New kit

[FoxTwo]

Apologies for asking a question with what may seem like a blatantly obvious answer :rolleyes: but...

I know the two new C-17s are turning up this year (April/September) but when on earth is the new kit such as the A400M, F-35, FSTA, Hawk 128 and Nimrod MRA.4 due to be coming in to operational service? The dates keep slipping back (i.e. with A400M not even in one piece yet!) and all I seem to find is contradicting or out of date reports on when the "current" in-service date for each actually is! :ugh:

I'm sure I'm going over well-trodden ground but can anyone help throw some light on it?

[minigundiplomat]

Nimrod MRA.4


Surely you mean Nimrod 2000?

[Pontius Navigator]

The dates keep slipping back (i.e. with A400M not even in one piece yet!) and all I seem to find is contradicting or out of date reports on when the "current" in-service date for each actually is! :ugh:



You said it.

Get the answer right you could be SecDef.

[Roland Pulfrew]

FSTA? Who knows. If you can find out would you let the IPT know. It was supposed to be Introduced To Service (ITS) last year. Then it became this year. Then it became........ Well we still haven't signed a contract yet!!:ugh:

[AlJH]

Is this thread an eye test?

[BluntM8]

I don't know about all the programmes you have mentioned, but the Hawk 128 - or T.2 as it will be known is at a fairly advanced stage. There are presently at least a couple of pre-production aircraft in testing (ZK010 and ZK011 IIRC). They fly from Warton wearing an RAF colour scheme.

Blunty

[Farfrompuken]

the Hawk 128 - or T.2 as it will be known is at a fairly advanced stage. There are presently at least a couple of pre-production aircraft in testing (ZK010 and ZK011 IIRC). They fly from Warton wearing an RAF colour scheme.


I'm not sure the purchase of the Hawk is remotely going to affect the current (and future) state of operations.:rolleyes:

We need to move away from the self-justifying RAF of the cold war and recognise that we've gone full circle and we're a now a full-on Army Support organisation.

Which brings me on to Typhoon......:\

Maybe one day the people running our small organisation will be those that have been on Ops and recognise the requirements of the Modern RAF.

However with the current (and foreseable) management we'll be blowing £Bns on Lincolnshire and Scottish Superbases with Super Fighters that can contribute Super-Sweet F.A.

If we don't keep up with what's going on we'll be history soon enough.

[nav attacking]

Who cares about the Hawk...

Whjat we need is front line capability not just cobbling together a package that can acheive the aim on paper. We need aircraft that can deliver a punch there and then. By then time the ROE have been cleared over Afghanistan it is time for the pointy jets to return to the tanker and get some more fuel, by the time they get back the target has gone away....

Time we had a full capability review without fast jet bias. Yes, we need the fast boys to go in when the going is tough, i.e. the first few days of war fighting (thank god for the bang seat) but after that we need to be able to stay around and take out the opportunity target as it presents itself. far more cost effective to have a few large aircraft around for a longer period of time than some fast jets for a few hours...

[Safety_Helmut]

I'm sure I'm going over well-trodden ground but can anyone help throw some light on it?
Yes, you are, and the same light that will be shed on here has already been shed elsewhere on pprune, so do us all a favour, don't be so lazy and go and look for yourself.

S_H :ugh:

[Bob Viking]

Why do some people insist on being obstructive when somebody asks a question? (I'm talking about you!)
The guy has explained his reasons and it is entirely your choice whether or not you either read it or respond to it. I reckon it took you longer to type your reply than it would have taken to simply skip the thread and read something else.
As for this whole 'who needs fast pointy things?' cr@p. We shouldn't be arguing between ourselves about whose piece of kit is most useful. It all is. The problem here is a government that has done bugger all for so long that now everything needs replacing at the same time and there isn't enough cash to go around. Blame them, not the jet jockeys!
BV:ugh:

[Pontius Navigator]

Why do some people insist on being obstructive when somebody asks a question?

The problem here is a government that has done bugger all for so long that now everything needs replacing at the same time and there isn't enough cash to go around. Blame them, not the jet jockeys!
BV:ugh:

Bob,

I think the answer lies in your last paragraph.

FRUSTRATION

[Safety_Helmut]

Not being obstructive Bob V, far from it. But there are already numerous threads on the subjects in question. Between them, they've got all the gen that F2 is after. So unless he's another pampered fast jet faggot like yourself, surely he can go and read it for himself.

S_H

[BluntM8]

I'm not sure the purchase of the Hawk is remotely going to affect the current (and future) state of operations.

Bzzt.

I was answering the question which had been asked. Not the one you thought I should have been answering.

Blunty

[Pontius Navigator]

S_H, as soft and reasonable an apology or excuse as we expect :}

[Bob Viking]

Chips? Check.
Shoulders? Both? Check.
Tw@t. Check.
Your moniker seems very apt.
Bell.
BV:=