EdLawI do not see any reason for name-calling Cliff, especially in response to a valid point. If the Lebanese people, and Palestinians for that matter, want peace, then embracing terrorism is not the way to go about it. Israel cannot sit back and watch as its people are murdered by terrorists – they must do everything within their power to stop terrorists striking Israel, and punishing those who help them.
People do not have to be ‘desktop war mongers’ to support the Israeli position – a final and lasting peace will not come through ceasefires or combat. Only through peace treaties being imposed upon the Palestinians, who have been found unwilling to negotiate in good faith (witness the entire roadmap issue, where the Palestinians want Israel to give in to all their demands, on the basis that the Palestinians might eventually stop the rocket attacks and homicide bombings). The solution may be to simply force the terms of the Camp David agreement on the Palestinians – if they will not sort things out for themselves, someone else will have to.
EdLawI do not see any reason for name-calling Cliff, especially in response to a valid point. If the Lebanese people, and Palestinians for that matter, want peace, then embracing terrorism is not the way to go about it. Israel cannot sit back and watch as its people are murdered by terrorists – they must do everything within their power to stop terrorists striking Israel, and punishing those who help them.
People do not have to be ‘desktop war mongers’ to support the Israeli position – a final and lasting peace will not come through ceasefires or combat. Only through peace treaties being imposed upon the Palestinians, who have been found unwilling to negotiate in good faith (witness the entire roadmap issue, where the Palestinians want Israel to give in to all their demands, on the basis that the Palestinians might eventually stop the rocket attacks and homicide bombings). The solution may be to simply force the terms of the Camp David agreement on the Palestinians – if they will not sort things out for themselves, someone else will have to.
EdLawActually, the cut in the Viper order was because of the earthquake – inking a deal for billions of dollars of new fighters, while thousands are rendered homeless by a natural disaster, would have been a disaster for Musharraf. It would also have cut the aid that Pakistan received – nobody will give money if they see Pakistan’s own money being spent on new fighters.
Also, saying that a fighter bomber is no more relevant to a nuclear program than an unarmed (and quite slow) transport aircraft stretches credibility beyond breaking point!
EdLawThe F-16 Block 52 is actually a very capable aircraft, and to dismiss them as ‘garbage’ is ridiculous, and more than a little offensive. Yes, the aircraft design is now quite old, but it has been constantly updated – the exterior does not need to change much, yet it is a very different bird to when it first entered service.
As for not delivering the original F-16s with nuclear weapons capability, why on Earth would the US want to deliver them with such a capability? Pakistan developed nuclear weapons, despite the non-proliferation treaty (I say this not to point fingers, but simply to make the observation), under which the US was required not to help Pakistan! Following the nuclear tests, the US (among others) imposed an arms sales ban on both India and Pakistan, not just one.
As for Pakistan’s activities on the border, the concern is that elements within the Pakistani establishment, particularly the ISI who helped set up the Taliban in Afghanistan, are actually still helping them. Pakistan has a large number of troops who could be deployed to the border, at the very least to minimise cross-border activity (watching for groups going across the border repeatedly etc…).
As for the J-11, it is the designation for the Su-27 in PLAAF service. The reported designation of their next generation fighter is generally reported as J-12, though it is often difficult to pin down.
EdLawThe state of Israel is actually very successful by itself, the US military aid merely serves to partially offset the fact that Israel has some very unfriendly neighbors. Israel has been building good relations with Jordan and Egypt (to a slightly lesser extent) for many years, and to be honest, if Arafat had accepted the deal offered in 2000, then things would be a bit more stable now. The problem came when the Palestinians elected a terrorist organisation to be their government – Hamas is a terrorist organisation, and no number of votes cast will change that fact. Would Al Qaeda be acceptable if it got elected?
As for the Israeli strike upon the airport, it was entirely necessary to prevent the moving of the hostages to Iran, as has happened before. It will not take long to repair, but long enough that transferring the hostages will not happen by plane.
As for all who advocate releasing all the terrorists in Israeli prisons, it is important to remember why those individuals are in prison – release them now, and they will be carrying out terrorism tomorrow. Also, any time you negotiate with terrorists, you legitimise their terrorism, and that is why the west’s ‘we do not negotiate with terrorists’ policy actually works.
EdLawThe state of Israel is actually very successful by itself, the US military aid merely serves to partially offset the fact that Israel has some very unfriendly neighbors. Israel has been building good relations with Jordan and Egypt (to a slightly lesser extent) for many years, and to be honest, if Arafat had accepted the deal offered in 2000, then things would be a bit more stable now. The problem came when the Palestinians elected a terrorist organisation to be their government – Hamas is a terrorist organisation, and no number of votes cast will change that fact. Would Al Qaeda be acceptable if it got elected?
As for the Israeli strike upon the airport, it was entirely necessary to prevent the moving of the hostages to Iran, as has happened before. It will not take long to repair, but long enough that transferring the hostages will not happen by plane.
As for all who advocate releasing all the terrorists in Israeli prisons, it is important to remember why those individuals are in prison – release them now, and they will be carrying out terrorism tomorrow. Also, any time you negotiate with terrorists, you legitimise their terrorism, and that is why the west’s ‘we do not negotiate with terrorists’ policy actually works.
EdLawI do not wish to perpetuate the discussion about fighter pricing, but I have to say, Flex is right, you made an assertion about the relative pricing of the Typhoon and Super Hornet, with very little basis for your numbers. Applying the alleged price of any Saudi purchase as being representative is flawed – every deal with Saudi is far more complex than first appearance. When Saudi buys equipment, they like the reported figures to be huge (they actually report the price of the 96 Typhoons on order and options as being the price of the initial 48), and they buy a lot of support that nobody else buys (training, maintenance personnel, etc…).
The sensible estimates on fighter costs, all things being equal, generally seem to be:
F-16 Block 50/52 – $45-60m each, depending on numbers
Super Hornet – very little information available (no exports) $55-75m
Rafale – $50-75m, depending who is asked
Typhoon – $65-90m, again, depending who is asked.
These figures are just my ballpark figures, but regardless of the specifics, the point is that Typhoon is more expensive than most, but not by more than ~50%, as Flex asserts.
This thread should be a free discussion, with no condemnation of peoples suggestions, just because they do not match the intended outcome. If you want people to follow rules, then you have to make them nice and clear, and allow people to feel free to suggest things. It might help to set some ground rules, i.e. $10bn to buy initial equipment, then a further $2.5bn a year for future procurement, with no fuel or weapons costs.
EdLaw– Embraer ALX or Pilatus PC-21s for training and light strike/FAC
– Yak-130 or M-346 for advanced training and strike/CAS
– F-16s with thrust vectoring for fighter cover
– Il-76/78s for both tanker and transport roles
– Predator C (turbofan Predator, 80% as capable as Global Hawk, 15-20% of the price) for surveillance, possibly even AEW, using the Searchwater radar
EdLawI agree with bring it on, the most important first step is an integrated air defense system – S-300 batteries are cheap, and at the very least would give any enemy pause for thought! An initial purchase of 3-4 systems makes sense (enough to provide an initial level of protection for a small country), and then ongoing purchases, to reinforce the system. If I were buying only western kit, then either the Israeli Spyder system or the SLAMRAAM would make sense – not quite at the same level, but not bad either. I seem to remember reading that the Poles looked making a similar system to the SLAMRAAM, but using Russian AA-12 missiles – a fraction of the price of AMRAAMs.
A large batch of ex-USAF F-16s or ex-AdlA Mirage 2000s would make for a good initial fighter fleet. Personally, I would go for F-16s, upgraded to the USAF’s new common glass ‘pit, and then buy a batch of new Block 50/52s, preferably upgraded with thrust vectoring (it was tested in the ’90s, and only did not go ahead because of the JSF program) and helmet mounted sights. Lots of AIM-9X and late model AIM-120s of course.
A batch of C-130s for transport and tanker use – they can refuel Vipers as long as the Vipers use the air refuelling fuel tank system (an F-16 fuel tank with a refuelling probe built in). Refurbished -H models should be affordable.
As for surveillance, I would either use the Erieye or Hawkeye radar systems, possibly fitted to a P-3 or similar, since that gives a very good endurance, at a reasonable price.
Each year, you try to roll out more equipment, eventually replacing all the initial purchases of used equipment.
EdLawPersonally, I was hoping for the M-346, or possibly the T-50 (it would have made a great aggressor aircraft for DACT), but in reality, the Hawk was the only politically acceptable choice. Much like the ill-advised Lynx purchase, it is another blind political decision, buying British instead of buying the best, which of course would have been built in the UK anyway.
EdLawAny idea when? Leuchars is not too far from here, should be able to see some of the action.
EdLawMerlock: you are right, though considering Putin is not a native English speaker, that is probably the least of the many problems with this nonsense! That type of conversation would not happen – as previously stated, there is no genuine European President. Also, ‘did you spot any foreign aircraft in your air space?’ is such nonsense – it would actually be very hard to find a single place in Europe where there are no foreign aircraft!
The whole thing is the usual conspiracy nonsense – perhaps next it will be revealed that Putin was the man on the grassy knoll! :diablo:
EdLawI would be very surprised if the A-330s for the RAF have boom refuelling – they may be three point, but the third point will be hose and drogue.
EdLawThe problem in terms of payload is that the internal payload is very limited – yes, it can theoretically carry an impressive payload, but only by carrying an external load, thus losing its advantage (stealth). Also, its external load appears to be limited to four wing hardpoints, and possibly a centerline (used for the gun on the -B/C), which does impose a limit on payload. Do not get me wrong, it is probably going to be a great aircraft, I simply do not think that it quite lives up to the hype. It is arguable that most nations would be better with a more conventional fighter, combined with UCAVs to do the SEAD…
EdLawI think the suggestion from the MoD, in their infinite wisdom, was that there would be no missions for the C-17 that would require air to air refuelling (and that presumably, if such a need arose, it would be possible to simply use US boom refuelling tankers). Also, the C-17s are currently leased, and modifications may not be much of an option, though since they are now to be bought, that may change…
Sign In
