RayRFrom the above report..
Mr Senewiratne says up to 18 planes were hit.
If he is telling the truth,looks like the SLAF’s day are numbered.
“key spy plane”….I hope not that the IAF is deputing its retired mig-25s to SLAFs use.
RayRI wouldn’t go that far, this is for a reported 24 aircraft, not enough to deter any potential US military action. If 24 aircraft were that much of a deterrent, then it would actually make military action before they were delivered more likely.
Atleast it gives Iran a long range fighter able to take shots at US warships deep into the Persian gulf.
RayRWhy should anybody buy the JF-17 when the J-10 is available?
That was my point exactly,if only for the numbers.But did Iran ever show any interest in the JF-17 or is it just a wishful thinking on part of JF-17 fans?
Anyway I think they have the numbers wrong. One J-10 unit in Chinese ervice is 28 aircraft, why do they think that Iran is buying only 24 and that they will form two squadrons? A lot of the Iranian force structure is based on the American and Soviet model, and that would indicate that around 24 aircraft would barely make up one squadron, let alone two.
Hmm.. I looked but wasnt able to find the current force structure of the IRIAF.24 aircraft could be made into 2 squadrons as in the RAF.Seems unlikely though.Maybe they made a reorganisation due to shortage of aircraft?
RayRwell I made a “What If Profile” some months ago …………….
Nice drawing.Didnt know J10 was known as “ferret”?:confused: .I thought its called “vigorous dragon”?
Is it a new NATO reporting name?
RayRIIRC the Phalcons are supposed to arrive in March next year?Any idea why its taking so long?
RayRTrue, Even India does not favour attack on iran. If they can settle matters at the table better. If they can talk to Kim jong they should be able to talk to ahemadinejad.
BTW..what are the chances of Iran buying the JF-17 now..:DI guess that is something somebody should strike that off from the “potential export list” in wiki for the JF-17:p
RayRwith Python V derby and AIM-120 the F-16 can deal with the J-10s besides they have better AWACs to support them.
The american also have AIM-9Xs and helmet mounted sights
No question about it.Rather than the capabilities of the individual aircrafts,organizational capability matter more.And they are buying only 24.
RayRF-16 blk 52/Soufa or Mig-29M2/35 should be enough. No need to bother the Big daddies like F-15, SU-30’s. It is interesting to note that Iran is trying to cozy upto china in light of US getting tough. I wonder if it reflects the mistrust between russia and iran on nuke deal.
Agreed.;)
Btw..lots of countries have their interests in Iran which includes China now.Going to be difficult for the US to do anything.
RayRI guess the deal includes more than just the J-10, probably it also includes weapons and spares, any way if Iran gets it guess Syria or Egypt will be the next customers
Yeah that would be correct.But still is pretty expensive.
I guess armed with Python V the Israeli f-16s are more than a match for the J-10s
Python V is a short ranged IIR missile,not a BVR one!
Want to see some F-15 vs J-10 combat now!:diablo:
RayRI dont think the relation with Iran is THAT bad as well.
:diablo: :dev2:
Why is it “military” if Iran’s police want to buy and use Indian motorcycles?They can buy it from the open market,as can civilians in Iran.
RayRAir Force says F-16 crashes are up
By SCOTT LINDLAW, Associated Press Writer
Mon Oct 22, 2:32 PM ET
The dreaded BANG! came from deep within the F-16’s lone engine, shaking the warplane as it made passes over an Arizona bombing range last December. Then came the alarming loss of thrust. ADVERTISEMENT
Two attempts to restart the engine failed. Having exhausted their options, the pilot and his student bailed out, parachuting to safety before the plane slammed into the Sonoran Desert, a $21 million loss for taxpayers.
Not all F-16 pilots have been so lucky recently. The accident rate for this workhorse fighter has risen over the past few years, and two pilots have died in the past year, according to an Associated Press review of Air Force documents.
In the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30, there were 10 “Class A” F-16 accidents — crashes that resulted in death, loss of the aircraft or damage of more than $1 million. (An 11th F-16 crash was counted separately as a combat loss by the military because the pilot was strafing enemy trucks at the time.)
The total was up from nine the previous year, five the year before that and just two the year before that.
The number of crashes has gone up even though the total number of hours flown has dropped steadily over the past five years.
An Air Force official said that one factor appears to be human error, and that pilots and maintenance crews must stay on guard against complacency. Pilot error was blamed for three accidents and the Iraq combat crash last year.
“I liken the problem to a really good football team that drops its guard,” said Col. Willie Brandt, the chief of the Aviation Safety Division at the Air Force Safety Center and an F-16 pilot now flying combat missions in Iraq. “We started well this year and were on track, but have slipped a little. If I have a concern it is in the trend I see there.”
The rate of Class A accidents this year — 3.18 per 100,000 hours flown — was the highest since 2001, when it was 3.85 because of a rash of engine failures.
The Class A accidents last fiscal year include crashes that happened during training in the United States and Italy. The total also includes several crashes that happened during sorties in Iraq while the pilots were not engaging the enemy.
One expert said that it may be that as the Iraq war drags on, the stress of combat is taking a toll on the 1,300 F-16s in the U.S. fleet, and their pilots.
“That might be putting wear and tear on the planes,” said John Pike, director of the Washington-based military think tank Globalsecurity.org. “It might be putting wear and tear on crews.”
The F-16 is known in Air Force circles as the “lawn dart” for its tendency to plunge back to Earth when its single engine flames out, and in most years, engine failure causes more accidents than any other factor. But pilot error was responsible for about the same number of F-16 accidents as engine failure in the past year.
An Air Force-wide increase last fiscal year in destroyed aircraft has spurred the service to redouble its efforts to confront human error, Brandt said.
The Air Force Safety Center housed at Kirtland Air Force Base in New Mexico now has a full-time flight surgeon, an aviation physiologist, a life-support specialist and two aviation psychologists on the staff, Brandt said.
“They are constantly immersed in trying to find ways to improve the human side of aviation,” he said.
One problem safety experts are on guard against is exhaustion amid the day-and-night sorties F-16 pilots are flying in Iraq.
Ohio Air National Guard Maj. Kevin Sonnenberg, 42, died in June when his F-16 crashed shortly after takeoff from an air base in Iraq. Investigators found he became disoriented while flying in a dust storm at night.
Before taking off at 12:25 a.m., Sonnenberg had complained to his roommate that he was having trouble sleeping, according to an investigation. His squadron mates also said Sonnenberg appeared “slightly fatigued,” but investigators found no proof fatigue was responsible for his misjudgments.
Despite the heavy flying responsibilities in the war zone, pilot fatigue is not a widespread problem, Brandt said. The Air Force has strict guidelines governing rest for its pilots, he said.
Pilots must take at least 12 hours off before showing up for duty, and duty on a flying day is limited to 12 hours, or 10 hours at night.
The F-16s damaged or destroyed in fiscal 2006 were worth about $112 million altogether.
The current crash rate remains lower than that seen during the 1980s and 1990s. In the late 1990s and the early part of this decade, engine problems caused the number of F-16 Class A crashes to spike to as many as 18 in one year. Experts pinpointed the problem, fixed it and brought the accident rate down.
There is no indication of such a problem today, Brandt said.
“If I thought there was an issue with the age or safety of the aircraft, I wouldn’t fly it, and neither would most of my friends,” he said in an e-mail.
A constant challenge, Brandt said, is squeezing the human-error factor out of the crash equation.
“We have aircraft piloted by human beings, designed by human beings, and maintained by human beings,” said Brandt. “We are the most combat-tested, combat-experienced force on the planet, and we learn more about ourselves and our business every day. But still we are human and make mistakes.”
RayRSyrians Disassembling Ruins at Site Bombed by Israel, Officials Say
By Robin Wright and Joby Warrick
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, October 19, 2007; Page A18
Syria has begun dismantling the remains of a site Israel bombed Sept. 6 in what may be an attempt to prevent the location from coming under international scrutiny, said U.S. and foreign officials familiar with the aftermath of the attack.
Based on overhead photography, the officials say the site in Syria’s eastern desert near the Euphrates River had a “signature” or characteristics of a small but substantial nuclear reactor, one similar in structure to North Korea’s facilities.
The dismantling of the damaged site, which appears to be still underway, could make it difficult for weapons inspectors to determine the precise nature of the facility and how Syria planned to use it. Syria, which possesses a small reactor used for scientific research, has denied seeking to expand its nuclear program. But U.S. officials knowledgeable about the Israeli raid have described the target as a nuclear facility being constructed with North Korean assistance.
The bombed facility is different from the one Syria displayed to journalists last week to back its allegations that Israel had bombed an essentially an empty building, said the officials, who insisted on anonymity because details of the Israeli attack are classified.
While U.S. officials express increasing confidence that the Syrian facility was nuclear-related, divisions persist within the government and among weapons experts over the significance of the threat. If the facility was a nuclear reactor, U.S. weapons experts said it would almost certainly have taken Syria several years to complete the structure, and much longer to produce significant quantities of plutonium for potential use in nuclear weapons. Nuclear reactors also are used to generate electricity.
“This isn’t like a Road Runner cartoon where you call up Acme Reactors and they deliver a functioning reactor to your back yard. It takes years to build,” said Joseph Cirincione, director for nuclear policy at the Center for American Progress. “This is an extremely demanding technology, and I don’t think Syria has the technical, engineering or financial base to really support such a reactor.”
While expressing concern over the prospect that Syria may have decided to launch a nuclear program in secret, some weapons experts question why neither Israel nor the United States made any effort before the secret attack — or in the six weeks since — to offer evidence to the International Atomic Energy Agency, a move that would trigger an inspection of Syria by the nuclear watchdog.
“The reason we have an IAEA and a safeguard system is that, if there is evidence of wrongdoing, it can be presented by a neutral body to the international community so that a collective response can be pursued,” said Daryl Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association. “It seems to me highly risky and premature for another country to bomb such a facility.”
But John R. Bolton, the Bush administration’s former ambassador to the United Nations, said Syria’s secrecy — including its apparent move to clean up the site after the bombing — suggests that Damascus is pursuing a strategy similar to that of Iran, which the Bush administration believes is pursuing a nuclear weapons capability. Bolton said Iran once attempted to conceal nuclear activity from IAEA inspectors by bulldozing nuclear-related buildings and even digging up nearby topsoil to remove all traces of nuclear material.
“The common practice for people with legitimate civilian nuclear power programs is to be transparent, because they have nothing to hide,” Bolton said.
The IAEA has not been provided any evidence about the Syrian facility and has been unable to obtain any reliable details about the Sept. 6 strike, said a European diplomat familiar with the agency’s internal discussions.
Syria is a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and has cooperated with IAEA inspections of the small, 27-kilowatt research facility it has run for decades, IAEA sources said.
Some experts speculate that Israeli and U.S. officials may have calculated that reporting their intelligence to the IAEA would have produced only limited repercussions, the equivalent of a diplomatic slap on the wrist to Syria, which might have decided to build the facility anyway.
Foreign sources familiar with the attack say Israel wanted to send a strong message to Iran about the price of developing a secret nuclear program. Israel is increasingly alarmed about Iran’s intentions and frustrated that the international community has not persuaded Tehran to suspend its uranium enrichment program.
If North Korea is shown to have helped with the construction of a Syrian reactor, it would suggest that the Pyongyang government has been secretly hawking its nuclear know-how to the Syrians for years, several experts said. But even if North Korea’s involvement is proved, it is unlikely that the Bush administration would halt negotiations with Pyongyang over dismantling its nuclear program, the experts said.
“The Bush administration has clearly decided not to let this incident deter them from trying to limit North Korea’s nuclear activity,” said Gary Samore, a National Security Council member under President Bill Clinton who is now with the Council on Foreign Relations.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/18/AR2007101802549.html
RayRGold plated aircraft difficult to maintain!
RayRI am not sure IAF or IDF would announce something like this publicly. It just giving more ammo to the commies.
Lets see it this way..maybe it was going on all the while,somehow info leaked out.
RayRIAF and IDFAF to exchange pilots
Author: idrw team | 18 October 2007 | Views: 271BY : AJAY FOR IDRW.ORG
In already growing close relationship by India and Israeli has got a new boost when Indian air force (IAF) and Israel Defense Forces/Air Force (IDFAF) have agreed to exchange pilots between the two air arm, IDFAF pilot posted in India will be flying MiG-29B Baaz operating from Adampur Airbase which is located in western India (Punjab) 100 kilometers East of the Pakistan border, Adampur is one of 14 Indian Airbases under the Western Air Command within 300 kilometers of the Pakistan border. Adampur Airbase is home to at least 70 combat aircraft including two squadrons of MiG- 29s, (No. 47 Squadron – MiG-29A/C/UB” Black Archers”, No. 223 Squadron – MiG-29A/C/UB “Tridents”) two squadrons of MiG-23s and a squadron of MiG- 21s, while IAF pilot will be attached with Israeli Tayset squadron which operates F-16C/D Barak from Hatzor air force base Located near the lower west coast of Israel , Hatzor airbase is home to three squadrons of F-16 A/B/C/D operated by 101 , 105 , 144 Squadrons by IDFAF , similarly pilots from the Transport wing will also be exchanged IAF pilot will be attached to C-130 Squadron and a IDFAF pilot will be attached to IL-76 Squadron and IAF Helicopter pilot will be attached to CH-53 Squadron and a IDFAF pilot will be attached to MI-17 units ,this exchanged pilots will carry out routine training sorties from their respected posted Squadrons and after completion of their tenure will be replaced by other pilots from their respected air forces, Mig-29 is also operated by Syria and Iran which have hostile relationship with Israel and F-16 is operated by Pakistan which has hostile relationship with India ,these agreement will help deep understanding of functioning and tactics of each others air arm and also give deep insight into aircrafts operated by their rivals
http://www.idrw.org/2007/10/18/iaf_and_idfaf_to_exchange_pilots.html
Sign In
