3900 replies to this topic

[waldo]

So the reference to the Royal Navies carriers was just you grasping at straws?

I appreciate you don't care for highlighting problems with the JSF...

[Derek L]

why are you so hesitant to link to whatever he said... is there a problem? In any case, I take it you, in kind, will now equally dispense with Laurie Hawn and his F-35 schilling in the same manner you just have with General Ronald R. Fogleman (Ret.) - Former Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force, yes?

Not at all, Mr Hawn is currently in Government…..General Fogleman left Government (Pushed out over Khobar Towers?) over 4 years prior to the Lockheed F-35 winning the competition over Boeing.

[Derek L]

So, a possible reversal by the Royal Navy on the direction of their Carrier force, doesn’t effect Canada’s purchase of the F-35. Correct?

[waldo]

So, a possible reversal by the Royal Navy on the direction of their Carrier force, doesn’t effect Canada’s purchase of the F-35. Correct?

as I continue to highlight your reading & comprehension difficulty... that was not the point. When nothing is certain about F-35 scheduling & costs you seem hell-bent assured that significant JSF partner changes won't have an impact on the overall program. Of course you do! One of the points you gloss right over, of course, is the whole failed "inter-interoperability & joint operations" aspect this snafu highlights. We keep reading you MLW war-hawks trumpeting the JSF advantage to allow partner nations so-called synergies... I guess that just fell right apart, particularly between the British & French, over this British forced shift to the B variant... notwithstanding it's described, "half the range and a third of the payload", of the F-35C variant. Hey?

[waldo]

In any case, I take it you, in kind, will now equally dispense with Laurie Hawn and his F-35 schilling in the same manner you just have with General Ronald R. Fogleman (Ret.) - Former Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force, yes?

Not at all, Mr Hawn is currently in Government…..General Fogleman left Government (Pushed out over Khobar Towers?) over 4 years prior to the Lockheed F-35 winning the competition over Boeing.

this is all very illuminating on just how far you're willing to go to ignore critical review & comment... Fogelman has a most distinguished career... medals and awards out the ying-yang. Your "pushed out" characterization certainly doesn't fit the summations I've just scanned. In any case, I note your continued self-serving acceptance of Laurie "fighter jet" Hawn as a supposed authoritative source!

[Derek L]

as I continue to highlight your reading & comprehension difficulty... that was not the point. When nothing is certain about F-35 scheduling & costs you seem hell-bent assured that significant JSF partner changes won't have an impact on the overall program. Of course you do! One of the points you gloss right over, of course, is the whole failed "inter-interoperability & joint operations" aspect this snafu highlights. We keep reading you MLW war-hawks trumpeting the JSF advantage to allow partner nations so-called synergies... I guess that just fell right apart, particularly between the British & French, over this British forced shift to the B variant... notwithstanding it's described, "half the range and a third of the payload", of the F-35C variant. Hey?

Do you understand that the CVF was originally intended to operate the “B” version, and the emphasis has only shifted to the “C” over the last few years?

Do you understand the differing requirements associated with Cat & Trap carriers versus STOVL? What about the increase in Naval platforms the RN/RAF will have accesses with the “B” over the “C”? The Greater interoperability between both the RN & RAF by using the “B” and not requiring the extensive CARQUALS for the pilots as the “C”?

And do you understand the intended usage of the RN’s QE class Aircraft Carriers, and as such, how range and payload won’t be a factor?

And what of the fact that they are switching back to a different version of the F-35? Why not use an alternative aircraft?

[Derek L]

this is all very illuminating on just how far you're willing to go to ignore critical review & comment... Fogelman has a most distinguished career... medals and awards out the ying-yang. Your "pushed out" characterization certainly doesn't fit the summations I've just scanned. In any case, I note your continued self-serving acceptance of Laurie "fighter jet" Hawn as a supposed authoritative source!

Are you going to use a Clairvoyant to channel the opinions of Mitchell, Spaatz, Doolittle and LeMay next?

[DogOnPorch]

waldo is still wrapping his head around that pushing forward on the stick doesn't make the plane go up.

[DogOnPorch]

Are you going to use a Clairvoyant to channel the opinions of Mitchell, Spaatz, Doolittle and LeMay next?

Don't you know most of the fellows he mentions?

[Derek L]

waldo is still wrapping his head around that pushing forward on the stick doesn't make the plane go up.

Indeed……..I’d gleefully engage Waldo in a discussion about maritime aviation, especially the Royal Navy and Fleet Air Arm.

[Derek L]

Don't you know most of the fellows he mentions?

If not directly, indirectly through past “co-workers”

[DogOnPorch]

Indeed……..I’d gleefully engage Waldo in a discussion about maritime aviation, especially the Royal Navy and Fleet Air Arm.

Yeah, right. You and waldo discussing the significance of the HMS Argus over tea.


There was a time Canada figured it would NEVER need an aircraft carrier. Then along came the Type VII U-Boat. Why we don't have one or two now for Arctic patrol duty is a bit of a puzzle.

[DogOnPorch]

If not directly, indirectly through past “co-workers”

lol...ok...so this is a situation like when these same posters try to tell BC-2004 how nuclear subs operate.

[bush_cheney2004]

lol...ok...so this is a situation like when these same posters try to tell BC-2004 how nuclear subs operate.

Indeed....Google is now a suitable substitute for Admiral Hyman G. Rickover.

[Derek L]

Yeah, right. You and waldo discussing the significance of the HMS Argus over tea.


There was a time Canada figured it would NEVER need an aircraft carrier. Then along came the Type VII U-Boat. Why we don't have one or two now for Arctic patrol duty is a bit of a puzzle.

*Jingoistic Chest thumping alert Waldo*


Indeed, and though not a Sopwith Camel, here's a intresting video of the last real Ark Royal and the difficulties associated with Cat & Trap operations: