The Falklands thread

[fadetoblack]

The US operates a very different military to ours, they have or should i say had the budget to service many different types of aircraft, whilst diversity in type and design is a nice thing to have it's far from cost effective, they did the right thing ditching the Harrier, better that than the Tornado going.

What a load of ####



Harriers are versatile in that they do not need landing strips. Typhoon can do ground attack and fighter role so why keep tornado?

 

[fadetoblack]

Indeed, but you need to ask yourself, in what situation do we need an outdated carrier providing outdated planes? Most of the time we can use a forward base around the world and i'm not a great fan of sending our guys into battle with outdated kit, especially when you've got the best kit sat at home.

Outdated planes ?? The flying coffin = tornado

 

[Firestar_3x]

What use is a subsonic aircraft with outdated avionics, the tornado with it's latest refit and Storm Shadow cruise missile is a far more capable aircraft.

As being proved at the moment day in day out, all over the world in live operations.

 

[dalin80]

Indeed, but you need to ask yourself, in what situation do we need an outdated carrier providing outdated planes?

While I agree that both the carrier and planes were teetering on obsolescence the fact that they existed as a resource provided a much greater scope for the navy and a much wider band of capabilities, and although iam aware your question was semi-rhetorical I would say a falklands situation. As outdated as the ship and planes might be they would make a lower level power like argentina think a lot harder about possible action.

As great as the type 45 is it would simply run out of missiles before even taking out half the argentine air force presuming it never missed or had to shoot a single missile down, a group of carrier based harriers could provide close in air support in case anything got through the 45's long range shield even if they are not front line craft anymore.

 

[DotA]

The US operates a very different military to ours, they have or should i say had the budget to service many different types of aircraft, whilst diversity in type and design is a nice thing to have it's far from cost effective, they did the right thing ditching the Harrier, better that than the Tornado going.

I just think it was wrong to get rid the harrier without having another fixed wing fighter to use. Our aircraft carriers represnted a major part of our fleet and if they argies do decided to invade it will be much harder to defeat them without the aid of fixed wing aircraft being able to take off from a carrier.


The Tornado was the right aircraft to keep compared to the Harrier

 

[Housey]

Typhoon can do ground attack and fighter role so why keep tornado?

Not as well as the Tornado today, it's avionics are not developed enough, the Tornado was having to target for it in Libiya I believe...

 

[Firestar_3x]

While I agree that both the carrier and planes were teetering on obsolescence the fact that they existed as a resource provided a much greater scope for the navy and a much wider band of capabilities, and although iam aware your question was semi-rhetorical I would say a falklands situation. As outdated as the ship and planes might be they would make a lower level power like argentina think a lot harder about possible action.

As great as the type 45 is it would simply run out of missiles before even taking out half the argentine air force presuming it never missed or had to shoot a single missile down, a group of carrier based harriers could provide close in air support in case anything got through the 45's long range shield even if they are not front line craft anymore.

No doubt about it, nothing projects power like a fully loaded aircraft carrier, it would be nice to think that the eurofighters would take on the brunt of the air to air stuff, i do agree however that running out of ship to air missiles is a real threat, and as i understand the silos can only be refilled with new missile pods in dock.

I just think it was wrong to get rid the harrier without having another fixed wing fighter to use. Our aircraft carriers represnted a major part of our fleet and if they argies do decided to invade it will be much harder to defeat them without the aid of fixed wing aircraft being able to take off from a carrier.


The Tornado was the right aircraft to keep compared to the Harrier

It would have been nice to keep everything, however we had to make a sacrifice and looking back at it now i really do think they did the right thing.

 

[dalin80]

Yeah the typhoon doesnt seem particularly versatile at the moment.

 

[Firestar_3x]

I thought the ground attack role had now been sorted out in the Typhoon?

 

[fadetoblack]

Don't do that - Gilly

 

[DotA]

As great as the type 45 is it would simply run out of missiles before even taking out half the argentine air force presuming it never missed or had to shoot a single missile down, a group of carrier based harriers could provide close in air support in case anything got through the 45's long range shield even if they are not front line craft anymore.

The Argentine air force has about 100-120 fighting air craft, 30 of which are turboprop support bombers, no worries there. most of the others are older craft, again no worries. not saying that there is no threat from them but that it wouldint be to hard for 4 typhones taking them out. Another problem though if other south american countries help them out. Peru being there best bet of getting help and perus airforce having some up to date hardware.

 

[Hitman_Leon]

What use is a subsonic aircraft with outdated avionics, the tornado with it's latest refit and Storm Shadow cruise missile is a far more capable aircraft.

As being proved at the moment day in day out, all over the world in live operations.

And if they ever managed to get anything on the ground that needed a smack-down there is the brimstone missile, which must be rather good as it was designed for the tornado but the US and France are looking at using it on their aircraft, also the brits are thinking of using it on attack helo's so looks like the ever awesome AH64 will be gaining even more of a punch if they do.

 

[[TW]Fox]

BREAKING NEWS:Argentine President Fernandez to complain to UN about "British militarisation" around Falklands

 

[Firestar_3x]

Wamblance for Argentina

And if they ever managed to get anything on the ground that needed a smack-down there is the brimstone missile, which must be rather good as it was designed for the tornado but the US and France are looking at using it on their aircraft, also the brits are thinking of using it on attack helo's so looks like the ever awesome AH64 will be gaining even more of a punch if they do.

Will have to look that up, sounds interesting, the AH64 would be perfect in this situation.

 

[[TW]Fox]

Wamblance for Argentina

It so desperately obviously looks like that, doesn't it?

Given that the UN are having absolutely no luck in agreeing how to deal with the fact Syria are basically just blowing everything up what does she think they'll do about routine navy movements?

 

[fadetoblack]

Wamblance for Argentina



Will have to look that up, sounds interesting, the AH64 would be perfect in this situation.

WAh64

 

[crinkleshoes]

Run to the kid your bullying's mommy to cry Argentina?

Boo..... frikkin... hoo





... morons... how can they possibly think this is anything other than embarassing for them?

 

[Muzza1875]

Type 45 destroyers have PAAMS missiles which can shoot down incoming missiles and aircraft. It protects not just itself, but any other ship in the fleet.

So yes, we have a defence against exocets.

Have they been tested to specifically shoot down exocets?

The patriot missiles that the Americans deployed against Saddam's forces during the first gulf war were supposed to shoot down scud missiles but didn't prevent scud missiles getting through to US Forces or Israel.

 

[Firestar_3x]

It so desperately obviously looks like that, doesn't it?

Given that the UN are having absolutely no luck in agreeing how to deal with the fact Syria are basically just blowing everything up what does she think they'll do about routine navy movements?

God knows, it's verging on pathetic, reminds me of the Canada on strike southpark episode, moan all you want, make threats, but no-one cares. Not that anyone will come out and say that, which is a shame.

 

[Firestar_3x]

Have they been tested to specifically shoot down exocets?

The patriot missiles that the Americans deployed against Saddam's forces during the first gulf war were supposed to shoot down scud missiles but didn't prevent scud missiles getting through to US Forces or Israel.

Yep, the exocet is a much slower sea skimmer, this system is designed to take out much more advanced stuff.