Originally Posted by
Pheasant
I think the point people are arguing, Insty, is why does it need to be converted for CAS when the GR9 is a far better CAS asset already doing the job in the stan and is the weapon of choice for the ground troops. If it were not for Torpy's desire to get the navy out of FW the Harrier would remain on task.
Why does [the GR4] need to be converted for CAS?
One answer might be found from the USAF in the Vietnam War. Earlier on the USAF was fighting 2 wars. TAC was fighting in Vietnam and SAC was waiting to fight the cold war. In those days you were either in TAC or SAC with no cross-over. The TAC guys were getting fatigued and the answer was to rotate SAC pilots through TAC. There are 2 wings of GR4 and one wing of Harrier. Logic says you must spread the pain.
When the GR9 is a far better CAS asset already doing the job in the stan .
Far better than . . . ? As they have not been in the CAS role it is too early to say the GR9 is better.
and is the weapon of choice for the ground troops
Choice of what? The aircraft you know from the aircraft you don't? How can the GR4 be declared 'not the weapon of choice' when it is not yet on offer?
If it were not for Torpy's desire to get the navy out of FW the Harrier would remain on task
Ah, now that is a different story and Air seems confident that CVF will never happen. Cut Dii/f, a glorified email system, and you could afford CVF, JSF etc. The more I learn of Dii/f the more I believe it sucks.
It is cheaper to buy a new suite of stand-alone computers - 30 to 40 off hand - to run a new software bought from the US than pay the 6-figure sums demanded to get in on Dii/. Who was behind Dii? Air.