drabslabAnd you reckon the grass is greener on the other side………….;)
sorry, I got a bit upset with that comment from bazv accusing europe to be a bunch of corrupt @ssholes.
But yes, i think that the grass is green in Europe. Maybe, and certainly, it could even be greener and there is still a lot of work to do but the evolution continues to be positive.
This is very much shown by the fact that every country (with greece as exception) which has fully joined the EU has made, or is making, massive progress economically as well as socially.
and don’t forget that the EU brought 60 years of piece to its members (at least those that put europe in the center of their policies) which has never happened before in history.
To stay fair, I love the UK for a number of reasons, but i hate its grazy policy when it comes to europe.
drabslabAnd you reckon the grass is greener on the other side………….;)
sorry, I got a bit upset with that comment from bazv accusing europe to be a bunch of corrupt @ssholes.
But yes, i think that the grass is green in Europe. Maybe, and certainly, it could even be greener and there is still a lot of work to do but the evolution continues to be positive.
This is very much shown by the fact that every country (with greece as exception) which has fully joined the EU has made, or is making, massive progress economically as well as socially.
and don’t forget that the EU brought 60 years of piece to its members (at least those that put europe in the center of their policies) which has never happened before in history.
To stay fair, I love the UK for a number of reasons, but i hate its grazy policy when it comes to europe.
drabslabWell everybody should know my feelings on this subject by now :D.
We should be out…it is a huge inefficient,expensive,undemocratic mess which is ripe for the picking by many corrupt people .
Those who say we could not survive without the EU only have to look at Norway,they are what we voted to be…we have never voted to join a Federal Europe .
You are absolutely right, please leave and close the door behind you.
Looking at the UK we see:
A prime minister lying his people into a bloody war in Iraq,
parliamentarians massively using large amounts of tax payers money for maintaining their castles and swimming pools,
ministries unable to manage procurements,
crapy social services, trains, water supplies…
Europe really does not benefit from a UK membership and the introduction of those “abilities” in the European institutions.
drabslabWell everybody should know my feelings on this subject by now :D.
We should be out…it is a huge inefficient,expensive,undemocratic mess which is ripe for the picking by many corrupt people .
Those who say we could not survive without the EU only have to look at Norway,they are what we voted to be…we have never voted to join a Federal Europe .
You are absolutely right, please leave and close the door behind you.
Looking at the UK we see:
A prime minister lying his people into a bloody war in Iraq,
parliamentarians massively using large amounts of tax payers money for maintaining their castles and swimming pools,
ministries unable to manage procurements,
crapy social services, trains, water supplies…
Europe really does not benefit from a UK membership and the introduction of those “abilities” in the European institutions.
drabslabWe keep hearing about the lack of helicopters for the war in Afganistan. Isn’t this due to us developing costly and time consuming choppers like the Merlin.
So shouldn’t we develop a low tech chopper, a T34 for the skies if you like. Rugged enougth to do the job but cheap enougth to reproduce in large quantities?
There used to be planes and choppers specialised in one task. This has now shifted towards multi role, very high tech, vehicles which, as a consequence, are very expensive to build and maintain, and difficult to fly and fully master.
This makes that today, attention is shifting again to cheaper solutions like UAV, cheap helicopters, and simple bomb trucks like the bronco’s they used in Vietnam.
I guess that it is very difficult to determine what will be needed in the future and strike a correct balance between “simple and many” or “superperformant but expensive”.
Starting development of a cheap helicopter for Afghanistan is not an option, it would take years and enter service when war is over (i hope at least). if you want a cheap chopper, buy cheap things which exist or make a simplified version (strip them from anything not needed) of merlins or NH90
drabslabAre you suggesting the US wouldn’t have exported it out of fear/protectionism (similar to F22)? It is infinitely more likely that no one else saw the need for the C17 pre-9/11. Britain had 4 which were enough, it liked them and suddenly became committed to 2 large scale expeditionary conflicts that had not been predicted pre 9/11, so it increased the buy, as it has just done again.
That was incredibly hypocritical.
Yes, protectionism is still a factor in procurement, but the scale that Europe performs it at is dwarfed by the US. I’m not saying there is no reason for it, in general I have nothing against using homegrown industry. What annoys me is pretending to be open and fair, in other words holding a competition with a foreign plane involved and going to great lengths to pretend that it has a chance. You want the 767, fine, don’t issue an RFP to a European company. None of the A400M countries issued RFPs to Boeing did they? No, because they wanted a European alternative to US products, nothing wrong with that.
Oh and don’t jump on the “Europe is unfairly supporting its industry” and point at EADs, it’s equally hypocritical.
I suggest to stop this part of the discussion until the F35 reaches 25%overspending on development cost and hence, according to US law, should be cancelled ;-))):dev2:
drabslabI think you guys are too hard on the A400M.
It is hardly surprising that it got delayed: first it incorporates a lot of ground breaking technologies and capabilities. Secondly it has been impacted by the delays that occurred to the A380.
The European countries should keep pushing it in order to keep/gain expertise on those technologies.
Of course it remains to be seen whether they can deliver it at a competitive price in the long run; but I think that once properly established it will sell superbly.
Nic
I agree that people are too hard on the A400, infact, nothing unusual has happened to this project that we have not already seen a 100 times before on other ambitious high tech projects.
However, I can also give a long list of political madness cancelling very promissing projects, even destroying the own industry (the canadian AVRO disaster, the cancellation of the british TSR, stopping development on the Harrier technologies…)
It would really not surprise me if the politicians would decide to dump the A400 but I hope the opposite.
For Airbus I think that the combination of A380 diificulties and delays, and the economic crisis make it impossible to continue with the A400 without additional funding.
Again, the potential of the engine alone is worth continuing this effort.
drabslabSubsutitute A330 for C-17 in your rant and you sound like the American argument for NOT buying the A330 vs. the 767!
And if the C-17 isn’t any good…”Not only are there reports suggesting”… (BTW: what unnamed reports are you referring to…the typical anti-U.S. nonsense on this forum?)…then why does it have more export customers than the A400?
My rant on the C-17 is founded in a document entitled “C-5 Versus C-17: An Assessment Of Airlift Options” issued by the Lexington Institute and issued on Oct. 19, 2009. My anti US nonsense are thus based on the opinion of an US institution.
Futher, there is nothing wrong as such with the US looking at their own interests first and then worry about the others, its a natural thing. Subsutituting A330 for C-17 does not change this but maybe Europeans should learn better to look at their own long-term interests.
I guess that the C-17 has more export orders because:
– it is available on the market while the A400 is still in development
– the political arm of the US is much longer than the European one
– the dollar is very weak at the moment while the strong Euro does not help exports
– EADS has other worries than selling A400 at the moment
drabslabDumping the A400M would be a huge mistake!
First because of the plane itself which has a huge potentail market for military and perhaps also for civil goods transport
Second because of its unique engine which may have considerable value on its own placed on civil airplanes
Third because of its technology or do we want to continue to increase the dependence on the US for anything slightly technologically advanced? Me personally, I think that ditching the UK knowledge on VTOL is more than sufficient.
And last but not least, because of all the employment it will bring
But i guess that dumping it is just a treath towards the governments to put some pressure.
Oh, something else, I don’t understand why EU citizens continue to support the C-17 . Not only are there reports suggesting that this thing is a piece of sh’t (not even able to compete with ancient galaxys) but also because of the way in which the US tanker deal got cancelled (for the simple fact that boeing lost against an EU plane)
drabslabI have such a lens.
I am satisfied with the quality that I am gettiong but it is not professional quality that is for sure.
If you want professional quality you need to search for highly expensive lenses without zoom capacity.
But then you will need more than one camera, and more than one lens
Sign In
