Spectre82US has 400 odd Tankers and still suffers from a shortage. 12 IL-76s wont cut it for “Global Strike”, think someone is getting grand ideas way above their pay grade!
Spectre82US-Pakistan defence ties being boosted
By Anwar Iqbal
WASHINGTON, Nov 15: The US and Pakistan have been quietly rebuilding their military-to-military relationship disrupted in 1990 when Washington slapped restrictions on Islamabad for its efforts to develop nuclear weapons, says a congressional report.
The report by the Congressional Research Service notes that in June 2004, President Bush designated Pakistan as a major non-Nato ally of the United States.
The report says the close US-Pakistan security ties of the cold war era — which came to a near halt after the 1990 aid cut-off — have been in the process of restoration as a result of Pakistan’s role in US-led anti-terrorism campaign.
The Pentagon reported Foreign Military sales agreements with Pakistan worth $344 million between 2003 and 2004, growing to $492 million in 2005.
In June 2006, the Pentagon notified Congress of a possible Foreign Military sale to Pakistan worth up to $5.1 billion. The deal involves up to 36 F-16 combat aircraft, along with related refurbishments, munitions, and equipment, and would represent the largest-ever weapons sale to Pakistan.
Congressional concerns about the sale and displeasure at the Bush Administration’s apparently improper notification procedures spurred a July 20 hearing of the House International Relations Committee. During that hearing, many members worried that F-16s were better suited to fighting India than to combating terrorists; some warned that US military technology could be passed from Pakistan to China.
The State Department’s lead official on political military relations sought to assure the committee that the sale would serve US interests by strengthening the defence capabilities of a key ally without disturbing the regional balance of power and that all possible measures would be taken to prevent the onward transfer of US technologies.
A resolution disapproving the proposed sale, was introduced in the House of Representatives, but was not voted upon.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice later sent a letter to Congress indicating that no F-16 combat aircraft or related equipment would be delivered to Pakistan until Islamabad provided written security assurances that no US technology will be accessible by third parties.
Islamabad has, however, denied that any “extraordinary” security requirements were requested.
After further negotiations on specifics, including a payment process that will require a major outlay from the Pakistani treasury, the United States and Pakistan in September signed a letter of acceptance for the multibillion dollar F-16 deal.
The United States has undertaken to train and equip new Pakistan Army Air Assault units that can move quickly to find and target terrorist elements.
There has also been a direct US role in training the security detail of the Pakistani president, help to fund a 650-officer Diplomatic Security Unit, and assistance with numerous programs designed to improve the quality of Pakistan’s internal police forces through the provision of equipment and training.
A revived high-level US-Pakistan Defence Consultative Group — moribund since 1997 — sits for high-level discussions on military cooperation, security assistance, and anti-terrorism; its most recent session came in May 2006.
Spectre82Unified Engagement 2006 kicks off
11/3/2006 – SCHOFIELD BARRACKS, Hawaii — In a welcoming speech to more than 300 military members and civilians at the Battle Command Training Center here, Gen. Paul V. Hester, Pacific Air Forces commander, kicked off Unified Engagement 2006.
Participants from the United States, Great Britain, Canada and Australia are here from Nov. 1 to 8 to carry out the Air Force Chief of Staff’s simulation known as “UE”. The purpose of UE06 is to investigate emerging Air Force, sister service, joint and multi-national operational concepts and capabilities, to learn how to prevent technological, strategic and operational surprise, and to advance coordination among global security partners.
The scenarios used in UE06 are fictitious and set 10-12 years in the future.
“The complexity of the scenario is set far enough out in the future that it gets us out of today’s ‘inbox,'” General Hester said. “The time frame is 2018, and hopefully our work here this week will prepare us for that future.”
The biannual UE series began in 1995. This was the first time the game has been conducted outside Maxwell Air Force Base, Ala., or the Washington D.C. area. Because the chief of staff wanted to take the game to the war fighters, he chose the Pacific theater. He is interested in the complex challenges of working with the many nations having a stake in the security of the Pacific region.
The UE06 series began with two small-scale events. The first was held in May in Malaysia and the second was held at Hickam AFB, Hawaii, in September. Participants from Australia, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, Singapore, South Korea, Thailand, the United Kingdom and the United States took part. Representatives from Brunei, Pakistan and the Philippines were observers.
“We deal with the ‘tyranny of distance’ here in the Pacific,” General Hester said. “Unlike Europe, we don’t have NATO-style organizations, so consequently we do things bilaterally. That’s part of the challenge we face out here, but through events like Unified Engagement we’re able to open up great learning opportunities with other countries.”
Experience gained from UE06, particularly integration into future national security methods, will be analyzed during and long after its completion.
“As we look at the war on terror, we recognize we cannot kill our way to victory. Winning involves all the dynamics of national power between us, our allies and friends…that puts increased emphasis on our U.S. interagency work,” General Hester said.
(Courtesy of PACAF News Service)
Strange as Pakistan comes under Central Command not Pacific Command
Spectre82PAF are ordering 6 Erieye based on SAAB 2000 platforms.
Does anyone know if its feasible that with 6 aircraft it is possible to maintain 2 in the air on a 24/7 basis?
I am assuming a commercial turboprop would be quite easy to maintain.
Spectre82Greek ERIEYE antenna looks same as Brasilian or Sweden ‘s ERIEYE…Can someone explain how come this side facing, flat looking antenna can provide 360 degree coverage? Unless the rule of physics change in a way that radar beams can be expanded or rotated in the space…IAI or Boeing or NG was so stupid that they could not discover what Ericson has discovered in ERIEYE….Look at IAI’s new proposal, to get 360 degree coverage requirement, they put arrays on every corner of the airplane…face, tail, sides….
Anyway, 300 or 360 degree it will not matter too much from the operational point of view…Nobody will take risk of attacking a well protected AEW aircraft from the blind spots…
Simple. The Swedes may actually have placed small front and rear antenna on the actually rod beam.
Spectre82The issue is, can ERIEYE get 360 deg coverage if it only flies in a straight line. With a oval shape flight path, it can get 360. That is not disputed.
No, International Air Power Review catagorically states
“The radar fitted the Greece’s EMB-145 provides 360 degree coverage”
Flight International
“The system itself features an active, phased-array radar. The antenna is fixed and the radar beam is electronically scanned through 360° with optimum performance in dual 150° sideways sectors. “
Not the plane flying fancy manouvres, not the pilots having laser vision, not the type of wrist watch the radar operators wear. The “radar”.
Spectre82OK, that clears that up then. Your right and numerous aviation websites and articles and the Greek Air Force are wrong. Apologies.
:rolleyes:
Spectre82Hey thats my course mate!!!
Met him last week and he tied the knot on the 12th of Oct.
They still tankbusting with a french missile.
Would not the Aloutte 3/AS-11 combo be a bit outdated for the anti-armour role!?
Spectre82Then get off your silly horses and stop comparing them to a existing plane.
Er…and when did I do that?
Spectre82Sometimes I think it may be possible for cockpits to become too “glassy” if you know you what I mean.
Spectre82Exercising with Mirage 2000 and Grippen is not exactly something the US would have to keep underwraps I would have thought
Spectre82No he is just a chinese who can’t comprehend that the Mig-29 is a better plane than the crappy J-10 and FC-1. It is quiet evident from his posts.
Its impossible to make such a statment. Unless you know the full specs of production J-10s and FC-1s.
As there is no “production” FC-1 flying yet, your living in cloud cuckoo land.
Spectre82Thanks for clearing that up Alepou
Greek machines have 360 coverage.
Spectre82The links that says 360 degrees is the exact reason why I started the thread. The articles at AFTech or wiki are not written by people who understand the technology. Someone saw 360 degrees somewhere and it got copied all around, that is all.
Does the fact that my handle and avatar means I am Indian make my intentions to be automatically malign Pakistan or the products it buys? Why do you want to take this as a honor&dignity issue? Can’t we treat this for what it is, ie a technical issue?
Unfortunetly for the quality of this forum, thats exactly what you wanted to do. The exact wording of your first post was on this thread.
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewtopic.php?t=2554&postdays=0&postorder=asc&&start=240
Then this
“good work Sumeet. you should consider posting this in AFM Pakbak thread where Ereyie is proposed as the new Mahdi.
let the truth be told. Ereyie has 30′ of blind spots front and back and 360′ is a LIE.
It must matter operationally else why would MESA go to time and expense of having the 3rd aperture ? gives total flexibility for the plane to fly as desired and not careful racetrack orbits to minimize the blind spot.”
So lets make yoru intentions quite clear. PAF is getting Erieye and so it must be crap.
Despite several posters having already proven its got total coverage. Despite your “evidence” being 11 years old, despite Erieye being upgraded consistantly since then, despite two European nations integrating Erieye into the NATO air defence network.
Sign In
