SchorschThat is exactly what I thought. Somehow Schorsch sounds either Austrian or German to me.. But I have seen the location Toulouse and thought that it is much easier to suppose a Frenchman having a German nick than a German living in Toulouse, even if the latter is realistic, too..
Viele Grusse
Flex
Ce sommes beaucoup d’Allemand en Toulouse. Merci a Airbus et A trois-cent quatre-vingt. Je suis Allemand.
The Russian-Algerian gas agreement is a major step for this North African country towards joining the future cartel of gas exporters. Since Europe views it as Russia’s major rival in its gas market, this step will make the future gas alliance supra-regional, and will consolidate the positions of all producers at the talks with consumers. Russia’s G8 Presidency makes it an obvious leader in this still informal international forum. Analysts will see the Algerian visit of President Putin and its oil and gas results in the context of a would be gas OPEC under Russia’s strong influence.
What, Russia is the leader of G8? News for me. The might have presidency for a limited time, but that actually reflects a 0% increase in power.
If Algeria would invest the surplus money in anything useful except of weapons they would have more gain. However, there might be nothing really useful exportable from Russia except oil and arms. Very sad heritage of communism.
Schorsch100-0 wet dreams 😀 and yet you conveniently forget that a monkified MiG-25 was the first a2a kill in GWI. My scenario never had any F-22s going down in any case but somehow that magically materialized from nowhere :diablo: Confident, boasting doesnt help your cause; unles syou show some evidence of your said knowledge of Iran’s actual capabilities, I’d assume you’re a bed wetting teen wasting our time here. 🙂
I think the one to deliver is the one who makes the boldest claim. That is actually you. I just stick to the things one can assume from the obvious facts. Those are:
– Iran has only 1970 and early 1980 fighters
– Iran has a serious problem with spares and upgrades
– Iran has not updated its fighter fleet since
These information might be wrong, but that has to be proven (not other way around). If the information is true (or at least comes close to the truth), scenario will be as I described.
And I haven’t read any usable post by you since started this discussion, neither any coherent picture of the situation. If I overread anything please point it out.
SchorschIt was in the news about 6 months ago that Boing were going to take advantage of the delays in the F35 program to develop a further model of the F18 with the USN in mind, and I think it was going to have stealth features and maybe supercruise. I have not been able to see anything further on it though. It was to be in production in 2010, several years before the F35.
Esp Stealth and Supercruise cannot be retrofitted. The F-18 is the most non-supercruise aircraft in US inventory (ok, after B-52), because is has a bitchy transonic drag problem. Actually this is true for other fighters with similar layout: they have more drag than early supersonic fighters.
SchorschOK, if specialized CAS aircraft are so mandatory, then why your own Armee L’Air does not use any? If you got Mirage 2000C/N/D/Dash-5, why does your own airforce use Jaguars and Mirage F1CTs? Why have the expense of another two Mach 1,5+ types. And why field Rafales? You could be buying some ex-USAF Warthogs instead, there are enough of them at AMARC.
Yesterday I’ve been in Paris. They clearly need a CAS aircraft, at least to bomb Sorbonne university. :diablo:
flex, I am wondering that you didn’t figure out my real country of origin, you should have guessed by now (just think which folks could pronounce my name, hey, you even speak the language).
The Ivory Coast is no colony of France. If they were engaged in a real conflict there, a Mirage 2000 would surely be the wrong choice. Algeria has a real problem with insurgents, actually they don’t have control about a considerable percentage of their country. However, there seems to be a real improvement, after all the oil money is useful for something else than MiGs.
And some news on Algerian economy:
oil exports of total exports: 97%
oil earnings of GDP: 30%
federal budget percetage by oil earnings: 65%
GDP per Person: 1800 USD (UNO 2002)
GDP: 55 bn USD (UNO 2002)
If a very optimistic 10% growth rate is applied, we have 80 bn USD in 2006.
It is win situation for all the parties provided they can manage the complex deal.
Depends. Money invested in arms is normally wasted in money for development.
Schorschanother thought…
… oh no!
we can all agree that Iran has a bit of a knack at reverse engineering equipment as it sees fit. It has produced parts for the F-4, F-5 and F-14 as well as reverse engineering an entire F-5. Whats stopping them from reverse engineering and mass producing an F-14, possibly with russian engines and radar?
I could name hundreds of reasons, in the first hand capability. The last aircraft really reverse engineered was the B-29. Afterwards some aircraft were reproduced without license but with some technical insight (MiG-17, -19 and -21 by the Chinese). An F-14 is a totally different ball game and actually a pretty stupid decission to do. It doesn’t yield much advantages, if the radar and the weapons (esp Phoenix) are not available in the same quality. If anybody can reproduce an F-14 by counting the screws and rivets, he can build his own. the Iranians didn’t build any fighter yet.
Its the most likelly option as they would be able to hide the program more effectivelly as there would be no trace of importing foreign aircraft, and as you will never see the entire F-14 fleet in the one place at the one time then it is extremelly hard to verify if they have 10, 20 or 200. Especially if they make an effort to only fly the originals regularly, using them to train up the pilots and keep them current while they build up a larger force of home made tomcats.
Because the CIA only employs idiots and uses their satellites for watching naked woman (which are least likely on an Iranian beach)? The Iranians did never achieve the level of secrecy as the Russians did, and even those were not able to completly hide their programs.
I agree that some parts have been made for the F-14, but after all it doesn’t change a potential conflict. The Iranian air force is not a real problem in case of attack for any US/alliance force.
Schorschwell what i have heard the IRAN’s MIG 29s have gotten a good moderzation with also a state of art rader for there MIG 29 fighter fleet with also they have purchased brand new airdefence systems from Russia and Russia is still selling to IRAN defence systems and military equipment and maybe this might be a good thing for Russia that maybe Russia give some kind of defence system to IRAN to shoot down a f-22 so they can send it to them and they can look in it beacuse thats what happened in Serbia they shot down the F-117A stealth laser guided bomber and they sent the whole plane to Russia and also they could say they sold them a SU-37 and let them paint in IRAN colors and let maybe are really good pilot to shot down the thing beacuse the SU-37 is a deadly adivosiry to the F-22.
This discussion becoming more and more BS. So, now they have a “Flat Spin” on the top and an APG-79 in the front?
Whatever modernization they got, it won’t help. Iran will be completely monitored by AWACS in case of an attack. All bases will be attacked. Iran will never have the opportunity to launch fighters in a manner to have a real air defence. Anything they can hope for is a lucky shot. But that is still very unlikely.
SchorschSince we are playing a stretching game, So y not i stretch a little aswell. So i put this stretch in the mix.
What if Stinger missiles from Pakistan find their way across the boarder to Iran. Considering its a hand held model so taking out these targets is almost impossible. What would the latest USAF A/C do against their own technology working against them.
Comments guys?
They will first take-out the AD-system. Against the HAWKS it won’t be a problem, against the other systems not really, either. Then their is no point in going low, so your Stingers or Strelas become useless. You can reactivate them in case of an helicopter assault, but that is not likely.
even against a low flying target a Stinger is of limited use. It can normally only be used succesfully if the attack is on your position. An aircraft flying by at 500ft in 1km distance stretches a Stinger to its maximum, at 1.5km distance you won’t hit it.
Schorschnobody is saying that it will be an even fight. However, not all uneven fight ends 0-100. I’m simply considering all the possibilities and to me those claiming that ratio are living in a fantasy themselves.. the truth lies somewhere in between. Thats exactly what I am trying to get at. I NEVER claimed Iran does have MiG-31s.. all I’m saying is it is very probably they do have SOMETHING – could even be the J-8IIs with russian radars. But it easily could be the MiG-31s as well or even Su-27. I’m just accounting for the mystery plane factor with 15 MiG-31s and 15 F-22s on either side 🙂
You are just specualting and having wet dreams at night showing an F-22 going down in flames shot down by your personal favorite from whatever country (I guess most preferable would be an F-14, because it would be so ironic). Sorry to disappoint you. But in the old days even the stupid, bad-equipped guy scored some hits. These days are over.
An airwar can go out 100-0 without a problem (see “Freedom for Galile” 1982). The biggest problem in this case: Can Iran bring 100 aircraft in the air?
SchorschLook at current AlgAF inventory. They use a variety of MiG-23 types, included BN, MiG-25s, MiG-29s and Su-24 tactical bombers with M2 upgrade. A step towards Su-25s would be a step back in time.. Maybe Su-39s.
Why, because Mach 2 is mandatory over the battlefield nowadays? The USAF still uses its A-10 and is happy to have it. It may go alongside JSF some day.
If the objective is:
– support friendly troops against a variety of targets, not well defined (infantry, artillery, tanks, troop concentrations)
– stay on station for a while
– expect heavy enemy resistance in terms of gunfire and MANPADS
you’ll send an Su-25.
If the mission is to destroy particular building/target in enemy territory under support of SEAD and fighter cover you can use the MiG-29. Actually other aircraft would be better suited, but a MiG-29 can do the job (I agree, it is multi-role).
Which scenario is more likely for a third world country? If you have Su-27 anyways, why have the expense of another Mach2 fighter with worse performance if you want to use it for tactical purposes?
SchorschSo ain’t Vipers, Bugs and Flankers but I don’t see you coimplaining that Poland bought F-16C/D Block 52s.
You don’t see me complaining because it is not the topic. They bought MiG-29, didn’t they? I did not say that F-16 is the better choice. It has its own limitations. The Super Hornet can be called a nearly new aircraft.
So, MiG-29 is not a true multi-mission aircraft but Su-25 is, do I understand it correctly?
No, you don’t. For missions like counter-insurgency, air-to-ground attack of military forces (no point targets) and close-air-support the Su-25 is better suited. For interdiction tasks the MiG-29 would perform better but still not really great.
Range is no longer a big issue.
So, you are the MiG-29 smart-guy. Then please tell me: The “Fulcrum A” had approximately 3600 kg internal capacity, how much has the -SMT? Actually the F-18C is rather short ranged, having itself only 4900kg internal capacity.
Schorsch… and their former colonial masters just across the pond
Which constantly threaten Algeria with military invasion?
SchorschWhy is that?
The MiG-29 proved difficult to maintain, short in range and capabilities and overall sacrficing too much for agility. The newest versions have ironed out some problems, but still it is not a new aircraft. It is still not a true multi-mission aircraft. Hence there are other designs better suitable, for example a Su-25, especially when regarding the tasks of Algerias airforce: It is not to defend itself against US but to project power against insurgents and potentially neighbors (very unlikely).
Algeria is also increasing its long-term costs as fighters like to have spares, pilots and some upgrades.
GarryB, stay calm. It is not an anti-MiG claim. It applies to all aircraft. If you buy a fighter for n million USD, you have invest constantly to have it combat-ready, or at least close to it. That is very expensive. Depending on your maintenance cost, your desired level of activity and pilot skill level you need more or less money. If Algeria buys 70 new aircraft they not only spend the billions for purchase, they also increase their long-term costs. That might be an issue. We have seen in some examples that air forces loose capability rapidly when money is scarce. That is of less concern for land-based armys and definitely untrue for guerilla armys.
SchorschHas anyone considered that Iran is Chinas main energy source, and in todays china, energy is everything. What makes you guys think that china will just allow the US to stifle its economy on the pretext of non-ploriferation, anti-terrorism, whatever?
I think if the US is serious about going after Iran then it may find that when it does go in it would be facing more than the Iranian defence force… Energy is the one resource the Chinese can not give away, yet everyone seems to be ignoring this.
Has anyone considered that USA is China’s number one export market and Walmart actually the third biggest export customer of China. Is it wise to go into conflict with your biggest customer?
However, when talking about Iran’s airforce we are talking about US/alliance going in combat against their own inventory and tactics of 1980.
Is there maybe a slight chance that US/alliance might have an edge over their own outdated tactics?
What did Iran learn new in the mean time? How to fight MiG-23MS and Iraqi helicopters?
How did their F-4Es and F-14As improve over the last two decades? Maybe new light-bulbs because the old ones were out of stock?
Who delivered all-aspect IR missiles and newest ECCM technology to Iran lately? What idea do the Iranians have about the newest gimmicks of F-18E, F-15C/E and Navy systems? the US/alliance just have to look up old manuals.
SchorschI trust by that you mean the 400D not the standard 400!
I don’t think certification standards differ too much. For the few domestic version Boeing does not make a new certification. More likely is that they certify a -400D with increased landing weight with tests made for -400. They then reduce the cycles from 25,000 to 12,000 and schedule a complete inspection/replacement of the landing gear after 12,000 cycles to prove the further usage of the aircraft. 12,000 cycles translate into 6 years of service for 6 cycles a day.
I don’t know how much cycles are OK for a B747, but I know that domestic usage is limited to less than 10 years for -400. Another possibility would be mixed use for long haul and short haul.
However, any -400D will find itself in the desert long before its “mates of the production line” arrive there.
SchorschAlgeria’s GP is about 60 to 70 bn USD. So this deal worth 3.5 bn $ will take if stretched over 5 years about 0.7 bn USD a year or 1% of their annual GP. That is comparable to the annual costs of OIF for USA. However, it is questionable if a country like Algeria can afford such a deal without jeopardising some other things. Just to put it into perspective: It would be like Germany spending 25 bn USD a year for additional defense (or 125 bn USD in 5 years). That is double the money spend now.
Algeria is also increasing its long-term costs as fighters like to have spares, pilots and some upgrades. The overall combat value of the whole undertaking must be considered doubtful. The MiG-29 of any version is surely not the right aircraft for a country like Algeria. Other aircraft would have been more suitable, except they expect an attack in the near future.
Sign In
