I would guess that it’s the Chinese copy of the Russian AA-2 Atoll, which is itself a copy of the AIM-9.

Would think so…. PL-2 perhaps?

Mark

Thud in Europe

So when was the last Thud deployement to Europe???

A guess.. early 80s to Aalborg from Hill??

Mark

Seen info on some of these..

http://a-37.org/VnafNet2.htm

http://vnaf.net/captured/cap8.html

http://www.tighar.org/TTracks/11_4/VNMuseum.html

Don’t know how good this guys info is on topic… he says 95

http://www.aviationmuseum.com.au/aircraft/Dragonfly.cfm

Mark

Just need a faster boat 🙂

Mark

Wonder what interest (or lack thereof) the US Navy might have in such a platform (FB-22)???

Lot’s of pros/cons… Greater range/payload…. Higher cost (to start — then add the Navy “peculiars” to the bill).

Hey, if the USAF can be ‘looking’ at STOVL JSF then ….

Mark

ps Probably NOT!!!

While I was looking at the sand… 🙂

Did note that there are what appears to be aircraft jack stands (I count three of them) in the picture.

Maybe a ‘not so serviceable’ aircraft used for decoy???

Mark

wrt General Hagee

“The Stovl version is going to be important,” Hagee said. “Look at what the [AV-8B] Harriers did in Operation Iraqi Freedom. We had five squadrons in the Gulf during major combat operations. They flew 45% of the tactical air sorties that were flown in support of the Marine division….”

Well that’s no surprise…. USMC Harriers flying in suport of USMC Division. I’m surprised it’s not more than 45% given USMC’s track record of being Marine Corps ‘centric’ when it comes to air support.

That’s the way they do business, and fully justified to work with a ‘known entity’ than with some USAF pilot who may not be as ‘proficient’ in CAS. The services still need to improve their ‘jointness’…. more CAS flown during training with USAF supporting Marine Corps ground assets, and “oh my gosh”, Harrier’s supporting US Army (yikes). But the USMC has this ‘thing’ about being self-sufficient (MEFs). Not saying they don’t subscribe to the jointness ‘philosophy’, but….

“… They were able to go into forward arming and refueling points–small spots in the road in the desert–rearm and refuel and go back up and provide close air support to those troops. That allows you to generate a lot more sorties. …”

If they did, it’s not well advertised. And if they did, you can believe it would SURELY be advertised (beyond this quote). If the General said it… so be it.

$$$$$… Trade offs are made on an hourly basis inside the Pentagon wrt funding available and the list of must haves, nice to haves, like to haves, etc etc. Sure, price being no object, only the best, but how do you provide the best given the $$$ in hand???

You’re right, the USAF leadership are the ones to make the case for this…. I’ll be listening

Mark

Originally posted by I.P.Freely
As you said, JSF “on call” is the best scenario, but what if they run out of munitions? Go back to the base?

Actually… Yes (Don’t mean to be a Smart Axx here.) When you’re “Winchester” you go home and someone else comes on station. If the person that built the FRAG is any good, the Air Tasking Order should account for spacing out your resources.

Better solution would be to have a rearming station not too far behind the line. Don’t need to have Tanker loitering around. And last time I checked they can’t re-arm planes in the air.

There will be tankers loitering around for lots of things. This is (IMHO) one of the things that makes the USAF what it is, the ability to put up tankers and hence reap all the benefits that come with them.

Hell take a stretch of Highway and use it at forward airbase, its been done before, and trucks can travel pretty fast on a road.

When you say complexity, what exactly do you mean?

Let’s review:

Bring the gas and weapons to a MOB. Arrange for the trucks/personnel [or if you have the resources not being used for something more useful, intra-theater airlift (e.g. C-130)] to get these to the FOB.

Bring the needed support equipment to load, arm weapons and fuel the aircraft (see same as above for how to get it there)

Bring the personnel to do the above (and the security forces to keep them from getting RPG’d every night).

Bring the food, equipment, personnel to support the above personnel…. They do need to eat, sleep, ‘hit the can’

You get the idea!!!! Why replicate all of this when it is in place at the MOB already??

As far as effectiveness of the Jump jets, you will have to ask the Marines. And I think USAF asked and they got the answers they were looking for.

Effective, yes, but how were they based? How many of the sorties flown by Marines were from a FOB (WHERE STOVL WAS NEEDED TO PERMIT OPERATIONS)?

I will freely admit that I don’t know, but my gut tells me — not many (if any).

Overall percentage of FOB ops where STOVL capability was required?? My guess is ZERO.

My Opinion: the performance/cost/supportability penalty for STOVL is not justified when looking at what the added basing ‘options’ provide.

FWIW

Mark