JSRF-15 with AMRAAM and AIM-9M (soon AIM-9X II). Typhoon with AMRAAM and IRIS-T. More then enough to handle Mig-29M partnered with Saudi force enablers the B707 tankers (soon A330MRTT) and E3 AWACS.
your assuming the weopons, training, contractors supplied to Iraq will be inferior. Those quite old AWACS not even PESA. i dont think it will give them situational awarness advantage compared to datalink MIG-29M & phased array ground based radars. Ground based radars are more easy to continously upgrades compared to AWACS. AWACS only advantage is picking up low flying planes. but who fly low? all stand off cruise missiles are lunched from highest speed and altitude.
Oh hang on I am repeating what you have already been told :rolleyes: I forgot you have a bit of a hard on for the Mig-29 and regard it as an all defeating death machine…the rest of us back here in the real world with an understanding of defence aerospace see otherwise.
Saudis dont trust western weopons and contractors (very slow implementation of EF deal) and also all the time begging NATO for no fly zone over Syria. This pretty much discredit there airpower in Arab world.
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/ariel-view/2012/11/the-israeli-defence-export-the-strange-situations-the-problem.html
Poland fears Russia will take control of its Israeli-made UAVs
JSRAlgeria and Libya are not part of sub-Saharan Africa.
Southern part is practically sahara.
Does Egypt has the industrial know how for assembly of such a complicated fighter? From memory they’ve assembled more simpler aircraft – Helwan HA-200, Alphajets, K-8 and from memory J-6s.
well India is trying to get Rafale license. It shouldnt be big problem for Egypt. They had more influential partners in France like Qatar.
If JF-17 is adopted by Egypt to replace it’s F-7/MiG-21/Mirage V/F-4 then that would be anywhere up to 250 additional aircraft which could improve economies of scale.
I really do think JF-17s success hinges on an Egyptian deal because:
1. Egypt operates a large fleet of combat aircraft.
2. Egypt has been trying to develop local aerospace industry for some time (in 1960s it was Helwan HA-300 light supersonic jet fighter).
3. Egypt has experience with licence production/assembly for decades.
4. US is restrictive in what it supplies to Egypt (e.g. denial of F-15) and Egypt cannot afford more expense Eurocannards.I think if JF-17 gets an Egyptian deal, it’s export prospects will increase massively.
Just because it has large fleet does not mean that future fleet will be large. JF-17 export prospect will brighten only once China declares prermanent naval presence in oceans around Africa. see Russia example of premanent Mediterranean presence.
Whilst Saudi Arab pilots and technicians aren’t known for being the world’s best, they do operate world class equipment and have world class Western “advisers.”
I somehow doubt the MiG-29M would do well against AWACS guided F-15C and Eurofighters.
what world class equipment currently Saudi has that MIG-29M cannot counter?. Do they have Meteor operational?. will they get 300km standoff weopons from antiship to anitradiation and why MIG-29M will not come with world class advisors.?.
Saudi/Irak border is flat. Iraq can install capable ground based radar system (dont forget advancements in ground based radar systems) which will give sufficient direction to MIG-29M. Also look at Geography of Oil. it is not whole saudi.
JSRI’ve heard similar stuff.
I suspect the problem is more that many sub-Saharan African states no longer possess fast jet fleets.
Su-27/-30 have only sold to Angola, Eritrea, Uganda and Ethiopia and other than Uganda, it’s all second hand base model Su-27.
Algeria also part of Africa and they had Su-30/Yak-130. i believe Sudan has some jets. If Embargo is lifted on Libya they may buy some more.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Egypt buys the JF-17 now that American relationship is turning sour and especially given licence production of K-8. There’s still 180 F-4/MiG-21/Mirage V that need replacing.
Eqypt and its Arab league is funded by Qatar/Saudi. i think Egpyt should open license assembly line for Rafale for like minded Arab countries.
Could Iraq plug into an Egyptian licence production scheme?
Not a chance.
And JF-17 is still better than most of the Iranian or Syrian fleets and could possibly tangle with Jordanian F-16/F-5s especially if you invest in AWACS.
JF-17 has low yearly production volume and low airframe life hrs. It may not end up as cheap and certainly not as capable.
As for countering Saudi Arabia, nothing short of Su-30MK + AWACS is gonna stop them (oh and maybe getting Saudi Western contractors to go on strike).
Your over estimating Saudi. MIG-29M with Kh-31PMK/Kh-38/Kh-35 can deal with it..
JSR“5. Bomb truck (guided/unguided) for low-tech, low-intensity conflicts such as the US intervention in Afghanistan – this last requirement is the least necessary in my opinion but USAF B-52s did a wonderful job and there’s no reason not to emulate that”
Whats wrong with Tu-95 ? you cant get it cheaper
5G engine power for all those electronics/radar and large internal bays for saturation attack. Much higher uptime for continous operations.
I still think it will be supercruise or high subsonic. This thing has very strong support for obvious reasons. Airforce equipment budget increased to 5T rubles from 4T rubles untill 2020.
http://russiandefpolicy.wordpress.com/tag/pak-da/
“If we don’t start promptly, I have the time frames for completing separate elements of this program in mind, we could miss the chance, because it’s impossible to extend the service life periods of existing equipment forever.”
JSRWell I certainly agree that hypersonic should be out the window on cost/risk grounds, but Mach 1.4 supercruise / 2.3 dash doesn’t strike me as unreasonably ambitious and would be enough to provide useful advantages over subsonic design when facing e.g. F-35. And it certainly strikes me as a more impressive use of the mighty Type 30 engine than a Russian B-2.
subsonic low g platform will be lighter and more longer life. so ability to carry more fuel/weopon load and hence more loiter time. loiter time is the most important criteria as you want significant strike capability patrolling continously for target of oppurtunity with most powerfull sensors/weopons. for example Fighter/tranport/air refueler aircraft on runway or launching barrage of missile on ships/sam installations.
Tu-22/Tu-160 are sufficient after there upgrades. I am not sold on stealth fighter planes concept as stealth fighters are too small for strike weopon carriage and too short range
JSR.
I do question whether Russia needs another Tu-160 class aircraft given that theatres of interest are relatively nearby in China, Central Asia, Middle East, Balkans, etc. It seems to me that an aircraft between Backfire and B-1 size would be sufficient and that lack of extreme range/endurance requirement further reinforces the case for a supersonic design.
hypersonic missiles will reduce the need for speed. but more important is developing space-sensor network that will give more time to respond so less need for last minute quick dash.
The exact numbers don’t matter, just the general concept. Russia has quite sensibly refrained from investing significantly in areas of marginal return. The lack of frameless canopy on T-50 is a good example of this conservative approach. I think we can all agree that avoiding B-2/F-22 like nightmare in terms of unit and maintenance cost is in Russia’s interest.
frameless canopy maynot be strong enough for T-50 speed without alot of weight. and this bomber speed reduction is old news and Putin himself said task is scientifically challenging. He never said that developing Pak-FA is challenge. so i presume it is more advanced.
http://weapons.technology.youngester.com/2012/11/russias-future-pak-da-will-not-be.html
“PAK-DA, currently under development, will not be hypersonic,” Lt. Gen. Anatoly Zhikharev told RIA Novosti on Wednesday.
The first prototype PAK-DA is due to enter service around 2020, he added
In June, President Vladimir Putin ordered initial development of the new long-range bomber for strategic aviation. Speaking during a conference on defense orders, Putin said: “We have to develop work on the new PAK-DA long-range bomber aircraft for Long-Range Aviation. The task is not easy from a scientific-technical standpoint, but we need to start work.”
JSR$700b reserve dont mean much similar to UAE. as Norway has practically zero industrial capacity and very hight cost of living eroded export service sector. skilled labor to maintain JSF will be very expensive in Norway.
so government has to dip into this $700b fund slowly to buy JSF. Norway will get JSF but what time line.
it is like Chinese/Japaneses having savings in banks which translates to couple of trillions. which both governments borrow at low interest rates to buy things.
JSRThis goes to show that operational cost is several times higher than acquisition cost, it really is operational cost that makes the difference
It does not show operational costs are higher than acquisiton cost.
There is concept called Time value of money. $30b over 30 year is not big deal in todays dollars.
Acquistion costs have upfront payments invovled with much shorter duration.
Problem of JSF is not just cost but complex supplier relationship with so many countries.
LM has already warned Italy against reducing JSF order otherwise it will get less or no business. similar is dire situation with Australlian based suppliers.
Turkey has spent $1b but without getting even a single fighter and they may not even get it for another decade but it will keep spending money in keeping suppliers and ultimately LM will not give them business as Turkey hasnt ordered any plane yet. This JSF is going to destroy alot of countries budgets and defence capabilities.
http://www.turkishweekly.net/news/147567/lockheed-dispute-clouds-turkey-s-f-35-commitment.html
JSRJSF programme is now practically unprofitable for Australlia based suppliers.
The more delay in JSF order the smaller the pool of supplier that have skin in the game. so the smaller pool of suppliers will get greater bargaining power.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/01/us-lockheed-fighter-australia-idUSBRE9200A720130301
Australian F-35 suppliers fret over potential order cutbacks
JSR😀
Today, the Russian two problems: The U.S. Navy and the Army of China.
U.S. Navy to stop for the 1000 – 1500 km to the borders of Mother Russia. Chinese army in the attack will be very large. Stop the Chinese can, if you put the terrible destruction, or use the “miracle weapon”.
These roles can play MFP
Well US/China are relatively less in Mediterranean than other places. it seem real threat is from Middleast.
http://www.kyivpost.com/content/russia-and-former-soviet-union/russian-naval-task-force-to-be-deployed-in-mediterranean-source-320867.html
A permanent task force of the Russian Navy will be deployed in the Mediterranean Sea in 2015
JSRbut AFAIK only MiG35 comes with AESA… AND the Zhuk-ME + OLS of MiG29M is inferior to the APG68v9 + Sniper of the F16IQ AFAIK. If only the russians could fit R77s or the europeans fit METEOR to Iraq’s F16IQ… 🙁
Zhuk-ME is now alot refined due to MIG-29K and MIG-29upg. with more powerful engines of MIG-29M it will retain advantage over APG-68.
MIG-29M TWR is comparable with EF. Irak need OLS more than pods.
JSRIt might be that I not especially knowledgable about Russian aircraft (though I do have some good books on the subject), but I am still not sure I am getting why we are discussing Mig-29M versus the SU-33. Can you confirm that when you are comparing the Mig-29M you are comparing it to say the Su-30MKM (which presumably is close to the standard that Iraq would order)?
MIG-29K won against Su-33 despite MIG-29K being multi role and longer airframe/engine life. when you impart those capabilities into Su-33. its weight will increase further and performance will degrade.
Now MIG-29M is lighter version of MIG-29K. It will have same advantages over Su-30. it is more suitable for airdefence. and AESA is extensively tested. and it does not need two pilots. Iraq is already dont have that much pilots. Although fuel costs dont matter that much but lighter fighter is going to save alot over long term.
JSRIt’s just Rogozin blowing smoke ( no pun intended ), guarantee you he doesn’t actually know anything about the specific fuels involved.
its some misquoting.
http://www.itar-tass.com/en/c32/640969.html
MOSCOW, February 5 (Itar-Tass) – Russia’s Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin has explained his earlier pronouncements that Russian-made fuels cannot be used by the helicopter carriers Mistral.“As a matter of fact, the “news” about fuels for Mistral is not appropriate, my words should have been quoted rather than interpreted,” he wrote in his Twitter microblog late on Tuesday.
“Russia will fulfill its contract liabilities to the French partners on the first two helicopter carriers,” he stressed. “All unexpectedly arising problem issues will be tackled at the Russian-French consultations on military technical cooperation on February 14-15.”
The defence industry commission, according to Rogozin, has asked military and industrial experts to report about the fitness of Mistral systems to Russia’s standards and conditions. After the commission presents such a report, all necessary measures will be taken, including in cooperation with the French partners.
“The decision about the third and fourth Mistral will be taken based on performance of the first two ones reported from the French shipyards,” he added.
JSRit has nothing to do with “fighting”… all to do with buying friends. Iraqis have paid for 36 F16s but sent only a dozen pilots to the US to train… they couldn’t care less about “fighting” prowess. its about appeasing the big boys and having political leverage in the region to not be bullied by the neighbours, and have a “nominal” capability to defend themselves. nothing more really.
Irak is only paying installaments for 18 F-16 at this point. Your overestimating Iraq budget for procurement. It simply does not have money for expensive fighters like EF/Rafale/Su-30MK etc. Its bare minimum procurement at this point. see trying to procure old Czech trainer
JSRSorry I am still confused, why would Iraq consider the Su-33, it doesn’t need a carrier based fighter? I admit that this thread has drifted a lot, but I thought the point you were making was the Mig-29M is better choice than SU-30MK, and personally, if I was in charge of the Iraqi Air Force I would prefer something similar to SU-30MKA or SU-30MKM than the Mig-29M, but then I have an aesthetic preference for the SU-30!
MIG-29K choice over SU-33 because its light weight despite having 5 wet stations and longer airframe life. If Su-33 has to gain similar capability its weight will raise further and performance will degrade.
MIG-29M has superior TWR to Su-30. so it makes a better fighter for airdefence. Su-30/F-15E are good strike fighter but not so efficient in airdefence like EF or MIG-29M. There is also further improvement in RD-33MK engine.
http://klimov.ru/media/news/100001056/
Sign In
