What about a pickup truck with box launcher in the back? Either under some kind of cover, or flat on the bed, looking like normal cargo, with some kind of quick elevating mechanism underneath.

That could work, but a forest isn’t usually that accessible to a pickup. But then you couldn’t really launch from dense forest anyway.

If it’s at that point though you may as well just stick a CAMM box launcher on the back and the whole idea of this being a MANPADS goes entirely out the window.

That is a very good point Grim I’ve no idea where he is so I suppose it needs to be taken in context.

Personally if I had to allocate £5 Billion GBP my main priority would be to get out of Afghanistan and maybe use that money to help take a chip out of the projected budget overspend. However this nation (UK) is in such huge amounts of debt and borrows so much each year I would rather money was saved across the board rather than spent. I accept that this goes against the idea of any money being a gift but I would rather the Nation was sound financially before I started giving additional funds to departments. Don’t give if you cannot give, I wouldn’t want a gift from someone if I knew they could not afford. Sorry if I spoiled the mood a bit.

That’s a fair enough point and one that I can’t really argue with. I would however make sure that no areas were ring fenced, health and education may be vote winners but there is a hell of a lot of waste and excess spending that should be cut out of them. It wouldn’t clear our debts but it would at least take some pressure off.

Okay, would then anyone want to venture out and say how much would the envelope increase with a engine increase from 5 kg to 12 kg?

Alternatively – how could one use larger and heavier missiles and make the whole system very unconspicuous in transit (when not prepared to shoot), very much shoot and scoot, very mobile in urban enviroments and forests, etc?

Something inconspicuous in a forest won’t be so in an urban area. I’d suggest a quadbike but they’d stick out in compared to a normal car or even a Humvee in an urban area.

I suppose you could mount the missiles on a trailer, rapier style, that can be folded down and covered to look like a regular trailer. Or you could use an inconspicuous box launcher like the new CAMM launchers.

US has reinstated nothing.

Obama killed the Next Generation Bomber (B-2 replacement) last April — drove a stake through it’s heart. The design teams have disbanded and several years of work were lost.

There is no funding to reinstate NGB in the FY10 defense budget and the 2011 POM is too far down the path to bring back and add money. The first opportunity to restart the NGB is the 2012 POM and that is not a sure thing as political intrigue can divert potential bomber development money to fund “pet rock” social programs.

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4416726

There was a more detailed story on it somewhere but can’t find it, that was the gist anyway. So funding is coming back for FY2011, no need to cry anymore because 100% of GDP isn’t being put into helping silly poor people.

There is something that I do not understand, if really the pack Sampson/PAAMS/S-1850 works correctly and the problems are attributable to the missiles Aster 15/30: how is it possible that they realize this problem until the year 2009? From 1996 that the shots of the Aster missiles began the MBDA publicity the only thing that it counts there are his successes…. when they are against only one target, the problem must be that the enemy launch three or four missiles SSM fly all grouped and the missiles interfere Aster to be able to knock down all.
The frigates Horizon have just come into operation in the French and Italian navys with a radar multufuncion (EMPAR) who supposes that it gives worse services than the SAMPSON: Do not the AAW franco-italian have these problems…. or the fact is that his demand level with multiple targets is much underneath of the requirements of the RN?

It isn’t clear what the exact problem is, they’ve been fairly vague. And the problem won’t be a UK one, it will be an issue for all three nations, they’re all sing the same test platform (some barge off the coast of France) that represents the PAAMS system for all three nations.

Even then even in the Astute you are unlikely to have very many on board. Isn’t it 38 that they can carry of which a large proportion will be Torpedos.

Indeed it is. Although the exact mix will shift about depending on what they’ve been tasked with.

I would have thought they’d design it with VLS as a hull plug, meaning you’re not losing space by adding it. I guess that’d make them too big though to work well as a proper SSN. Enter the Vanguard replacements in SSGN config.

A more fundamental question regarding the flight crews..

I presume to step from an MR2 in to a MRA4 would be a relatively straight forward transition.

But from not having flown an MR2 for 2 years into an MRA4 ??

Would the MR2 crews rotate through the R1s to keep “current” ahead of the introduction of the MRA 4? There is going to be a lot of crews sitting on their thumbs awaiting their turn.

Parts of the crew might be able to rotate, as in the pilots, but the mission crews (11 or so I think) won’t be able to go to the R1’s as easily. My guess is that most of the crews will sit about or be part of the reductions in numbers being made. There are always simulators they can use to practice.

Just a quickie as I am only an interested on-looker. If the Jaguar is retired what should still be “secret”?

Well if it pertains to something that made them better than the still in use GR9’s and GR4’s (the majority of Britain’s frontline aircraft at the moment) then giving it away wouldn’t just affect the retired Jaguar would it? It’d essentially point to a weakness in current aircraft.