Some pics and video of the ongoing Al-Saqoor 2 excercise in SA;
ACM seems to be participating himself, quite impressive for his age! 🙂

I’m sure with all the administrative duties that fill the role of top leadership(still pilots at heart), he must have enjoyed every moment of flying…

No thats not true. In a recent issue of Air International, it was clearly mentioned that the sale of 24 Harpoons was for IAF’s Jag IM fleet. So Harpoons are to be used on P-8I and Jag IMs.

did you read my post before responding to it?

insomnia…if he had been talking about the US, USAF etc. you would be somewhat correct…
However he was talking about Europe.
So you are either not understanding the point he is making or just completely wrong.

I do not think that many of the European Air Forces require a 5th gen platform that is low in tech and high in numbers, when they have the option of using the F-35 manufactured by a very close ally, nor do i think that US military is thinking big wars the same way they were when they were facing the Soviet threat, or that they can accomplish much of what they desire to do with their fighter squadrons by distributing a single bomb squadron around the world, or that they are planning to fight everyone at the same time.

There is every chance that i could be completely wrong, or not getting the point.

yes, 24 Harpoons for $170 million or so..costly but apparently includes training, maintenance manuals and ground equipment for their storage. Maybe further orders may be cheaper.

How was the air force able to acquire planes that were to operate primarily in a marine environment, a navy territory?

If the Navy wants these assets deployed in a certain space at a certain time, the process involved might be too ineffective, as the naval maritime surveillance assets are with the Navy it would have been more logical to keep these anti-ship/surface marine assets with the Navy, especially if we consider that Indian Navy is not that new to fighter aircraft’s.

in a single conflict:
sortie rates mate. sortie rates.

global commitments doesn’t mean parcel out your resources to deal with everyone at same time. USAF is still built to do big battles with big adversaries. so sortie rates matter. which goes back to my original point, Europe better-off in long run to man up and build a 5/6-gen fighter. even initially it is substantially less capable than f-35′ geewiz. optimize for air defense role, and sell them in bulk to whoever got cash.

save industry, save experties. save $$$. rather than to buy F-35 to hual bombs for USAF but find your self couldn’t keep up with PAK-FA on airdefence missions.

europe got good things going. replica was a good program. it’s got good AESA system going compare to r.o.w. good engine research. good missiles, and you would need the same type of tech anyways when you dive full into ucavs anyways.

…
rest of your stuff, imho, is fluff. 😀

Yes the entire leadership of USAF, Pentagon, and the defence contractors are wrong and you are right.
:rolleyes:
Dreams of grandeur.

Attack planes dropping bomb is not important, instead its important to achieve Air to Air superiority against Soviets (In case you did not notice, there is no threat to US military achieving air supremacy in a conflict left in this world).

Yes rest of the stuff i said is fluff: like B-2 is a bomber that will never fit in the role of the F-35.

Meet Ignore button, good bye that is….

they can base a dozen B-2 in 2-3 spots in the world and hit anywhere in the world in 24 hours with a dozen jdams. … unless they are required to hit everyone at sametime, they are ok, which clearly is not the case.

so that leaves one last scenario, that the planners sees number as important as individual quality, in a single conflict that involves a determined and technologically competent adversary with an sofisticated air defence system. the planners see quantity as important enough factor to ask for thousands of F-35 buys.

What the hell are you talking about?

me:At a point where both the planes give very small RCS and carry high performance air to air missiles what else is left but the sensors?
You:numbers.
Me:Thats the case with everything, however western military forces are not comfortable with throwing numbers(pilots in planes) at military problems.
You:then why is USAF insistent on maintaining squadron strength?
Me:Because its the USAF, with huge global commitments that are not going to decrease, and a squadron is raised for a purpose, till that purpose exists so will the squadron,

Global Commitments, let me explain again:

Iraqi IADS completely destroyed, Absolute radar net over Iraq and Hundreds of plane in the air trying to prevent Scud Launchers, yet the first sign of a scud was when it was launched.

Thats just a part of the picture, by the end of the war they had to do thousands of sorties over Iraq in both gulf wars, to accomplish several types of missions.

There are very specific requirement for numbers, and thousands of them, even without any IADS in enemy territory, F-35 will be replacing several F-16s and talking over the role of several F15s (that will not be replaced with F-22s) all of these squadrons have several roles including SEAD/DEAD, and for most of these roles F-35 will not use its VLO characteristics.

B-2 is a bomber, not an attack plane, there are several things it can not do with equal efficiency.

And sensors will keep being the winning edge.

The biggest adversary with the sophisticated IADS is no more(Soivet Union),

again, How many F-35 they are planning to field? :rolleyes:

They will change squadrons with the F-35, it will be the only plane in service.

where is this new all aspect broadband stealth fighters, being adopted right now? where? 😮

last time I checked Boeing is stilling peddling their 6 gen to the navy and whoever has cash.

Well its not just the fighters that will play a role in a conflict, i am talking about overall VLO technology, they just started the bomber project.

Super hornet will complete its service with the USN, and new platforms will be inducted, and yes they will be their 6th generation, Boeing is trying to take the lead with the project, and yes it does seem from their design that the next planned fighter will have all aspect broadband stealth, and another generation of evolution in electronics.

So you envision it WVR to be better than T-50, SU-35, Gripen, Rafale, Typhoon, J-10, et.al? Highly unlikely. SO, if your idea of stellar is able to take on Gen 4 aircraft and older, then I guess you’re right afterall. I have not included J-20, cause there is still too much unknown.

The F-35 can launch a missile in any direction cued through its EO system, so how do you judge its WVR capability? (which i think is about getting in position to fire your weapon and avoid being fired upon).

I much rather see a Super hornet, if reports of its strike performance are true, and the weapons load(and mix) that can be integrated, along with a 200/150 hi-lo mix it creates with the Tejas.

I think if the criticism of InAF of being fighter jocks is true, they might like the Eurofighter with its focus on air to air combat.

I think they are putting the first few Tejas squadrons down south (Tamilnadu), very interesting choice for a relatively short ranged fighter aircraft…..

People should not discount delays in FGFA program, AMCA program.