Originally posted by neformore
There are US F-15's of the 48th Fighter Wing stationed at RAF Lakenheath

The UK has no twin-tailed Aircraft in its inventory.

Wish our country did though, F-14 Tomcats, F-15 Eagles n stuff like dat.

If the RAF/FAA did have them, Id be down my local AFCO applying for a Jet Jockey Career!.

No offence but Britain does use some crap planes.

[edit on 12-8-2006 by Browno]

Browno,

>>
The UK has no twin-tailed Aircraft in its inventory. Wish our country did though, F-14 Tomcats, F-15 Eagles n stuff like dat.
>>

You were offered both and turned both down because they didn't nominally meet the RAF's needs. As I recall the F-15 didn't have enough AJam or Range in it's radar or enough gas in it's tanks and the overwater approaches mission was considered 'too demanding' for a singleseater (snicker, depands on whether you're down in the clag with 'Circle X' aperture or 10-20,000ft above it now don't it?).

The F-14 came closer and would have only really needed some overland PRF mods for the 'residual' (primary) CentAF mission. Unfortunately, it was and remains a bit of a pig as a dogfighter even as the systems costs were rather higher than GB was willing to pay (oh what a difference 30 years makes eh? 45-50 million then, 70-112 million now...).

>>
If the RAF/FAA did have them, I'd be down my local AFCO applying for a Jet Jockey Career!
>>

The UK would have been defacto defended by the USN the moment USAFE was slaughtered in their bunks, at the friday-night bar or as they taxied out by moles and commandos and rockets that were and remain a whole helluva lot more accurate than what the Iraqis and Hezbollah are using.

>>
No offence but Britain does use some crap planes.
>>

You're always a generation behind and crippled by 'consortia politicking'. That will likely change with the new UCAV generation, it just remains to be seen if you go it alone or leach off other people as with the Flubber and holding Germany's toes over the fire only to get cold feet yourselves in Tranche 2. Or the JSF which is an utterly useless plane in our service and therefore is essentially being built 'to custome order'.

Of course the UCAV will not look anything like the so called 'modern fighter' (stick and paper pterodactyl air that it is). It will be largely featureless if entirely sleek and thus more bird or ray like than anything heretofore seen before. But it's design points will be much more specialized, there will be new missions (lasers on high and high-speed body lift recce/strike rider down low) and the generations will gallop by for the first 3-4 at least.

With Corax and the others you have the baseline of configurational experience but it remains to be seen (how long the oil really lasts, whether we get a global government to distribute it, how powerful the UN becomes as a peacemaker-or-else linkup with WMF and others) whether you can apply it rapidly, cheaply, to an integrated netcentric BMC2/ISR architecture. Vs. what the Continent does in your absence over Iraq and the F-35.

My bet is that if BAe stays a player at all, it will be because they continue to do what Britain always has done: buy up companies, drain them of all technical ideas and licenses and then set the husks adrift as The City moves on.

Whether there's still room for nationalism in the politics of financial predation remains to be seen.


KPl.

BAE long since gave up on nationalism, the most open sign being the adoption of the letters BAE (as opposed to the acronym BAe) for the company name (BAE Systems) thus removing the word 'British'.

BAE is now pursuing its hard won status as an approved supplier to the Pentagon (which EADS covets and hopes to achieve itself) through buying up US defence contractors and increasing its presence 'over there', funded by the selling off of Airbus shares.

There are fears within the UK that BAE could actually leave the UK behind completely and become a US domestic company, though these may be a bit far fetched it may not be too much of a stretch to imagine BAE as a US based corporation with a UK 'presence' because America is where the big bucks contracts are. Further to this aim, in recent 'security checks' to see which companies were best placed to handle sensitive technologies BAE outpeformed several major US suppliers (all except Boeing and Lockheed in fact) and this leads to a situation where the US division of BAE is unable to share information with its own parent company. Such is the lengths that BAE will go to to secure its position.

In light of this it really is anyobody's guess which direction UK UCAV work will choose to go, but US rather than European partnership has to be a strong possibility.

Browno, so you wish the RAF was flying an interceptor which is no better than the one it has already (for the UKADR) but was roughly twice as expensive or a fighter which was great in its day, and still is, but is inferior to the fighters the RAF is now putting into service.

Did you say that for a joke?

[edit on 13-8-2006 by waynos]

Originally posted by Browno

Originally posted by neformore
There are US F-15's of the 48th Fighter Wing stationed at RAF Lakenheath

The UK has no twin-tailed Aircraft in its inventory.

Wish our country did though, F-14 Tomcats, F-15 Eagles n stuff like dat.

If the RAF/FAA did have them, Id be down my local AFCO applying for a Jet Jockey Career!.

No offence but Britain does use some crap planes.

[edit on 12-8-2006 by Browno]

The Eurofighter is far superior to the F-15, its also a swing role jet which can switch back and forth from ADV to Ground Attack, is stealthier, more manuaverable, supercruise etc. Fact of the matter is why buy American jets when we have or take part in companies like BAe and EADS . The tornado's do their job. Why buy dedicated fighters when there really isn't much air-to-air combat in the world today.

Waynos Spaketh Righteously Right Up To Here-

>>
In light of this it really is anyobody's guess which direction UK UCAV work will choose to go, but US rather than European partnership has to be a strong possibility.
>>

The USAF will have to be neutered and lobotomized before they admit that they were _dead wrong_ to drop the UCAV in favor of their 'prefered manned option'. Don't think otherwise you who helped force us into this damn JSF debacle.

I would also argue that, no matter how you spell it, so long as 'BAe' does its B-I-Z in UK banks it will 'always be a lamprey for England'. That's the standard British business model. Suck It Dry (absorbing all patents), Strip It and then Sell It Off.

>>
Browno, so you wish the RAF was flying an interceptor which is no better than the one it has already (for the UKADR) but was roughly twice as expensive or a fighter which was great in its day, and still is, but is inferior to the fighters the RAF is now putting into service.

Did you say that for a joke?
>>

Indeed, I might say the same thing about the F-35 but you know 'harsh words and hurt feelings' might follow thereafter.


KPl.

The 2 jets mentioned earlier, were seen over Romney Marsh, UK (SE Coast, near Dymchurch) at aound 11:15am (10/08/06) they were then seen in Swanage UK around 11:45am and as someone claimed on this thread, were then seen later in Norfolk UK.

I never actually claimed they were black, but very Dark Grey nearing on black.

I also heard some low flying jets yesterday, was too slow in getting to the window to spot what they were though.

This is not a regular occurence.

Potential targets for attacks in the area would be Dungeness Nuclear Power Station and the Channel Tunnel.

I saw one in N Wales in late may, heading from Valley towards the Midlands at about 5-10,000 ft. First one I've ever seen in the area: see lots of hawks, a few tornadoes (fewer now than before) and 'copters (both black & yellow SAR)

Not doing the usual low-level training we see in the area - looked like he was just transitting. Odd that there was just one but I thought he was probably just lost!

Originally posted by Browno

No offence but Britain does use some crap planes.

[edit on 12-8-2006 by Browno]

You see i don't fully agree with that statement..

Looking at the planes currently in use - the tornado - easily the best low level strike aircraft currently in use, anywhere in the world. Do you know many low level strike aircraft capable of mach 2? Thought not.

Also the harrier jump jet, sure it's old.. but it does the job, and has seen combat. And is still currently the only vertical take off fighter jet in service.

The eurofighter, i don't need to say much about that, but the eurofighter is easily in the top3 best figther jets in the world.

Everyones entitled to there opinion, but i think you should do some more research before making a comment like that.


[edit on 15-8-2006 by clashrock]

So could we agree that USAF is in a very high alert at UK?
And is USAF in USA in a high alert too?
What's the current readines level of the RAF?

I'm figuring that the increased activity with F-15Es could be a warning that USAF is preparing for offensive duties, since Tornadoes and EFs are more than enough to protect UK airspace in all terror relater scenarios?

Originally posted by clashrock
Do you know many low level strike aircraft capable of mach 2? Thought not.

Not that I have anything against the Tornado but you could have highlighted some its strong points as the high mach ability is a moot. First, you’re not going to bomb anything nor fly at mach two, and second the Tornado can’t even reach mach two at low alt, being able to go really fast for short periods of time at high alt without a combat load doesn’t mean squat these days.


[edit on 15-8-2006 by WestPoint23]

That's a fair point.. I was just talking in general terms.

The tornado is very good at low level, compared to an F-15 for example..which struggles at lower level.

I was just annoyed at the lack of thought behind the comment, that's all.

The f-15 is an amazing aircraft, and before the eurofighter it would have been cool to have some F-15's flying for the RAF.

But something tells me that would never happen.



[edit on 15-8-2006 by clashrock]

Originally posted by waynos
Browno, so you wish the RAF was flying an interceptor which is no better than the one it has already

Browno is right. The real reason for not taking the F-14 is its original cost, in comparison to funding a new project to build a cheaper, smaller, less capable F-14 knockoff. You know what I'm talking about, that damn ugly 3rd generation-looking plane, with the angularity of an early 20's MiG, that's only worth its salt in low altitude manuverability. Great .

Originally posted by waynos
but is inferior to the fighters the RAF is now putting into service.

Uhm. Just now. The 4.5 is so late it's not even funny.

[edit on 25/4/07 by SteveR]

Originally posted by jensy
Try telling that to a pilot who has to fly a B-52 at tree top height over a hostile area brimming with Sa-6 missiles.

Jensy

I think visibility would be the least of the B-52 pilots worries if he is at tree-top height! Not only would the enemy hear him coming about 10 minutes prior, but he would probably also blow himself up when he let loose the dozens of bombs he is carrying!

I know you didn't mean the B-52, but I had a good chuckle picturing the huge bomber skimming the tree line at night....

Originally posted by stumason
I know you didn't mean the B-52, but I had a good chuckle picturing the huge bomber skimming the tree line at night....

Can't help imagining a squirrel being sucked into the B52s engine... "finally i'm flying... oh crap"

No offence but Britain does use some crap planes.

I cannot beleive you people are taking that seriously. the poster said it as all RAF planes use a single vertical vertical tail surface which he must find boring.

[edit on 25-4-2007 by PisTonZOR]

I think the black f-15's fly over uk to get a repaint. In british colors.

Meaning - The black color is the rough paint - Now they only need the unionJack in the buttom of the hull.

Or otherwise - They must be looking for UFO's - As simple as that.
case solved - MOD's can close the thread now.

thx

Originally posted by Zaphod58
The only planes painted black are the stealths.

Zaphod58,

Actually most of the US stealth fleet is grey. F-22's, and F-35's are grey, while the B-2 Spirit is actually a blue-grey mix. I think the F-117's are the only stealth that still come in black, and even some of thoes have been repainted in grey.

Tim

Originally posted by stumason

Originally posted by jensy
Try telling that to a pilot who has to fly a B-52 at tree top height over a hostile area brimming with Sa-6 missiles.

Jensy

I think visibility would be the least of the B-52 pilots worries if he is at tree-top height! Not only would the enemy hear him coming about 10 minutes prior, but he would probably also blow himself up when he let loose the dozens of bombs he is carrying!

I know you didn't mean the B-52, but I had a good chuckle picturing the huge bomber skimming the tree line at night....

B-52Gs actually did do low level pentration during GW1, although from some accounts, they were lucky to have not lost one or more.

You arent going to hear it 10 minutes before it arrived (even it if it did do low level penetration) which it wont anymore, or releasing dozens of dumb bombs either. You would not hear it until it was almost right on top of you, it not a speed demon but its not that slow or loud

The main use for them now is a JDAM bomb truck when there is little to no threat, or carrying cruise missiles where there is a air defence threat.

Getting back on-topic for a sec - wasn't it around Norfolk way where there was a major UFO sighting in the 80's (Rendlesham)?? Any reports of UFOs around there since?