after the Yom Kippur War in '73, McDonnell sent engineers to Israel
to see how they had improved the Phantom :-)
-Ben
>Boeing and skiorsky can sell the prototypes to israel :> or the UK or
>any other number of countries who might want a kick ass little attack
>helo.
>
>
>
>--
>Bill Wheatley
>Senior Database Developer
>eDiets.com, Inc.
>(NASDAQ:DIET)
>3801 W. Hillsboro Blvd.
>Deerfield Beach, FL 33442
>V: (954) 360-9022 ext. 159
>F: (954) 360-9095
>E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>W: www.ediets.com
>
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Angel Stewart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2004 9:52 PM
>To: CF-Community
>Subject: Comanche Cancelled :(
>
>
>Welp.
>
>
>The Comanche helicopter programe was cancelled.
>For those that don't know, the Comanche was a stealthy attack helicopter
>that was supposed to replace the Apache 64s...which may now have to
>somehow fly until 2030 or beyond?
>
>
>So about twenty years and 6.9Billion dollars later...the project gets
>cancelled.
>
>
>The line is that after seeing what happened in Iraq, stealth isn't worth
>diddly squat because any guy with an eyeball can nail a helo with a
>cheap RPG.
>Will the F22 be next?
>
>
>They also say that America and her allies no longer have to defend
>against a threat as during the cold war, and UAVs can do the same job as
>helicopters like the Comanche at a fraction of the cost.
>
>
>"Excerpt from Jane`s Defence Weekly:
>
>"...The Comanche was intended to be a light reconnaissance helicopter
>with stealth capabilities. But advances in UAVs have suggested that they
>might do that job better, while simple rocket-propelled grenade and
>missile attacks on US helicopters in Iraq have shown that the Comanche's
>stealthiness would not be as useful as it was thought at the 1983
>inception of the programme, when it was designed to face Soviet air
>defense systems.
>"
>
>"...the system was too vulnerable to anti-aircraft threats and did not
>fit with future army plans."
>
>"...The officials said the army will now start to plan an entirely new
>reconnaissance aircraft as a replacement for the OH-58 Kiowa. The army
>also plans to buy a new version of the AH-64 Apache, known as Block III.
>Army officials Monday said this version will have all the advantages of
>the Comanche except stealthiness."
>
>
>So they cancel a project that already took 6.9Billion dollars and two
>decades, it was close to completion....in order to start on yet ANOTHER
>project for reconaissance...??
>
>
>And the prototype "Stealth" system was too vulnerable to anti aircraft
>threats....which is why they are upgrading the completely non-stealthy
>Apache?
>
>
>I'm certainly not privy to any 'inside' information, but the reasons
>given and the alternatives just don't seem to add up.
>What's going to happen if America DOES have to fight a conventional war
>against a fairly modern opponent? How could stealth not be necessary
>simply because it wasn't very useful in Iraq?
>
>
>Somehow I am starting to think the whole Defence Industry in the US
>right now is about making money, rather than on defence. Because that
>6.9 Billion certainly went into a lot of pockets, and what's there to
>show for it?
>
>
>But, they are getting *more* funding for yet another Reconnaissance helo
>design?
>Let's see...the Comanche was nearing completion, so the development
>budget was nearing the end. So...let's cancel the Comanche, and get a
>new development budget?
>
>
>"The Comanche was being designed and built as a joint project by Boeing
>Co. and Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, employing about 1,300 people. The
>companies issued a joint statement saying they were "surprised and
>disappointed" by the Army's decision.
>
>"Five of these advanced technology aircraft are on the production line
>today, and we are on plan for the program," the statement said. "While
>we regret the Army's announcement, we are committed to working closely
>with our customer and will engage in further discussions to ensure we
>have a complete understanding of the next steps for Comanche."
>
>Again we see this whole "war on terror" rear its ugly head, as an army
>spokesman stated that America's focus now is its war on terror, which
>calls for different requirements for which the Comanche wasn't suited.
>
>Is there anything that the 'War On Terror' Cannot be used to justify??
>
>HYPERLINK
>"http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/02/23/helicopter.cancel/index.html"http://ww
>w.cnn.com/2004/US/02/23/helicopter.cancel/index.html
>
>
>-Gel
>
>---
>Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
>Version: 6.0.593 / Virus Database: 376 - Release Date: 2/20/2004
> _____
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
