Looks like a revival of the Battleship concept. The 90 degree angle on the ramp-boat is ugly, IMHO
Its how the Soviets won WW2 despite the lack of a vibrant economy.
Not forgetting all those Western lend-lease trucks and jeeps that carried their motor rifle troops all the way to Berlin.[/QUOTE]
Where not the quantities of trucks, in the overall scheme of things was quite small. How many trucks did the Red Army have, and how many where leased from th West? It would be informative to know. Please do share, in case you have the numbers.
Pic taken May 2014, published 27/07/15:
What an incredibly beautiful paint scheme. Nothing quite as beautiful as this that I’ve seen in recent times. Most beautiful 5th gen plane I’d vote.
best place to look would probably be ASM harpoon sales DSC notifications
agree, in the long run, economy win every time
You’re right, from an economic point of view, NATO would win. I was speakiing from the technical point of view of the ease of manufacture, ruggedness and maintainability of the WP platforms.
Its how the Soviets won WW2 despite the lack of a vibrant economy.
Turkey launches heaviest airstrikes:
http://www.trust.org/item/20150729073427-g4u9l/
Fascinating topic.
I think that there are some important points that would have favored a WP victory in a real war but let me first define some parameters for the scenario:
1. War does not go nuclear.
2. The war is not a week or two’s engagement but assumes 1-5 year period.
3. The theatre of operations is restricted solely to Europe leaving out Turkey’s Asian regions.
4. Resupply and replenishment is not blocked for NATO (open seas)
5. War takes place only between NATO and WP. All others stay neutral.
Under these circumstances I feel that:
1. Because of the Lancaster rule, quantity would have a quality all its own.
2. All NATO European air bases are within missile strike range, significantly effecting operations.
3. Dense radar network and developed infrastructure would provide cover for some of the WP training deficiencies
4. WP HOBS missiles would mean a clear WVR advantage for WP.
5. Ease of manufacture, simplicity and ruggedness would give an increasing quantity advantage to WP as the war drags on
6. Dense SAM networks would ensure no quick victory possible for NATO
All these factors suggests to me that an initial advantage for NATO would quickly move to a stalemate and the tides would then turn irrevocably against it.
My 0.02
http://www.grandestrategy.com/2011/05/jf-17-block-ii-final-thunder-fc-20.html
hey, where are the block 2 jf-17s with aesa and all that wang bang biz stuff? its supposed to be out by now lol
I would answer that question, but it would derail the thread. Also, you don’t seem to be seriously asking this question and what would seem, flamebaiting… At the very least, could you ask the question in the relevant thread?
AFP suggests about 260 casualties with PKK, although some Turkish estimates higher while PKK estimates are only in the dozens.
Is TuAF using SIGINT or AWACs platforms?
I think in certain scenarios aircraft recognition should not be an issue.
In a scenario where we know the general vector of the enemy, and we know general time frames for a returning strike package, one could have a “let the dogs loose” strategy where UCAVs run about loose in those time frames.
This is particularly true for a defensive air force that may not have too many outgoing strike packages to begin with.
As IFF recognition improves, this is automatically a reducing problem to begin with.
ROEs do not have to meet the US standard always, at least for the rest of the world.
In war time, if Bangladesh sees a vector south south-east from our coast, and is a fighter sized target not using designated civilian airspace and air speeds, it can safely be assumed to be an enemy ingress. After that all that pragmatically remains is to let the punches loose…
We can worry later “who let the dogs out” 😀
Hmm just typed a reply didn’t post… Testing…
Tested.
I think that’s a great idea Sanem. Also consider a satellite or high altitude radar as stealth aircraft are not stealthy from a top-down angle.
Thanks Orko and Andraxus, fascinating and detailed info. Seems Kurds getting many more sorties than ISIS from the numbers you indicate. Also interesting Turkey can make its own bunker busters. Israel still dependant on US shipments to an extent.
Following are some of the platforms likely to be used by the TuAF:




I wonder if the Anka will have an attack role and if it does, what kind of munition it will use.
Interesting, Kuwait is mulling over the Eurofighter, offered by Italy. Why not from the UK or Germany?
Sanem, have to hand it to you, you’ve kept the UCAV flame alight for a long time. I think you may get your wish at least partially if Israel attacks Iran. Something tells me UCAVs just may play a role.