Got a link to support that? Because Italy has two Horizon Frigates in service and one carrier all carrying Aster, and of course, the two SAMP-T batteries. Hardly "dumped"...

Ian

 

It helps if you read between the lines. Why would Italy dump the missile immediately after trying it out?

With regards to those highlighting the problems in Iraq / Afghanistan and equating them to overconfidence in the military I would say the following.

 

What you have in both countries is not a military failure, but a political failure. 

 

It's not mainly russian weapons that are killing servicemen it's very simple containers filled with explosives and laid under roads, the truth of the matter, both in Iraq and Afghanistan is that it's nation building, western forces are geared to armed conflicts, because these represent the greatest threat. You could easily "contain" Iraq/Afghanistan, you could carpet bomb it, torture the families of those convicted of crimes against the state (an incentive used by S-Hussein), you could do anything you wanted if you didn't have any principles.

 

What is being dealt with is a civil war, a period of schism that will last as long as it does, there is no technology that can determine whether a population will put their lives at risk to report enemy combatants, but in Iraq, and as will one day be made public, the use of backtracked surveillance has had an absolutely incredible effect on the ability of the enemy to operate effectively.

What I'm saying is that I don't think that people are being particularly arrogant in asserting that a technological and qualitative military advantage to the US, yes an AK can kill, as can an RPG, yes these can be used to great effect, but the purpose of the wars is not "domination" but rather to lay the framework for a nation state that can sustain itself. Frankly if you took every gun and RPG out of circulation you'd still have nearly the same casualty rate from IED's..

 

And the reality is, whilst both conflicts drag on, both of the threats have been neutralised insofar as they are able to project power outside of their own borders. These are wars of "convenience" to at least some degree rather than strict necessity, it is a much easier objective to simply neutralise a threat, what has to happen in both conflicts is neutralising a threat whilst avoiding actions that undermine a credible system of govt you hope to install..

 

These are wars to build nations... to destroy them would be far easier, it's principles that limit action, not technology.

 

R

They were scheduled for six and eight respectively. They since have stopped at two and two and their carrier does not rely on her ASTER 15s, though she carries that junk missile. She relies on her actual assigned escorts who carry ASPIDE.  

 

I don't know exactly how they intend to tear that crap out and replace it, but they will as soon as its politically convenient.  

 

H.

You have Aspide and sea Dart that work if you just can't bear the thought of buying anything from those evil capitalist American war mongering pigs, you know stuff that works, like Standard, ESSM, and RAM?  Why not put an active seeker on Aspide or just a better motor and control surfaces.  Andy why not improve Sea Dart which seems to be quite good?  Or, why not just put boosters on MICA and save $?

Aspide is Italian improved SPARROW. They did have a program to make an active seeker SPARROW, but then the French (Marwan Lahoud) convinced the Socialist Prodi Italian government to scrap it in favor of ASTER. Alenia was furious because they were benchtesting Aspide 21, an active seeker missile, that was supposed to be the follow on to ASPIDE 2000. ESSM is BUILT along similar lines to ASPIDE 2000 especially the SARH architecture.

 

The best I can say is that Italy us lobbying hard now for MEADS. They WANT it. Plan B..

H.

 

The UAE tests aamram for a period of six months, then require their F-16 to also be able to carry the Mica because they regard the aamram as inferior.

That's all politics, of course europeans are going to favor european tech, and of course Indians are going to develop they're own, tis the way of the world,  as for the UAE... who really cares what they think? Did they actually state they're reasoning?

And if so where are the links, THE LINKS I TELLS YA :)

The UAE tests aamram for a period of six months, then require their F-16 to also be able to carry the Mica because they regard the aamram as inferior.

Intreresting set of lies there, Mirage. You do know what Mirage means?

 

H.

 

 

 

everyone wants the http://www.strategypage.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Images/emlove.gif" alt="" />micahttp://www.strategypage.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Images/emlove.gif" alt="" /> its even fitted to the f-22
when only the best can do 

I actually got links to all evaluations mentioned, however since H never has to provide links, why should I?

 

 

Why do we care about the UAE.? Well because countries like these and Qatar, can actually buy what they want. The taiwanese love the micas, especially the ir, but because of chinese pressure the french don't sell them spare parts, so they can't fly their mirage, so unfortunatly they find they sell in a situation were they got to buy cheap american crap. The same can be said about the greec, but they simply can not afford their micas, so they have to buy some cheap american crap with 30 year old technology, called, yes the amraam.

... yes, everyone loves and wants the mica, the barely BVR missile that costs around the same as two AMRAAMS that both outpace and outrange it and have more modern seekers...