Steve TouchdownOriginally posted by m.ileduets
On the other hand a USAF pilot should also state that the F-15 won’t be good enough in the near future to defend against 5th generation fighters (like Typhoon and Rafale) and that the US is desperately in need of the F-22.
In short they have to be sort of schizophrenic nowadays 😀
Not at events like these, Marc (it is Marc isn’t it?! 🙂 )
Replace “USAF” with “Boeing/Defense Security Cooperation Agency” and you’d be closer to reality. 😀
By the way, I’m not knocking this at all…it’s all part of the “game” 😉
Steve
Steve TouchdownOriginally posted by 140 Sqn
haha
i spoke to a US pilot a couple of days ago in the Asian Aerospace in Singapore and when asked about the competition , he said RSAF should go for the F-15.. being combat proven and has a wide range if weaponry.. and of same generation as the rafale and the eorofighter
You’d hardly expect a guy selling Porsches to recommend you went out and bought a Ferrari….or would you? :confused:
Why do you think the USAF pilot was there!? 😀
Cheers
Steve
Steve TouchdownJust saw the same article that started this thread at http://www.strategypage.com/messageboards/messages/6-4460.asp
and it doesn’t say “F-15Es” it just says “F-15s” so, as I thought, somebody along the line has inserted the “E”. I know it wasn’t our Swiss friend Marc (who began the thread) because I’ve seen where he took the story from and that already made the Eagles the Mud Hen variety :rolleyes:
John, do you happen to know what the origins of the piece are? It’s looking more and more like a piece written around the very brief comments by Archie Neill.
The board where Marc took the story from said it came from USAF news (although I’m not sure what that is right now!) but I’d be surprised a journo from there would be making obvious mistakes like “48 TFW” and “F15” with no hyphen.
This smells fishy to me.
Wachenroder: no, Tranche 3 isn’t cancelled. I think John will agree that discussions underway at the moment (which may go on all year going by BAE statements in the past week) appear to be partly concerning making Tranche 2 a/c more A2G capable.
It’s purely speculation on my part, but I’d not be too surprised if Tranche 2 turned out to be Tranche 3-capable a/c and that the order (for the RAF especially) finished there. Time will tell.
Anybody actually know the status of the Rafale’s A2G programme as it stands? It would be nice to see something more substantive than 3 and 4 year-old PR releases which were talking about events in the future………
Cheers
Steve Rush ~ Touchdown-News
Steve TouchdownOriginally posted by SOC
C’mon, they can’t have been THAT hugely expensive…certainly not cheap but I’d bet the RAF could have afforded two or three squadrons worth.
Leaving half a dozen airworthy to man the QRA sheds!?! 😮 :confused:
I lived near Miramar for a year, SOC, I know what hangar queens those ‘Cats can be! 😀
Of course, it would have been great to have had RAF Tomcats…but how many AIM-54 do you think we could have afforded to go with ’em!? 😀
More than pleased to be a big ol’ CVN: often wish the “circuit” (AR -> Mildenhall -> LN -> and the twin WR bases) were all still open for business ‘cos it made a great day out when the weather was how it’s been here today.
Steve ~ Touchdown-News
Steve TouchdownOriginally posted by SOC
Go to the RAF PX and get Cuban cigars? 😀
Oh no, SOC…they’re DEFINTELY coming to take you away in a black helicopter now. Isn’t that considered treason!? Or is it not a federal crime which explains why you have chosen KS for your current abode!? 😀
Steve TouchdownOriginally posted by SOC
Actually participate in OSW? Them AdA guys were able to hand wash them triangular thingys for a reason 😀
No, but from personal experience I figured PSAB = KSA period! I do know a couple of guys who TDY-ed down there though.
Well what was the reason then?! It’s not been that long since they left has it: didn’t they stay on until just about the last minute or did they move the M2Ks to another AB in KSA?
Steve TouchdownOriginally posted by SOC
Original F-14 = missile platform to bring down long-range bombers and AShMs then RTC ASAP, refuel, re-arm and get airborne again.😎
…just not on the UK’s budget 😀
Steve TouchdownOriginally posted by SOC
Old habits must be hard to break, I saw them honest-to-god hand-washing their Mirage 2000s at PSAB 😀
Well what else IS there to do at PSAB!? 😀
Steve Touchdown1) Cost
2) Geography
3) F3 was a replacement for the Lightning so same doctrine applied
It’s easy with 20/20 hindsight to apply a/c to the global situation we have now (expeditionary warfare etc.) but when the F3 was dreamed-up in the late 1960s I doubt the MoD imagined many dogfights with Warsaw Pact jets over the North Sea. Original F3 = missile platform to bring down long-range bombers then RTB ASAP, refuel, re-arm and get airborne again.
Cheers
Steve Rush ~ Touchdown-News
Steve TouchdownPersonally I’d love to see the F/B-23A…but then I always preferred that to the ’22 anyway 😀
Cheers
Steve Rush ~ Touchdown-News
Steve TouchdownOriginally posted by SOC
Eh, I wasn’t trying to imply anything, just saw that it said -E models in the first post. I’d be curious to know what load condition they were operating under is all. No doubt the Typhoon is the most advanced fighter aircraft operating on the British Isles right now. Too bad it’s not the most advanced operating in Western Europe though 😀
I’m not implying that you were implying etc. 😀
I think you raised a very valid point, SOC! When I read the original post (that John Cook found on the PPRuNe site) I assumed that they were talking about a pair of C models. I agree with you, I think that makes a big difference: not just in airframe but in the aircrew, doctrine, training etc.
You don’t mean those French jets they put away when it rains do you, SOC!? 😀
Cheers
Steve
Steve TouchdownOriginally posted by SOC
I wonder how they’d have fared against C model F-15s, instead of heavier E models which like to fly around with CFTs on…
It’s funny you should say that, SOC…I was wondering when “F-15s” became “F-15Es” and if that was assumed or confirmed. The 48th has C, D and E models as I’m sure you know.
I’ll see what I can find out.
Cheers
Steve
p.s. may have been just a slip, but the use of “Tactical” in “TFW” also made me wonder who it was who wrote this up….
Steve TouchdownSomewhat confusingly IMHO the USAF have decided to designate the stretched -30 models CC-130J with the standard length Hercs remaining as C-130J.
I’ve just had confirmation from Per Thorup Pedersen that the Danish ones, although -30 variants, will remain as C-130J.
Per was at Aalborg for the delivery of B-536, and also the transfer of Esk 721, and has posted LOTS of pictures covering both events at his site below:
Enjoy! 😀
Best regards
Steve Rush ~ Touchdown-News
Looking forward to tanker KCC-130J and Canadian CCC-130J 😀
Steve TouchdownFrom today’s Telegraph. This could prove interesting should it come about:
BAE seeks help from the Russians to build new jet for military
By Christopher Hope in Irkutsk, Eastern Siberia_(Filed: 01/03/2004)
BAE Systems is holding talks with Irkut Corporation, Russia’s second biggest defence company, about building a successor to the successful Hawk trainer jet._
Irkut’s BE-200 multi-purpose amphibious plane, which can be used to fight fires
Irkut, which used to make MiG fighter jets, is also discussing whether it can work with BAE on aircraft wing technology and on a new project for unmanned military aircraft.
Alexey Fedorov, the president of Irkut, said he had met Mike Turner, chief executive of BAE, several times in London, Farnborough and Malaysia.
Mr Fedorov said: “We have held a series of negotiations with BAE Systems and we may get involved in some of their projects. I think we are clear where our mutual interest can be for their fighter trainers. BAE are one of the leaders in the industry. A new aircraft project is not created by one company – it is all about co-operation. So this is the way that Irkut and BAE can find a way to do the same.”
Mr Fedorov continued: “BAE, as a major wing manufacturer, could be a partner potentially and, of course, [for] the unmanned aircraft.” No deal has been signed but Mr Fedorov said any collaboration would have to be on a 50-50 basis. “Both parties have mutual interest in terms of design and manufacture,” he said.
Irkut has already signed a deal with Eads, the European aerospace business, to supply components for Airbus from the second half of this year. Irkut, which had sales of $528m in 2002 and claims an order book of $4.5 billion, is one of Russia’s most outwardly looking defence companies. It is gearing up for a flotation – the first by a Russian defence company – on the Moscow stock exchange, probably in the next few weeks.
The company is hoping to attract foreign investment through a series of investor road shows. A listing on the exchanges in London or New York could follow within two years. Irkut is also hoping to be a prime mover in the Russian government’s recently announced plans to create a single defence company. This would see Irkut merging with its rivals.
Mr Fedorov said: “We are optimistic and enthusiastic about the government programme aimed at uniting the industry.” He was speaking at Irkut’s manufacturing base at Irkutsk, Eastern Siberia, where the company has made planes for 70 years. It graduated from churning out 180 MiG jets per year to designing and making Sukhoi fighter jets and BE 200 multi-purpose amphibious planes.
The company has already signed deals with the Indian government for the fighter jets and is starting on a contract for seven amphibious planes for the Russian government. Irkut is trying to push sales of the planes to countries that need to control bush fires in high summer, such as France, Italy, Greece and Portugal. The company has already signed a “letter of intent” to supply eight of the planes to Hawkins & Powers, a US fire-fighting equipment company.
Irkut makes the planes and jets at the one site, where it employs up to 15,000 people. About $30m has been spent on new equipment – much of it from Germany – over the past two years.
A BAE spokesman said: “We will always seek market opportunities and one of the best ways is through the local indigenous industry. It is an area for the business for the future that we’re interested in.”
Best regards
Steve Rush ~ Touchdown-News
Steve TouchdownTransall,
there’s more here on the selection process for Singapore, from an article that has appeared on Jane’s this afternoon. If anybody has the full text I’m sure more than just myself and Transall would like to see it please 😀
Asian Aerospace 2004: Singapore fighter contest hots up
Peter Felstead JDW Special Correspondent and Michael J Gething JDW Aerospace Consultant Singapore
Singapore’s fighter competition, which will see the Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF) replace two squadrons of A4-SU Super Skyhawks with up to 20 new aircraft, is poised to enter the in-country flight-evaluation process.
Two of the three shortlisted aircraft – the Boeing F-15T Eagle and Dassault Aviation’s Rafale – both flew as part of Asian Aerospace 2004’s (AA2004’s) daily flight display schedule, while the Eurofighter Typhoon is due to make its in-country debut mid-year.
BAE Systems officials remained unconcerned by the lack of a Typhoon at the show. “Obviously we’ll take a bit of a PR hit,” explained Peter Anstiss, BAE Systems’ managing director of Typhoon export programmes, “but concentrating on the [Typhoon’s flight] evaluation is probably the right call for the competition as a whole”.
Talking about how the Singaporeans are weighing up the three contestants, Anstiss said: “The DSTA [Defence Science and Technology Agency] evaluation process here is as effective as I’ve seen anywhere. They put a lot of stake in life-cycle costs, in the modelling that looks at life-cycle costs and we’re confident that Typhoon will be the least expensive over the life of the programme.”
Dassault Aviation is hoping that the Rafale’s long association with Asian Aerospace – 2004 marks its fourth appearance at the show – will stand it in good stead for the fighter contract.
Following the conclusion of AA2004, the Rafale that performed in the flight display, the French Air Force’s first production-series two-seater, will be joined by a French Navy single-seat Rafale M for the competition’s in-country evaluation process.
Dassault officials seem to regard the Typhoon as the greater adversary in the contest and see the delay to the development of the Typhoon’s Tranche 2 air-to-ground strike capability as giving the Rafale the edge.
Boeing’s Integrated Defense Systems’ regional director (Asia/Pacific international business development), Tom Lillis, declined to make any specific comment on the F-15 Eagle configuration being offered to the RSAF. Instead he emphasised that the F-15E Strike Eagle “continues to grow”, citing its development for the South Korean requirement and the US Air Force (USAF) modernisation road map for the F-15E.
Lillis confirmed that the two USAF F-15Es at AA2004 leased by Boeing for the show would remain in-country for the RSAF evaluation process, which, he said, would last three weeks.
Best regards
Steve Rush ~ Touchdown-News
Sign In
