Maybe my eyes are messed up, but i dont see air inlet on top of the bomber on the yellow model
[ATTACH=CONFIG]217536[/ATTACH]

Take another look, there are a number of differences.

Edit: Basically because they’re different aircraft.

Argentine economy is hardly a steller performer either and where are the Harriers it would need going to come from? not from Spain that’s for sure and I can’t see anyone else willing to sell any either.

“It’s Groundhog day!”

1, forget the Malvinas – the population has voted to stay British. Even if you can evade, the consequences would cripple the country. If you want to gain from the riches hidden in the sea, co-operate with the Brits to find and exploit them. Workers, equipment, trade all could go through Argentina.

It really should be that simple, shouldn’t it……….

Not very German is it?

No, it’s a ****-up worthy of the MOD.

My personal opinion is that there are obvious problems with existing MALE UAV’s either lack of power or folding wings however Telemos could be a contender if it had folding wings and uprated engines overs those fitted to the BAE Mantis. If a STOL MALE UAV could be produced that could take off from a CVF then I think it would be extremely helpful to RN beyond 2020 potentially carrying out AEW, MPA as well as the typical MALE roles.

I’m of similar opinion, I’m not sure if the Mantis airframe is strong enough either and I have real concerns about the landing gear.

I have no idea what your talking about? The source I quoted was from the UK MoD which is just as true today as it was in 2002. Which, just stated the CVF could be equipped with Catapults and Arresting Gear. Either from the start or as a retrofit. I’ve seem nothing to counter that…………

No the source you qouted isn’t just as true as it was in 2002, because it was written before the design for cvf was complete, see Swerve’s info about the CVF design not being as adaptable as you seem to think it is.

You have stated more than once that CVF has been “planned from the very start to be equipped with either STOVL F-35B’s or CTOL F-35C’s using Catapults and Arresting Gear”

Bit difficult when no space is reserved for catapuilts?

Well, I think you are misreading or taking out of context what they mean? What you think the Royal Navy is going to leave the spaces empty were the Catapults or Arresting Gear may or may not be installed. No they will use the space for storage or other non critical uses. Which, would be removed if retrofitted at a later day. This is one of the reasons for the added cost because both CVF’s were in the middle of construction. Which, wouldn’t be a problem if a Brand New CVF equipped with Catapults and Arresting Gear was constructed from the ground (so to speak) up!

As Swerve has told you repeatedly that space was not reserved, they haven’t allocated the space to something else, it doesn’t exist.

In addition how many times do I have to say I wasn’t talking about redesigning or retrofitted a current CVF (Queen Elizabeth or Prince of Wales) for Brazil. I was (yet again) stating that Brazil could purchase a Brand New (3rd) CVF constructed with Catapults and Arresting Gear from day one.

As I have told you and Swerve stated in his first post (which you contradicted) the design doesn’t exist.

Well, if you would read what I have written and not made assumptions that aren’t there! Maybe I wouldn’t feel so compelled to post rolleyes………

Stop being childish, we all know what you’re saying here, the simple fact of the matter is you are wrong and refuse to accept it.

Would the CVF have to have cats and traps to operate UCAV/UAV especillay if we are talking about something along the lines of a MALE BAE Mantis type UAV? The OV-10 could be launched from and landed on the JFK without cats and traps.

In the absense of any available data on length of takeoff or recovery, I reckon it probably would, the installation of a lower impact catapuilt system such as EMKIT would probably be required, unless of course someone built a STOL/STOVL UAV.