The French deployed a small handful of theirs (3 in 2009), but the last I heard the Germans were still having difficulties with theirs as well.

Here is the story from May 2010, where Germany suspends their contract for them, saying none of the 11 they have received are fit for even training, much less combat: http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/Caged-Tiger-Germanys-Troubled-Helicopter-Purchase-06411/

Note that the Germans were supposed to have received all 67 by 2010, but only 11 had been delivered.

In this story from this month, a German General says that they could, in 2012, send 4 to Afghanistan… 2 to fly and 2 as “technical reserve”.
Could German Tiger Attack Helos Be Afghanistan Bound?

However, the RAAF has had theirs for years, and still won’t clear them to fly at night or in combat scenarios (current “full combat capability” isn’t expected until at least December this year, despite the entire order having been delivered in mid-2010).
See this thread: First Tiger deployment: Aussie Tiger to Afghanistan

Note that, while the thread opens in 2007 with the planned deployment of RAAF Tigers to Afghanistan, in the second post on page 2 we are in 2011, and they still haven’t been cleared for combat ops. The posts from there discuss why, and the problems the Aussies have been having with them.

Thanks… will have to keep an eye on it.

I think that impression is down to editing because after the engines stop you see a crewman opening the top hatch then there’s a cut, whereas the earlier footage seems to continue on from that and then abruptly cuts back to just after the crash-landing with the engines running down. Why insert that part of the film reel there is a mystery.

Actually, if you look at the film again, in the scene where the majority of the crew slide/run down the wing, you see the stbd props still spinning fast.

Then comes the scene where all props are still running, but you can see aircrew walking around the aircraft.

Later, the spinning props finally stop.

Only then do we see the scene where the props are stopped and someone climbs out of the top hatch.

I strongly suspect they exited rapidly in case it caught fire, and only when they were sure that wasn’t going to happen did one man re-enter and shut down the engines.

Well u could be right, but..
Isn’t most of the foregin Intel now focused on war against terror:confused:

I fail to see what the Pak-Fa program has in common with ‘war on terror’?

I think it is more a question about industrial Hi-tech intel/espionas/stealing.
While Sukhoi is partial under State ownership, they could just as likely be under the scope by other privatized competitors..
Like LM etc etc.

But of course it is partial related with National security anyway i guess..
How is it done?
LM sends a inquiry to Pentagon about the Pak-Fa progress.
Pentagon then patch it through to CIA or something..
And any conclusion comes back in the same order..:)

Only the stupid focus on only one of the many possible enemies.

The “War on Terror” is NOT the last armed conflict this planet will have… and insisting on a “WOT-only” mindset is lunacy.

Even if the US intel community regarded Russia as not being a threat (and they do accept the possibility of renewed antagonism, trust me), they still have to consider Russian military equipment sales to other, more likely opponents as posing the risk that our forces might face top-line Russian equipment in non-Russian hands.

This means that the US (and UK, and France, and Germany, and China, and India, etc) will still be trying to find out everything about everything as soon as the Russians know it.

Notice the sabre? 😉

I like it!!

How is this “naval aviation”?

1. HMS Astute is a naval vessel.

2. The gunman was tackled and disarmed by Southampton city councilman Royston Smith (part of a group of city officials touring the boat).

3. Mr. Royston Smith is a former RAF flight engineer on Nimrods… a maritime patrol aircraft.

Thus, naval aviation stopped further bloodshed.

Ark Royal would be a much better (imho) name than PoW. Hope it happens.

Yes… its bad enough that the British association of PoW is with a man who was unfaithful to his first wife from nearly the start of his marriage, but the first thing an American thinks of when he sees the acronym is “Prisoner of War”!