HAWX aceYemen uses the export version alread equipped with underwing pylons, so no need for any conversion. L-39 are surely much better suited for COIN ops than MiG-29s so I can well imagine the accident was combat-related.
I agree, most likely it is not a MiG-29.
I found an old article, seems I recalled correctly after all. They were upgraded at the Odesaremservis factory in Ucraine where other than new displays and avionics, they were certified with a new centerline targeting pod for use with guided weapons. They also received new Ivchenko-Progress AI-25TLSh engine with more thrust.
HAWX aceprobably, as the rest of the “non-stealth” jets, they usually counts this way.
Agreed, but if this is the case, then we are talking about a major contradiction in Saab’s promotional rhetoric. They keep saying that the F-35 may be stealth, but it carries an minimal usefull weapons load, and if it carries more externally, then it’s no longer stealth.
The same would apply for the Gripen, no?
Dont forget its half the size anything else (exept LCA), so its really “broadband stealth” all the way to UV-VIS spectrum 🙂
Well, there is always the F-16. It has won a few contests against the Gripen and it’s still a major adversary in contests where they both participate. If size is the issue here, even Mirage 2000 is as small too. Though not produced anymore, but it was one of Gripen’s adversaries in Polish contest.
Allthesame, the canards and all those floating wingtips and antennas probably don’t help towards that 0,1 m2 figure…
HAWX acehttp://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showpost.php?p=1321013&postcount=1
its best summered up in signatorys thread..
it says in swedish:The Swedish defence research agency names the average rcs of Gripen A to 0.1m2
this is the gripen A, new measures have been made with C/D and lastly NG.
O,1 m2?!
Impossible and unlikely as it sounds, I believe it could only apply to a clean Gripen, no pylons and weapons whatsoever, save for the Mauser.
HAWX aceYes, that was my first thought, but there is one pilot missing. Is it possible that he flew a trainer like an L-39 on his own?
BTW, Yemeni L-39s have been overhauled and upgraded with new avionics by Ucraine. Not sure, but IIRC some of them have been converted to the light attack role. Could be one of them perhaps?
HAWX aceYemeni Air Force lost an aircraft in a crash today and AFAIK the pilot is still missing. Don’t know the exact type of the aircraft, but it was said that it was on a training mission. A MiG-29SMT perhaps?
Let’s hope that they find the pilot.
HAWX aceFrom flightglobal…
By Stephen Trimble on January 12, 2010 1:06 PM
Militaryphotos.net has posted the clearest frontal view yet of the RQ-170, courtesy of the latest issue of Combat Aircraft monthly magazine. The US Air Force still refuses to release official photos of the Skunk Works project, so we have to rely on these shots from the aviation paparazzi. This particular shot appeared in the latest Combat Aircraft. More photos are available inside the magazine.
Pic:
Indeed, like a scaled down B-2.
HAWX aceArgentina haven’t F-5:confused: 😉
I only said where they were tracked down. Argentina AFAIK does not operate F-5s, not anymore. Venezuela actually has a few CF-5s, but I got no idea about their availability status, but it shouldn’t be too good.
Anyway, given the chance, here is another extensive article in English, about F-5 parts in Malaisia. F-5 is another fighter also found in many countries, just like F-16s, MiG-21s, F-4s, Mirage IIIs and so on. I suppose arms dealers in the black market find good chances for profit with desperate air forces. Even though Iran is under official embargo, The US had to pass a law plan especially for the prohibition of spare parts for F-14s to keep them out of Iran…
STOLEN PARTS BACK HERE
Submitted by pekwan on Monday, December 21st, 2009* Local
* RMAF Stolen partsRMAF possibly bought parts from jet engine stolen from Sungei Besi air base two years ago
MARHALIM ABAS
Monday, December 21st, 2009 11:42:00
RMAFPETALING JAYA: The Royal Malaysian Air Force (RMAF) possibly ended up buying parts and components from a jet engine that went missing from its base two years ago and was subsequently sold abroad.
Local defence industry sources told The Malay Mail the General Electric J85-GE-21 engine had most likely been dismantled into smaller components when it was reportedly “sold” to a South American arms dealer….
Full story:
http://www.mmail.com.my/content/22508-stolen-parts-back-here
HAWX aceYes I read that, same old situation with the Guardian, there probably isn’t much interest amongst their readership so no real need for accuracy, so usual Guardian lack of attention to detail and doom laden messages for the UK armed forces.
Could it merely be a case of the press attacking the governement or the industry (in order to secure money from ads)? I mean being ignorant is one thing. Having an agenda is another, more possible IMHO. I find it hard to accept that both columnists in two major british newspapers are morons/ignorant.
Allthesame, what he says is not insane. Building both carriers but finally getting only one (either by converting the other or selling it) would not be unprecedented. It has happened before, with british upholder class SSKs sold to Canada instead of delivered (correction: after only 2 or 3 years in RN service) to RN. However since India is expecting Gorshkov and building two new carriers of its own AFAIK, I think would not be interested, as the article suggests.
HAWX aceSo why all this speculation about getting only one carrier after all? There was another story at the Times some two months ago about the same issue. (Discusesd here)
He doesn’t cite any specific source however (only “unnamed” and “well informed” military officials), so arguably he could say whatever he wants, meaning IMHO that there is an obvious question of reliability. Either you trust the author/paper, or you don’t. But there are two articles/authors. Both of them morons/ignorants?
HAWX aceThe Americans still supply Spares to the Venezuela F 16s ?
DID has a comprehensive article on the matter…
Other than that, I had run into an article a few months ago citing a whining Chavez over the US not supplying spare parts for his country. In particular, he argued that although his country is offering hot liquid cash $$$, “the US is not honouring the support contracts they signed”.
Anyway, impressive as it is, there are after all 25 other users for the F-16 all over the world, so I guess there is an extensive black market. Iranian F-14s though cannibalised still fly, and Iran is the only user of that type. Last month I believe Indonesia “lost” two F-5 engines which were after all tracked in Argentina…
HAWX aceVENEZUELA LAUNCHES 2 F-16 AGAINST AMERICAN P-3 ORION
President of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, stated that last January, 9, 2 F-16 of the Venezuela Air Force (FAV), tracked a military north-american aircraft, invading airspace of Venezuela. He showed an image, that he described as an P-3 Orion, that had taken off from USA Air bases in Colombia or Caribbean, and that lasted 15 and 19 minutes.
US Govermment has not any comment at the moment.
http://miragec14.blogspot.com/2010/01/venezuela-intercepta-p-3.html
Not according to this…
“We can confirm no US military aircraft entered Venezuelan airspace today. As a matter of policy we do not fly over a nation’s airspace without prior consent or coordination,” Reuters quoted an unnamed Defense Department Spokesperson as saying on January 8.
That’s nice. “He’s a liar! We didn’t violate their airspace. Not today…” :diablo:
HAWX aceneuron is also developed at the moment on the account of saab…
Neuron is not “developed” per se, in the sense that it is only a technology demonstration project. Nobody knows if, how, or when it will mature to a series produced UCAV.
Additionally, it is not developed “on account of Saab”, but from a international group of companies led by Dassault with the participation of amongst others, Saab.
I don’t see how it is related to an upgraded Gripen? Are you suggesting that some of the technologies developed by this group of companies could be applied on the Gripen?
HAWX aceReplacement for Trident nukes ‘delayed indefinitely’
The UK Government’s controversial £20billion programme to replace the Trident nuclear weapons system on the Clyde has been thrown into disarray by an indefinite delay, the Sunday Herald can reveal.
The Ministry of Defence has admitted “further time” is now needed before a crunch decision can be taken on the design of the submarines needed to carry the new nuclear missiles.
The decision was originally meant to be made last year.
Read more
HAWX aceBut there aren’t any secondhand AV-8s! There are none for sale! I’ve already said this.
I’ve also already said, more than once, exactly why Cavour is not inferior to Wasp (etc) as a carrier, despite its smaller size, & why the manpower issue is only one of many issues.
You now appear to be trolling.
So, whoever disagrees with you, is a troll. Thank you very much, have a nice day.
Nope. Someone who refuses to acknowledge arguments presented to him, repeats claims which have already been refuted, misrepresents his own or others words, argues in non sequitors . . . Nothing to do with disagreeing with me, or anyone else.
Well, since you have done these very things, you just described yourself… 😮
Like I said, have a nice day.
HAWX aceDo keep up! 😉
Well. There is really nothing to keep up with. You see, I made it clear from the beginining that I put forward this issue of US selling second hand LHAs and LHDs on a strictly hypothetical basis. On your behalf, you never denied that you actually cannot predict the future.
Buying second hand carriers or LHA/LHD has actually been of interest in the past, and the US has sold to its allies such vessels in the past (the spanish Dedalo for instance). It may be a good or bad idea, that’s perfectly arguable, but certainly not merely theory.
So, at the end of the day, we really don’t disagree. 😉
Built to operate fixed wing aircraft even if they are only of the STOVL variety; Cavour is definitely an aircraft carrier, I don’t recall reading anyway that an aircraft carrier has to have a catapult installed, does this mean the Kuznetsov is not an aircraft carrier?
Well if you compare the Su-33 with the Harrier, I believe you’ll get your answer as to whether the Kuz is a carrier or not. 🙂
Anyway, assuming that “Built to operate fixed wing aircraft even if they are only of the STOVL variety” is the sole presupposition for a vessel to be named aircraft carrier, then yes, the Cavour is an aircraft carrier. I do not agree with this definition but it obviously doesn’t matter, that’s just me. I believe an aircraft carrier sould operate a substantial number of high performance jet fighters as well other assets, early warning aircraft and so on. The Cavour is neat, but too small. I think it’s vanity to call it aircraft carrier, even if it carries a few Harriers.
I think the Royal Navy gets to call its new “ships” aircraft carriers if it wants to, after all they invented them in the first place.
Sure, they may call them floating casinos too. But then again, they may have invented aircraft carriers, but certainly they did not invent neither the language, nor linguistics.
The UK was offered ex US ships as replacements for Ocean (an LHP), this has since been dismissed for the same reasons that Swerve has already stated, no real indication anyway that it was ever given serious thought.
That’s ok. As for the Times article, I was not aware it was “rebuffed”, as you said. I found the relative thread, so I stand corrected, no worries.
You are mistaken to conflate Juan Carlos I & Cavour. The former is an LHD, a dedicated amphibious warfare ship, with a secondary STOVL carrier role (for which, BTW, it has to temporarily sacrifice its amphibious capability). The latter is a STOVL carrier with fleet command & modest secondary amphibious capabilities. The former is akin to a smaller Tarawa: the latter is a very different ship.
Agreed, except that I am not conflating these two. Read my post again.
As I keep saying, Cavour is superior to Tarawa in the carrier role. An F-35B will be able to take off with a bigger load from her deck than Tarawa’s, in worse weather.
Sure, but that’s not what I said. Right now, a Tarawa would be made available only with second hand AV-8s. Like I said, The F-35B would be made available later on, certainly not with Tarawas. So, I still think that in either case, Tarawa vs Cavour both with AV-8s, or Wasp vs Cavour also both with F-35Bs, the Cavour is always inferior, just because it is smaller. Except for the manpower issue.
I’m afraid it’s not at all obvious, because of the lack of second-hand AV-8s. The USMC is having to manage airframe hours carefully on its current fleet to keep them in service until they can be replaced by F-35B.
If any LHD/LHA were to be given away, it would only be with its air wing of at least 8-10 AV-8Bs which either way were operating from her. .
But what countries of their size & ambitions are there? Are there any you can name which might be interested in a Tarawa? I can’t think of one.
Neither can I, not right now anyway. 😉
Except that the discussion was about their value as aircraft carriers.
One of the two previous french carriers, the Foch I think was degraded to helo carrier role at some point. So was Arromanches even before that. Still, they both begun as aircraft carriers. I mean, It’s not that it has not happened again. Thailand does not even operate its own AV-8B due to lack of funds. Does this make their carrier useless? Hardly.
No, it proves that the option was examined and rejected. Why was it rejected? Well, see above – all the reasons I’ve already given.
Which brings us back to the begining of this post I guess. Got nothing else to add.
My best and sincere regards.
Sign In
