This aircraft has been salvaged - in a since deleted tweet, there's an image of it upsidedown on the deck of a ship.
seen it, looks pretty complete.
 
This aircraft has been salvaged - in a since deleted tweet, there's an image of it upsidedown on the deck of a ship.

f35salvaged.webp
 
That would be best. From a technical point of view.
I beg to differ. Multi-national cooperation is the right way if the collaborating countries have similar requirements. However, pack too many countries with too diverse a set of requirements together and you'll end up with something like the Tiger attack helicopter. Heck, even neighbouring France and Germany struggle to agree on which direction FCAS is supposed to take.

If one requires a sports car and another a pickup truck, they'd best not try to design a pickup truck also capable of breaking speed records. In theory we could all save a whole lot of money if we joined forces to create Europe's sixth generation fighter jet. But all potential synergetic effects of the merger could easily be lost in the industry's struggles to reconcile competing concepts and requirements.
 
The locals in the military airfield areas in the European countries complain about high noise level of aircraft.
 
Speaking of the Tiger attack helicopter … With France having issued a (as of yet unheeded) mid-year deadline for Germany to commit to the Tiger Mk3 upgrade programme, all indicators point to the German Army phasing out the type. Citing execssive cost overruns associated with the upgrade, para-public defence think tank SWP expects that Berlin will soon announce the retirement of the Tiger in favour of the US-made Boeing AH-64E. Boeing has confirmed having been invited to launch a bid. The fleet that would need replacing numbers up to 68 helicopters. (Source)
 
Respect to Kay-Achim Schoenbach, unfortunately telling the truth has become a crime in the West.
Let me get this straight, if the head of the Royal Australian Navy suddenly began talking out of his arse and demanded that Canberra forget about those pesky Americans and ally with, I don't know, North Korea instead, he wouldn't get reprimanded? You Ozzies really are a laid-back bunch.

That was obviously a rhetorical question. No government takes insubordination lightly, neither in the West nor anywhere else. Let's not pretend that's a novelty. Schönbach resigned out of his own volition, by the way. Sure, he would've been retired eventually. As well as he should've been, I might add.

It's not a flag officer's job to engage in politics – especially in this country, where the primacy of the elected politician over the appointed general has constitutional status. So don't give me that "telling the truth" rubbish. Schönbach signed a paper forbidding him from making his comments. In 1982.

But more importantly, Schönbach advocated allying with Russia against China due to him being (in his own words) a radical Christian. I hope I don't have to explain why advocating religiously-based alliances is something the chief of the German Navy should not engage in?
 
Let me get this straight, if the head of the Royal Australian Navy suddenly began talking out of his arse and demanded that Canberra forget about those pesky Americans and ally with, I don't know, North Korea instead, he wouldn't get reprimanded? You Ozzies really are a laid-back bunch.

That was obviously a rhetorical question. No government takes insubordination lightly, neither in the West nor anywhere else. Let's not pretend that's a novelty. Schönbach resigned out of his own volition, by the way. Sure, he would've been retired eventually. As well as he should've been, I might add.

It's not a flag officer's job to engage in politics – especially in this country, where the primacy of the elected politician over the appointed general has constitutional status. So don't give me that "telling the truth" rubbish. Schönbach signed a paper forbidding him from making his comments. In 1982.

But more importantly, Schönbach advocated allying with Russia against China due to him being (in his own words) a radical Christian. I hope I don't have to explain why advocating religiously-based alliances is something the chief of the German Navy should not engage in?
Don’t mind him.
His views are not representative of usual people living Australia.
Let’s imagine, you talk to a Russian guy who resides somewhere in Moscow. He hates Russian nationalism and Putin. He supports LGBT and trolls everybody and their dog to give back Crimea to Ukraine. Would he be a representative of the usual Russian guy living in Moscow? ;)

Likewise, I was born in the central western Polish region that is adjacent to the German border.
Look at this map to see where people voted for the PiS-approved candidate during the last presidential elections in Poland. It’s the blue color.


So, yes, you can meet people voting for PiS in my region as well, but are they representative of the entire population? Come on lol

 
I thought he's Australian. But if he isn't, it doesn't matter. My arguments don't hinge on his nationality.
You are talking out of your ass while trying to get it straight, are you woke?
Vague one-liners aren't going to hide your contradictions or your woeful state of knowledge on European affairs.

You're Australian, so I'd assume you're knowledgable on Australian affairs. So, I shall ask again: Aren't Australian military members obliged to remain politically neutral? Could a high ranking Australian officer criticise his government's policies and demand that Australia ally with a country the government considers hostile without having to face repercussions? Would the Australian government tolerate an officer who advocates that his country should make alliances based on his religious beliefs (as opposed to normal factors such as common interests, geographic proximity etc.)?

Whilst you're at it, show me any country who would tolerate religiously-motivated insubordination by its highest military officers which isn't a) radically Muslim or b) a military dictatorship. You won't because you can't. In other words, what the fluff are you even complaining about? You're making a mountain out of a mole hill because it suits your narrative about the Ukraine situation. You're fantasising something about a criminalised "truth" when in actual fact any admiral in any country – including yours – would've been fired at any time in history for what Schönbach did.

That man began his career decades ago by signing a paper saying he's not at liberty to comment politics and somehow he's not at fault?
 
You are talking out of your ass while trying to get it straight, are you woke?
No better arguments when talking to somebody who is actually educated, clever, and his English is better than yours despite him not being a native English speaker?

Indeed, high-ranked military figures are not supposed to voice their political opinions in Western countries. In contrast, in Russia, even sport and politics are mixed up.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top