It seems to have been a legit project.

Canadair CL-99 – * military cargo transport (4 x P&W JT3D-14 turbofans [TF33]), 1961

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=3119.0

It is mentioned in Canadair – The First 50 Years written by Pickler and Milberry (CANAV Books, Toronto 1995 / ISBN 0921022077)

The TF33 was the turbofan development of the J57 turbojet, and was used in B-52Hs, late-model EC/KC-135 models, C-141s, etc. It produced between 17,000 and 21,000 pounds of thrust.

Thus, the mention in the designation list from the above book that the CL-99 was in the “same category as the Lockheed C-5” is rather suspect… the 43,000 lb.s.t. TF39s of the C-5 produced twice the thrust of the TF33.

It looks more like a shorter, wider counterpart to the C-141 Starlifter. The human figures in the illustration also tend to support the “C-141 category” impression… as the C-5 is larger in both diameter and length (as I can attest to from personal experience).

I would need to see more data to really form an impression.

maybe I should Clarify what I was saying. If the USN does not go with the F-35 at all, both the C and B variants are off the table meaning the RN would have to look for another platform.

Extremely unlikely for both to be canceled.

Yes this is another what if but given the squeeze that is going to be put on the DoD the Navy may decide as has been rumoured that it cannot afford the F-35C and maintain aircraft numbers and so decide to go with the F-18 until the next gen platform and/or UCAVs are available. The F-35B would probably actually be the most vulnerable of the three in this what if.

Actually, with ~480 USMC F-35B, nearly 100 Italian F-35Bs, however many British F-35Bs, and an unknown number of Spanish F-35Bs on the table, the ~250 USN F-35Cs currently planned are looking far more vulnerable… especially considering the large numbers of USN F/A-18E/F Super Hornets in service and on order.

Remember, the USMC has only older, less-capable F/A-18A+/C/D and AV-8B/B+, all of which need replacement.

With the political pressure Italy, the UK, & Spain can bring, the F-35B is safer than the F-35C, in my opinion.

I personally find it quite offensive to read:

Apparently, my depreciation of the American “contribution” and my attempt to portray the view that the Australian efforts in New Guinea and elsewhere were “tainted” by American meddling and credit-seeking were too subtle for you.

I shall be more direct next time.

My intent was not to disparage Australians, but to comment that even their truly great military accomplishments likely had unpleasant overtones of being treated like second-class cannon-fodder by the “larger powers” who had pushed their way into command of the Australian forces.

The more I study the full history of American-led campaigns in WW2, the more I am impressed (or depressed, rather) by the sheer naivety, borderline incompetence, and unjustified arrogance of the American generals.

Having just read about the beginnings of the North African Campaign from a mostly-French viewpoint, especially from those who had worked long and hard to try to set up a peaceful course for the events, it is clear that the Americans felt no French could be trusted, and that misleading and ignoring them was the plan.

Especially in regards to that very loose cannon Patton… he had been given specific orders NOT to fire on French troops unless fired upon, as he was landing in a sector where the French commander had pledged not to resist… but Patton decided that the best way to handle probably friendly forces was to “hit them hard, give them a bloody nose and they’ll fold quickly”.

Really?

By the time of the Japanese attack at Milne Bay, The Allied Commander for the Southwest Pacific Theatre, which included New Guinea, was Gen. Douglas MacArthur.

On March 24, 1942, the newly-formed British-US Combined Chiefs of Staff issued a directive designating the Pacific theater an area of American strategic responsibility. Six days later the US Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) divided the Pacific theater into three areas: the Pacific Ocean Areas (POA), the Southwest Pacific Area (SWPA), and the Southeast Pacific Area. Therefore most of the Pacific Ocean and its islands fell under a separate Allied command, Pacific Ocean Areas, headed by US Admiral Chester Nimitz.

The Allied commander in the Philippines, General Douglas MacArthur was elevated to the post of Supreme Commander Southwest Pacific Area, although he preferred to use the more conventional title of Commander in Chief (CinC). As the Japanese surrounded US and Filipino forces in the Philippines, MacArthur was ordered by US President Franklin D. Roosevelt to leave his headquarters on Corregidor, and to relocate to Melbourne, Australia.

On April 17, the Australian government, led by Prime Minister John Curtin, directed Australian personnel to treat orders from MacArthur as equivalent its own. In fact, for most of 1942 and 1943, MacArthur commanded more Australian than U.S. personnel. He also commanded some Dutch forces which had retreated to Australia. Some British, New Zealand and other national forces also came under MacArthur’s command.

While the Australians did excellent work amid harsh conditions, and really did exceptionally well by any standard, there will always be the lessening of pride due to the involvement (meddling) of the US in affairs in that campaign.

I have been told by a number of Aussies that the operations of Australian forces were hampered by restrictions placed by McA, which relegated Australian & Dutch units to areas that got little attention and were perceived as being “less important” than those which American troops were tasked with.

India in the market for LPD’s…finally focusing on amphibious abilities.

“Finally”?

In the last 4 years the IN has commissioned 3 LST(L) ships… which are improved versions of the earlier 2 commissioned in 1987 & 1997.

The earlier two were themselves improved versions of the RN’s “Sir” class LSLs (and the RAN’s Tobruk).

3 years ago, the IN purchased ex-USS Trenton to gain both design and operating knowledge of the larger, more capable amphibious dock type ship… and are now ready to build 4 of that type themselves.

It appears to me that the IN has been focused on amphibious abilities for some time now… it simply takes time to evaluate, develop, build, and put into service large warships of any type.

After all, the 3 Shardul class LST(L) were ordered in 2001, and construction of the first began in 2003.

I’ve seen that at a few US airshows as well… usually as support crew for one of the old warbirds.

Then there is the whole “historical reenactment” scene (Historical reenactment)… tens of thousands of Americans and other nationalities across Europe, Canada, the US, etc dress up in various period costumes each month… some as anything from Romans to Vikings to merchants, tradesmen, nobles, etc from across Europe (reference Society for Creative Anachronism)… mountain men, fur trappers, & “Indians” (reference Mountain Man Rendezvous/)… Revolutionary () & Civil War (American Civil War reenactment)soldiers & battles, WW1 & WW2 events, etc.

So… perhaps the correct question is… “What is it with you Aussies, no sense of history?”

Somehow the “Sukhois” and “Mig-27” evaded recognition… perhaps I was more tired than I realized.

However, that is still a particular annoyance to me… posters using acronyms with multiple “on-topic” meanings and expecting readers to guess which meaning they intend.

Yep… the C-17 has proved to be very good at what it was designed to do… replace the C-141 with a more capable aircraft.

It is good enough that a pretty good number of them have been purchased by other nations… funny that, for such a “flawed, compromised design”.