MaskirovkaThe Penguin made by Kongsberg in Norway entered service in 1972, seven years before the Exocet. Still, the Rb04 was the first that I know as well.
Yes, but it only entered service with Norway and Turkey at that time. As I said, seems strange to me that the rest of the western world did´nt see the need for anti-ship missiles much earlier. In the 1960´s SAMs had become a real threat to attacking planes and artillery and torpedoes does´nt have anywhere near the range of a missile.
In a war between East and West in 1970-80 the west may not have ruled the waves…
MaskirovkaThe site is worth what it is, but here you have the US missile list. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/missile.htm
The harpoon was the first “true” airlaunched antiship missile as we know it, and as you can see, the in service datae was 78.
The french Exocet came into service at around the same time..
I did not think of the fact that Sweden probably was the 1st country in the world (don´t know about Soviet) with a anti-ship missile.
Rb04C was first launched from a SAAB 29 Tunnan in 1955 and was in operational service from 1961 with the 32 Lansen. Rb04 had a active radar and was in service until the early 1990s.
I had no idea the rest of the western world would be 20 years behind. It just sounds strange considering the threat from the Soviet northern fleet and all…
MaskirovkaAs Distiller says,
The Walleye was the antiship missile. Carried, if memory serves me right, by the A-6 and 7.
The Bullpup was another option, and could be put on A-4s as well (There even was a nuke tipped one)And, don’t forget the S-2 and S-3, armed with torpedoes, as well as the various air dropped mine systems.
It all depends of the threat you’re facing, of course..
But those are not still radar-guided anti-ship missiles. The aircraft has to come well within range of the ships SAMs.
Sounds strange that USA did´nt have a real anti-ship missile…
MaskirovkaBullpup? Walleye?
I don´t get it. Did´nt USA have an anti-ship missile like Sweden used A-32 Lansen armed with Rb04?
MaskirovkaThat in part is true, ble bla bla etc
(It was to much rubbish for to read, f*cked that part)
So in 2030 Brazil will rule the world and we are gonna have string bikinis everywhere? Sounds OK with me.
The new order: String bikinis, every girl has to look like Aria Giovanni and nuces all around!!!!!
MaskirovkaI agree with you in some points but not in all.
By economic growth and GDP, Mexico and Brazil will be large enough to surpase several european national economies, even Canada is becoming smaller.
The Importance of Canada for the US is decreasing and Mexico increasing even militarily, mexico is building more US weaponry for US companies.
You expect the world to be the same, no change, but the reality is different.
While China and India can growth they lack resources and they are unwilling to change economic growth by enviromental growth.
China and India are the most likely nations to be involved in military actions for resources.
The US still has Canada to be anexed and be exploited, it can with Mexico and Central america to get cheaper labour, but as the dollar decline they will become a lesser of a global power and more of a regional one .
Brazil has plenty of resources and will be successful joining south america because they want to do it, Argentina wants to do it, venezuela wants to do it and bolivia too, most of south america wants an economic union ala EU, so by 2020 you can bet it will happen.
the US needs Mexico to merge central america into mexico and therefore to increase the GDP and growth of the North American Union. however it will have a price the price to compromise with Mexico and since mexico is getting more tech transfers so it will demand more share in wealth.
I can assure the US will remain the second largest economy by 2020 and 2040 simply by Changing the name of the dollar to Amero and anexing Mexico, central america and Canada to the US economy.
Asia will remain the most likely area of conflict for two reasons, weaponry available and overpopulation.
China has J-10s, JH-7 and so on and has neighbours with needs like Iran and Pakistan, China needs oil too, so China will pretend to play the game of the big boys by middling in the middle east invited by allies like Syria or Iran.
India too might have a part in that.
So basicly oil can create war and very likely air war.
I don´t know why you are so obsessed with Mexico and Brazil but neither of theirs economy’s or military strength could challenge USA, EU, Russia or China in 2030. No one in those areas would care less about them…
The world would not be the same, no. Today we have one global power that almost do what it wants – USA. In 20 years from now we will have four – EU, USA, Russia and China, with its allies off course. Brazil, Mexico and India will not matter at all. (Sorry all LCA-fanboys on this site whom dream of a India as a superpower.)
MaskirovkaYou points are very valid and honestly the most grim and realistic.
By 2030 the world will be divided in economic zones
the North american Union, the South american Union, the EU, China and allies very likely a reunited Korea, Japan allied to a properous China abandoning the weaker US financial system; Russia and allies, mostly central asian nations and posibly Ukraine, Belarus, Iran and Syria, india and satellites, a possible central and south african Union, the mediterrenan Union of Islamic states . australia and friends.
Of these nations some are are not going to be as bad as you think.
South american will have a prosperous aviation industry probably by that time will have rocket launchers and a manned space program.
Brazil might be produccion a follow on of the Russian indian PAK FA that was built under license in Brazil.
Since Brazil and south america have plenty of water like Russia will develop a military alliance to stop the US from controlling the AmazonsThe US and Mexico will be so economically link that any real attempt to stop illegal immigration will be finish in 2020, by 2025 Amexica will almost make a civil war between the US states with less mexican influence and those with most of it.
People like lou Dobbs and Bill o Reilley are banned from television, some paramilitary forces financed by the KKK and the national allaince flying gunship helicopters attack mexican civilians trying to enter in teh US illegally this makes the US federal Governement to respond and eliminate right wing movements, since they threat the adoption of the Amero, some USAF Units attempt a coup d etat, this fails, some F-35s battle other USAF F-22s loyal to the US federal government the north american Union continues and the Amero replaces the US and Canadian dollar and the Mexican Peso.
The mexican air force is re equipped and attacks Cuba to support Cuban dissidents to take the island and mexico advocates for the integration of the island to the North american Union, Venezuela protests and sends a couple of Su-35s to threat Mexico. the US sends F-35s to stop them, Brazil eliminates the tensions and the borders of the North american Union and MERCOSUR are stablished
I don´t think there will be a South American Union. I think the countries there have either started allies between 1-2-3 nations, are under the influence of one of the four super powers or are totally independent like Brazil will be. How ever, that part of the world is not that interesting for the rest of the world. There may be some border clashes as there has always been , but nothing serious. The only thing that might cause concern is “Falkland-like” clashes. For instance, Venezuela against Netherlands Antilles or French Guyana and such…
Brazil may be a regional superpower against its neighbors, but nothing else. No other super power would like to mess with them, there would be nothing to earn. And Brazil could never have a power projection. So they will play on the home field.
The reunited Korea and Japan will still be allied to USA. So will Taiwan, and China will not attack any of those countries. There is just much more they risk to loose then to gain. And by 2030 Japan/Korea and Taiwan will still be formidable military powers. China would never hazard their business suffering by going into war with such countries they risk loosing 100.000 lives…
Ukraine will be in EU.
Iran and Syria will be in a very shaky “mid-east allied treaty” (along with other mideast countries ) where everybody distrust and hates each other but is kept together by Israel and the fact that USA still has “control” over Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, Kuwait. Iraq will either be divided between a small northern sunni and a major shiite or totally annexed with Iran (Perhaps Turkey, Syria and Saudi has taken there small parts). Iraq may be a Poland in the 30´s between Hitler and Stalin but with a few more players involved.
North Africa I think is going to somehow incorporated with that “mid-east allied treaty”. Only because they are muslims, have oil and cause of internal stress. They will need an outside enemy to blame, everyone who is not into islam that is….
Russia… As I said, like it is today. Today it is aggressive and trying to incorporate the former Soviet states into the republic. This will continue, and they will probably have some allies in Africa and a couple in South America. India will not be one of them tough. India will try to be independent but will essentially be in the same position as today, but more of an ally to USA (I know the Indians on this board would hate that thought)
Africa will still be the black sheep. In the next 20 years they will not evolve, they will devolve. They will go back to 17th century age (or today almost) where companies really had the power of the countries but let the strongest tribes believe they were. By offering small payments in form of alcohol, drugs and weapons so they can serve their masters. The rest of the world will suck this continents resources dry and they will keep killing each other in tribal wars, just like it have been done in the last 400 years or so.
Australia and New Zealand… They will be exactly as they are today.
The first major conflict I think will be between China and Vietnam. Ok, tough odds, but they are still neighboring countries and the death toll could climb well over 10.000.
The other one I think is between Israel and Jordan. Such a conflict would off course also spark Syria and Iran to join. And probably the whole of northern Africa and the remains of Iraq. This could very well be the 2nd nuclear war in the world depending on how successful the Arab league are in the initial days. The rest of world would not intervene in fear of nuclear attacks. This could very well mean the end of the Zionist nation, but probably not by looking at previous wars. But it would certainly be more bloody.. This war will go to the history books as “The most idiotic reason to start a war”, Israel stole Jordans water supply…
MaskirovkaYou are right and i agree up to a point a doubt Brazil will have nukes and ICBMs in 2030 and mexico will be a military power like canada at least, but but technologically and economically their influence will be enough to grant or not a military action by the US or Europe in Latin america, since Brazil will be able to veto any military action in South America and the US will be highly influenced by the Mexican position in their latin american policies.
basicly Russia and China won`t be able to attack Latin america and extreme regimes like Hugo Chavez are not going to last, Latin america will be more independent and less hostile instead of more dependant and moe hostile like it is now with leaders like Hugo Chavez
In the most pessimistic future of 2030 I see a world where countries and allies are competing to explore natural resources all over the world. Old treaties are ignored and broken. Nations are racing to set up oil-platforms, fishing-ports and military bases where there are non today, such as north/south pole, off-shore oil-platforms wayy out of the economical zones etc. This will cause tensions and make you more hostile no matter how economical or technological advanced you are. There is always someone who is weaker and you can take advantage of.
USA are fed up with Europe and is thinking, “USA comes 1st, screw the rest”. NATO is disbanded and USA still have “control” over the most important country in the world, Saudi Arabia, but are also trying to consolidate its position in other parts of the world which have oil. But are constantly running into competition with the Chinese, mainly in Africa and Asia.
Europe is a Union with one common agenda, policy etc. Not aggressive in the hunt for oil but is set on not letting large parts of North/South pole will slip from their hands.
Russia is basically like it is today…
China is stronger, more advanced and more aggressive. In every part of the world.
Add to this a disbanded UN. Much of the world is troubled with pollution, starvation and lack of water which results in massive floods of refugees which in its turn causes more tension between countries. Perhaps even a global warming which has led to millions of people in coastal regions having to leave their homes.
With all this you have a nice cocktail of tensions that could cause conflicts in the future. Conflicts where even old allies can turn on each other.
I have´nt exactly thought of smaller regional powers in latin/south-america and India and such. I don´t think they can change anything in the global point of view.
As I said. This is the most pessimistic view of the future. It can all be roses, we hold each others hands and live in harmony as well.
MaskirovkaI agree with you in many aspects, very likely the nations to be blamed if there is a WWIII are the USA, China, Russia, and the EU.
However you are forgenting this by 2030, new nations will be getting to maturity as industrial powers, by 2030
Mexico, Brazil, India will be among the 10 largest GDPs in the world and technologically speaking the west will be less important having technology and trading centers hubs in Asia and Latin America, i can assure by 2030 mexico will be able to make jet aircraft and Brazil jet fighters so do not bet the west will be able to intervine at will, only a coallition of nations will decide what nations will be attacked and which will be spared
I don´t doubt that. But I hardly believe these countries can compete with the four “superpowers” at that time when it comes to economy, military force and world wide power projection. I don´t think Mexico/Brazil or India would challenge USA over and oil field outside Equatorial Guinea or even be capable of sending forces and task groups there. (Well, I don´t see EU doing that either BTW. But that because of political issues)
I find it strange no one ever mention the fight for clean water today and in the future. It´s always oil, oil and gas. Water supplies are already today a big issue in parts of the world and I think it will increase in the future.
MaskirovkaFuture wars will mainly be caused of water, oil and floods of refugees causing internal stress and political tensions.
Almost all of Africa, from Egypt to Angola and Nigeria to Zimbabwe. Proxy fighting by USA and China.
China vs Vietnam/Philippines
Israel vs middle east (except US “allies” Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar)
Iran vs Iraq
Northern South America (mainly cause of border disputes, drugs and internal stress)
India vs Pakistan/China (border clashes, air war. Not full out war)
Thailand vs Burma
Indonesia, internal stress that may spill over to neighboring countries.
Russia vs ex Soviet Republics (well duh?)
And the most surprising. Morocco vs Spain.
In 20 years from now one may also see tensions between EU/USA/Russia/China over natural resources world wide. Specially in the Arctic… (By 2028 I think NATO has more or less played out its role and EU have replaced it. By then we have four major players in the world)
MaskirovkaI read about a Su-25 factory in Georgia being bombed. Have the Georgians been able to produce entire Su-25s on their own without importing parts from Russia or have them just been able to maintain their own aircrafts and build spareparts?
Either case, the Su-25 seems like the logical choice, in combination with SAMs.
MaskirovkaAs mentioned in a latter post, the Gripen orients its canards to a near vertical position while landing on civilian highways (photo posted earlier). Maskirovka rightly said that it effectively acts as an air-brake. This enables low landing distance by it.
I think crobato asked for the short take off. Not landing.
MaskirovkaIs the really that difficult for you guys to spell Rafale?
Gripen is not that easy to spell either. I think Grippen is the most common, followed by Grypen and on the last place Gripen. 🙂
MaskirovkaIf i recall correctly, the Saab2000 the pakistanis are getting are coming from Saab own inventory. And they have a few more they can sell as well.
Yes, IIRC most SAAB2000 out there are owned by SAAB, they are just leasing them out. The Swedish air force is about to replace their 340 with 2000 as well.
MaskirovkaThe next step is the contract negotiations. The deal includes four airborne radar systems and is worth around 7 billion dollars.
“We are waiting to enter the negotiations with the customer for the delivery, but it must be a definition of what their needs are and how we will match it,” said Erik Löwenadler.
That should read 7 billion kronor. The Pakistani deal with 5 Erieye on SAAB2000 platforms was just over 1 billion dollars.
Sign In
