Found the butthurt gayreek. Greece isn't getting the F-35s until late 2020s/2030 at the earliest and might not even get them at all since the US still wants to reel Turkey back in. Also considering how Turkey's defense industry is progressing, it's very likely that any attempt by Greece to attack Turkey will end with Greece's entire air force getting demolished. Their F-16s are worthless when Turkey has even more upgraded ones and the F-35s already got locked on by fucking Syrians against Israel, Greece isn't gonna fare much better.
> Their F-16s are worthless when Turkey has even more upgraded ones
Lmao, pathetic cockroach cope. Turkey doesn’t even have block 70 F-16s you gay. > and the F-35s already got locked on by fucking Syrians against Israel
Lmao. Now you are posting vatmoron cope. Keep wishing buddy.
They actually do but they wanted extra ones. Not to mention Turkey has upgraded their F-16s with a ton of extra other shit while Greece was just sitting on their ass and going on spending sprees courtesy of EU gibs. No wonder their economy is going into deeper shit again.
gay.
>Now you are posting vatmoron cope.
LMAO, vatmoron this, vatmoron that, even the US criticized Israel for it. Also pretty funny coming from a gayreek since your shipping fleet is secretly transporting Russian oil while claiming how you're totally in line with EU sanctions. Kind of like how you lied about your economy and institutions to get into the EU. At least Turks were straight-up honest that they wouldn't enforce sanctions and cited reasons for it.
> They actually do but they wanted extra ones.
Lmao. Lol. You cockroaches aren’t even intelligent enough to talk to. Since when are block 50/52 F-16C/Ds block 70 F-16Vs? Kys. > Turkey has upgraded their F-16s with a ton of extra other shit
Lmao. Again kys.
>Juan Carlos class carriers can deploy F-35Bs >three different countries operate Juan Carlos class carriers >none of them have any F-35Bs for bullshit internal reasons
My predictions: >Australia pulls their head out of their asses soon due to Chinese pressure >Spain drags it out until 2028 when they retire the AV-8s, but then have to do it to avoid the indignity of being nocarriers >Turkey NEVER EVER
I don't think you understand how long these projects take from initial ambition to in-service. The primary customers (USAF, USMC, RN and USN) began their fighter/carrier discussions in the mid 90s for a shared platform.
By the time the RAN was thinking about the Adelaides, the F-35 was well into project maturity -- and was hotly debated within.
It could be converted easily enough, and I've seen some good commentary that Australia should order a 3rd anyway.
The only real argument against it is that it still might not be efficient for Australia to run one or more squadrons of F-35 b's if those squadrons would still be land based most of the time while the LHDs stay loaded with helicopters to support their originally intended role.
They couldn't. I read a paper on it -- you would basically need to rebuild the thing from the ground up. You're talking about fitting new fuel pipes & tanks, engineering spaces, larger munitions bunkers, landing/deck equipment and crew accommodation. For the price tag you'd be better off buying a new build.
It would be expensive, but so would acquiring and maintaining F-35 B's just incase you wanted to embark them on the LHD one day.
And for all this, you're robbing internal space from the amphibious ship that could have otherwise taken any given Pacific island and turned it into an unsinkable aircraft carrier.
All of these are better arguments than the cost imo.
It isn't cost, that is money that could be spend more effectively somewhere else. You are rerolling something that is already built to fulfill a requirement and degrading it. That has impact on other capabilities.
>The design was changed to accommodate the RANs needs -- which didn't include fixed wing aircraft.
What's the ramp for then
Removing the ramp from the build is quite literally not worth the cost.
https://i.imgur.com/3ERpEPo.jpg
The Juan Carlos is their sister ship and is already permanently embarked with 25 Harriers
She isn't Jaun Carlos. The RANs Canberra's internals are different.
> you would basically need to rebuild the thing from the ground up
No you wouldn’t you gay. The RAN would be changing a few things for sure (mostly just heat treating and reinforcing the flight deck) since they are outfitting it for a different role, but they wouldn’t need to “rebuild the thing from the ground up.” The biggest argument against procuring F-35Bs for the Canberras is that doing so changes their capability from being amphibious assault ships (low value targets for PLA) to essentially light aircraft carriers (high value targets for PLA), and since the RAN bought the ships specifically for supporting low intensity amphibious operations outfitting them with F-35s would invalidate the mission they were procured for and leave a hole in the Australian military’s capability to sustain deployed troops. Why would the Australians sacrifice their LHDs to make some light aircraft carriers when the US already has that area covered in spades?
Yes you would. The internals are massively different from their Spanish cousin, this is quite literally on the record stuff. You cannot just convert a ship like that. There's massive structural changes requires as I listed above -- all of which would impact their current role.
>The biggest argument against procuring F-35Bs for the Canberras is that doing so changes their capability from being amphibious assault ships (low value targets for PLA) to essentially light aircraft carriers (high value targets for PLA), and since the RAN bought the ships specifically for supporting low intensity amphibious operations outfitting them with F-35s would invalidate the mission they were procured for and leave a hole in the Australian military’s capability to sustain deployed troops.
Partly agree.
>Why would the Australians sacrifice their LHDs to make some light aircraft carriers when the US already has that area covered in spades?
I don't know. I am not making the case for this.
> you would basically need to rebuild the thing from the ground up
No you wouldn’t you gay. The RAN would be changing a few things for sure (mostly just heat treating and reinforcing the flight deck) since they are outfitting it for a different role, but they wouldn’t need to “rebuild the thing from the ground up.” The biggest argument against procuring F-35Bs for the Canberras is that doing so changes their capability from being amphibious assault ships (low value targets for PLA) to essentially light aircraft carriers (high value targets for PLA), and since the RAN bought the ships specifically for supporting low intensity amphibious operations outfitting them with F-35s would invalidate the mission they were procured for and leave a hole in the Australian military’s capability to sustain deployed troops. Why would the Australians sacrifice their LHDs to make some light aircraft carriers when the US already has that area covered in spades?
>when the US already has that area covered in spades?
Why are Japan, South Korea and even Singapore dashing for carriers?
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Have you looked at a map? All 3 of those nations have the strategic depth of Luxembourg compared to China. Having places to put their panes other than static airfields is a strategic imperative, which isn’t the case for Australia, which can safely rely on the size of its country, distance from China, and the projection of US air power.
How deHispanicable Turkish government. Their people just got hit with devastating earthquake which lots of people dead and their government decided to built a new navy ship instead of helping their own people? No wonder they called Turkish people a cockroach.
Is that a Slope de Cope that I see?
Y-yeah so?
I don't like how boxy she looks, it makes her look very fat
I can’t wait for Greek block 70 F-16s and F-35s to sink that piece of shit. Fuck Turkey.
Found the butthurt gayreek. Greece isn't getting the F-35s until late 2020s/2030 at the earliest and might not even get them at all since the US still wants to reel Turkey back in. Also considering how Turkey's defense industry is progressing, it's very likely that any attempt by Greece to attack Turkey will end with Greece's entire air force getting demolished. Their F-16s are worthless when Turkey has even more upgraded ones and the F-35s already got locked on by fucking Syrians against Israel, Greece isn't gonna fare much better.
> Their F-16s are worthless when Turkey has even more upgraded ones
Lmao, pathetic cockroach cope. Turkey doesn’t even have block 70 F-16s you gay.
> and the F-35s already got locked on by fucking Syrians against Israel
Lmao. Now you are posting vatmoron cope. Keep wishing buddy.
>Turkey doesn’t even have block 70 F-16s you gay.
They actually do but they wanted extra ones. Not to mention Turkey has upgraded their F-16s with a ton of extra other shit while Greece was just sitting on their ass and going on spending sprees courtesy of EU gibs. No wonder their economy is going into deeper shit again.
gay.
>Now you are posting vatmoron cope.
LMAO, vatmoron this, vatmoron that, even the US criticized Israel for it. Also pretty funny coming from a gayreek since your shipping fleet is secretly transporting Russian oil while claiming how you're totally in line with EU sanctions. Kind of like how you lied about your economy and institutions to get into the EU. At least Turks were straight-up honest that they wouldn't enforce sanctions and cited reasons for it.
> They actually do but they wanted extra ones.
Lmao. Lol. You cockroaches aren’t even intelligent enough to talk to. Since when are block 50/52 F-16C/Ds block 70 F-16Vs? Kys.
> Turkey has upgraded their F-16s with a ton of extra other shit
Lmao. Again kys.
>the F-35s already got locked on by fucking Syrians against Israel
o dear, anon thinks this is real
Absolutely no one thinks Greece can even hurt turkey meaningfully in an armed conflict, let alone defeat them. And turkey is a shithole
>Juan Carlos class carriers can deploy F-35Bs
>three different countries operate Juan Carlos class carriers
>none of them have any F-35Bs for bullshit internal reasons
My predictions:
>Australia pulls their head out of their asses soon due to Chinese pressure
>Spain drags it out until 2028 when they retire the AV-8s, but then have to do it to avoid the indignity of being nocarriers
>Turkey NEVER EVER
Wonder if the USN is going to sell its Harrier frames and parts to Spain when finally retired.
Stupid roaches lost F 35 for this carrier because of silly S 400
The Adelaides aren't built for F-35Bs. The design was changed to accommodate the RANs needs -- which didn't include fixed wing aircraft.
Wow a carrier from 2015 wasn’t built for the F-35? Color me shocked
I don't think you understand how long these projects take from initial ambition to in-service. The primary customers (USAF, USMC, RN and USN) began their fighter/carrier discussions in the mid 90s for a shared platform.
By the time the RAN was thinking about the Adelaides, the F-35 was well into project maturity -- and was hotly debated within.
It could be converted easily enough, and I've seen some good commentary that Australia should order a 3rd anyway.
The only real argument against it is that it still might not be efficient for Australia to run one or more squadrons of F-35 b's if those squadrons would still be land based most of the time while the LHDs stay loaded with helicopters to support their originally intended role.
They couldn't. I read a paper on it -- you would basically need to rebuild the thing from the ground up. You're talking about fitting new fuel pipes & tanks, engineering spaces, larger munitions bunkers, landing/deck equipment and crew accommodation. For the price tag you'd be better off buying a new build.
It would be expensive, but so would acquiring and maintaining F-35 B's just incase you wanted to embark them on the LHD one day.
And for all this, you're robbing internal space from the amphibious ship that could have otherwise taken any given Pacific island and turned it into an unsinkable aircraft carrier.
All of these are better arguments than the cost imo.
It isn't cost, that is money that could be spend more effectively somewhere else. You are rerolling something that is already built to fulfill a requirement and degrading it. That has impact on other capabilities.
Removing the ramp from the build is quite literally not worth the cost.
She isn't Jaun Carlos. The RANs Canberra's internals are different.
Yes you would. The internals are massively different from their Spanish cousin, this is quite literally on the record stuff. You cannot just convert a ship like that. There's massive structural changes requires as I listed above -- all of which would impact their current role.
>The biggest argument against procuring F-35Bs for the Canberras is that doing so changes their capability from being amphibious assault ships (low value targets for PLA) to essentially light aircraft carriers (high value targets for PLA), and since the RAN bought the ships specifically for supporting low intensity amphibious operations outfitting them with F-35s would invalidate the mission they were procured for and leave a hole in the Australian military’s capability to sustain deployed troops.
Partly agree.
>Why would the Australians sacrifice their LHDs to make some light aircraft carriers when the US already has that area covered in spades?
I don't know. I am not making the case for this.
The Juan Carlos is their sister ship and is already permanently embarked with 25 Harriers
> you would basically need to rebuild the thing from the ground up
No you wouldn’t you gay. The RAN would be changing a few things for sure (mostly just heat treating and reinforcing the flight deck) since they are outfitting it for a different role, but they wouldn’t need to “rebuild the thing from the ground up.” The biggest argument against procuring F-35Bs for the Canberras is that doing so changes their capability from being amphibious assault ships (low value targets for PLA) to essentially light aircraft carriers (high value targets for PLA), and since the RAN bought the ships specifically for supporting low intensity amphibious operations outfitting them with F-35s would invalidate the mission they were procured for and leave a hole in the Australian military’s capability to sustain deployed troops. Why would the Australians sacrifice their LHDs to make some light aircraft carriers when the US already has that area covered in spades?
>when the US already has that area covered in spades?
Why are Japan, South Korea and even Singapore dashing for carriers?
Have you looked at a map? All 3 of those nations have the strategic depth of Luxembourg compared to China. Having places to put their panes other than static airfields is a strategic imperative, which isn’t the case for Australia, which can safely rely on the size of its country, distance from China, and the projection of US air power.
>The design was changed to accommodate the RANs needs -- which didn't include fixed wing aircraft.
What's the ramp for then
Where is your naval aviation fixed-wing squadron bitch
For you I put extra
the only carrier where a roach infestation is the norm
turks are subhumans and should be exterminated mercilessly
This looks like the box image for one of those Chinese made low-budget warship toys
How deHispanicable Turkish government. Their people just got hit with devastating earthquake which lots of people dead and their government decided to built a new navy ship instead of helping their own people? No wonder they called Turkish people a cockroach.
I hate those Turkish ice cream.
It looks fat.