Posted on 06/06/2002 3:23:27 AM PDT by spetznaz
Yes, I was thinking in particular of Alfonse D'Amato and his ridiculous posturing to keep the A-7 assembly lines on IIRC Long Island open, years ago. He was "a hero to his people", but I don't see old A-7 airframes groaning around Naval Reserve airfields the way we see Warthog-equipped ANG units being reactivated time and time again to go settle some armored camel-driver's hash for him.
Too, there has been some heavy politicking involving Texas aircraft plants, and I'm sure you know of some others. I suppose we're just fortunate that there were never any SPAD plants located in Bobby Byrd's beloved West Virginia.
So Cheney dinged our future naval-aviation needs in order to discipline Grumman and "teach them all a lesson". Now thanks to Clinton's policies, they're down to two companies, as you pointed out. I wonder whether Cheney's lesson took, or whether, in the long run, he and his successors can avoid future squeeze plays. After all -- capitalism is about Darwinism, and Darwinism is about a single winner.
Seems like there's no way we'll be able to avoid co-production or off-the-shelf deals with overseas design bureaus and manufacturers, in order to keep from getting juiced by the "survivors" ourselves. Which is a mark of a banana republic, but the more serious point is that you wind up separated from your sources of supply, and wind up having to defend an ocean and maybe another continent, just to keep your logistical train intact. Then, if we do a co-production deal and shoot the moon on producing content here, how do we turn around and tell Boeing that they can't let the Chinese do the same thing with the 777? Yuck.
Yeah, Grumman was "disciplined" all right. Don't know Cheyney's reasoning -- he may have had the whole deal misrepresented to him. There was a whole lotta lying going on in those days, and by the time the staff study got to the 5th floor E-ring, there is no telling who had been lied to or who was doing the lying.
Not to mention the Lobbyists who were hard at work to get the F-18 program started.
No version of the F-18 has or ever will meet the initial design specifications as to range, payload, speed, altitude or manueverability. When it is discovered that some aspect of the F-18's performance is below design spec, the spec is changed to reflect actual performance.
Sound familiar? "When your standards are too high, lower your standards!"
With that said...you seem to have a zeal for Russian weapon systems that could come in handy for me if I really want specs on the stuff they produce.
The Kamov is decent but the Apache can sit "behind" a mountain, Trees, Buildings and see & fire on targets on the other side of it without giving away its position to ground troops.
That is an everyday thing for the Apache.
The Kamov doesnt come close to that capability. If I am not mistaken...the Kamov needs a line of sight in order to engage ground forces or it needs a ground operator to laze a specific target in order for its missiles to engage.
It's producers have turned to Israel as well as France to spruce it up....that alone is telling.
It is a fine weapons/Recon platform.....for a second or third world country....but it isnt in the Apache's league especially not in the upcoming Comanche's.
It was the Apache that kicked off the air war in Iraq by slipping in under Iraqi Radar and attacking an Iraqi Radar/CC station located in southern Iraq and opening a door for our conventional Aircraft.
Strictly speaking, the "Flanker" isn't a Russian design, but rather a Russian copy of the Iranian F-14A the KGB got them. Hence the sobriquet, "Tomcatsky".
That's why it so closely resembles the Tom in size, performance, and appearance, and why it's such a good fit to replace the F-14D's Cheney and Grumman screwed us out of.
Load a "Flanker" up with F-14 avionics, and you've essentially got a fixed-wing Tomcat.
Again i fear you may have misconstrued some of my posts. I believe i clarified myself on the Hokums position in that it is the 'best' (and the word best is always relative) when it comes to matters of cost effectiveness (the ability to perform the same or similar duties at the same level of efficacy, yet at a cheaper economical or logistical cost). In that respect the Kamov is spectacular.
Secondly the fact that Israel and France has been participating in the development and upgrades of the Kamov do not mean it is deficient! The KA-50-2 Erdogran produced by the IAI was simply to fit the Hokum with Nato weapons, and a cockpit customized for the Israelis! That does not mean the Kamov was lacking, just that it wasn't equipped to utilize Nato weapons just Russian ones, and the cockpit was Russian!
And as for your assertion that the Ka-50 is relegated to use by bottom tier countries is not entirely correct, unless you consider Russia among the dregs when it comes to military power. The Russians may have undergone several major changes, and even their military is not what it use to be as is still undergoing a paradigm change to make it more efficient, and leaner, than it used to be during the Soviet era. However it is definitely not a walkover military state. And the Kamov has been quite efficient in chechnya, especially in 'cauterizing' areas that are bristling with AA missiles since the Kamov can utilize its low acoustic, radar and thermal signatures to penetrate those defenses, or destroy them.
However again i am not posting this to start a whole 'The Apache is Better Than The Hokum....and So is the Comanche!' I think the AH-64D is a work of art aesthetically, and also one dang great tank killer. However that does not mean the Kamov, Eurocopter tiger, or even the quite impressive South African Rooivalk is suddenly null and void.
And the Kamov is not as 'basic' as you imply. The versions in use by the Russians can perform to the same specifications as a LongBow Apache. To almost an uncanny degree (i guess that is why some people claim the Russians reverse engineer American military concepts....and sometimes even the actual models in a number of cases).
And this brings me to the Comanche. The comanche is definitely an amazing concept since it brings the element of reconnaissance/attack helicopters to a whole new plateau. However i have gotten wind of some 'oligarchs' in positions of power in the military and congress who have been trying to oppose this project. To the best of my knowledge the Army put orders for around 1000 RAH-66s , starting from around 2007. And i know for certain it has finished several importan milestones.....including i believe starting the EMD (where they start seeing its true capabilities). Still the program remains in perpetual jeopardy (until the day the army actually get their mits on it) due to some people (who by the way in the event of combat will be safe and sound at home and not in active warfare) who are trying to kill in in vitro! Why are they doing this? Take your pick from a number of choices, but the bottom line is that the RAH-66 has come extremely far, but you could well say the sword of damocles hangs over it. I hope it makes it through, but that question will be 'completely'answered some time in the near future. 
Could not help myself, and once i discovered how to post pics on this forum i just took to it like a duck to water.
However i am glad you liked them.
Low and slow is the problem with the A-10, even though it is a mean machine. Years ago, one of the pilots told me it was designed to kill a massive onslaught of Russian armor into western Europe, but the pilots knew it was a suicide mission due to the proliferation of man-portable AA missiles. In fact, the A-10's and the British Tornadoes were both pulled back from ground attack missions early in the Gulf War. I don't remember if we lost any Warthogs, but the Brits had 2 or 3 Tornadoes go down, and that's one expensive airplane. Good pilots are very expensive too. Looks like standoff weapons are the wave of the future.
I'd love to have a 56K connection.....our neighborhood is stranded on a 35-year old "pair gain loop", a juryrig lashup that SW Bell has used for years -- top datarate over one of those is stuck at 26.4K, half the usual rate. A woman living five blocks away outside Purdah gets 48-49K every time. :^ \
Say whut ?
Isn't that a French munition...or rather, submunition?
Say whut ?
I didn't get that either. I thought maybe he shot over my head with that post. Glad I'm not the only one...
Harry ;)
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.