Path: utzoo!attcan!telly!lethe!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!bu.edu!att!cbnews!cbnews!military
From: stoffel@dtoa3.dt.navy.mil (Stoffel)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: A-12, Australian Carrier? A-4's..
Message-ID: <1990Dec21.030434.11486@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 21 Dec 90 03:04:34 GMT
References: <1990Dec20.015931.28940@cbnews.att.com>
Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker)
Organization: David Taylor Research Center, Bethesda, MD
Lines: 20
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: stoffel@dtoa3.dt.navy.mil (Stoffel)

In article <1990Dec20.015931.28940@cbnews.att.com> disc3c1@jetson.uh.edu writes:
>From: disc3c1@jetson.uh.edu
>
>version of the SR-71.. now that I have heard about the Navy A-12, I was wonder-
>ing whether I was incorrect about A-12 being a designation for an Attack
>version of the SR-71.. Help... also, Can anybody Tell me, will Australia get
>an Aircraft carrier EVER??? I wanna be a Carrier Pilot, and I have the option

The Navy A12 is the planned replacement for the venerable Intruder.
As far as I know, the first plane still hasn't flown. Last night's news
(CNN I think) said that the Navy is threatening to cancel the contract
for various cost & schedule reasons. They also showed an artist's concept
of what the plane would look like. It looked very stealthy, but more
like the Air Force's new stealth fighter than an SR71.

Bill