Ok, there is one important issue to address before I really get started:

“Upgrade Orao J-22 with stronger engines, radar and better missiles and bombs”

The J-22 is particularly un-upgradeable – the reasons being that it’s nose (housing the nose-wheel) is too small for the installation of a radar, the electronics are outdated and replacing them would mean ripping out everything and starting from scratch, there are serious problems with the quality of construction (as with the G-4) which make maintenance of the structure, bulkheads, fuel tanks etc very difficult. The airframes are old and designed using outdated materials and technologies. In my opinion, upgrading the J-22 is pointless and a waste of time and money. My opinion is in line with that of the Romanian and Yugoslav air forces – neither is even considering a J-22 upgrade programme.

Now, the RV of SiCG has two major combat roles to perform. They are as following:

1. Air defence. This includes the effective interception of aircraft in SiCG airspace and also achieving air superiority over the battlefield. For this SiCG will (or does already) need a modern, high-tech multi- or swing-role tactical aircraft with a wide variety of air-to-air ordinance including effective advanced medium range missiles.

2. Support of the VSiCG. This requirement can be divided into two sections. First, the RV must be able to provide Close Air Support for combat operations of the army. This requires an aircraft that will be able to fly nap of the earth to target, be manoeuvrable over the target and deliver a potent combat load precisely onto the target. Secondly, the RV needs to be able to strike at behind the lines facilities of the enemy through the air defenses of said enemy with enough punch and precision to be able to decisively curtail the effectiveness of the enemies fielded army. This role can be carried out by a 4+ gen multi-role aircraft capable of delivering precision guided weapons, preferably at stand-off ranges.

Now, we’re all dreaming a bit here, the RV hasn’t, and won’t, have the funds to properly equip itself for a long time and I foresee at least another ten years but probably another 15 or 20 in which SiCG are equipping their RV with stop-gap upgraded, second rate aircraft. I hope that this isn’t the case but my hope is waning.

Therefore, I am going to suggest aircraft that I deem as slightly unrealistic in the current economic situation (not to mention the political opposition to my choices).

For the role of air defence and deep strike I would chose the MiG-29M2 as an aircraft capable of performing both the roles and being cheap but with no political strings attached. The only draw back of this choice is that the Russians expect hard currency in exchange for their hardware – something that might be a bit of a sticking point for SiCG.

For the CAS role I would ideally like to see SiCG pushing the Russians to design a single seat Yak-130 with better protection and ground-attack capabilities and allowing SiCG to build under license, or at least assemble this and the two seat advanced trainer variant in large numbers (maybe 100+). Failing this, the MiG-AT would be an acceptable second best (with the added advantage of being able to be linked to the 29M”s). Both aircraft would be excellent lead in trainers for the ’29s and could, if suitably adapted, be good light CAS aircraft.

Finally, the reason I’d choose the MiG-AT or Yak-130 over the G-4 is that I have serious reservations about the latter, even in its G-4M guise. I’d be glad to explain these reservations to anyone who expresses an interest.

Actually, I just thought of another ‘finally’; None of my comments above were conceived with the potential enemy being NATO or the US. I don’t think SiCG can possibly attempt to design an air force around the possibility of combating anyone other than potential regional rivals.

I hardly think Algerian airpower is going to seriously threaten Morocco. More likely they realise the very real need to upgrade and modernise their forces without any aggressive intentions.

This sale, if it goes ahead, looks extremely good for MiG – might go some way to disspelling the frequently reoccuring criticisms of “no new MiGs”.

Seahawk,

I’d like to voice my opinions on the question of defeating NATO with limited resources. I think you might have some very good ideas about attacking NATO countries on their own soil but they go too far. I think a better tactic would be the assasination, or even attempted assasination of political figures involved in the NATO attack on country-x. This would be enough to bring the reality of the war to these countries while sticking to viable and, in my view, morally acceptable targets. Actually in country-x the methods wouldn’t be that different to those employed by Serbia. Make your army and AD system as undestroyable from the air, do your best to oppose the air-campaign and hope like hell that NATO goes for a ground war option where they would be, if not slaughtered, then at least on a closer level where striking back is possible. (provoking a ground war might be a good idea and I am of the opinion that in Serbia didn’t try to do this enough – basically the politicians and army high command, got nervous that they’d taken things a bit too far).
The only drawback here is that NATO is likely to start bombing civillian targets and to threaten to carry on doing so until the people rise up against their political leadership. in cases such as these the political leadership ‘generally’ gets nervous and caves to NATO demands (although in ’99 Milosevic got a much better deal post-bombing than he was offered at Rambouillet).

DISCLAIMER: I am not suggesting any country should fight on to the last resulting in the deaths of thousands+ of their own civillians if an alternative can be found.

Ok, so its a given that the J-8II(M) is not exactly a Flankerof an Eagle but I still think its a useful aircraft for China right now. In large numbers and deployed with intelligence it should still be dangerous enough for its potential enemies (maybe even including the USN).

What does this mean for a Brazillian purchase of a new combat jet?

Is that a Command and Conquer nuclear explosion? Sure looks like one!

What bothers me most is that so many Americans remain totally unembarrased to have Georgey boy as their representative to the world. At least Italians have the decency to go red if anyone mentions Berlusconi.

Sauron,

Having a rant at people for being former ‘commies’ isn’t going to get you very far with your new allies; Ukraine and Poland… They’re both sending significant numbers of troops to Iraq as we speak.

Incidentally, I spoke to a couple of Ukranians yesterday and happened to ask what they thought of their country deploying troops to Iraq. They hadn’t heard about it until I mentioned it and, after a moment of confusion where they thought I meant that Ukrainian troops were going “to fight Americans”, they said “no, no, no, no, very bad”.

As for Alex’s anti-Americanism, it seems to me no worse that the anti-French sentiments of a few US posters on here and I’d like to voice my dislike of both forms of expression – although I appreciate the right of people to voice their views so long as they are not too offensive.