МиГ-23МС и МиГ-23БH широко поставлялись на экспорт и в страны ╚третьего мира╩, чему способствовала, кроме высоких ЛТХ, относительно низкая стоимость истребителей. Так, в ценах 1980 г. один МиГ-23МС ╚отпускался╩ за 3,6-6,6 млн.долл. (в зависимости от степени ╚дружеского расположения╩ к стране-покупателю). Для сравнения, самолет IAI ╚Кфир”С.2, уступающий по боевым возможностям МиГ-23, по курсу 1978 г. стоил 4,5 млн.долл., ╚Мираж╩III – 6,5-7,5 млн.долл. (курс 1983 г.), F-16A – 14 млн.долл. (курс 1980 г.), а ╚простой и дешевый╩ истребитель Hортроп F-20 ╚Тайгер╩2 предполагалась продавать иностранным покупателям за 15 млн.долл. (курс 1985 г.).

MiG-23MS and MiG-23BH were widely exported to third world countries, which was facilitated by the relatively low cost of fighters, in addition to good flight characteristics. So, in 1980 prices, one MiG-23MS was released for $ 3.6-6.6 million. (depending on the degree of “friendly location” to the buyer country). For comparison, the plane IAI Kfir “C.2, second in combat capabilities MiG-23, at the rate of 1978 cost 4.5 million dollars, Mirage III – 6.5-7.5 million dollars (course 1983 ), F-16A – $ 14 million (course of 1980), and a simple and cheap fighter Northrop F-20 Tiger2 was supposed to be sold to foreign buyers for $ 15 million (1985 rate).

http://airwar.ru/history/locwar/bv/mig23/mig23.html

A Swedish news outlet says that they’ve read a classified report on the NH90 operating costs:
https://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/a…ya-helikoptrar

They say that the NH90’s that the Swedish Armed Forces have in service at present cost about 24 000 euros per flight hour to operate, six times (!) more than the UH-60’s that Sweden bought as an interim measure while waiting for the delayed NH90’s. So not only were they more expensive to acquire than planned, and delayed by many years (making the Swedish Armed Forces spend even more money acquiring UH-60’s, simply by necessity), they are also incredibly expensive to operate and each flight hour requires some 20 hours of maintenance.

They are allegedly considering to mothball them at this stage.

Firstly, I think it costs a lot more than 4,000 € per hour to operate the UH-60, where did they get that figure?
Secondly, Swedish SAR and ASW equipped NH90 is a very different beast from the Swedish UH-60M basic utility helicopter. Anti-submarine operations are a lot more expensive than just simply hauling troops and their equipment. How much more does the ASW suite on an airframe add to the cost of that airframe – around 50%?

Spotted this on the news thread and it makes me think someone missed their april fools deadline by 6 weeks

When I first saw your post the first thing to flash in my mind was the Tupolev Tu-2Sh – 88 PPSh-41 submachine guns firing out of the bomb bay:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]260554[/ATTACH]

German engineers were even sent to Allied countries to work on multiple project ,

It is very well known that many German specialists were sent to the USA and other western countries after the war and worked on many military and aerospace projects – it is not so well known that the USSR also took advantage of ‘nazi’ German know-how in the post-war period as well – that was why I raised the point.

With 22 missiles ??

Why not?

it started with 22 targets, than 8 and finally 3. you only declare what is hit.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/12/trum…irly-soon.html
Quick reply to this message Reply

But in the end only 3 locations were targeted – and successfullly destroyed.

I would suggest the other way around. The J-20 at least is already in service

I doubt if the J-20 is any way further ahead in regular military service than the PAKFA – the J-20 actually first flew a year later than the T-50’s first flight.