plawolfI know you’re making a good point here but I think its stupid to bring China in every time when someone mentioning Vietnam. The world we living is now is rapidly changing and is more dangerous, so when a nation upgrade its armed forces doesn’t mean that it has to be aimed at one specific threat, but maybe for the sake of defence they just want something better. But in SE-Asia, I think it has more to do with prestige.
well, i only meantioned china because of the remarkable similarities in the types of combat ac the two purchased and the timing of these purchases. i never said china was the target of the build up, if u go back and have another look, u would see that i believe the exact opposit is true.
Heres an update:
Russia given Vietnam a license to produce ‘IGLA’ MANPADS.
A deal signed with HAL for MiG-upgrades.
In August 2003 a deal worth $250 million was signed for the purchase of S-300PMU-1 air-defence, which will be delivered sometime in 2005.
12 missile boats (similar to the Molniya) are to be built in Vietnam, worth $120 million.
4 Sukhoi Su-30MK2 has been delivered and there are plans for 12-24 more.
cheers for the info.
plawolfIf you’re trying to make a point then you should get the facts properly, Vietnam never bought the MKK-variant, only the MK2 that was recently delivered.
i said i didnt follow vietnam’s military developments that closely. but even a casual glace reviels some interesting patterns of purchases.
Yes, the purchase of weapons to meet a precieved threat is one thing, but modernisation is another. Aside from buying the Sukhois, Vietnam have also signed a deal with HAL for the upgrade of MiG-21 jets, do you see pattern in that?
there are generally two main reasons for military modernisation, and these are to reduce costs or to increase combat capacity.
clearly adding new, much more capable and expensive (both to buy and to use) types, while upgrading older ac (hence planning to keep them on and not retire them) is not a cost saving measure.
every military ac type that has ever entered service has been upgraded over its service life. there are two main types of upgrades: a) life extention upgrades, and b) combat capabilities upgrades.
there is a general rule that determines what the AF in question is doing depending of what kind of upgrade they are undergoing.
an life estension upgrades usually means that the said AF sees little or no increase in its threat environment (like austraila with its F18s), meaning the existing types can soilder on for a little bit longer. hence there is no need to waste money on new, more capable types.
a combat capabilities upgrade is almost always forced upon AF in order to meet the changing (increasing) strengths of precieved adversaries so that it can offset the opponent’s own increases in capability and maintain the military balance that was there before.
so, vietnam’s military modernisation is not a cost saving measure on any count. meaning there is only one good reason for the modernisation – to meet the increases in military capacity of one or more precieved threats (unless, of course, u count showing off as a good reason).
oh…just because Vietnam is trying to modernise its armed forces dosen’t mean that it aimed at someone, why don’t you look at other ASEAN nations?…Indonesia bought new Sukhois for it’s air force, does that mean they try to aim it at someone? I don’t think so!
why dont u take another look? :diablo:
ASEAN is no EU, many member states have conflicts of interest with one or more of its fellow members (which is often over disputed territory). is it just a coincidence that as soon as one starts buying advanced russian jets, everyone else that can afford it is following suit? (but buying difference versons, ruling out the possibility that this is a co-operdinated move to try and form some kind of joint military force like the european rappid reasction force)
plawolfI still think they should consider a dual IRST/laser thing, have an IRST above the nose and a FLIR/laser designator below. You could make the whole thing integrated, but then you’d have a tough choice to make as to where to put it. Above the nose means you have to dive towards a target to use the laser, below the nose means you lose some of the IRSTs FOV.
well, a dual config would make more sense, but that’ll start making the flanker look ugly. 😀
one way around that could be to place the laser in the tail spike instead of another radar or landing chute. but this is only useful if u intend to use the plane only as a mid-high level bomber, as the laser would not have a good enough frontal view for nap-of-the-earth missions.
plawolfWouldn’t that give you a limited FOV?
yeah, it might not be the best way to hang low-level nav pods, but u can easily get around the restrictions to the laser designator pod by planning the FOV limitations into the flight path and/or hanging two laser pods on either side of the ac instead of just one (its not like the flanker will suffer much as a result of one extra pod).
plawolfWhat are the best sources for information about China’s air forces? Is there a good, recently written, book on the subject?
thats the kinda thing the CIA has been looking for for decades. 😉
plawolfDamn, another good idea shot down… 🙁
what about putting them at the root of the wings where the wing meets the engine neccels? wouldnt obstruct airflow into the engines and also shouldnt need too much extra support to handle the extra weight.
plawolf[QUOTE=Canpark]
bro… not everything got to do with China
Sign In
