Good fighters, these Pashtuns. Might not be compatible with Western/European mindset, but can’t avoid to acknowledge their willingness to make sacrifices. Very effective and efficient attack.

That should be the most successful enemy anti-air operation against U.S. aerial assets since December 20th, 1972 over Hanoi.

I agree that the Pashtuns and Talibans are very good fighters and their strategy has been superb.

They’ve managed to stay in the fight and force a withdrawal by the world’s leading super power despite not having access to support from other major powers (unlike Vietnam), limited resources and remarkebly low casualties (when compared to other similar wars ala Vietnam, Sri Lanka, Sudan etc)..

6 USMC AV-8Bs destroyed, 2 damaged in insurgent attack

Further to this, jets (and one killed Marine) were from Yuma based Marine Attack Squadron (VMA) 211.

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/sep/15/yuma-harrier-jets-marine-felled-afghanistan/

Big loss for the Marines. From memory they are already being forced to disband one Harrier squadron due to shortages of airframes. This will put another at risk.

They might have to reconsidering remanufacture some of those English Harriers they acquired for spares.

As I said before, it is perfectly valid to debate the specifics of decisions, but simply accusing a dozen highly professional forces of being some combination of:

Incompetent
Lying
Confused by marketing/powerpoint

or

Forced by political pressure to purchase an aircraft they don’t want

because they made a decision that doesn’t fit well into your simplistic nationalist worldview is childish.

These forces absolutely, unquestionably, know vastly more than you do and they are making the best decisions they can based on the information they have.

Sorry but you sound rather naive and don’t seem to understand the aerospace or defence industry.

Here’s some other examples:

– US decided guns would no longer play any role in air combat as missiles would completely take over. Fine until Vietnam where the AAMs were unreliable and the close engagements favoured Vietnamese gun armed fighters.

– In 1957 the British government pretty much killed the British defence aerospace industry by declaring aircraft obsolete compared to missiles. Boy were they wrong.

– Latest USAF tanker procurement program – wracked by politics and corruption.

– RAF Nimrod MRA 4 program – initial incompetence (using old airframes to save pounds but not having checked the state of aircraft)

– US Army RAH-66 Comanche program

– Australian Nomand aircraft program – basically something to keep the Government Aircraft Factory running.

And I have no opinion on F-35. It’s still such an unknown. I suspect we won’t really know until it starts regular squadron service.

I reckon the F/A-18s would’ve thumped the TNI-AU pilots.

I’ve heard the TNI-AU isn’t exactly the most professional AF out there.

I don’t think they’ll go Chinese due to national pride.

If they ever get new jets, I suspect it’ll be Russian and probably Flankers.

This might not be the most optimum jet for them, but most military procurement seems to focus on political, economical and egotistical considerations and not on operational requirements.

For the Serbs this seems especially relevant as they seem to have inherited the Jugoslav bent for self sufficiency/independence at all costs. Whilst buying Flankers might not seem “self sufficient” it is a bit of a “#$%^ you” to NATO. :p

Sad news to see the Tonkas out. They’ve performed brilliantly over the years.

German ones go the way of the dodo in about 2020 too.

That’ll leave the Italian and Saudi ones in service.

Given Israeli electronics capability, I wouldn’t be surprised if F-35 Kosher was the best model.

Until the Australians get theirs and proclaim it’s the best one, even if it’s identical to a USAF/Dutch/Japanese versions (in the past when I’ve read Aussie mags ala Australian Aviation apparently Aussie F/A-18s are better than any others in the world).