MK2 nimrod retired from RAF service, page
Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 1 times


reply posted on 26-3-2010 @ 03:46 PM by stealthyaroura
reply to post by zoomer72



thanks for the heads up i hate it when links bust ok now



reply posted on 27-3-2010 @ 06:11 AM by Ulala
reply to post by waynos



Yes ! I'm sure the Shackleton is the one, because it had the tail of the English bombers which went to Germany in the war, that's what I remember most. Mainly they flew over the sea in the distance but sometimes they overflew the land.

In the middle 1980's, when we lived in Haugesund, there were many attempts by CCCP submarines to enter Scandinavian waters and I guess that's why the English airplanes were patrolling about the Norwegian skies. But we moved back to Finland after that, which isn't an OTAN/NATO country so we saw the English planes no more

I can't be sure about the Nimrod with the nose, it was a huge distance away but had the bulb nose ... I don't know if any other sea patrol airplanes had that ? But my Father said it was a Nimrod and he's never wrong (even when he is !)

Thank you for the pictures & explanation, it is appreciated


reply posted on 27-3-2010 @ 02:49 PM by stealthyaroura
reply to post by waynos



thanks for the info,you no ya stuff! yeah the women in one of the reports i saw said MK4 then i heard another interview say MR4 but i did not realise it was still a nimrod, All be it a new one see them time to time here in north yorkshire big beast of a plane.


reply posted on 28-3-2010 @ 01:08 PM by waynos
reply to post by RichardPrice



We might have to agree to differ on this one Richard. The loss of the Shar removed a whole level of capability that the GR.9 cannot replicate. Frankly I believe the AV-8B+ should have been acquired as a replacement for both, if the Shar HAD to go, but we both know this was never going to happen. I wonder if they looked at fitting the Shar2 radars onto the GR.9's, to make an FGR.11?


reply posted on 29-3-2010 @ 07:12 AM by RichardPrice
Originally posted by waynos
reply to
post by RichardPrice



We might have to agree to differ on this one Richard. The loss of the Shar removed a whole level of capability that the GR.9 cannot replicate. Frankly I believe the AV-8B+ should have been acquired as a replacement for both, if the Shar HAD to go, but we both know this was never going to happen. I wonder if they looked at fitting the Shar2 radars onto the GR.9's, to make an FGR.11?


As I said, the role of the Harrier force has changed dramatically - its not an air superiority or fleet defence force any more, and I cannot think of the last time it needed to be. Fleet defence has been taken over by better missiles and systems, while air superiority - well, lets not kid ourselves there...
Pages:     ^^TOP^^



Amazing video of 747 lifting in place in extreme wind conditions
  Posted 1 days ago with 11 member flags
Eerie Second World War RAF fighter plane discovered in the Sahara
  Posted 16 days ago with 8 member flags
Stealth chopper based in Nevada
  Posted 16 days ago with 4 member flags
HIFiRE Scramjet Research Flight Will Advance Hypersonic Technology
  Posted 14 days ago with 2 member flags