Al.Yes, and some people here seems to have reasonS to suspect it.
They should have let the inquiry go on, since they were clean, unless you mistrust the Justice.
It would have been ok to have the tribunal saying “they are clean !” :confused:
That is a very seductive line of reasoning. And entirely reasonable. In principle it sounds like a good idea. The answer would be (and I don’t KNOW enough to be able to say whether BAe were innocent or not)
it wastes time and money which would be better spent
where the public interest is at greater risk
or where there is more evidence of wrongdoing
it also casts a cloud over all parties which may make other customers or suppliers less willing to do business
Of course the reason might also be that there IS sufficient evidence of wrongdoing but the decision has been made that considerations of economics and appearances are more important!
One COULD have an enquiry into ALL arms deals and I suspect that this could be justified for the majority of them.
Al
Al.One thing I keep wondering; if the 767 was so much better suited to the requirement, on what grounds did the USAF select the A330?
Surely they would be best placed to decide what would be best?
I was/am amazed at this as well. The US have shown that they WILL buy foreign if they absolutely have no choice (Canberra, Goshawk, first gen Harrier, Popeye) but it is pretty rare.
Regardless of whether A330 is better I am amazed that it won first time out.
It is absolutely relevant to consider wider economic implications of the souce of procurements. Bankrupt your own economy and you have no basis to buy anything anyway. And it is certainly wise to try and buy from your own established world class manufacturing base if you have one.
What did A330 provide that the wholly domestic machines didn’t?
Al
Al.After watching the clip, Gripen’s small size and single-engine doesn’t leave much for further upgrades or adding additional stuff for the airframe. Nice clip, though, and somehow I could only picture F-20 Tigershark instead of the Gripen whenever they show the jet from the clip.
Agreed
F-20 is a hole other story, a bad managed project which was terminated in prototype stage because of big techincal issues, and budget overruns. Nothing to do with capability.
‘a hole’ story eh? Never has a typo been so apt and ironic.
I’d also add: some bad decisions by potential customers (‘cooh F16 looks sexier lets have that instead and never mind the whole-life cost issues‘) and a complete about face by US administration which Northrop could not (or at least did not) forsee.
F5 was a Mig 21 beater available at a sensible price with sensible maintenace overheads to US allies. F20 could have been the next generation in the same vein. It wasn’t. I am not privy to the technical details of development and testing but its failure appears to have been at least in part due to appearance and a desire to keep up with Joneses.
The Gripen is certainly the spiritual successor to the Freedom Fighter series of jets and may not gain as many orders as it technically merits for exactly the same reasons that the F20 did not.
Al
Al.The MiG-31 is an interceptor. The propulsion-system of that does allow to operate at Mach 0,85 and above Mach 2. That was in need to engage subsonic cruise missile at low level. The both main targets of that weapon-system were bombers and their stand-off missiles. For the later the MiG-31 got short-range AAMs too. 😉
I’m not arguing with any of that. But I think that we are at slight cross purposes here.
MY READING (which may be incorrect) was that Mig 31 has excellent speed-range combination at altitude. Better even than F22. Thus F22 SC does not provide a kinematic advantage. In fact the Mig 31 is able to impart more energy to its long range AAMs when shooting DOWN at F22 (or other)
And that Mig 31 loses ITS kinematic advantage when it has to lower its performance to that of its prey in order to make visual recognition and engage in this regime.
Thus Mig 31 as interceptor may well have a height-speed advantage. AND F22 may well have a kinematic advantage at WVR
In an ideal world you’d have Mig 31 analogues for very long range, look down shoot down BVR engagements. X31 analogues for WVR knife fights and F22 analogues sent out deliberately looking to engage enemy planes in their own territory. In our non-ideal world you may not have any or all of these planes or their analogues and have to develop tactics for the planes you do have in these situations.
FWIW IMMOO Raptor and equivalents (when they come online) are going to be the least worst ompromise in most situations. But their pilots and commanders will need to keep the performance of potential foes in mind.
Al
Al.-Mig-25s have been shot down, so it’s not an insurmountable task to engage high and fast flying aircraft.
-Can you provide an example where a Mig-31 would need to be visually identified prior to engaging? Just it’s altitude and speed alone would be a pretty good clue, not to mention its electronic and physical signature.
I read that as Mig 31 needing to visually identify before engaging and thus IT losing its height and velocity advantage.
Al
Al.You’ve obviously worked in better run companies than me! (Lucky you) I’ve seen exactly that kind of behaviour and exactly the same lack of response. Whilst Joe sap in production loses his job due to the damage being wrought.
Al
Al.Supercruise POTENTIALLY gives you the extra energy on launch for your own AAMs and reduced transit times without the price of 5 minutes endurance and an IR signature large enough for Falcon to actually hit which come with pressing the afterburner button.
LM use supercruise as one of their selling points – fair they are a business
Others pick holes in the concept – fair again
The USAF will need to define and refine tactics which maximise the benefits from SC and minimise the vulnerabilities. A Nighthawk was shot down because the USAF’s foes were not as stupid as the USAF believed and the USAF were complacent. I would hope that this lesson has now been learned.
Naysayers pointing out the weaknesses of SC are actually doing the USAF a favour. For myself I kinda hope that they are employing people who are being more nitcpicky and objective.
Al
Al.In private business people would have been fired by now!
I agree with everything else in your post.
However the idea that private businesses operate efficiently without the monstrous waste and incompetence and lack of strategic planning evidenced by HM Gov is naive. There is plenty of waste and incompetence in the private sector as well.
Al
Al.I’ve nothing against the future ‘Heavy’and ‘Light’ air laucnhed guided weapons; and indeed both are probably more relevant to C3 than a true AShM. I kinda assumed that the magazine on C3 would be prepared for both.
My suggestion for FFBNW Harpoon was to allow for that fact that when shooting starts its gonna be too late to recall precious T45s and fit them with Harpoons and I don’t want the flotilla to be entirely without a system for hitting and hurting warships.
FFBNW Harpoon in 2 locations is to allow leeway for CAMM or SeaRAM as SAM. I think that its too early to assume adoption of one or both and I didn’t want to finalise my (non-existent) design too early and find that I couldn’t fit next gen SAM on board.
Al
Al.An actual calculation of life-cycle costs doesn’t always make its way to the top of treasury lists (wtiness: PFI, PPP in UK; witness: failure of F20/F5G to win orders from F16)
However in our thought experiments and lets pretend discussions this is a pretty important design goal.
Having just read the Blighted Cliffs (amusing if not technically relevent and certainly not high art) I like the idea of broadsides for smugglers/pirates/swarming small boats. I also think that MOD PE/Treasury mantra of FFBNW is one which can be turned to the RN’s favour.
So I would like to see
Khareef (more particularly the C3 optimised Khareef already posted) used as a base for C3. BOUGHT OUTRIGHT
Fitted with automatic turretted small calibres amidships (I’d like Breda-Bofors fast-forties but the commonality savings on that particular 40mm may be illusory and I could be swayed to another particular solution but not GAshMBO)
Work deck completely enclosed aft of hangar (thus giving a much bigger landing spot for the WAFUs, increasing flexibility of aircraft to be landed – although not hangared, protecting kit and crew from elements and a nominal signature reduction)
FFBNW
Mk8 at A position
CAMM at B position
SeaRAM above hangar
2 twin Harpoon racks at B and above hangar
Thus ship is able to be deployed for surveying, MCM, showing the flag, piracy-interdiction, anti-smuggling as is
AND
can be given quick (or ‘quick’) refit with modules if seen as desirable
Given that T45s will be too rare to take offline and fit with Harpoons it would be nice to have a platform available in sufficient numbers that a couple could be fitted with en route to a shooting war
Likewise we don’t want to remove Mk8s from frontline warships to fit to non-warfighting until/unless they are replaced, but if there is no obvious ship to fit them to it will be all to easy to just scrap and lose them.
It would be very unlikely that we’d fit with Harpoons B and Hangar or CAMM and SeaRAM but this FFBNW gives the flexibility to mix and match
Al
Al.Raptor is specifically designed to go looking for trouble. Go in wipe out the opponent’s air power and gain ‘air dominance’. Is that a role that the Japanese need to fulfill?
Or do they need a much more defensive aircraft? I guess that I’m saying that of the Japanese do continue to push for F22 then its a indicator that they have changed their concept of how they defend the home islands quite significantly.
Al
Al.Yep, someone should tell the current heads of service that, they don’t seem to have learned from history.
I blame the old Jon Snow fronted presentations showing government spending as a cake. VSOs obviously took these too literally and seem to assume that once the slice of cake has been cut they can mug their counterparts* take the slice of cake/funding and go away to eat/spend it.
Al
* or more likely get a junior to do it for them
Al.( im sure Labour would love to see the RAF reduced to just operating rotary, and then just a handful so they can squander the cash on more loonie left pinko policies – woah little bit of politics there!!!).Steve
What’s the last left wing policy implemented by Not Labour?
That Blair and co and thence Brown and co have made awful decisions and sqaundered public cash I would absolutely agree. That it has been spent on progressive, liberal or pseudo-socialist* agendas I just do not agree.
Al
* I am sure that you are politically literate enough to understand that one cannot have socialist policies or politics in a market capitalist society. Centre-driven wasteful policies of course can be easily implemented in such a society.
Al.Oi! Enough of the Westcountry bashing.
Affectionate I assure you
Al.Thanks for that Ill have a go at a new design with those on. Althoug like you say the Venator is an excellent design and I do like the video with the CAMM. I really hate bean counters at the mod btw.
TBF its the bean counters at the treasury.
That’s not to say that MoD PE haven’t made some technically inept decisions or not been anywhere as clever as they thought when writing contracts.
Al
Sign In
