Absolutely, Holland could build its own fighters. This is a silly thread.
If Israel (population 6 million) and Sweden (population 9 million) can do it, then Holland (population 16 million), with arguably a larger industrial base than these two put together, can certainly do it.
It’s simply a matter of political will and this, quite simply, is lacking. End of story.
There are plenty of other, perhaps more stark examples. Australia? Brazil? Argentina?
My guess is that returning Iran to ‘the Dark Ages’ would be doing the more radical Mullahs’ work for them…
Hey, thanks for that.
I’m pretty sure I saw a photo of a mock-up rather than just an artist’s impression but, yes, it could well have been this idea…
… although just how ‘inexpensive’ it would have been is open to debate!
It might be just my imagination but I’m pretty sure I recall seeing a mock up of Concorde in RAF markings.
Bomber?
Stand off missile carrier?
Super Blairforce One type?
Whatever, it would have been cool x power N….
Um… Concorde..?
My thanks to all who posted information.
Yes, not before time.
A friend was killed in his Benson-type in a classic PIO-chop off the tail mishap.
It reminded me of all the horror stories I’ve read and they turned out too be true. Because eof my familiarity with rotors & such, I was asked to help the unit safety officer with his report. It was such a classic example of that type of mishap that the FAA asked for the wreckage to use at their crash-investagator school.On a happier note, there is a firm in the U.S. trying to reintroduce autogyros…the make nice turbine powered ships. But at $500,000 +, a bit too expensive for private use.
Which firm is that? For sure, it sounds too steep to be for the private market… in which case it appears that someone does think there’s a ‘commercial’ future for them…
This could be a case of giving a dog a bad name.
I’ve always thought that the type has punched well below its weight and really ‘could do better’ – but for the inconvenient fact that people tend to see them as a ‘second rate helicopter’.
As long as this perception lasts, autogyros will continue to be a case of potential unfulfilled.
And I say again that the Su24 was a lookalike and not much more.
My point about ‘copying’ has been misconstrued. Anyone who has any memory at all of those Cold War days of the 60s and 70s will tell you that the idea of imitating the West in almost all things but politics – and then claiming that they, the Soviets had invented the idea in the first place – was almost a weekly occurrence. It became so banal and commonplace that it was almost a surprise when they didn’t do so. It certainly became the stuff of comedy routines, such was its notoriety.
The Soviets had agents in the West on a truly massive scale whose only job was to bring/report back data for the purpose of imitation or reproduction. They paid no royalties; they acknowledged no indebtedness. All of this is well documented and relates to all areas of technological endeavour, not just the military. Perhaps people simply would rather forget this or, regarding the younger amongst us, are blissfully unaware of what a totalitarian state is capable of.
This kind of thing still hasn’t stopped:
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htmurph/articles/20071009.aspx
… all of which strikes me as hilariously poetic justice.
The French Aéronavale will embark for the first time on an American aircraft carrier. Without a second aircraft carrier, while Charles stopped for maintenance for eighteen months, pilots of Rafale and Hawkeye are going to train in July 2008 aboard the USS Roosevelt off Norfolk, in the Atlantic. “We are setting up this operation with the American Navy” said the French Navy Office. A dozen airplanes are to be deployed on Roosevelt: six to eight Rafales of the flotilla 12 F and two Hawkeyes of the flotilla 4F.
For the Navy, it is a simple “technical exchanges”. So far, FN aircraft could not land on Americans carriers. But since last July, as we announced then on this blog (see photo), the Rafale F2 have the capacity to do so after validating their alignment system. There are very few technical obstacles, since Charles is equipped with catapults and arresting wires made in the United States. Since the nineties, French navy pilots are trained in the United States, in the absence of trainer aircraft for learning carrier landing techniques.
The newsletter TTU, which reveals information this week, sees in this case “evidence of warming in Franco-American relations and the willingness of President Nicolas Sarkozy to ensure that France regains its place in the “Otan”. TTU said that this “initiative is strongly encouraged by Craig Stapleton, the United States Ambassador to France.” Boarding a dozen planes french aboard an American is indeed never seen before!
This operation will backfire against the interests of the French Navy. It gives arguments to the opponents of the construction of a second aircraft carrier (PA2), many in the upper héirarchy of the military. If the French can operate their Flotillas from the large American carriers in the event of an international crisis and non-availability of Charles, France can possibly save three billion euros, the cost of PA2. As for national independence …
Ah yes, national ‘independence’. The French have worshipped at that particular altar oftentimes, even at the sacrifice of many other, some would say more desirable objectives.
French aircraft operating from a US carrier? How times have changed! The good general would be turning in his grave at this cohabitation with ‘les anglo-saxons’.
It looks like we’re going to have to charge the French with that entirely unFrench quality: pragmatism.
Plus ca change…
So many confessions. You dreadful people…!
… but we all had a great time, didn’t we?
In fact, the nostalgia is so strong that I might just…
Amazing.
I honestly hadn’t known about the prog when I posted my thread yesterday. Quite a coincidence!
Good to see they’ve got all the moulds back. What the hell were they doing in France, anyway?
I hope the make a success of the business and the name survives.
So, to bring things back OT, it seems that to say the Fencer was a direct analogy to the F111 is contested by more than one contributor.
I agree.
Su-24.
Yes, the Fencer comes to mind but it seems to me the ‘closeness’ is indeed remote.