Aspisso realistic result of simulations show SU-35 is at least 16 times superior!!! to poore typhoon (even awacs doesnt help).
buy russian.
ta-da…
Yes, this would explain why Typhoon is 4th gen, while Sukhoi is 4++. (4^2=16). ๐
That should make EADS think twice before using Su-35s as preys for her own marketing videos. ๐
Aah, there is nothing more exhilarating than a nice promo video, which shows your products’ superiority over the competition. Even if it fails to boost sales, it sure boosts morale! :p
AspisWhy make a marketing video in Russian :confused:
Is the Ru-AF not so excited/interested in the program?
This is a weird particularity of the russian weapons systems. If you look at youtube, there are many russian advertising videos about weapons systems that are strictly in russian. I don’t know why. Bad marketing, not being used in the western advertising manner? Lack of funds to hire an english speaking commentator? I don’t know. Fact is, that even with russian made equipment we bought (Sams for example), we often had to translate the operating manuals ourselves. One would expect that upon delivery they would provide the user with translated manuals in the language of the end user on their own expense…
Fact is, that in the video, the smoked the Typhoon. I didn’t know if you also noticed, but the russian formation consisted of a Su flying in a more forward position as “scout” who then transmitted the target data to the trailing wingmen. While the Typhoon’s links were severed by jamming. Spectacular. ๐
AspisAh, see? They ‘re catching up with marketing:
The Su-35 is a 4++ generation aircraft employing technologies of the fifth generation. They make it superior to all other 4th generation fighters now under development worldwide.
http://www.sukhoi.org/eng/planes/military/Su-35/
So, a 4++ gen (how many + is the max allowed to describe an aircraft?) aircraft with technologies of 5th generation. So, if you add 4++ and 5th gen tech, you get what? 4,8? 4,9 generation? Or a 5- or 5– gen?
On the other hand, when Boeing is marketing the Super Hornet as 5th generation…
This things with generations is getting ridiculous really.
AspisThose who create and run those simulations always win… :rolleyes:
Yes, funny, isn’t it? ๐
lol true, maybe thats why sukhoi has never, to my knowledge, produced any public results from simulations of its own.
The Russians are a bit behind when comes to marketing of weapons. They still need to learn our capitalistic tricks.
Ok, maybe they haven’t done a simulation, but look at this, they ‘ve done it in a way that even a small child can understand it!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7ChAzr7iFE
See how it is smoking all Typhoons? ๐ More than simulation! Visual experience! ๐ At 5:36 and 7:12 you can almost suspect that the Russian pilot is laughing below the mask, while looking at his wingman. What can a simulation say more than this! ๐ Besides, as the video clearly demonstrates, there is no defence against a Pugachev’s Cobra.
AspisF-35 may be, as long as its flying inside india against the naxals, or may be chambal ke daku. ๐
Why give Russia the money to develop a fifth generation fighter?
If they end up developing it alone, just buy it when its available.
Infact, why have a fifth generation fighter at all, the AF wants a FGFA, screw them, all the opposition they have can be handled well till 2030 to 2040 by the MMRCA contenders, lets face it, PAF is not getting a 5th G fighter and PRC is still stuck on developing J-10 variants.
The government needs to realize that the money that is with them should go into realistic threats, cause there are a million ways to spend it better.
5th generation fighter should be put on hold till there is a real program around the neighbourhood, and then just buy whatever options avialable Russia or the USA, not now, no way, no money should leave for foriegn shores.
This is the best argument i have heard about not partecipating in the PAK-FA venture with the Russians.
But, at the end, it’s a political decision on whether you want a 5th gen aircraft, while there is no real need.
Otherwise, i agree with Flex. If you do want 5th gen, the PAK Fa is the best bet. And since you pursue to acquire always more know-how in the aircraft industry to build your own aircrafts, being partner of the Russians in the PAK Fa is the more logical way to go.
AspisDistiller i think you make valid points. The problem is of course the $$$ to do these projects…
USAF in the forseable future doesn’t need it.
Especially knowing the position of the tankers, could allow an enemy to prepare “trap” against aircrafts low on fuel that are heading towards the tanker, as well as betraying the position as you said.
But, there isn’t on the horizon an enemy that could have enough airforce power to attempt such tasks without being shot down first.
AspisThere in lies the real secret of how 4.5 generation fighters have done so well vs earlier 4th generation fighters in exercises. For all the hype of the superior flight performance of the Eurocanards, for the most part that flight performance superiority only really matters in a WVR non HOBS fight (which is not realistic for future near peer air combat). But where they really get their high kill ratios is due to their reduced RCS (which is actually to a greater advantage in most exercises due to most exercises being conducted in clean or near clean configuration).
It is also the primary reason why the F-22 & F-35 will have a similar or greater advantage over 4.5 generation fighters. For all BS that 5th generation naysayers thow out about stealth not being a game changer, since most of them are a naysayer to some degree or another because of their love for their favorite 4.5 generation fighter & just can not stand the fact that there is something better out there in 5th generation fighters, it is the greatest advantage their 4.5 generation fighters have over earlier generation fighters. 5th generation fighters have taken that advantage to much greater level & is an advatage over even their 4.5 generation fighters.
The problem with exercizes is that everything is a convention and weapons aren’t fired trully. You shoot down “first” the other? Automatically you have a “victory”, no matter if the other has also shot you back.
In the Rafale visit to Greece, all french BVR launches were regarded as “kills” by the french, our pilots had different opinion on how the “kill” was calculated.
You have restricted area and altitude limitations and you are supposed to have locally the same intelligence available…
And of course, you can’t really see how the EW suite or kinematics will affect the PK of the incoming missile. Once you are in the NEZ of the one who fired, you are considered “dead”. And of course, the one who gets the NEZ first, is the one that can fly higher faster , so he can extend the missile envelope first (call me Typhoon). Stealth aside.
Hardly realistic… But you can’t do more. The truth is, there hasn’t been any “Battle of Britain” lately, as to know how really things work in a serious A2A war.
But i will add something to this:
in 5th generation fighters, it is the greatest advantage their 4.5 generation fighters have over earlier generation fighters.
I will leave the F22 aside, as it was designed with very clear and unique purpose in mind. In the case of the F35, the stealth isn’t the greatest advantage, but the ONLY advantage. And as soon as you put external stores, it gets in clear disadvantage. And even in stealth conf, the F35 must pray to God, not to come to WVR without AIM-9X or he doesn’t stand a chance.
The F22 was designed to do well one job. That’s why is so good at it. The F35 was designed to do every other job. That’s why it can’t be set at the level of efficiency of the F22 IMHO. Jack of all trades, master of none.
A note on HOB missiles: No matter how one sees it, the best position to fire an IR missile with the highest PK, is to have the enemy with his engine exhaust visible in front of you, right before the seeker’s eyes. The F22 has no trouble in that. The F35 has some trouble in that against high performance aircrafts. Specially when you carry few IR missiles to spare , firing them at bad odds, will only make you dead.
Otherwise, here’s a tactic. Have a bunch of F4E Phantoms following at distance your first line fighters. Integrate a HOB missile to the F4E and carry full load. As soon as they are in range of the merge between the front line fighters and the F22s, start shooting all your HOBs. All F22s shot down with 1970 era aircrafts. ๐
But enough of F35 bashing for me, i know that this is a discussion with no end and becomes tiresome.
AspisDon’t forget that enemy airfields are also at the top of the list of targets
I don’t. Don’t get me wrong. I think the Obama decision was perfect. I also think that for USAF, with her resources and potential enemies, the aircraft can amply fullfil the missions. But, if the enemy of today was Russia, meaning a Russia of comparable strenght in airforce, i wouldn’t count on the F35 doing the job as well as if more F22 were around. Because for once, the whole F35 thing, revolves around the hpothesis, that the F35 won’t be detected. Now, that can be true for current Iranian air defence for example, but would you bet your life that it could do the same against a russian air defence, with various radar wavelenght coverage, Awacs and enemy aircrafts equiped with very powerful radars and IRST?
What i mean, is, that the US plans, are made according to US needs. This doesn’t reflect an absolute reality. And i think that this is what Sprey is basically talking about. He is talking about the aircraft, if it had to go against a very capable enemy country. It is obvious, that against largely inferior enemies, the F35 will have no problem, because as a matter of fact, not even the F16 had any problems to go against Serbian, Iraqui or Afghani airforce. But these airforces are hardly a true measure to judge the real capability of the aircraft.
The F35 is stealth. Yes. But the best RCS is head on frontally and in X band. It’s not invisible.
The only reason to fly a F-35 in a high-threat environment with external stores is that the store is too big. In those instances, it can be escorted by either F-22s OR F-35s. F-22s are not required.
Yes, always supposing the enemy is inferior in capability and numbers… The point is, the F35 in WVR, needs HOBS or is dead meat even against a F16 with JHMCS. In order to carry HOBS, as things are today, it needs to mount the AIM-9X externally. This cancels the stealth. And how much the RCS is increased by external stores, is something one can only guess. Nobody from us, can predict how the “touchy” RCS, will change from the external pylons/missile. How will this affect the radar reflection and brake the perfect “VLO” shape? Maybe more than one would like. All the enemy needs, is being able to shoot back at you.
Says who? It can carry 8 SDBs for CAS dudy, use the gun, and still be VLO.
The SDBs are GPS guided correct? What about moving targets or advancing enemy infantry? And the worst of all… Ok, you are USA, you dominate in air, sea, land, so 8 SDBs are enough per sortie. But come again to a scenario of an enemy of equal strenght or an enemy like China that uses huge numbers to overwhelm you. Ask the G.I. down there fighting for his life… What would he prefer to come to his rescue? 1 F35 with 8 SDB or 1 Super Hornet with 24 (?) SDBs or higher yield bombs or more versatile bombs (hit various types of targets)? You may say, “but the Super Hornet may never arrive in the area”. Well, with an F22 sweeping the “road” in front of it, it will arrive. The G.I. will reply “to hell with stealth! I am getting killed down here, i don’t care if the F35 can come all alone and throw its 8 SDBs! I want the enemy advance to be stopped ASAP, i don’t care if you have to escort and babysit the striker, i want the biggest payload you can give me”. So why use the “stealth” F35 for CAS (if you are not USAF with endless numbers and inferior enemy)? Because the enemy is inferior so that 8 SDBs are enough. This doesn’t apply for most other airforces around the world that can’t afford the USAF resources.
In order for there to be enough enemy aircraft to pose a significant problem for the F-35s, then the day1 anti-airfield operations would have to have failed. Not likely. But again, the F-35 can self escort, no F-22 NEEDED.
Again, it depends on the who the enemy is…
The F-35 will fly with 4-6 internal D+ model AIM-120s. They have HOBS, 2-way data links, etc. Combined with the VLO RCS, LPI AESA, EOTS, and DAS.. the F-35 has the advantage in A2A.
The F35 have HOBS… in external stores. The BVR only scenario again depends on enemy and enemy tactics and numbers. The EOTS is not there yet and by its positioning alone it is optimized for A2G and slaved to the radar anyway (you need to do lighten the target). The LPI isn’t panacea, nowdays ESM can catch even link comms between aircrafts. How much LPI is against modern EW suites is something we don’t know (i have my doubts). The problem as i said, is that others now have IRSTs too (today), which can track completely passively, AWACS and they can use links too. One sees you, everyone sees you. And some also have better kinematic performances. As for F35s kinematics, we will have to wait for the real thing to come out, it’s not TW ratio. At each speed and altitude the characteristics of an aircraft change.
And the problem with the F35, is that it wants to be presented, like it can do anything better than anything. Like trying to sell a car, saying that it is better than any other luxury car, 4×4 offroad truck, F1 racing car, SUV,pickup truck, urban utility car, family car, coupรจ. I am sorry, i won’t believe it, until i see it. Probably the USAF couldn’t believe it either, that’s why she wanted the F22, just like she wanted the F15 before, instead of relying in F16s.
The F-35 was not designed to need the F-22. Otherwise, you had better let the USMC,USN, and all of our partner nations that they need to buy the F-22 also. The F-35 was designed to be a multi-role fighter that can prosecute all missions needed, ALONE. Will there be a higher survival rate if the F-22 tags along, sure, but that’s why it’s called an Air-Dominance fighter… It’s the best out there.
At the end… does this poor ******* of F22 really have a purpose? I mean, really, the F35 if you believe forum enthusiasts (and LM), is the answer to everything. Makes you wonder why produce the F22 at all… Or why USAF wanted it in the first place…
My friend, the point is, that for USA the F35 at the numbers you can get and with your other aircraft, is enough agains Iran, Korea, Syria and i don’t know what else potential rogue state enemy you may have to fight in the next 15-20 years.
Other buyers, YES, DO want the F22, because they don’t have USAF resources and don’t see the F35 like the “panacea”. I will remind Japan, Israel, Australia and even HAF, which is widely known that our pilots would want F22 and not F35. But, is the F22 for sale? NO. Just like we wanted F15. Was it for sale? No. Even in 1999, that the F15 was for sale for Greece, it was the F15H (degraded export version).
If you had still the cold war with Russia today, and Russia was still throwing in the field loads of Sus and Migs (and pending the PAK FA), i don’t think your F35s would be so ready for “going alone” against hordes of Sus… That’s the whole story.
USA made 2 aircrafts for her needs. With the current geopolitical situation, the 1 of them (the F22) is too costly to take in large numbers and air dominance againt US potential threat isn’t a problem (it isn’t even today without the F22). Hence a large number of F35 to do “everything” is a cost effective solution, that will allow the US economy to breathe.
Now, LM takes this, and tries to sell it worldwide as being true for any airforce… This is where the problem comes. And i think that this is the POV of the F35 critics. I mean, if you ask Sprey if USAF will have high casualties against Iran, Korea or name the potential enemy, i am confident he will tell you “no”. I think Sprey’s POV is of what happens if you go against an enemy with similar capabilities. Which is more or less, the same story of what RAND did in the scenario against PLAAF in Taiwan. The survivability of the F35 against high tech enemies would be greatly improved with the F22 sweeping and protecting them. Surprising an enemy like Iran? Likely. Surprising an enemy like China or Russia with dense air defence and AWACS? I wouldn’t bet my money on it. Sensor fusion and links work for the others too. And BVR isn’t panacea, EW suites get better and better, kinematics have improved, IFF and target ID are harder the longer the distance and tight formations can make your locking almost impossible to ranges that will allow you to avoid any WVR. And the F35 in WVR, as is today, will be dead or not stealth in the first place, which will make it dead in the BVR too against a Su. One can argue that the F35’s “stealth” profile won’t brake much to allow the enemy to detect it first. Even if we take this as true (nobody knows really) and even if we suppose that an enemy Su with IRST won’t detect the F35 (or the missile flare launch), the Su all that needs is to be able to have the F35 with external stores within launch parameters. And unfortunately, however you look at it, the best situation for BVR launch, is head on approach, from high altitude, high speed. This makes you more vulnerable to IRST detection. The most surprise attack is from 3 or 9 oclock, but that’s also the worst position for a BVR launch. The NEZ will narrow down too much, the missile will be in the worst kinematic position, modern aircrafts now have MAWS…
The DAS, is nice to have, but its real gain in WVR combat i don’t know how much it can change the issue of needing a HOB missile in the first place (going with guns won’t help you much, DAS or no DAS) and good kinematics. Because, even an F16 Block 30 (which is the most agile F16 version for dogfight), if it arrives at WVR against the F35 with stealth configuration, will most probably shoot the F35 down, even without JHMCS (the HUD alone and plain AIM9M/L will give advantage). Needless to say, that should the F35 “strike dedicated” versions, that have not even the internal gun, find themselves forced to enter WVR engagement range and are in their “stealth configuration” (no AIM-9X onboard), they can only eject and nothing else, even if the pilot is world class ace that could succeed in gun killing the enemy.
I add about DAS, that until the EOTS comes in (the first blocks don’t have it, correct?), it’s hardly comparable to a real IRST (range wise). The whole structure of the F35, can’t help betraying, that it was made for strike as primary role (kinematics, internal A2A payload, position and function of EOTS, gun availability in the various versions). The fact that now suddenly the F22 has more or less become “useless”, is another story. It’s called “making a virtue out of a necessity”. The “panacea” thing is LM marketing, just like any company that wants to export, says that her product is the best. IMHO, the F35 is asked to fit too many roles and you can’t be best in every single one of them. There are too many compromises you need to make.
For USAF, where numbers isn’t a problem, this isn’t an issue. But for others it is. The F35 is too valuable to risk losing it like that.
Anyway, as i said, i reserve my final word on the F35 when it will come out flying and we see it. As a matter of fact, we (in Greece) will probably be the first ones to both have it as enemy and as friendly aircraft. So we will know soon enough… If you suddenly see DAS video from the Parthenon in youtube, it means that it’s really impossible to detect and intercept. :p On a more positive side, maybe it’s a way to find peace with Turkey (since Turkey doesn’t really want anything greek). You can’t intercept what you can’t see, can you… So no more daily attrition in the air in the Aegean… We will be flying blind vs blind. ๐
And a question that was raised from a greek editorial… Why can’t an UCAV be used as 1st day strike aircraft??? It would also cost much cheaper… I am sure LM has the answer for that too. (Probably is that UCAV has shorter range and we need to get in deep into Iran to strike various targets. Well, not all customers need to bomb Iran…)
AspisI will make a summary , which is in essense what Alepou wrote, from the more specialized article in defencenet.
The Navy’s chief, basically said about the Papanikolis:
– The Navy has decided not to accept the Papanikolis for both technical and psychological reasons.
– The Navy is ready to proceed to the acceptance of the 3 newer U214, after the Pipinos (2nd sub), passes successful trials. To this end, negotiations for the modification of the contract are to begin soon.
– The Navy intends to replace the Papanikolis with a yet another, new, U214 (so to go back to the initial number of 4).
– The reasons of the non acceptance:
* The vessel has conducted too many sea trials in the last 5 years and has consumed a part of the operational life of several equipment onboard, including the fuel cells.
* However strange it may sound, the vessel has now acquired a “bad name” inside the navy, which for sailors makes part of a traditional superstition and so nobody wants to sail with it.
* The submarine is now “within parameters”, but, in order not to cut the hull again (expensive), several modifications were done to correct the excessive rolling:
– Placement of plates of polyester at the bottom of the vessel, in order to increase boyancy.
– Placement of transversal separators (like bulkheads) between the outer and the inner hull in order to control the direction of the water flow.
– Reallocation of ballast from the upper section of the vessel, to the rear end, to help bring the center of gravity of the vessel at a lower level.
– Modification of the fuel gas exhausts.
– Reduction of the height of the periscope mast by 1m, to improve the overall weight distribution.
http://www.defencenet.gr/defence/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=7823&Itemid=51
If the German navy wants to take Papanikolis, then all is fine… Because it appears, that the contract is done in such way, that can’t force us to take it… Maybe HDW should just keep it as tourist attraction. After all, it was the prototype vessel.
AspisAgree with you, i was just talking about SPECTRA’s bug for development software, not production software.
Look at it this way… At least it wasn’t taking in water, was it? ๐
Brief story. Why aren’t any F16 B52+ Adv of the “missionized” version delivered in Greece yet? Because , in one of the LRU units of the Aspis II EW suite, there is vapor condensation with the result of water being formed inside. So LM has kept all the missionized ones to replace the LRU units and is delivering only the 1-seat versions. The problem was caused because there was no provvision of a way to allow to humidity to escape from the Aspis II compartment. And why is that? Because the Aspis II is “custom assembled” for HAF EW suite, never used before as a complete suite (HAF chose components from various US companies). So LM hadn’t predicted the problem…
http://www.defencenet.gr/defence/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=7781&Itemid=49
This to show how to that when you make something new or install new sensors, it’s very likely that you will encounter bugs. Or even water… :p
Aspisas far as I remember it wasn’t that Spectra was buggy per se but more that there was interferences from and with other Rafales around. The article said something like “the Spectra active Rafale should be first and alone to be free of interference from others”.
I don’t remember if the article concluded that it could be (or was) resolved in some other way.
All EW suites are good or less good into this or that. Most new EW suites also have bugs, but usually they can be ironed out by intervention in the software. Thales has a long tradition and reputation in high quality EW suites. We got initial bugs in the EW suite of the -5Mk2 too. This caused the delay of official acceptance for 2 years(?) i think. But it was solved by tinkering in the software.
What i want to say, is, that it is improbable that Thales managed to come up with such an advanced suite as Spectra (which i personally think as the best out there), yet was unable to resolve the bugs. The partecipations of Rafale in Red Flag, missions in Afghanistan and if you want, even the last presentations of the aircraft in Switzerland (or Greece), didn’t show any serious problem that we know of. I would expect leaks in the press about that from the potential customers. On the contrary, at least in the last Rafale visit in Greece, we read only about pilots praising of the Spectra.
With every new addition of a new sensor, it is probable that some new bugs will appear and will need to be ironed out. But this, i think is valid for every aircraft, not just the Rafale. The main issue, then, is, how quickly can you solve them, so that the customer remains satisfied. Nowdays, that the aircrafts are loaded with many electronic equipment, it is natural to have more headaches when some new project is launched or new sensors need to be added. Look at how many programs that require advanced electronics have delays.
I wouldn’t worry much about the Spectra. As a matter of fact, if i were a pilot, it would be glad to know that i have the Spectra onboard, while the others have… something else.
I would worry more about weapons integration and a HMD.
AspisF-35As will not be accompanied by F-22As for many reasons. See the F/A-18 about that. Even the Russians do quit escorts since the 80s most of the time. ๐
I do not mean that they will be flying COMAO all the time. The F22 will be in sweep role in areas of probable enemy interceptors.
The F35 mentality is the first strike using stealth to destroy enemy air defence by surprise. After that surprise has gone, the F35s will fly with external stores too and then they will fly with F22 escort too , if the enemy has still valid aircrafts left. You can’t go to CAS in stealth configuration, nor you can be stealth with AIM-9X in external stores. So in a non stealth configuration, if the enemy has still high performance aircrafts and remaining detection ability, the F35 will better use the F22 cover too. The F35 may be stealth, but as things are, if it arrives in WVR, it will need external stores. But this, cancels the stealth. The F22 has no such issue, plus it can outmanouver anything and still shoot down with the guns if the internal AIM-9 shouldn’t suffice.
Which is why originally the plans were for F22 and F35 and not just for F35. Of course, needless to say, if the enemy is Afghanistan, then of course, you don’t need the F22 at all. You can even send A7 alone to do the job.
AspisLipstick on a pig or not, we will have to wait and see when the aircraft is ready.
Personally i think that the F35 was designed with a specific primary task at mind, to be accompanied by the F22 , which on its turn was designed with yet another primary task in mind. Hoping to change that reality now , just because for economy reasons (USAF thanks you, Dubya!), the MoD wants to reduce F22s and bet almost everything to F35s, is something irrational.
The good thing about USAF, is that, even if the article’s author has turned insane or simply mistaken while in good faith, it’s no big deal for USAF, because of the sheer numbers of F35s that will get. Which possible enemy would USAF need to fight in the forseable future, for which a horde of F35s with the coverage of say 120 F22s (leave the 60 rest back home or in maintanance), wouldn’t be able to handle easily (not counting the evergreen teen series)? Iranian airforce, which is the most likely candidate for a future war, can’t possibly preoccupy the current USAF , let alone the future one.
China, the probable contender in the future of the title of new superpower, for the time being, is happy with taking advantage of globalization, so that she can export low cost goods and boost her growth rates at high speeds. Not interested in any attrition with USA yet, not even about Taiwan. The Chinese have been around for a long time to be wise enough and know when to lay down and wait, growing and growing while others wear and tear themselves economically in wars, weakening their position.
If the “lipstick” opinion is correct or holds a good percentage of truth, the only headache that could come to USAF, would be in a future, if someone managed to acquire in extremely large numbers something like the – unborn yet- PAK FA. Which is quite unlikely if you think about it and even if it was to happen, the US will have ample time to review her position and act accordingly (in the worst case, you can reopen the F22 production line).
In my view, there is a point in the RAND study which is crucial. That , if we believe the RAND analysts (and i see no reason why not, seems a reasonable conclusion), even superior quality has its limits against quantity (the F22 could according to RAND perform at best, a 3 to 1 ratio, granted, also because of the geography of the scenario which was penalizing the F22). If you look at it the other way, then the USAF will simply do what the Chinese would do according to the RAND scenario: “saturate the enemy with overwhelming numbers”.
So, i don’t see any drama in the US MoD decision, even if it is “lipstick on a pig”. The US economy isn’t in its finest hours. The F35 is proposed to do the job of almost every other existing aircraft in USAF inventory. IMHO, this can’t be done without compromises and probably, it won’t come as cheap as initial expectations were. But, exactly in a time of difficult economy, where USA needs to start bringing down that trillion $ national debt (thank you Dubya), buying large numbers of F35s, while there is no credible enemy force around that could preoccupy USAF, *IS* the best thing to do and was very wise of Obama to go ahead with this. Simply put, large numbers of F22, would be a waste of money for the forseable future. The same job of F22, can be done by a larger number of F35s, pigs or no pigs.
Russia herself, has still a long way to go (and $ to pay) before gets a good amount of PAK FA and even so, it would require big numbers of PAK FAs to worry a huge number of F35s. Because as Stalin used to say, “quantity has a quality of its own”.
So, ok, let’s say that the F35s critics are right… What’s the worst thing that can happen? That Iranian airforce may manage to actually shoot down 1 F35?
For all the rest potentially “dangerous” opponents (Russia, China), USAF will have enough time of warning as to review her plans and requests and same for US MoD. Even if Russia was to somehow magically sell 300 PAK FAs to Iran (more of a scifi scenario), you would come to know it in time to react accordingly.
So, in the worst case scenario… let the pig enjoy its lipstick… No big deal…
AspisSo you do you really have wet dreams about Hague arbitration, Aspis? ๐
Yes, but only during the breaks between the war wet dreams! :p
Jupp. Alas. But just as a ceap temporary gagpfller till yรณu find your true next gen figter. And when the HELAFs 5:th gen eventually gets operatonal, Im sure the Gripens still could play the vitale role of its little broter to supplement it. And while big brother F-35/22/PAK-FA/Silent Eagle/Supe Bug (ok SB was ajoke!) take over the arsurperiority role in the HEAF, all those Gripens will be freed to take on new and very diferent roles (after all this is the general idรฉa of Gripen as a weapon system anyway) like CAS for the Greek marines fighting in the arcipilago, or regular anti ship raids with RB-15F or Taurus on Turkish vessles trying to sneak trough the Dardanell Straight to pick a fight with the Greeks in tha Adriatic sea. While the HEAF provide top cover with its 5:th gen fighters Gripens could very mouch, at low cost, roam around and blow everything what th Greek Erieye AWACS:es just wants to get rid of.
The use that i see for a Gripen NG in the airforce, would be:
– Low cost routine interceptions. Speaking strictly for the economical part, if the Gripen has lower life cycle costs even to the F16 (as Saab claims), there are obvious advantages in having an aircraft that is better than the latest F16s and costs less. The “regular” activity over the Aegean, consists of 1) identification and shadowing of the turkish aircrafts that enter Athens FIR without contacting greek ground control authorities and 2) engagements that end up in dogfight in the cases of airspace violations. It is easily understandable, that for the above cases, it is more a declaration of respective political positions that is done, since no real missiles are fired. So, you don’t need to send everyday something “heavyweight” just to identify a turkish F16 and inform your HQ… A cold war, while still “cold”, is largely also a war about economics. If you reduce your regular costs in a sector, then you can divert your money to another sector and strengthen it.
– With the current structure of HAF (and without knowing future HAF plans), with the withdrawal of A7 (and the last upgraded F4Es somewhere before 2020), the CAS will logically pass to the F16s. So, the better use of a potential Gripen NG purchase, would be to assist the more heavyweight in A2A, specially in anti-F16 role and secondarily against F35 with Meteor. Heck, with the Gripen, you even solve the problem of what to do with the MICA missile stock if we eventually phase the Mirage out without buying the Rafale. Especially the MICA IRs will be still good to use for many years, since they are the only western BVR IR missile around. There would be also in deed the option to use them in secondary role in TASMO with RB-15F and so give a hand to the M2000 squadron that is currently the only one with the task of doing TASMO.
– Another good thing with the Gripen, is that the Swedes would probably have no problem in giving access to whatever technology or software we ask and isn’t “US restrained” on the Gripen. Especially full access to the EW suite (which i hope will be made in Sweden in the NG), would be very welcome by HAF i think.
– Last but not least, the contained costs of the Gripen, should also allow for a contained upgrade cost in some point in the future.
– And as a bonus, i would see in deed the possibility to buy cheap second hand Gripens C/D, which would be even more suitable, for more “dirty” tasks , such as CAS and TASMO (or long range strike with Taurus), while leaving A2A to the more expensive aircrafts.
– As a second bonus, i see the possibility of Gripen to operate from short airstrips and even roads. This, with adeguate preparation for such use, could increase versatility for HAF in case of war, since there could be various points on islands where to prepare “Gripen compatible” straight line roads and use small civillian/firefighter airstrips that exist. In other words, Gripen is the best to fit the role of “aircraft carrier aircraft” (the carriers being the islands themselves), which is already part of current HAF doctrine in case of war.
The best thing about Gripen is the flexibility in weapons integration. If you find yourself in shortage of aircrafts to do a specific task, you can always divert Gripens to that task, since they can use 99% of the weapons you want. And we can also be sure that it will work immediately after the delivery with 100% compatibility with the Erieye (see the delays in Erieye itself and Wedgetail project and you will see how software issues can become a headache). As a matter of fact, we should buy 4 more Erieyes to increase availability in time of operations and eventual losses and improve the coverage of the area. Plus, Sweden in case of need, would probably not cut us the supply of spare parts (this goes both for Gripen and Erieye).
Now it’s all up to politics and on what aircrafts HAF would like to see in the inventory in the future.
AspisIn my opinion you have just wet war dreams.
I think someone else has wet dreams for the eastern aegean for 40 years now… Tell me again… Why do you have the 100.000 “Aegean army” again? To prevent the greek invasion? And you had to buy the Leo2A4, because we bought first Leo2A6, right? So, we might invade Turkey by land?
And you are professionally seeking support to the Greece at this forum.But this is not the right place.
No, no support. I am in favour of informing and exposing… when others try to minimize and trivialize. I mean, i couldn’t resist, when i read your posts, where everything is fine, war can’t possibly happen, it’s a teasing, etc. Unofficially, we arrived close to war more than 3 times (crisis kept secret).
If you would live in Turkey you would understand that the people in Turkey even don’t mind a war between Greece and Turkey because we don’t have an obsession.And at the island dispute all countries politicians does like that statements.It doesn’t make you right.Turkey and Greece can get in a war everytime:)This is funny…
What you don’t understand, is, that it’s not the people of Turkey that decided for the crisis of the past, but rather the goverments. What did they tell you in 1996? “Let’s go invade a greek island”? No! They told you “The Greeks have raised flag on turkish island, we must reply”. And you were all ready to fight against the despicable Greeks. Do you understand now the difference between goverment and people? Because, the Imia, as well as the rest of the other 149 islands, can’t be both greek or turkish. So, someone was wrong in that crisis and was the aggressor. For us it was Turkey. For you, it was Greece. But the border can’t pass both on the left and the right side of an island. So one of the 2 pubblic opinions was fooled by the respective goverments.
I don’t know about what kind of statements politicians are supposed to do, i know ours haven’t threatened Turkey (heck, we haven’t even threatened FYROM militarily who is claiming greek land). Can you imagine the difference, if you were in our position and a small country like FYROM was claiming officially that part of Turkey is theirs? How would you react? I will tell you. Casus belli.
I am sorry to tell you, but aside the people, Turkey isn’t an “ordinary” country when it comes to politics. The first thing you (your goverment) think of, is threat of war and the last is a court. (Casus belli against Syria for Ocalan case, Casus belli against Cyprus for S300 deployment, Casus belli against Greece for the application of Law of Sea, threats that you would not permit the birth of an independent Kurdistan in Iraq, closed borders with Armenia over the disagreement on the armenian genocide issue). Do you know many countries like that?
Right or wrong, we ‘re not the ones that are afraid to set foot in a court…
You can laugh all you like (i laugh more with the fairytale that you need 100.000 army in the coast because we will invade you or that you had to buy new armor, because 170 greek Leo2A6 and 180 A4 meant you were under threat in Thrace). The fact that war hasn’t occured, doesn’t mean that you don’t have “expansive” desires. It’s more a verification of the roman saying “if you want peace, prepare for war”. As long as Greece has maintained a reasonable firepower analogy, your goverments have postponed their desires. What do you have to lose by waiting…
I mean, you do realise , that since the problems in the Aegean can’t be solved by “sirtaki”, then what remains is:
– To continue like this forever.
– To solve this in court.
– To solve this bilaterally (improbable it seems, 40 rounds of talks to no end).
– To solve this by threat of war or war. Now, since Turkey doesn’t seem to be pursuing the previous ones, seems that this is a more desirable solution. And to this end, you refused the mutual decrease of defence expenditures. Why do you think you need an LPD for? Or why do you think you want to raise your main surface units to 20 or possibly 24? Or as we say in Greece, “what’s on the rooftop and says “miaaaaooooo”?
From the book “Strategic Depth: The International Position of Turkey” (Stratejik Derinlik: Turkiyeโnin Uluslararasi Konumu) of your new Foreign Minister, Davutoฤlu. (page 154):
“Today are known the results of the strategic error of not taking under control the Aegean islands, which were abbandoned after WWII. At the moment that Turkey is holding the pulse of the soft underbelly of Russia through the Straits, Greece has acquired a strategical advantage over Turkey, through the Aegean islands. The area to which Turkey is closer to war, more than in any other case, is the islands of the Aegean, that limit in considerable degree her vital space, a fact that is caused by unforgivable mistakes that have been done, because of the absence of a coherent maritime strategy. The crisis of Kardak (Imia), that brought to surface the greek sovereignty even on rocky islets close to our coasts, is the bitter price of these accumulated mistakes”.
Page 171:
” The source of the main problem in the Aegean , is the contraddiction, between the geological and the geopolitical reality and the current status quo. In contraddiction to the fact that the islands of the Aegean are the natural prolongation of the geological structure of the Anatolian penisula and to the geopolitical necessities that are born by the above situation, the political division was made according to international treaties, in favour of Greece, a fact that aggravates problems such as the continental shelf, territorial water, airspace, the FIR limits, the areas of command and control and island militarization”.
Now, excuse me, but what do you understand out of this? I see someone with revisionist thoughts, speaking of vital space (ringing a bell?), of how Greece has “strategical advantage” , “geopolitical necessities” and so on.
So, one thing is what you as population think. Another, is how your politicians think…
As i said earlier… In 1996, if instead of the greek army, it was the Greek Cypriot National Guard , do you really think that your SF team would have withdrawed? I think not.
And i could put it also in a different way. Do you think that the greek Cypriot national guard would have dared to risk confrontation? I think not, based in the S300 experience. You would have just added a new islet in the turkish border without firing a shot.
This is your goverment’s strategy. You wait… Of course, when time comes and if Greece doesn’t follow Cyprus-way in the S300 issue, they won’t tell you “let’s go invade Greece”. They will tell you again about Kardak, disputed islands and greek provocations and if war starts, of course, once the operations have started, if you are ordered to land to say Rhodes island, it will be natural in a war, which after all the Greeks provoked…
You say about the people in Turkey… What people in Greece think is how is it possible for the people in Turkey to believe these wild stories they are given. Like that you need the Aegean army because we will invade or that the Greeks got 170 Leo2A6, so it’s natural for us to do so too, because… i guess Greece may invade… You even denied passage through the Straights to the replica of the ancient greek ship “Argo”, that was doing the route of the ancient Argonautic expedition, because it was seen a greek attempt to claim Pontus… ๐ฎ
Ok, we have wet war dreams. But at least we have your politicians drooling openly about how your “vital space” is limited by the islands, how unfair it is, the newly discovered 150 “disputed islands”, “casus belli”, the NOTAM 714, etc… What’s called the story sold to you about the greek invasion to the turkish coast? Paranoia? 1919 syndrome and “Megali Idea”? (Someone should explain to the average Turk that the idea died in 1921 already, when Venizelos lost the elections exactly against the opposition that was cheering for a “small Greece”). “Greece is trying to apply Sevres Treaty”?! This is the incredible part of the average Greek… How can you possibly buy all these fairytales? The 10mln Greece, will make the surprise attack on the 70 mln Turkey, so that’s why you want the Aegean army, the invasion fleet, you complain about greek military presence on the islands, etc? :confused:
Instead of seeing this as “attempt for support”, you should ask yourself it there is any logic in this story according to your gov’s positions… And then maybe inform other of your friends. Maybe then one day, they won’t be able to sell you fairytales anymore and we will both find peace and spend our money in better place than F16s.
The “you don’t live in Turkey, people don’t want war”, doesn’t tell me anything, as long as your people can be made to buy even the wildest story and believe anything. Do you recall the “Atamizin evi, bomba ile, hasara ugradi”? Do you think that the people then had any particular will to do progrom? No… But they were willing to believe the story they were fed. Where’s the difference with 1996? Did the average Turk woke up then thinking “today i want to invade Greece?”. No. Ah, yes, it was “turkish” island, being stolen by the devious Greeks, so war was OK and later became “disputed”. Then in 50 years from now, maybe you will learn it was greek after all, just like it took you 50 years to understand what happened in 1955.
It’s easy for you to minimize everything, because everything is disputed in the greek part. When was the last time you hear a greek PM or minister or govermental official saying anything about “taking back” something that is in Turkey today? That’s why we are tired of this story and you are not. We ‘re also tired of spending the money in weapons, while other EU countries of our size have a small or no army to speak of. And since you have no exit policy out of this, you can only try to minimize and pretend it’s a normal situation. By “exit policy”, i mean, that you dispute everything a man can imagine (only the fish aren’t disputed, because they can pass the border below the surface), yet you don’t pursue a policy with a specific target that will allow a peaceful solution. I mean, we hope, that either through EU laws you will recognize international law and drop the claims or go to Hague. That’s our exit policy. What’s yours??? Pretend it’s not there??? Isn’t it weird to say the least, that you want a peaceful solution apparently , but yet, you have no specific target on how you will arrive to that? Certainly not by denying to decrease military expenditure… This doesn’t sound like exit strategy towards something peaceful.
The only positive thing about sustaining your EU negotiations, is that possibly some will “wake up”… Unfortunately i don’t see a peaceful solution near, because you are not ready for it… Some in Greece are against Hague too, because of maximalistic positions. But the truth is, we have made declaration since 1993 and so,if you do the same, we can’t avoid it even if we wanted to. And from time to time there’s talk about it (an ex president of repubblic has more times spoken in favour).
Regards
P.S. : In case you don’t know, you should try to search the scenarios of the biggest turkish military exercizes. You will find them most interesting. Then compare them to the greek scenarios. It will be enlightening.
Sign In
