Swerve, you forget the socialists and communists call themselves liberal, I call them leftists.

Nope. Never met a Marxist, Trotskyist, Maoist or Stalinist who claimed to be a liberal. To be honest have not many who actually had the first idea what they were claiming to be either.

I am amused when slightly left of centre parties with no intention of overthrowing capitalism claim to be socialists. Presumably they do so only to provide easy ammunition for slight right of centre or full blown right wingers. I can see no other reason. Reformers yes. Workers representatives yes. Socialist. Clearly not.

Also ‘American’ is not equal to ‘citizen of united states’, it refers to two entire continents. I have met and spoken to several Canadian, Mexicans and Argentinians who did not conflate liberal with socialist. In the name of fairness though I suppose that cannot be taken as being a scientific or necessarily representative sample.

Oh and representative democracy is of course also a nonsensical idea. If you want genuine government by the people you need to have government as a civic duty like jury duty is. Just like it was in Athens. (I would hope that it goes without saying that the pool is citizens would now be rather wider though)

For the sake of completeness I am a rational anarchist.

I’ve just thought of an answer. The USMC sets up an army co-operation wing, equipped with C-27Js. The USAF can’t object, as the USMC already has an air transport fleet. The USMC knows all about the sort of support the US army wants, as it does it for its own ground troops. The army could lend the personnel & provide the funding. Everyone’s happy except the USAF. :dev2:

Ooh I like that. USMC of course has enough political backing to get away with that where another service would not. And it shows interference co operation. And it would be useful to all concerned.

Any ideas on probe and drove for the aircraft?

The advantage of putting strike length mk41 on t45s is that we already have the t45s.

I do not pretend for one moment that procuring, fitting and working up is going to happen overnight. But it is possible to get tomahawks to see on t45 much more quickly than on t26s.

Seems a contradiction to me……making a modern AD destroyer “stealthy”……..I mean, in order to be “stealthy” you have to shut down all its radars, making it into (essentialy) a floating missile magazine……..dependent on other sources for its target data………flexible I know but HORRIBLY expensive. If your not gonna use the sensors, why put them to sea (and pay for them) in the first place?

I sort of agree. Switching aegis on is basically saying ‘here I am come and get me.’ The USN can do this as each aegis ship has lots of missiles and one tends not to find one isolated aegis skimmer.

But navies do use emcon and networking sensors means that not every skimmer has to be broadcasting for the whole flotilla to have a good picture of the battlespace. Also making the ships signature smaller makes it more likely that decoys can do their job

Hi All,
No need to apologise after all were all capable of it but some choose to forget this (No offence to al.)

None taken, hence starting that post with an apology for pedantry

Who said the MiG-31 was the predecessor?

Post 1 this thread paragraph 1 sentence 3 in paranthesis

What about the stx pv90?

Seems to do all of the platform things required and gives commonality with our closest neighbour

After having seen the Yak-38 thread, I think it is controversal enough 🙂

Somewhat bizarrely my immediate thought was the Harrier

For every strongly held, eloquently articulated view on the Harrier espoused by a rational human being there seems to be an equally strongly held, equally eloquent view espoused by an equally rational human being.