IIRC the Su-30MKM uses Topsite too.

How come Sagem has fallen behind? I realy cannot criticise the loss of the IRST enough, when you have a missile as good as Mica-IR the loss of the IRST is near criminal.

However this is something present in both the Rafale and the Typhoon, they are both being under developed. Typhoon could easily have AESA, TVC and CFTs by now and the Rafale could have IRST, CFT, HMD and more powerful engines. The Russians on the other hand are creating aircraft to their maximum potential with the Mig-35 and Su-35, so are the swedes with the Gripen-N/DK.

One of the biggest problems with the OHaP design is stress cracking of the superstructure. Lengthening the design would only exacerbate this. Incidently this problem also makes the design marginal for RAN patrols in the Southern Ocean.

That pretty much covers it. Taiwan initially built 7 OHPs, the plan was for the eigth to have a mini Aegis (assumably SPY-1F) and a Mark-41. However the idea came to naught and the final OHP was built to the same standard as the others only significantly delayed. The basic problem was that the OHP hull is too small and any enlargement would require an improved propulsion and electrical system to the extent that you might as well design a new ship from scratch. Incidently when the Australians fitted a VLS to their OHP’s they had structural problems too IIRC.

The photos in this thread (including the Gripen pic) are awesome! Can the outer wing pylons carry an Exocet? A single anti-ship missile is not exactly generous against targets that can be expected to be capable of shooting down a fair number of incoming missiles.

I would have thought that there is the potential to carry at least 1 exocet under each wing if not 2.:confused:

quite a big modernisation program…could it be that they are preparing for rafales in the future?

AASM, MICA, Damocles…

anyway this gives the Moroccan air force a great advantage over their old capabilities.

If anything I would say that it means that they are not going to procure the Rafale in the near future, this is a very deep modernisation that likely cost alot and is aimed at a significant life extension. The one thing that surprises me is that they have not included the Thales R400 radar.

The opening post to this thread is ridiculous. Just sounds like a bit of attention seeking or an effort at trolling.

Exactely.

It is said that in this configuration, it brings 10 tons of fuel. Notice that it still has a self defense capability 😉 😀

It could carry even more if it could take of with 2 CFTs too.;)

USN Aircraft Carriers have Sea Sparrow and Phalanx. Yet, they just fired a ESSM from a Sea Sparrow box launcher. So, I beileve the plan is to convert them to fire ESSM at some point. As usually ESSM are fired from Mk-41 VLS. Regardless, I would support a gun/missile defense. Hopefully the trend continues????

Well if DDG-1000 is anything to go by it will.;)

If, you want to talk about saving money fine! Yet, would the US Goverment, US Navy, and the American Taxpayer. Want its Aircraft Carriers Deck only equipped with Super Hornets for the next 30-40 years! If, that is exceptable than the US wouldn’t need F-35’s at all and you mite as well cancel the whole program………………..Just not going to happen! Just can’t make a case for it.:D Funny, sounds like the usual GAO Report we hear about every Big Military Program. Which, sounds very similar to what was said about the F-16 and Abrams Tank to name just a couple.

This looks like the perfect opportunity for the Brits, if they ask for CV versions they may get a knockdown price to keep it alive and have proper aircraft carriers themselves.

However I have to say that I cant see the CV version being cancelled, what is more likely is they will combine it with the land based version. Or just kill the land based variant and give the air force the naval variant- it would help with interoperability at least!:D