stuwii Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 As far as I'm aware, an F-35 costs in the region of $150m, while an Apache costs more like $20m. I'd rather have 7 or 8 Apache's for this kind of thing than 1 F-35. An F-35 is damn more scary tbh. They enemy don't like our jets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danny Posted July 22, 2009 Author Share Posted July 22, 2009 Why do we use jets when the f-35 exists, it can hover, attack and bugger off quicker than an apache can Apache is more or less untouchable in afghanistan. The taliban tend to drop there weapons once they get to the battlefield and wait until they have left again. You do get the odd brave soul who try to take them on with an RPG but they only get one chance, and then it tends to be very one sided. Jets are good for droping bombs. But for picking out people i dont think theres much that can really compare to Apache. Also there is no where in Helmand that can take fast air to give support. So they have limited time above the targets before they have to withdraw for fuel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blender Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 there is such a thing as too many helicopters i'll have you know Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danny Posted July 22, 2009 Author Share Posted July 22, 2009 there is such a thing as too many helicopters i'll have you know Cheers for the utterly irrelevant post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyxis Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 Why do we use jets when the f-35 exists, it can hover, attack and bugger off quicker than an apache can Only in Die Hard 4;) The STOVL variant of the F-35 will only hover when it lands (Short Take Off Vertical Landing). The plane can't do what it does in Hollywood films and it can't manoeuvre in the air like the Harrier. The plane wont be in service before 2015-2016 anyway. I don't think that the F-35 will be that good at Close Air Support... It can carry a max of 8 SDBs in its internal weapons bays (maybe less with the B variant?), while a Typhoon or Tornado could carry up to 18 Brimstones on their external hard points. Stand off missiles are very expensive and overkill for the Taliban and you wouldn't see them using their cannons.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dyson Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 Cheers for the utterly irrelevant post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuwii Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 Only in Die Hard 4;) The STOVL variant of the F-35 will only hover when it lands (Short Take Off Vertical Landing). The plane can't do what it does in Hollywood films and it can't manoeuvre in the air like the Harrier. The plane wont be in service before 2015-2016 anyway. I don't think that the F-35 will be that good at Close Air Support... It can carry a max of 8 SDBs in its internal weapons bays (maybe less with the B variant?), while a Typhoon or Tornado could carry up to 18 Brimstones on their external hard points. Stand off missiles are very expensive and overkill for the Taliban and you wouldn't see them using their cannons.. So it is not superior to the harrier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbob Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 So it is not superior to the harrier Not as such no, the harrier is the better of the two jets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The fish Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 (edited) So it is not superior to the harrier It depends what you want it for - in terms of providing close support, the Harrier takes the biscuit. In most other areas (bar "actually being in service"), the F-35 wins. As close support goes, everyone I know personally who's been on the ground in Afghanistan swears by the Apache. No to bring a helo down takes effectivley takes some amount of technology. The taliban do not posses this really. A couple of years ago a Dutch F15 had a SA7 fired at it, fortunately it followed a flare instead of the engines, but since then there's been no confirmed, functional MANPADS. The civilian helicopters that occasionally go down are due to either small arms or large-calibre machine guns - a couple of Apaches have been hit by the odd DShK round. Edited July 23, 2009 by The fish Automerged Doublepost Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
navarre Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 No to bring a helo down takes effectivley takes some amount of technology. The taliban do not posses this really. Apparently they do have some surface to air missiles left from the soviet period. But the chances are they dont work any more. Yes, when the US were killing thousands of Taliban in their initial invasion in 2001 simply by the Air Force, it was feared those air missiles would come into use. The Taliban most likely do not have them any more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danny Posted July 23, 2009 Author Share Posted July 23, 2009 Yes, when the US were killing thousands of Taliban in their initial invasion in 2001 simply by the Air Force, it was feared those air missiles would come into use. The Taliban most likely do not have them any more. As i said our briefs were there are a few kept as trophys. But its very debatable that they will be in any sort of working order now anyway. And there unlikely to gain any more as they have no major supporters to get them off now. Unlike in the soviet era when america was supplying them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danny Posted July 27, 2009 Author Share Posted July 27, 2009 Another 2 lads lost today. Bringing the total for july 2009 to 22 and the total in general to 191. A sad day for all. From what i have heard one of the lads was in a Viking armoured vehicle which was never supposed to be in this sort of warfare. And one was on foot patrol. A sad day and a very very sad month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danny Posted September 24, 2009 Author Share Posted September 24, 2009 Have just watched this program on BBC i player. A very moving and inspiering program. Didnt know what thread to put it in so this one seemed as good as any. http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00mzs74/Wounded_Part_1/ http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00n04df/Wounded_Part_2/ Two amazing blokes, really must be dusty in this room. Both the millitary and NHS staff do amazing things at both selly oak and headley court. Such a sad shame that most of the stuff at headley court has to be funded by charity and not the govenment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goafer Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 I watched that. It was amazing stuff. I half expected it to be like all the other documentaries that end up being a glorified freak show, but it was really good. I can't imagine what it must be like to wake up with no legs and no sight when the last time you were concious you were in Afghanistan or wherever. The bit where the guy met Prince Charles was pretty amazing too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuwii Posted September 26, 2009 Share Posted September 26, 2009 Was that meant to be anti-war? It makes me even more angry at the enemy tbh. And now there are body bombs. This is gonna turn really shit really fast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goafer Posted September 27, 2009 Share Posted September 27, 2009 I didn't see it as anti or pro war. Just made me appreciate how hard a job it is and what can go wrong (although it's obvious, just hammers the point home). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danny Posted September 27, 2009 Author Share Posted September 27, 2009 Was that meant to be anti-war? It makes me even more angry at the enemy tbh. And now there are body bombs. This is gonna turn really shit really fast It wasnt meant to be political just show what these lads are going through. And show what great young people this country still produces despite what the older people say about the 'youf of today'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuwii Posted September 28, 2009 Share Posted September 28, 2009 But it shows all the suffering of out troops but never what they are dying for- that is disgraceful Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danny Posted September 28, 2009 Author Share Posted September 28, 2009 But it shows all the suffering of out troops but never what they are dying for- that is disgraceful No there are plenty of TV shows that show what we are doing out there. And why we are doing it. This program shows the human side and the cost for those who do not make it back in one piece. And how there lives are changed forever by something that took place on the other side of the world. This program didnt need to focus at all on what we do out there. Just the 2 lads in question and there familys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts