A bit like New Zealand letting Australia defend them eh? 😀

I’m not arguing Hungary should abandon defence, but they should concentrate on providing a good, realistic force suited to their needs. If they want to develop a fast jet capability then they could save a lot of money by buying combat versions of aircraft like the L159 or Hawk. NATO and EU security is best served by political stability and effective border controls. NATO would probably be better served by telling the poorer members (no offence intended) to provide good domestic security forces and a border guard and let the bigger countries worry about air defence. Ultimately a single squadron of Grippens (great machine that it is) is a drop in the ocean.

I’m not arguing against defence, I’m saying defence is one part of a governments responsibilities and that defence should be linked to threat and at least try to be effective. A lot of countries buy expensive weapons they can not afford to operate for reasons of prestige, arms companies and governments do all sorts to persuade countries to buy weapons that very often are not in the best interests of the countries in question. This isn’t even about trust, what can a handful of Gripens do to guarantee Hungarian security? Seriously, is a fighter force in single figures going to deter anybody? If Hungary can afford it then fair enough, but I see a lot of other things the money could be better spent on. A lot of countries have no fast jet fighters and are not being invaded. Why doesn’t the Irish Republic buy a fleet of fast jet fighters in case Britain invades? Of course countries have to evaluate threats and act accordingly, but an awful lot of defence investment (UK included) has more to do with national prestige and political pork barrel tactics than true defence needs.

Geez these Eastern European airforces are expensive jokes. They might as well scrap them all and put the money into worthy social projects.

What they should do is demilitarise – scrap their armies and airforces (and navies if they have them) and replace them with Coast Guard type services responsible for fisheries protection, SAR and other peace time policing roles, counter terrorist police units and border police.

Land locked countries such as the Czech Republic should simply have border guards and SAR aviation.

I think you could apply that logic to a much wider area than Eastern Europe. For all I’m interested in military equipment and am ex-forces myself I do think most countries in the world have some seriously screwed up priorities.

Definition of Optimism: F-104 pilot with a pension plan.

Either that or a Soviet Navy submarriner with a retirement plan :diablo:

Excellent thread!!

What, so you are saying that for you to say Japan and Korea bought the F15 for reasons other than a straight capability/price comparison is valid but if I say France takes full advantage of political pressure to help sell weapons it is changing the point? That’s consistent :rolleyes: If France had maintained the military presence that the US has had in South Korea for 50+ years are you saying France wouldn’t use it as a lever to sell stuff? :confused:
And if American product support is so bad why do so many people consider product support a good reason for buying US equipment? Are you saying that nobody can get spares or upgrades for the F4, F5, F16, F18 etc? Are you complaining that the US expects the customer to pay for this service? Obviously it’s not free, but if you need an upgrade or spare and you can pay for it then you’ll get it. I can get just about any spare for GE gas turbines in a matter of days from stock, most consumables within 24 hours.
And of course the R&D money is linked to US purchases, that’s the whole point. Or are you saying that in Europe a company will jump up and invest billions in R&D for a two bit contract? :confused:
And you aren’t really answering why Europe makes big play of the RAM coatings and radar signature of the Rafale and Typhoon then suddenly says it doesn’t matter when talking of the F22 and F35. Either stealth matters or it doesn’t, you can’t have it both ways. And with a full payload the stealthiness of the Rafale and Typhoon evaporates.
And then you claim US designs can’t be used intensively as they’re not easily serviced, despite the unfortunate fact that USAF and USN fighters and similar jets in IDF service have seen incredibly intensive use in real action. And what is the point of saying it’s because America has the resources to support it? Obviously any major operation requires a long logistical tail and technical support, or do you think the Rafale can fly round the clock only helped by one guy with a screw driver? :confused:
Don’t know the mean time between failures eh? What about average service claims on the respective engines?
Europe bought E3’s as they were cheaper than developing new ones=America had the resources to build AWACS, Europe either didn’t or didn’t have the will to do it. Fair enough, it’s just another sign of greater US resources for weapons development.
The battlefield management and radar of the F100 is based on USN equipment in service for over 15 years, and now the Type 45 and Horizon can match it. Great progress.
And your pic of the Mirage 4000 just proves the point again, Europe has neither the political will nor funds to match the US. And are you saying Europe has no need of a heavy airlifter like the C17? In that case why do European air forces have to charter in heavy lifters from commercial operators? Europe has no need of a strategic airlifter, are you serious?
And the final point, if you are going to make sweeping statements about how US equipment has no product support, can’t operate intensively etc. then you can’t very well ignore the fact that a lot of European equipment uses an awful lot of US sourced components.
Just face it, the USA has the financial resources and political will to do defence on a scale nobody else since the fall of the USSR and until India and China’s economies grow in the next 20 years can match, and that rubs off on their capabilities.

Not to mention bankrolling and arming Hizbollah isn’t cheap….in addition to various other nut cases around the globe.