Jump to content

Agent K

Members
  • Posts

    390
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Agent K

  • Birthday 08/15/1966

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Henlow, Bedfordshire, UK
  • Interests
    Aviation, Travelling, Endurance Racing, cricket

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Agent K's Achievements

Established Member

Established Member (3/9)

286

Reputation

  1. A wonderful county! Welcome aboard
  2. What a fantastic result for an interesting aircraft too, nicely done and thanks for sharing.
  3. Is it though? and who is "the Army"? the Chiefs of staff, the troops? all? and what about the RAF that will operate and fly it? and it depends of course on your measures to deem what is the best?, it's all subjective........ I guess if you get the RFP right, and be detailed and specific on the requirement for performance, cost, training, operational costs, build offset, maintenance, etc etc etc then the best is what wins that competition, and if it's the Blackhawk then good, if not then good too.
  4. Nice to see a Nellis based scheme too, having seen a number of these during a number of trips out to Red Flag over the past several years.
  5. Agree with a lot of the statements above, I have bought it from day 1 and of late it seems to be more akin to a comic than a serious historic aviation journal. The quizzes, the frankenplane thing, poor and unprofessional editing and writing. Why change something just for the sake of it, no news stories at the front of the magazine any more, lots of white space, I suspect Ken Ellis will be aghast at what has happened.
  6. Very nice! just loved the Europe 1 cammo scheme and it's such a unique and great looking aircraft. Was lucky to see some a few weeks back as I headed to Vegas and Nellis to catch a week of Red Flag action.
  7. You know the old drill, it was on back-order, already paid for etc etc.....
  8. If you've ever had the (dis)pleasure of being close to him, him requesting you move out the way (he got annoyed because I wouldn't) and have him invited to do some work at your aviation company (to which he was never invited again due to his attitude and rudeness) you'd understand some of the less than favourable comments. Good for him for spotting a nice and filling it, but I don't watch it, the drivel and inaccuracies are too much, and you don't need to carry that arrogance around with you.
  9. They have over 30 years experience in the executive aircraft business so I'm sure they are more than competent in such operations, let's face it, carrying VIP passengers is just carrying passengers, irrespective of status, additionally I believe it will be a mix of civilian and military crews before becoming full military when military specific kit is added. I think anyway, these days, the Royal element is negligible, they tend to lease with executive jet companies as needed, this will I guess be used for more governmental and military leadership, which is what the company does.
  10. Quite superb, that first night time photo looks absolutely lifelike, as do the rest tbh.
  11. Stunning! always great to see good airliner models too.
  12. Yeh you're not wrong! as somebody working in aviation management and a close family member as a manager in Typhoon production, I see we've a good number of Christmas trees out there.....
  13. To me, at least, it seems sensible, as you say they will all take aircraft from the pool of 9 as required, and for which there should be a reasonable amount of synthetic training. Irrespective of whether it's 1, 2 or 3 squadrons, or 1 squadron and 3 flights (they will rarely ever deploy all 9 at the same time) there will still pretty much be the same amount of personnel required, and of the same rank, as nowadays as you will know the ranks don't indicate the position being held. Looking at the cost of the aircraft and infrastructure set up, I'd suggest it would be approx $2 Billion so compared to your proposition, which I don't believe holds, the costs of an extra S/L or two vs. F/L's in a single squadron set up would be negligible. I've often thought, that to provide more flexibility and keep more squadrons alive there should be more squadrons of fewer aircraft as again, deployments are rarely full squadrons anyway, so instead of a 15 aircraft or whatever Typhoon Squadron, , create three 4 or 5 aircraft squadrons? My thoughts and happy to be convinced otherwise..... Agreed that 54 does seem out of place in the maritime/ISTAR environment.. but it's still alive I guess.
  14. if you’re a subscriber and thus got the calendar for this year it shows January 12 as publication date for reasons I suspect as you suggest.
×
×
  • Create New...