Is this a new capability or do the Aussies already operate the Chinook?:


http://www.dsca.mil/PressReleases/36-b/200...ralia_09-17.pdf

Australia got its fisrt Chinooks in 1974 - ie 35 years ago - I think that they may need replacement.

The original C model Chinooks were paid off in the 1990's and we bought four CH-47D's (1996 IIRC) which have been serving in Afghanistan two at a time for several years now.

These look like a supplement. It makes sense, most other helo's struggle in Afghanistan and the versatility of a handful of very flexible, very powerful aircraft with large lift load and volume make sense, plus with the required EW SP suite (To defeat the Taliban's integrated air-defense network).
Our Blackhawk fleet is the biggest group of hangar queens this side of the RAAF, they've done... err Timor...

I wonder if the intention is to supplement of eventually replace the D's?
I wonder if it signifies any delays in the NH90 program?

Reading through it, what I want to know is who the f*ck is the 'Royal Australian Army'?

Splinter, Royalist group, controlled by HM back at Buckingham. Mission: to rein in former colonies and reinstitute the British Empire. IOW, be prepared for your old/new overlords.

No - he got beaten in the last election (though it appears that some elements of the ADF and Department may not have realised that Australia is a democracy yet....)

From a small town NE of Oxford?

Or do you mean the palace named after the Duke who had it built?

I wonder if this is part of something bigger? Is there a shadowy organisation called the Royal British Army hiding out somewhere?

Yup, I have seen the British Army referred to as the Royal Army several times!

We have to counter the Neo-Cromwellian menace somehow!





Most people don't understand the concept of regiments, and assume you've got the Royal Air Force, Royal Navy etc you've got the Royal Army.
It gets even more complicated in Australia trying to explain the Royal Australian Regiment...

Yeah we have Royal Regiments too, but the Army is not Royal here, never was, although we did have the RCAF and RCN. All part of the Canadian Forces or CF now

Guess the tradition of the Royal Army ending with the roundheads is lost on most people

Ah yes, indeed. And some of the other factions with similar or even more nefarious aims. I'm sure I heard mention of Levellers not long ago, & there's been a lot of talk about Diggers lately. Worrying.

Yes it seem the Diggers in particular are a well worth keeping an eye on. I'm told they hold radical egalitarian ideas, perhaps ever Republican hereasy and rant about a 'fair go for all', but what can you expect from a rude group of simple rustics. I hear they are descended from convicts, liable to drink and to thieve anything not nailed down while spouting on about the brotherhood of man - a verminous bunch to be sure.

shane

Why limit oneself to that which "not nailed down". I was always taught to steal the hammer first (by a late, much lamented, WO1 friend of mine)!

That resembles me, except for the vermin. I lost all those to my mate in a card game.

Always remember, property is theft! So you stole it first!

They're connected to the Ranters? It gets worse! At least the Fifth Monarchy Men don't seem to be coming back. But - I've just had a dreadful thought. Weren't there some Seekers around a few decades ago, and weren' t they something to do with the Antipodes?

It's all starting to make sense.

So is NuLab neo-Cromwellian, or neo-neo-Cromwellian?

And clearly the Windsors aren't the bunch to fully restore the throne. Too dissipative. So who is out there, orchestrating the impending coup? Some latent Plantagenet? A Tudor? I can only imagine the havoc if its a bunch of Stuarts...

OK you got me, I can't top the bloody Seekers

Speaking of which Judith Durham has done a new version of Advance Australia Fair's lyrics. I know its not a great anthem to start with, but is there a WORSE theme for a national anthem than Policial Correctness? Triumphalism, nationalistic furor and naive optimism might all be a little passe, but an anthem is suppose to cry out not cringe, its supposed to make hearts pound not bleed.

I'd post a link however the Youtube file has been pulled, and curiously the ABC has has no mention of it despite it being premiered on 774 Melbourne on Tuesday afternoon when I heard it.

Is it just me, is it well past time that we stopped talking about inclusiveness and started practicing it? It's more than possible to come up with version of AAF that acknowledges the whole of our society including pre-european history without singling out individual groups (I roughed out a few verses in the car on the way home from work) - which strikes me as the exact opposite of the stated intention. I mean if what they really want to do is just acknowledge everyone, they might as well just add a few verses to this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJmw5SQiims

shane