So true, but times are changing, It really is a shame though, the harriers are REALLY damn cool
EDIT: Just watched that vid, i love the way they take off. very cool.
Armada of British naval power massing in the Gulf as Israel prepares an Iran strike
- Thread starter LateX'Dog
- Start date
So true, but times are changing, It really is a shame though, the harriers are REALLY damn cool
EDIT: Just watched that vid, i love the way they take off. very cool.
a) how do you know the depth of Iranian facilities?
b) how do you know whether or not the weapons they have at their disposal would succeed? (The Americans could've already made one of these available, for example, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...432782/US-bunker-buster-bomb-ready-to-go.html).
A: Its been widely reported by credible sources, their [suspected] nuclear enrichment facility is in a reinforced underground bunker.
B: Because they use F15/16 fighter jets and their standard AS ordinance wouldn't cause a dent, it was said that if the USAF were going after Iran they would need to send in hardcore bombers like the Lancer or Spirit to get the job done and Israel don't have any of them.
Associate
- Joined
- 17 Feb 2009
- Posts
- 76
- Location
- Bristol
I think the questions you need to ask is "Will Israel strike first, with an American election just around the corner?"
Would Obama really commit to another war that would probably cost him his re-election.
Would Israel wait until after the American election? Would Mit Romney throw his weight behind a view that Iran's nuclear programme must be stopped.
Would Obama really commit to another war that would probably cost him his re-election.
Would Israel wait until after the American election? Would Mit Romney throw his weight behind a view that Iran's nuclear programme must be stopped.
If it was my decision we would be buying the Harriers that the US are replacing with F35's (their Harriers were more advanced than ours), as I'm sure they would sell us them cheap instead of scrapping them. Thus giving us an upgrade that's compatible with our current infrastructure.
The US use the second gen Harrier AV8B, the UK harrier 2 which is the GR 5, 7 and 9s are all derivatives of the AV8B which had many items jointly developed and are for all intents and purposes the same planes, the UK varied what radar systems and avionics were used and things like that across models which made several of them more capable attack planes then the US version, the GR9 was probably the best of all the versions as it had the top end pegasus 107 engine and the best day/ night avionics. We would be left with a set of old well used airframes that would offer no upgrade at all over the previous invincible carriers and be completely dwarfed by modern plane and missile capabilities.
Maybe upgrade was a strong word, how about reinforcement. The most up to date US Harriers do outclass the GR9 in some areas though so would be useful in some mission types, but ultimately I still maintain that if the was a real need to retire a plane to save money it should have been the Tornado not the Harrier.
But to that last point, the last time the RAF went up against an air force with modern planes and missiles it was commander by Hermann Goering
Looks like we're close then:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2203892/Nick-Harvey-axed-supporting-Iran-attack.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2203892/Nick-Harvey-axed-supporting-Iran-attack.html
To preserve the value of the US dollar.
My Google-fu is weak today....keeps bringing me back here.
Now going to spend rest of afternoon trying to work out that acronym......
It's been inevitable for many years now. It would have happened 5-6 years ago but the US was too bogged down in Iraq and had to keep Israel on a short leash until they could extract themselves. Combat operations in Iraq are now officially over and the last hurdle is the US elections in November. Israel can afford to wait until then - Obama has almost certainly promised them he'll deal with Iran once he's safely in the White House for another 4 years, and if Romney gets in.....well, Israel will have a blank cheque and free reign.
Which means he will turn his back on Israel. He lied about everything else, why would this be any different?
Maybe someone here can confirm this, but I read the F22 raptors incredibly sophisticated sensor equipment and capabilities allowed it to build a detailed battlefield picture and trasmit that data to other allied air power in the vicinity. Somewhat like an awacs can (though obviously without quite the range or detail) Still far above anything currently available from a single fighter. This gives a much broader battlefield situational awareness.
Is this sort of capability something the F35 sees to? Or do their similarities end purely at the aesthetic point?
Is this sort of capability something the F35 sees to? Or do their similarities end purely at the aesthetic point?
I don't think the F22 has a recon role. In fact, while it is being stealthy, it cant communicate with anyone, and even when not being stealthy, cant communicate with other allied planes.
Lack of communications is the main reason it is actually not used very much.
Both supposedly have very powerful sensor and network suites but I expect the details will be classified for decades yet. The F22 was certainly a very ambitious plane too bad it fell into the 'too expensive to ever actually risk taking out of its box' category.
My theory is the F-22 is actually goddamn awful. OK it is stealthy but everything else? Won't ever be proven.
No need to actually invent all that technology, just *say* you invented, never show it because it is classified and never use it because the cost makes it prohibitive.