The MoD’s answer:

UK MoD Responds to News Reports on Force Cuts

(Source: UK Ministry of Defence; issued Jan. 13, 2010)

(See note at bottom—Ed.)

Potential Cuts to Armed Forces

Various newspapers report that there could be a 20 per cent cut in Armed Forces personnel, according to a study by the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) into what the Armed Forces might look like if expected cuts in MOD spending are implemented.

Like all departments, the Ministry of Defence is facing challenging financial circumstances. We routinely review our spending to ensure we focus on Afghanistan and live within our means.

The Chancellor has already said not a penny will be cut from the Defence Budget next year but it is not possible to give a meaningful assessment beyond 2010/11 as future spending plans have not yet been set.

A Strategic Defence Review will take place after the election and we welcome RUSI’s contribution to the debate.

Equipment for troops in Afghanistan
The Sun newspaper says that, according to a poll they have run, only one in four British people believe our troops have all the kit they need to defeat the Taliban.

Since 2006, we have spent £10bn on equipment for the front line, with £3.2bn spent on Urgent Operational Requirements for kit and equipment specifically needed for Afghanistan, and over £1.3bn spent on more than 1,200 armoured vehicles alone.

The Chief of the Defence Staff, Air Chief Marshal Sir Jock Stirrup, recently said: “The equipment that our people are using is frankly the best that they’ve ever had in any of my 40 years of service and it’s getting better all the time, so in terms of numbers, in terms of quality, both are increasing.”

We are constantly buying new equipment and improving the kit sent to troops on the front line in Afghanistan. Troops who deploy on operations are issued with a ‘black bag’ containing over £3,000 worth of equipment from boots and sleeping bags to camel back water packs and binoculars, as well as body armour and personal weapons.

Other recent equipment increases include:
–The Royal Air Force’s fleet of battle-winning Chinooks has today been boosted by the arrival of the first two new Mk3s of eight. The arrival of these aircraft is further evidence of the measures we have taken to strengthen our Support Helicopter Force and follows our announcement three weeks ago that we plan to buy up to 22 more Chinooks.
–5,000 sets of the brand new Osprey Assault body armour and Mark 7 helmets have been sent to theatre, with 5,000 more on the way.
–Two brand new tactical support vehicles have been introduced to Afghanistan – the Coyote and the Husky which carry troops, kit and supplies to the front line.
–A 77 per cent increase in the number of Ridgbacks, a smaller, more agile version of the Mastiff, since August 2009.
–By May 2010, the number of available hours provided by the Hermes 450, Desert Hawk and Reaper Unmanned Aerial Vehicles will have increased by around 33 per cent, 50 per cent and 80 per cent, respectively.

(EDITOR’S NOTE: Surprisingly, MoD does not comment the biggest news story published by the British press on Jan. 12, in which the Guardian reports that “Defence chiefs are preparing drastic cuts to the number of American [F-35 JSF] stealth aircraft planned for the RAF and the Royal Navy’s proposed new carriers.”)

link: http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-pres/3/pres_release.html

A russian Su-27 was lost from radar today in the far east of the country, still missing:

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20100114/157543847.html

Also, another Su-27UB or Su-30 crashed yesterday in Russia, but I am not sure whether that was RuAF’s. Perhaps it was registered to Aeroflot. That’s all I know, but I got no source for this in English, sorry.

The tiny canards on the B-1 are not retractable and are used to alleviate structural loads due to fuselage bending during low level, high Q flight. They are not used for vehicle flight control and are inactive during takeoff and landing due to low Q.

You are by all means 100% right, I had the Concorde in mind :D:D:D

X-36 has canards.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_X-36

Yeah, so does the X-31 by Rockwell/MBB, and the Grumman X-29 too. WTF? Even the F-15 S/MTD and the F-16 AFTI both have canards.

And your point is…?

You sound way too certain…

only americans thinks canards are a problem for rcs. No one else.

Does that “no one else” include the Russians too? :rolleyes: Cause I believe that’s what they cited when they deleted canards from the Su-35BM. RCS reduction.

Sweden, china and india have stealth in sketch

Well, Americans too had and still have stealth with canards, but only in sketch. You will, hopefully, *not* disagree that sketch is one thing and reality another. And right now, reality says that the only low RCS (a.k.a. stealth) airplanes flying around are american bulit. Guess what, none has canards. So if they think canards are bad for low RCS, and untill someone else comes ahead with a different but existing, mass produced, operational and combat tested and proved stealth approach, I’ll go with the american concept.

No offence whatsoever, I don’t particularly like the American attitude, but what is right is right.

Saab has even a patent for a canard concealer tech …

…and Northrop Grumman has a patent for variable geometry forward swept wings, but they don’t make a fuss over it.

No offence again. Just making a point.

It’s an aviation magazine really (10/2008). Even if I scan it, it’s not in English. It says also that Belarus too upgraded its own L-39s in the same factory.

Oh, well. He who dares wins, they say. He who insists also wins, I say.

Got it:

Egypt, Yemen fund MiG-21 upgrades

Further pictures shown at Aviasvit provided evidence that Yemen has also chosen to upgrade its Aero Vodochody L-39 trainers in Ukraine. The work includes the installation of a sensor/designator turret under the aircraft’s fuselage that enables the type to perform light attack tasks using precision-guided weapons.

The air forces of Belarus and Ukraine have launched more modest L-39 upgrades also offered by Odesaremservis, with the work introducing a revised avionics suite and a multifunction cockpit display. A full specification L-39M upgrade would also add identification friend-or-foe equipment, and an Ivchenko-Progress AI-25TLSh engine offering a 10% increase in thrust and an improved rate of climb.

My only mistake is that I presented it as if the upgrade is complete, probably it is not, not in such a short notice (14 months) anyway. Also, the new engine is translated as a certain addition, but from the english text seems it’s just an option.

Just one engine was “lost” from Malaysia, not Indonesia

Argentina never operated any F-5s :rolleyes:

Bad memory on my behalf in both cases. Hope you feel better now. :rolleyes:

Though I think it was really two engines.

It’s two engines stolen as Najib pledges no cover-up

Have the two missing F5 fighter jet engines ended up as scrap metal? – Lim Kit Siang

…the two J85-GE-21 engines, which power the F5 fighters, which had been stolen from two RMAF facilities while some components from the same planes were also unaccounted for?

Unless if there is a more recent source explicitely stating otherwise…