Page 11 – Key Publishing

m.ileduets

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 151 through 165 (of 380 total)

← 1 2 3 … 10 11 12 … 24 25 26 →

Author

Posts
March 18, 2004 at 2:12 pm in reply to: new F/A-22 unit cost #2660770

m.ileduets
Participant

Sure, why not replace all designated army F-35s with F-22s? It would surely bring the unit price of the F-22 down heaps….:D

March 18, 2004 at 10:28 am in reply to: The paranoid Irish Air Corp #2661003

m.ileduets
Participant

link

How about a link to this forum? This starts sounding interesting, (just to read and maybe raise the humor level a bit occasionaly);)

March 17, 2004 at 8:07 pm in reply to: Out of production aircraft #2661460

m.ileduets
Participant

I agree with the Viking. But doesn’t the Superbug replace well the A-6?

Depends on whether you were more used to running an AN2 Colt and a couple MiG 21s that chickens roosted in at night.

Well, I agree, but these countries are probably already well served with a hi/low mix of F-5s and Tucanos, with a lot less maintenance costs.

March 17, 2004 at 7:11 pm in reply to: Out of production aircraft #2661505

m.ileduets
Participant

Originally posted by ForkTailedDevil
How about a hi/low mix of F5 Freedom Fighters and F20 Tigersharks 😀

Sounds more like a very low/low mix to me! 🙂

Other aircrafts yet unmentioned they should keep producing: A-10 and PC-6. There’s no real replacement in sight for both.

March 17, 2004 at 2:31 pm in reply to: Out of production aircraft #2661782

m.ileduets
Participant

Originally posted by Twilight2002
On the F-5, good idea. Didn’t the TuAF recently start modernising theirs to be used as nice trainers? On second thoughts, if you are going to go as far as making a high-survivability fighter, you might as well ressurect the F-20 Tigershark / F-106 and give it a BVR capability with AMRAAM or Sparrow or something.
[/B]

I agree here. An updated F-20 could offer just as much as a Gripen at a lower price. This would make it an excellent choice for all the LA or African countries willing to replace their ageing Migs, Mirages and F-5s. They would also offer an innexpensive solutions for countries looking for a high-low mix in combination with EFs, Rafales, F/A-18s, …

March 16, 2004 at 4:39 pm in reply to: Are they stark staring mad? #2663149

m.ileduets
Participant

Well, why not?
If the F-15 wins in the Korean and possibly in the Singapore contest against the newest generation fighters, the US can obviously afford to skip the F-22 😉

March 15, 2004 at 8:19 pm in reply to: Hi group! #2664027

m.ileduets
Participant

Here’s a special welcome to A-29
(It’s not quite the sea, only lake Lucerne, but you might like it nevertheless)

picture by Swiss AF

Well; here’s one for the threat starter, too. Hope you like it, Buglover:

picture by Swiss AF

March 14, 2004 at 11:24 am in reply to: Finally, something I can brag about — the mighty CF-18 of course! #2664995

m.ileduets
Participant

Seeing all these fantastic paintjobs I now know why the Canadian army almost went bankrupt! 😀

OK: naughty sarcastic comment, I concede
How’s the budget situation now, by the way?

March 13, 2004 at 10:34 pm in reply to: South Korean's F-15K #2665405

m.ileduets
Participant

I wonder why people get so easily insulted. We’re not talking about eachother’s mother after all. Just cool down. :rolleyes:
Let’s try to find a common ground: Could we all agree that we’re talking about two pretty good planes and that the Koreans made a pretty logical, yet not well communicated, decision that was not entirely based on the capabilities of the two airframes?

March 13, 2004 at 7:20 pm in reply to: South Korean's F-15K #2665504

m.ileduets
Participant

This makes sense. But then it was a bad strategy by SK to let the Rafale win the contest, and order the F-15 nevertheless. They should have made the criteria such as only the F-15 could win it firsthand. Would have saved them a lot of political pressure from the US and bad feelings from France. 😀

March 13, 2004 at 3:03 pm in reply to: South Korean's F-15K #2665604

m.ileduets
Participant

I don’t think, NK is a serious opponent for SK when it comes to conventional war. Even if they got one of the largest military worldwide (on the paper), I wonder how much of their equipment is really useable at any moment.

This is hardly a good argument. Obviously SK takes the North dead serious, with good reason.
Remember Vietnam? Want to comment on the equipment of the Vietkong? Most wars are still fought and won with rifles, not fifth generation fighters.

But I agree: They probably shouldn’t have made it a contest. Even if the Rafale were superior: For political reasons the F-15 made sense, so why waste time and money?

March 12, 2004 at 1:56 pm in reply to: Swiss rental jets for Austria #2666603

m.ileduets
Participant

delivery details

The first four F-5Es are supposed to be delivered Juli 1st with Austrian paintscheme on. Immatriculation numbers are:
J-3005, J-J-3030, J-3033 and J-3065.

Source: flugzeugforum.de

March 11, 2004 at 10:09 am in reply to: Swiss rental jets for Austria #2667824

m.ileduets
Participant

Originally posted by Castor
m.ileduets,
Seems like an interesting Hi/Lo mix of F-18’s and F-5’s you got there. How many Tigers have you got in Switzerland? Do they play a different role than the Hornets, or are they used for the same kind of tasks?

There are 54 operational Tigers left until 2010, when their successor should be introduced.
The F-18 took over the interceptor role from the Mirage IIIS, whereas the Tigers are used for point defence. The Tigers are also used for advanced training (F-5F), as “Patrouille Suisse” aircrafts and target designators for the ground based air defence. They are mostly flown by militia fighter pilots (usually airline pilots doing their military service) whereas the F-18s are flown by professional fighter pilots exclusively (Überwachungsgeschwader). They practically do all the air policing.

March 10, 2004 at 4:44 pm in reply to: Swiss rental jets for Austria #2668773

m.ileduets
Participant

Originally posted by milavia
I think it is, because didn’t Saab go to court because they were treated like a final candidate, but really they already made up their mind and knew all along that they didn’t want the Gripen? So SAAB did make costs for nothing. Or was that in some other competition?

Not really. In fact the competition was more or less tailored for the Gripen and nobody really expected the Austrian government to opt for the EF.
The Swedes were probably a little overconfident and chose to offer their jet at a pretty elevated price. The EF offer turned out to be only 4% more expensive than the Gripen, so it was rated “best offer” (most bang for buck, I suppose). There was an official inquiry (initiated by the Austrian opposition) going on and they just confirmed that there was (probably) no bribing etc. going on.

Google: Indeed it can be called “rental” since everything including training, maintenance spares, even kerosene… The Austrians more or less just have to provide pilots. They call it “wet lease”, maybe somebody else can elaborate. It’s supposed to cost 12 Mio. EUR per year, without special occurences but max. 75 Mio. EUR for four years.

March 10, 2004 at 10:56 am in reply to: Swiss rental jets for Austria #2668916

m.ileduets
Participant

I don’t suppose Sweden would offer a Viggen rental for less than their offered deals for spare parts. It’s all a matter of costs in Austria…
The Tiger is rather easy to fly. I don’t suppose that the Draken pilots will have big problems adjusting. But they would have probably preferred Viggen, I agree. Or even more exciting: EF- rental jets.
But it’s the politicians who decide, and they probably made a smart choice.
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 151 through 165 (of 380 total)

← 1 2 3 … 10 11 12 … 24 25 26 →