<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Friday Linkzookery &#8211; 07 Aug 2009</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.murdoconline.net/archives/8177.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.murdoconline.net/archives/8177.html</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 20:06:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Nicholas</title>
		<link>http://www.murdoconline.net/archives/8177.html/comment-page-1#comment-343183</link>
		<dc:creator>Nicholas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Aug 2009 01:34:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.murdoconline.net/?p=8177#comment-343183</guid>
		<description>Toejam yes I thought about B1-s as being a possible replacement for the F-111 but my understanding is they&#039;re a bit of a white elephant. About 100 were made -- I think? The production finished long ago and I&#039;m not sure what the deal would be for getting spares if we bought used ones from the USAF (if they would even want to sell the operational airframes they have). The advantage of the Sukhois is they&#039;re more of a multi-purpose aircraft and as far as I know they are still in production (some variants, anyway).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Toejam yes I thought about B1-s as being a possible replacement for the F-111 but my understanding is they&#8217;re a bit of a white elephant. About 100 were made &#8212; I think? The production finished long ago and I&#8217;m not sure what the deal would be for getting spares if we bought used ones from the USAF (if they would even want to sell the operational airframes they have). The advantage of the Sukhois is they&#8217;re more of a multi-purpose aircraft and as far as I know they are still in production (some variants, anyway).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Toejam</title>
		<link>http://www.murdoconline.net/archives/8177.html/comment-page-1#comment-343180</link>
		<dc:creator>Toejam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Aug 2009 09:01:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.murdoconline.net/?p=8177#comment-343180</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;&quot;All violent video games poised for ban in Germany&quot;&lt;/i&gt;

Ya know, even though many members of my family&#039;s prior generation, both male and female, (my aunt Betty served in the European theatre via the WAACs) were in the military in WW-II and several were wounded in battle, I still think I prefer the attitude of the 1940&#039;s brand of Kraut to the 21st century&#039;s Deutche Von Pussies.

Having said that, thank goodness there are some who still haven&#039;t accepted the Euroweenie, surrender monkey attitudes. The German army today is small, (too big might change the political spectrum), relatively well armed (thanks H&amp;K) but most importantly very &lt;b&gt;proud.&lt;/b&gt; And &lt;b&gt;proud&lt;/b&gt; is all it takes to be effective. 

For those who haven&#039;t seen &quot;Band of Brothers&quot; here&#039;s a good example of a defeated, but &lt;b&gt;proud&lt;/b&gt; military force:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CtwftQUxqpM</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>&#8220;All violent video games poised for ban in Germany&#8221;</i></p>
<p>Ya know, even though many members of my family&#8217;s prior generation, both male and female, (my aunt Betty served in the European theatre via the WAACs) were in the military in WW-II and several were wounded in battle, I still think I prefer the attitude of the 1940&#8217;s brand of Kraut to the 21st century&#8217;s Deutche Von Pussies.</p>
<p>Having said that, thank goodness there are some who still haven&#8217;t accepted the Euroweenie, surrender monkey attitudes. The German army today is small, (too big might change the political spectrum), relatively well armed (thanks H&amp;K) but most importantly very <b>proud.</b> And <b>proud</b> is all it takes to be effective. </p>
<p>For those who haven&#8217;t seen &#8220;Band of Brothers&#8221; here&#8217;s a good example of a defeated, but <b>proud</b> military force:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CtwftQUxqpM" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CtwftQUxqpM</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Toejam</title>
		<link>http://www.murdoconline.net/archives/8177.html/comment-page-1#comment-343179</link>
		<dc:creator>Toejam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Aug 2009 08:43:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.murdoconline.net/?p=8177#comment-343179</guid>
		<description>Nicholas,

Have you thought about going with some &lt;b&gt;Bones?&lt;/b&gt; (B1-B)

I think they would certainly do the job as far as payload and range.

And I&#039;m certain they would be more cost effective than the Ruski planes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nicholas,</p>
<p>Have you thought about going with some <b>Bones?</b> (B1-B)</p>
<p>I think they would certainly do the job as far as payload and range.</p>
<p>And I&#8217;m certain they would be more cost effective than the Ruski planes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nicholas</title>
		<link>http://www.murdoconline.net/archives/8177.html/comment-page-1#comment-343176</link>
		<dc:creator>Nicholas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Aug 2009 15:07:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.murdoconline.net/?p=8177#comment-343176</guid>
		<description>I posted a reply on the F-111 post at the Daily Telegraph but I don&#039;t know if it worked or whether they will publish it so I might as well duplicate it here:

I think Eric is onto something.. sadly, while the F-18 &quot;Super Hornets&quot; will be replacing the F-111s they won&#039;t be able to do the same job. Neither will the F-35s, if they are ever finished. That&#039;s why we&#039;ve kept the F-111s so long, despite the incredible cost, there aren&#039;t really any modern aircraft that have a similar combination of long range, good performance and flexible loadout.

In fact the closest modern aircraft to the F-111 in terms of range, payload and performance is probably the Sukhoi Su-27 &quot;Flanker&quot; and its derivatives (Su-30, Su-33, etc.) I think the Russian aircraft have some maintenance problems - they just aren&#039;t designed to last as long as aircraft from the USA - but India have some experience operating them and we&#039;d probably have gotten more capability for less money with those aircraft.

Unfortunately I get the impression that the politicians in charge of making this kind of purchasing decision made their mind up before seriously comparing the various options. It&#039;s a pity as I think we will collectively suffer for it until the next upgrade, at which point I hope a better decision is made.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I posted a reply on the F-111 post at the Daily Telegraph but I don&#8217;t know if it worked or whether they will publish it so I might as well duplicate it here:</p>
<p>I think Eric is onto something.. sadly, while the F-18 &#8220;Super Hornets&#8221; will be replacing the F-111s they won&#8217;t be able to do the same job. Neither will the F-35s, if they are ever finished. That&#8217;s why we&#8217;ve kept the F-111s so long, despite the incredible cost, there aren&#8217;t really any modern aircraft that have a similar combination of long range, good performance and flexible loadout.</p>
<p>In fact the closest modern aircraft to the F-111 in terms of range, payload and performance is probably the Sukhoi Su-27 &#8220;Flanker&#8221; and its derivatives (Su-30, Su-33, etc.) I think the Russian aircraft have some maintenance problems &#8211; they just aren&#8217;t designed to last as long as aircraft from the USA &#8211; but India have some experience operating them and we&#8217;d probably have gotten more capability for less money with those aircraft.</p>
<p>Unfortunately I get the impression that the politicians in charge of making this kind of purchasing decision made their mind up before seriously comparing the various options. It&#8217;s a pity as I think we will collectively suffer for it until the next upgrade, at which point I hope a better decision is made.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Toejam</title>
		<link>http://www.murdoconline.net/archives/8177.html/comment-page-1#comment-343175</link>
		<dc:creator>Toejam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Aug 2009 11:53:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.murdoconline.net/?p=8177#comment-343175</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;&quot;F-111 - the RAAF&#039;s white elephant in the sky&quot;&lt;/i&gt;

Shoulda stuck with the &lt;b&gt;Hustler!&lt;/b&gt;

http://www.aviation-history.com/convair/b58.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>&#8220;F-111 &#8211; the RAAF&#8217;s white elephant in the sky&#8221;</i></p>
<p>Shoulda stuck with the <b>Hustler!</b></p>
<p><a href="http://www.aviation-history.com/convair/b58.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.aviation-history.com/convair/b58.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
