Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Britain in battle with US over fighter plane
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2095-1902806,00.html ^

Posted on 12/05/2005 1:11:22 AM PST by Arjun

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-106 next last

1 posted on 12/05/2005 1:11:22 AM PST by Arjun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Aeronaut

ping


2 posted on 12/05/2005 1:13:26 AM PST by Jet Jaguar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arjun

I actually hope Britain does withdraw. Yes they are allies. But we do not need our STEALTH technology getting into anyone else's hands.


3 posted on 12/05/2005 1:24:57 AM PST by Paul_Denton (The U.S. should adopt the policy of Oom Shmoom: Israeli policy where no one gives a sh*t about U.N.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paul_Denton

The JSF and similar aircraft are the last war's technology.

They are unneeded. The F-22, B1, B2, F-117, F-15, A-10, and F-18's can handle all near-term threats...and in the longer term, a fighter will either have to be unmanned or sub-orbital.

Thus, the JSF program should be killed off.

4 posted on 12/05/2005 1:29:34 AM PST by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Southack
Not so sure myself. The Brits have stuck with us in Iraq pretty darn well. They also are the counterpart to the Poles in the east. France is boxed in. Germany will change sides if we keep up the pressure. Let us make the box much more confining, eh?

Besides, there really is no cost involved, just funny money.

Agree completely on the unmanned or sub-orbital. Well, by sub-orbital I mean the machine can insert into a near earth orbit. About Project Mercury delta V. Most excellent for making enemy space assets a little visit. A bit of wide band radar, a little missile lock, a quick flyby, a nice hello in peacetime, just a reminder really, would help keep a few important minds focused.
5 posted on 12/05/2005 2:07:10 AM PST by Iris7 ("Let me go to the house of the Father.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Jet Jaguar; Tijeras_Slim; FireTrack; Pukin Dog; citabria; B Knotts; kilowhskey; cyphergirl; ...

6 posted on 12/05/2005 2:11:30 AM PST by Aeronaut (It is deeply irresponsible to rewrite the history of how the war began.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Southack

I think the Air Force should give their A-10s to the Marines.

Had a Drill Instructor on Parris Island in 1989, an Air Winger, who said about Warthogs, 'You take a big gun, and you build an airplane around it...'


7 posted on 12/05/2005 2:16:02 AM PST by real saxophonist (The fact that you play tuba doesn't make you any less lethal. Semper Fi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: real saxophonist

What I want to know is, who costs military aircraft projects? They can’t be very good at it because I can’t remember the last time one was completed within budget.


8 posted on 12/05/2005 2:25:34 AM PST by FostersExport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: real saxophonist
I think the Air Force should give their A-10s to the Marines.

Agreed.

9 posted on 12/05/2005 2:38:24 AM PST by Cobra64
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: FostersExport

hey the F4U corsair was way overbudget...i think somewhere around 60,000 dollars as opposed to 55,000 for a Hellcat. that was alot of bread in 1944


10 posted on 12/05/2005 3:21:57 AM PST by wildcatf4f3 (admittedly too unstable for public office)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Paul_Denton
I actually hope Britain does withdraw. Yes they are allies. But we do not need our STEALTH technology getting into anyone else's hands.

The following are the nations participating in the JSF project.

Level 1: Britain. Contributed around 2 bil.

Level 2: Italy and the Netherlands. Contributed 1 bil and 800m respectively.

Level 3: Turkey ($175m), Australia ($144m), Norway ($122m), Denmark ($110m), and Canada ($100m).

Security Cooperative Participants: Israel and Singapore.

11 posted on 12/05/2005 3:38:39 AM PST by spetznaz (Nuclear-tipped Ballistic Missiles: The Ultimate Phallic Symbol)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Arjun

I hope we don't pull out, as the Eurofighter is gay.


12 posted on 12/05/2005 4:12:18 AM PST by agere_contra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: agere_contra

The F-22 is better at air dominance by far over the F35,and the US only wants the Naval and marine vtol version of it(F35). That is one of the problems. Also, the US wont sell the F-22 to anyone, and it really doesnt trust France's getting their hands on the JSF tech(they would whore it out to anyone). Which we know that would happen since the EU is really just one bloc now. Doesnt worry me at all. Thats the great thing about a nation building its own fighters and navy we are self reliant. I love the brits but they're a strong anti-american movment in the EU. The EU and even Jack Straw in the UK was pushing for the dropping of the arms embargo of the communist chinese. Most of the EU's military tech is shared from the US, and this set off warning lights in Washington. Our top tech can not be shared with the chinese.


13 posted on 12/05/2005 4:52:03 AM PST by MARKUSPRIME
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Southack
They are unneeded. The F-22, B1, B2, F-117, F-15, A-10, and F-18's can handle all near-term threats...and in the longer term, a fighter will either have to be unmanned or sub-orbital.

More than a few problems with your logic.

1. The JSF is navalized, the F-22 and F-117 aren't.

2. JSF is much less expensive than the F-22. It is to the F-22, what the F-16 was to the F-15.

3. It should be superior to the F-18 in most every way.

4. STOL/VTOL capability coupled with JSF capabilities makes each of our 12 amphibs a more capable CVA than any other country's aircraft carriers. Your plan reverts these ships to helicopter only platforms.

5. Its development is going far better than the F-22's.

JSF won't get cancelled, but the F-22 might see a very short production run.

14 posted on 12/05/2005 4:59:11 AM PST by SampleMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Iris7

You neatly side stepped the entire issue, which is that of very high level technology transfer to the EU member nations.

Even though I highly value Britian's close relationship with the US, that technology would find its way to every nation in the world in a short amount of time.


15 posted on 12/05/2005 5:11:23 AM PST by bill1952 ("All that we do is done with an eye towards something else.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: MARKUSPRIME
The F-22 is better at air dominance by far over the F35,and the US only wants the Naval and marine vtol version of it(F35). That is one of the problems

Apples and oranges. The F-15 is better at air dominance than the F-16, so what? That's not why the F-16 was purchased. Same goes for the JSF. It is to replace the F-16 (USAF certainly does plan on purchasing it) not the F-15. The JSF was and is to be a replacement for the F-16, F-18, and AV-8B. The fact that it is much better at air superiority than them, doesn't mean that is its primary purpose.

Curiously, this same debate raged about buying the F-16 instead of buying more F-15s.

16 posted on 12/05/2005 5:12:53 AM PST by SampleMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Southack

Whole heartedly agree. MAnned fighter planes are a waste of money. Strictly for AF Generals in Pentagon reliving wars of long ago.


17 posted on 12/05/2005 5:16:24 AM PST by hubbubhubbub
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan
The JSF is navalized, the F-22 and F-117 aren't.

2. JSF is much less expensive than the F-22. It is to the F-22, what the F-16 was to the F-15.

3. It should be superior to the F-18 in most every way.

I would say the same thing about the F 14.
And we wouldn't be reverting anything except plans.

We don't need the JSF at the expense of our technology.

18 posted on 12/05/2005 5:16:37 AM PST by bill1952 ("All that we do is done with an eye towards something else.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Paul_Denton

Agree, not even Israel that sold UAVs to China and penetrated our intelligence on Iran. F-35 should be for US only. Sales to certain allies are tolerable even it is concern of leaks of technology, but it is very irritating when it comes to sales to anti-American countries, especially the Islamofascist Turkey that are violating human rights and still denying the Armenian Genocide, genocide against our Christian brothers. We could always provide F/A-18E/F Block III for allies that want stealthiness, but something not as much as the F/A-22 and F-35, letting US to maintain its advantage in stealth technology.


19 posted on 12/05/2005 5:18:20 AM PST by Wiz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Wiz

Speaking of Israel, they just got a pali bomber attack.


20 posted on 12/05/2005 5:18:58 AM PST by MarMema (http://www.curenikolette.org/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-106 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson