It was designed as a counter to the proposed Mach 3 B-70 bomber but the US binned the project, and also to high altitude spy planes like the U2.
Strike Eagle Replacement.
- Thread starter Von Smallhausen
- Start date
It was designed as a counter to the proposed Mach 3 B-70 bomber but the US binned the project, and also to high altitude spy planes like the U2.
Thats a failry big difference in range/payload. a third! I can imagine it will get less as development goes one. Last I hear the F35 was on a severe weight loss programme. Considering the recent conflicts, range and payload on hot/high locations seem quite important. I can't see how it would be as manoverable as a F15 either. Maybe it is. It just doesn't look right either.
Soldato
The f35 project particularly the STOVL variant that we plan on buying for our new carriers is a disaster waiting to happen, the project is already over budget and late and we only ever seem to hear bad news about delays, costs and capabilities. The non-STOVL version is less dodgy but still a bit of a confused mess, the main trouble with all 5th generation fighters is the lack of viable oposition. Does the UK really need anything beyond an F15 given that the countries we are going to war with generally speaking don't have air forces or when they do are flying a mixture of antiquated rubish?
They already had that data though, the trust fund is simply to show to other potential defectors come to us with something good and you'll be made for life.
F-15 is a fine fighter plane, but the Sukhoi-27 and its variants takes the cookie (IMHO)
http://kuusanmaki.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/su27_flanker_t.jpg
http://konstantinep.files.wordpress...b9cebaceac-cf8ccebccebfcf81cf86cebf-su-27.jpg
The Su27 is absolutely stunning I agree.
All they need is a smart bomb truck that can loiter, and COIN aircraft.
The Typhoon will make a great bomb truck though. The Typhoon just looks soo right. Which is always good.
They also need to keep up to speed with technology so that is that threat does appear, (that doesn't exist today but could tomorrow), the west is not left playing catch up. But theres no way they could ramp up to build these 5th gen fighters in anything like the numbers required should they be needed. They are too slow to make and too expensive. The F35 I can't see being a success at all.
I guess though they'd point to the success of the F15 with Israel in the 1982 Lebanon War, where F15's got the similar number of kills as the F16's but with far fewer F15's.
Suspended
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 9,479
We have ground support. Hi2u Apache?
Because the Air Chief marshalls in the RAF are primarily fighter obsessives, still hoping for one last glory days battle a la Battle of Britain, and all the associated coverage/attention it would get.
A squadron of A10's would have been pretty handy over the last 10 years of conflict, and seeing as the USA doesnt plan to retire them until at least 2028, thats a service life of 51 years!
A bargain if ever I saw one.The A10 Thunderbolt has shot down more enemy aircraft in combat than the RAF has since the end of WW2.
Associate
You can say 'Hi' back to it at this years Fairford RIAT.
AFAIK (and I could be wrong) I don't think they use the A10's a low level any more. Its all above 10k. They can use smart weapons and stay out of ground fire, and sams. I think they fire the cannon from higher than you think as well, in a shallow dive. They come low for shows of force, as do other aircraft. I'd say the A10 cannon ammo isn't cheap. Its all about money at the end of the day, and the harriers did a good job, lots of hard points, fast response time. Also the Apaches might be more useful down low. Combination of all of the above. Dunno about the Tornado's they seem to be underpowered for the heat/altitude haven't heard much about them.
...
The A10 Thunderbolt has shot down more enemy aircraft in combat than the RAF has since the end of WW2.
What are the numbers. I assume is mostly choppers?
Permabanned
- Joined
- 10 May 2010
- Posts
- 372
It's all about the Sukhoi Su-27.. end of story.
Seriously, we better hope never fight the Russians, their new fighter planes will pwn us, easily.
Seriously, we better hope never fight the Russians, their new fighter planes will pwn us, easily.
Caporegime
Or more likely because we have other aircraft that fit the bill for CAS already, and we don't need our own when the US have been supplying it for us.Because the Air Chief marshalls in the RAF are primarily fighter obsessives, still hoping for one last glory days battle a la Battle of Britain, and all the associated coverage/attention it would get.
A squadron of A10's would have been pretty handy over the last 10 years of conflict, and seeing as the USA doesnt plan to retire them until at least 2028, thats a service life of 51 years!
The A10 Thunderbolt has shot down more enemy aircraft in combat than the RAF has since the end of WW2.
But we don't use harriers in Afghanistan do we?
we have to rely on the Americans for air support.
We do.
2 Iraqi helicopters. Still, thats got to be pretty awesome shooting to lead a moving helicopter when your gunsight is designed for a static target!
Or more likely because we have other aircraft that fit the bill for CAS already, and we don't need our own when the US have been supplying it for us.
Such as what? The Harrier GR7/9?
Suspended
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 9,479
The A10 Thunderbolt has shot down more enemy aircraft in combat than the RAF has since the end of WW2.
You need to do some research sonny - forget about the Falklands did you?