Yep. I agree with Phrozen.
The fact that we don’t want to risk our country and our civilians makes us “the nervous Israelis”? 😡
Erez, That is enough. Living in that land is for a lot of parties not the healthiest. Calming down isn’t a bad choice. Better safe then sorry.
Did Cyprus accept the landing or Israeli planes? Is it checked in Cyprus? About Israel and guiding to to Cyprus. Well. If the plane does not follow the instruction then it is even in Holland allowed to shoot down. I would be wondered if that is different for Israeli case.
To be multirole is nothing new… When the F16 came out one could see many pics with a lot of bombs attached. Now it is J10 and suddenly some find it wrong? I would gladly say that… Yes… The j10 has also a a2g role… Like most other aircrafts…
What is extra… The fact that a2g testing has began!
http://www.f-16.net/PhotoGallery/album20/alh.sized.jpg
http://www.f-16.net/PhotoGallery/album24/acx.sized.jpg
http://www.f-16.net/PhotoGallery/album70/akd.sized.jpg
Turkey is currently hosting NATO’s live-flying exercise NATO Air Meet 04. It is taking place from 04 untill 16 September 2004, with live flying between 06-10 and 13-16 September 2004.
The exercise involves F-16 Fighting Falcons from Belgium (349 Sqn), Denmark (730 Sqn), Greece (330 Sqn), Portugal (201 FS), the Netherlands (313 Sqn), Norway (331 Sqn), Turkey (192 Filo), and the United States of America (22 FS).
Other participating nations are Czech Republic, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Poland, Romania and the United Kingdom; and as observing nations Estonia and Lithuania.
Participating aircraft will operate from 3rd Main Jet Base (MJB) Konya and from Incirlik Air Base, Turkey.
NAM 04 is designed to exercise air forces in tactical air operations. It will focus on practicing and evaluating tactics for the use of composite air operations, with emphasis on the suppression of enemy air defences and electronic warfare. It will also serve to maximise the exchange of ideas, and promote mutual understanding, confidence and co-operation between participating air forces.
The exercise area is limited to Turkey and involves more than 100 different aircraft, including tanker and airborne early warning aircraft and ground-based air defence systems.
There is no flying on weekends, nor during nighttime.
Back to 2004… Here some pics I found on the net.
http://www.f-16.net/PhotoGallery/album13/ant.sized.jpg
http://www.f-16.net/PhotoGallery/album13/anu.sized.jpg
http://www.f-16.net/PhotoGallery/album14/adv.sized.jpg
http://www.f-16.net/PhotoGallery/album14/adw.sized.jpg
http://www.f-16.net/PhotoGallery/album14/adx.sized.jpg
http://www.f-16.net/PhotoGallery/album15/aen.sized.jpg
Wow. I like those phantoms… A lot…




Some pics of last year (2003)






The Egyptians requested amraam for their f16’s. The asnwer was no… :rolleyes:
Maybe US will stop providing everything after that? 😉
It was US that reported that they need some high tech stuff in Pakistan to fight terrorism. I agree. One cannot fight Al Qaida with some Huey’s… If it was that easy then Irac was done a few weeks ago… Otherwised look at Israel. They take max security and very high tech approach.
Since there is no Pak news topic…
New US law to help Pakistan fight terror
By Khalid Hasan
WASHINGTON: A bill introduced in Congress seeks to provide the president with blanket authority to help Pakistan fight terrorism and Islamic extremism.
Bill No 5024 based on some of the recommendations of the 9/11 commission lays down in Section 302, “Assistance to support efforts by the Government of Pakistan to fight extremists:
(a) Sense of Congress – It is the sense of Congress that, if President Pervez Musharraf and other leaders of Pakistan remain willing to make their own difficult choices and stand for enlightened moderation in a fight for their lives and for the life of their country, the United States should be willing to make hard choices too, and make the difficult long-term commitment to the future of Pakistan. (b) Assistance – The president is authorised to provide assistance, on such terms and conditions as the president may determine, to support the Government of Pakistan in its struggle against extremists. The president shall ensure that assistance provided under this subsection is part of a comprehensive effort by the United States to provide increased military assistance and economic and development assistance (including assistance for education reform) in Pakistan.
Section 302 asks that the United States and the international community make a long-term commitment to achieve security and stability in Afghanistan in order to give the Government of Afghanistan a reasonable opportunity to improve the life of the Afghan people. Afghanistan should not be allowed to become a sanctuary again for international crime and terrorism, it adds.
Section 304 relates to US-Saudi relations and notes that it is the “sense of Congress” that the current problems in the relationship between the United States and Saudi Arabia should be “confronted in an open and transparent manner” and the two countries should work together to determine if they can build a relationship that their political leaders are prepared to publicly defend and that is based on mutual interests other than the oil production capability of Saudi Arabia. It adds under the heading Declaration of Policy, “It shall be the policy of the United States government to ensure that the relationship between the United States and Saudi Arabia includes a shared commitment to political and economic reform in Saudi Arabia and a shared interest in greater tolerance and cultural respect in Saudi Arabia, translating into a commitment by the Government of Saudi Arabia to fight violent extremists who foment hatred.
Another section deals with “programmes to enhance a positive image of the United States in Muslim countries” and notes that “opinions of the United States in Muslim countries are significantly distorted by highly negative and hostile beliefs and images and many of these beliefs and images are the result of misinformation and propaganda by individuals and organisations hostile to the United States.” It points out that these negative opinions and images are highly prejudicial to the interests of the United States and to its foreign policy. This section declares that as part of a broad and long-term effort to enhance a positive image of the United States in Muslim countries, programmes should be established to promote greater familiarity with American society and values among the general public and select audiences in Muslim countries.
As for the protection of human rights in Muslim countries, Section 312 notes that it is the sense of Congress that the United States government should re-evaluate its relationship with the governments of Muslim countries, including such governments that are friends or allies of the United States, if those governments violate or otherwise do not respect internationally recognised human rights or the rule of law. The US, it recommends, should consider taking appropriate measures against such governments, including withdrawal of diplomatic relations.
The next section suggests that as in the Cold War, the United States needs to defend its ideals abroad vigorously, pointing out that often, the United States does not stand up for its values. It states that the US “defended, and still defends, Muslims against tyrants and criminals in Somalia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Afghanistan, and Iraq.” It warns that if the United States does not act aggressively to define itself in Muslim countries, extremists will “gladly do the job for us.”
To achieve this, the section lays down, “There are authorised to be appropriated to carry out United States government radio, television, and other communications activities to Muslim countries under the United States International Broadcasting Act of 1994 … including to make and supervise grants to the Middle East Television Network, including Radio Sawa, such sums as may be necessary for fiscal year 2005 and each subsequent fiscal year.”
The bill urges the president to work with friendly foreign countries and international organisations, such as members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the Group of Eight (G-8), to “develop a comprehensive coalition strategy against Islamist terrorism. Such a strategy should include the establishment of a flexible contact group of leading coalition governments to discuss and coordinate the most important policies with respect to the coalition strategy, including policies for targeting travel by terrorists and their sanctuaries.”
Rival Fighter Jet Makers Irkut, MiG Will Merge
Legendary fighter jet maker MiG will merge with rival Sukhoi
Post ReplyBack
shadowcat2
10/04/2004, 01:33:01
Rival Fighter Jet Makers Irkut, MiG Will Merge
By Lyuba Pronina Staff Writer
Legendary fighter jet maker MiG will merge with rival Sukhoi manufacturer Irkut, a top government official said Friday.
“MiG and Irkut will form an ideal structure and that is what we want,” Federal Industry Agency chief Boris Alyoshin said as he presented Irkut CEO Alexei Fyodorov as MiG’s new chief executive.
Fyodorov was given his second company to run after MiG general director Valery Toryanin was fired on Sept. 25, leading to speculation that the government had finally decided to push forward with stalled plans to consolidate the industry.
“The change in leadership is first of all connected to the ongoing consolidation of [the industry] and MiG cannot stand aside from it,” Alyoshin said, Interfax reported. “These two companies have to be together.”
Konstantin Makiyenko, deputy head of the Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies, an independent defense think tank, called the move historic.
“September 25th marked the most important event in the post-Soviet history of Russian aircraft manufacturing. Merging MiG and Irkut is the beginning of OAK,” he said, referring to the Russian acronym for the Unified Aircraft-Building Corp., a holding company Irkut has long been pushing the government to create.
Under the plan, which is backed by Alyoshin, privately controlled Irkut and state-run MiG, Sukhoi, Tupolev and Ilyushin will all be brought under one roof. But how that will be done is still up in the air and Sukhoi, Tupolev and Ilyushin are taking a wait-and-see attitude. “It all depends on how the companies are unified,” said Alexander Zatuchny, adviser to Tupolev president Igor Shevchuk.
When at MiG, Toryanin was a vocal opponent of the plan, arguing that it was just an excuse to redistribute property and divert cash from future sales to companies whose export contracts are about to expire.
Alyoshin said Toryanin was fired for not being “effective enough, pointing to MiG’s failure to fulfill “a few international contracts.” He did not elaborate.
Meanwhile, Fyodorov, the industry’s new top gun, told Interfax he was already at work analyzing MiG’s research and development programs and its entire product range. He said the goal is to create a powerful new company able to compete globally while providing for the needs of Russia’s armed forces.
Related link: http://www.themoscowtimes.com/stories/2004/10/04/042.html
China has no Chinese engine? Or is it not ready?