REVscene Automotive Forum - Military Aircraft Thread

REVscene Automotive Forum (https://www.revscene.net/forums/)

- Vancouver Off-Topic / Current Events (https://www.revscene.net/forums/vancouver-off-topic-current-events_50/)

- - Military Aircraft Thread (https://www.revscene.net/forums/632757-military-aircraft-thread.html)

Thoughts, anyone?

Quote:

Reinstating ‘royal’ military tags is archaic and harmful to identity

ABERDEEN, SCOTLAND – This week the Harper government announced that Canada’s Maritime Command, Air Command and Land Force Command will be known from now on as the Royal Canadian Navy, Royal Canadian Air Force and the Canadian Army, respectively – designations that were eliminated more than four decades ago.

In 1968 Paul Hellyer, then minister of defence in the federal Liberal government, scrapped the old names as he amalgamated the navy, the air force and the army into a single structure – the Canadian Forces – with a single uniform.

The change comes at a time when a number of shifts in the global political and economic fabric demand that Canada’s military adapt to new paradigms of security and defence. But far from bridging the gap between the Canadian Forces and their burgeoning responsibilities, the name change represents a disconnect with the present-day concept and the future role and capabilities of the military. A move that increases ties to the British crown is more divisive than unifying – and unification is a concept fundamentally entrenched in the character of Canada’s military forces.

Canada is a conglomerate of communities that seeks to defend its values and morals, not use the historical roots of its armed forces to wage war in the name of them. The “royal” restoration might be injurious to the overall image of the banner under which Canadians currently serve.

Many veterans who served in what were then the Royal Canadian Navy, the Royal Canadian Air Force and the Canadian Army wanted the traditional names returned. There was a 40-year letter-writing campaign by veterans pressing for the rebranding of the Canadian Forces. Ottawa’s recent submission to this appeal seems to be an attempt to connect the interests of a few traditional politicians with a Canadian minority. Many who are not a part of the group of veterans will see it as little more than an empty link to the past.

Even to some with connections to the military the move is a sore point. The spokesperson for the Royal Canadian Legion, Bob Butt, said the government money that will be spent on making the change “would be better used to equip our sailors, soldiers, and airmen.”

Robert Finch, the chairman of the Monarchist League of Canada, opines that “by having the word ‘royal,’ you are underlining the fact that the Queen is the head of the armed forces. … I think it’s important to drive home the point that the military is non-partisan or political. They’re not the prime minister’s or the defence minister’s; they are the Queen’s.” But those signing up to serve in Canada’s military forces retain the choice to pledge their allegiance, not only to the Queen, but also to God.

Canada is no longer a colony. It is no longer part of the dominions that might march to war against monarchal opponents on the battlefield amid musket and cannon fire. These imperial appellations are as archaic as the empire that Canada served and supported for more than a century. Canada is an independent country that has taken many strides to forge its own unique identity as influenced and inspired by new generations, not one that represents solely those of the (distant) past.

If the Conservative government wishes to connect further and more positively with those new generations, it should cast aside this regal and rather imposing nomenclature.

Scott Nicholas Romaniuk is a Dollard des Ormeaux native who is a conflict analyst and researcher in the fields of military and strategic studies, and international security and politics. He is affiliated with the Department of Politics and International Relations at the University of Aberdeen and the Centre for the Study of Terrorism and Political Violence at the University of St. Andrews, Scotland.

© Copyright (c) Postmedia News

Read more: Reinstating

I, myself, am a closet Loyalist but I definitely agree that the separation of the Forces is more trouble than it's worth after 40 years of being one entity.

Quote:

Originally Posted by seakrait (Post 7550036)

um....

the b2 is like flying pc of paper...and hidden engines, no vertical stabilizer...... quite different from t-50.
guess t-50 is based on angle of metal... nothing close to 90d.. i wounder how they would reduce heat signature of those massive engines.

Quote:

Originally Posted by seakrait (Post 7550264)

Thoughts, anyone?

I, myself, am a closet Loyalist but I definitely agree that the separation of the Forces is more trouble than it's worth after 40 years of being one entity.

Royal ties the forces to the queen, i say get rid of the queen all together.. .. she is still considered the head of the Canada! didnt australia recently vote on this issue.. decided to keep her. If canada goes that route, im sure canada would keep the queen also, as many people still living in the 1800

Now all we need is to put the RCAF back into the right shade of blue, and get rid of the gawdy gold coloured rank insignias. The only thing worse than looking like a bus driver is having officers that look like hotel doormen.

Going back to the RCAF and RCN has nothing to do with the monarchy. It's for departmental pride and is a tribute to OUR armed forces that fought in past conflicts such as WWII. These changes will be paid for from within the CF's annual budget and will not cost the taxpayer an extra dime. It's a minimal cost that will be a boost for morale in the long run.

Imagine the US Navy, US Air Force, US Army, and Marines forced to amalgamate and all fly the same colours as the 'United States Armed Forces'. Sounds retarded doesn't it? Well that's what we've had in Canada for the last 40 years. This is a good thing.
Posted via RS Mobile

who cares about the name, just give the military proper budget/funds to spend on decent gear and salary. think that would be far beneficial. cdn gov. now wants to cut 1 bil. from military budget

Quote:

Originally Posted by tool001 (Post 7551936)

who cares about the name, just give the military proper budget/funds to spend on decent gear and salary. think that would be far beneficial. cdn gov. now wants to cut 1 bil. from military budget

This will not be done by a downgrade of our military force, or equipment, but by cutting excess staff from higher up in the chain. Seems in the last 7 years our civilian element of the CAF has increased 3x as fast as the rest of our services.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/im...tealth.jet.jpg

Quote:

Russia's new stealth fighter jet made its public debut Tuesday, according to state-run news source RIA Novosti.

The Sukhoi T-50, developed collaboratively by Russia and India, appeared at the MAKS 2011 air show in Zhukovsky, outside Moscow.

Gen. Alexander Zelin, head of the Russian air force, told RIA Novosti he expects the T-50 prototype to be ready in 2013, with "mass-produced aircraft" arriving in 2014 or 2015.

The aircraft is expected to become a staple of airborne defense for both Russia and India, Mikhail Pogosyan, head of Russia's United Aircraft Corp., told RIA Novosti.

"The T-50 will be the newest main plane both for the Russian and the Indian air force," Pogosyan said.

The article from the state-run media source says the Sukhoi T-50 cost the two governments about $6 billion to develop, with India shouldering about 35% of the cost. It is intended to match the U.S. F-22 raptor.

New fighter jet to bolster Russian air force – This Just In - CNN.com Blogs

Will make for a good airshow tumbler but as a combat effective war machine it has a long, long way to go. Their only hope is to sell them in large numbers, but one for one it still lacks LO, avionics and radar technology against the F-22 and F-35.

Pakistan is doomed lol. India receiving Su T-50.

Quote:

Originally Posted by seakrait (Post 7550264)

Thoughts, anyone?

I, myself, am a closet Loyalist but I definitely agree that the separation of the Forces is more trouble than it's worth after 40 years of being one entity.

I would care slightly less about this article if it was written by someone who you know, still lives in Canada, preferably around a military base who interacts with our soldiers on a regular basis. This dude can seriously fuck right off though.

Quote:

Canada is no longer a colony. It is no longer part of the dominions that might march to war against monarchal opponents on the battlefield amid musket and cannon fire. These imperial appellations are as archaic as the empire that Canada served and supported for more than a century.

No, now instead of the Queen, it's when our friends to the south ask us to go to war that we go to war. Rather than monarchal alliances, we're now bound by economic ones.

Quote:

Reinstating ‘royal’ military tags is archaic and harmful to identity

Quote:

Canada is a conglomerate of communities that seeks to defend its values and morals, not use the historical roots of its armed forces to wage war in the name of them. The “royal” restoration might be injurious to the overall image of the banner under which Canadians currently serve.

Royal tags is harmful to the people in which regiment? Perhaps the people in:

The Queen's Own Rifles of Canada
The Black Watch (Royal Highland Regiment) of Canada
The Royal Canadian Regiment
Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry
Royal 22e Régiment
Royal Canadian Horse Artillery
The Royal Canadian Dragoons
Lord Strathcona's Horse
The Princess Louise Fusiliers
The Royal Canadian Hussars (Montreal)
The Royal New Brunswick Regiment
Royal Newfoundland Regiment
The Royal Montreal Regiment
The Royal Highland Fusiliers of Canada
The Princess of Wales' Own Regiment
The Royal Westminster Regiment

I've pretty much gotten bored copying and pasting names but this gives you an idea of how many of our regiments proudly hold a royal connection. I suppose he figures we should rename each of those to something more "Canadian". Rubbish.

Quote:

If the Conservative government wishes to connect further and more positively with those new generations, it should cast aside this regal and rather imposing nomenclature.

If you ask me, returning to the historical names harkens back to an era where our military actually had pride and a rich sense of self. The amalgamation of the forces and the gutting of the Cadets program throughout the last 40 years certainly did more to destroy any impact on the youth and people of this country than this name change ever will.

Anyways, both myself and a few of my friends in the forces that I asked about this think it'll be nice to have the new (old) slightly less retarded names for the 3 services. When the point of wasting money was brought up, the general consensus was that our government (and military) waste money in a lot stupider ways than this...

Quote:

Originally Posted by tool001 (Post 7556418)

pak-fa does a flame out. :P

Russian T-50 PAK FA Aborted Takeoff in MAKS-2011 - YouTube

Imagine if this happened to the F-35, Boeing nut-swingers would be going crazy!

Quote:

Originally Posted by belka (Post 7556545)

Imagine if this happened to the F-35, Boeing nut-swingers would be going crazy!

lol for the amount of money put into f-35....they'd better be

Quote:

Originally Posted by tool001 (Post 7556748)

lol for the amount of money put into f-35....they'd better be

I'm more worried about the F-22, slowly poisoning their pilots.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gars (Post 7556782)

I'm more worried about the F-22, slowly poisoning their pilots.

mmmm antifreeze

The 10th Anniversary of 9/11 has brought this story back to light. I laugh every time I read it because it's such a crock of shit:

Kamikaze: F-16 pilots planned to ram Flight 93 - US news - 9/11: Ten Years Later - msnbc.com

Look at the following timeline of events, and recent history of scrambling fighters.

9/11 Facts Timeline

But to intercept Flight 93, after 3 hijacked jets have already struck targets, all they can do is get an essentially unarmed Air National Guard F16 in the air with a plan to RAM THE AIRLINER!? The United States has tens of thousands of fighter aircraft in service in the continental US, some of which are armed at all times and on alert for situations exactly like this. NORAD had 90 minutes between notification that Flight 93 was hijacked and it's crash in Pennsylvania, but it was never intercepted. It's just another very suspicious situation in the series of events that made up 9/11.

Somebody needs to give JD13 back his "Thanks" button...

Quote:

Originally Posted by JD¹³ (Post 7573083)

Couple new F35 shots:

Love that FLIR/optics housing. And the cockpit definitely looks a lot less busier than earlier-gen fighters.

Quote:

Some other random shots, black Eurofighter?

You do realize the file name says Rafale? And the EF has canards, whereas this clearly doesn't.

Quote:

Originally Posted by roastpuff (Post 7573095)

You do realize the file name says Rafale? And the EF has canards, whereas this clearly doesn't.

Yup, caught me sleeping. Incorrectly ID'd :failed:

Got my hands on some squadron patches from the 509th thanks to some 'Spirit' pilots "Slash" and "Stitch". 393D Squadron dropped the nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in WWII out of the B29 Superfortress, now they fly the B2. I'm going to find my old 416 Tactical Fighter Squadron patches (Area 51 and 52 based Stealth Fighters) that I have buried somewhere and get some photos for you guys. In the meantime, here are some shots of one of the coolest Black Ops projects to ever take to the skies:

http://wallpaperswide.com/download/b...-2560x1600.jpg
http://wallpaperswide.com/download/l...-2560x1600.jpg
http://thepaperwall.com/wallpapers/w...ecf96997a0.jpg

More: http://thepaperwall.com/search.php?s...71&search_btn=

http://files.blogter.hu/user_files/132039/Rafale-40.jpg

thats one of the Rafale prototypes.. not the eurofighter. (france bailed out of eurofighter program to make this)

Rafale has canards too, they just blend in with the wing in that pic.

Quote:

Originally Posted by T.Goat (Post 7576990)

Rafale has canards too, they just blend in with the wing in that pic.

The Eurofighter canards are set far more forward and prominent though...