dark light

F-111buff26

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 76 through 90 (of 527 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Australia to buy RFA Largs Bay #2003223
    F-111buff26
    Participant

    While the JSS idea presents som interesting capabilities, I dont know if the RAN would be able to sneak the extra sealift capabilites into the AOR replacements…. although it would be nice if they could:D

    in reply to: Australia to buy RFA Largs Bay #2003287
    F-111buff26
    Participant

    Wanshan, while you raise some good points, unfortunately i believe it would be too late to implement such a plan….

    If it was known last year that Ft george was coming on the market…. things may of been different.

    But I honestly believe the best chance the RAN has is acquiring 3 new ships in the 5-10 year time frame.

    in reply to: MORE UK defence cuts??? (Merged) #2336087
    F-111buff26
    Participant

    I’m not saying there wasnt going to be a peace dividend…. all i was saying was that with smarter spending decisions, the 2011 BAF could be more towards 1990 levels…. somewhere in between?

    As for sneering, I refer to a more global sneering at American equipment on this forum by various British and European posters… it was NOT directed directly at you PPP…. more to the kind of posters along the lines of “they still use leaf springs in cars” kind of top gear sneering at anything if its….AMERICAN!!! I mean realistically, are people going to continue to defend the stupid decisions taken by the British MoD and various governments?

    How much money on Chinook HC3s that sat there for how long?

    How much money was spent on the MRA4s?

    How much on FSTA?

    On the Wildcat?

    Various armoured vehicle acquisition programmes?

    how much of the money wasted on these and other programmes would it have taken to save JFH? Various warships of the RN? Various BA units?

    There are other ways to keep jobs and capital in country while buying established systems and getting more for less(as long as its not attempted to integrate too many “systems” and “changes” to make the product “perfect”)

    Local and licenced production?
    Cost offsets?

    It works for numerous countries….

    Some money and skill is maintained in country….while making savings in design and actual cost of the product….which can be spent on maintaining capabilities and size….or the social programmes that are often the reason behind defence cuts in the first place.

    in reply to: MORE UK defence cuts??? (Merged) #2336316
    F-111buff26
    Participant

    But your entire solution seems to be don’t buy British, buy American. We must support our domestic industry as the money goes back into our economy, rather than floating off to America, never to return. Nimrod should have just used a new airliner as the platform, even if not as good as a Nimrod. P8 is not exactly cheap either.

    Yes buying British, or Australian for that matter is always preferable.

    But the money saved on rationalising some of these programs could of paid for employment endeavours of equal numbers and delivered more systems into service than is the case now. Really at some point you have to stop sneering at everything ‘AMERICAN’ and accept reality.

    Britain cant and shouldnt attempt certain kinds of programs until the budget is in good enough shape to throw away 100bn quid on national pride.

    in reply to: MORE UK defence cuts??? (Merged) #2336319
    F-111buff26
    Participant

    What P-8 !!! when the Nimrod replacement program was selected the USN had no intention of doing its P-3 replacement due to them expectiing the P-3s to soldier on in the post cold war environment. If there was a possibility of a joint program within the timeframe we needed for a Nimrod replacement then we would have done a joint program. By the time the USN realised its P3s were being used up faster than expected and that LM had cherry picked the better reserve examples for export that then then moved the P8 program ip the schedule by which time the UK was well into the Nimrod MRA4 program.[/QUOTE]

    Maybe the case, but buying P-3s or SLEPing the Mk2 Nimrods would of been preferable to an over ambitious program that kept a few people at BAe in work but ultimately the deal kept involving fewer and fewer airframes to the point it was ridiculous and then it got cancelled. Just a few more realistic expectations of the MRA4 would have resulted in having the aircraft in service…instead of being the victim of cuts half brought about because the budget of the project had blown out so bad. Just like our Seasprite disaster, sometimes you have to cut your losses and move on.

    in reply to: Australia to buy RFA Largs Bay #2003315
    F-111buff26
    Participant

    Also they are two different circumstances….

    Durance is doing fine in our service…

    but we really didnt have a choice BUT to buy Largs Bay…

    otherwise we wouldn’t have the needed amphib capability.

    in reply to: MORE UK defence cuts??? (Merged) #2336392
    F-111buff26
    Participant

    Its certainly sad to see the UK waste so much money on chasing perfect capabilities instead of good enough….. of course in a perfect world our armed forces should have the very best…. but if you add up all the money wasted by the UK MoD on ridiculous procurement programs they wouldn’t be in such a mess

    how much money could of been saved by SLEPing old Nimrod Mk2 until P-8 is ready or purchasing P-3s as an interim would surely have been cheaper than the MRA-4 debacle.

    Same goes for various armoured vehicle replacement programs…

    ridiculous amounts of money spent on the lynx wildcat… seahawks would of provided massive savings…

    sometimes the pride of having a UK built and designed system actually leads to the UK losing the capability altoether…

    sometimes the money spent on keeping defence jobs could be better spent on purchasing PROVEN systems and the savings spent on employment opportunities in other areas…at least that way the capability is maintained!!!

    so sad to see the difference in the 1990 British Armed Forces and 2011 version…. and what it could of been if some savings had been made by the brass… it would of cot less pride than the alternative!!!

    in reply to: Australia to buy RFA Largs Bay #2003428
    F-111buff26
    Participant

    Yes it will be interesting to see how the RAN handles all of these ship introductions….but that is part of the process to get a more efficent and capable RAN…more ships with smaller crews on newer ships ao as to entice as many as possible to enlist.

    I do think that the future AORs should resemble a ft george in capabilities, with more automation and double hulled. this also brings into question whether 6 MRH-90s will be enough for the RAN… realistically it should be doubled to 12…

    in reply to: Australia to buy RFA Largs Bay #2003540
    F-111buff26
    Participant

    Would the RANs future needs not be better fulfilled by looking to acquire 3 new AOR type ships in 5-10 years time so as to standardise and expand capabilities while achieving economies in training spares etc…. what is being suggested is to operate 2-3 different ships of different classes which doesnt make much sense to me…. but i can see a requirement in the future for more AOR especially in the power projection role in combination with a LHD and AWD.

    But not that there would be sense in purchasing the ft george.

    in reply to: 707 Tanker Down #2336576
    F-111buff26
    Participant

    So is there any word on the former RAAF tankers that were have said to heave been bought by OARS?

    in reply to: CVF Construction #2003584
    F-111buff26
    Participant

    Sorry Scooter but seriously mate….
    If I was the RAF I wouldnt even mention a Typhoon/Tornado replacement…
    but really i cant see the UK ever getting the F-35 without an increase in defence budget
    more than likely rafales or something like super hornet.

    in reply to: Australia to buy RFA Largs Bay #2003760
    F-111buff26
    Participant

    I can’t see a need for the ft george at the moment…. unless we decided a 20 year old ship would be the way to increase our AOR capabilities…

    in reply to: Australia to buy RFA Largs Bay #2003864
    F-111buff26
    Participant

    And at the same time the AREA of Jervis Bay, of which the two ships were named, and infinately more important in RAN history than Largs Bay….

    Really in todays environment keeping the name of a ship from the Royal Navy would sit uneasily with a republican loving left wing government…

    in reply to: 707 Tanker Down #2339464
    F-111buff26
    Participant

    thanks mate. hope it wasnt one of the ex RAAF airframes omega were ment to have bought

    in reply to: 707 Tanker Down #2339515
    F-111buff26
    Participant

    Any photos or idea of which airframe?

Viewing 15 posts - 76 through 90 (of 527 total)