I love when people use statistic to draw misleading conclusion… “you are 5x more likely to be killed by a lighting than shark”… maybe if you are Mongolian Steppe Horsemen who never gets near the ocean.. if you are in the water like me almost every day, and in the Australian waters at that… the odds change rapidly. In Britain mere sighting of White Pointers, mile of coast in enough to send people into panic… here and in S.Africe i can show you damned things any time you wish.. i know spots with 100% guarantee population.

Now i never go out and kill them, unlike Steve, i would not eat one either.. sharks have largest % of mercury and lead in their meat then any other fish on earth.. eating them is like licking lead while keeping your feet in bucket of mercury.

That said i have killed some while spear fishing.. when they get with in spear gun range im sorry but its too close for my comfort. It its a smaller one basically anything less than 1.5-2.0m ill try jab it with tip off the gun to make it go away… if its behaving aggressively (fins down , arched midsection ) or its more than 2.0m .. im sorry but its getting speared trough its head if its gets anywhere near me. Largest one i ever killed was a Whaler near Pt.Bottany.. must have been 3.5m… i saw it and decided to surface and get out of the water, but it went under and started slowly coming up below me.. did not look threatening more inquisitive .. but sharks investigate with their teeth, so i put a spear through its big head and went up.. cost me $200 for lost spear :mad::mad::mad:

PS: Only once ive seen White shark when in the water, in the distance minding its own business… still i think i might have surfaced faster than a submarine on a full blow. 😀

Swis : Gripen done deal

India : MiG 35, since they are getting more Ks anyway

Brazil : Squat All , they cant afford such programe

Gadafi : Flankers… Rafale was in there with a chance, buuuuutttt as someone said it above 🙂

Dutch : F35, done deal

It’s not the size of the tool but how well it’s designed.

Your Girlfriend is just saying that to make you feel better :D:D:D

(sorry, i just had to do it :diablo:)

While I don’t disagree, I think the F-22 (and/or JSF) do have advantages in response time. If an asset is already in theater, or even already in flight, responding to a ToO becomes that much quicker and easier. I just don’t see the USAF forward basing B-2’s, and routine patrols with the Bat are a non-starter.

Matt

I can agree for the F35 part… but just as you dont see forward basing of B2s, i dont see forward basing of F22. This all has a signature moves of a gigantic while elephant getting created. And lets at this point state that in no way i am dissing the aircraft it self… but F22 is turning into B2… to valuable to even risk loosing, or even deploying to out “buddies” as tech is to big of a secret .
So in essence they will float around US mainland looking pretty and forward deploy at time when conflict is iminent, say as Kosovo campaign or Desert force… now for campagins like those two when you have months to plan, this works…. but lest have our self a hypothetical scenario.. Pakistans gov. gets ousted in a cue by extermists.. Reminets of Pak army under moderates, are holding up in parts of the country including the bases with nuclear arsenal.. they need help urgently.. but dont want it from India.

Now US can respond in two ways send CBG with F35s and SHs which can be there in days.. or ..send B2s (assume B52s will run greater risk of getting shot down) from Whitemen , mid-air refuel , and attack enemy, or bomb location where nukes are stored .

How does f22 fit into this scenario?? You need weeks to forward deploy it .. even better question is where possibly CAN you safely deploy it so it can operate above Pakistan??

In majority of possible Conflicts US is to face in next 25 years, it is F35 that will most likely be getting to battle, not F22… so to scare Russians and Chinese current numbers are more then enough.. extra 60 will make 0 difference… better put that money towards more VTOL F35s and small fast carriers.

PS: The best way that US could utilise F22s supperiorty over anything in the air, is to actually sell it to its closest alies.. Israel, Japan, S.Korea, Australia, Taiwan. You kill two birds with one stone, 1) You give your “adverseries” a serious headache should they contemplate something stupid, without actually risking your men, and equipment… 2) You may actually make few $$ and pay for extra toys for the USAF… and use saved money to save tens of thousands of jobs in those car companies going down the toilet.

It may something to do with this…

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1834785,00.html

Israel told Russians in straight terms that “advanced AA systems will not be sold to Georgia”. In turn Russians denied pleading from Iran to secure S300…

But somebody did not play ball ….:rolleyes:

… and now have a serious problem on their hands.

If they are planning to attack Irans facilities , well they better hurry before it gets whole lot more complicated.

Precisely … and its been working fine due to fact that to date UCAVs have been employed over places like afganistan, iraq, and Africa.

Lest see how much use would they be over country with somewhat sophisticated AA network and capable EW systems.

The dependency of UCAV on constant input from remote controlers is something that has to be overcome before we can make wild claims such as “Pilots are getting obsolite”

Hmm this sounds like a viable solution to defend at least some vessels .. in particular the oil tankers and ore carriers. You design/modify the superstructure of the ship when controls are, to be easy to lock out and hard to access. It no different to middle age type Carracks which had raised rear (and sometimes forward) towers and would use them as mini forts if enemy landed on the deck.. made it more difficult for landing force to take over.

Now i know for cruise liners this wont work.. but for oil tanker, ore carriers, cargo ships, why not up armor/reinforce all access hatches , doors and port holes big enough for men to get in, and make them lockable from inside. Esentialy make the bridge area a “safe room” where crew could widraw and hold up for period of time. If crew can remove them self from danger and avoid being taken hostage, then any rescue force can be free to engage boarding pirates with out threat to crew and hostages.

230-250 MKI

170-200 Mig35/Rafale/S.Bug as part of MRCA (other contenders are not up to requirements )

38-50 (2-3 squadrons) Su32 modified for maximum range and long penetration (talk to israelies ) for ground attack (pak afgan border)

38-50 Mig29K/S.Bug for carrier opperations (providing Boeing is telling truth)

Reserve room for PAKFA about 100-150 when and if its avaliable , if not get SU35 (30-50) to most capable outfits

Scrap Bisons … yes even if they can match Pakistans F16s, MKI and MRCA can do it better

Scrap 27s

Scrap LCA while its not total disaster yet.