The Global Economy still facing huge problem, Middle East still precaurious as ever or even more, South China sea increasingly become more like kettle close to blown, Africa still well Africa, but hey Happy New Year guys. Still not an excuse not to be optimistic. After all Mayan Apocalypse still a far dream away 😀

I think it won´t be exciting, Argentina will probably go for used F-16s and Brazil for the F-18. Not because the planes are better, but because spares are plenty and that situation won´t change in the next 3 decades. The parts Market for Dassault planes was big with the old generation and due to South Africa and Israel you had reliable non-OEM sources, which forced Dassault to keep prices down. For the M2000 generation there is no secondary spares market. There might be one for Rafale (India).

US planes on the other had are produced in huge numbers (F-18) or even licence produced in many countries (F-16) and even after withdraw from US service the spare reclaim process from AMRAC gives a reliable and affordable spares source. A huge user base has its own charm when buying into a fighter system.

Personally for me as I’ve stated on my previous post, upgraded F-16 will have better market potential then JF-17 or any other upgraded fighter program will be, for Air Force that looking for relative lower cost but still reliable airframe for the next two decades.

Just like you say, the number of populations and worldwide services of F-16, will guarantee the fighter operational survivability up until 2040 timeframes. Besides using upgraded F-16 can provide stop gap if you want for until 2020 -2030 timeframe, until your budget or something more relavant come out in the market.

Some argue that US will not provide say to Argentina their plane, as long as Argentina continue their agresive stance toward UK on Falkland. Howewer politics change. Up to six years ago nobody will bet that US will provide Indonesia with more F-16. Two years ago US then give Indonesia choice of 8-10 newly built block 52 Viper or upgrading up to 24 older airframes toward capabilities and electronics close to block 52 standard. The later offer then being taken.

Point is, given choice, upgrading F-16 still provide best alternatives for money to get respectables capabilities up to 2030 timeframe, or even 2040 if you choose newly build block 52. Politics for F-16 for US can change fast, as Indonesian example.

Crashed Superjet’s pilot silenced terrain-warning system

Another news on the issue from Jakarta Post:
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2012/12/19/pilots-blamed-sukhoi-crash.html

He said that unfamiliarity with the route and a distraction had caused the pilots to direct the plane toward and subsequently crash into Mount Salak, near Bogor, West Java.

“The pilots were not aware of the mountainous area surrounding the route due to various factors. As a result, they disregarded the warning signals of the plane’s Terrain Awareness Warning System [TAWS],”

The report also mentions that a lack of information from the air traffic controller (ATC) at Soekarno-Hatta International Airport may have contributed to the crash.

Even though the title of the article seems put all the blame on the pilot, however the report from Indonesian NTSC also put part of the blame to Jakarta ATC Operator at that time which allowing Sukhoi’s Pilot request to descend to 6000 feet although (from another article) the safest minimum cruising altitude on Mount Salak area supposedly on 6900 feet.

This report in my opinion put clean bill for Su-100 for Indonesian market, since not any in the report show any technical malfunction.

Note:
Got confirmation from other media (Business Indonesia), that two airlines that have outstanding order for Su-100, will continue their procurement process after the report put no mechanical or design failures from the aircraft.

Probably the biggest thing here is we try to make what should be a fighter into all things to all people. That makes them so damned expensive we cant afford more than a hand full. Yet we see Russia and China build fairly simple fighters, and field hundreds if not thousands of thier fighters.

Give us a simple straight forward air superiority fighter, and build hundred is not thousands of them!!!!

What’s wrong with Multi-role. Specialization is dead end under current economic condition. Nobody build single purpose/specialize fighter anymore, not Russia, China, US, Sweden, France, Europe Consortium, etc. Even the wannabe player like South Korea, design KFX as multi-role.

Nobody can hope to build credible fighter program without thinking on export market, and nobody can enter export market with the credentials of single purpose only fighter.

At most, world air force even the big players now can only fielded several hundred of fighters, and procured just teens of them annually. In then situations you bet the average Air Force want their fighter capable of multitasking as much as possible.

Ok, with Rear Cargo Ramp seems more preferable to Large Side doors, how difficult or more precise how costly it is to adjust An-140 with rear cargo ramp ? If it costly, and rear cargo ramp do matter, then it will be EADS duo C-295/CN-235 vs C-27J.

For their use they could stand to get a CN-235 with C-295 engines and wings.

Not an engineering expert, but I recon it won’t be much difficulty on doing that. However why India want with CN-235 shorter fuselage mated with C-295 larger engine and wings ? It can potentially increase the range (with larger wings), but no much on the capacity lift. Heard from guys from DI and CASA/EADS in Bandung few years back. They have talk about the idea for some time (upgraded the CN-235 engine with C-295 ones), but the increase on the capabilities (if I’m not mistaken) did not be too substantial thus permit on the cost investment. Why not just go with C-295 if larger engine and capacity is what they’re looking on.

Note: Just reread the CN-235 NEO concept. It’s CN-235 with uprated engine and modified wings. However from what I undertand, the concept seems aimed more for commuter market or (if not mistaken) maritime patrol market. The concept still in talk, since it’s being debated whether its economical to further upgrade CN-235, or just concentrating with C-295.

Attached is the model of CN-235 NEO from DI/IAe. They call it CN-235 NG. They still in talked with EADS as Senior Partner (I call EADS as Senior partner since bigger portion of the money will come mostly from EADS), but like I said they (EADS and DI) still evaluating the current market need.

Russian Air Force is supposedly interested in acquiring An-148 variants with a rear ramp. I’m not sure if they have ‘signed on the dotted line’ yet, but IAF also operating a ramp-modified An-148 would let the production be optimized over a larger production run, etc., so I see mutual benefits conspiring to make it a reality for both parties (if IAF inducts the Antonov).

Why An-148 and not An-140 ? From what I read on several media sources and forum, seems Russian AF more interested with An-140 as their light transport. Thus choosing An-148, India AF can be risk on the cost on developing An-148 Military variance on their own.

When it is about air-policing at first a F-5 or MiG-21 is still sufficient with low operating cost. There are a lot of F-16s and MiG-29s around and can stay firstline for some years after upgrade. But both are much more expensive to operate the daily defence needs in mind.

That much more expensive daily operational cost, can be debatable on the long run. Afterall GE F-110 and Klimov RD-33 turbofan more economical to run then J-85 and Tumansky turbojet in F-5 and Mig-21. Unless you choose to replace F-5 and Mig-21 power plant with newer turbofan, which in turn increase the price/cost of upgrade, which in turn again make them too much closer with upgrade costs of F-16 and Mig-29.

This is one of the reasons why Indonesian AF still mulling on possible upgrade program for F-5. They are now upgrading 24 ex USAF F-16 Block 25 and in the process on upgrading existing 10 F-16 Block 15 OCU. Some source in Mindef talk to local Media, there are possibility on getting another 14 ex USAF F-16 which coincidentally (or not) are the same number of F-5 E/F airframes in the inventory. They are now considering the plus and minus whether to upgrade those F-5 or take the US offer and upgrade further F-16.

While it’s not same for every potential operators, this is just an example that operators of F-5 and Mig-21 now have options (and being targeted) with F-16 and Mig-29 upgrade program. That in my mind will potentially put much limit for any potential of F-5 and Mig-21 upgrade in the future, beyond what already being done so far.

The Yellow shirt shooter is telling whoever controls the hold back grid to release the aircraft, a similar task to commanding the catapult to fire. The carrier still needs flight deck officers and plane directors so the yellow shirts have a job to do.

Ahh I also think that one of the job of those yellow shirts. Watching the video, I just realize the STOBAR system using that to hold the plane before take off. I do believe the purpose to keep the plane in place while the engine take on the momentum before take off. In some way, it’s close to catapults that they hold the plane in line for the engine getting momentum before launch it.

The difference is in STOBAR after the grid being release the pilot take over the launch, while in catapults the pilot take over after the launch.