Al.swerve- The Hawk is a primary trainer
The RAF for one diasgree with you
The Hawk first entered service with the RAF in 1976, both as an advanced flying-training aircraft and a weapons-training aircraft.
from http://www.raf.mod.uk/equipment/hawk.cfm
it is in the same class as the L-59 and Alpha Jet.
Sounds about right.
Al.They might have then turned this around and offered it for the MRCA
I’m sure that I’ve read (maybe even on these here forums amongst others) that MRCA was written around the Mirage 2000 so that doesn’t read as fantasy at all.
Al.If India decided to purchase Typhoon’s would it increase the chances of countries like Japan buying it?
In the same way as Pakistan and China collaborating on defence with a common compettitor (India) presumably India and Japan might collaborate against their common compettitor (China).
Al.Thats absurd,
No it isn’t. I didn’t make up the nickname (largely coz I was a small child at school when Eagles came on stream). It took McD and USAF a long time to iron the wrinkles out.
but Ive heard that both the F-15 and F-16 have some of the lowest maintenaince per hours of flight time and overall longest airframe life time of any jet of its generation.
The latter I’ve heard no disagreement on but the former you’ve heard different stories to me apparently.
Al.But how do you get 19inch chrome rims on a warship?
Put Gripens onboard and then fit with (ridiculously small) Saab 19″ chromes and the Hirsch Saab badges.
The bigger question is ‘How do you make it hop up and down
Hydraulic bilge pumps?
Thanks to Wanshan for pointing out that I was rather hoping for reasons why stuff has been added.
I’m going to amend my proposal with Otomat instead of Exocet. So that it can have 4 ASM and 4 ASW (Milas?) so that Lynx doesn’t have to carry Stingrays and can have greater range and endurance
Al.I’d change that to “European industry can compete”
Which contains within it ‘can beat’. As if it cannot beat then it cannot compete. Eurojingoism is no more pleasant than any other jingoism so I’d certainly join you in a cry of ‘now hang on that’s a bit steep’ if the quote had been ‘will beat’ or ‘grinds all others into the dust’.
I think that 2 seat tyffie (or 2 seat F16XL whilst we are at at) with TVC and no vertical stabiliser would look awesome and new and worldbeating and trailblazing so should be pursued for those reasons alone. Whether they would be right for carrier ops is perhaps another issue.
Al.#i thought we were selling Invincible, but keeping Illustrious (already afloat when the Argentineans invaded) & Ark Royal (building).
I shall confess to a spot of pesimism here. Without the Falklands conflict I cannot see Lusty and Ark being immune from Knott and Thatcher. In fact without the conflict I would expect any of the subsequent HMGs to have sold or scrapped before now.
Al.The F-15’s maintenance record wasn’t much different from the Tomcat’s. Especially in the early days.
Indeed, F15s didn’t earn the nickname ‘hangar queen’ because they looked regal and were slinging out knighthoods.
Al.What if Argentina didnt invade the Falklands until 1986 or latter
Militarily they would have won.
Not only would they have had all the Exocets they ordered and Etendards and possibly F1s and better scooters. And no doubt an uprated airstrip as part of improved flights between Falklands and Argentina.
But also (as mentioned) no UK CVS, no V Force, no Antarctic patrol ship, and a crippled UK dockyard capacity. As it was the Task Force was hurriedly prepared by men who knew that they would soon be out of a job. As the Task Force sailed we set about making sure that we would never again be able to prepare and send such a force ever again.
But ………… if the junta had been able to wait until 86 to launch the invasion then they wouldn’t have done so. They launched the invasion as a desperate gamble to divert their own public opinion from domestic issues. If they had been able to deal with that successfully for 4 years there would have been no need to invade.
Al.If the LHAs are really meant to carry up to 20 F35Bs, then the failure to include a ski jump makes even less sense, especially if it is having weight issues. It may need a ski jump to be able to take off with any sort of useful payload.
Its politics though isn’t it? The USN does not want to run even the slightest risk of losing its new supercarrier programme; if gators have skijumps and look like the carriers being used by RN, PLAN and Russian Navy there is a (real or perceived) danger that USN will be told that it already has the aircraft carriers which it needs.
On a technical note I’d fully agree that the loss of helo spots would be a price worth paying for the extra effectiveness of the embarked JSFs. But of course I don’t have to fight the funding battle ………….
Al.10 Brand new Iowa Class battleships including kevlar and light weight armour, AEGIS and 3 or 4 MK41 VLS with SM-2ER.
Where would you put the VLS? Would you do as per one of the planned full conversion and replace aft turret with a single enormous VLS? Or did you have in mind about a thousand peripheral Mk57s?
I have a vague recollection of sea sparrow not being fitted to Iowa and her sisters due to concerns about their ability to survive overpressure when the main battery went off. But that might be misremembered nonsense and the Iowas certainly used Tomahawk and Harpoon so maybe sea sparrow/sea sparrow launcher was particularly fragile?
My mind boggles at the thought of lightweight armour on a Battleship 🙂
Al.The number of T/R modules is clearly going to have an effect on the performance of the radar. But as Apple liked to point out when selling computers with processors which has lower MHz (remember them?!) ratings than their compettitors you cannot tell how fast a car will go by how high the engine revs.
Nice picture though.
Al.plawolf you raise (IMO at least) some perfectly valid moral issues. And yes indeed there are somalis (and others) in horrific situations who do not prey on their fellow humans.
However we are realistically in the realms of statisical correllations rather than causal relationships and the greater the wealth disparity and sense of injustice the more predatory behaviour occurs.
If we wish to erradicate piracy we need to prevent it occuring.
The current situation is hugely expensive, puts innocent (both service and civillian) lives at risk and is not sustainable.
For the force option.
Either
a) change the rules of engagement (and risk collateral damage)
b) find other methods of solving the perennial (sp?) military issue of how to bring overwhelming force to bear at the correct place.
The first is a political decision the second a technical one (and probably more appropriate to this forum before we are politely instructed to desist!)
Convoys with fast well armed units (be they surface or aviation) able to intercept pirates en route to their victims (as recommended here by flanker and nocuts)
Protection embarked on vessels (as recommended here by me)
Attacking bases ashore (not recommended here yet and terribly risky as highlighted in Somalia previously)
Might well be more effective ways of doing this
But ……….. to erradicate requires I believe a different strategy. One which I suspect would be cheaper, more effective and more just. Some hearts and minds work with the fishermen and ex-fishermen as part of the force option would be a worth a go as well.
Al.Maybe the best way would be to make sure there is no need for folks to turn priate: economic development.
Ultimately that is the only thing which will end the problem. Currently benefits outweigh the risks for enough Somalis (and ‘Somalis’) for it to be a viable source of income. If other sources were available then they would become preferable. But its not politically popular and there are those who would see this as a weak response.
Hiring Somali boats to escort ships transiting (and paying only on completion of safe transit!) might work short term. Of course there is the danger of providing an incentive to keep the need for these paid escorts.
Stop shipping so much stuff halfway across the world which could be produced locally (I state this as an eco rather than protectionist argument but feel free to read in what you will)
If we are limiting ourselves to a purely use of force situation.
Embark armed police and/or marines on each vessel transiting the area in order to prevent boarding and capture in the first place. Similar to some harbours or other controlled stretches of water insisting that an expert pilot be taken on board before entering.
Pass a UN resolution on the treatment and trial of Pirates. Use the International Criminal Court. Which might persuade the US to sign up and give the ICC some oomph.
Go after the money men acting as financial intermediaries (I appreciate that the concensus is that their services sprang up AFTER piracy re-reared)
Al.What If:
Tomcat had been fitted with TF-41? Spey began in early 60s and so I believe did TF30 so would this have been possible?
USN had dumped Phoenix when F111B died and gone with an Active or Passive Sparrow (for multiple simultaneous engagements) sacrificing range for lighter weight? Would F14 have been a much lighter, cheaper more exportable warplane?
The all weather two seat A10 had made it through to operational service? Would it have found export success? Would USAF Generals have still been so anti the hog?
Slimbody gunship Lynx had made it off the drawing board?
Sign In
