Actually since 1999 there has been no A2A combat anywhere on the planet other than smacking down the odd drone. Only execption maybe an Israeli take down of 2 Syrian MiG-29s and that’s unconfirmed.
That probability is getting lower. Global fighter numbers are dwindling, especially in the third world where most combat is likely to occur as it has done since end of WWII.
The potential opponents are also getting less and less capable with no or little recapitalisation of fighter fleets as well as air defences and even radar networks.
Main factor is lack of super power support – no thousands of Soviets MiGs and SXXX SAMs for free. And also no massive economic aid to keep unstable countries together.
The other factors are decline of strong ideological based dictatorships, US hegemony (keeps weapons out and makes conventional war unlikely even between smaller powers) and replacement of ideology by ethnic and religious divisions which usually result in internal strife.
Yep and the F/A-18E/F or Eurofighter are both A2A capable.
Bare in mind Canada has not operated top of the line AD fighters in the past – no F-4 Phantoms, no F-106 Delta Darts and no F-15 Eagles – instead it’s been F-5s, F-101s and F/A-18s. And this was when the threat of WWIII was at it’s highest!
And what wars do you foresee Canada fighting on their own without US involvement? Contrary to popular belief, Libya had extensive US support – fighters, tankers, ISR, recce etc etc.
Most countries are maintaining a token ability only – 12-24 jets. And not necessarily top of the line either – the average air force in Latin America is still operating Mirage III/V variants in the form of Kfirs and Cheetahs or F-5s. SubSaharan Africa is even worse – most airforces have lost supersonic capability when the Soviet supplied MiG-21s expired. Even large ones such as South Africa maintain no capability. Eastern Europe’s main fighter is often 1980s vintage MiG-29s or truly ancient MiG-21s – all maintained in pitifully small numbers (I think Slovakia for example has 8 MiG-29s whereas Croatia has 12 MiG-21s).
Middle East is awash with fighters in Western allied countries and potential hotspots (Iran, Yemen and Syria) are generally in decline and have very few modern aircraft and generally even fewer operational.
It’s about bang for buck.
Given you average Air Force out of 196 countries in the world struggles to maintain Su-25 or Mi-8 Hips, B-1B isn’t exactly cost effective. F-16 or MiG-29 is often challenging enough!
Yep and F/A-18E/F and Eurofighter are quite capable of intercepting Il-38, Tu-95, Tu-142 and Tu-160.
They’re also quite capable of performing ground attack sorties against defenceless third world types. And by defenceless I mean the Libya and Iraqs and Serbias of the world and not just the Afghanistans and Malis.
Whereas Senegal and El Salvador and even mighty Brazil and once mighty South Africa don’t need high end 4th generation aircraft as their main threats and areas of operation are far different to Coalition minded Canada or Norway.
The only countries that need 5th generation are those that want to project global power (e.g. USA, China, Russia) or those that are in potential high risk of conventional warfare areas and that can afford larger numbers of aircraft (e.g. South Korea, Japan, India etc).
The Europeans and Canadians generally can continue with 4th generation – and indeed the French and Germans are not even looking at 5th generation and are only focusing on 4.5th generation for medium term. The 4th generation allow overkill capability on most opponents in expeditionary warfare.
Because again Myanmar or Yemen gains nothing out of 12-16 Pak Fas or J20s if those that can wage war upon them (i.e. USA or large powers) decides to pick on them.
Well said. As usual.
Sign In
