Development of the Twin-Warhawk.

Hey, it worked for the Mustang.

Also, wasn't allowing local production of parts pretty much the bread and butter of the Viper's success as an export product? IIRC, they've got various license-built derivatives produced in Japan, Korea, and the Benelux nations at the very least.

I keep saying that . Curtis did make the transition to jets, the way a vegan tries to convince you that tofurkey is edible. The Curtis "Blackhawk" was a bloated underpowered monster that the Pentagon didn't want. Curtis bet the farm and lost. Northrup's F-98 Scorpion one the marbles, and that jet turned into a flop later.

Curtis was sold to North American Aviation who in turn became Rockwell then Rockwell was bought by Boeing.

Such is the nature of the defense biz.

edited 2nd Dec '16 10:16:22 PM by TairaMai

So what would it have taken for Curtiss to remain successful after World War II? IIRC, they weren't doing all that well even during the war, with their only new designs to enter service being the Helldiver and the C-46.

Oh, and I made some changes to my British Aviation scenario.

edited 3rd Dec '16 10:46:16 AM by ElSquibbonator

As far as new designs go, maybe, but they were cranking out Warhawks through the entire war, with the design being constantly updated as they went. Nearly 14,000 Warhawks were built overall.

The thing about the Warhawk is, it was obsolescent at best in 1940. By the end of the war there was only one Warhawk squadron still in service—all the rest had converted to Thunderbolts or Mustangs.

If it was obsolescent in 1940, they wouldn't have kept buying them through the end of the war.

The fact of the matter is that the Warhawk's only big drawback was poor high altitude performance, which is why they didn't see action over western Europe. OTOH, they could outrun and outgun most of Japan's early war fighters, and they could outturn the Me-109 at lower altitudes.

Curtis couldn't adapt after the war. The Warhawk was a good airplane, but you can only coast on a good rep so far:

Aren't Rafale-N's optimized for proper carriers anyway?

They could always buy F-35s, assuming that is an option for them.

I mean, the F-35 is having all manner of teething problems, but compare with most of their other options lately.

If they do buy into the F-35 it would probaly benifit the Koreans too since odds are the Amercians would put a repair depot there, and then the Koreans wouldnt have to ship them all the way to Australia because they dont want our cooties.

F-35 is too much suck for too much price. That's an easy contract for Dassault.

And then:

Fix'd. At least Tsushima had a legitimate military objective: Reinforce Vladivostok. It wasn't their fault the Japanese A) knew they were coming, B) had superior ships and crews, C) had good knowledge of the terrain and seas in the region and D) was able and prepared for night battle, something the Russians were unfamiliar with at best.

Admiral Kuznetsov has no such excuses. They're a broken down rust bucket with limited if any capabilities all for what? To send some kind of half-cocked lolworthy political statement?

Losing almost half of their fleet before even get near the Asian sea and sinking a British fishing boat on their way was entirely on the Russians though.

The F-35B is fine, but selling it to India may not be viable. India doesn't like being chained to Russia, US arms regs can be just as much as a sand trap. Pakistan is an ally and they would throw a fit if India got the F-35.

Here we go again.

edited 5th Dec '16 7:05:08 PM by TairaMai

And that will change when I'm elected President in 2020. Pakistan will be told that in a way You Have Outlived Your Usefulness. I'll refuse to ally the US with traitorous, backstabbing "friends" like them. (Same goes for Saudi Arabia.)

I'd rather side with the world's largest democracy than the hellhole that is Pakistan. If they start getting all uppity and talking nukes let's just say that will be dealt with.

You and our current President-Elect should exchange notes over breakfast one day.

Or better not.

Yeah I'm not going to. I'm pretty sure Trump would plagiarize and steal my ideas and claim he made them.

And I voted for the guy for strategic reasons, the least of which is setting me up with an easy guy to topple. Nothing else save Hillary being the worse candidate. The Democrats won't be a threat, they'll send up their typical Establishment blowhards who have no credibility, folks like Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton who will be an easy sweep.

And if you try and place me according to political compasses I baffle most of them. I can't be placed in a single category though the closest I can identify with is a more Libertarian-esque Republican.

Republican, Tom. It's called being a Republican.

^ There are numerous varieties of us man. We're not some monolithic Hive Mind.

Sure, that's just what someone trying to conceal being part of a Hive Mind would say!