it up so you tell me. Are you trying to say you did not bring it up? Okay so, once again, what was this in aid of?

You said:

…..but I am talking about competant Russian pilots who are professional even if they don’t get the hours in the air they need.

So once again I ask you Garry just what does the pilot have to do with this? If you don’t want to talk about the pilot the trick is not to talk about the pilot. You talked about the pilot I just joined in.

I asked you why you wanted to talk about weapons and you relpied:

Because the weapons are part of the aircraft. The aircraft is a fighting tool… its gun and weapons are what it uses it fight with.

So then I come back to the above statement once again. You either do want to talk about things related to the aircraft or you don’t. If you don’t then do not start an argument/conversation or whatever you want to call it about something completely different and expect me to understand your criteria for this debate.

If you want to make up the rules go ahead but don’t change them on the fly I’m hardly likely to come around to your way of thinking if you are intransigent and unreasonable.

A good example is that on paper a SHs new AESA radar looks comparable to the radar fitted to the F-14. Of course without the missiles to match the range performance and considering both will be operating in an area with Hawkeye surveillance then the reality is the radar range difference is less important than the missile range performance. A third world country can buy missile performance but you can’t buy pilot quality except by hiring mercs. In fact the missiles and weapons often come with the plane when you buy it.

Here we go again. Surveilance aircraft, solid state radars, F14 Tomcats, third world countries and mercenaries. Yet if anybody else changes the subject its “not about ‘that’ its about the aircraft”. Get a grip man.

“……….and then you tell me I can’t make my own examples.”

Where did I say that?

You said it when you pointed out it was about the aircraft and not the pilot or anything else.

(ask the Argentinians)

Sorry I’m obviously missing the point again. Ask the Argentinians what exactly?

but as long as you don’t go to war with anyone more important to the US than you you should be well looked after.)

Ah yes I see. You really do have an attitude problem. You couldn’t see sense or reason it smacked you in the face. The USA did not spring to Argentinas defence you arrogant insulting idiot because they though Britain was more important. They didn’t spring to Argentina’s defence because the Argentinians had broken international law and were being intransigent, unreasonable and downright arrogant about it. Nobody in the Junta could agree on a course of action and nobody had any overall jurisdiction or even authority to make a definitive agreement. Its not rocket science its more like trying to talk reasonably with you. You would have fitted in well with the Argentine Junta of the day.

:rolleyes:

I wonder if they will consider, on the quiet, stripping out the Blue Vixens fron the FA2 and fitting them to the GR9. Probably not but look at the work they did on the Jaguar and Tornado ADV fleet. That was on the quiet and nobody knew about it until the work was almost complete. I know its still on going and more ground attack capabilities have been mooted for the ADV. Quiet finance I call it. Diverting funds where the forces think they need them most is a nice concept. Nobody knows better what the forces need than the forces themselves.

I’ll tell you what angers me most about this bloody 2003 white paper. Its the cynical way that the service cheifs have been ordered to say openly that this is exactly what they wanted all along. That is just sick in my book. Does the MoD really expect the defence community to beleive that the service cheifs actually WANTED a reduction in manpower? Especially at a time when they are already stretched to the absolut limit?

It politicians thats the problem. Defence is an easy target for the treasury. I heard a “defence expert” on the radio this morning talking to John Humphries (yes I listen to Radio 4). He dismissed the Typhoon as an obsolete cold war dinosaur. He was obviously in the Sue Willets School of Defence Studies. The Tories wouldn’t be any better and the Lib Dems would be a whole lot worse. I mean the RAF has 350 combat aircraft on the front line with perhaps another 200 in second line reserve. Just how many do these incompetent money grabbers intend to cut? It makes me want to puke I’ve been angry all day.

Well I suppose the Labour Party will just have to do without the votes of the entire defence establishment but seeing as there soon won’t be a defence establishment I don’r suppose they care. Its a bad bit of maths though because they are not going to get any votes from a much enlarged dole cue either are they?:mad: 😮 :rolleyes:

You are all quite quite mad its true. Me? The only sane one here I expect.

“A wandering minstrel I”

“Pting”

and Wibble, oh yes indeedy, pass the gingham dress please.

😀

Just an idea.

Not close enough mate.:)

Which direction is this thread heading to???

I haven’t the first idea mate I’m just along for the ride.:D

for them the irish ares called “celts”, germans “krauts”, spanish “iberian” dutch “batavians”, french “galls” americans “yankies dull”, aussies “convicts” etc etc…

Hold on hold on. Off subject for a moment I was born in England mate and I call myself a Celt so don’t knock it.

He is using the same logo under his name. I reckon its the same bloke and he wants to join the debate properly in which case we owe it to him to take him more seriously in future. I suppose we will have to wait and see.:)