why would Australia invest in any military program with a potential future enemy? The best option was F-22, second best F-35. we’re getting F-35, thats it

Australia would be better served by doubling the Super Hornet, KC-30 and C-17 acquisitions, scrapping MRH-90s and buying more CH-47Fs and buy new/ upgrade S-70As….with some dedicated pave hawks for 171 sqn…

Why should the mods do anything about this page? Really? This is about the future of the Red Arrows…. which if you look at it objectively, is coming to a head soon, either through funding or the need to re-equip…. I dont see anyone insulting the pilot that died…. So if a soldier dies, in combat, everyone should stop talking about soldiers, and the future of their deployment? If you find it distasteful as such hardcore fans of the team, maybe you should just not look at or participate in this thread anymore… and let the people with ideas or opinions discuss the subject… just because you dont like the thread, doesnt mean others cant.

I’m sorry, but how are they a billboard for hawk sales? how many hawk sales have there been recently…. were the Red Arrows responsible for Indias order… I doubt it….

But I do believe they are valuable…. don’t get me wrong!

You know its funny how the PKK is listed as a “terrorist” group, just because they want independance.

A few years ago we were all lamenting “OH THE POOR KURDS!!!” when they were supposedly gassed by Saddam (When Turkey was the more likely suspect)… but now the media keeps telling us they are “Terrorists”.

Everyone is a “terrorist” these days… not a freedom fighter (unless they are propped up by western money and arms).

In WW2 the Germans labelled the French Resistance “terrorists” in propaganda films… Explain how someone in their own country can be a terrorist when fighting an invader?

Or when someone is fighting for independance?

Rightio then….

I will say I’m surprised the focus of the Turkish military is the Kurds at the moment… I would of hoped it would of been Syrian forces attacking its own civilians….

I can see a coversation like this…..

“we have a 2 CF-18s operating with a CC-150, supported by a CP-140 and we have a CC-177 inbound with the support crews”…. and the allied operators going… what you talking about?:D

Actually, while spelt the same, the motto can be interrepretted in several(albeit similar) ways….

And as common sense seems to be breaking out, maybe someone could stop changing the designations of the aircraft…. why C-17A ever became CC-177 is beyond me…..