Originally posted by Vympel

Nup. The new lightweight fighter isn’t going to be 5th generation. It’s going to be a cheapie.

This makes sense: There’s a big potential market for an inexpensive fighter. Fighter planes keep getting bigger and more expensive. Hell, they should have come up with a true Mig-21 successor long time ago.
Think of all the ageing Mig-21, F-5’s, Mirages etc. Most countries operating these won’t be able to pay for an F-35, even if they would be allowed to buy it. If Mig manages to come up with a model just as capable and easy to maintain as the Gripen at half the price, it will be a big hit. They should be able to do this.

Originally posted by aCiDHg
itz unrealistic to expect low casualites in any real war w/ another major power with or without f22.
an taiwan straight scenerio has much chances of widening in2 a major war of attrition & hence require many boots on the ground. the chinese side has much more to lose & feel much more passionately about taiwan & has much mroe political will than any american (administration) & would be willing to take far greater casulties. letz face it barring an direct threat to continental united states, the average american dont’ give a rabbit’s behind about most any1 else. & it is definately not a good reelection platform.
US would ultimately win any military conflict but that would mean possiblities of crossing the nuclear threshold on the losing side. even if america neutralize the nuclear threat, is it prepared to occupy/rebuild a country 50 times the size of iraq?

Couldn’t agree more. To point at China as the new major threat for security is plain stupid. To follow this strategy diverts far too much energy and money from pressing needs. See what this silly obsession with Iraq has lead to, making Al Quaeda a second priority?

If the Reps are now getting obsessed with China, there will be even less money for real threats: Afghanistan is a mess again in the hand of warlords producing half the opium supply of the world, Iraq has turned into a breeding place for terrorism, even Kosovo is about to become a hot spot again. What good for are F-22s in these places?

Originally posted by seahawk
Basing your future millitary projects on an assesment of your future needs and opponents ist a good millitary strategy.
I would believe that China is considering building its forces to a level at which China can regain control of the “renegade republic called Taiwan” millitary, while being able to fight of an US intervention.

Agreed, but how does the Raptor fit in there? If they wanted to counter this thread, they would need excellent carrier based aircrafts. Can the Super Hornet counter it? I doubt it.
The F-22s are useless for this scenario, unless they place them in Taiwan, which would be very offensive to China.

Indeed in a thread assessment Taiwan shouldn’t play a major role for US security concerns. There are clearly other priorities now. Taiwan is sth. China and Taiwan have to sort out themselves.

Did I understand this right? The article basically sais that the FAB’s recommendation (SU-35) is entirely based on the aircraft’s performance and not on considerations based on offsets and technology transfer. These will be evaluated now by the “Advice of National Defense”.

Since Suchoi seems to offer more than BAE/Saab and Dassault, the outcome seems pretty obvious to me, though.

Does the other article mention why the Gripen would have been chosen in 2002?

Re: interesting reading

Originally posted by chuck yeager

bad luck or….

…or what? What are you implying? Bad maintenance? Sabotage? Bad training?

Originally posted by google
Ah, so now the tune is being changed from WMD to terrorists? Besides Saddam’s giving money to the families of palestinian suicide bombers, which has nothing to do with Al-Qaeda, there has never been any evidence of Al-Qaeda terrorists working with Saddam. Powell admitted as much this year, but now that there is a power vacuum in the region, of course there are a gazillion crazy AQ wackos all waiting to blow up the US.

On January 8, 2004, Powell conceded that despite his assertions to the United Nations last year, he had no “smoking gun” proof of a link between the government of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and terrorists of Al Qaeda. “I have not seen smoking-gun, concrete evidence about the connection,” Mr. Powell said, in response to a question at a news conference.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/special/iraq/2344058

The removal of Saddam from Iraq was a stabilizing factor int he region

Would you care to explain how this is so? Now all the ethnic groups in Iraq are at each other’s throats, and the situation is far less controlled than in the Saddam-era. In fact, without a strong Iraq, a resilient and rising Iran will be forthcoming.

You got some valid points there, and it is topic related indeed:
By pointing at China the Reps again pursue the same paths as in Iraq: Instead of confronting the real thread of international terrorism they perpetuate good old military thread scenarios that can be countered with traditional military might.

It’s the secret services they should beef up, not the military. This much they should have lerned from 9-11. The military gets more money already than the military of Russia, China, GB and France combined. No suprise people like Richard A. Clarke were getting frustrated.

That was up to the ’90s. Now all we have left is US-made. But diversity of origin will again be a strong argument in the F-5 replacement evaluation.

Brazil seems to be a good example nowadays, With F-5 (USA), AMX (ITA&BRA), Mirage (FRA) and maybe soon SU-35 (RUS) or Gripen (SWE).

Originally posted by Dubya
Do they have an airforce? I thought they were only had those nifty knives for defence. 😛

I know Switzerland has F-5’s to replace, but I thought they were interested in acquiring additional F/A-18’s (though production line has shut down – perhaps exUSN-F/A-18C or maybe even F/A-18E/F??????). Don’t quote me on this…..

The need of a F-5 replacement is being debated. There’s a majority among the voters who doesn’t see the need of such a replacement at the moment, and a referendum looks quite likely.

But if everything should go according to original plans, the EF would probably be the frontrunner.
More F/A-18s would defeat the strong argument the AF comes up with of a need of an alternative model in case of a shortage of spares or a fleet grounding. This sort of rules out another Boeing purchase. There’s was a discussion going on here.