But then I could say, that by 1995-2000 the first F-22, Rafale and EF would be entering service. I would be very careful to compare WarPac and NATO forces after 1986. Gorbatchev changed the game and the Cold war was about to end. After 1989 all is speculation.

If true and coming from real documents this could be very interesting, when it would disclose in which airspace the WarPac wanted to fight such battles.

Would they intend to sent large fighter forces over the FEB and fight those furballs over NATO territory, would they try to fight them over the FEB or would they anticipate to fight them over their territory.

I would rule out option 1, as the limited endurance of the MiGs and the limited GCI coverage would mean that their own fighters would be at a huge disadvantage in such battles. Especially if we believe that they need to form such attack groups, which would be detected by E-3s which would negate the element of surprise.

The other 2 options seem equally likely to me. But considering their basic tactic, which focussed on the Air Force supporting the deciding push of the ground forces, it would distract precious fighters from defending against nATO strikers and from escorting their own strikers.

Which leaves option 3. If NATO F-15s would operate over WarPac frontline troops they would keep the WarPac Air Forces from carrying out their main role according to WarPac doctrine. In that case such tactics to reduce the number of F-15s would start to make sense.

However that would mean that they would expect to loose control of the airspace over the FEB.

A clarification from the original source would be highly welcome.

The bad thing is, that Israel looses when it sinks a single Turkish warship in internation waters. It even looses if it shoots down one single Turkish fighter over international waters.

While this is certainly true I do believe the Argentine Government would have been a great deal less inclined to take the risk if the RN still had its CVs.

4-6 F-4s and a real garrison on the island would have worked as well.

Do not forget this is not KC-390 vs A400M only. A KC-390 purchased in 2019 instead of a A400M is money given to a direct rival to Airbus in the civil airpliner market. By that time it is very likely that Embraer is building or developing an enlarged EMB-190 that will bea competition to the A319/320. While it will also be the starting time of the A320 replacement project at Airbus

I don’t see any possibility of the USA buying a dozen KC-390.

Sweden currently has 8 C-130E/H, of which the newest was delivered in 1981, & could justify buying KC-390 to replace them.

France seems to be standardising on A400M (replacing Transall & C-130) & CN-235 as tactical transports, so buying KC-390 would be a purely political choice. The French are capable of such a political decision, though.

Exactly what I was thinking. Join forces with a country that has a large sahre in EADS, which is developing the A400M which they believe to be the ultimate C-130 replacement and also offers the C-295 for the lower capacity and costs markets.

Saab on the other had has no current airliner in production, but they have many old time operators of the 340 and 2000, which also have found their way into military service.

Nice to know that all those nice support assets are going to be capable to roam freely inside enemy territory too 😀
Gees

Datalinks do ring a bell?

Do you think that is likely, that F-22 would be operating with the radar on, while the opponent flies around with the nose cold? Does anybody believe that F-22 will be operating without E-3 (or whatever replaces them) and “Golden Eagles” (or other legacy fighters) support and still fly offensive CAPs or sweeps deep over enemy territory? In an netcentric environment the lower RCS and higher speed will always be an advantage to the F-22 against other fighter aircraft, even if they should also be supported by an equal effective C3 force. In most circumstances the F-22 will be able to choose the time and place of an attack.