It was originally touted to replace the original Etendard, but later it was realised it could also replace the F8 in the interceptor role.
Again, I speak from memory so mught be incorrect, but I think it was to be powered by the M53 to provide better thrust IIRC.
At the time, I think they settled on the Super Etendard for reasons of economy/budget. I personally think this was a missed opportunity to replace 2 airframes with one.
A mockup, or partial mockup at least was displayed.

Big problem with Jaguar M, Mirage F1M and Corsair (which was also considered) was that they would have required modifications for French carriers, which were pretty small. So it was decided to to with ‘temporary solution’ Super Etendard, until new & fancy ACT would be ready for the carriers. As it was, ‘temporary solution’ ended up serving for near 40 years.

Finish delegation visited UVZ in the 1990s to check out the T-90, and by insider accounts were quite happy with it. But due to politics, it was not considered, the only real “contender” was the Leo2.
Trade between Finland and Russia has grown hugely from those days, even accounting for past few rocky years. While arms wise Finland has moved away, in almost every other sense the countries are closer than they were in Soviet times.

T-90 inquiries may have been part of studies to see what arms purchases Finland could make to write off Russia’s post-Soviet debt. Considered major items were tanks, helicopters and missiles. In the end, only major acquisition was the Buk deal (which the Russians almost immediately began to regret). The Army was extremely cash-strapped in the ’90s and couldn’t afford any new equipment. The plan was to modernize T-72, but then European countries began dumping used Leopard 2’s at fire sale prices, so the plan was scrapped. Confused state and chaos within Russian arms industry in immediate post-Soviet era didn’t really help. “Nobody knew anything, or could point us to a person who could have helped”.

MiG-23MLD with R-73:
http://www.airwar.ru/image/idop/figh…mig23mld-9.jpg
http://www.16va.be/galeries_vvs/mig-…_2/_00018.html
http://www.16va.be/galeries_vvs/mig-…_2/_00022.html

Thanks, I had read that R-73 was integrated but pics usually only showed R-60 so I wondered whether that was error, or only applied to some trials aircraft.
MiG-23 did not have HMS however, right? That only came with -98 upgrade?

Finnish photographer Leif Rosas took these, and was signaled from getting too close:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]254942[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]254943[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]254944[/ATTACH]

Mach 2 isn’t very high on the list for adversary operators…they seem to want simple and small-ish aircraft with modern subsystems installed. Mirage F1 is relatively small, sure, but probably not very fuel economical and radar set is very old. Can French Mirages carry attack pods?

Argentina might have missed their chance….cash talks.

If those articles are correct, asking price was about 300 000 euros per aircraft. If Argentina can’t afford that, they can’t afford anything.
I wonder, though, if the Mirage F1 is really as suitable for adversary role? Sure French Mirages were modernized somewhat, but avionics set is still very old even compared to KAHU Skyhawks.
I would think that SEM was more suitable for private operators, though the airframes are probably out of flying hours.

Since radar remains the primary sensor on an aircraft, it most certainly is relevant to the discussion.

The point is that if you simply take out an existing radar and bolt a new one and everything else stays the same, performance gain is going to be modest.

Throw in the costs of training, logistical suport, etc, for a handfull of airframes that the nearest operator is on the other side of the planet and throw in the costs of integrating a BVR weapon (thats not cheap, it can easily go to a 200 to 300 million US$ bill) and sudenly it might not be so cheap.

Although FA-50 currently does not have BVR missile and integrating one is not cheap, true, many present and future operators are interested about it and probably costs can be shared.
But, OTOH, Austrian Eurofighters don’t have BVR capability either, so maybe that is not on the menu.