It does say that… “Continental Golden Jet”… on the tail…

Lots of chubby girls look good in a poofy, gauzy dress… but not so good naked!

No biggie… its just me getting to be a grumpy old fart… ok, 44 isn’t that old, but I still get grumpy off & on… I also gripe about “zombie threads”… (they just won’t stay dead), so…

Anyway, the items that make a great air force, small or large, are:
1. training: without this, all else is wasted.
2. balance: too much emphasis on one aspect makes you inflexible and rigid.
3. facilities: new, state-of-the-art aircraft rotting in the weather on a pot-holed airfield being worked on with 1950s test equipment?
4. finally: good aircraft (reliable, good at the tasks your nation needs to do, able to match up with your potential adversary’s aircraft), but not too good [if they have Northrop F-5As, do you need F-22s? Buying overkill steals money from other vital projects].

Haven’t I read nearly every post here in almost word-for-word form on the last “best small air forces” thread?

For a minute I thought someone had just re-posted the previous thread with new date/time stamps?

Remember, only half of the F-14Ds were re-built -As… half were new-builds, and are only ~10-12 years old. Those airframes had much lower maintenance requirements than the -D upgrades did… but the numbers for both types were added together into one set of numbers in the reports to Congress and the media.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6180945.stm

some exerpts: (underlining and bolding are mine)

“Lord Goldsmith said he thought that a prosecution “could not be brought”. He said the decision had been made in the wider public interest, which had to be balanced against the rule of law.”

“Lord Goldsmith also told peers that Prime Minister Tony Blair had agreed that the continuation of the investigation would cause “serious damage” to relations between the UK and Saudi Arabia.

“Lord Goldsmith said that both Mr Blair and Defence Secretary Des Browne had argued that carrying on the investigation would harm intelligence and diplomatic co-operation with Saudi Arabia, in turn damaging the UK’s national security.”

“BBC business editor Robert Peston says that major UK companies – both arms firms and other manufacturers – have voiced fears that they stood to lose other lucrative deals should the probe have continued.

The SFO said its decision had been taken “following representations that have been made both to the Attorney General and the Director of the SFO concerning the need to safeguard national and international security“.

It added: “No weight has been given to commercial interests or to the national economic interest.”

“Liberal Democrat constitutional affairs spokesman Simon Hughes said: “From the moment investigations began, it was clear that they would not be popular in Saudi Arabia. “But to pull the plug halfway through, and when real progress was just being made, is the worst of all possible outcomes.”

“But Shadow Defence Secretary Liam Fox said: “We made it clear that because of the commercial issues involved we wanted the SFO to make a rapid decision about whether to continue their inquiry or whether to bring it to an end. “Having decided there is no case to answer, it will be welcomed by all those concerned.”

So, just what is the real story… does the Lib Dem voice have a point? Was proof starting to show up?

When “Lord Goldsmith said he thought that a prosecution “could not be brought”, does that mean that they weren’t finding evidence, or that there would be no charges brought by the Attorney General (see above statements) no matter what evidence was found!

What is clear is that tremendous pressure was brought on the SFO… including representations that the investigation constituted a security risk, and therefore continuing could be considered an “act against National Security”.

With that position, could treason charges have been brought against the SFO if they had continued the investigation?

Were they told “stop, or face charges yourself”?

Or was it a recognition of the fact that if there will be no prosecution no matter the findings, why spend time and money continuing?

And power wins over law again!

So, fully modernized version, eh?

Any chance of retrofitting the curved-plexiglass canopy and shorter rounded nose (& two-position turret) so it looks kind of like a Vietnam-era AH-1G?

Of course, the mini-gun & grenade launcher would be mock-ups… it is in the UK, after all.