I’m not claiming the system will fail – I’m just utterly floored that people seem to be taking an excruciatingly complex system, arguably one of the most difficult rocketry projects ever undertaken, as something which is going to work just fine and doesn’t really need testing any more; rather, it apparently needs to be rushed into Europe as soon as possible to defend the US from (one single) ‘enemy’ who has never once demonstrated a shadow of the capability of putting warheads on their soil….
I am also pretty impressed that even voicing an opinion which doesn’t line up with nothing but praise and garlands for the NMD programme is enough to stir up vitriol on the scale of what I’ve seen here. Evidently a civilised argument is impossible with NMD ‘doubters’…
Second the motion on this one.
I understand philosophical differences between people when it comes to the need for this system, the threat assessment and whether the deployment will or will not help the US become safer.
But I do not understand how people on either side of this contentions issue would be against adequate testing of exceedingly expensive & technologically challenging kit. Putting aside everything else, without proper testing how can the American taxpayer be able to understand if they are being sold a bill of goods by an unscrupulous contractor or not? It has certainly happened before and the testing regime is there to at least provide some oversight to the work of the contractors. I would submit that right now every other argument for and against this deployment is moot until the testing issue is addressed.
First of 8 armed Griffon helicopters arrive in Kandahar to support Canadian Troops
http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5hRrLGo4VWbzdGnR3EtiQjtkXTVlg

(image: Griffon Helicopters from 438 Tactical Helicopter Squadron located at St-Hubert [Quebec], arrive at Mirabel Airport- Montreal, where they were shipped to Afghanistan via CC-177 Globemaster III. Image courtesy Canadian DND)
KANDAHAR, Afghanistan — The first of eight armed CH-146 Griffon helicopters arrived at Kandahar Airfield on Saturday.
The Griffons, which have been given extra sensors and Gatling guns on top of their existing side door machine-guns and armour plating, will provide escort and protection for the larger Chinook transport helicopters. The lumbering Chinooks are more vulnerable to attack by ground fire and rocket-propelled grenades, so they typically travel with smaller, armed escorts like the Griffons.
The Griffons will also give air cover to ground convoys, and will be on standby to evacuate battlefield casualties. The commander of Canada’s air wing, Col. Christopher Coates, says the Griffons may also be used to spot roadside bombs, which have killed more than half of the 103 Canadian soldiers lost in the Afghanistan mission.
“We can avoid areas where there are known IED (improvised explosive device) threats,” Coates said. “Some of the Griffons may be used in other roles like helping spot IEDs or other activities on the ground, surveying convoys as they move.” Acquiring battlefield helicopters to move troops and supplies around Afghanistan was one of the conditions set down for the extension of Canada’s military mission in Kandahar to 2011.
Interesting debate.
Japan license produces substantial amounts of kit from American designs (Seahawks, Apaches, Orions, F-15’s, etc.) with some local content added in. These platforms are substantially more expensive than the equivalent airframe from America and this comes down to the fact that Japan uses it’s arms industry more as a “make work” program for the Zaibatsu than seeking effeciency.
Until that changes they will never be effecient when it comes to cost.
Well, price is not everything and the US can offer things Russia can clearly not…………
Yes they can…but would they???
Would they allow license production?
Would they allow technology transfer??
Would they allow co-development like what is happening with the PAK/FA?
They can, but they will not. Two different things.
No, opening a thread with an insult is as bad as gets and that is what you did.
I suppose you did not read my apology
I think at the moment the Sukhoi name has more credibility and respect worldwide.
MiG has the overall name credibility with the general public, but to those in the know (like all of us of course 😉 ) Sukhoi is the Russian brand.
You were and still are trolling, that is why you decided to insult other forum members in your first post. The article did not deserve its own thread because the impact on the programme will minimal. Your initial post made it clear that you posted this article to suggest that the ABM programme had failed when clearly it has not.
One could argue that always trying to have the last word in every conversation you feel the need to have on thie board is as bad or worse than anything you perceive as trolling.
Ahhh threats….Wonderful debating skills you have there. It is great that you bring so much to the conversation.
I think it’s fantastic that you have decided to not adress the fact that the US Congress has legislated adequate testing before a deployment decision, calling it a “weak” article.
It’s also wonderful that you choose to not comment on the fact that your new President is essentially saying that he requires this testing to take place before any decision takes place.
And it’s simply awesome that you see a legitimate post referencing a legitimate article discussing a legitimate aspect of the debate as trolling.
Looking forward to how you address the fact that without adequate testing your country has the chance to be ripped off to the tune of tens of billions of precious dollars by contractors who may not be able to provide the level of capability you are paying for.
I have said this before and will repeat myself for emphasis. I am not attached to my opinions (unlike you appear to be). prove me your point in a reasonable fashion and I will become a disciple. But don’t dismiss out of hand anything or anybody who disagrees with you as a fanboy or a troll. You should be above this.
This could have been posted in any number of already existing threads and your use of the phrase ‘star wars fanboys’ proves that you are a troll.
get over yourself, grow a thicker skin and try and talk reasonably about the topic, or go away…the choice is yours.
One question that may have already come up:
If the Raptor is not as advanced in terms of avionics as the F-35, as some have suggested, why is there such a strong block to exporting the Raptor and yet the total opposite policy towards the F-35?
I think the conventional wisdom is that the restrictions surround the stealth aspects of the design more than the avionics per se.
Check “emergency capability” as it related to nuclear weapons. Basically when the consequences of having NOTHING are so high you get it into service even if it only works 10% of the time and then you work on improving it. The whole mentality of “if it’s not perfect 100% of the time it’s worthless” is completely assinine.
I think this is a valid argument (sealordlawrence could learn from this approach 🙂 ) and I understand the point you are making. A bird in the hand so to speak… However critics of this technology state that there does need to be a much more rigorous testing regime put in place before this technology can be deployed, and I tend to agree with that. Logic dictates that there needs to be un-biased testing of military systems before they are operationally deployed in order to ensure that they work as advertised and to ensure that the taxpayer is not being hosed.
No your attempt was to troll, that is the purpose of this entire thread, unfortunately for you in your haste and desperation you chose a very weak article.
Well…so much for an olive branch for you. Posting news about an important political development surrounding the issue of deploying this technology in Eastern Europe is not trolling. It is a legitimate news item that I think brings up a serious issue. I chose some unfortunate words that may have antagonized some and I apologized for it. You sir however choose to lash out personally with anybody who has a different perspective than yourself. It is pretty sad actually.
I would be more than prepared to change my position on the need, the workability, or the political ramifactions of this system being deployed if it could be proven to me that these concerns could be addressed. I think that you would not change your opinion on this topic under any circumstances and that it pretty weak.
Opinion is not fact. You seem to confuse the two.
But enough about you…..I am hopeful that people on both sides of this debate can take a dispassionate look at the state of the technology and have an enlightened discussion of the facts.
Apologies to all for the “star Wars Fanboys” remark. My intent here was to stir some additional debate. The last thread got a little personal and I want to apologize to all for continuing that tone.
Cheers
China to send warships to fight piracy off Somali coast
![]()
China said Thursday it is preparing to send warships to the coast of Somalia to counter piracy, an advance that would be its first military operation in the area. The ships will join the naval forces of several other countries in the troubled waters in the Gulf of Aden, where attacks by pirates on cargo ships have become a major problem over the past year.
“China is actively considering sending warships to participate in convoy actions in the Somali sea and Gulf of Aden. China is now actively preparing for this,” said Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao on Thursday. He did not elaborate on details of the mission, but said formal information would be released later. The Global Times newspaper, published by the country’s Communist party, quoted two military officials as saying the contingent would consist of two destroyers and a supply ship to the area. The ships will depart from a Chinese naval base on Hainan island after Christmas, and will be sent on a three-month mission to the region, the paper reported. Beijing welcomed stronger international cooperation in fighting piracy, said Liu. His comments come a day after a Chinese cargo ship, the Zhenhua 4, was rescued by a Malaysian-led international naval force from nine armed pirates who had boarded the vessel.
Mission could provide navy with experience
The mission represents the first Chinese naval foray into far-flung waters. Most of the country’s naval activity has been centred on coastal defence. “Combating piracy is an opportunity for the Chinese to give their navy something it doesn’t have — experience in operations thousands of kilometres from home,” said the CBC’s Anthony Germain. “There’s a growing feeling here that now is the time for a rising great economic power to also flex its military muscle instead of relying on other countries’ navies to come to the rescue,” he said from Shanghai.
China’s participation comes two days after a unanimous UN Security Council vote to authorize nations to conduct land and air attacks on the increasingly brazen pirates in the Gulf of Aden, one of the world’s busiest shipping lanes. Citing data from the Kenya-based East Africa Seafarers Assistance Program, Liu said 300 ships were attacked by pirates last year in that area. More than 40 ships were hijacked in the first 11 months of this year. During the same period, 1,265 Chinese ships have passed through the area — an average of three to four a day, he said. About 20 per cent of them have come under attack, Liu said. This year, there have been seven cases of pirate attacks involving Chinese ships or crews, he said.
Realistically 10 MiG-29’s (SMT’s or non upgraded MiG’s notwithstanding) will not alter the balance of power in the Middle East. What it will allow Lebanon to do is to hopefully have a credible sort of QRA capability and also the ability to air police it’s borders. If this makes both Israel and Syria to think twice before flying into Lebanese airspace to avoid a potential incident with Lebanon then they MiG’s will be a good investment. But that’s all they will be able to do.
2 MiG’s on QRA will be hard pressed to be sustained with only 10 Fulcrums to carry it out. Training and maintenance will eat up a lot of hours and keeping a pair of birds ready to roll on the tarmac will be a tough committment to sustain. As well there is no talk of two seaters. Could we assume that a pair of two seat Fulcrums might be part of this deal as well? And will this mean the end of the Hunters?