Sea Skua in the Falklands War
"
I'm not sure if the "It needed an expensive refit" really stacks up here, but it gets trotted out everytime something needs to get canned. The Indians used it for a further 10 years quite happily Here."
This isn't the place to discuss specifics, but its fair to say that to have continued in service would have required significant expenditure on an item of negligible military value.
I'm not sure if the "It needed an expensive refit" really stacks up here, but it gets trotted out everytime something needs to get canned. The Indians used it for a further 10 years quite happily Here."
This isn't the place to discuss specifics, but its fair to say that to have continued in service would have required significant expenditure on an item of negligible military value.
Suspicion breeds confidence
Thread Starter
That sounds like a leading question and if you have first hand knowledge, please share it with us. The Indians seemed to be very happy with it and it generally had a successful record in trials.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: A Hole
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's not exactly correct. Sea Eagle was only ever intended for the Shar and Tornado GR1a in UK service. It was deemed surplus to requirements when the cold war ended. It strikes me as a very expensive development programme for a weapon which only had two customers no matter how good it was.
Unless I am sadly mistaken, I think the launch airframe for Sea Eagle in the UK was the Bucc - later replaced by the GR1B?
Naval Eye - there was nothing intrinsically wrong with it, but AIUI at the time of SDR the missiles were approaching the point where they would have required a significant expenditure on refurbishment to maintain OC (as do all missiles) This would have cost a lot of money which we just didn't and still don't have. Given the demise of its target, plus the existence of Sea Skua and Harpoon, it was a no brainer really.
