SintraMan you number one misundestand Latin american policies, Brazil never has being a nation with a direct imperialistic posture, why? first is the fact the US and Europe have been the imperialistic powers in the region and second Brazil never has taken a direct role of imperial nation as the US has taken.
Of course the Brazilian politicians have been very practical, they won`t show a direct imperialistic policy first because they will face a direct american response in the area and up to a level Brazil has been always being isolated by the fact Argentina and Mexico are the other leading nations of latin america whose links with the spanish speaking smaller nations has counter balanced any brazilian imperialistic policy.
The best posture at this momement for brazil is the one of a peace maker while still continues trying to achieve a minimal technological level in terms of Nuclear Submarines and rocket technology which can in a very realitic way provoke a hostile US response.
Brazil won`t support of course Venezuela in a very direct way since it can also geopardize its nuclear program and nuclear submarine but if at least france supports the nuclear submarine project brazil might achieve another technological feat the same is with the Rocket technology they want to achieve.
Someone here has misunderstod Latin American policies, but guess what, the “one” it´s not a Portuguese midle aged man…
Brazil isn´t “imperialistic”, they never were (for almost a century, at least), but that doesn´t mean that they suport some kind of southern anti-USA “NATO”, that´s just B#$%$cks.
If that was true, Chile, (and even Argentina) would be yelling “Bloody Murder” and not giving full suport.
For Brasil it´s a question of re asserting it´s role has the natural leader of the region, sending a message to washington (“dont have stupid ideas”), keeping in check Chavez (“dont have stupid ideas, keep yourself civilized and stop threatning military interventions in your neighbours”) and that without spending a huge bucket load of “Reais” in rearmament (the Brazilian economy and Government budget are almost equivalent to Russia´s, the big diference between the two, it´s the amount that his spent with the respective armed forces).
That´s a very far diferent picture of a unified South America anti-USA Bloc that you´re trying (hard) to portray.
And besides, Lula won´t be there forever and the Brasilian oposition simply hates Chavez. Next change of governement in Brasilia (or in Caracas, or in Buenos Aires) and the Geo Political situation changes 180º degress.
Let´s just hope that South America keeps calm.
SintraMan do not make me laugh, in Latin america there are many opinions some are totally contradictory, however a forum does not make policies, The governments of Brazil and Argentina along side the ones of Mercosur have a regional plan of economic integration and eventually an economic plan of a common currency and movement freely of goods and people within the MERCOSUR nations this will imply at the end a common military plan, you might think a forum decides policies but it does not policies are taken by Lula and his advisors and all the heads of states of South america and they know economic integration will mean political integration and this will lead to a common defence.
Sweet Jesus…
A common military plan?
And no, a forúm dont decides politics, but being in several, and discussing these same subjects with University teachers, military officers, police officers, top rank bureaucrats, journos, etc, will give you a very good idea of the finer nuances of the policies and politics of a country. Doing that for more than a decade, working direcly with several Brasilians, being Portuguese and being fluent on the exact same language, reading Brazilian newspapers and magazines for several decades, and the lot, might, just might give a nice idea of what his happening in Brazil. And believe me the idea of a “South American military block” in wich Brazil and Venezuela are partners his not, and i repeat, it´s NOT on the cards for the foreseable future, at least in a NATO sort of way.
And yes, Nelson Jobim, the Brasilian Defence Minister his proposing an “Conselho de Defesa Sul Americano” for the entire region, but that as a lot more to do with avoiding that several of the South American nations going (again) to each others throats than an efective military alliance. The political diferences between those countries are simply huge.
Jobim tenta evitar crise com Venezuela
São José dos Campos (SP), 26 de Fevereiro de 2008 – O ministro da defesa, Nelson Jobim, inicia no próximo dia 05 as conversações oficiais sobre o Conselho Sul Americano de Defesa com o presidente da Venezuela, Hugo Chaves. Atualmente, o governo venezuelano é um dos pontos críticos deste processo, pois tem buscado estabelecer uma corrida armamentista no cone sul. Além de manter uma relação instável com os Estados Unidos e proferir ataques constantes ao Brasil, país criador da proposta.
“Eu terei uma conversa direta com o presidente Chaves sobre esse assunto e depois disto eu irei aos Estados Unidos. Na volta, eu farei um conjunto de visitas, que incluem a Argentina, Uruguai, Paraguai e Chile. Na outra semana irei à Bolívia, Peru e a Colômbia e na seqüência Suriname e a Guiana”, revelou o ministro sua agenda. Ele pretende completar esse circuito ainda no primeiro semestre deste ano.
O ministro Jobim teve conversas preliminares, porém estratégicas, sobre a proposta com dois dos governos mais fortes da América do Sul, Chile e Argentina. Ambos aceitaram e apóiam a iniciativa. A idéia é promover uma reunião em Brasília no segundo semestre deste ano para instituir o conselho, que será dirigido por um órgão executivo eleito pelos ministros da defesa dos países convidados.
O projeto brasileiro é ter uma política única de defesa continental, na qual haja a criação de uma plataforma para a indústria de defesa e discussões de questões específicas, como as posições a serem adotadas pela América do Sul diante dos organismos internacionais de defesa. Haverá também o intercâmbio no treinamento militar e a integração das bases industriais do setor.
Nelson Jobim ressaltou que o conselho tratará exclusivamente de posições e políticas sul-americanas. Sem citar nominalmente Cuba, que recebe o apoio integral do governo de Hugo Chaves, o ministro foi categórico ao afirmar que o novo órgão só cuidará somente desta porção continental. “Neste momento está totalmente excluído o Caribe e a América Central deste processo”, salientou.
O regime chavista tem assustado seus vizinhos e os Estados Unidos pelos altos investimentos no setor militar. Até o momento foram comprados 24 caças Sukhoi , cerca de 50 helicópteros e 100 mil fuzis Kalashnikov, todos equipamentos russos.
Além disto, a Rússia se incumbiu de instalar no país o maior centro de treinamento de pilotos da América Latina. Para os especialistas da área, isto é uma resposta de Chaves aos Estados Unidos, na qual envolveria inclusive o uma ação diante do veto a negociação com a Embraer, na qual seriam adquiridos 36 aviões de combate leve SuperTucano. O contrato de US$ 500 milhões acabou cancelado.
Estudos da Organização do Tratado do Atlântico Norte (Otan) alertam que a Venezuela pretende ter uma frota com 120 aviões de combate supersônicos, 10 submarinos equipados com mísseis e algo em torno de 140 navios de guerra.
(Gazeta Mercantil/Caderno A – Pág. 8)(Júlio Ottoboni)
SintraThey get much better bang for the buck with an order of 24 export-grade F-22 followed later by 100 F-35’s. So what if it costs more, it covers what the true needs of Australia. A good ally wouldn’t sell a steamie piece of cow pie – the F-18E family – to their friends like that. They don’t need carrier planes. They need air superiority planes that pull double duty in the long-range precision strike role. By the time the F-35 gets in service they would then have the F-22’s to carry out their original air superiority role.
What his a “export-grade F-22”? When did the US Congress lift the ban on RAPTOR exports? Why would Australia replace a long range “bomb truck” with an Air Defence Fighter almost useless in the attack role?
And why the “true needs” of Australia are a “stealth supercruiser AMRAAM shooter”? To defend from what, or from whom? That massive Indonesian “Flanker” Fleet? The entire FOUR SU7/SU30´s?!!!
GEEEEEEEEE, talking about throwing money out of the windows!
SintraThey are not mentioning any enemy or invader they are only saying under the regional plan an united South America will be modeled upon NATO and the EU, Argentina and Brazil have realized that the only way their nations can advance technologically and economically is to remain independent of any foreign power and the Brazilian economic planners know south america is rich in resources, it seems the most eager nations to join the south american army are Brazil, Argentina and Venezuela.
Bolivia, Ecuador and Peru probably will join those plans in the same way Uruguay.
Chile and Colombia are still two nations who still show not much interest or no interest at all, however as Mercosur grows the likelihood of that grows
😀
Go and try to tell that to the Brazilians… A South American Army with… Chavez Venezuela, and Argentina?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The two biggest Brazilian defense foruns are “forum defesa Brazil” and “Alide”, try to write something like that in there and you´re going to get “stoned”. You can find several officers of the Brazilian armed forces there and, believe me, the chances of that “South American Army” happening in the next two decades are slightly bigger (but just slightly) of Iran recieving an invitation to join NATO.
Dont mix Hugo Chavez dreams with reality.
SintraDoesn’t change the fact that the MiG-29SMT was never izd. 9.14. I don’t say the list of board numbers is wrong.
But i´ve never said that you are wrong. You´re correct, the izd 9-17 his the “SMT” standard.
The 9-14 was one single prototype (nº407) with enhanced air-to-surface capabilities (made it´s maiden flight on February 13, 1985) and latter was modified for research into the possibility of reducing the take off distance from improvised airfields.
Cheers 🙂
SintraIzd 9.14? Definitely not this was the internal designation for a modified 9.13 back in the 80’s which was rejected in favour for the MiG-29M (9.15). The first MiG-29SMT was designated 9.17 current variants are the 9.18/19.
The exact planes are those that flex297 mentioned, with the adition of Nº404 who was used for N019MP radar tests. A “Grand total” of seven airframes who never got to a VVS active regiment. 😉
The best article that i´ve seen about the “Fulcrum” variations can be found in january 2007 AFM, by Andrey Fomin.
Cheers 🙂
SintraScince 98-99 150 of the 455 MiG-29’s have been upgraded to SMT
No they haven´t.
SintraSo there may be some leeway in the numbers, as I said before the key for Eurofighter GmbH is the ToT and offsets as the price can’t be cheaper that the partner nations pay, so theres not much room for improvemant unless they rewrite the partner contracts.
That´s true, but what price? The “System Cost”? The “Fly Away” cost? And what are the costs that are on discussion right now for the “Tranche 3”? And that rule aplies to foreign built Typhoon´s? 😉
SintraMKI was meant to cost $34 mil a piece or so (???). How much does it cost. Regardless of anything, with those ToT/Ofset demands, costs are going to be huge.
There´s a huge diference in terms of manpower costs between Russia (and India) and the Western Powers.
If most of those aircrafts are going to be built in India, the expression “cost equalizer” is exactly that. It´s expectable that the Europeans and American designs, if built in India, lower the Unit “Fly Away” price, and in the case of the Russian Mig-35 it might go on the oposite direction.
If you want a good exemple just look at the cost of an Indian built Jaguar, if those planes were being “pieced” together in Warton, GB, the cost would be way higher.
Cheers 🙂
SintraYou’d could assume from this the Typhoon has already made the cut technically, but price, delivery and offsets are still to be tested.
It sure looks like a good sign at this stage… but Typhoons price doesn’t match the Indian budget i.e. 126 Typhoons busts the Indian MRCA stated budget – solutions include buying fewer Typhoons, or increase the budget.
(funds allocated = Rs. 42000 crore ~Approx. £5.33B) or approximately 85 Typhoons – you can insert your own price here, £41M flyaway/£61M system Note I used the £61M price
Depends if the extra capability and availability of Typhoon can offset fewer aircraft, so its a difficult one for the Typhoon, not impossible though, offsets/ToT may be the key here for Eurofighter GmbH.
Anyone else have any thoughts?
Cheers
If you´re not going to use the “Fly Away” cost as a measure, it´s not only the “Tiffie” who´s in trouble. Both the Super Hornet and the Dassault Rafale blow the “rooftop”.
SintraAnd Typhoon is also probably the most expensive of all (???) even in its current format. With AESA and the sort of ToT/ofsets India is asking for I can imagine its (or for that matter any of those machines) price going up considerably.
Actually, and after “digesting” for almost a week the 2009 Budget of the US Navy and taking advantage of the excelent job done by TMOR on the cost of the RAFALE program, it seems that the French Fighter, the Super Hornet an the Eurofighter Typhoon are on the exact same bracket of costs. At least the fly away costs. And the fact that most of those aircrafts are going to be built in India his a major cost “equalizer”.
Cheers
SintraThe A400M is starting to look a lot less like a paper plane now.
http://www.airbusmilitary.com/images/1sta400m2.jpg
Maybe its a photo perspective thing, but it looks about 10-15% smaller than somehow I had anticipated
The photo was taken with a tele-lens, the image is a bit compressed.
Look at this photo: http://www.airbusmilitary.com/images/1sta400m.jpg
There´s a guy some three meters on the left of the “nose”, it gives a good indication of the size of the plane (it´s big).
SintraConduct a fair and open competition, which Boeing wins
Bill Sweetman say´s it all…
And, yes, i can´t really criticise the USAF for the choice. It´s a good plane and it´s not, well… “French” 😀
Congratulations to the USAF who gets a good plane, congratulations to Boeing who´s going to build them, and, “last but not least” congratulations to Northrop and Airbus for a “jolly good fight”. They´ve given Boeing a “run for their money” right to the last second, something that was completely “impossible” just a couple of years ago.
Cheers 🙂
SintraIts OK – I understand all that price-confusions but other dont, I think.
Its important when discusing cost – even so I cant believe the flyaway price is so low for a F-35A as figured in some articles. If so – why have Norway, Denmark, Netherland and others been so upshirted and that without trade-exchangings?
You just have to read the post 227 to know the exact “Fly Away” costs of the F-35A, the number´s weren´t taken from some newspaper article but from the USAF OFFICIAL Budget…
Can you get more serious than that?!
SintraCan you imagine the stink that would be kicked up by the US manufacturers of Gripen components, as the Swiss immediately switched to Rafale or Typhoon? Lawsuits against LM, Boeing & the US State Department, furious lobbying of Congress – oh, what fun! :diablo:
😀
And just try to imagine the formal reasons to an American veto on a Gripen sale to Switzerland…
“Well, those evil Swedes, a Nation that his a threat to… well, hmmmmm… someone… trying to sell advanced fighter jet´s to those dangerous… well… Swiss… I´m sure they are a threat to… hmmmmmm… someone… so… being a threat to… Well… Actually we have received a complaint from… someone… about… well… noise… Nestle just made a few… well… noises about… about, well… noise… The Nestle Lilac Cow just presented a complaint about… noise, and the problem´s of producing first grade milk with fast jet´s making sonic boom´s above the Alp´s… noise… NEWSFLASH, Milka´s Cow, sorry, Nestle has nothing to do with it…”
Sign In
