Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 38 of 38

Thread: Question about the French Airforce

  1. #31
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    1,759
    If we went by oil, Italy would have 50,000 men crossing the mediterranean already. Austria, Switzerland and Ireland too. Those are the ones with higher dependency on Libyan oil than France.

  2. #32
    Contributor Tin Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    02 Jun 07
    Location
    In the `shires.
    Posts
    649
    The USAF F-15-E that went down was from the "Heath in the UK.

    The French have said they have conducted recon ALL OVER LIBYA. Good on them getting into this as quickly as they did, the most decisive action so far in stopping that armoured column advancing on Benghazi. Rafale uses the SPECTRE defensive aids suite, according to RAF reports the system is excellent in the A2A arena. Whether the capability is as good against SAM systems using different bands is as good remains to be seen. The Damocles pod is also supposed to be excellent kit.

    I think it is fortunate Libya has no double digit Russian SAM systems with operators having the smarts to use them as smartly as the Serbs did way back when. Admittedly, the Serbs had more places to hide. Not much cover in open deserts.
    "Liberty is a thing beyond all price.

  3. #33
    Battleship Enthusiast Defense Professional USSWisconsin's Avatar
    Join Date
    05 Dec 08
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    4,288
    Quote Originally Posted by Tin Man View Post
    I think it is fortunate Libya has no double digit Russian SAM systems with operators having the smarts to use them as smartly as the Serbs did way back when. Admittedly, the Serbs had more places to hide. Not much cover in open deserts.
    It sucks to be them.
    "If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for ten years, plant trees.
    If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children." -- Confucius

  4. #34
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    21,348
    Quote Originally Posted by USSWisconsin View Post
    Isn't there a step where they drain the onboard wine tank?
    I'm sure you meant "wing" tank.
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  5. #35
    Regular Zad Fnark's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Nov 09
    Location
    Neenah
    Posts
    72
    Saw this posted elsewhere...

    Dailymotion - Libye : appareillage et montée en puissance du porte-avions Charles de Gaulle - une vidéo News & Politics

    Interesting footage, but gawd, Super Etendards. That's about like flying F-8s from one of ours. How long is that thing going to hang around?

    ZF-

  6. #36
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    1,759
    Quote Originally Posted by Zad Fnark View Post
    That's about like flying F-8s from one of ours.
    The Super Etendard isn't that old really. Came into service in 1978. The current SEM-5 isn't that bad, regarding air-to-ground it's probably on par with a Rafale F2 (air-to-air it sucks, but that's why the carrier has Rafales). They were in fact still definitely needed till last year as nuclear missile carriers because the Rafale M F3/ASMP-A combo didn't become operational until July 2010.

    And btw - the French did use Crusaders before

    Quote Originally Posted by Zad Fnark View Post
    How long is that thing going to hang around?
    2013.

  7. #37
    Regular Zad Fnark's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Nov 09
    Location
    Neenah
    Posts
    72
    A little newer than I thought, at the top of my head. I was thinking early 70's. Yeah, their F-8s did stick around 'til 2000.

    I always thought that Jaguar-M might have been a better choice, capability-wise. It did look rather hot (to me) for carrier ops, though.

    ZF-

  8. #38
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    1,759
    In comparison to SE/SEM? Nah. The Jag M was underpowered like hell, and was proven not to be able to perform a captured landing with only one engine. The investment to upgrade it with new engines, new landing gear, structural reinforcement etc would have been enormous.

    The money was fixed down before the project. Was planned to be enough for 100 planes - Jag M would have been 50, SE came out to 71 planes in the end.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Indian Airforce vs Pakistan Airforce
    By Thakur in forum Military Aviation
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04 Jun 08,, 21:22
  2. INDIAN AIRFORCE vs TURKISH AIRFORCE
    By vishv29 in forum Military Aviation
    Replies: 110
    Last Post: 24 Apr 08,, 14:23
  3. isreali airforce vs french airforce
    By vishv29 in forum Military Aviation
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 03 Jan 06,, 16:09
  4. pak airforce vs irani airforce
    By vishv29 in forum Military Aviation
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 12 Dec 04,, 21:40

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •