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 |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Tomas By tomas NO @ SPAM basun THANK . YOU net writes:
There is now something called the `Swedish Air Force Rapid Reaction Unit JAS 39' and it seems to be eight aircraft, operating up to 4000kms from Brussels, for up to six months. /Tomas |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 18:06:51 +0100, "Paul J. Adam" wrote:
In message , Alan Minyard writes On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 00:10:25 +0100, "Paul J. Adam" wrote: Eurofighter? Rafale? Gripen? Not capable, modern a/c Based on what analysis? Tornado GR.4? Harrier GR.9? Harrier is not a capable strike a/c, The results tend to disprove this. Not really, it has been used effectively in the CAS role, but not as a true "strike fighter" such as the F-15E. And yes, this includes the MD AV-8B. although it has been used as such on occasion. The Tornado is OK if you have air supremacy. And no slouch if you don't (when have US aircraft been so tested?) Well, we tend to have "air superiority". Lynx AH.7? Tiger? Mangusta? Not in the same league as Apache, etc. That's a sizeable "et cetera" - the Cobra's a good attack helo and performed well in TELIC, but it's still a much-updated 1960s design. True. Al Minyard |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
On 24 Jun 2004 12:17:05 +0200, Tomas By tomas NO @ SPAM basun THANK . YOU net wrote:
"Kevin Brooks" writes: And more importantly, how many Gripens can the EU (as a body) commit to action anywhere in the world? Actually... There is now something called the `Swedish Air Force Rapid Reaction Unit JAS 39' http://www.f17.mil.se/article.php?id=7841 (The page seems not to be available in English unfortunately) /Tomas And just exactly how would these aircraft deploy to, say S Korea?? No tankers,etc limits them to local use. Al Minyard |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Alan Minyard writes:
And just exactly how would these aircraft deploy to, say S Korea?? No tankers,etc limits them to local use. Well I am not an expert on these things but can't you stop somewhere on the way and refuel? Or maybe that is too pedestrian. Several EU countries have tankers, I believe. (But I guess those are all US made aircraft. We'll have to wait for that new super Airbus.) /Tomas |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
B2431 wrote:
ArVa wrote: The strategic airlift has been accomplished by French Air Force Transalls Transalls are strategic airlift? Tactical perhaps? Are you saying that a C-160 can't handle a supply of bleached linen? GD&R |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Tomas By wrote:
Several EU countries have tankers, I believe. (But I guess those are all US made aircraft. We'll have to wait for that new super Airbus.) Er, since when has the VC10 been a Yankish aeroplane? (Or the Victor which we used to use?) |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
I M B E C I L E
|
#58
|
|||
|
|||
|
#59
|
|||
|
|||
In message , Alan Minyard
writes On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 18:06:51 +0100, "Paul J. Adam" wrote: The results tend to disprove this. Not really, it has been used effectively in the CAS role, but not as a true "strike fighter" such as the F-15E. Harrier GR.7 was chosen over Tornado GR.1 for strike work in Allied Force. (Harder choice between Harrier GR.9 and Tornado GR.4 - but in 1998 the Harrier was more survivable, just as accurate, and in range) And no slouch if you don't (when have US aircraft been so tested?) Well, we tend to have "air superiority". Sure, but then the Tornado was designed to fight from Day One when control of the air was disputed, and it can do so. (The F-15E has a great many many strengths, but with that large wing it's not really a low-level penetrator except in emergencies: not if you want the crews to keep their eyeballs in their heads) The Tornado can also fight very effectively when our side owns, or at least leases, the skies - and has done so. That's a sizeable "et cetera" - the Cobra's a good attack helo and performed well in TELIC, but it's still a much-updated 1960s design. True. Doesn't detract from its performance either. For that matter, the Al Fao operations were supposed to be heavily supported from the air, but due to 'changed priorities' the only air support provided was Lynx AH.7s, which did yeoman work without loss. Similarly, while the Apaches had some problems - doctrine and tactics rather than airframe AFAIK - the Cobras demonstrated the old DBF motto, that 'age and treachery will always triumph over youth and vigour'. Luck, crew training, tactics and blind chance all play parts in -- He thinks too much: such men are dangerous. Julius Caesar I:2 Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
encore un autre I M B E C I L E
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Did the Germans have the Norden bombsight? | Cub Driver | Military Aviation | 106 | May 12th 04 07:18 AM |
review: new magazine "Bomber Legends" | Krztalizer | Military Aviation | 7 | April 24th 04 06:00 PM |
Night of the bombers - the most daring special mission of Finnishbombers in WW2 | Jukka O. Kauppinen | Military Aviation | 4 | March 22nd 04 11:19 PM |
WWII bomber crews recall horror of Ploesti | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | August 5th 03 10:58 PM |
US plans 6,000mph bomber to hit rogue regimes from edge of space | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 14 | August 5th 03 01:48 AM |