Im sure Germans will assist too 😀

Please, just like Strategic Bombing was going force Germany and Japan to Surrender Early…..:eek: Which, would never have happen without boots on the ground or ships at sea.

Now you really confused the crap out of me… im not sure are you taking a **** or are you serious.

Airfield and residential proximity dont go hand in hand.. both military and commercial… Which is why i detest location of Sydneys Kingsford Smith, every time 747 rumbles over my office and over thousands of homes on the both aproach and landing.

I disagree. There’s value in the Tejas program (It is more than one design project) and I don’t see much has changed in the planning or significant added costs. And obsolescence against what and on what basis? A Improved Tejas pitted against the JF-17 would be so worthess? What do you suggest instead that can b delivered in a few years? India ordering 500 fuel guzzling high operating cost Super Hornets?

My suggestion is simply don’t put all the eggs in one basket.

Not worthless but on par at best… and why would you want something on par with JF-17 when both MFI and any of the MRCA contenders outclass 17s by a country mile.

Dont want fuel guzling supper bug?? Pick Gripen NG or MiG35 as MRCA.. and you wont need 500, original 126 plus 50-60 at later date would cover all IAFs needs.

If IAF wants navalised airframe to match MRCA for compliance and cost effectivenes, they then have choice between MiG35/29K, Rafale , and SuperBug.

Yeah Aussies get bit antsy when you talk about flying Roo, the logo is a huge icon here so even with promise that brand will stay, they would never allow majority foreign ownership.

This could be problematic for any type of merger.

Even with economic downfalls in global markets, PAK-FA should be still relatively well funded, due simply to the importance of the project to RuAF. The fact that they are resisting to order SU35 in any significant numbers suggest they will take sizable order of PAK-FA to replace both flankers and fulcrums. Then ofcourse there is India, being jointly funded does have its risks, (like one partner pulling out as did french from EF2000 for example) but it also gives project more resiliance on the other hand since your funding is diversified. Do not forget also that crude oil is a fraction of Russian income, compared to natural Gas, where they have almost monoply on the market, and natural gas prices have not taken that big of a hit as oil, and will recover due to all this “green mumbo jumbo”

Further more Russia can see that PAK-Fa could be good commercial investment, as there would be quite a bit interest for it as long as it offers greater capability than F35/Eurocanards … It stealth does not have to beat F35, so long it has greater range , payload and twin engine it will be a desirable product for many AFs, especialy sinceF22 is not getting any foreign sales bar Japan maybe.. Yes even with supper strong lobby on capital hill i dont see raptors going to Israel, its geography and constant state of conflict makes it quite plaussable that aircraft could be lost over say Syria or Iran..

All in all, i think it is foolish to debate design and peformance of something we have no any solid information on. However to suggest that it will be a Flanker with supercruise and basic reduction in RCS as alike super bug, is bit daft. Im pretty sure we can expect stealth to be integral prat of design, though maybe not as deep as in F22.. i have this gut feeling it will have very low RSC from front but huge round engine TVC exausts from the rear 😀

my personal estimation :

UAE : 80%
Qatar : 70%
Brazil : 60%
Greece : 50%
Libya : 40%
Swiss : 40%
India : 30 %
Pakistan :10%
Argentina : 5%

With in next 5 years

Serbia : 50%

Croatia : 10% (70% Gripen)

I am not in the “pro” or “anti” Apache camp at all. But I was wondering if someone would be willing to explain to me that if the Apache is the be all and end all of American attack helicopters and is best for virtually any scenario, then why do the US Marines persist in using and upgrading the AH-1 Cobra family instead?

Would it not make sense to support one platform than two? The Brits have “marinized” the WAH-64 I believe with folding main rotors and have ensured that their electronics work on ships, so a marine Apache would not be a stretch.

Looking forward to your collective thoughts.

Because they are two designs for two different purposes … Apache was designed to hide behind trees and shoot Helfires at soviet tanks from miles away… period. Its CAS ability comes from decades of upgrades on airframe designed for something else.

Cobra/Supper Cobra was born in Vietnam as a CAS machine with role of getting upclose and personal with Vietcong and taking them out, providing cover for aircavalry troops or any other ground forces. It was designed with speed and manuverability in mind and has thinnest front facing profile of any chopper today, and it can take a beating. Its tank hunting role comes from decades of upgrades on airframe designed for something else.

Now if you are US marine, getting ready to go first into combat zone, which one of these two do you want above your head?? People running USMC are not idiots, and know what kind of warfare they are going to face, which is why they fly Cobras and Harriers.