If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
rnf2 wrote:
On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 07:05:53 -0800, Henry J Cobb wrote: So can anybody come up with anything more probable where the F/A-22s are even a tiny bit relevant? Indonesia trying to take soem of Australias land for their population explosions? thats IIRC is within F-22 range of Okinawa/Guam and you'd probably have the aussies damn glad to put them up in a base somewhere around. And the Super Hornets can beat the entire Indonesia air force, no Raptors needed. -HJC |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
"Henry J Cobb" wrote in message ... Kevin Brooks wrote: "Henry J Cobb" wrote in message ... I like the F-35, but I can't see the point of spending 11.7 billion dollars to add the "A" to F/A-22. But we are not spending $11.7 billion to add the "A". http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04391.pdf Read the report. LOL! I did. And you know what? As usual, you are trying to make sources say something to suit your needs instead of actually digesting what they have to say. That $11 billion is for *all* F/A-22 spiral development, including enhancing the air-to-air capabilities, enhancing it as an ISR platform, etc (and care to guess how much we have spent on continued RDT&E on other systems like the F-16, F-15, etc., over their lifetimes?). Not to "add the "A"". Geeze Henry, why don't you READ the crap you are using before you cram that other foot in your mouth? And it is interesting how quickly you dropped that whole "Okinawa requires a permission slip and is too far away" BS...you figure if you snip it away it just disappears, huh? Unfortunately this is about par for your pronouncements--short on reasoning, short on conclusions, and bolstered by inappropriate supporting evidence. No wonder the folks in SMN regularly unload a broadside at you when you uncloak and make similar utterances. Brooks -HJC |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
"Henry J Cobb" wrote in message ... rnf2 wrote: On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 07:05:53 -0800, Henry J Cobb wrote: So can anybody come up with anything more probable where the F/A-22s are even a tiny bit relevant? Indonesia trying to take soem of Australias land for their population explosions? thats IIRC is within F-22 range of Okinawa/Guam and you'd probably have the aussies damn glad to put them up in a base somewhere around. And the Super Hornets can beat the entire Indonesia air force, no Raptors needed. That would be the Indonesia that has just contracted to buy its first lot of the very same aircraft that in PLAAF or Russian hands you were claiming were a viable threat that would justify purchase of the F/A-22? Odd how your parameters seem to be ever-changing, Henry. http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040301183100.oj5mf3an.html Brooks -HJC |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Brooks wrote:
That would be the Indonesia that has just contracted to buy its first lot of the very same aircraft that in PLAAF or Russian hands you were claiming were a viable threat that would justify purchase of the F/A-22? Odd how your parameters seem to be ever-changing, Henry. http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040301183100.oj5mf3an.html Would they maintain or use them as well? -HJC |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 22:13:53 -0800, Henry J Cobb wrote:
Kevin Brooks wrote: That would be the Indonesia that has just contracted to buy its first lot of the very same aircraft that in PLAAF or Russian hands you were claiming were a viable threat that would justify purchase of the F/A-22? Odd how your parameters seem to be ever-changing, Henry. http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040301183100.oj5mf3an.html Would they maintain or use them as well? -HJC probably better. they have a better economy than the russians at the moment. and they train reasonably well. besides which they are gonna get a LOT more than the aussies are gonna get S-hornets... and even those S-hornets seem to be in doubt, the Aust govts cut the numbers to be aquired at least once that I have heard of. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
"D. Strang" wrote in message news:wdM5c.25310$m4.14673@okepread03... "Kevin Brooks" wrote ... until recently I too was of the opinion that the F/A-22 would have to be a non-player, until that is I noticed that Okinawa, where we *already* have basing rights, is within range for the F/A-22. Guess you missed that one, huh? Okinawa is history. I'd say in less than 10 years, we will be gone. The giant F-16 clone (F-2 ??) will probably be based there with nationals. Besides, the ZZ on the tail was won through cowardice during the Korean war. There hasn't been a General yet that would let the Wing change the letters. I suppose you have a cite for this cowardice? |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 17:44:53 -0800, Henry J Cobb wrote:
Use of Okinawa requires the permission of the Japanese government, which might not want to get involved in a shooting war with the Chinese. We are not going to get into a shooting war with the Chinese. That is the one war that cannot be fought, and fortunately the Chinese seem to realize it as well as we do. Every year that goes by makes a war even more improbable. all the best -- Dan Ford email: (requires authentication) see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
"rnf2" wrote in message news On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 22:13:53 -0800, Henry J Cobb wrote: Kevin Brooks wrote: That would be the Indonesia that has just contracted to buy its first lot of the very same aircraft that in PLAAF or Russian hands you were claiming were a viable threat that would justify purchase of the F/A-22? Odd how your parameters seem to be ever-changing, Henry. http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040301183100.oj5mf3an.html Would they maintain or use them as well? -HJC probably better. they have a better economy than the russians at the moment. and they train reasonably well. besides which they are gonna get a LOT more than the aussies are gonna get S-hornets... and even those S-hornets seem to be in doubt, the Aust govts cut the numbers to be aquired at least once that I have heard of. Australia has never indicated a buy of Superhornets, let alone a number. AIR6000 is still running to select the F/A-18 replacement, Aust is a partner in the F-35 program so that is probably the frontrunner. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
"rnf2" wrote in message ... On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 07:05:53 -0800, Henry J Cobb wrote: So can anybody come up with anything more probable where the F/A-22s are even a tiny bit relevant? -HJC Indonesia trying to take soem of Australias land for their population explosions? thats IIRC is within F-22 range of Okinawa/Guam and you'd probably have the aussies damn glad to put them up in a base somewhere around. Have you ever had a look at the Indonesians ability to deliver troops? The TNI is set up mostly to fight Indonesians. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Report Leaving Assigned Altitude? | John Clonts | Instrument Flight Rules | 81 | March 20th 04 02:34 PM |
Report: Pentagon needs to justify new fighter jet | Michael Petukhov | Military Aviation | 0 | March 16th 04 12:44 PM |
Report: Sedatives found in pilot's blood | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | November 15th 03 11:55 PM |
Bu$h Jr's Iran-Contra -- The Pentagone's Reign of Terror | PirateJohn | Military Aviation | 1 | September 6th 03 10:05 AM |
MEDIA ADVISORY ON 767A REPORT TO CONGRESS | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | July 11th 03 09:30 PM |