Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Blackwater Orders Super Tucano  
User currently offlinePPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8976 posts, RR: 39
Posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 6533 times:

Quote:
August 27, 2007: Security company Blackwater U.S.A. is buying Super Tucano light combat aircraft from the Brazilian manufacturer Embraer. These five ton, single engine, single seat aircraft are built for pilot training, but also perform quite well for counter-insurgency work.

. . .

Blackwater already has a force of armed helicopters in Iraq, and apparently wants something a little faster, and more heavily armed, to fulfill its security contracts overseas. Initially, Blackwater is getting one two-seater, for pilot training in the United States.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htairfo/articles/20070827.aspx


"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
68 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineTexL1649 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 299 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 6449 times:

Blackwater; the air support a rational man would put together today. Meanwhile, the air force doesn't want the Army/Marines to operate UCAV's.

User currently offlineGunsontheroof From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 3509 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 6405 times:

Terrific! Looks like we can look forward to a "Private Military Aviation" forum sometime in the near future.  sarcastic 

Private enterprises deploying combat aircraft into war zones. Nobody has a problem with that?



Next Flight: 9/17 BFI-BFI
User currently offlineShyFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 6366 times:

Quoting Gunsontheroof (Reply 2):
Private enterprises deploying combat aircraft into war zones. Nobody has a problem with that?

I sure as hell do. Nothing more than a bunch of mercenaries.


User currently offlineTlfd29 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 81 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 6362 times:

I think that is a very unfair comment. These are mostly soldiers that have given more time than required to go back into country to keep fighting. Weather you agree with the war or not the Blackwater men and women are putting their lives on the line every day. Sure they're getting paid a lot but I sure would want to be if I was putting my life on the line every day.

User currently offlinePPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8976 posts, RR: 39
Reply 5, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 6361 times:

Quoting Gunsontheroof (Reply 2):

Private enterprises deploying combat aircraft into war zones. Nobody has a problem with that?

With that, yes. But if they are going to stick with training services to foreign militaries, private security, etc., I don't see a problem.

I've heard of stories of some of their "agents" going into not so friendly countries (under contract by the manufacturer) and taking back aircraft that were defaulted on by their buyers, and the countries wouldn't do anything about the default.

Whether it's true or not, I don't know. . . cool job though

[Edited 2007-08-28 06:13:05]


"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
User currently offlineShyFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 6348 times:

Quoting Tlfd29 (Reply 4):
Blackwater men and women are putting their lives on the line every day.

Point noted.  checkmark 

Quoting Tlfd29 (Reply 4):
Sure they're getting paid a lot but I sure would want to be if I was putting my life on the line every day.

I would as well. But if the US (& its allies) is going to fight a war, it should do so only with our (& allies) military forces. War is not supposed to be a business opportunity.


User currently offlineGunsontheroof From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 3509 posts, RR: 9
Reply 7, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks ago) and read 6321 times:

Quoting Tlfd29 (Reply 4):
Sure they're getting paid a lot but I sure would want to be if I was putting my life on the line every day.

I'm sure the other men and women putting their lives on the line in Iraq (soldiers) probably have something to say about that! They aren't making anywhere near as much money in Iraq as Blackwater's personnel are, and I don't think you can argue that they're in any less danger (probably quite to the contrary). You can't possibly expect me to believe that they joined Blackwater for the same reasons your average soldier joined the U.S. military.

You should also keep in mind that many of Blackwater's contractors aren't Americans. Blackwater has hired hundereds of Chileans (many trained under Pinochet), South Africans (ex-Apartheid regime forces), and soldiers from Balkan nations.

Hired guns=mercenaries. Period.

This is probably another thread altogether and probably a good one. Maybe it'll pop up in non-av.



Next Flight: 9/17 BFI-BFI
User currently offlineDEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4952 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks ago) and read 6322 times:

This Flightglobal report paints an innocent enough picture.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...-acquisition-for-trainer-role.html

Quote:
"The aircraft would launch a new pilot training programme for Blackwater, which provides a broad range of training and operational services for military and law enforcement clients.

The Super Tucano programme would be limited to providing for US personnel only, the spokeswoman adds, and the aircraft would not be allowed to leave the country.

The pending license also mandates that all weapons, including the 12.7mm, wing-mounted guns and provisions for smart bomb stores, are not used as part of the training mission."


One CONUS restricted, unarmed plane doesn't exactly constitute a mercenary air force. The question though is how tightly Blackwater would adhere to these limitations as the phrase "a broad range of ..... operational services" does raise some eyebrows.

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 5):
I've heard of stories of some of their "agents" going into not so friendly countries (under contract by the manufacturer) and taking back aircraft that were defaulted on by their buyers, and the countries wouldn't do anything about the default.

Ah, a "special ops" version of the repo man? A sizable fleet could be patiently formed through that, come to think of it.

Quoting ShyFlyer (Reply 6):
War is not supposed to be a business opportunity.

I think this concept is somehow lost among defense merchants.

Quote:
"The pending deal for the two-seat Super Tucano would launch Blackwater’s first training programme dedicated towards a light attack jet. Brazil and Columbia both employ the Super Tucano to battle drug smugglers and insurgents.

The US Air Force, meanwhile, is soliciting for bids to acquire a new fleet of counter-insurgency aircraft on behalf of the Iraqi Air Force."


This latter part of the report could indicate the Hawker Beechcraft AT-6B would have a tough competition ahead....

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...es/AIR_AT-6B_Concept_Desert_lg.jpg



"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlineTlfd29 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 81 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 6209 times:

I agree with you that Blackwater employees are probably very motivated by their paychecks. But at the same time no one forced them to go back to fighting is all I'm saying so they still voluntarily put themselves back in the danger zone. Technically mercenaries? I would agree with you but leaving them with that title alone I think is a mistake.

User currently offlineATCT From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 2349 posts, RR: 38
Reply 10, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 6194 times:

Quoting Gunsontheroof (Reply 2):
Nobody has a problem with that?

Nope

Quoting ShyFlyer (Reply 6):
War is not supposed to be a business opportunity.

War has been that since the first day people fought. Air America, Laos, Cambodia, The Congo, Liberia, etc. etc.
There will always be "Soldiers of Fortune" who will fly or fight for the highest bidder. End of story. If they want to risk their lives for some cash, why would you, but then again, Im argueing with CAP'er.

ATCT



"The way to get started is to quit talking and begin doing." - Walt Disney
User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14139 posts, RR: 63
Reply 11, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 6193 times:

What worries me is the lack of political control over companies like Blackwater. It reminds me too much of scenarios like Forsyth's "Dogs of War", where business interests hire mercenaries to to topple governments or start wars for financial gain.

Just an example: Back in the 1930s, a group of Japanese officers and business people staged a fake "Chinese" attack on a Japanese owned railway line in Northern China without the knowledge and approval of the Japanese government. This gave the pretext for the Japanese invasion in China and the colonialisation of Manchuria (due to business interests), which a few years later caused WW2 in the Pacific region.

Also remember the incident last year when several priivate security employees from the US were arrested in Iraq by US Marines because, from moving cars in a convoy, they sprayed indiscriminately the houses and civilians with bullets "to discourage an attack". They even opened fire on the marines who tried to stop them. As a result a few of the mercenaries got roughed up a bit by the soldiers.

Jan


User currently offlineShyFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 6148 times:

Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 8):
I think this concept is somehow lost among defense merchants.

My post was badly worded (totally my fault). I'll attempt to rephrase: What I find unacceptable is private enterprise engaging in war fighting activities. Training, services, and support roles are fine, even vital.

Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 8):
One CONUS restricted, unarmed plane doesn't exactly constitute a mercenary air force. The question though is how tightly Blackwater would adhere to these limitations as the phrase "a broad range of ..... operational services" does raise some eyebrows.

Thanks for that article. It does put this purchase in a different light. The first article seemed to imply that Blackwater would be using the aircraft in Iraq.

Quoting ATCT (Reply 10):
Im argueing with CAP'er.

Huh?  Confused


User currently offlineCorsair1107 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 121 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 6101 times:

Quoting ShyFlyer (Reply 6):
War is not supposed to be a business opportunity.

whether it is supposed to be or not, it always ends up making somebody wealthy beyond their wildest dreams.



Flown on: DHC-6/8, F100, B1900C, 717, 727, 737, 757, 767, 777, 319, 320, C152/172, E135/145, DC-9, MD-83/88 CL600
User currently offlineGreasespot From Canada, joined Apr 2004, 3086 posts, RR: 20
Reply 14, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 6082 times:

Quoting Tlfd29 (Reply 9):
I would agree with you but leaving them with that title alone I think is a mistake.

ummm Then what are they?

GS



Sometimes all you can do is look them in the eye and ask " how much did your mom drink when she was pregnant with you?"
User currently offlineGunsontheroof From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 3509 posts, RR: 9
Reply 15, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 6035 times:

Quoting ATCT (Reply 10):

War has been that since the first day people fought. Air America, Laos, Cambodia, The Congo, Liberia, etc. etc.
There will always be "Soldiers of Fortune" who will fly or fight for the highest bidder. End of story. If they want to risk their lives for some cash, why would you, but then again, Im argueing with CAP'er.

I don't agree with your perspective on the issue, but this is unfortunately true. That, however, doesn't make war profiteering any less reprehensible. If powerful institutions (defense contractors, etc.) stand to gain from a war that millions of innocent people only stand to suffer from, they'll only be further encouraged to use their political clout to compel politicians to use force. This is exactly what we've seen happen over the last seven years; the massive campaign donations the Bush Administration has received from Lockheed, Boeing, Bechtel, DynCorp, Halliburton, Blackwater and others are hardly coincidental.



Next Flight: 9/17 BFI-BFI
User currently offlineTlfd29 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 81 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 5997 times:

I would have to say they are brave men and women trying to make some good money and risking everything for it. I'll admit that I don't believe people should be making a profit off of the killing of people, but the opportunity has presented itself and these people have chosen to take it.

User currently offlineTheCol From Canada, joined Jan 2007, 2039 posts, RR: 6
Reply 17, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 5985 times:

Personally, I don't have a problem with them. Defense contractors provide invaluable services, without them an armed force's operational ability would be severely limited. However, more oversight is needed. These companies should be expected to adhere to the same conventions as the rest of the international community.

Quoting Gunsontheroof (Reply 15):
If powerful institutions (defense contractors, etc.) stand to gain from a war that millions of innocent people only stand to suffer from, they'll only be further encouraged to use their political clout to compel politicians to use force. This is exactly what we've seen happen over the last seven years; the massive campaign donations the Bush Administration has received from Lockheed, Boeing, Bechtel, DynCorp, Halliburton, Blackwater and others are hardly coincidental.

As for the lobbying issue, each nation is responsible for their own political shortfalls. The blame should be placed squarely on the officials you elect.



No matter how random things may appear, there's always a plan.
User currently offlineAeroWeanie From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1610 posts, RR: 52
Reply 18, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 5982 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Type into Google "definition mercenary" and you get:
1 materialistic: marked by materialism
2 mercenary(a): used of soldiers hired by a foreign army
3 a person hired to fight for another country than their own
4 mercantile: profit oriented; "a commercial book"; "preached a mercantile and militant patriotism"- John Buchan; "a mercenary enterprise"; "a moneymaking business"
5 A mercenary is a soldier who fights, or engages in warfare primarily for money, usually with little regard for ideological, national or political considerations. However, when the term is used to refer to a soldier in a regular national army, it is usually considered an insult, epithet or pejorative.
6 Mercenary is a Bolt Thrower album. It is recorded at Chapel Studios, Lincoln, England, December 1997 to January 1998. Produced by Bolt Thrower and Ewan Davis. It is released on Metal Blade Records: 3984-14147-2 in 1998
7 Mercenary is the first in a series of computer games, published on a number of 8-bit and 16-bit platforms from the mid 1980s to the early 1990s, by Novagen Software Ltd. The games were notable for their smooth polygonal graphics, vast environments, and 'open-ended' gameplay style; there were several ways to complete each game.

I think #2, #3 and #5 are most appropriate here. I guess I am too old to understand #6!


User currently offlineUH60FtRucker From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 5901 times:

Well look at their helicopters... they are no small joke. The fire power they can put on target is impressive, and if I had millions of dollars and wanted top-notch security, they would be my choice.

But are they really mercenaries? A lot of people who claim that Black Water is an unchecked mercenary group are unaware of what they're doing over there. They are NOT fighting the war. They're not out there manning road check points. They're not attempting to maintain security amongst the general population. They're not actively seeking to engage the insurgents on a daily basis.

The closest term to describe them is: body guards... albeit very, very, VERY well armed body guards! They're getting paid huge sums of money... so yes, they're in Iraq for money... but they're not soldiers.

-UH60


User currently offlineShyFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 5869 times:

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 19):
They're not attempting to maintain security amongst the general population. They're not actively seeking to engage the insurgents on a daily basis.

Apparently my information was incorrect, or I interpreted it incorrectly. I retract my earlier statement labeling them mercenaries.


User currently offlineGunsontheroof From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 3509 posts, RR: 9
Reply 21, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 5848 times:

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 19):
Well look at their helicopters... they are no small joke. The fire power they can put on target is impressive, and if I had millions of dollars and wanted top-notch security, they would be my choice.

But are they really mercenaries? A lot of people who claim that Black Water is an unchecked mercenary group are unaware of what they're doing over there. They are NOT fighting the war. They're not out there manning road check points. They're not attempting to maintain security amongst the general population. They're not actively seeking to engage the insurgents on a daily basis.

The closest term to describe them is: body guards... albeit very, very, VERY well armed body guards! They're getting paid huge sums of money... so yes, they're in Iraq for money... but they're not soldiers.

-UH60

I was hoping to get your perspective on this UH60, thanks for dropping in.

Semantics aside ("mercenaries" v.s. "bodyguards"), don't you think it's a bit ridiculous for these guys to be making the money they are when soldiers like yourself are the ones putting themselves in real danger? The Iraq vets I've talked to or heard speak about the war--and I should specify that most of those have been IVAW members--have given me the impression that there's a lot of resentment in the U.S. military towards these guys, and furthermore, that many of the ex-soldiers in Blackwater's employ are vehemently "gung-ho" about the war and even openly racist towards Iraqis. It's no secret that their leadership are staunchly right-wing in their political leanings (among the few companies that donate exclusively to Republican candidates--they've never donated a dime to a Democrat), so many of us on the left have some serious concerns as to their broader agenda--especially when we see stories like this.

As for an "unchecked mercenary group", I agree that a lot of people seem to have a misconception of what Blackwater does in Iraq (your summarization of their duties seems apt), but at the same time, they're not held accountable for their actions in the way you and other soldiers are. For that matter, I've even read an account of Blackwater guards directing U.S. troops in combat (during a 4/4/04 firefight in Najaf)...I've got that handy somewhere here and can clarify further if needed, you might know something about it.

In any case, I've got some pretty serious misgivings about privatizing military operations, especially when the contracts are as lucrative as they've been.



Next Flight: 9/17 BFI-BFI
User currently offlineChecksixx From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1141 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 5813 times:

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 19):
Well look at their helicopters... they are no small joke. The fire power they can put on target is impressive, and if I had millions of dollars and wanted top-notch security, they would be my choice.

Well the helicopter's themselves are unarmed...but your right, the men inside are packing....


User currently offlineDEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4952 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (7 years 3 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 5424 times:

Quoting Checksixx (Reply 22):
Well the helicopter's themselves are unarmed...but your right, the men inside are packing....

Maybe not for too long anymore (at least in Iraq).....

Blackwater Suspended In Iraq (by MDorBust Sep 17 2007 in Non Aviation)



"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlineKevinSmith From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (7 years 3 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 5411 times:

Quoting Tlfd29 (Reply 4):
Weather you agree with the war or not the Blackwater men and women are putting their lives on the line every day.

And are getting paid a lot more than Spc Schumkatelly. Also they can quit.


25 Post contains images Scbriml : Welcome to the Bush Presidency!
26 Bennett123 : Apart from the link provided by Devilfish, who are they accountable and what laws are they subject to Iraqi/International law/ US Military/US Federal
27 PPVRA : I don't know, but I suspect International and Iraqi Law. In regards to the USA only as far as their contract goes (which could include a clause to re
28 Post contains links Bennett123 : http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?activeTextDocId=1137244 The reason that I ask about which law are they subject to is that under the Visiting
29 Post contains links DEVILFISH : Here's something which could shed some light on the matter..... http://www.defense-aerospace.com/cgi...1H8AAAEAAFNsW98AAAAL&modele=jdc_34 US Promises
30 Post contains links Bennett123 : http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...07091902503.html?wpisrc=newsletter Apparently they are not subject to Iraqi or US Military law. If the company
31 IADCA : What perhaps bothers me most about this whole situation is the attributability of actions of non-state actors to the American military. Regardless of
32 Post contains links Bennett123 : http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...src=newsletter&sid=ST2007092200176 Latest news from Washington Post.
33 PADSpot : I think the question whether these people are mercenaries or not is utterly irrelevant in light of the actual problem. The problem is that they potent
34 RIXrat : For those of you who are debating private armies, has anyone ever heard of the French Foreign Legion? This iconic group to this day is made up of fore
35 HaveBlue : PADSpot I agree completely. Good post.
36 MD11Engineer : But these Foreign Legionaries are fully integrated into the French military (same as the Gurkhas in the British Army) and fall fully under the respec
37 IADCA : In American democracy, the power to authorize a war is vested solely in Congress. There's a lively Constitutional law debate stemming from the Vietna
38 PADSpot : The question of legal control of PMCs is not related to the constitution. Even a dictatorship could impose control and regulation on that type of ser
39 IADCA : Sorry, I misunderstood you. I thought you were talking specifically about American democracy, not democracy as a form of government. You were talking
40 PADSpot : I was a little surprised when I read the thread title first. In Germany we a "Weapons of War Control Act" and it certainly does not allow private sec
41 MD11Engineer : Imagine company XYZ hiring mercenaries, arming them military style (with heavy weapons included) and conquers itself a chunk of raw material rich lan
42 MD11Engineer : Or even further back: The British East India Company had it's own military, which by and by conquered most of India. Actually, India for the first hal
43 Post contains images PADSpot : The phenomenon of mercenaries can be dated back to at least the ancient Roman or Greek era. But hey, remember? Blackwater? Super Tucanos?
44 ShyFlyer : I'm not intimately familiar with all the rules, regulations, paperwork, etc but I would surmise that buying an aircraft with offensive capability is
45 Post contains images MD90fan : If it goes to the Sandbox, let's hope the jihadis make minced meat out of it
46 PADSpot : Even without military sensors, weapons or avionics the problem could start with registrating the aircraft. Does the Tucano has got a civil certificat
47 Bennett123 : Shyflyer I know that people are making assumptions, but unless they are only going to use the Super Tucano for pilot training and in the USA, then COI
48 BarfBag : That is incorrect. They operated out of cantonments located in towns in the Gangetic Plain between Delhi and Calcutta, maintaining alliances with loc
49 Bramble : especially when the Blackwater founder is a republican donater and former member of George Seniors staff. Afterall it would be unfair to give ALL the
50 Post contains links DEVILFISH : Speaking of business opportunities..... http://www.defense-aerospace.com/cgi...cH8AAAEAAEwBLSsAAAAK&modele=jdc_34 A Simple Business Equation (Source:
51 F27Friendship : This is something that really disgusts me. Please add sadistic murderes These people are sensation seekers who live by the rule: "kill them all, let
52 ATCT : Note, the US Government is not the only governmental or private organization using Blackwater. As some people have said, if I have to go to Iraq for
53 Art : That's gonna be news to the foreign construction and oil companies involved in Iraq.
54 ShyFlyer : From earlier in the thread:
55 PADSpot : But one thing remains: Once they bear arms, they need to be made liable, need to be regulated.
56 Star12 : Prick...
57 Oroka : And about every military equipment maker that supplies any army at war. I know here in Canada there has been over $10b in new/upgrade equipment spend
58 Post contains images FXramper : I'm emailing J Cofer Black my resume...
59 Star12 : That makes two of us!!!
60 N74jw : I would start getting nervous when Blackwater starts buying AH-1s, Mi-24s or the like. A single A-29 is nothing to shout about... Is it illegal to sho
61 UH60FtRucker : Do you mean, is it illegal for an insurgent to shoot a Blackwater employee? If so... um... there is no rule of law in Iraq. Only the law of the gun.
62 PADSpot : The point is that the Blackwater operative and the insurgent "base" their actions on different "laws". Both may say that under the law they believe i
63 UH60FtRucker : Make no mistake about it, I wasn't excusing Blackwater personnel. I believe at a minimum they ought to be held to the same ROE as US soldiers... and
64 N74JW : Is it illegal for a US soldier to shoot a Blackwater operative? Sorry for the lack of clarity on my part...
65 PADSpot : I did not think you were. Which is probably as close to immunity as you can get. The sentences that were given to US soldiers in such cases were eith
66 Post contains links PADSpot : After the Blackwater scandal escalates beyond what most people expected, there are accompanying accusations against Blackwater concerning arms smuggel
67 Blackbird : I just hope Blackwater won't decide one day to turn on us in a catastrophic coup de tat. But even with that aside, the other comment about Blackwater
68 Ftrguy : And bite the hand that feeds you. Makes real sense. Maybe their training facility in North Carolina is where they breed Al Qaeda terrorists too. Anot
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Blackwater Orders Super Tucano
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Embraer Delivers 5 Super Tucano To Colombia posted Sat Dec 9 2006 02:25:22 by Fhlaran
WSJ: RAF Orders 6th C-17 posted Thu Jul 26 2007 17:45:18 by N328KF
Great Time For Usmc To Buy Super Hornets... posted Sun Jun 24 2007 20:09:58 by AirRyan
Super Sabre / Voodoo Maximum Speed posted Wed Jun 13 2007 00:48:51 by Blackbird
Israel In Talks With USA Over F-22 Orders posted Fri Apr 20 2007 13:46:49 by Keesje
US Will Offer JSF Partners Multi-year Orders posted Mon Mar 12 2007 21:04:18 by Tak
Raaf To Buy 24 Super Hornets posted Tue Mar 6 2007 10:46:07 by Anthonyspider
Can A Super Hornet Takeoff A F/D With Out Cats? posted Sat Dec 30 2006 05:34:40 by 747400sp
Super Hornet Mishap At Pensacola... posted Mon Dec 4 2006 16:36:49 by Ulfinator
Embraer EMB-312 Tucano Pilots posted Tue Nov 21 2006 10:35:25 by Casonf

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format