Guys (especially Phantom II) I think you should have a look at this forum:
http://www.airwarfareforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=3674
________
Vermont dispensary

we had 6 built to RN spec. They’re operated by a civilian firm, which charters them out when the RN doesn’t want them, keeping two permanently available.

Interesting. Where could I find any data about those specific ships, please ? 🙂
________
MARIJUANA TRICHOMES

Given the success of the airbus family and the fact that the Euro- name will be avoided as with Euro-fighter I think that something like Airtruck A400 can be the first member of a family with many different variations or planes to follow.

“Aerolifter”, then ?

But “airtruck” is not a bad name… 😎
________
Toyota Hiace Specifications

I must say I agree fully with Feydakin. The Jaguar M was not fit for carrier use and attempts to blame Dassault are just lame, especially for french people that have readily access to material in french on internet.

Well…

The Jaguar-M was far from ready to operate from an aircraft carrier, and it would have required much efforts to have it so. But other (non-French) solutions were also available but, Dassault manage to place its Etendard which, by far, was not an optimal solution.
Remember that Dassault always tried tu sell its Mirage F-1 over the land-based version of the Jaguar and therefore blockaded many attempts for export, at the expenses of its British partners of the time.
So, blaming Dassault is not “lame”, since this firm has always been very good at lobbying the various French governments…
________
SMOKING KILLS

3000 tonnes for a OPV ? That’s quite…err, big, isn’t it ? What distinguish this vessel from a “real” frigate ? Is this a question of weapon integration ? :confused:
________
Ford Prefect History

and the SuE has worked out very well for them in the end.

Yes.

But the SuE’s success was heavily liked to the Exocet’s. Whil it was a good aircraft, it suffered of some drawback, like insufficient autonomy and range, and limited payload (hence limited firepower), which is sad since the Foch and Clemenceau could only carry a small air group. Having had more capable aircrafts would have been a serious plus…

For that matter, when comparing our Crusaders/Etendards/SuE-equipped Foch and Clemenceau carriers, with the british Buccanners/Phantoms-equipped Ark Royal carrier, I’d have gladly traded the first for the former…
________
TOYOTA A TRANSMISSION HISTORY

I hope a French poster will see this thread and have some information on why the programme was cancelled

To my knownledge, the main cancelation’s reason is named Dassault aviation. By merging with Breguet to become Dassault-Breguet they got their hands on two aicrafts that were actually competitors between each other (the same happened between the Jaguar and the various mirages Dassault proposed at this time).
So, Dassault quitly killed the Jaguar M programme in favor of it’s own “100% Dassaylt” Etendard. That’s, at least, the story I have been told, but I’d appreciate some confirmation…
I also heard that the Jaguar M was finally not that good when it came to land on an aircraft carrier’s deck, but again I’m not sure of that story again…
However, I mostly agree with Pioneer, when he says the Jaguar was a more capable aircraft, in terms of payload and range, than the Etendard…

Regarding replacing the Crusader, I’m not sure a Jaguar with an AA-radar would be a better interceptor than the F-8E(FN) which did use the SARH R.530.

Right. The Jaguar was first and foremost a strike aircraft, with only very secondary Air-to-Air capabilities, to say nothing of its lack of a radar (a useful tool for an interceptor, don’t you think ?)
________
No2 Vaporizer