- Thread starter
- #201
Royzee617
Tech Sergeant
Cheers.
'Videos of the Day' an ongoing thread
- Thread starter Royzee617
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
- Thread starter
- #202
Royzee617
Tech Sergeant
Here is the competition 'winner'.... an altogether neater machine.
trackend
Chief Master Sergeant
I think its going to be the bird to beat, excellent stuff Roy
- Thread starter
- #204
Royzee617
Tech Sergeant
Thanks mate!
Here's some more food for thought...
"Consider the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), a $200 billion multinational project to build a versatile attack aircraft. It has been plagued by disputes between the partners, in particular a refusal by the Pentagon to allow its foreign partners, including Britain, access to the vital software code that governs the aircraft's systems.
"Without access to the code, the JSF becomes an American aircraft assembled abroad, and agreement is even lacking for the latter role. Britain and Italy are vying for the location of European final assembly, raising the prospect of two factories and extra expense. For Europe, the problem is cost, because cost does not matter in Washington".
see:
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8210-1863396,00.html
I certainly didn't know that! So much for that 'special relationship' eh?!
Here's some more food for thought...
"Consider the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), a $200 billion multinational project to build a versatile attack aircraft. It has been plagued by disputes between the partners, in particular a refusal by the Pentagon to allow its foreign partners, including Britain, access to the vital software code that governs the aircraft's systems.
"Without access to the code, the JSF becomes an American aircraft assembled abroad, and agreement is even lacking for the latter role. Britain and Italy are vying for the location of European final assembly, raising the prospect of two factories and extra expense. For Europe, the problem is cost, because cost does not matter in Washington".
see:
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8210-1863396,00.html
I certainly didn't know that! So much for that 'special relationship' eh?!
I agree Lee, although the F-22 will be up there too. Nice video Roy.trackend said:
- Thread starter
- #206
Royzee617
Tech Sergeant
One of the last flying F86s. Nice colour scheme.
This used to be the 'plane to beat'.
It has always puzzled me why this US fighter was/is called the Sabre. Surely it should have adopted the US spelling 'Saber'?
This used to be the 'plane to beat'.
It has always puzzled me why this US fighter was/is called the Sabre. Surely it should have adopted the US spelling 'Saber'?
trackend
Chief Master Sergeant
Royzee617 said:
It do'nt suprise me Roy contracts and big orders always tend to superceed the need of the guys at the sharp end, look at the SA80.
- Thread starter
- #208
Royzee617
Tech Sergeant
more grist to the JSF mill:
Will it get the chop? What a mess. But this and the delay in actually commissioning the carriers might give the SHAR a reprieve. Plus I hate it that these carriers are named after royals!!!!!
Pentagon cuts pose new threat to plan for British carriers
IAN BRUCE, Defence Correspondent November 10 2005
BRITAIN'S plans to build two new aircraft-carriers could be thrown into further disarray and extra expense by a £20bn cut in US military spending.
The major casualty of the budget cuts on future projects is most likely to be the vertical-landing version of the US-designed Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) chosen by the UK to fly from the carriers.
The Royal Navy and the RAF want 150 of the aircraft, which were also to be built for the US Marine Corps, to replace their Harrier jump-jet squadrons.
The Ministry of Defence has already spent £2bn on the JSF to help fund Lockheed-Martin's development of the stealthy fighter-bomber.
The total bill to the British taxpayer for the full order has been estimated at £10bn, on top of the £3.6bn cost of building the 60,000-tonne carriers.
Thousands of UK shipbuilding jobs, including between 2000 and 3000 on the Clyde and at Rosyth, are dependent on the shared construction work on the huge warships.
But, if the JSF programme is axed, the vessels would have to be fitted with electro-magnetic catapults and arrestor gear to allow conventional aircraft to operate at sea – adding tens of millions of pounds in costs. The move would also considerably delay the carriers project.
The MoD still insists that the carriers will be ordered and built, although shipbuilding unions have warned that any further delays will result in lay-offs at yards from Portsmouth to Govan.
The MoD had announced last month that negotiations over the cost of construction would mean a year's delay in bringing the ships into service. The first, HMS Queen Elizabeth, was due in 2012 and its sister ship, Prince of Wales, three years later.
Defence officials say no comment can be made until the Pentagon confirms any decision it might make on the future of the JSF project.
A US defence source told The Herald: "We understand that Gordon England, the US deputy defence secretary, is looking to kill one of the three JSF variants being developed. The one in his crosshairs is the short-take-off, vertical-landing version ordered by our Marine Corps and your Royal Navy and RAF."
The American budget cuts announced last week are a direct response to the continuing drain of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan and to the cost of recovery from hurricane damage.
IRONIC HUH?
BTW WHY IS IT ALWAYS WRITTEN 'Harrier jump-jet'?
A bit like you know that when they mention Mars it is always going to be followed 'the Red Planet' ARGH!
Will it get the chop? What a mess. But this and the delay in actually commissioning the carriers might give the SHAR a reprieve. Plus I hate it that these carriers are named after royals!!!!!
Pentagon cuts pose new threat to plan for British carriers
IAN BRUCE, Defence Correspondent November 10 2005
BRITAIN'S plans to build two new aircraft-carriers could be thrown into further disarray and extra expense by a £20bn cut in US military spending.
The major casualty of the budget cuts on future projects is most likely to be the vertical-landing version of the US-designed Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) chosen by the UK to fly from the carriers.
The Royal Navy and the RAF want 150 of the aircraft, which were also to be built for the US Marine Corps, to replace their Harrier jump-jet squadrons.
The Ministry of Defence has already spent £2bn on the JSF to help fund Lockheed-Martin's development of the stealthy fighter-bomber.
The total bill to the British taxpayer for the full order has been estimated at £10bn, on top of the £3.6bn cost of building the 60,000-tonne carriers.
Thousands of UK shipbuilding jobs, including between 2000 and 3000 on the Clyde and at Rosyth, are dependent on the shared construction work on the huge warships.
But, if the JSF programme is axed, the vessels would have to be fitted with electro-magnetic catapults and arrestor gear to allow conventional aircraft to operate at sea – adding tens of millions of pounds in costs. The move would also considerably delay the carriers project.
The MoD still insists that the carriers will be ordered and built, although shipbuilding unions have warned that any further delays will result in lay-offs at yards from Portsmouth to Govan.
The MoD had announced last month that negotiations over the cost of construction would mean a year's delay in bringing the ships into service. The first, HMS Queen Elizabeth, was due in 2012 and its sister ship, Prince of Wales, three years later.
Defence officials say no comment can be made until the Pentagon confirms any decision it might make on the future of the JSF project.
A US defence source told The Herald: "We understand that Gordon England, the US deputy defence secretary, is looking to kill one of the three JSF variants being developed. The one in his crosshairs is the short-take-off, vertical-landing version ordered by our Marine Corps and your Royal Navy and RAF."
The American budget cuts announced last week are a direct response to the continuing drain of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan and to the cost of recovery from hurricane damage.
IRONIC HUH?
BTW WHY IS IT ALWAYS WRITTEN 'Harrier jump-jet'?
A bit like you know that when they mention Mars it is always going to be followed 'the Red Planet' ARGH!
trackend
Chief Master Sergeant
Oh great so they knock the VTOL on the head and we either stick with out of date Harriers or nothing. The keels for the new carriers have not been laid yet so no garentees they will get built anyway with or without EM Catapults and our exsisting carrier needs VTOL planes to operate.
- Thread starter
- #210
Royzee617
Tech Sergeant
Ironic isn't it?
I think that the SHAR in its latest version is potentially one of the most capable F/A aircraft around for the task anyway. With the radar and other avionics and AMRAAM the pilots have finally got the weapon system they always wanted only to have it snatched off them before they ever got to use it fully. And what will happen to these planes? Indian Navy might get itself a bargain! But can we let them have the avionics technology?
I think that the SHAR in its latest version is potentially one of the most capable F/A aircraft around for the task anyway. With the radar and other avionics and AMRAAM the pilots have finally got the weapon system they always wanted only to have it snatched off them before they ever got to use it fully. And what will happen to these planes? Indian Navy might get itself a bargain! But can we let them have the avionics technology?
Nice video Roy.
- Thread starter
- #212
Royzee617
Tech Sergeant
Here we are with the Typhoon doing some antics - showing off its big mouth.
Nice video Roy. I don't mind the Typhoon's big mouth, it is not stealth but it what designed to be. It still looks cool though.
- Thread starter
- #214
Royzee617
Tech Sergeant
Not as subtle as the F16's chin intake. Especially those lips...
You are correct there Roy, but I still like the Typhoon even though in some respects it is probably out of date. They still say they will get 20-30 years service out of her though.Royzee617 said:
- Thread starter
- #216
Royzee617
Tech Sergeant
Its technology other than stealth is for the most part state of the art.
That said so far there have been no fighter vs fighter combats in a war where stealth was tried out.
No doubt attack planes like the B2 and F117 used it to good effect a couple of times.
But until the F-22 gets it on with the bad guys then the jury's out.
Meanwhile, the Typhoo will rule Europe's skies. Unless Rafale gets a major upgrade.
BTW another area where the F 22 is ahead is AESA radar. This (when they get it to work) will be far superior to any antenna-based radar like Foxhunter etc.
That said so far there have been no fighter vs fighter combats in a war where stealth was tried out.
No doubt attack planes like the B2 and F117 used it to good effect a couple of times.
But until the F-22 gets it on with the bad guys then the jury's out.
Meanwhile, the Typhoo will rule Europe's skies. Unless Rafale gets a major upgrade.
BTW another area where the F 22 is ahead is AESA radar. This (when they get it to work) will be far superior to any antenna-based radar like Foxhunter etc.
- Thread starter
- #217
Royzee617
Tech Sergeant
Tonight's main feature is some footage of the NF11 Meteor landing at Cranfield.
Nice video Roy.
- Thread starter
- #219
Royzee617
Tech Sergeant
One clip from Airbus and one of the Embraer.
Nice videos Roy.
