CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
Profile
Posts: 32460
PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 7:38 am
 


$1:
Yeah? Say who? I should remind you that (like the CF-18 Hornet) the F-22 is a plane which has been beset by technical problems, ever since its launch in 2007. It has had so many problems that this mission against ISIS is actually its first combat mission.


There's a steaming pile of poo. Exactly what "technical" problems have beset F-18?
$1:
In terms of weaponry, the Tornado is also deadier than the F-22, considering that the Tornado is bristling with Brimstone missiles, and there's nothing the F-22 has which matches the capability of the Brimstone.

Bristling? :lol: You have provided no evidence of this other than a cut and paste propaganda blurb from the paper. You aren't that smart so the evidence you provide must be validated by something else other than Wiki.

$1:
Because the British Brimstone missile, which the Tornados are bristling with and which are much sought after by the Yanks, are the most accurate precision strike product on the market, proven in combat in Afghanistan and Libya by the RAF. It is effective from multiple platforms, including fighter aircraft, propeller aircraft, helicopters, Remotely Piloted Aircraft (RPAs), surface vessels and patrol craft. It also has a low risk of collateral damage – guaranteed by Brimstone’s pinpoint accuracy and focused, low fragmentation warhead, which allows RAF Tornados to go for targets that they USAf will not touch.

Basically, RAF Tornados are armed with the very best missile there is in the world today.


Careful boys........don't step in this pile either.


Offline
Active Member
Active Member
Profile
Posts: 422
PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 7:41 am
 


Jabberwalker Jabberwalker:
They can't sell it to us because it has an action radius as wide as Ontario. If you live on a tiny, postage-stamp archipelago , ... "back for tea and refueling after a fifteen minute sortie" then it's a terrific aircraft. The RCAF has to fly the equivalent of the length of Europe just to get to their patrol areas. The British don't make any aircraft that can fly a fraction of that distance and still fight when they get there. Why would they when their little world is so tiny, perfect?



Bullshit. The Tornado has a longer range than the CF-18.

To use Canada's silly "kilometres", the Tornado GR4 has a range of 3,900 kms, whereas the CF-18 Hornet has a range of just 3,330 kms. The F-22 has a range of just 2,960 kms. So the Tornado beats them both hands down.


Offline
Active Member
Active Member
Profile
Posts: 422
PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 7:44 am
 


Regina Regina:
There's a steaming pile of poo.



So all the news reports about it have been lies, have they?

$1:
Bristling? :lol: You have provided no evidence of this other than a cut and paste propaganda blurb from the paper.


So anything which states that Tornados are bristling with Brimstones are lying are they?

Each Tornado carries TWELVE Brismtone missiles, the deadliest missiles that exist.

$1:
Careful boys........don't step in this pile either.



That's some inferiority complex you've got there.


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 9445
PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 7:45 am
 


Regina Regina:
I always liked the F-14 as well. Replaced more by the F-15 and F-18 in the twin engine category. I think the F-16 is probably the best bang for the buck for fighters in the world. Because of it's single engine, it wasn't considered by us though.

Image
Maverick agrees. :lol:


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 9445
PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 7:48 am
 


Image
This British talk has me craving some bangers and mash and heading over to the pub for a pint.


Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
Profile
Posts: 32460
PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 7:50 am
 


$1:
As for British cars, Britain is the country which gave the world Aston Martin,
Daimler, Rolls-Royce, Mini etc. Much better than any Canadian cars.

Maybe those little puddle jumpers are fine on your short narrow roads but they don't hold up in North America and turn to a piece of shit in no time at all.

$1:
We also gave the world the Spitfire, the Harrier Jump Jet and Concorde.

Love the Spitfire but you didn't "give" it to the world and the Mustang far out preformed even the latest Mk ever produced. I've seen the Harrier fly a few times and also saw one crash at it's home base while doing virtually nothing. I've been on a Concorde and it's very small but fast.........and wasn't built and designed by the UK alone. But taking undeserved credit is where you live.


Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
Profile
Posts: 32460
PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 7:58 am
 


$1:
So all the news reports about it have been lies, have they?

Are you even remotely serious with that statement??

$1:
So anything which states that Tornados are bristling with Brimstones are lying are they?

:lol: Even a christmass tree "bristles" ........it means nothing and is just you exaggerating the fact they carry a weapon type.

$1:
Each Tornado carries TWELVE Brismtone missiles, the deadliest missiles that exist.
I know you aren't smart enough to understand why no one would believe you.
$1:
That's some inferiority complex you've got there.

No just sitting back and enjoying the self flagellation you provide us.


Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
Profile
Posts: 32460
PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 8:02 am
 


$1:
German cars are over-rated.

I'd take a 911 over ANYTHING I ever saw in the UK any day of the week.

$1:
As for Continental European military hardware, it's far inferior to that of Britain but much more expensive.

Must be true because you just said so......right?


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 9445
PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 8:08 am
 


Regina Regina:
$1:
As for British cars, Britain is the country which gave the world Aston Martin,
Daimler, Rolls-Royce, Mini etc. Much better than any Canadian cars.

Maybe those little puddle jumpers are fine on your short narrow roads but they don't hold up in North America and turn to a piece of shit in no time at all.

British cars are great if you're living on the west coast but anywhere else with our extreme winters enjoy getting to know the service staff at the dealership because they will become your best friend.


Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
Profile
Posts: 32460
PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 8:20 am
 


I have two friends that have Jags. One has a XJ and the other has a F-Type convertible. Both nice but obviously neither can be driven in the winter............plus they need to drive 5 hours just to get an oil change. :lol:


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Montreal Canadiens
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 13404
PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 5:17 pm
 


Batsy2 Batsy2:
$1:
Jabberwalker wrote:
You see, we had the brilliant British-built "O" boats before and it seemed to be perfectly natural to replace them with a British design. The error was, though, that the O class was the penultimate development of the German H-Boat, not from British genes at all. British "design" ... there's an oxymoron considering that the British designed and built the very worst automobiles ever to be sold. Quirky may be cute in Redding but here, it was laughed off of the road.


What's the German H-boat? Is that something you've just made up?

As for British cars, Britain is the country which gave the world Aston Martin,
Daimler, Rolls-Royce, Mini etc. Much better than any Canadian cars.

We also gave the world the Spitfire, the Harrier Jump Jet and Concorde.

$1:
Shoudda bought Kraut ... Subs AND cars!


German cars are over-rated.

As for Continental European military hardware, it's far inferior to that of Britain but much more expensive.


The Concorde was partly given to you by us with the Canadian engineering team that migrated to Britain after the Avro Arrow was cancelled.
http://www.avroarrow.org/AvroArrow/Avroengineers.html

Just for fun, watch footage of Concorde taking off and then watch the Arrow doing same. They are both identical, but quite distinctive from most other aircraft like them. There are more Arrow genes in Concorde than you might realize.

Anyway, about those delicate garage queens that the Brits refer to as "luxury cars". I've been in the North in various places and what you will NEVER see up there are Land Rovers, Range Rovers or the rest of the poseur line. They're just not up to a truly hostile environment ... overpriced cream puffs. The ads show them in the Wild of Africa but they were actually designed for the rough, tough country lanes of Surrey.

BTW That is a U-Boat ... Unterzee Boot. Even you must have heard of them.

I like this little blurb about the O Boat:

Canada The three Canadian submarines were built with improved air-conditioning systems, while as many common components as possible were replaced with Canadian equivalents.[2] The Canadian Oberons used United States Navy torpedoes throughout their career: they were initially equipped with Mark 37 torpedo, but were later upgraded for Mark 48 torpedoes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oberon-class_submarine

I guess, that is so they would start when it was below 32 Deg. Fahrenheit!


Offline
CKA Elite
CKA Elite
 Calgary Flames
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 4247
PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 8:37 pm
 


Batsy2 Batsy2:

Yeah? Say who? I should remind you that (like the CF-18 Hornet) the F-22 is a plane which has been beset by technical problems, ever since its launch in 2007. It has had so many problems that this mission against ISIS is actually its first combat mission.

In terms of weaponry, the Tornado is also deadlier than the F-22, considering that the Tornado is bristling with Brimstone missiles, and there's nothing the F-22 has which matches the capability of the Brimstone.


Did you seriously just try to compare a F-22 to a Torrnado? :roll:


Offline
Active Member
Active Member
Profile
Posts: 422
PostPosted: Sat Oct 11, 2014 2:31 am
 


Regina Regina:
$1:
So all the news reports about it have been lies, have they?

Are you even remotely serious with that statement??

$1:
So anything which states that Tornados are bristling with Brimstones are lying are they?

:lol: Even a christmass tree "bristles" ........it means nothing and is just you exaggerating the fact they carry a weapon type.

$1:
Each Tornado carries TWELVE Brismtone missiles, the deadliest missiles that exist.
I know you aren't smart enough to understand why no one would believe you.
$1:
That's some inferiority complex you've got there.

No just sitting back and enjoying the self flagellation you provide us.



Unlike you I have checked all the facts before I posted. I believe in facts. By the looks of things you just believe what you WANT to believe.

Of course, if I'm wrong, you'd be able to prove me wrong - which you won't be able to do.


Offline
Active Member
Active Member
Profile
Posts: 422
PostPosted: Sat Oct 11, 2014 3:01 am
 


Jabberwalker Jabberwalker:
The Concorde was partly given to you by us with the Canadian engineering team that migrated to Britain after the Avro Arrow was cancelled.
http://www.avroarrow.org/AvroArrow/Avroengineers.html


Whoopee-do. Half a dozen Canadians finding employment in the construction of a British-conceived and invented plane designed by Sir James Hamilton.

$1:
Just for fun, watch footage of Concorde taking off and then watch the Arrow doing same. They are both identical, but quite distinctive from most other aircraft like them. There are more Arrow genes in Concorde than you might realize.


You do realise that Avro was a British aircraft manufacturer, don't you? And that it was the parent company of Avro Canada, which built the Avro Arrow?

And, of course, the Avro Arrow wouldn't have been possible had Britain not invented the jet engine in the first place.

And, as we all know, Britain also invented the fighter plane - the RAF's Vickers F.B.5 was the very first one.

$1:
Anyway, about those delicate garage queens that the Brits refer to as "luxury cars". I've been in the North in various places and what you will NEVER see up there are Land Rovers, Range Rovers or the rest of the poseur line. They're just not up to a truly hostile environment ... overpriced cream puffs. The ads show them in the Wild of Africa but they were actually designed for the rough, tough country lanes of Surrey.


The Land Rover is the best 4X4 ever made in the history of the world - and the most successful.

The Land Rover Discovery first went on-sale in 1989 and has received over 150 awards from all over the world. The Discovery 4 has won awards including, in the UK, 4x4 Magazine's Car of the Year and the Scottish Car of the Year, internationally, the Best 4x4 for Spain's Car and Driver, Best Annual SUV for Autocar in China and All-Round SUV of the Year for Bloomberg's USA.

What you will NOT see almost anywhere in the world outside of Canada is any Canadian car. The world just doesn't seem anywhere near as interesting in Canadian cars as it is in British cars. Most non-Canadians would struggle to name a Canadian car.

$1:
BTW That is a U-Boat ... Unterzee Boot. Even you must have heard of them.



I don't see how the Oberon-class is linked in anyway to the U-boats. The Oberon-class is based on Britain's hugely-successful Porpoise-class.

$1:
I like this little blurb about the O Boat:

Canada The three Canadian submarines were built with improved air-conditioning systems, while as many common components as possible were replaced with Canadian equivalents.[2] The Canadian Oberons used United States Navy torpedoes throughout their career: they were initially equipped with Mark 37 torpedo, but were later upgraded for Mark 48 torpedoes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oberon-class_submarine

I guess, that is so they would start when it was below 32 Deg. Fahrenheit!



It comes as no surprise that a Canadian submarine was outfitted with Canadian equipment.

It also comes as no surprise that the Canucks went for the American Mark 48 torpedo, seeing as they are now incapable of designing and building their own military equipment.

And the purchase of Mark 48 torpedos, rather than using British ones, has left the Canadian Navy with a huge problem and highlights once again Canadian incompetence with its military.

Canada's stock of second-hand submarines – already beleaguered with repairs and upgrades — is incapable of firing the MK-48 torpedoes they currently own.

When Canada purchased its current fleet of four submarines from Britain in 1998, they were fitted for British torpedoes. At the time, Canada was heavily invested with the modern MK-48 torpedo system and did not want to abandon it.

Like any shopper trying to justify a second-hand purchase in the face of an obstacle, they figured it was still a good deal. They “Canadianized” the submarines, but, 13 year later, they still haven’t got around to the “weaponization” part.

“The Canadian Forces has always intended for the Victoria Class submarines to carry and fire the Mark 48 torpedo,” wrote Denise LaViolette, the director of navy public affairs, in an email. “Initial weapons certification will be progressed early in 2012 in HMCS Victoria for Pacific operations followed that year by HMCS Windsor for Atlantic operations.”

In late March, Canadians discovered their government has been cross-border window shopping for 36 “Torpedo Conversion Kits” when the U.S. Defense Security Cooperation Agency issued a release. These kits come with spare parts and logistical support to upgrade the current stock of MK-48 torpedoes from Mod 4 to Mod 7. The estimated cost is $125 million, but the sale hasn’t been completed yet.

The Mod 7 torpedo, developed by the U.S. Navy and the Royal Australian Navy in 2006, is optimal in deep water and has advanced “counter-countermeasure capabilities,” according to the U.S. Navy. The Canadian navy already has some in stock but is hoping to upgrade all those dusty Mod 4 torpedoes they’ve unable to fire because of an engineering issue.

“We are re-using major portions of our existing weapons to create an inventory of newer, more capable and more cheaply maintained weapons,” wrote LaViolette.

The HMCS Corner Brook is the only submarine that is currently operational, and is lurking somewhere in the Pacific Ocean. On its maiden voyage, the HMCS Chicoutimi caught fire when power cables immersed in seawater sparked a deadly fire. One sailor died. The other submarines are undergoing refits.

At the time of the 1998 purchase, the submarines were the best non-nuclear technology available, said Roger Sarty, a naval historian at Wilfrid Laurier University.

“Within the limits on our defence budget there isn’t the possibility of keeping all of them operational all the time,” he said. “My guess is the navy would probably like to have one operational on each coast.”

The Royal Navy, on the other hand, turned down the Mark 48 and went for its very own designed and built Spearfish torpedo, which are arguably superior to the Mark 48. So the RN submarines are, unlike Canadian ones, actually able to fire their torpedoes.


Offline
Active Member
Active Member
Profile
Posts: 422
PostPosted: Sat Oct 11, 2014 3:26 am
 


Regina Regina:
Love the Spitfire but you didn't "give" it to the world and the Mustang far out preformed even the latest Mk ever produced.


The Spitfire was a far better plane than the Mustang.

The Mustang only became a decent aircraft only after it had its American engine taken out and had a British Rolls-Royce Merlin engine fitted.

$1:
I've seen the Harrier fly a few times and also saw one crash at it's home base while doing virtually nothing.


The Harrier Jump Jet is a truly innovative, highly successful aircraft, which proved its worth in the Falklands War. It's so highly-admired that countries as far apart as the US, India, Spain, Italy and Thailand also operate it, and it inspired almost all the subsequent V/STOL aircraft, including the Soviet Yakovlev Yak-38.

$1:
I've been on a Concorde and it's very small but fast.........and wasn't built and designed by the UK alone. But taking undeserved credit is where you live.


Concorde was a British idea; a British innovation, with its design based on the RAF's Avro Vulcan bomber. The Frogs only jumped onboard the project after the Yanks didn't want to get involved as they believed, quite laughably in hindsight, that a supersonic passenger plane was impossible.


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 71 posts ]  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests




 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.