eactly that is what i said…does then a weapons system that consists of 60% foriegn components considered indegenous?

I think it could if the DESIGN was home made. And if the aircraft was destined to be used primarily by the builder.

I think its a combination of (1) and (2) to varying degrees.

Design: If the platform is born from a local requirement, designed at home, possibly with some foreign technical assistance on the drawing board.

Prototype/Block 0 construction: Again, starts locally, but may not necessarily be 100% local systems or parts. A Foreign source may be required for some parts. Depends on time frame involved and level of local industry.

Full production & testing: Hopefully ALL locally. Production for parts from foreign source may have been acquired under license and can be built at home, other wise imported.

I think the phrase indigenous program doesn’t have just ONE definition, but a varying degree of different definitions. I think as long as the primary design and primary construction is all done locally, and for a single local requirement, it can be accurately labelled as a local program in the broader sense.

Just my opinion.

GD,

I well know. I am not trying to analyse everything, just making a light hearted statement about me. Personally, I couldn’t care less whether or not we ever join up with ASEAN, or even get an invitation. I have my angel, and that is all I need. 😉

(you only need to use the reloading crane at sea, not when reloading in port, and basically the missiles just aren’t being replenished at sea).

In peace time it is hardly surprising I guess. And even in conflict, ala Iraq last year, how many SM-2s were fired in anger from USN vessels? None, as far as I recall. Until such time the USN is threatened by a major power launching a saturation attack, then………….

The keyword is seems 🙂

In practice, the R-27 family has not performed well at all. The East Africa conflict shows a score of about 25 odd launches with a single possible hit. This was year 2000 in a low ECM/ECCM environment.

GD,

Are you referring to the Eritrea-Ethiopia conflict involving combat between Mig-29s and Su-27s? Weren’t they flown by experienced mercenary pilots? And if so, the R-27s seem to be poor performers. Or could one blame the actuall way they might have been used? That is, incorrectly.

With the new boats in service what will happen to the remaining Gulf War-ear OsaII class missile boats? Will it be replace or be scrapped by the new Iraqi Navy?

I would be surprised if they’re actually still intact! They would surely have been destroyed last year.

When will the RNZAF replace their obsolete A-4 Skyhawks?

No time soon.

It is unlikely but what happen if some country decide to invade New Zealand, what will the RNZAF do to prevent his, with their Skyhawks?

This is so unlikely its probably is not worth actually speculating about. The air combat capability is gone, and the Kiwis need not worry about invasion. That is the reality.

please, go read a little bit more on the history (all verson if possible) on this and you will easily see how wrong that assuption is.

I am not assuming this. I am simply referring to what I have heard in the past regarding their text books and the teachings on the war.

who defeated and occupied japan after WWII? what parts of history (as in who it involves) is japanese textbooks trying to change? answer those question and you can easily see that this time tested rule of history is completely valid.

From what I recall, SOME of the text books were painting the war as a justifiable cause against western aggression, and a grand plan that was to benefit the nation at the time – or something along those lines. Further more, Japan has never admitted it was wrong and apologized for the war. The paranoia that Asia often feels about a Japan on the move is not baseless, but can be traced from the collective controversy that Japan can still generate with regards to it’s past, and the text book saga was just part of it – this is fact. BUT, it is just paranoia. Japan is no longer an imperial nation.

and dont be so brash as to brand anything remotely different from what you have become accustomed to as merely ‘speculation’ without carefully examing it.

You stated to me: “history is written by the victors. would you have been taught the same lessons in class had germany and japan won?”

Agreed that the history books would be different, but would the ones written by us (the losing side) be accurate? We can speculate, but would never know, as this is a hypothetical WHAT IF scenario. True, history is written by the victors, but my point is that the losers don’t always portray an accurate recollection of events, or reasons, etc. This is what has caused controversy in Japan in the past, with respect to the rest of Asia.