Considering that you live in the neighbourhood, why not simply send them an email and ask them. When it is something innocent they might just be preapred to tell you

In Air &Cosmos there is an article about the Dubai meeting and that shows an F 22 pick-up by a Rafale OSF. While it is not big deal because all the 6 encouters between the two were WVR, in the article there is a short note (on the lower left). If my French still works, it said that “the planes of the new tranche (59 in total) will be equiped with a new system OSF-IT that abandon the IR channel for a new, improved TV channel”.

Now, why would the French drop the IR channel, if it would worked? Maybe because they realised that it would be better to concentrate on (midranged) TV system? In these conditions, the fact that F 35 IRST is based on a MW system (+TV and laser) instead a LW system would make more sense?

A particular effect can usually be achieved with different technologies. The supporters/investors of a particular technology are cpnstantly improving “their thingy” and are in the lead (hence selected to be put in a machine) until another technology takes over the lead.

This is the case in almost all technology driven areas from motorcycle racing to airplane design

Articles have appeared in the media stating that 10 NH-90 Helicopters are to be ordered to support British Special Operation forces at a cost of £100 Million. I have to ask why? Putting the Chinook HC3 debacle aside couldn’t existing platforms be modified for the role, or couldn’t a number of the Chinooks on order be purchased for the role?

It is also stated that the SAS actually wanted the Special Operations variant of the UH-60 which they believe is a more reliable and proven platform.

Germany has put its order for NH-90 on hold because its armed forces claim that it is quite useless and dangerous to be used in any operational circumstances worth that name…

and then UK special forces would use it??? I don’t believe it!

All this issue boils down to is that, west has suddenly realised that they can not bomb with impunity any country they choose to.

Already the military option is not looking so feasible, in terms of stopping Iran going nuclear. Its a matter of time only.

The unchallenged global dominance the west took for granted is slipping away fast, hence the window of oppurtunity is shrinking. The only solution would be to agree to a painful compromise.

It is a bit annoying when you have been playing ‘my stick is bigger than yours’ and realise that your stick is not that big anymore.

I estimate that in a not so distant future, the EU, the US and Canada will form a new economical and strategic alliance with fixed exchange rates between their currencies and a slow coordination of their economical and foreign policies. A process similar to the one currently still on-going inside the european Union.

Even when flying over Saudi Arabia, you are still talking about a 3000 km trip (one direction). That could be 4 hours to get there, 4 hours to get back home and then a maintenance/rearming/refeuling period.

You are talking about the whole Israeli air force, not a few planes. Leaving the Israeli airspace undefended for 8 hours at least with neighbours like Syria (who will know about it at least 4 hours before your planes are back). That does not seem to be a good plan.

On top of this, Iran also has fighters and pilots, maybe not good enough against the israelis but indeed qualified to destroy the tankers needed to refeul those fighters… and then what? Land in Saudi Arabia with probably a large part of the population choosing the Iranian side against their political leaders??? That does not sound very good either.

But suppose it is succesful, all nuclear facilities are destroyed and all planes happily make it back home. would there not be any nuclear fall-out?? or are we comfortable with images of dying children within dozens of miles around the reactors (ever heard about tsjernobil?).

What about the morning after and the nationalistic outbreak in Iran (and the rest of the arab world). Iran openly and massively supporting the taliban, invading its neighbour Iraq, joining forces with the anti semitic radical forces in Pakistan, stirring up the **** in Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan and Armenia… helping kurdistan to create difficulties in Turkeye (a NATO country)…

NATO demonstrates for 9 years now that it can’t beat a heap of taliban renegades hiding in a country the size of TEXAS (650 000 square kilometers), do you really want to enlarge the war zone with another 1.6 million square kilometers (Iran).

Attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities, it would be stupid but then it would not be the first stupid decision