dark light

Srbin

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 886 through 900 (of 1,678 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Sweden Confirm Pakistan wants to buy Gripen Jets #2675241
    Srbin
    Participant

    the Su-30MKI is overall superior to the Rafale or Typhoon, and yet some expect the little Gripen to be better.

    in reply to: Global Hawk Uses #2675289
    Srbin
    Participant

    Wow I just realized how large that thing really is!

    in reply to: Comparative Capability: Amur vs Scorpene #2076971
    Srbin
    Participant

    How much would the Amur and the Scorpene cost really?

    in reply to: Sweden Confirm Pakistan wants to buy Gripen Jets #2675595
    Srbin
    Participant

    With all due respect technologically Gripen is much more advance than any SU-30 varient.

    I don’t think you know what you’re talking about really.

    in reply to: phalcon or wedgetail? #2675611
    Srbin
    Participant

    Wow it seems much much cheaper than the Phalcon and if it really is at least a decent combinement of the JSTARS and E-3 then it’s a killer aircraft. The Turkish deal is said to be 4 ac for 1.1 bn, the Phalcon sold to India was 3 ac for 1.1.

    in reply to: Sweden Confirm Pakistan wants to buy Gripen Jets #2675613
    Srbin
    Participant

    The Gripen is a rather mature aircraft, tested and with all the weapons like Taurus and such. However Pakistan is looking for a good aircraft to stand up to India’s Su-30MKIs, I however do not think that the Gripen can exactly do it very well, maybe it can but the question is can it do a much better job than the twice as cheaper J-10 that they might be able to get from China and with Western Avionics and such.

    in reply to: Chinese turboprops, types listing and pictures #2675635
    Srbin
    Participant

    Yes but even the An-70 is twice as cheaper than the C-130J. I mean the newest C-130Js sell for over 60mn, it’s ridicilous really.

    in reply to: Chinese turboprops, types listing and pictures #2675672
    Srbin
    Participant

    Anyways i messed up with the names.

    Anyways the Y-8F-400/600 is not up to par as the C-130J or the An-70 but it’s way more cost effective. I would expect the Y-7H-500 to be around 10mn, it’s pretty safe to assume though.

    in reply to: Chinese turboprops, types listing and pictures #2675716
    Srbin
    Participant

    Wow, i do agree if anything the Chinese transports are the most cost effective. I mean I would rather get the 15mn Y-15 than the 35mn An-70 or the 60+mn C-130J even if they are superior to it, for 1 An-34 you can get some 2 Y-14s or for 1 C-130s you can get 4 Y-15s.

    As for Y-12, it’s twice as cheaper than their Russian counterparts and in some cases 3-4 times cheaper than their Western counterparts.

    Also how much does the latest Y-7H-500 sell for(copies of An-24/26)??

    in reply to: Chinese turboprops, types listing and pictures #2676270
    Srbin
    Participant

    What are the costs of the Y-8s and Y-12s compared to their Western and Eastern counterparts? I assume they would be much much cheaper.

    in reply to: Lesser Fighters status? #2676671
    Srbin
    Participant

    Performance wise the Ching Quo is not as capable as the F-16, it has smaller range and I believe it’s also a bit slower than it and that’s pretty important when it would get chased down by those speedy Flankers PLAAF and PLANAF posseses.

    in reply to: Vietnamese Air Force 2010 #2676674
    Srbin
    Participant

    So far everyone been talk about the VPAF’s role as a fighter force and how it should be, but what about the air force’s martime strike roles, I think Vietnam should purchase the naval-version of the LCA when its availble in the arms market. And the LCA doesn’t seem to be that cheap, it cost $20 million per-aircraft, thats only $5 million cheaper then the Sukhois Vietnam purchase in the mid-90s, but since no western fighter is cheaper the LCA would make a perfect choice.

    The Su-27s can handle the maritime strike roles better than a LCA ever could, not only they are much bigger, faster and with longer range but if upgraded they could have much larger and longer ranged radar to fire something like Yakhonts which have 300km+ range.

    You need to learn, the Naval LCA is for Carrier use.

    in reply to: Best ASW chopper around #2677263
    Srbin
    Participant

    I know some ASW helos are much more expensive than others but as it seems many times you really would want to get those deep quiet subs. I wonder which is the most sophisticated ASW helo in the World, I assume it might be NH-90, Merlin and SH-60R or maybe the Helix series. Can someone compare their ASW capabilities? I know that the first three don’t really have any cost advantages over the Helix series and AFAIR the Helix series are twice as cheaper to purchase than the Nh-90 for example, just based on what various countries paid for.

    in reply to: Serbian Air Force and Air Defence modernisation #2677276
    Srbin
    Participant

    I agree truong, not just when comparing Vietnam 1962-1975(whenever it lasted) with Serbia in 1999, it’s ridicilous.

    Also Vietnam really did not stand a chance against US even with all the Soviet support. US was just too much for a few Mig-21s and if it wasn’t for US politics, Viet Cong would’ve probably either surrendered or been annihiliated along with the NVAF.

    in reply to: Second Mi-28N prototype delivered for flight tests #2677285
    Srbin
    Participant

    thay thing is so mean looking(ugly I mean) that it scares me.

    It is now arguably the best Attack Helicopter in the World. Not only can it really match other attack helicopters EASILY like the Tiger or the Apache but it’s far superior to them when it comes to cost, I mean Mil officials quoted it to be around 13-15mn, yet an Apache and a Tiger sell not under 35mn. It’s ridicilous.

    I remember reading how under te Swedish competition, the Mi-28N was the first one to penetrate it’s defences and Tiger came in second with Apache third.

Viewing 15 posts - 886 through 900 (of 1,678 total)