![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 1 Jun 2004 20:11:47 -0400, "Kevin Brooks"
wrote: While I generally agree with your critique in terms of the usual journalistic twisting of words, the MoD quote does allow leeway for them to say later, "Well, we relooked at our requirements and decided we *really* did not need 232 of these aircraft, that 180 is just fine..." or some such drivel. If so, then it would be easier to just not order Tranche 3, rather than ordering all 232 and then immediately selling some on. That's why it tripped my BS meter. Peter Kemp |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Peter Kemp" wrote in message ... On Tue, 1 Jun 2004 20:11:47 -0400, "Kevin Brooks" wrote: While I generally agree with your critique in terms of the usual journalistic twisting of words, the MoD quote does allow leeway for them to say later, "Well, we relooked at our requirements and decided we *really* did not need 232 of these aircraft, that 180 is just fine..." or some such drivel. If so, then it would be easier to just not order Tranche 3, rather than ordering all 232 and then immediately selling some on. That's why it tripped my BS meter. But isn't tranche 3 the one that finally captures the full multi-role capability? I would think that given the RAF's budgeting problems, the very last thing they would want to do is give up the fully multi-role aircraft; upgrading the earlier variants to that standard would presumably require a cost somewhat greater than what is being saved by deleting those cannon... Brooks Peter Kemp |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
Kevin Brooks wrote: But isn't tranche 3 the one that finally captures the full multi-role capability? I would think that given the RAF's budgeting problems, the very last thing they would want to do is give up the fully multi-role aircraft; upgrading the earlier variants to that standard would presumably require a cost somewhat greater than what is being saved by deleting those cannon... This is exactly the reasoning behind what the Swedish air force is doing regarding Gripen. (Not that they're not multi-role already, but they ones in service now aren't JAS 39C/Ds.) -- Urban Fredriksson http://www.canit.se/%7Egriffon/ "It is bad luck to be superstitious." - Andrew W. Mathis |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
30 Jan 2004 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | January 31st 04 03:55 AM |
15 Dec 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | December 15th 03 10:01 PM |
27 Nov 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 1 | November 30th 03 05:57 PM |
Shock news EUROFIGHTER to be axed in RAF program changes. | Aerophotos | Military Aviation | 11 | November 10th 03 08:55 PM |
18 Sep 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | September 19th 03 03:47 AM |