iirc in Gulf War MiG-25 found to be superior compared to MiG-29, shooting an F-18 and escaping the pursuing F-15….
More info here, from this post onwards: http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?p=1214559#post1214559
Let’s not derail too much. :p
you left out the RF-84F
Shame on me!!! 😀
I was under the impression they were retired in 1989, so I didn’t bother, but they were retired in March 1991. Indeed, it was a time that we had one combat wing for each type… 🙁
France would be a good example I suppose, since a single type, Rafale, is meant to replace virtually everything:
1. Jaguar (air-to-ground attack),
2. Super-Etendard (carrier-based air-to-ground attack),
3. Crusader (carrier-based air cover of the naval group),
4. Mirage F1 (multi-role),
5. Mirage 2000 C (air defence),
6. Mirage 2000 N and D (precision strike/interdiction with conventional and nuclear weapons),
7. Mirage 4 (nuclear strike and recce),
The US Navy probably managed something similar with the Super Hornet eventually replacing:
F-18A-Ds
F-14s
A-6s
EA-6s
S-3 Vikings (partly)
It must have been a real hell for them during the first part of Cold War though, with fighters coming and going every ten years or so.
On the other hand the opposite has happened too, some countries buying yet another type, ie Thailand getting Gripens instead of F-16s.
if you included Indian Navy you could add the harriers to make 8 types!
What about Pakistan? What was its worst record? I believe JF-17s are meant to replace many legacy fighters, right?
As for the HAF’s RF-4E’s, they can carry AIM-9’s so they aren’t totally defenseless.
It’s the RF we’re talking about. It can carry AIM-9s, true, but they are not slaved to a radar, and the aircraft itself is no match against any turkish F-16, even if not BVR armed. It’s as if your adversary has an AK-47 and you have a slingshot. You can claim that you are not totally defenceless it’s true. For example, if your adversary falls asleep, you got a pretty good chance!
These planes are no good today: They simply suck up way too many resources both human (pilots-mechanics) and non-human (maintenance, escort fighters).
(Speaking airplanes with class and charisma being replaced, what’s the story on the HAF’s remaining A-7E’s and TA-7C’s? Are they gone as of now (February 2010)?
Whatever I said about RF-4s equally applies for A-7s, with the addition that in this case HAF is the single user of this bird for the last 20 years, so no spare parts easy to find around, plus if RF-4s are somewhat defenceless, this bird is totally.
But it’s an excellent bomber and we need numbers, so they will remain in reserve for a while.
Interesting photos to compare. I’d never thought of the RF-4E’s not getting the smokeless engine mods.
So does the HAF plan to replace them soon or what is planned in that area?
Seems like the Turks see a use for their photo-Phantoms for quite a bit longer, which I think is great.
They are to be replaced by F-16 Block 52+ equipped with removable reconnaisanse pods, DB-110 by Goodrich. These pods were already certified on Polonian Block 52s, thus making their selection pretty obvious. HAF has order 2+2 pods, more orders to follow, 4 pods is an extremely small number for HAF’s needs.

There is simply no room in HAF for such a specialised airplane, the era of multi role fighters was late for HAF, but has come… RF-4Es are simply obsolete. They can do nothing but photorecon and some ELINT and even for that they cannot selfdefend, thus requiring escorts. Plus they are expensive to maintain and require a two-man crew, a pure luxury nowadays for HAF…
Turkey on the other hand has much more reconnaisance needs, in its anti-PKK warfare and “elsewhere”. But make no mistake, there is an expiry date for THK’s RF-4s too, they are also quite old frames. They will stay around only untll THK manages to induce a sufficient number of UAVs during the next years. The same with other RF-4 users, if any.

Not exactly a game changer but still… Pakistan is already building italian Falco UAVs BTW.
US ready to supply UAV ScanEagle to Pakistan: official
By Sajjad Malik
ISLAMABAD: The US is ready to provide the unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) ScanEagle to Pakistan to improve its reconnaissance capacity, US Under Secretary of Defence Michele Flournoy said on Tuesday.
Flournoy was talking to reporters at the end of her two-day visit to Pakistan.
I’m also curious about the HAF’s RF-4E’s.
HAF bought eight RF-4Es as part of Peace Icarus FMS procurement in the late seventies (delivered in early eighties) which formed the basis of 348 tactical reconnaisance squadron Matia (Eyes). These were supplemented by 27 additional RF-4Es from Luftawaffe surplus. Most of them however were scrapped as spare parts. Today there are just over 10 in operational service with 348 sqn IIRC.
In Greek service they are equipped with the french made ELINT-SIGINT pod ASTAC which however is not certified for real time data relay with the RF-4. They were originally purchased for french made Mirage F-1s, but, what a surprise, the French were not thrilled to see them work with non french birds… Finally, they are typically equipped with LOROP KS-127A cameras and AAD-5 infrared sensors. There was an upgrade program to get new cameras, but it was a failure. Here is an article in greek on that:
They have NOT received engine upgrades like Peace Icarus 2000 examples, thus they remain highly smoky. Take a look and pick the odd one out: 😀

Especially visible on this pic, bottom left an RF-4E and right next to it, a PI2000: :dev2:

http://www.haf.gr/el/structure/units/ata/units/348mta.asp
http://www.haf.gr/el/mission/weapons/weapon.asp?id=6
Two examples have crashed in recent years, one in 2008 and one in 2006, pilots safe in all cases. Finally, the only female fighter pilot (and one of the two female pilots) in HAF is assigned to RF-4Es, 1st Lt. Ioanna (Joan) Crisavgi:
http://teleytaiothranio.blogspot.com/2009/12/blog-post_522.html
http://www.diplomatia.gr/index.php?module=column&clid=35&aid=107
http://www.tanea.gr/default.asp?pid=2&ct=1&artid=80921
When was Indonesia offered the T-50? Indonesia needed a Russian loan just to buy the few Flankers it has ordered.
And your point is…? Most countries get loans to buy military hardware, nobody has enough monetary fluidity to pay in cash. Even the Arabs buy via FMS mostly…
Guys – stop calling it the damn Su-50. If it was the Su-50 then the Su-27 would’ve been called the bloody Su-10. Its totally wrong. As a Military Aviation forum, I expect higher standards from all involved. 🙂
You should know that all Russian fighters are given odd numbered suffixes. Not even numbered. The only exception to this rule that I can think of is the Tu-95, which was originally Tu-20 anyway.
If I had to guess, its designation will be Su-51- Su-47 and Su-49 are technically taken and it wouldn’t make sense to undercut those designations and name it Su-41, Su-43 or Su-45.
That one of the prototypes is now Blue 51 may be a clue for this.
How about Su-22, Su-24, Su-30, Su-34, Yak-38 and Tu-28?? Are they not russian fighters?
I agree it’s premature to assign a number though, when not even Sukhoi has, officially anyway.
THANKS but I only posted the link !!
Regarding the upper side I’m almost sure this is photoshoped !
Deino
Yes, it is, no question about it. 🙂
from ARES-Blog …
Beautiful, thanks for sharing. We already have the upper side, I think this scheme is very neat, though I would expect it all grey from beneath.
In this momenmt, the F 35 design is frozen. The present F 35, nomatter you consider it (overbudget, underperformer, delayed, etc.) is the real thing that USAF/foreign buyers will have. Now tell me, is there anything comparable in SAAB yard?
No, it’s not frozen; If it was, development would have been completed and production would be under way. But guess what? It isn’t.
The same with the NG. With your logic, its design is frozen as well. It is perhaps not what Flygvapen will have (at this point), but it was not meant for the Flygvapen in the first place, but for exports. So, if any country wants the NG, it will receive production copies what you saw flying on June 2008 onwards. Just as with the F-35.
This is not what SAAB said. What do you think that NG stand for? Correct, but 5 flying prototypes is more than no flying prototype…
Excuse me? ??? What do you think the Gripen Demo is? A prototype for the Gripen Demo?
You didn’t read my post. What you ar talking about is the (present flying) Gripen Demo not Gripen NG. Yes, the Demo has some features intended for the palned NG (414 engine, redesigned landing gear allowing some 800 kg extra fuel), but is not the NG. There is no NG around in this moment, belive me.
You should other poeple’s post before accusing them of that very same thing. I never said there is an NG around; I only said it’s not a paper plane. With your logic, there is no F-35 around either.
If you discount the AA 1, there is one AF 1 and 3 BF. Still more than NG. BTW all of them have been flying. Also 3 F 35 C are in final stage of assembly at Forth Worth…A lot different from the NG program, if you ask me.
Numbers is not an argument; F-35 has 3 different versions: USAF’s, VTOL and naval. Gripen NG only one plus it’s a major upgrade rather than a brand new frame. If the job can be done with one, why should there be more prototypes?
DELETE
:DThat’s gripen Demo, not Gipen NG.
Yeah, well. The same goes for everything else out there currently or previously in the fase of development, including but not limited to: F-35, YF-23, Rafale Fx, Typhoon and so on. Before January 29 you could easily call PAK-FA a paper/fictional-plane and be well undisputed, not the case anymore.
The Gripen NG has not been a paper plane since April/June 2008, when it was presented to the public, made its first flight and secured corporate/state funding. End of story.
This is a paper plane:

There are ~ 5 F35 in tests. No NG yet. So, F 35 is not fictional (on paper). NG is. For now.
So, to your mind, only serial production planes can be classified as “non-fictional”, thus making every demonstrator/test plane a product of imagination, including the F-35 you mentioned.
Thanks for sharing your views. 🙂