DubyaI was browsing the thread on F-15 losses that was recently posted here and started wondering, why are we so quick to believe US reports and claims and so quick to dismiss Russian reports and claims?
I think the answer is political. Russia was a dictatorship for a very long time. Syria still is while Serbia was under the power of nationalists for a very long time and started several wars.
This makes these countries highly suspect when it comes to information because it is clear that they had great controls on information and manipulated it at will. The Russians and Syrians still place great controls on information. Try taking some photos of a Syrian airbase and see how long it takes for them to arrest you.
Now the USA is also known for lying but it is hypothetically a democracy and is a lot more open than Russia, Syria or Serbia. Anyone in the world can track the serials of American aircraft and their location. You can generally visit American military facilities without a problem. American families also cry out when their relatives get killed. American investigative reporters love cover ups and it would not be hard to uncover huge losses.
Remember that the US has admitted to great losses in Iraq. They might lie about the political situation or make grandiose statements of improvements in Iraq, but we know American soldiers are dying and we know that helicopters are being written off.
When it comes to Israel, then it becomes a total gray area. Israel is a democracy that acts more like a dictatorship when it comes to security issues.
So we don’t really know what true losses the Israelis suffered in any war they’ve fought in. And it doesn’t help that teir enemies have been dictatorships as well. So it’s a case of claim versus counter claim.
But Israel has several advantages to back up it’s claims. Again it’s hypothetically a democracy, whereas Syria is not. It also has a track record of winning wars and maintaining truly elite military forces that utlise innovative tactics. The equipment it has used also has a good track record when used by other users be they the USA or Pakistan (F-16) or whatever. Syrian equipment such as the MiG-21 or MiG-23 is not that highly regarded in terms of performance.
DubyaMig-21s that we have are at least 10 years older airframes than Mig-29s. The airframes can last only so long before the material becomes to buckle under stress,corrode etc. And most,if not all Mig-21s are stored in the open and exposed to weather conditions. It is no wonder they said that they want to retire Mig-21s by 2010.
Mig-29 can carry a better radar than Mig-21 which for an interceptor is very important and has more external pylons .Its two engines make it more reliable. Look at the other nations that have adopted twin engines for their airplanes (Rafale,Eurofighter…).
I do not think that prestige is the reason as the Air Force would rather have a better airplane than one purely for prestige. There is no reason to show off,and no money of course.They just want to stick with the best they’ve got,and thats Mig-29.
This makes a lot of sense.
Perhaps the MiG-29 can be used in conjunction with the MiG-21 for airspace policing. So merge the two interceptor squadrons into 1 and used the MiG-29’s as a form of lead fighter, while the MiG-21 acts to keep pilots current on supersonic aircraft.
Because a squadron with a mere 5 airframes is nearly useless. It would be impossible to keep all 5 operational as one has to take account for maintenance requirements. It would also mean that only a small pool of pilots can be actually kept current on this aircraft.
Also in Air Forces Monthly, it was said the one of the MiG-29’s was in especially bad condition. Is this true? And if it is, is this airframe recoverable or is it only good for cannibalizing spares?
Also djnik do you know how long the Orao’s are meant to be kept in service?
DubyaInteresting pics there mate, I wonder if anyone has used an Mi-8/17 as a motor home, there certainly seems to be enough room for it!
Yay. That way many more poor Americans can be housed. Instead of trailerpark trash we have Hip trash!
DubyaAnd of course that means they’re ALL a waste of money huh? :rolleyes:
No, not at all.
My point is that the US military is susceptible to failure as much as any organisation. The F-35 could be a great fighter, a mediocre fighter or a total failure.
DubyaAre they still in service?
Judging by their paint jobs they aren’t. But then maybe they have not been repainted after overhauls and other maintenance.
DubyaYou mean : Vidimo se ! It is 2 words actually:)
Somehow i think you are not from Serbia :rolleyes: Or you need a new keyboard. I see letters on mine not symbols.
I personally think he’s a troll.
Comments such as the “Mi-8 is better than a Mi-17 and besides they look the same” seem only designed to incite responses.
DubyaEver heard of latinica?
That might be too Croatian! 😀
DubyaI don’t believe for an instant that the USAF/USN/USMC would waste their money on a flop.
You’ve never worked for a government agency then! 😀
DubyaMi-26’s will cost too much to maitain. The Mi-17’s could be good but Mi-8’s are better, plus they look exactly the same.
No offence, but you are either trolling or you are insanely clueless.
The Mi-17 is an upgraded version of the Mi-8 and is the current production version of the Hip. It has stronger engines, a more powerful transmission and many of the modern ones include updated electronics. Unless you are referring to the Russian Army Mi-8MT because the Ruski’s never adopted the Mi-17 designation.
But the line “…plus they look the same” would point you out as a troll. Cause no-one is that dumb.
DubyaIt is very easy to identify the “Air Forces intended to fly airshow routines on sunny Saturdays.” Typically, the air forces in question lack any conceivable mission other than vague references to “disaster assistance” and “humanitarian relief.” Of course, the air forces in question fail to deploy much of anything when some sort of crisis occurs.
They also have only token combat forces usually consisting of a single squadron of fast jets.
Most modern airforces only exist so that countries can pretend they have airforces or to meet some NATO requirement in the case of the Eastern European states.
DubyaMi-6’s are ancient and on their way out in most airforces.
Mi-26 is the way to go.
As for Serbia’s airforce, they should acquire new helos (primarily Mi-17/-35 combo) and keep the MiG-21’s chugging along until they can afford a new fighter.
DubyaFortunately this is exactly what I was thinking:
Of course you suggest that we stop buying Russian which I don’t completely agree with. Or rather, I don’t agree with completely buying western because a, we may never get into either the EU or NATO (although frankly NATO looks more likely), b, Russia today aren’t Russia from 1998 and the Russia of tomorrow (possibly with close links to India and China) may be even better off and keeping the Russians sweet could pay dividends even if we do get into the EU and doubly so if we don’t, and finally, c, Russian kit tends to be better value for money (and can be integratable into western force structures if the client so desires). Some of those points overlap but I’m tired – so sue me.
Russia is also a lot more volatile so your spares could run dry very quickly.
And support may also not be forthcoming. The latest model Flankers and Fulcrums have not been adopted by the Russian military. Indeed nearly all the MiG-29’s sold over the last 15 years have been surplus aircraft that were built and never delivered or ex-Soviet aircraft.
The Flanker has been more of a success story mainly thanks to China and India. But do you think a Su-30 is really cost effective or actually even necessary for a small country like Serbia?
As for the PAK-FA it’s a paper plane. Currently it’s the year 2006. Given the gestation period any fighter aircraft goes through (look at anything from the F-22 to the J-10) I doubt it will fly anytime in the next 5 years and probably won’t enter service for a further 10 or even 15.
If Serbia did the smart thing it’d be striving to join NATO and maybe one day the EU (I say maybe cause the EU is a mixed bag).
DubyaI don’t think the Gripen’s export opportunities are very good. There is a lot of cheap ex-USAF F-16’s available. And I expect Block 25 and 30 and even earlier Block 40’s to come on the market soon especially as from what I remember the latest BRAC round pretty much disbanded the last Block 25 and 30 airframes. Plus the US is willing to near give them away.
And there is still a large-ish number of MiG-29’s available, especially as the Ukraine considerably down sizes it’s fleet. These may be borderline junk but for a lot of countries it’s all they can afford.
I would think the following would be potential customers:
Thailand – has a current requirement for fighters and has been known to make “odd ball” purchases (e.g. L-39ZA and ex-Luftwaffe Alhpa Jets).
Pakistan – despite it’s commitment to new F-16’s, the Pakistanis have shown interest in the JAS-39 before. And perhaps they can wrangle 65 JAS-39 for a cheaper price than brand new F-16’s. A long shot though by any stretch of the imagination.
the Philippines – highly unlikely but given ithe fluidity of its government, there might be a chance.
Bulgaria – needs new fighters. Cheap JAS-39 might appeal to them. However court decision to continue MiG-29 upgrade will probably negate any new fighter purchases.
Romania – same as Bulgaria. They have a requirement for 48 aircraft to replace LanceR’s.
DubyaMorale of the sory: both SiCG and Albania are poor countries where people are struggling to make ends meet. Their militaries are in a state of decline and neither can afford to maintain even a semblance of past forces.
DubyaThe only problem with Labor getting into power is that they won’t be able to afford any new defence equipment after they run the economy into the ground like they did in 1991.
Besides Labour is a party in name only. It’s still a bunch of factions who are battling internally for control.
And remember Beazley’s track record with losing elections.
As much as I disagree with Howard and co, they are currently IMO the only viable possible option in Australia right now.
Sign In
