Indeed, whilst the Australian variant of the San Carlos has retained the Ski-Jump the ship is not configured to support jets lacking the appropriate support systems and munitions stores. At best they could operate as a Lilli-pad for the F-35B.

It is nonsense to think that Argentina coulod buy Gripen or Tejas jets. They both have British components inside and England will never allow them to be selled to Argentina. Also if the buy Tejas, than considering the Indian production progress, than Argentina could wait for them for decades.

The best choice for Argentina is to buy MiG-29SMT or MiG-29M2 jets as they have longer range than MiG-29A and more modern equippment with Zhuk-M radar. MiG-35 will also get AESA radar, so there will be no problem to modernize MiG-29M with it. Other option is Su-30SM, which is still one of the best fighters.

As Buitreaux has already pointed out hell would frezze over first before the Argentine Airforce accepts a Russian or Chinese, never say never but it is highly unlikely.

With Sweden acquiring the new E version of JAS 39 Gripen the politicians have come up with the ‘bright’ idea of SCRAPPING ca 100 or so “old” C/D. Incidentally the last one delivered was 2015. Gripen has significant US content, the engine beeing the obvious one, so in a sense it could also improve US relations.

Argentina already have C-130 and P-3 (…and electras) and/or experience operating them. So getting a few new makes sense. But introducing KC-135 which was old already 20 years ago doesn’t. If tankers are needed buy som ex USN/USMC KC-130’s

\Dan

Gripen even second hand is a non-starter for Argentina, the C/D has significant UK content and they would struggle to support those sub systems.

Unfortunately, this time, there was substance to that deliriuos and stupid idea, by the highest voices in the MINDEF. The said: “We needed to look at options, so we looked everywere, and for this year 2017, the needed fighter selection has been put on hold. We have adquired (actual verb usage, as in a certainty) 12x Texans IIs, 4x C-295, and a C-130. A4-AR will be phased out by 2022.”

In my forum we became extremely angry at the stupidity of even considering the MiGs as a valid system, and spending money on sending personel to evalute whatever.

By the Way, since this is month 2 of the year 1 under the Macri adnministration budget, the Armed Forces have increased their share of GDP% spending from 0,40% to 0,95%. By 2019 the proyection calls for 2,20% GDP, which is quite substancial. In U$D FY17 we are looking at U$D 6,080,000,000 for this year, when 2016 under the f…..g kirchners cleptocracy it was U$D 2,430,000,000. The proyection is for FY17 U$D 14,000,000,000 in 2019.

Make no mistake, we need basically everything. Good thing we already paid Beretta for the 100,000 ARX-200 and 120,000 M-9s, and the factory to make them.

Cheers.

EDIT: By the way, Macri has a FA-50 model in his presidential office.
EDIT2: I understand it was a very nice phone call with Pence and later with Trump. Macri and DJMT have been doing deals since the 80’s.
EDIT3: Get it off your heads. Soviet (russian) or chinese equipment is utter fantasy down here. Will never happen.
EDIT4: We don’t have oficial papers on the T6-C+ Texans IIs, other than the program runs for U$D 300,000,000 and estipulates 24 airplanes initialy.

Thanks Buitreaux as always a solid insight into what is actually happening within Argentina, her armed forces and defence sector.

Looking through what you have written the Macri government appears to be really trying to sort out the mess that the Kirchner government left and actually make some decisions. Are they making any progress routing out the La-Campora hanger-on’s placed all through government departments and the defence industry and weeding out the older personnel in the military taking a wage and filling up offices doing little actual valuable work who should have been pensioned off years ago?!

12x Texans IIs, 4x C-295, and a C-130 is a really solid start that should be commended. The Texan II’s are particularly interesting as it is in effect an admission that the next generation Pampa project is a waste of time (it should be noted that the Texan II and Ia-63 Pampa were marketed in the same class for the US trainer contest that the former won out). 4 shiny new C-295 and an extra C-130 must be welcome to Argentine transport squadrons!

Interesting to see 2022 for a final OSD for the A4-AR considering they were talking about next year. Is it going to be like the last Mirage in service, a token force of 4 – 6 just to maintain some form of QRA and canibilising the rest of the fleet for spares?

Looking to the future the FA-50 is increasingly imho the best choice, affordable, modern and available at an attractive price. With tanker support range is not particularly an issue. It’s modern avionics and Israeli radar open the door to better smart munitions and even a BVR missile of some form.

I can see improvements in Ground radar and C4i being another priority if Argentina wants to make proper use of any new jet.

As a firearms enthusiast the Beretta deal is interesting, is this again a result of the Macri government actually getting on with things? A factory to boot in the deal has potential for regional contracts. The army must be delighted about actually getting some new rifles

In respect of the improved US Argentina relationship there are various excess defence articles that would be of interest to Argentina for, example more C-130, P-3, various helicopters and ships. Maybe some KC-135?

is it easier to take off and land with an stovl plane than a catobar or stobar?
I had always assumed stovl (at least) were more prone to damaging the ship deck with its hot exhaust. As well as higher crash ratio on landing.

some maximum take-off/range concerns were there with stovl and stobar aircraft, but the russian guys seem confident the su-33 can take off with a very reasonable load and fuel.

Significantly easier, the most complex aspect is training the pilots in deck taxiing and handling skills. Take off and landing is a relatively minor issue, during operation corporate the RAF pilots that were called to operate Sea Harrier and GR3 off the carriers need a very small amount of training.

With modern training aids the F-35B is almost comically easy to operate off a carrier, even journalists have been able to do it first attempt in the simulator.

I know many have a hang up about rotary AEW vs fixed wing but it is a better than none capability that many a nation can’t even call upon. Jonesy’s observation about fixed panel AESA on rotary wing typesis spot on it is a game changing capability. Even types that are not purchased for the AEW role can provide a picture to vessels via data links due to the Air to Air modes offered by AESA.

For example the new Lynx Wildcat has an Air to Air mode and I remember a recent article in AFM noting that the RN is exploring the options that gives them.

30’000ish ton LPH/LHD that can support F-35B are an interesting choice for nations that want to have the option to enter the carrier game in the Future, a good example being the new Turkish San Carlos derived LPH TCG Anadolu that will be built F-35B capable.

End of the line for the Brazilian Aircraft Carrier “Sao Paulo”

Official Statement from the BN:
http://www.defesaaereanaval.com.br/desmobilizacao-do-nae-sao-paulo-a-12/

Well they have finally faced up to reality, trying to operate a forty year old aircraft carrier with elderly but upgraded jets was a costly black hole sucking funding away from other programs.

A Ski-Jump carrier and AV8B would probably have been a far better fit for their budget but that solution sailed years ago. The UK would probably let them have an Invincible class carrier for a song in 2000 and Harriers could have been sourced.

Looking to the future a variant of the Navantia Juan Carlos LHD design would be a better fit, it would be good platform for helicopters and keep the door open to a F-35B purchase in the future.