Sorry H_K, I’ve just seen your correction.

Perhaps I’m not reading it correctly. What is the estimated airframe hours on the average Spanish F-1s?

EDIT: Got it. Tally’s roughly with the SAAF hours, once the years of service difference is factored in.

Those Ecuador F-1’s have seen lighter usage, relatively speaking.

I’ve seen it mentioned that Libya may upgrade some of their F-1 fleet with French help.
Are there any Mirage F-1ADs still airworthy in Libya?
Would these be looked at too, or just the interceptor models?

In fact, I would be most appreciative if anybody had any pictures of the Libyan F1AD, as pictures seem to be very scarce…

Does anybody know what sort of fatigue life the Mirage F1 was designed to have?

EE Lightning and Golddust.

If you can’t act like adults, and stop polluting various threads with your rubbish, perhaps the mods might be able to persuade you in other ways…

Seriously, the other posters simply aren’t interested in your drivel.

Please do not reply to this unless you have something of value to contribute to the thread topic.

That’s exactly what I thought! Are they in good long-term storage somewhere? The F1 is supposed to be a long-lasting airframe…

I too suspect it wasn’t really about airframe hours, and more to do with the expense of an upgrade.

On the SAAF forum, there is a guy from Ecuador that has been posting about the Cheetah C being inducted. They are extremely happy with it, as it represents a quantum leap over an unmodified or non-updated Mirage F1, systems wise.

Considering what the Cheetah C had all the way back at the beginning of the 90’s, it was actually very advanced.
MFD displays, multi-mode radar, a completely self contained internal EW/ECM system, datalink, BVRAAM, helmet guided SRAAM, …etc.

Whilst a lot of that won’t have been transferred when the Cheetah C was sold to Ecuador, enough of the basic architecture would probably be a whole decade or more in advance of what an unmodified Mirage F1 would be equipped with.
I suppose they got a bargain with the Cheetah C, and an upgrade to the Mirage F-1 is not a neccessity or too expensive as a result.

Still, from what I can gather the SAAF regarded the Mirage F-1 as probably a better platform than even the Cheetah C if suitably modified. The whole F-1 fleet was to go through a comprehensive upgrade, with the Cheetah C cockpit and avionics/ECM/radar/weapons fit (the architecture was designed with that expressely in mind), as well as various airframe tweaks, such as a new composite verticle tail with a new bulged base for avionics space, ala the F-16, and IFR probe.
Certainly, a Mirage F-1 thus equipped 15 to 20 years ago would have been a very capable aircraft indeed, and probably still relevant for a lot of middling airforces today…
The end of The Cold War and the resultant dismantling of Apartheid meant the Cheerah C was done, but the follow on Mirage F1 upgrade was cancelled.

On the Argentine needs, the Mirage III’s are out of life.
If I were in their shoes, I would look at an interim aircraft to maintain core capabilities and pilot hours.
In this regard, a small purchase of Mirage F-1’s or Cheetah C’s would be a very good thing, with the proviso that it was cheap, and for a limited time only of no further than 2020 at the most, and only to cover the period of when a properly structured new fighter purchase is put in train and delivered by that time, that would serve for the next 20 years and more.

Obviously F-18 Hamburg…. I mean Y-20 Bacons topic is hypothetical, and based around a 2 to 2,5% of GDP defence spend.

With this is mind, and concentrating on aviation solely, and considering that it is actually not chump change like the small change the current armed forces have to survive on, I would do the following:

Like it or not, The Falklands is an issue.
With this in mind, some Su-27xx/Su-30xx or hatever derivitives. One of Argentinas primary problems in 1982 was that it’s planes were operating at the extreme end of their range, allowing very little leeway for anything really when over the combat zone.
The Su-30 is ideal for this, with massive internal fuel capacity. I would ensure a retractable refuelling probe came with the deal.
24 – 28 aircraft, or 2 squadrons worth.
Leaving aside the Falklands, Argentina is geographically a very big country. Add France, Germany, Spain, Italy, and the entire UK together. Then add 3 more Germanies, and that is roughly the size of Argentina.
So range would be useful in other contexts.

Next, I would add something different. I would look to buy the J-31. If after testing it shows a substantial reduction in RCS frontally (Chinese espionage surely delivered shortcuts to their domestic teams already clearly working on this), I would ensure datalinking and AAM compatability with the Su-30’s. They have to come with inflight refuelling probes.
4 Squadrons of these please, or 48 to 60 aircraft.

It has been strongly suggested that the J-31 has been designed with consideration of a carrier borne variant in mind. Thus, this purchase could bear fruit later.

Off to Brazil next, where I would purchase the Embraer KC-390 in Transport, ECM/Jamming, Tanker, AEW, and MPA.

If not the KC-390, then something like the An-70, which seems to be pegged at less than half the price of the A-400M.

Order more Pampa trainer jets.

Pick a medium/large chopper, and order sufficient quantities. Eurocopter could be looked at. The small chopper is covered already.

Expensive, but doable in a phased approach over a few years. You will have quite a capable force geared toward the single most likely touch-off point, The Falklands/Malvinas, but also quite capable on other Argentine requirements.

The driving force must be compatability in the way these units communicate with each other. An absolute essential, even if it takes an indigineous data-link system between them all.
Over long range, you’d want the AEW, Su-30s, and J-31s putting each other in the picture, or handing info off to each other at appropriate times.

Why so little Western European/US sharp point combat equipment?

I would think it rather obvious, seeing how some of those suppliers compromised the Argentine force, whether they were right or wrong, before.
And they are, after all, within an economic and loose political union.

It is also not 1945-1991 anymore.
The world keeps revolving, and moves on, with different players in the game now.

All hypothetical, and IMHO of course.

Political realities would likely prove very different.

Getting back on track, and quoting myself above, others have mentioned Brazil.

Assuming that the conditions are as they are in the original thread post, then a closer relationship with MERCOSUR partner Brazil is sensible.

Brazil is another big country.

Obviously the aviation industries of these two countries is firmly weighted in Brazils favour, but co-operative projects would likely lead to more stable projects. Well, certainly more funding.

I suspect Brazil will go with the Gripen, but perhaps a “top end” longer range fighter purchase could be locked in together. Something along the lines of Rafale, or even, the PAK FA. Did I imagine that there was talk that Russia would have been interested in Brazil as a PAK FA market eventually, or was I imaging things again?
Corrections welcomed.

In the hypothetical scenario given, perhaps the Pampa and Z-11 helicopter being built in Argentina could be purchased by Brazil, with a raft of Brazilian projects for Argentina.
This would also serve as a stable supply of external parts, regardless of what was happening politically.
They could select whatever medium fighter serves their needs, and collaborate on the purchase of the “heavy stick” long range combat aircraft.

Those pics of the aircraft graveyard look quite old.

Wonder if they’re still there?

Maybe a “Second Falklands War” thread should be opened for all of this?

Disheartening, isn’t it?

It’s amazing that some people haven’t even the basic competency to be able to read their own language, and see the original post is a hypothetical based on a scenario of Argentina increasing their defence spending to a global average as a GDP percentage.

Instead, the usual hot headed, comprehension-failure driven chest thumping comes into play in what is quite a simple question:

How would you rebuild the Argentine Air Force given a 2 to 2,5% GDP defence budget….

Obviously F-18 Hamburg…. I mean Y-20 Bacons topic is hypothetical, and based around a 2 to 2,5% of GDP defence spend.

With this is mind, and concentrating on aviation solely, and considering that it is actually not chump change like the small change the current armed forces have to survive on, I would do the following:

Like it or not, The Falklands is an issue.
With this in mind, some Su-27xx/Su-30xx or hatever derivitives. One of Argentinas primary problems in 1982 was that it’s planes were operating at the extreme end of their range, allowing very little leeway for anything really when over the combat zone.
The Su-30 is ideal for this, with massive internal fuel capacity. I would ensure a retractable refuelling probe came with the deal.
24 – 28 aircraft, or 2 squadrons worth.
Leaving aside the Falklands, Argentina is geographically a very big country. Add France, Germany, Spain, Italy, and the entire UK together. Then add 3 more Germanies, and that is roughly the size of Argentina.
So range would be useful in other contexts.

Next, I would add something different. I would look to buy the J-31. If after testing it shows a substantial reduction in RCS frontally (Chinese espionage surely delivered shortcuts to their domestic teams already clearly working on this), I would ensure datalinking and AAM compatability with the Su-30’s. They have to come with inflight refuelling probes.
4 Squadrons of these please, or 48 to 60 aircraft.

It has been strongly suggested that the J-31 has been designed with consideration of a carrier borne variant in mind. Thus, this purchase could bear fruit later.

Off to Brazil next, where I would purchase the Embraer KC-390 in Transport, ECM/Jamming, Tanker, AEW, and MPA.

If not the KC-390, then something like the An-70, which seems to be pegged at less than half the price of the A-400M.

Order more Pampa trainer jets.

Pick a medium/large chopper, and order sufficient quantities. Eurocopter could be looked at. The small chopper is covered already.

Expensive, but doable in a phased approach over a few years. You will have quite a capable force geared toward the single most likely touch-off point, The Falklands/Malvinas, but also quite capable on other Argentine requirements.

The driving force must be compatability in the way these units communicate with each other. An absolute essential, even if it takes an indigineous data-link system between them all.
Over long range, you’d want the AEW, Su-30s, and J-31s putting each other in the picture, or handing info off to each other at appropriate times.

Why so little Western European/US sharp point combat equipment?

I would think it rather obvious, seeing how some of those suppliers compromised the Argentine force, whether they were right or wrong, before.
And they are, after all, within an economic and loose political union.

It is also not 1945-1991 anymore.
The world keeps revolving, and moves on, with different players in the game now.

All hypothetical, and IMHO of course.

Political realities would likely prove very different.