According to channel 4 last night it was unmaned fighters, according to the bbc this morning it’s Surveillance aircraft.

The only possible war-fighting scenario for the new British carriers will be in the South Atlantic. There the capability of the Super Hornet will be important.

Regards

Really? That’s an awfully big prediction you’re making there. Care to supply me with six numbers from between 1 and 49 for tonight?

I read that the French people ain’t that happy about the deal, they fear job losses and so and so. May be people in the Typhoon partner nations would have been more grateful.

Then they’re idiots.

The problem with an interim aircraft is that it goes against the current policy of reducing the UK airwings to a 2 Types (RAF with Typhoon and F35C and FAA with F35C), therefore reducing the support and Logistics tail.

In Interim aircraft means 3 types… Typhoon, F35C and SHornet/Rafale. OK so SHornet/Rafale would be replaced by F35C, but in infrastructure and logistics terms all three types would require support. That would be no better than Tornado Typhoon and Harrier as the 3 Jet types.

Probably the reason why the Admiral that was supposedly the source for all this never actually said what has been reported.

Yes that is almost certainly the all frills removed one that we’re going to get.

Kev, if you think the jibes re LM shares etc. were in any way an issue then it only goes to show that the main point of the comment has been missed.

I doubt it, it wasn’t exactly subtle.

The tone and comments from both John Symons and one other in particular is the catalyst that triggered those comments.

I certainly don’t feel put in my place by anything John Symons, you or anybody else has posted.

Fine I only say things as I see then.

In fact it is notable that due to my continually pushing the point(s) John Symons eventually did respond with a thoughtful , reasoned and logical post. My response was to that, as it would have been all along if the simple questions i asked had been taken as simple questions and not attacked alongside attacks on me.

You’re questions were loaded, we’ve already established that, why would anyone answer them when both you and he already know the answers? John was right it smacks of cheap point scoring.

Thus those of us who may not share the view that all is good and no critical comment should be tolerated may have a tendancy to react less than positively when we see the same tired excuses being trotted out. There is also a suspicion that it is the same people trotting out the same tired excuses for their own gratificaition rather than a desire to discuss aviation.

You could easily state the same thing about many of the detractors, same names across multiple forums, saying the same things over and over again.

I’ll leave this tired debate now, after all I broke my own rule of “never get involved in an F35 thread” to do so and rather wish I hadn’t.

Sorry Kev99 this smacks of the thought police.

I have to read day in day out comments that essentially state the F35 program should be left alone and “yes it’s late and over budget but it’s all ok” yet i can’t make, albeit slightly brutal, points based on fact?
Sorry but i’m not accepting that.

As i hope you’ll see from John Symons and my lastest offerings it is perfectly possible to have a civilised debate.

I have never stated there is anything wrong with what you think about the F35 programme merely the way you (and others) have expressed them and how this has ruined any chance of a reasoned debate, therefore I find the suggestion that this in any way represents the ‘thought police’ is not relevant.

As for John Symons posts, he has responded in very level headed way considering some of the language you’ve thrown at him. I also note that you’re reasoned reply only appeared after John put you in your place regarding the accusations over him and others of being an LM employee and of him questioning your motivations.

The fact that you are essentially saying there is no other answer but yes rather suggests that it is thus difficult to make an argument that all is good with the F35 program.

Or that those questions were deliberately rather heavily loaded, which of course they were.

The posters in this thread on both sides are acting like a bunch of hysterical children.