Can’t see why not, they outsource a lot of jobs already in the forces already!
I should know, I work for one of the companies that is contracted to the Army Air Corps.
Well it sounds like Blackwater might have some labor going cheap soon!:D
The worrisome part about giving up a stand alone military capability is that it forever consigns Brit forces to be camp followers to US or French military leadership. Sad. Very sad.
French? You are aware that the UK spends more on defence than France arnt you?:confused:
I think its good that the religious aspect of the calendar is taken away, as there is unlikely any change for getting international calendar that isent based on lifeline of some fairytale figure.
world needs to get rid of all religions and all steps like these are welcome for the future;)
Go an tell that to Al Qaeda, im sure they will appreciate it, or Iran, or Saudi Arabia.:rolleyes:
I think its good that the religious aspect of the calendar is taken away, as there is unlikely any change for getting international calendar that isent based on lifeline of some fairytale figure.
world needs to get rid of all religions and all steps like these are welcome for the future;)
Go an tell that to Al Qaeda, im sure they will appreciate it, or Iran, or Saudi Arabia.:rolleyes:
The important part of the header is about wether people believe in the armed forces of this country.
When people hear that they are being sent to fight in (yet) another war do people actually believe they are going to make a difference?
Or do they think lack of proper equipment and a lack of troop numbers combined with possible morale problems due to poor kit and high death rates are seriously affecting how our troops are performing?
Its a vicious triangle, all the factors are linked. For instance, the shrinking of the armed forces means less people in them which in turn means less people connected to them or knowing people in them, the result is less people have an understanding of them. The more distant they are from the voting public the harder it is to press for the necessary funding. The as funding is reduced their ability to perform the missions on which they are sent. The biggest error this government has made is trying to keep a small military with little funding, whilst sending it on big military missions, you cant have both ways as is now being discovered, unfortunately there is not the motivation to solve the problem, hence why the rather insulting council tax rebates are going to come out of the existing MoD budget!
Nobody talked about the following, though i think it’s interesting. According to the latest Air & Cosmos, the new M88 ECO currently being “benchmarked” will finish these tests later this year. Results may help deciding whether it will equip (french) Rafale or not.
The M88 ECO which benefits from the M88-3 is intended to demonstrate the ability to :
-produce 60/90kN thrust, with still a longer life than the M88-2,
-have a twice as long life as the M88-2 if set with the same settings (50/75kN).😉
Great news, thrust is certainly an area where the Rafale can grow and hopefully it will enable the type to make better use of its excellent load carrying configuration.
Deterrent.
To deter what?:confused: Certainly I think the Tu-160 could be turned into an anti terrorist bomber kind of like the B-2 has, but all this dettering the west cr*p is just ego. no body is planning on invading or nuking Russia.
Its been that way for a while. And yes it is absurd, if you are offended by a marking of time you need to ask yourself serious questions about your life. Especially in a world where the Christian calender has become the internationally accepted one. But hey we must avoid, at all costs, upsetting the people who despise every sing one of our values and thus feel the need to randomly blow us up.:mad:
Its been that way for a while. And yes it is absurd, if you are offended by a marking of time you need to ask yourself serious questions about your life. Especially in a world where the Christian calender has become the internationally accepted one. But hey we must avoid, at all costs, upsetting the people who despise every sing one of our values and thus feel the need to randomly blow us up.:mad:
………….And I forgot to mention FRES :rolleyes:
At least that is now apparently ahead of schedule. Haven’t heard about the budget though
What is rather amusing is that the Boxer program, from which the UK withdrew all those years ago, is now a contender for FRES.:D
To me it looked more like SLL was saying that:
– Dassault can’t design planes because they cant’ even make a propre retractable probe.
– The Rafale has the RCS of a B52 because of said probe…
Funny becouse I never said any of that.:rolleyes: Go back and read my posts, I never said that Dassault cant design a retractable probe and I never said anything about the RCS.:rolleyes:
The Sealord said
So true. You could make the case that the army alone is 20-25,000 men short of what is really needed. That will cost not far off a billion a year to start with 😮
In addition to the items listed by Sealord and Swerve for immediate procurement, you might also want to add;
MARS & its various parts
The Royal Marines really need an Amphibious Fighting Vehicle like the USMC for use with the improved Amphib capability
FSC (big money)
A proper Land attack derivative of Type 45 to assist Amphib capability
Housing improvements for all services
Medical improvement all services including battlefield
Decent pay rise for entry level soldiers
I still think we need a proper ground attack aircraft similar to the A-10.It all costs money that no-one wants to cough up though
For the life of my I cant remember the details but I am sure that there was a recent government report that stated that the Army needed to be 130,000 strong, il have a look and see if I can find the details.
Simply talking from the perspective of the ghan I know that much more mobile firepower would be greatly appreciated, (http://www.baesystems.com/ProductsServices/l_and_a_ls_m777_portee_system.html) to support operations there. Indeed mobile battle groups based around Supacats would be highly useful in that scenario. I would certainly agree with the dedicated attack aircraft point, the CAS does look like an area where improvement could be made.
Christ who yanked your chain….?
……………these are not my words they are Micks so just settle down a bit and keep a lid on those accusations.
You are right about Russia are you? How do you come to that conclusion? Do you use an all seeing eye? A chrystal ball? An ancient forgotten oracle? Don’t be daft you can’t make sweeping statements like that you have no idea wether you are right or not. They don’t need the same size population as Europe all they need is a single integrated command and control structure which Europe doesn’t have, despite NATO. If a war started tomorrow half of Europe would would be trying to run things ‘their way’, not knowing that the other half would be individually trying to discuss surrender terms with the enemy.
I’m not up for a fight I’m up for a discussion. You try to keep the BS to a minimum and I’ll try to do the same otherwise we’ll be here just promoting ill feeling whilst trying to argue (mostly) the same point. Which would be just silly. 🙂
You yanked my chain and with that post you are continuing the theme. Go google ‘Russia demographic crisis’. Then go and do in depth research into the state of the Russian economy, focus on the over reliance on the energy markets, at the same time look at the levels of defence expenditure of Russia and Europe and European countries, then come back here and take back your sarcasm and comments about BS.
[QUOTE=rayrubik;1168882]
That is exactly the point I am making..that the preference has shifted from fixed ones to retractable ones.There should be some advantages after all fixed probes are simple to design,cheap,less maintainance etc.
And I am not saying Dassault has done a grave crime by going for a fixed probe.It will be like why does dassault design deltas.The aim was to determine if possible the reason why Dassault went for a fixed probe.And a lot of probable reasons have come up.
SLL is not saying they should design a retractable one.He was just saying which were the more probable reason according to his opinion and which of the reasons werent likely.We all have been doing the same.Only if someone from Dassault comes here and says explicitly the reason then the actual answer can be known.
‘Nuff said.No more wasting words/time on this trivial subject.
That sums it up perfectly.
Anyway, refueling probes are such a trivial thing really, it is pathetic that some people can not understand that facing a simple problem
(aerial refueling) with several solutions, different Air Forces will adopt different solutions…………… :.ohmygod:
Coming from someone who has yet to explain his point in anyway shape or form that post just further undermines your position here. Rayrubik points out very well that most modern aircraft now have retractable probes, without incident, Rafale does not. All you have given so far is the ridiculous ‘simplicity’ excuse.