Working on the old saying if it looks right it will fly right oh dear
Firstly how many Mig-31’s would be sent and secondly the Israelis alone have 75 F-15’s of different marks but all highly upgraded and supported by AEW so why are we using the F-16’s as a bench mark?
[ATTACH=CONFIG]217869[/ATTACH]
Having been on a visit to the Typhoon simulator and the Chinook – Merlin and Puma simulator’s I have to say they offer outstanding training which means aircrews need less time in the aircraft they will be linked together to offer real mission training with each pilot being able to talk to the next on the same mission
Having said that there will always be a need to fly real live training sorties
I think Thobbes is right to say that it is time the USAF pulled out of Europe and if it did the transfer of 20 F-16’s to the Polish air force at nil cost and the transfer of 25-30 KC-135’s to a European tanker wing also that nil cost would be a good move to ensure capability and flexibility in the region
Also as said transfer the F-15E’s to PACAF and close down 2 F-16 units
I think I would keep 250 A-10’s – 40 B-1B’s – 50 B-52s
Drop 150 A-10 – 200 F-16’s – 40 F-15C’s 100 transports – 25 of 100+ VIP types – 80 T-28’s 25 – B52’s -25 B-1B’s Total 645 airframes
Transfer 30 KC-135’s taking some 675 airframes off the books
I think it said they would have them by 2020
I was looking at the new Air forces monthly today and it clams Russia is buying the 60 planned An-70s for it air force which could make it a game changer
Anyway, rhetoric aside, this was interesting from the article.
If one looks at the more recent purchases that the various Argentine military aviation branches have made, China and Russia feature quite prominently, whereas in years gone by, they didn’t feature at all.
Perhaps a pointer for the future that they won’t simply buy western every time as in the past?
I feel this is out of need more than chose however it could be a good thing for them
With flying hours down to 40 hour per year per pilot due to economy, -why day dreaming of purchasing anything ?
Sorry who where what and when are you talking about
At this time there are only 42 An-124’s in service plus 10 on order so to build 6-10 with different engines and avionics would add cost but its not impossible you would be starting with a well proven airframe – engines and avionics and there are airframes that can be used as test beds
Also the Russian are looking to upgrade 20 of their 124’s with new avionics and engines of course this is with Russian kit
There was a Joint proposal with Air Foyle to meet UK’s Short Term Strategic Airlifter (STSA) requirement, with Rolls-Royce RB211-524H-T engines, each rated 60,600 lbf (264 kN) and Honeywell avionics—STSA competition abandoned in August 1999, the reason I put forward the RR Trent 772C and A330/340 avionics are because that is what the A330MRTT run
Answer to what question? Lacking a budget for the existing planes? – hardly. If SAA wants transport, I hear the US is having some used C-27J available soon. And yes it lacks range any payload compared to the requirement, but the requirements fails to meet budget realities, so forget the requirement.
mayby the Luftwaffe should just push its requirement for A400m to one side and have some used C-27J’s what is the point of setting a requirement just to kick it out
For me Hawk is the way ahead buy them in kit form fit their own avionics it has a joint French/UK engine they could even have them built in India by HAL as part of the off set for Rafale
[ATTACH=CONFIG]217752[/ATTACH]
Putting aside if it goes into full production for just a second An-70 is in the same class as A400m for the same price as C130J and after looking around South Africa wanted A400m over C130 due to its size and capabilities so if Russia do buy the 60 they had plan to and still might An-70 could be the Answer
If Europe wanted a full on strategic airlift platform what could be a interesting project would be buy 6 New Built An-124’s from Antonov and then have them fitted with RR Trent 772C’s and avionics from a Airbus A330/340 this would make logistics of engines and avionics essayer
[ATTACH=CONFIG]217712[/ATTACH]
You guys haven’t mentioned anything about the BAE Systems Hawk :confused:. Pretty much worldwide used as a trainer. Easy to fly, reliable etc. But the cost is 18 million each British Aerospace and BAE Systems, Hawk respectively. It has been used in a training capacity and as a low-cost combat aircraft. See? Light plane and subsonic.
Just saying, better choice to go with the BAE Systems Hawk in my opinion.
please see posts 18/19