I think currently the only Armee de ‘ Aire squadron assigned with nuclear deterrent role is EC 02.004 La Fayette at BA125 Istres.

One would think SSBN would be sufficient nuclear deterrent and in fact far more viable than short range Rafales.

Also how would squadrons with second tier fighter pilots be structured?

Would they be assigned to a unit equipped with trainers and then do their fighter flying on an existing squadron?

Or would they be assigned to an operational squadron which in addition to fighter equipped flights is also equipped with new trainers in a separate training flight?

Or will there be something akin to USAF associate squadrons where there will a first tier squadron with fighter planes and an “associated” second tier squadron with trainer aircraft.

Currently nearly all Alpha Jets and especially those tasked with training are based at Tours (advanced training EIV03.004, EIV03.013) and Cazaux ( initial training ETO 01.008, ETO 02.008 as well as Belgian 11 Squadron).

Does that mean units at Tours will have new aircraft or will they be transferred to active fighter bases or deactivated?

So many questions!

But there’s their Sukhoi product with agility to acquire good dogfighting skills without having to do such combat experiance training.

You need to train to be able to fly that Flanker to it’s full potential. Poorly trained pilots will get killed regardless of how good their aircraft is.

But the US has such lower cost in maintaining flight hours and combat experiance. Which is why there the most experienced pilots in the Navy and Airforce in the world. Or some should say in the US inventory

But they get significantly good air combat training, with smart people that knows what there teaching to the pilots at Naval Air station and Red Flag etc. But…..

Due to sequestration, US has cut a lot of training hours. In fact whole units are effectively grounded.

This not only results in deteriorating pilot quality, but also poor morale and reduces attractiveness of recruiting new airmen or even keeping existing pilots/ground crew in the service.

All that matters is you getting some enough experiance to get ready for such emerging threat either if it’s a SU-35 threating to emerge you in a dogfight.

It’s not just about dog fighting.

Combat flying also includes:

1. Navigation training
2. A2A refuelling training.
3. Ground attack training (both interdiction and CAS )
4. Low level training
5. Emergency training (i.e. you’ve just lost an engine, what do you do)
6. Austere operations training
7. Formation flying.
8. Weapons training (obviously a GBU-12 has different performance to a Mk 84 or an AGM-65 or cannon).
9. Electronic Warfare training
10. Bad weather flying
11 Night flying
12 Learning how to operate with other assets (be it other fighters, FACs, AWACS, , spec ops, warships etc etc)
12. Etc etc

Some of that can be handled by simulators or a PC-21/M-346/Hawk but a lot of it requires actual air time in the combat type.

With 40 hours a year in combat type, how much training can you fit in? It’s probably enough to keep a pilot certified on the type.

Some interesting stuff Andraxxus.

I think it points out to differing design paradigms.

When F-16 was designed in 1970s, air combat was still quite common. Enemy air defence relied on both SAM and interceptors.

A2G was important but often assigned to specialist assets (e.g. A-4, A-7, A-10, F-111, Buccaneer) or older aircraft no longer fit for A2A combat (e.g. F-100). True multirole aircraft were rare (basically F-4 and F-105 and some Mirage derivatives). But given need for air superiority, A2A was emphasised.

When F-35 concept was designed, A2A combat was increasingly rare and ground attack became more important. Enemy air defences had shifted to SAMs instead of combat aircraft. Also the US military became obsessed with low observability at all costs.

Not necessarily so. The report doesn’t specify which fast jets will be cut, in my opinion no more Rafales will be cut, more likely Mirage 2000s and F1s, which are due to be retired soon, if not a little later anyway.

Of course F1s and 2000’s will go sooner.

My point was it looks bad when the primary operators cuts orders from 336 to 180 (plus maybe 50 in future to replace Mirage 2000) and then gets it’s pilots to chug around in a turboprop because Rafale is too expensive to fly.

Any F-16s without ugly dorsal spines or CFT.

What’s interesting is that the USA (and West in general) has taken a position in the centuries old Shia-Sunni conflict (i.e. pro-Sunni). It’s so pro-Sunni they’re willing to risk arming Al Qaeda insurgents.

That’s completely against Western values of equality.

Interesting comments from Italian Defence Minister – basically he states Syria could become like Spanish Civil War.

http://www.defensenews.com/article/20130616/DEFREG01/306160004/Italian-DM-Will-Syria-Boil-Over-Into-Regional-Conflict-

Yes – known rather unoriginally as F-16/79:

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions_article12.html

Never sold cause it was effectively a dud with more weight and less power.