thobbesMany countries are not purchased fighters. Because they’re waiting for one the world economy to improve and two the F-35 to enter service.
Which countries?
Provide examples.
Most of those NATO partners couldn’t afford second hand F-16s when the economy was good, let alone F-35s.
And there’s plenty of fighter procurements happening in this terrible economy. Countries that need* fighters are ordering them.
Where there is a need, there is a way.
The only place that I can think of that is not ordering new aircraft and probably usually would is Greece.
thobbesDo you now how many countries ordered more F-16’s than was originally planned.:D
Different time – most large F-16 orders (100+ aircraft) were made during the Cold War or were heavily subsidised by USA (Egypt and Israel).
As you can see from list I posted above, most recent F-16 sales have been small (24 aircaft).
Oh and Australia seems to be reembracing 2 fleet type.
Countries like Australia or Netherlands or Canada only purchase aircraft every few decades.
For most NATO partners involved in F-35, last time they ordered aircraft was during the 1980s.
So whatever F-35s they order now will be most likely the only orders they make.
Also I seriously doubt the F-35 is going to be available to a lot of current F-16/F/A-18/F-15 users due to either economics or technical complexity or political factors.
In fact large F-15 user Saudi Arabia is already a no-go and I suspect large F-16s user Egypt and Pakistan are in the same boat. That’s 600 odd aircraft that won’t be replaced by F-35 unless USA completely turns its back on Israel.
thobbesYet, those types aren’t selling! Hell, I believe even secondhand Gripens are available but no buyers.
Thing called politics and economics – Wikileaks has already shown the diplomatic pressure placed by US on smaller NATO states to buy American.
And so far neither Rafale nor Eurofighter have lived up to export orders – Rafale has only been selected (not yet ordered) by India and Eurofighter has won 3 orders for 99 aircraft – Austria (15), Oman (12) and Saudi Arabia (72)
Compare to Gripen with 5 successful orders for 88 aircraft – South Africa (26), Hungary (14), Czech Republic (14), Thailand (12) and Switzerland (22)
And F-16 was selling well up to recently with new build sales to Oman (24), Morocco (24), Iraq (36), Pakistan (32), Poland (48), Chile (10), UAE (80) and second hand sales to Jordan (66), Chile (36) and Indonesia (24).
thobbesThe F-35 has better range than the Hornet and Super Hornet! Plus, do you know the range of the J-20. Which, has yet to enter service and may never do so.:rolleyes:
Who cares if South Korea, Australia and Japan are smouldering ruins and the US Pacific fleet is sitting at the bottom of the Pacific.
Cause that’s what needs to happen if RCAF is defending it’s airspace against the Chinese.
And then 50-65 F-35s aren’t going to cut it.
thobbesIf, you’re talking 3rd World such countries can’t afford new “4th Generation Fighters. Let alone 4.5/5th Generation Fighter. So, what is your point?
Who’s talking 3rd world – look at most NATO partners – Portugal, Poland, Czech Republic, Hungary, Croatia, Bulgaria, Romania. Spain’s looking at selling off sizeable chunks of Eurofighters and retaining Gen 4 F/A-18A/B. Look at Switzerland who chose the JAS-39E/F instead of “more capable” Eurofighter/Rafale.
And even Denmark and co might not be able to afford F-35 in “meaningful numbers.”
Personally I think JAS-39/F-16C/D is the ideal candidate for these.
Even rich and up and coming countries such as Brazil don’t care much for 4.5/5 (how many delays) and still operate mainly 3rd generation jets.
Hence my point stands – 4.5/5 is too expensive for anyone other than Tier level
thobbesHow about Advanced Intergraded Air Defense Networks and 5th Generation Fighters coming from Russia and China. The F-35 will be vastly more survivable than the Super Hornet in the next 10-20 years. Which, is about the time Canada would receive Super Hornets. If, they ordered them in the near future instead of the F-35.
And they have the range to fly to Canada?
And what happened to NORADS? Hell what happened to US Allied forces in South Korea, Japan etc.
If the Chinese are able to fly J-20s over Vancouver, I suspect the war is already lost.
And whose Advanced Integrated Air Defence Networks – Iran’s? Syria’s? North Korea’s? Maybe Egypt’s but I suspect Uncle Sam can easily shut down systems supplied by Uncle Sam.
Most likely warzones do not have advanced IADS.
thobbesScooter, I think the price of all those jets is too high for smaller airforces.
The only airforces that need those kind of jets are those that actively plan to fight conventional wars against peer level opponents.
And in most cases even peer level is quite low – e.g. average fighter type in Latin America is 3rd generation F-5/Mirage III/5 derivative.
In Africa peer level is usually Su-25 rotting in a hangar.
Even in Asia, 4th generation is still cutting edge and will be in the long term future – F-35s will be rare whilst J-20/-31 will take a long time to operationalise.
But even then, older or cheaper jets are sufficient e.g. continental defence of US airspace or bombing of insurgents/3rd world conscripts can be handled by F-16s/Gripens/F/A-18s.
thobbesMoving forward, there is of course China; however I would much rather be in NATO and remain a US ally than switching to China. Shared values and all that.
NATO has no mandate in Asia Pacific (much to disgust of Australia who views itself as more NATO than NATO partners).
And I suspect most of the countries in NATO would not get involved in a conflict with China.
Some have suggested a Nordic alliance as an alternative; however it would most likely be too small. Denmark would not join in, and that would leave Sweden, Finland and Norway, which has a population of less than Australia…and quite a big area to defend!
To maintain a credible defence such a small alliance would probably need to increase the defence budget compared to today.
Area is not that big. And you would get economies of scale especially with assets such as training, maritime patrol, fighter aircraft, electronic warfare, logistics etc.
By the way Australia is defended by a military of about 58,000, 95 combat jets, 11-12 frigates and 6 (generally unseaworthy) submarines and is much bigger than combined area of Sweden, Finland and Norway and in a much more volatile region.
Given vast distances Australia maintains a large logistical component.
Sweden, Finland and Norway currently maintain a combined force of 67,000 active troops with 200 odd-combat aircraft but mich smaller navy and logistics due to smaller area.
thobbesThe point is no JSF Partner has left the program nor cancelled any orders. So, until that happens its just all talk in my opinion. Regardless, I believe most is just pressure to get a better deal. (if possible)
Also, just for argument sake. If, Canada could order 65 Super Hornets vs 50 Lightings (F-35’s). What would be the value in that??? As the former are vastly more capable and more importantly survivable.
Survivable against what?
Muhajedeen DShk and SA-7? Russian Tu-95s? USAF F-22s?
thobbesWhat is amaze me it’s all the good thing say about the Gripen? Its a mystere to me. Yes it’s cheap and it is probably what comes closest to that LM wanted to sell us with the F35: An F16 more capable and cheapest. But nobody has read the”EVALUATION REPORT SWITZERLAND” where the Gripen are behind the F/A18C/D in all areas…?
Capability is generally irrelevant especially when your last “war” was a month long civil war in 1847 and the current main purpose of your airforce is intercepting errant civil aviation aircraft and maintaining a presence.
Same applies to South Africa, Hungary and Czech Republic who all brought JAS-39.
The same applies to 90% of the world’s airforces.
The only Gripen customer that might ever use them in combat is Thailand and then it’s against the Cambodians who have no effective airforce or Myanmar whose mainstays is the F-7 and some MiG-29s or bombing Islamist insurgents in south of country.
thobbesF-16 if your US friendly – lots of spares support.
JAS-39C/D is good too.
thobbesGeelongcat – Israelis might have turned a blind eye to this sort of thing.
Both Israel and US was supplying Iran with arms – Israel did it because at the time Saddam’s Iraq was more of a threat to Israel than Iran.
thobbesIf they want to participate in coalitions in the future, they’ll stick with the F-35,” said one source familiar with the F-35 program.
I find this to be an interesting comment.
What sort of coalitions are we looking at?
Remember that in the last 3 coalition wars, there was no functional air defence present.
And you don’t need F-35s to bomb Iran or Syria either.
In fact for most work F/A-18E/F or F-16C/D Blk 50 is still completely adequate and will continue to be more than adequate in the foreseeable future.
thobbesUnexpected! Is F-16 Blk 30 buy still happening?
thobbesWe are in the worse world economy in decades. So, some countries maybe forced to slow down or put off orders in the short term. Which, has nothing to do with the capabilities of the F-35.
The Europeans ordered hundreds of F-16s, Tornados, F-104S, Mirage F1s etc in the 1970s when the economy was stuffed and fuel prices went through the roof.
And in case you didn’t notice, Australia is doing well economically. And they have delayed 12 F-35s and are looking at buying an additional 24 F/A-18s
Japan is also chugging along at usual speeds.
Also, none of the aforementioned have left the program or said they would not purchase the F-35.
So, until you find a confirmed Member that has left the program. Its all just talk. Especially, considering it not from official circles. Except for possible delays.
I totally agree with this one.
However you missed my point – most of the partners countries are generally not signing up for concurrent buys and indeed some are delaying concurrent buys – they’re looking at buying full spec aircraft later on.
Sign In
