Phalcon deal was well reported because it involve Israel and US and the English media will tend to focus more on it.. and Phalcon deal has nothing to do with any technology transfer or aircraft modifications. A-50EI is not derivative of A-50I.

Don’t try to defend the indefensible.

The C-130 in general, including the C-130J, has proven itself to be an extremely safe and reliable aircraft over many many years of service.

The Mig-21 meanwhile has proven the opposite.

Just drop it.

its not comparision of MIG-21 and C-130. I am sure F104/F-16 would have similar fate like MIG-21 if they survived 40 years under Indian budget, maintainance and training.
Infact crash rate of M2K is about the same as MIG-29 in IAF. but those MIG-29 were bought very cheap in 1980s. India has to raise it military budget way higher than inflation to maintain once western equipment gets older.

Where you get this information that Israel gave asea tech in 90s to China? How can Israel modify A-50 airframe for AESA or any radar. 4 A-50E information. was released by Russian. and that’s what they got for long time. Extremely slow progress on Y-20 shows that china has very limited ability to do structural modifications with large planes in year 2014 let alone in 1999.

It exists otherwise where China got these 4 A-50E. China simply not have any capability to modify such platform more than a decade ago.

A-50M/E the standard before A-50U never had 50 target track claim. rather its 300. it has long range ground/ship survellence capability.

http://www.beriev.com/eng/A-50E_e/A-50E_e.html
http://www.ruaviation.com/news/2011/8/10/462/print/

A-100 is supposed to outperform A-50EI. that had larger 10.5 meter antenna.

I think you’re rather missing the point. Crimea can’t pay for anything anyway: it’s been heavily subsidised by the rest of Ukraine. It now has to rely on the munificence of Russia, while still being dependent on Ukraine for electricity, gas, & fresh water. It doesn’t have the option of following the Moscow economic model, since it doesn’t control large reserves of oil, gas, coal, or other raw materials which it can sell.

how can Ukraine subsidize?. Ukraine got discounted energy supplies due to Crimean base. and Russia is going to impose kind of economic model that Southern/Eastern Ukraine only survival will be trade with Crimea and Russia. in less than a year government in Kiev will become a basket case even with EU money. EU will simply don’t have any funds for military.

Note that peripheral regions of Russia benefit little from the wealth flowing into Moscow from energy exports.

They benefited a lot. see Sukhoi factories in Siberia.

RMK shipyards are owned by Koç Holding. During gezi incidents, Koç holding opened up their Divan Hotel to protesters and supported the anti-goverment protests. Now the goverment wants to take multi billion $ bidding away from the Koç Holding. In short: You know nothing about our internal matters. I accept there is corruption in govement and some moronic Islamist guys still supports the goverment them despite the corruption. More, there are billions of religious and social problems in Turkey I would complain about.

dysfunctional governments are usually responsible for military defeats.

However, this is a military discussion, and all of these are irrelevant. According to any and all sources you can find on the internet, we still maintain 3000+ tanks in active service, we still maintain around 400 combat aircraft in active service, along with the Navy units I mentioned 50 times. We still do maintain our cold war numbers, and we don’t need this kind of army only to protect ourselves from Greece or Syria or anything. If we had slightest trouble maintaning our armed forces, we could have easily shrinked our army to 400 tanks and airforce 200 combat aircraft just like any EU country did, but we choose not to. Also, I’ve provided independent sources that both prove we have 18b$ military budget, and that is ever increasing from year to year. If you have problems believing in any of this, the problem is really you.

3000 tanks and 400 combat not for first day war against top tier rival. you will be luck to deploy one fourth of that in active combat and much less in sustain support. you simply don’t have that deep airbase infrastructure that can be operational from cruise/billistic missile attacks. your complete import depended country from finances to energy. on top of that 30 to 40 percent of population that can rise up for right price.

I will repeat myself; Everything you say irrelevant to these discussions. You run theories and they are wrong, thats it. You make Russian propoganda, by denying even the FACTs that Russians accept. So all you do is losing your credibility.

theories that are wrong. show me my single predictions that has proven wrong.

Stupid and childish comment and I wont enter into pissing contest. However i will have say these;
1-Russians dont even have 1000 air delivered antiship missiles in their inventory; In fact, only Tu-22M3 and Su-34s are capable of delivering dedicated anti-ship missiles. Other than that; some upgraded Su-24 and Su-27/30s provide Kh-31A.

have you looked at tactical missile corporations revenues and that revenues is understatement for true quantities produces for Ruaf. even downgraded export models Kh-31PMK/AD has more than 200km range.

2-Flankers cannot carry ANY antiship/antiradar missiles. Only upgraded ones, which is less than 1/3rd of the Su-27 fleet.

there are 30 to40 Su-34 in service. and that fleet in single take off can rain down close to 300 Antiship/Anti radiation missiles. They carry 50% more payload and much wider radar than Flanker. the first step of war is suppression of radar and communication network and than energy infrastructure.
those useless ships with short range subsonic missiles have no relevance.

see the 2008. Russia does not want to stop oil supply to Turkey as favor. as Turkey is very loyal customer of Russian energy and BP was part of TNK-BP.

http://www.rferl.org/content/Georgia_Russia_Conflict_Changes_Energy_Equation/1194496.html
Pierre Noel, an energy expert at the European Council, points out the strategic difference for Russia between the two export routes. The Russians, Noel says, “always want people to believe they have a limited agenda, so they bombed the railway that brings Azeri oil to Georgia, and BP has been forced to stop its shipments of Azeri oil to Georgia by rail because the bridge has been bombed. But they wouldn’t bomb a pipeline which is not directly linked to supplying Georgia.” That, Noel says, would give the West justification to accuse Russia of aggression against the West or the region beyond Georgia itself

incase of Russia against Turkey. You will not even get Oil and money from Arab countries. bankruptcy in hours. forget about rest of the world coming to rescue.

3-I am sure Hitler said Napoleon’s history lesson about invasion of Russia did not apply too. “Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” is a really nice quote.

those days are over. there is not much willing population for such adventures. It is now supercomputers/software/precision engineering/high paid and train troops that decide it.

By the way some another fact; Tatar Turks which constitute the 12% population of Crimea is now represented in Crimean Parliament by 20%. Each individual Turk in Crimea gets almost double representitive rights of a Russian. (1.6 per person vs 0,9 per person). I am 100% confident your RT will fail to mention this, as -almost certainly- will rest of the world media, but we certainly got what we want :stupid: Have fun proving your theories.

short term inducements to pacify and disarm the society for long term bending.