dark light

Teer

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 751 through 765 (of 1,980 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Hot Dog Indian AF News and Discussion Part 17 #2332018
    Teer
    Participant

    Wish they’d upgraded the Avionics to true cutting-edge standards rather than settling for a technological level equivalent to the 7-year old MKI. Given these will likely be flying for another 15 years into the era of 5th gen aircraft I’d have preferred they at least have a phased array radar(instead of Zhuk-ME), an HMD(instead of Schel HMS), MAWS and so on…

    Not that simple..
    The avionics are fairly cutting edge. Its every bit the equal of most upgrades being sold on the market today.

    It has an integrated EW suite superior to the Elta 8222 SPJ, with a DARE UREP with an AESA jammer, derived from the suite developed for the LCA which is superior to the Elta 8222 SPJ (but it can carry that as well, typical IAF standardization).

    The Helmet sight is Top sight from Thales.

    The rest of the avionics will be fairly modern as well – including a new nav suite same as on the IAF fleet wide (Sigma-95N based). Glass cockpit (4 MFDs), HOTAS as well.

    The radar is not Phased Array, but a phased array comes with a significant weight penalty! The Zhuk-ME in its latest version is fairly competitive against similar systems e.g. RDY2. It has a 650 mm antenna, pretty good gain, 1.5KW average power & should be fairly powerful. The IAF version is the M2E variant with additional processing. With the IAF datalinking away and umpteen AESAs on the way via the MMRCA and a very powerful Bars and upgrades planned, you need a radar able to guide weapons to maximal distance & maintain silence otherwise. The combination of a powerful jammer, probable RCS reduction (see the 29K) will give this aircraft first look versus most regional peers IMO.

    Coming to MAWS, check under my posts for the MKI & you’ll see why IAF has not acquired currrent MAWS off the shelf. They are not reliable enough for fast moving fighters. The IAF intends to mostly procure an indevelopment system. Meanwhile choppers and transports are getting AN/AAR-60.

    Its also receiving the OLS-UEM, the imaging IRST which also has TV channel developed for the MiG-35.

    Add new engines, airframe hours, a shift to predictive maintenance, an offsets facility which is to be fulfilled by spares transfer & maintenance facilities funded by Russia, additional fuel and IFR (the most critical part), and new weapons (pretty much everything on the MKI).

    And this is a superb upgrade by any standards. This has turbocharged the MiG-29. The Mirage 2000 upgrade OTOH, addresses the avionics but not the engine & does not include so much reengineering. Plus its taking more time.

    Some reading info.

    Radar
    http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogscript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3A27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3A2169bc6d-c814-4f70-97ee-4d3d39c241e1

    Stealth
    http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogscript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3A27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3Adff8783a-1885-4567-9cc7-340a81179c86

    EW
    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-9CpB8C_ptDI/TZo3V_uzPkI/AAAAAAAAACY/SdJSSzRgH3g/s1600/Internal+EW+suite+for+MiG-29UPG.JPG

    OLS-UEM
    http://www.aviapedia.com/video/new-mig-35-ols-video

    Overall Upgrade capabilities
    http://en.take-off.ru/news/102-feb2011/558-mig-29upg-india-02-2011

    in reply to: Hot Dog Indian AF News and Discussion Part 17 #2332039
    Teer
    Participant

    1.statement does not make sense especially 2.as we do not have any idea of how much getting on the ladder would have cost compared to what they are trying to do now.

    First go and reconcile 1. and 2. You state “we do not have any idea about how much getting on the ladder would have cost” versus its alternative yet are definitive its a better idea. Huh?

    BTW, whats this getting on the ladder business? Whats the point in getting on the ladder if the ladder leads to nowhere and wont give the capabilities required?

    And not getting on the ladder will cost India $20 million + when it makes the purchase of the MMRCA because the LCA and its sub technologies including the radar and engine could not be delivered by DRDO or GTRE in time.

    What? Where are these numbers coming from? And what irrelevant stuff are you saying now? Because the LCA has little to do with the medium weight MMRCA which by the way is all about acquiring relatively developed systems off the shelf. The LCA is all about developing stuff locally. Which means more risk to begin with.

    in reply to: Hot Dog Indian AF News and Discussion Part 17 #2332211
    Teer
    Participant

    http://pics.livejournal.com/fotografersha/pic/0059s456

    Indian UPG….@ MAKS rehersal?

    Is that a 1500 Ltr centerline tank? So thats 950 Ltrs in the hump+ 1500 Ltrs tank, ie 2450 Ltrs extra on the MiG-29 Upg, with the fuel from the center tank used first? So it wont even impact maneuvering capabilities.

    Have to say, the Upg may be not a looker (with that tank below) but its a thorough rework to first class standards.

    Teer
    Participant

    @Quadbike and Teers
    Your whining, is not gonna change situation in ground.

    Errmm… you are the one whining about the US’s God complex and how its not doing a “grand bargain” ™ with Pakistan!

    But seems like US has a god like complex, does not want deal with lesser countries.

    Pakistan is gonna be relevant to US for awhile.

    Is that the reason for this whine? “Pakistan has been villified for years, so dont worry about that.”.

    Sure, Pakistan will be relevant. Just that the US is increasingly looking for proper accounting of how its money is spent & that it gets its moneys worth.

    Looking at evidence of transfer, which relies on Pakistani statements at beginning of crisis, only concrete fact from this is certain members can gloat. SO sad.

    No gloating here. Just a pointer to the facts as they stand..

    US failed to give what Pakistan really wanted! I am not gonna spell it out, figure it out yourself.

    Yeah, figured it out. Hand over Afghanistan to the Taliban on a platter, hand over fifty odd F-22’s, a trillion bucks (since billions are passe), and yeah, thats probably for starters.

    “Failed to give Pakistan what it really wanted” – indeed.

    Teer
    Participant

    On a serious note. Pakistan has made over $ 20 Billion out of the United States over 2002-2010 and thats not taking the time value of money into the question.

    Pakistan recapitalized its armed forces with US assistance already. The term Grand Bargain is apt.

    http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/pakaid.pdf

    Direct Overt U.S. Aid Appropriations and Military Reimbursements to Pakistan, FY2002-FY2012
    Prepared by the Congressional Research Service for distribution to multiple congressional offices, May 6, 2011
    (rounded to the nearest millions of dollars)

    2002 to 2010: Grand Total (without 2011 numbers) $ 20,713 mn

    And

    http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R41856.pdf

    The Pentagon reports total Foreign Military Sales agreements with Pakistan worth $5.4 billion for FY2002-FY2010 (inprocess
    sales of F-16 combat aircraft and related equipment account for more than half of this).
    The United States also has provided Pakistan with more than $2.1 billion in Foreign Military Financing (FMF) grants since 2001 (including FY2010 funds). These funds are used to purchase U.S. military equipment for longer-term modernization efforts. Pakistan also has been granted U.S. defense supplies as Excess Defense Articles (EDA).

    Major post-2001 defense supplies
    provided or soon to be provided under FMF include:

    • eight P-3C Orion maritime patrol aircraft and their refurbishment (valued at $474
    million; two delivered);
    • about 6,312 TOW anti-armor missiles ($186 million; at least 2,007 delivered);
    • more than 5,600 military radio sets ($163 million);
    • six AN/TPS-77 surveillance radars ($100 million);

    31 “Pakistani Military ‘Misspent Up to 70% of American Aid,’” Guardian (London), February 28, 2008; “Revamping
    Aid to Pakistan is Expected in Bush Report,” New York Times, December 7, 2008. In mid-2008, the leader of
    Pakistan’s ruling party, now-President Zardari claimed, without providing evidence, that, as president, Pervez
    Musharraf had been passing only a fraction of the funds over to the Pakistani military, leaving some $700 million of
    reimbursements per year “missing” (quoted in “Where’s the Money?,” Sunday Times (London), August 10, 2008).

    • six C-130E transport aircraft and their refurbishment ($76 million);
    • five refurbished SH-2I Super Seasprite maritime helicopters granted under EDA ($67 million);
    • the USS McInerney, an ex-Perry class missile frigate (via EDA, $65 million for refurbishment);
    • 20 AH-1F Cobra attack helicopters via EDA ($48 million, 12 refurbished and
    delivered); and
    • 121 refurbished TOW missile launchers ($25 million).

    Supplies paid for with a mix of Pakistani national funds and FMF include:

    • up to 60 Mid-Life Update kits for F-16A/B combat aircraft (valued at $891
    million, with $477 million of this in FMF; Pakistan’s current plans are to
    purchase 35 such kits); and
    • 115 M-109 self-propelled howitzers ($87 million, with $53 million in FMF).
    Notable items paid for entirely with Pakistani national funds include:
    • 18 new F-16C/D Block 50/52 combat aircraft, with an option for 18 more (valued at $1.43 billion, 17 delivered to date34);
    • F-16 armaments including 500 AMRAAM air-to-air missiles; 1,450 2,000-pound bombs; 500 JDAM bomb tail kits for gravity bombs; and 1,600 Enhanced Paveway laser-guided bomb kits, also for gravity bombs ($629 million);
    • 100 Harpoon anti-ship missiles ($298 million);
    • 500 Sidewinder air-to-air missiles ($95 million); and
    • six Phalanx Close-In Weapons System naval guns ($80 million).

    Other major articles transferred via EDA include:
    • 14 F-16A/B combat aircraft;
    • 59 T-37 military trainer jets’ and
    • 550 M-113 armored personnel carriers.35

    Under Coalition Support Funds (part of the Pentagon budget), Pakistan has received 26 Bell 412 utility helicopters, along with related parts and maintenance, valued at $235 million.

    Under Section 1206 (global train and equip), Frontier Corps, and PCF/PCCF authorities (all overseen by the Defense Department to date), Pakistan has received four Mi-17 multirole helicopters (another six were provided temporarily at no cost), two King Air 350 surveillance aircraft, 450 vehicles for
    the Frontier Corps, 20 Buffalo explosives detection and disposal vehicles, hundreds of M-141 34 The first of the new F-16s were delivered in June 2010, when three aircraft were inducted into the Pakistani Air
    Force at the Shabaz Air Base near Jacobabad. A fourth delivery saw five more planes delivered in December, representing “near completion” of the new Block 52 squadron (all 18 aircraft are set to be delivered by January 2012) (see the U.S. Embassy’s December 13, 2010, release at http://islamabad.usembassy.gov/pr-10121309.html).

    Bunker Defeat Munitions, helicopter spare parts, sophisticated explosives detectors, night vision devices, radios, body armor, helmets, first aid kits, litters, and large amounts of other individual soldier equipment. Pakistan is eager to receive more counterinsurgency hardware for use in
    western Pakistan, including armored personnel carriers, laser target designators, laser-guided munitions, and more night-vision goggles and surveillance gear. They also request better and
    more sophisticated surveillance and communications equipment, along with more attack and utility helicopters.

    Despite the provision of equipment suited to unconventional warfare, some analysts have continued to criticize the programming of security-related aid to Pakistan. Foremost among these are assertions that the Pakistani military maintains an institutional focus on conventional warfighting
    capabilities oriented toward India and that it has used U.S. security assistance to bolster these capabilities while paying insufficient attention to the kinds of counterinsurgency capacity that U.S. policy makers might prefer to see strengthened. For example, of the some $2.1 billion
    in Foreign Military Financing provided to Pakistan from FY2002-FY2010, more than half has been used by Islamabad to purchase weapons of limited use in the context of counterterrorism.37

    Pretty much everything, from fighters to PGMs to artillery to radars to antiship missiles, APCs, TOW missiles, trainers …and yet? Not enough, more grand bargaining required.

    Teer
    Participant

    Actually if I stop oneliners and list the freebies it would possibly take several pages to describe. As for U.S turning against Libya IIRC it was the UK and France which were more pro-active there and its a case of humanitarian intervention.

    US did make a Grand Bargain with Pakistan by supplying them with weapons in return for their support for war on terror, worked well as long as Musharaff was in charge and Pakistan started playing the double game after him, leading to the current situation. IMO had musharaff been in power it would have been a joint US-PAK operaiton to kill laden.

    The “grand bargain” didnt turn out too well for the US either even with Musharraf around.

    The Longwarjournal site has some really apt imagery for the situation.

    http://www.longwarjournal.org/threat-matrix/images/Whack-a-Taliban.gif

    http://www.longwarjournal.org/threat-matrix/images/Taliban-ISI-Hand-Puppet.gif

    This one of course is the most ironic.

    http://www.longwarjournal.org/threat-matrix/images/pakus-truth.jpg

    Teer
    Participant

    I don’t now if you can read the traditional Chinese words, because the links you want are often written / discussed in traditional Chinese words, not English….

    Anyway, let me provide some links about the stories of original F-CK-1 and its upgrading projects:

    http://www.tnu.edu.tw/mt/EDUS/military%20olosy/IDF.pdf

    http://www.wretch.cc/blog/luke822/20527144
    http://www.wretch.cc/blog/luke822/20528186
    http://www.wretch.cc/blog/luke822/20529392
    http://www.wretch.cc/blog/luke822/20530557
    http://www.wretch.cc/blog/luke822/20531691

    http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-CK-1%E6%88%B0%E9%AC%A5%E6%A9%9F

    http://forum.acewings.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=5181&whichpage=1

    Thanks a ton – I’ll machine translate the links.

    Teer
    Participant

    Good work Pakistan, maybe next time Americans will think twice before barging in.

    American friendship has been a huge liability for Pakistan, it has almost ripped the country apart. No amount of money is worth 30,000 civillian and 5000 military deaths.

    Can’t blame American friendship for the handiwork of Pakistan’s own establishment & its hitherto proxies.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/05/world/asia/05pakistan.html?hp

    Pakistan’s Spies Tied to Slaying of a Journalist

    ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Obama administration officials believe that Pakistan’s powerful spy agency ordered the killing of a Pakistani journalist who had written scathing reports about the infiltration of militants in the country’s military, according to American officials.

    New classified intelligence obtained before the May 29 disappearance of the journalist, Saleem Shahzad, 40, from the capital, Islamabad, and after the discovery of his mortally wounded body, showed that senior officials of the spy agency, the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, directed the attack on him in an effort to silence criticism, two senior administration officials said.

    The intelligence, which several administration officials said they believed was reliable and conclusive, showed that the actions of the ISI, as it is known, were “barbaric and unacceptable,” one of the officials said. They would not disclose further details about the intelligence.

    But the disclosure of the information in itself could further aggravate the badly fractured relationship between the United States and Pakistan, which worsened significantly with the American commando raid two months ago that killed Osama bin Laden in a Pakistan safehouse and deeply embarrassed the Pakistani government, military and intelligence hierarchy. Obama administration officials will deliberate in the coming days how to present the information about Mr. Shahzad to the Pakistani government, an administration official said.

    Teer
    Participant

    Funny thing is those MANPADs would probably be used before long on some PAF aircraft. Some fantasies that people have though…

    Like as if its some “corrupt elite” that favour US aid, and the military will fight the US by supplying weapons to the Taliban or even shooting down US drones, while in real life, its the military thats soaked up the lions share of the US aid, has allowed drone strikes to continue, and has been receiving US training to even do COIN.

    Fantasies indeed.

    If its US mil. vs Pak. mil. I don’t think we’ll need Paul the octopus to predict the outcome.

    Teer
    Participant

    Great. I hope the US does that the next time Pakistan cries for aid relief. Maybe China can match those dollars 1 for 1.

    @ Teer, thank you for the link. Really hope it keeps moving in that direction.

    It is too bad Russia and the US can’t come to an understanding, and serve mutual interests in Afghanistan. Come on Medvedev, give the US expanded transit rights.

    Agreed. Talib success in Afghanistan = Bad for CARepublics = Bad for Russia

    Teer
    Participant

    All the Americans and their allies here forget that Pakistan is the main route to Afghanistan. If they want their main supply routes and main air passage cut off, sure stop all monetary inflows there.

    You’re not giving anything away for free, you’re diplomatically buying a land and air route to your crazy Crusader fire-bases in Afghanistan.

    The people of Pakistan would like nothing better than to have none of your money and none of your people / trucks / cargo / aircraft anywhere near Pakistan. If you lose your corrupt elite friends in Pakistan, we’ll be going after drone attacks with our own air strikes and cruise missiles. Think about it. Think about what would happen when we start handing SAMs to the taliban.

    These particular ones would work great and are manufactured in Pakistan:

    http://www.defence-analyst.co.uk/siteimages/large/anza_3_.jpeg

    Couple that with ATGMs and a healthy supply of SBRLs and mortars, and we’ll see how well you sleep or by what route you escape.

    To sum up, feel free to stop your “aid” anytime you like.

    Ermmm….thats very impressive prose:

    “Crazy Crusader fire bases” – LOL (is that patented?)

    Sorry to poke a few holes there..

    But Pak seems to be pretty reliant on US aid (those F-16s etc all do come from the US). Shooting down US drones = act of war.

    Handing SAMS to the Taliban & bragging about it, really?

    Those Anza’s BTW, are AFAIK, license produced QW series MANPADS from Norinco.

    Supporting the Taliban versus the US, with SAMS, SBRLS, ATGMs etc…seriously? And you expect no backlash from the US?

    Teer
    Participant

    F-CK-1 upgrading is something like Indian MIG-29UPG / Mirage UPG / Jaguar Darin, which can reduce the numbers of fighter that are needed to replaced right now, but you still need to introduce the new fighters to replace the outdate old fighters that have no more upgrading value (F-5E/F for ROCAF, just like MIG-21 and MIG-27 for IAF….)

    Agreed, but can you point me to some links about these or other ROCAF/ROC programs? I have always been pretty interested in ROC systems, which appear fairly credible and often more sophisticated than PRC counterparts (apart from the surprising lack of ROC interest in tanks or land systems).

    Teer
    Participant

    TR1,

    Looks like something is being done.

    Wall Street Journal

    U.S. Links Pakistani Aid to Performance
    White House Is Basing Billions in Assistance Funds on Islamabad’s Ability to Meet a ‘Scorecard’ of Security Objectives
    By ADAM ENTOUS And SIOBHAN GORMAN

    WASHINGTON—The White House has started conditioning the award of billions of dollars in security assistance to Pakistan on whether Islamabad shows progress on a secret scorecard of U.S. objectives to combat al Qaeda and its militant allies. The U.S. also is asking Pakistan to take specific steps to ease bilateral tensions.

    The classified system, put in place after the U.S. raid that killed al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden at his Pakistani hideout, signals a shift by the White House toward a pay-for-performance relationship with Pakistan, as doubts grow that the two countries can for now forge a broader alliance based on shared interests.

    A senior military official called the unusual new approach “a hard-knuckled reflection of where we are right now” in relations.

    Since 2001, the U.S. has lurched from one policy to another in an attempt to win Pakistan’s help in fighting al Qaeda and its allies, only to find itself frustrated by what the U.S. sees as Islamabad’s double-game in accepting American aid—more than $20 billion since the 9/11 attacks—while still providing clandestine support to some of America’s enemies.

    U.S. aid to Pakistan, including economic and security-related assistance, totaled nearly $4.5 billion in fiscal 2010. 😮 Security aid accounted for more than $2.7 billion of that, according to the Congressional Research Service.

    The White House is responding in part to mounting calls in Congress for putting stringent new conditions on future aid to Pakistan, officials say. Many lawmakers have demanded sharp cuts in military assistance.

    “The message is: You make progress in these areas, and we can release some of this assistance,” a senior U.S. official said of the review process. “Give us something that we can show [Congress] that we’re working together.”

    Under the new approach, the office of the Director of National Intelligence James Clapper is compiling classified scorecards that track Pakistan’s cooperation in four areas, referred to in the White House as “baskets.”

    Each basket contains a to-do list that the administration wants from Pakistan.

    More at the link:
    http://professional.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904823804576504383697702592.html?mg=reno-wsj#articleTabs_comments

    Teer
    Participant

    He replied to TR1, not the thread starter. :p

    in reply to: Carrier Hilarity on the Beeb #2332617
    Teer
    Participant

    Hmmn funny Tim doesn’t pick out the other over expensive projects such as the A330 Tanker program, the A400M, the C-17 or the 16 Billion Typhoon program when using his reasioning we will only need 20 for UK air defence as there is no valid reason for British forces to be deployed overseas.

    Arent they much cheaper though than a carrier, and also more flexible? The A330 IIRC can do both transport and tanking & transports can be used for everything from wartime to disaster relief, getting UK citizens out of harms way etc. The Typhoon program is already being scaled down as well.

Viewing 15 posts - 751 through 765 (of 1,980 total)