Get_ItJust copy the XF-23 and don’t even go into the trouble of fitting EW and weapon systems. The sheer beauty of the aircraft will be enough to make enemy pilots cry of happiness, get disorientated and crash their own aircraft.
Best regards,
Get_ItThe Airforce would operate
28 Mirage F-1’s
16 Fighting hawks
6 C130’s to be replaced by KC-390’s
8 C-295M
4 Learjets and 2 Citation’s
30 Pucara’sNavy
12 Fightinghawks
4 P-3 Orion’s
4 C295 MPA’s
3 S-2 Tracker ‘s
6 super king airs
4 Seakings and 4 AS555’s
18 Bell 412’s for SARArmy
5 C212’s
20 OV-1 Mohawks
20 Huey 2’s
15 Mil-17’s
20 Bell 206’s
20 Z-11’sAll other types would be withdrawn from service
I think that those OV-1s could be easily replaced by further Pucarás as a way to strength the local industry and finance further development of the aircraft, more importantly WP (lot of grain of salt here) points to 10 being operational, and even with upgrades and an improvement in the maintenance those aircraft are about 40 years old and replacing them would help to eliminate another logistics line.
Dump the fighter carrier aviation (the A-4 and any ideas of deploying them from any carriers in the future): Argentina will no longer have the economy, political will or foreign support to operate a carrier force. Instead use that money to invest in a fighter-bomber with long-range anti-shipping capability or in a submarine force.
I’m not sure about the current state of those C-212s. Sources “say” that the Army has one or two 212-200 in service — easy, dump them and have the AF do that job or have them share a C-295 fleet — and the Coast Guard has five C-212-300 (maritime patrol and surveillance) — have them operate these aircraft until they reach their lifetime and only then buy the C-295MPA. Additionally, have an ASW version of the C-295 (either a buffed up C-295MPA or simply additional C-295 dedicated to that role) replace the P-3 in the future. Under this thinking an aircraft with longer range would be purchased in the far, far future to complement both the C-295MPA/ASW, thus replacing effectively the P-3 in range, and replace the S-2 Trackers.
Would the navy’s SAR helicopters complement the Coast Guard’s SAR helicopters or would the navy take over that mission?
Best regards,
Get_ItMexico did end up with Sukhois in its skies.
Just not Su-27s.
Are you referring to Sukhoi’s Superjet for Injet? Were the Su-27 supposed to be part of some payment that the regional jet ended up being?
Best regards,
Get_ItI think that it would be much better for their defense capabilities to take some of the money from that investment in the air force and instead lease a naval base (Algeria?) and buy submarines, either German, Italian or Russian built.
Additionally, if they sign a defense cooperation type of deal with Algeria or even Morocco, they could base some Su-35 fighters there for both joint-training and to have a better strike capability against Spain or France when they are attacked.
[/sarcasm]
Best regards,
Get_ItJudging by squadron numbers and aircraft allocated, it looks like the first digit represents role (e.g. 2XX = combat, 1XX = utility) and last 2 digits is squadron number.
From what I can see:
1XX = Liaison/Utility (equipment includes variety of Cessna light planes and Bell helicopters as well as Hughes MD520/530 light gunships))
2XX = Combat squadron (PC-7). WW2 squadron with P-47s was 201 Escadron (currently equipped with PC-7)
3XX = Transport (C-130, C-295, Mi-17) – However all 3XX squadrons are assigned to 3 Gruppo but this does seem to be coincidence (in other airforces, first digit or first two digits may represent wing/group number = e.g. Spanish 142 Escadron is 2nd squadron of 14th wing).
4XX = Interceptor (401 with F-5s) but 402 squadron is equipped with PC-7s so not sure. In past 402 squadron was equipped with T-33s though. Maybe 4XX means jet combat and 402 Esc was never redesignated following retirement of T-33s?
5XX – VIP Tansport (but no presidential flights – given older equipment of 502 Escadron (B727) this might be a unit assigned to supporting staff officer movements).
Escuadrilla de Vigilancia Aérea – surveillance squadrons.
Then there’s a variety of non-standard squadron designations for Presidential VIP, Training and UAV.
All just interpolation based on Orbat.
Thank you thobbes, your analysis makes perfect sense. Even if 402 Air Squadron simply wasn’t re-designated after the retirement of the T-33 they could still consider the PC-7 has an interceptor against the slow moving planes of the cartels.
Other than this I was hoping that someone actually knew about any official designation systems.
Best regards,
Get_ItInteresting. I have never given that much thought about their structure. Very good thread guys/gals. Does anyone know if the Mexican squadron designation system (112 Air Squadron, 109 Air Squadron, 401 Air Squadron, etc…) is based on some sort of guidelines/pattern or if it’s only based on historical squadrons?
Best regards,
Get_ItThe large-scale protests in Brazil of late don’t bode well for a timely resolution of FX-2, and indeed lend retrospective credence to excuses offered for previous delays.
The protests in Brazil should have little effect on the timely resolution of the FX-2 competition, since its resolution has already been compromised by the investments for the World Cup and the Olympics.
Best regards,
Get_Italthought the PC-21 cannot be used in a weapons training role as the aircraft itsself is unarmed (unlike the Super Tucano).
That’s an old and outdated idea of the PC-21. It has hardpoints for air to ground weapons and has an advanced weapon systems simulator for weapons training.
Best regards,
Get_ItMaybe talk to Germany and see if they’re interested in training their own pilots — joint M346 buy?
Would be interesting, but the German training is basically based in the US (T-38) and will probably continue there. Something else to have in mind in that aspect is that Belgium also operates the Alpha-Jet and has them based in France.
Why not Rafales to FAB for KC-390 and A-29 Super Tucano for AdlA?
The Super Tucano might be a good mix of training and COIN aircraft but it isn’t enough for advanced training, especially for LIFT. It simply wasn’t designed for it has the PC-21 was. Besides, Brazil won’t be buying the Rafale anytime soon, especially with them having to pay the Olympics, so France should stop focusing solely on that deal. They already have other ToT agreements with Brazil and have talked about buying the KC-390, what else do they need for Brazil to buy the Rafale? Name a region of France after Dilma?
Best regards,
Get_ItMy 5 cents:
Go with the PC-21 to replace both Epsilon and later Alpha-Jet and establish an agreement with the UK to send their pilots to train in the RAF on the Hawk. Later buy the M-346 or a new version of the Hawk.
Buying the T-50 won’t given them any political bonus with South Korea, even if it’s a good damn training aircraft it shouldn’t tromp other European built trainers like the M-346. Even with France selling the Mistral to Russia it isn’t enough to prompt a French buy of the Yak-130, especially when it could damage relations with Italy and there’s to a certain point an agreement between Italy and Russia regarding M-346 and Yak-130 sales. Even with a “trade” of Rafales for Pampa Argentina will not have the money to buy the Rafale and the Pampa doesn’t have that much of a significant capability compared to other trainers.
Best regards,
Get_ItWhat would then be the end of service time frame for the F-16 and Mirage? As much as 2030-2040?
Best regards,
Get_ItThe UK probably would of been receptive to a carrier variant Rii but that wasn’t really the problem. France wanted a wholly unrealistic level of work share, they wanted to lead the program and have final assembly of a disproportionate amount of systems including complete aircraft. If France had been open to a more reasonable amount of work-share then they probably would of stayed on-board. Also at that very early stage of the program the Aeronavale wasn’t interested in a domestic replacement for the Crusader that was forced on them later by the French government. Their prefered choice was the F/A-18 Hornet which was even had approach trials with one of Frances Clemenceau class carriers:
The major sticking point leading to France pulling out was not the lack of desire for a carrier variant by the other nations but over unreasonable work-share demands.
Speaking of which, here’s a documentary about the Eurofighter program: Eurofighter – Weapon of Mass Construction (BBC, 2003)
Best regards,
Get_ItI see that most of you are respecting the OP’s request of not using Western companies. Yet you are buying aircraft that has a great amount of Western sensors and equipment and would require at least exporting licenses, if not exporting the actual material, from those Western countries.
Best regards,
Get_ItEveryone can criticize — are even correct from a certain point of view — the number of submarines that Australia wants to acquire. However, for a country (that isn’t landlocked) that has no nuclear weapons submarines are a must in terms of deterrence. Even if the number is low they are still very effective at making any nation doubt their actions during a conflict.
And yes thobbes, I did get your point and agree with you, I’m just preempting this post and had to comment because the subject kind of hit a personal spot.
Best regards,
Get_Itthat’s good because Turkey is in Europe. Thus they have access to European markets 😉
Turkey does seem to have a lot of money to invest in other European countries that are struggling economically. However, Turkey is kind of seen as the black sheep of the family when it comes to Europe and there’s some resent against them because a lot of jobs were lost to Turkey, which would make any decision to buy Turkey design/made expensive hardware as political suicide. Additionally, most European countries have better relations with the Western European industry, such as that of UK, France, Germany, Spain and Sweden.
Best regards,
Sign In
