crossed my mind few times this week.

Maybe US gives a “trojan” gift to Iran. Then Iran takes it to most secret facility for dissection and US gets the location of this facility via GPS. Would that be possible?

A hidden Wireless bug (long range) not detectable by Iranian scientists because it automatically turns ON and quickly OFF just for short moments to report location and transmit data. Is it likely that such transmission could go by undetected, while physical transmitter is well hidden in the frame?

This was a nice scenario theory for one episode of the TV series JAG, where a pilot lands his F-14D on Cuba claiming malfunction, so as to lure them into handing it to the iranians and thus using its bug “to return them to the stone age”.

It’s way too obvious in this case though.

The inboard wing pylon is capable of 5k lbs and the outboard 2.5k lbs. The new BRU-69A (pictured blow is it’s predecessor the BRU-55/57) is slated to carry two BRU-61s (for a total of 8 SDB per pylon).

So with 8 internal, 16 on the inboard pylon, and 8 on the outboard pylon gives us 32. The speculative 44 comes from if the outboard pylon can also carry two BRU-61s (as it is a “2500 lb class” pylon) for an additional 8 and (here is a stretch) if the belly hardpoint can carry a BRU-61 which would enable another 4 SDB.

I doubt so many bombs of that size can be carried reliably on such small space, but anyway, I see the point. The F-16 could carry 16 Mk82 bombs (there is even a pic) but of course that never happened.

That being said, there is no way we will ever see a F-35 carrying this many SDBs in combat, even if it could. This was only meant as an expertise in “what if”.

So basically this phrase…

Just to show how many it can carry, the F-35A can carry 32-44 SDBs when all the internal and external hardpoint are used.

…could be better rephrased as “…how many i could carry”. I think if maximum number of ammunition is the absolute necessary factor, then 8 x CBUs would be better suited.

A joint exercise between the Hellenic an Israeli Air Forces, in Israel. We participated with 5 337 SQN F-16s. The exercise lasted five days, was concluded yesterday.

More beautiful pics here: http://www.haf.gr/el/news.asp?id=5783

The same country who might be interested in buying russian fighters TODAY is facing the option of buying either a bunch of flankers, or two bunches of fulcrums. That option won’t be there in the future. That’s my point.

And if it was there they wouldn’t be able to afford it anyway, just as they can’t afford to buy, maintain, equip, upgrade and fly modern Flanker/Fulcrum variants right now. Nations like Uganda have no real airpower future, that’s just the way it is.

Unless you are some sort of wizard with a supernatural ability to predict the future, you can’t know that for sure just like you don’t know that today. :dev2:

If someone had told me 10 years ago that Uganda would buy Flankers in th future, I would most probably laugh at his face. But reality today is that…

What led those people in that crazy decision (since I agree it has no future)? I don’t know and frankly I don’t care. But bottom line is that they had the option. I doubt the ugandan example will be liable in the future; Unless one believes that the russian government would be willing to share an advanced fighting machine such as the PAKFA with a third world country. Maybe in 20-30 years, when the successon will be under development (such as in the Su-30 case today).

Really? Given the enormous distances in Russia, the modern trend towards larger aircraft, the rise of unmanned platforms, limited state funds and the lack of Cold War or equivalent pressure Russia’s current near-exclusive focus on heavy fighters makes perfect sense to me.

The problem with larger aircraft is that they provide limited option to potential customers and limited customers in whole. The world is not exactly full of Indias and Chinas.

So it would make equally perfect sense to have a smaller, cheaper and easier to operate fighter in your “palmare” so as to provide more options against your competitors.

ok, I thought so. The 2 seconds of the launch duration indeed don’t look too real.

Just out of curiosity though, would it be possible to make a test launch without a radar system installed?

Yes it is certainly an uncomfortable situation, to my eyes Greece has over the last few years has made some rather unsustainable defence procurement decisions in an attempt to keep up with the growing regional power Turkey.

True, too many procurements were extremely short minded, for example the navy, army and air force each have seperate utility helicopter types in service, thus maximising maintenance costs. Seahawks for the navy, Super Pumas for the Airforce and Chinooks for Army plus NH90s. Even the Police Air Arm have two (!!!) different types of helicopters for a total of five birds!

Not long ago a Defense News article mentioned the possibility of Greece selling some surplus F-16’s, presumably the Block 30 ones. Is there any information and/or discussion regarding this?

I really can’t see that happening; They are too old, over 20 years old, but most imprtantly, I don’t think they are structurally adequent; They had some severe crack issues in the first years (like most bolck 30s and before) and have been used under extremely harsh conditions, in everyday dogfights in the Aegean mostly, or patroling over sea water. Not exactly what one would call a “bargain”. Also, in order to sell them a buyer must be found, and the US must approve the sale, I don’t see either happening. And finally, what would be the €€€ benefit? Too little to justify withdrawing 2 fighter quadrons.

There was a rumour about merging the two squadrons operating Block 30s into one, cannibalising the rest and use as an advanced training/reserve squadron. We’ll see about that.