But even with these cuts, isn’t the typhoon a bit overkill, considering the Austrian requirement?
The Typhoon in Austrian Service
Having just read the article in AFM on the Typhoon in the Austrain air force, it strikes me as a very poor choice of procurement on their part.
Apparently they only ever fly it with a single AAM and the gun, and they do not have the software to use the AMRAAM. If this was all they wanted, why not get the M-346 or the A-50? These would be able to do the same job for a fraction of the price.
Is it just because of a slower scrable time or something? Any Austrains here who can shed some light on the decision?
There has been some talk of Blue Vixen sets being podded so they could be fitted to a GR7/GR9. Anyone know the truth behind that?
There has been talk, but it won’t go anywhere, there wouldn’t be much point getting a Gr.9 to carry a radar if it can only carry sidewinders anyway, and what with the cost and development of the pods the SHAR replacement should be online before the navy gets any use out of said radar pods
Well, what they did was at best pathetic and at worst harassment. If they had made some light hearted prank of a call then I would probably just give them a rap on the knuckles and let them get on with it, but this is overstepping the mark of common decency, imho.
Well, what they did was at best pathetic and at worst harassment. If they had made some light hearted prank of a call then I would probably just give them a rap on the knuckles and let them get on with it, but this is overstepping the mark of common decency, imho.
The thing is though, as disliked as Bush may be by much of the liberal US, these aren’t typically the type of person to reach for a rifle in most circumstances….
Fingers crossed nobody does anything stupid and spoils democracy for everyone.
The thing is though, as disliked as Bush may be by much of the liberal US, these aren’t typically the type of person to reach for a rifle in most circumstances….
Fingers crossed nobody does anything stupid and spoils democracy for everyone.
Atheism, on the other hand, has none of these. It can be defined in full by the simple statement: ‘There are no gods’.
This is more of a gnostic atheism claim, claiming absolute knowledge that there are no gods, which is impossible to achieve.
A more appropriate definition of an atheist would be anyone who accepts that the claims of theists who postulate the existence of a God have not met their burden of proof.
Atheism only exists as a response to theism, it is a rejection of the beliefs of someone else. In some sense, we are all atheists, with regard to the deities of long dead religions such as Thor, Zeus or Mars, or any other deity we do not accept the existence of.
Atheism, on the other hand, has none of these. It can be defined in full by the simple statement: ‘There are no gods’.
This is more of a gnostic atheism claim, claiming absolute knowledge that there are no gods, which is impossible to achieve.
A more appropriate definition of an atheist would be anyone who accepts that the claims of theists who postulate the existence of a God have not met their burden of proof.
Atheism only exists as a response to theism, it is a rejection of the beliefs of someone else. In some sense, we are all atheists, with regard to the deities of long dead religions such as Thor, Zeus or Mars, or any other deity we do not accept the existence of.
I think the most sensible thing to do would be to purchase the aircraft for which there has already been significant investment, with a view to standardising with a new fleet of next generation aircraft in time.
Rafales for the Carriers, small force of F-35Bs for any ‘Harrier Carriers’ and forward deployment.
If you’re looking at ways of integrating airforces, however East and West Germany worked it out might be a useful model.
The UK has little choice in regards to the F-35B. As its cancelation would also be the demise of the CVF’s. Clearly, as tight as the Defense Budget are. She could hardly afford to redesign the Typhoon for Naval use……….As a matter of fact the latter has been dismissed time and time again as not being practical.
Actually, with the Rafale, Super Hornet (or even Anglicised Su-33 :D) available as alternatives, the UK could quite easily build the CVFs and install catapults.
I wouldn’t necessarily agree with the decision, but it is a viable alternative.
is there anything to say that F-35B is going to be roughfield capable? what are the differences and can they be incorporated into other models?
I think the STOVL features speak for themselves in this regard.
Can be the first export of the Rafale, the French ties in mind. The F-18E seems to be kept to avoid the anger of the USA at first. The USA is an important market for the products of Embraer, when the Gripen does present the political will to look into the most economic solution at least. 😉
True, Embraer does sell many jets to the US, but entirely(?) to the civilian market, or at the very least the majority of its sales go to civilian firms, who are unlikely to be influenced in their purchase decision by Brazil’s choice of warplanes.
My 2 cents:
Cancel F-35 A and B versions, RAF/RN buy the F-35C for conventional carrier/airfield use. Save money on development for A and B. Unless of course there isn’t much development left to do on these models?
It could save some pennies.
It seems I will have to step back onto the dating scene myself, as my owing to a rather upsetting breakup. Any advice from peeps who have had to get back into the swing of things after a long(ish) break?