dark light

thobbes

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 286 through 300 (of 2,012 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Future Light Attack – Textron Scorpion #2240577
    thobbes
    Participant

    Remind me – how many L-159s have been sold? And how many did the Hawk 200 sell?

    Or AMX.

    in reply to: Waging an air war in North Asia – 2025 Scenario #2240580
    thobbes
    Participant

    BRICS is not a faction like NATO or a military and political alliance.

    Why would India help China when they view China as a potential enemy who arms its real enemy (Pakistan). It would probably suit India for China to bleed a little if a war did happen to erupt.

    As for Taiwan, the purpose of Taiwanese forces would not be to defeat PLA, but rather delay it as much as possible.

    This does two things:

    1. Allows US to build up additional forces and initiate contingency plans.

    2. Prevents China from refocusing its attempts on Japan or other US targets.

    in reply to: F-35 News & Multimedia thread #2240590
    thobbes
    Participant

    And before people view MSphere’s post as “anti-F-35” this kind of pseudo-corruption (i.e. political donation) is conducted by many different corporations in a massive range of industries.

    Political donations are in essence legalisation and institutionalisation of corruption.

    They do it in Australia as well.

    Imagine making political donations illegal!

    in reply to: Western Air Force bright spot – RAAF and Australian Army #2240651
    thobbes
    Participant

    I want to know what happens when Australia is required to deploy to a combat zone without the US, what will the tank crews use then?

    They won’t be there.

    Australia doesn’t deploy by itself other than really small key stuff that generally doesn’t involve combat (Solomon Islands, East Timor, UN peacekeeping etc). Heavy armour was not deployed in those instances.

    When’s the last time Australia deployed to a combat zone without the US or in the past Great Britain? The answer is NEVER.

    When it comes to fighting wars, Australia only does so under Major Ally auspices (Boer War, WWI, Russian Civil War, WWII, Korean War, Malayan Confrontation, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan).

    In fact the last time Australian tanks were deployed was in Vietnam and their main purpose was guarding bases. They did see combat too as it was an insurgency.

    Yet no Abrams were deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan despite Afghanistan seeing Aussie combat deaths.

    in reply to: Does the UK need strategic bombers? #2240655
    thobbes
    Participant

    Tomahawk Cruise Missiles are your modern strategic bombers.

    in reply to: Future Light Attack – Textron Scorpion #2240658
    thobbes
    Participant

    I don’t see much market opportunity for this.

    US is struggling even with funding the light turbo prop strike aircraft and most poorer operators prefer cheaper to operate turboprops in COIN role ala EMB312/314 and PC-7. These have been replacing a whole heap of jets ala A-37, AT-33, Strikemaster and MB-326.

    Countries that can afford combat aircraft prefer larger multirole jets.

    If you have grunts on the ground in trouble, you’re better off sending this down low than an F-35.

    As we’ve seen in Libya and Syria (and Croatia, Angola, Vietnam etc etc) sending low armoured jets/aircraft is risky. There’s not just MANPADS to worry about but also light AAA ala 14.5mm, 20mm and 40mm systems.

    This is the main reason A-10 and Su-25 are heavily armoured and why modern Russian/US helo gunships ala AH-64 and Mi-28.

    in reply to: Waging an air war in North Asia – 2025 Scenario #2240665
    thobbes
    Participant

    Blitzo, very nice post.

    A big issue with pre-deployed assets is susceptibility to first strike. But then shifting units from continental USA or Australia has its own problems too.

    Damned if you do and damned if you don’t really.

    I think given the ranges involved and the threat to carriers from AShM and SSKs and Air Refuellers from longer range stealth jets, would make the tac jets limited utilisation resource other than over Taiwan itself.

    The main assets seem to be SSK/SSNs, the surface fleets and MPAs – P-3s/P-8s.

    Who ever wins the naval battle would gain a massive advantage.

    The other interesting thing is Rules of Engagement in terms of both what can be attacked and how.

    in reply to: Waging an air war in North Asia – 2025 Scenario #2240673
    thobbes
    Participant

    Invasion of Taiwan is theoretically possible but very very unlikely. China and Taiwan have established a mutually beneficial equilibrium in their relation that neither wants to disturb.

    Last time I did research on this at Uni in the early 2000’s, China’s official policy was to launch a military response if Taiwan declared independence.

    Is this still the case?

    With regard to an invasion of Taiwan, it has to be primarily seaborne i.e. an amphibious invasion. The world’s largest most sophisticated submarine fleet is still operated by the US Navy which shouldn’t be counted out anymore than naval aviation should.

    Taiwan Strait is a pretty narrow stretch of water (130-180 km) and only up to 70m deep (not exactly great submarine territory).

    It’s within range of all Chinese naval aircraft and smaller surface combatants. It is basically a Chinese pond.

    US SSNs would struggle operating in such a dense Chinese environment especially with little room to maneouvre.

    in reply to: Waging an air war in North Asia – 2025 Scenario #2240676
    thobbes
    Participant

    Right. This is not their fight, but definitely Australia’s fight. 😀

    Australia is an American lap dog with no independent foreign policy of its own.

    Where America goes, so does the USA and especially in Asia.

    Up to and including last year Australian White Papers emphasised war against China. They toned down the rhetoric in 2013 but that’s probably just a temporary blip. Especially as the current PM, the Mad Monk Tony Abbott, has a 1950s vision of what Australia should be.

    in reply to: USAF could scrap KC-10, F-15C, and A-10??? #2241389
    thobbes
    Participant

    Of course if the more capable A330 had been selected for KC-X the prospect of retiring KC-10 would be far more plausible and palatable.

    KC-X is kind of irrelevant here.

    The cutbacks would take place before KC-X enters service in meaningful numbers.

    And even with KC-X you still have several hundred vintage KC-135 making up the bulk of the fleet for the next 20 years.

    in reply to: Military Aviation News-2013 #2241396
    thobbes
    Participant

    In Croatian:

    First two T/A-50s delivered to TNI-AU (Indonesia)

    Total of 16 aircraft ordered and deliveries to be completed in 2014.

    Philippines delay acquisition of 21 UH-1Hs for 3rd time

    Only vendor didn’t supply adequate documentation so competition to be restarted.

    Philippines AF suffering massive issues with servicability

    Only 71 out of 265 aircraft are airworthy. 25% of the fleet has required repairs for some time now but these are not forthcoming.

    Typical Philippines AF stuff really.

    in reply to: USAF could scrap KC-10, F-15C, and A-10??? #2241402
    thobbes
    Participant

    CASE 4:
    A combination of 1&3 seems an even better scenario, stabilizing the budget for several years and leaving the USAF hand free from political pressure until the next election.

    In prior statements, USAF said that to make trule effective cuts they needed to cut a whole type.

    Keeping fewer numbers of all types doesn’t allow these kind of savings as you still need to maintain training, maintenance and spares support.

    in reply to: General Discussion #267696
    thobbes
    Participant

    It’s our best bet.

    I suspect if it ever meets an alien, we’ll all be dead and buried!

    in reply to: Voyager I enters interstellar space! #1868358
    thobbes
    Participant

    It’s our best bet.

    I suspect if it ever meets an alien, we’ll all be dead and buried!

    in reply to: USAF could scrap KC-10, F-15C, and A-10??? #2241405
    thobbes
    Participant

    Oh and A-10 going to US Army won’t happen. It’s been tried before.

    USAF will sooner keep the A-10 than let Army take over a fixed wing combat aircraft.

Viewing 15 posts - 286 through 300 (of 2,012 total)