MildaveOutgoing Mossad chief’s Meir Dagan : “Israel and the international community still have plenty to do to undermine it, and a military assault is not the right solution. ” (http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/mess-report/how-will-israel-s-new-strategic-leadership-deal-with-iran-1.335982)
Glad to see there is some sense left in some people.
MildaveIsreal didn’t wait for any “political” soluton before bombing Syria. No, if they could effectively bomb Iran the already would have.
Even if they use US bases in Iraq as I read somewhere someone suggesting, they are going to make more mess, and I doubt US-Europe are really ready to back such an act, given the mess they already have in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Even F35 with limited fuel capacity would have a hard time covering the totality of Iran’s territory. That’s the reason why Israel is lobbying the US so hard.
MildaveClearly PAK FA is a Russian design, only deluded Indian posters will aruge otherwise.
But I do not expect India to be in a position like the partners of the JSF who are being denied radar source codes, India will possibly handle the radar software, mission computers and weapon integration of the Indian version. Depsite their industrial complex contributing more to the F 35 than Indias can contribute to the FGFA.
This is the difference between buying Russian and American. Even a friendly U.S administration is powerless before draconian legislations regards ToT that the Americans have.
And there is also significant amount of ToT that will be helpful to India’s future programs.
Ideally I would like the FGFA money to be spent on the AMCA, but India’s difficult strategic position ie. being surrounded by two Nuclear Powers warrants programs like the FGFA.
The US is the world only super-power that must protect its status by protecting its technologies. The US technology is the world most advanced around and represent a political and diplomatic mean of pressure toward country and government that would be against US’s interests. Every time someone desagrees with the US they restrict their tech (look at France and the war in Iraq). Todays wars are politicals, tech, before been purely military. The US needs to protect their position (been at the top is always hard), Russia doesn’t.
Whatever Russia is building today, you can find the equivalent or something very close in the western world. The opposite is not true. To compete with the US, and now with China, Russia has to look for cooperation with country like India. The US doesn’t really need cooperation. They are only looking for customers to be dependant on their technologies so that their government may protect their “interest”, whatever that really means.
Look at all the fuss about the PAK-Fa been the threat to the US and all the free world, as if Russia spend all its nights dreaming about “invading” the US air space. Even the soviets never sent U2 flying above Washington…
MildaveWhile it’s true that the Russian economy is growing and will be more and more able to support Russian’s army modernization (specifically thanks to Russia’s energetic ressources) in the future, it’s only thank to massive exports during the 90’s to China and India (and other smaller countries) that most of Russia’s defense industry remained open, despite falling quite far behind compared to the west and most of its exported hardware were upgraded with western subs-systems.
India is buying more western hardware because its growing economy allows for a growing military capability (mostly to compete against China). Strong cooperation between Idia and Russia has created a bond that is going to last for decades. For exemple the Kaveri engines are been tested in Russia despite been a “indigenious” program, and I’m sure that many other “indigenious” programs benefits from Russian’s advices, cooperation and such (think about Russia’s help with nuclear technology, which is usually and very long term commitment).
But India doesn’t want to be just a buyer like the golf states, happy just to get the best money can buy with no consideration for local industry. India want to become a big international player and so must be able to build its own equipment. So buying western make sense (beside a little competition to remind the Russians to keep their contracts is always a good thing).
Finally it’s political. Buying US, allowing the west to invest in civil and military industry makes it harder for China/Pakistan to mess with India since the US is usually so eager to protect its economics “interest”.
MildaveYou can’t just read the first sentence, forget about the “In addition” bit and then make me say what I don’t want to say.
According to Wikipedia : “fifth-generation fighters are characterized by being designed from the start to operate in a network-centric combat environment, and to feature extremely low, all-aspect, multi-spectral signatures employing advanced materials and shaping techniques. They have multifunction AESA radars with high-bandwidth, low-probability of intercept (LPI) data transmission capabilities. The Infra-red search and track sensors incorporated for air-to-air combat as well as for air-to-ground weapons delivery in the 4.5th generation fighters are now fused in with other sensors for Situational Awareness IRST or SAIRST, which constantly tracks all targets of interest around the aircraft so the pilot need not guess when he glances. These sensors, along with advanced avionics, glass cockpits, helmet-mounted sights (not currently on F-22), and improved secure, jamming-resistant LPI datalinks are highly integrated to provide multi-platform, multi-sensor data fusion for vastly improved situational awareness while easing the pilot’s workload”
Exept that all the stuff about network-centric, data fusion, supercruise, sensors etc has been claimed by 4.5 aircrafts like Typhoon, Rafale, F15k, SU 30MKI, SU 35 etc… So what is left to a 5th gen aircraft is low observability. In fact all aspect stealth even when armed is at the very core of their ability to be “force multiplier”, “game changer”, “extremely survivable” and all the wonders we have been promised.
The fact that a Mig 31 is “non-emitting” doesn’t make it “stealth” defined as:
“Stealth aircraft are aircraft that use stealth technology[1] to interfere with radar detection as well as means other than conventional aircraft by employing a combination of features to reduce visibility in the infrared,[2] visual, audio, and radio frequency (RF) spectrum”(my friend Wiki again).
MildaveI went through Wiki and while I learnt that the UK were at the origin for the Meteor requirement I havn’t found anything specific about MBDA UK… But anyway I guess I will be better off looking for myself.
All weapons acquisition and integration are through the DGA and not the French navy, army or air force. They usually tell the DGA want they want and then the DGA try to find how best provide what they need. Once the DGA, Dassault and MBDA(?) integrate the Meteor on Rafale, it will be available for the navy and air force since they share the same aircraft with the very same system. So it won’t matter which squadron the aircraft is from.
MildaveIn CAS over Afghanistan, the aircraft is often required to make a first pass at low altitude in order to proceed to what they call “show of force”, then if the insurgents don’t desengage they start dropping bombs.
The A10 is a classic in CAS because its capability to fly relatively low and slow provide a much better platform. Also dive attack permits greater accuracy which is best used by the A10 canon and relatively slow speed. That’s the reason why the US air force has been looking into the Super Tucano as a replacement which is a turboprop aircraft and so will fly relatively lower and slower for better fuel consumption than a jet aircraft which consume generally a lot flying low to the ground and at subsonic speed.
Airforce Technology article dated from 11 March 2009 says:
“the UK government[…]is also trapped in a procurement minefield over the Eurofighter Typhoon, plagued by years of cost overruns, technical delays”
“The RAF’s problem is that under its Tranche 1 and 2 allocations it has already ordered all the Eurofighters it needs”
“Another issue is that the aircraft was originally conceived purely as an air-superiority fighter but these days the RAF really needs a truly multi-role plane and it won’t get that until the final delivery.”
“While Tranche 2 models can be upgraded for multi-role duties, Tranche 1 machines can’t.”
“At any rate, he says the UK has little choice but to ‘bite the bullet’.”
“If we can learn one lesson from the Eurofighter it’s that when designing a new combat aircraft it will need to be as modular and as flexible in its functions as possible.”
“The aircraft will have to be multi-role – like the Eurofighter – and modular, which it isn’t” …
Really if there is something I missed or misunderstood I would be glad to have someone explain it to me.
@swerve : you have issues…
MildaveMBDA is producing among other things Aster, Mistral, Mica, Storm Shadow/Scalp, AASM, Milan, Spectra (with Thales), and Meteor. So far I thought that the Meteor for UK would be assemble in UK, Meteor for Germany in Germany, Meteor for France in France since MBDA is very well implented in France with many project exclusive to the French Armed Forces. Which is why I was confused by the article and I’m still wondering why even if MBDA UK is the prime contractor, it’s the British autorities that process the order from France. Now if you can explain to me how it works and if there are other instance of this happening for other european projects, I would appreciate.
Now about the integration of the missile, since the rafale is using the same software for its C, B and M variants, all you need is to integrate the weapon on 1 rafale for all rafales to be able to use it.
MildaveSaudi Arabia. See WikiLeaks. Israel and the Saudis are de facto allies.
There is a long shot between some diplomats talking and having Israeli’s plane landing in Saudi Arabia. They refused the demand by the US to invade Iraq (forgot if it was GW1 or GW2) from their land because they were afraid of manifestations or troubles from the muslim world
MildaveThere’s nothing in the article to suggest that. It’s a purchase by France, for the French air force & navy.
It’s being bought from MBDA UK through the British MoD purchasing agency, but that does not make it a joint buy, any more than US military exports are joint purchases because they go through the Pentagon.
Sorry that sentence confused me : “The British authorities signed the contract with MBDA UK on Dec. 22, a DGA spokesman said.”
But I fought Meteor was a european missile with french funding as well so why do they need the British authorities to sign anything ?
MildaveThe topic is about “MMRCA News And Discussion” or should I stress “Discussion” a bit more ?
I was only stating than in my most humble opinion Super Hornet and Rafale have the best performance/multi-role/cost for international bid like India, fact that even the Brazil understand with Super Hornet or Rafale the most likely winner.
I only demonstrated (as is my right specially since I’m a UK taxpayer) why I think that Typhoon is not as pertinent as advertised and suffer from the same shortcoming and price overrun than the F35 program. The British government agrees with me and said in 2006: “that it would no longer tolerate industrial inefficiencies that had effectively turned the project into a “charity” (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1535019/Minister-furious-over-20bn-bill-for-Eurofighter.html). The true raison, again in my opinion why the Typhoon will probably never be first choice for CAS apart from a lack of appropriate ordinance is because its engines and to a lesser extent aerodynamics weren’t made for it, flying low and flying slow must consume quite a lot of fuel (similar problem with the F22). And I believe all these things must be of importance for the MMRCA selection.
Here again (http://www.airforce-technology.com/features/feature50517/) a very well documented article about the raison why it’s so difficult and expensive to make the Typhoon multi-role. You’ll notice that so far I havn’t quote any dubious sources about some funny excercices showing how “interesting” the Typhoon air supremacy is over other aircrafts 🙂 (81% kill in BVR they had prophetised against a F22 100%, Rafale 50%…).
Beside Rafales there are around 6 Mirages deployed as well. 8 Ceasars have been deployed (http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htart/articles/20090712.aspx?comments=Y) and Leclercs are operating with the UN in Lebanon.
Right now my motivation is trying to enjoy some factual “discussion” since because of the rain and bad weather outside I can’t really enjoy the last days of my prolonged holidays outdoor…
MildaveMildaveMildaveLooks like it’s a joint buy with UK.
MildaveThe French air force only has 3 Rafales in operation in Afghanistan since mid 2007 in order to validate the concept Rafale in combat operation. The fact that the RAF could not deploy at least 2 or 3 Typhoons in 2008 as they first planned, has but so far been only explained with poor excuses. Most armies deploy their new hardware in Afghanistan in order to test them in combat operation.
Due to the early retirement of the harriers, the RAF said they may deploy the Typhoon in Afghanistan this year, and I’m looking toward to it, because so far and apart from the commercials and enthusiasts who keep saying how amazing that aircraft is, I’m yet to see real numbers about real performances demonstrated during deployment.
So far IIRC a first £10.9 was awarded in 2007 to improve the support for Typhoons, with an additional £450 million in 2009.
“Tranche 1 aircraft over the next decade will become much, much harder to support and sustain over time, which is against our aspiration to reduce support costs, and over time it will lose its operational relevance,” Innes said at the briefing. (http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4246871) Well I didn’t know T1 were so old, and apparently it is more cost effective to buy brand new T2 and T3 Typhoon than to upgrade T1, all while reducing the original amount of Typhoons to be ordered ?! (the aircraft was created to be around till 2030 and beyond… seems to me like there is no saving our shiny new Typhoons after all!!)
I admit I have some trouble understanding what is going on, are the changes so important that it doesn’t make sense to upgrade previous Typhoons ?
So I’m just saying, for a aircraft with A2A confirmed, A2G “demonstrated”, buddy to buddy (with the Typhoon in the tanker role )still in trials, havn’t heard about reco or sea attack yet, £20billions for the RAF alone (certainly as much for luftwaffe since they have the same share in the program), it sure is a “impressive” plane !
Sign In
