Steve TouchdownThe Gulfstreams look great in the USCG livery. I think they’re on their 4th Gulfstream serialled ’01’ ,after starting with the Gulf I they’ve now had a Gulf II, a Gulf III and now a Gulf V/C-37A.
I’m not sure if they’re still using them but they also had at least three Schweizer RG-8A/SA 2-37B Condor surveillance motor-gliders packed with all kinds of hi-tech gizmos. Two were later converted to RU-38A Twin Condors and another crashed.
You’re right, PII: evidently the official name for the HU-25C is “Guardian Interceptor” and they’re known as “Nightstalkers” by their crews.
FTD: I knew about the cutters being used in the Gulf but would you happen to know if it was a deployment that crews could opt in or out of or was it compulsory for them to go? I guess, at the end of the day, that would be the best way to differentiate between traditional military nomenclature and the situation that’s getting more common today where missions are “outsourced” to other branches and organisations.
Best regards
Steve Rush ~ Touchdown-News
Steve TouchdownIf the deal/funding for 40 Bell 407s all goes through as expected then it would be more than feasible to use those in the scout role
Steve Rush ~ Touchdown-News
Steve TouchdownWell, strictly speaking, the USCG is part of the Department of Homeland Security not the Department of Defense and the USCG aren’t funded from the DoD budget so I guess it depends on One’s definition of “branch of the military”.
MH-68A Stingray is correct: I’ve also seen these called “Mako”, which I believe was unofficial, and “Enforcer”, which was presumably an error and mistaken for the MH-90/MD-900 name. The two of those the USCH had were returned to McDD.
The HH-52A and HH-3F have been out of use for a LONG time now.
Oh, and the HU-25 is the Guardian.
C-23 Sherpa isn’t American: they were built in Northern Ireland/Ulster and made by Short Brothers.
Ciao!
Steve Rush ~ Touchdown-News
Steve TouchdownThe full unedited version….
…before being sexed-up by the BBC 😀
Cancellation of Defence 2004 Event and Enhancement to the Royal International Air Tattoo
The Defence 2004 exhibition, under the leadership of the Royal Air Force, scheduled to take place at the Royal International Air Tattoo at RAF Fairford in July, has been cancelled. Continuing operational commitments mean that the manpower necessary to ensure its success cannot be met in full. Instead, this year’s Tattoo, run under the auspices of the Royal Air Force Benevolent Fund, will be enhanced with support from the Armed Forces, although on a reduced scale to that originally planned for Defence 2004. _
_
The changes will still see a significant contribution by some 1800 Service personnel and the inclusion of a Youth Day and Armed Forces Careers Convention, a commemoration of the centenary of Entente Cordiale and a celebration of the 60th anniversary of D-Day. _
_
The Defence 2000 series of events was launched in 2000 as a replacement for the Royal Tournament. Each event was to be led by one of the Services, with the overall aim of taking Defence to the Nation. The next scheduled event in 2005 will be led by the Royal Navy, bringing a strong maritime focus in the bi-centenary of the Battle of Trafalgar. _
_
Defence Minister Ivor Caplin said: _
_
“I understand the disappointment many people will feel that Defence 2004 cannot go ahead as planned. But the heavy operational commitments our Armed Forces are facing must clearly take precedence. However, we can all still look forward to a varied and exciting range of events at Fairford which will show visitors the Armed Forces at their best.” _
_
Director of The Royal International Air Tattoo, Paul Bowen, said: _
_
“Whilst regrettable, the cancellation of Defence 04 was not entirely unexpected. At a time when the Armed Forces are so heavily involved with continuing commitments overseas, events such as Defence 04 were always going to be vulnerable. However, I am delighted that there will still be a very strong RAF, Army and Royal Navy presence at this year’s Royal International Air Tattoo and features such as Armed Forces Youth Day – one of the centrepieces of Defence 04 – will still go ahead. Defence 04 was always planned to be an addition to the Tattoo’s core programme and with a number of special and unique events being organised to mark the 50th anniversary of the C-130 Hercules, the 60th anniversaries of both D-Day and The Great Escape plus the centenary of the signing of the Anglo-French ‘Entente Cordiale’, we shall still have a magical blend of show-stopping aerial attractions to entertain the crowds in July.” _
Source: UK Ministry of Defence; issued Jan. 30, 2004
Steve Rush ~ Touchdown-News
Steve TouchdownSo now you know what will be in the French defence budget proposal for 2008-2013! lol
And if everything is so great and wonderful in Rafale/PILOTGHT Land…why the “cut”/”slip”/”call-it-what-you-like”?
These are only the first 11 to go…trust me 😎
Ciao!
Steve Rush ~ Touchdown-News
Steve TouchdownOriginally posted by PAF Fan
cheers for that steve!
I dont understand the need for 40 206s and 40 UH-1Hs! Would 40-60 Blackhawks be better!?
I’m pretty sure the Hueys and the 407s will be used for border security, anti-narcotics and what’s now being termed “anti-terrorism” support for mobile army units: what used to be called COIN (counter insurgency) in “tribal” areas on the Afghanistan border. It could even be that the Ministry of Interior will provide oversight for some of these rather than the Ministry of Defence/Army.
Sure, a Black Hawk has far better reange and payload than a Huey (even if Pakistan decides to go for the upgrade to Huey II spec) but a basic UH-60L is going to cost around $10/11 million a piece without anything fitted (even engines) and no spares or training support. I’m sure if the Pakistan Gvmt came up with half a billion dollars then Congress would approve 50 Black Hawks for them 😀
Best regards
Steve Rush ~ Touchdown-News
Steve TouchdownThe Italians have already splashed their first Lawn Dart after having them for all of ten minutes. In this case it was a Seabed Dart though.
Glad to report the pilot was fine…just soggy.
Ciao!
Steve Rush ~ Touchdown-News
Steve TouchdownNo idea if Pakistan had any outstanding orders for Mi-171s etc. If they did then I’ve certainly not come across it anywhere.
I only read a couple of posts in this thread but someone was arguing about wanting to see “proof” of the AH-1F deal. Check out the thread from late last year on this forum here http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?threadid=16325
There won’t be any “contracts” to see: the AH-1F and UH-1H all come from surplus US Army stock. The Cobras are at Fort Drum in upper New York state and the Hueys are at Draughon-Miller regional airport which is just outside Temple in Texas. The serials of most of the Hueys that are heading for Pakistan are already known.
Somebody also mentioned cost: these are all FREE to Pakistan as they stand in their present condition. If Pakistan chose to have them upgraded or refurbished then they have to pay for that, plus shipping costs.
It’s still too early to assume that 40 flyable examples of each type of chopper will enter service though: during overhaul some may be uneconomical to spend time and money on so end up being little more than a source of spares for the rest.
There will be several transfers of excess Hueys and Cobras over the next ten years or so: Thailand has just recently taken delivery of 30 UH-1H/V Hueys under the same programme and Argentina just pulled out if taking 12 AH-1F that were allocated to them (see Feb’s AFM for details). Israel, Jordan and Bahrain have all recently taken AH-1F Cobras via the same route.
Best regards
Steve Rush ~ Touchdown-News
p.s. don’t forget Pakistan are also getting 40 brand-new Bell 407s as well as the surplus US Army stock.
Steve TouchdownDid Perceived US Arrogance Scupper the Deal?
Bargaining Tactics Hurt U.S. Bid To Sell F-16s To Czechs, Experts Say
The United States threw away its chances of selling F-16s to the Czech Republic by mishandling aspects of a competition ultimately won by the Swedish government with its JAS-39 Gripen, according to leading Czech political analysts.
The United States underestimated the competition and made a series of mistakes in its lobbying efforts by failing, among other things, to grasp the complexity of the Czech political scene, they told The DAILY.
The United States, which offered used but upgraded F-16s, made an error in underestimating the Swedish offer, according to Vladimira Dvorakova, head of political sciences at the University of Economics in Prague. The Swedish offered 14 brand new aircraft at a relatively low cost, while the U.S. offer came fifth and last in a technical valuation process, she said.
“It was quite clear that the Gripen was the best proposal for the evaluation commission and it would be very difficult for the government to decide against these proposals,” she said.
The United States, she continued, still could have turned the situation around because the government, which has decided to hold exclusive talks with Sweden next month, was not bound by the commission’s recommendations.
But any hopes were killed off by comments from outgoing U.S. Ambassador Craig Stapleton, who said Czech-U.S. relations could be affected by the Czech government’s final decision, she said. Stapleton’s comments were interpreted widely in the Czech press as a veiled threat.
“At the moment I read what the U.S. ambassador said, it was quite clear that it would not be possible for the government to choose an American aircraft,” she said. “Ministers would be seen as being under pressure from America and accepting everything American. Any cabinet would be very afraid of this because of our experience with the Soviet Union, when everything recommended by them was immediately done.”
Radek Khol, head of the center for security analysis at the Prague-based Institute of International Relations, said late-in-the-day lobbying efforts, combined with the ambassador’s comments, ended any realistic chance of the United States securing a deal.
“The statement which the ambassador made was, in my reading, rather unhelpful. The way he presented the issue, and especially the threat of Czech problems in NATO and worsening of Czech relations with the U.S., was sufficient for government ministers to go firmly behind the experts and recommend the Gripen,” he said.
Khol said the United States underestimated the strength of the Swedish bid and the complexity of Czech politics in view of enlargement of the European Union, which the Czech Republic is scheduled to join next year.
“The U.S. talked about the proven record of F-16s but this [supersonic aircraft contract] wasn’t seen here as a purely military agreement. It was balancing pro-Americanism and the European Union,” he said.
Khol added that the United States still could sell aircraft to the Czech Republic.
“I wouldn’t call this a complete setback, because the Czech government left the door partly open for a U.S. bid in five or 10 years. Also, no final contract has been signed yet and there is a few percent chance that the negotiations could fail.”
If and when the Czech Republic decides to buy new supersonic aircraft for a long-term solution, “the Americans could proceed on a learning curve and see that they have to present a good offer, that only selling the aircraft on the argument of strategic partnership will not be enough,” he added.
Steve Rush ~ Touchdown-News
Steve TouchdownIndia set to buy three AWACS aircraft from Russia-Israel team
Russian and Israeli companies fulfilling a contract envisioning delivery of three AWACS [airborne warning and control system] aircraft to India are clarifying the financial aspect of the deal, Viktor Livanov, Ilyushin Aircraft Company director-general, told Interfax-Military News Agency. [Passage omitted]
He also said that three new Il-76MD airframes would be manufactured and delivered to Russia by the Tashkent-based Chkalov Aircraft Production Association (TAPO), while the Ilyushin Company would be responsible for fitting the airframes with PS-90A-76 engines, in its capacity as the flagship contractor. The engines will be mounted on the airframes at the Voronezh aircraft plant. After that the aircraft will be sent to Taganrog to be fitted with Israeli avionics.
The contract to deliver three AWACS aircraft to India was signed by the Russian, Indian, and Israeli sides in New Delhi on 10 October 2003. The aircraft will be fitted with the Phalcon radar, designed by the ELTA Company (IAI subdivision). The radar is designed to detect enemy aircraft, monitor airspace, and guide combat aircraft. The aircraft are to be delivered to India in 2004-2005.
India has selected the Il-76MD-based AWACS aircraft, since it boasts a large fleet of such aircraft. The Indian Air Force operates several dozen Il-76s, and has the necessary maintenance infrastructure.
According to experts, India may procure at least another four aircraft of this type in the near future.
Excerpt from report in English by Russian news agency Interfax- AVN web site
Source: BBC Monitoring South Asia ~ 31st December 2003
Steve Rush ~ Touchdown-News
Steve TouchdownIt’s not a new order, just part of the MYP, and the cost is only for the airframes that Boeing supply. Nothing else.
Expected completion is for 2011.
Ciao!
Steve ~ Touchdown-News
Steve TouchdownOutstanding.
Because I know that the French Air Force doesn’t have 550 combat aircraft and that Rafales are built at Merignac I have to work for Dassault?
May I suggest that PILOTGHT is the only person registered on this forum who didn’t know either of the above?
With those credentials as a starting point how can anyone take anything you post seriously?
I see you’ve topped it again in your last posting and pasted a link that’s three years old!
Steve ~ Touchdown-News
Steve TouchdownYou could well be right, Phil, but maybe we should give him the benefit of the doubt and just let him carry on posting about things he obviously knows nothing about. To be honest I canhardly make any sense of his latest outpourings above your post.
What really makes me smile is the use of info/data that’s wishful thinking from 30 months ago.
The belief that just because he makes a statement makes it true is also laughable. About the only thing I can understand from his latest drivel is that:
A2A is full operational since 2001! live with it!
Oh really? I wonder why then that none of the 12F Rafales have FSO installed and fitted and that 2003 has been spent integrating that system on the test fleet of Rafales at Istres?
As I said in my previous post, let’s see some evidence from the past 12 months that all of this A2G integration and acceptance has actually happened. Anybody else notice the silence so far?
2010/12 for Typhoon A2G integration is also nonsense. That date is purely arbitrary down to the fact that the requirement for them isn’t until then. If an export customer wants that capability they will get it. Even Tranche 1 Typhoons have GBU capability…and from the evidence presented so far those are the only A2G weapons integrated/cleared on Rafale at this point in time. I’m prepared to have an open mind and be persuaded otherwise but nobody has shown me anything to prove otherwise.
I won’t hold my breath as it’s been five weeks since I first asked.
Steve Rush ~ Touchdown-News
Steve TouchdownYAWWWWWWWWWWWNNNNNN
The usual mix of sh1t posted by the man who knows nothing.
This is from one of YOUR links in YOUR reply:
I – Program milestones
The Rafale programme is in full compliance with performance, budget and schedule requirements and has successfully achieved a number of significant development milestones.
* orders for the production engineering contract, and for series production of 61 aircraft (the requirement of the French armed forces is 294 Rafale).
* five carrier-borne test campaigns, leading to operational qualification of the naval version of Rafale.
* validation of in-flight refuelling.
* Rafale flight-test with the RBE2 radar, the countermeasures system and the first major components in the system.
* Gun and MICA fire control system qualification; flights in various stores configuration (fuel tanks, missiles), including a heavyweight configuration with three 2000-litre tanks, two Apache missiles and four Mica missiles.
* manual and automatic very low altitude flights above the sea and over land using digital terrain files.
* order for technical publications, based on the latest information technologies.
* Scalp long range stand off missile launching test.
Errrrrr………. SO WHAT??
What’s so great about any of that?? Where are the COLD, HARD FACTS??
And this is from the site that’s supposed to be responsible for marketing Rafale in Singapore!
What’s being claimed for A2G, which is what I actually asked about? Zero apart from “launching test”. C’est formidable!
Your French Defense link is 2 and a half years old and even more out of date than the usual rubbish you post.
Look how proud Dassault must be of their achievements in 2003. This comes from the Rafale page at Dassault Aviation:
Veuillez nous excuser, cette page est en développement.
Revenez dans quelques jours pour découvrir son contenu.
The latest copy of their PDF brochure “Fox Three” hosted on the site dates from the middle of 2001: 30 months out of date now. Yep, that’s the same as the link you also posted to support your pathetic “Wrong”.
Read what I said: the first Rafale built as an F2: not converted or updated but built from scratch around the full F2 system.
Oh look…let’s see who was right:
On 16 April 2003, Rafale C101, the first production single-seater for the French Air Force, made its maiden flight from Mérignac with test pilot Frédéric Lascourreges at the controls. During the 1h 15min flight, the fighter performed aggressive combat manoeuvres and flew at high supersonic speed.
Rafale C101 is the first aircraft to be equipped with the new avionics core of the omnirole F2 Standard which encompasses major improvements over the F1 Standard currently in service. The main features of the F2 Standard include the Front Sector Optronics (although it is not yet fitted to C101), the MIDS – LVT (Multifunction Information Distribution System – Low Volume Terminal) Link 16 datalink, specific air-toground modes for the RBE2 electronic scanning radar, additional modes for the Spectra self-defence/electronic warfare suite, and a wide range of weapons: Scalp EG cruise missiles, the AASM (Armement Air-Sol Modulaire) air-to-surface modular armament with INS/GPS reference and imagery guidance, plus longrange infrared-guided Mica IR missiles which supplant the long-serving Magic 2. Moreover, a higresolution 3D digital database permits automatic terrain-following at low-level.
PILOTGHT why don’t you do everybody here a favour and actually find out a little about the subject you profess to know so much about? Some links from within the past two years may also help your lost cause. Why bother posting at all when I actually asked for data and details of A2G tests from 2003?
Pfffffffffft
Steve Rush ~ Touchdown-News
Steve TouchdownYour point is well made, ELP…but how accurate is your information and/or sources when you didn’t even know that the AMRAAM had been cleared for Typhoon?
As the first Rafale built as an F2 only flew for the very first time in April 2003 how “massive” were the amounts of A2G testing that it did? Using your own parlance what other weapons have been “checked off” so far?
I’ve asked this before a month or so ago and nobody could tell me what progress has been made on Rafale’s A2G capabilities during 2003. As glitter pointed out there is (or was) a software problem. The only maintenance issues highlighted were negative ones.
Where’s the hard and fast info coming out of the Rafale programme? Anything that gets posted here is far too nebulous. I’ll be darned if I can find it so maybe somebody else can! :confused:
Cheers
Steve Rush ~ Touchdown-News
Sign In
