Search found 1469 matches
- 29 Mar 2024, 11:38
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: The future form of the Army
- Replies: 646
- Views: 115356
Re: The future form of the Army
Also what the army needs is a new light gun witch needs to come in both towed and light SP witch has a 40km range Using the same ordnance on towed and SP seems sensible, but is 40km from a light gun possible or desirable? Would it not compromise the "Light" part of the requirement? Greate...
- 27 Mar 2024, 18:58
- Forum: UK Defence & Aerospace Industry
- Topic: Airlander Airship
- Replies: 72
- Views: 5903
Re: Airlander Airship
Wouldn't this be better done by Airlander?x A Chinook could land almost the same amount vertically*, an Airlander might be able to land more depending on the model, but an Atlas ought to be able to drop more too. I suppose an Airlander might be able to go slower and lower, but at that point small a...
- 25 Mar 2024, 18:34
- Forum: British Army
- Topic: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)
- Replies: 2802
- Views: 715456
Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)
Well, he'd know about that.
- 23 Mar 2024, 18:47
- Forum: British Army
- Topic: Section Infantry Weapons
- Replies: 1476
- Views: 432641
Re: Section Infantry Weapons
What do understand by a GPMG. from what have read think the MG-42 The MG42 and its predecessor, the MG34, are certainly the first iteration of what we now call a general purpose machine gun. This by dint of its use in the section as a LMG and as a crew served support weapon on a mount, which was at...
- 23 Mar 2024, 18:03
- Forum: British Army
- Topic: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
- Replies: 2432
- Views: 526824
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
Well said. When people argue that AJAX is too big, they've clearly not met BOXER. Thank you. To go further, this is the picture I wanted to use to highlight the issue, but couldn't find earlier: https://www.army.mod.uk/media/11307/redone_panorama1.jpg Note how the Boxer hull roof is about level wit...
- 23 Mar 2024, 15:29
- Forum: British Army
- Topic: Section Infantry Weapons
- Replies: 1476
- Views: 432641
Re: Section Infantry Weapons
I disagree, it's going to be no heavier, it's not an LMG anyway, it's a HMG hybrid. You have to view this in another way, .338 will defeat all body armour and lightly armoured vehicles, if it's using armour piercing rounds, than it's capable of defeating or crippling AFV's. The gun is a similar wei...
- 23 Mar 2024, 12:25
- Forum: British Army
- Topic: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
- Replies: 2432
- Views: 526824
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
Unfortunately Ajax has been built so bespoke to British army requirements it has been a total flop in the export market. Too heavy to be a scout and reconasaince vehicle but too small internally to be considered an IFV. Considering that Australia and Germany are acquiring turreted Boxer as a Scout ...
- 23 Mar 2024, 11:06
- Forum: British Army
- Topic: Section Infantry Weapons
- Replies: 1476
- Views: 432641
Re: Section Infantry Weapons
Possibly the first genuine potential contender to replace the GPMG, That would be an appalling choice to replace the GPMG, the size and bulk of the gun and ammunition rules it out as a light MG, even if the gun itself is a similar weight. Given improvements in fire control on AFVs, a round somewher...
- 20 Mar 2024, 18:40
- Forum: Royal Air Force
- Topic: de Havilland DH.98 Mosquito (RAF)
- Replies: 24
- Views: 14400
Re: de Havilland DH.98 Mosquito (RAF)
You could try the de Haviland museum, https://www.dehavillandmuseum.co.uk/
Or the RAF museum:
https://www.rafmuseum.org.uk
Or the RAF museum:
https://www.rafmuseum.org.uk
- 17 Mar 2024, 17:33
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
- Replies: 15446
- Views: 4411314
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Where is the open and transparent press release from MOD to cut this off at the pass? How much information on the operational status of a British warship would it take for you to consider it "open and transparent"? How much information do you think would be needed to "cut this off at...
- 11 Mar 2024, 18:13
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
- Replies: 15446
- Views: 4411314
- 11 Mar 2024, 15:31
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
- Replies: 15446
- Views: 4411314
- 25 Feb 2024, 18:33
- Forum: Royal Air Force
- Topic: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)
- Replies: 4067
- Views: 951784
Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)
I think Saudi Arabia have missed the boat regarding partnership now, but will sign up as a lower tier partner. While final assembly might not be on the cards, they can certainly manufacture components for the program.... Ok, I get that, but why would a tier 2 partner 3d print things? Why not machin...
- 25 Feb 2024, 16:34
- Forum: Royal Air Force
- Topic: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)
- Replies: 4067
- Views: 951784
Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)
Why that particular combination of level of partner and manufacturing process?mrclark303 wrote: ↑25 Feb 2024, 13:57 I think Saudi Arabia will end up being a tier 2 partner, they can certainly contribute by 3D printing sections of the airframe.
- 16 Feb 2024, 17:10
- Forum: British Army
- Topic: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)
- Replies: 2802
- Views: 715456
Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)
The German shill still at it I see.
- 22 Jan 2024, 22:18
- Forum: British Army
- Topic: RBSL Challenger 3 (Future) Main Battle Tank (British Army)
- Replies: 349
- Views: 65101
- 30 Dec 2023, 19:49
- Forum: Conflicts
- Topic: The war in Ukraine
- Replies: 1163
- Views: 85726
Re: The war in Ukraine
Is the F16 that much of a smaller return than a Mig 29?mrclark303 wrote: ↑30 Dec 2023, 19:10 Getting a solid lock on an F16 will be a very different prospect and I think the R37 would be lucky to hit a hard manoeuvring small target.
Fighter aircraft aren't pulling hard manoeuvres all the time.
- 30 Dec 2023, 11:03
- Forum: Conflicts
- Topic: The war in Ukraine
- Replies: 1163
- Views: 85726
Re: The war in Ukraine
I’ve seem articles suggesting that the greater threat to Ukrainian aircraft is the MiG 31 with the R37 missiles
- 23 Dec 2023, 11:05
- Forum: British Army
- Topic: RBSL Challenger 3 (Future) Main Battle Tank (British Army)
- Replies: 349
- Views: 65101
Re: RBSL Challenger 3 (Future) Main Battle Tank (British Army)
Good to hear things are moving forwards, but those are some very expensive lights.
Tens of thousands per vehicle?
Tens of thousands per vehicle?
- 10 Dec 2023, 12:30
- Forum: Joint Service
- Topic: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
- Replies: 6067
- Views: 1725279
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
If true IMHO that’s good more aircraft for the £ current F35B should be navy owned and operated but maintenance costs shared between RAF/RN I'd expect any cost savings in the purchase to be eaten up by running two* maintenance/training pipelines, plus it provides a wedge between disparate forces fo...
- 05 Dec 2023, 18:53
- Forum: UK Defence & Aerospace Industry
- Topic: Hill Helicopters
- Replies: 12
- Views: 3069
Re: Hill Helicopters
Given the last two Starship launches, one hopes not.Could this company shake up the GA sector in the same way SpaceX has disrupted the launch market?
- 22 Nov 2023, 20:53
- Forum: British Army
- Topic: Warrior Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
- Replies: 1041
- Views: 318768
Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
Boxer is modular at the mission module, so you'd have to "simply fit" the IFV mission module.mrclark303 wrote: ↑22 Nov 2023, 16:26 Did we do the "UK thing" and specially bespoke modify ours, so we can't simply fit the turret systems already developed, I wouldn't put it past the MOD....
- 12 Nov 2023, 14:31
- Forum: British Army
- Topic: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments
- Replies: 865
- Views: 293474
Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments
If we had more Artillery regiments great and maybe Hero 120 is to much and just sticking to 120mm and brimstone is enough for Battalion battle groups as brimstone allows targets out 20km's to be hit if needed That's the thing. If we've got resources to create weapons companies armed as such in each...
- 12 Nov 2023, 13:11
- Forum: British Army
- Topic: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments
- Replies: 865
- Views: 293474
Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments
For me Brimstone is a weapon that is key I would if money allowed also drop in a lortor weapon section within the maneuver group for what i would call (for want of better name) the Infantry deep fight which I would mark at 45Km's from the firing point. The main combat area would be 0 to 10 km's wit...
- 11 Nov 2023, 18:37
- Forum: British Army
- Topic: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments
- Replies: 865
- Views: 293474
Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments
As I said before for me I would change the infantry Battalion maneuver group to have a 120mm mortar platoon and a Brimstone overwatch platoon and then give each rifle company 2 x 60mm mortars this would allow the infantry to fight from 100 meters to 30 Km's in turn allowing the Artillery to get on ...