I’m pretty sure that a couple of you chaps will find this of interest 😉

Russian Air Force to Trial New Data Transmission System

A system of transmitting non-verbal data from the ground to aircraft pilots will be tested for the first time at the forthcoming exercise in Belarus, Russian air force Commander-in-Chief Army Gen. Vladimir Mikhaylov, said on Tuesday.

“Information about the targets will be transmitted in the form of impulses from the ground-based unit commander to a display screen showing a map. It takes 0.3 seconds for the command to reach the pilot who is ready to hit the target,” Mikhaylov told reporters in Moscow.

The exercise will for involve two of the most modern Mi-28N helicopters the first time, he added.

Source: Interfax-AVN (16th May, 2006)

Steve Rush

Arthur (I don’t think this applies to anybody else who might be reading this, but please chip-in if it does…)

how early did you take your first “peep behind the curtain”?

I’m sure you’ve read some of the same accounts as me, and know a few of the individuals involved, but I’ve yet to meet anyone who was overly impressed with the state of the hardware and infrastructure during those early ‘expeditionary’ trips in the late 1980s/early 1990s.

Personally speaking I think 1987 was probably a little too close as a date to the whole edifice crumbling for the WP forces to have been anything like as effective as some here believe….

But it’s all a matter of opinions and conjecture.

Steve Rush

If we’re the ones giving out the aid, it’s within our rights to attach conditions to that aid, is it not?

100% correct in the case of FMF (Foreign Military Financing) which is what I believe we are talking about in the case of Colombia.

For what it’s worth, the comments of a General in SOUTHCOM over the proposal to purchase Super Tucanos is of very little relevance: he would be way, way down the pecking order as to any allocation of funding to Uribe’s government.

There was actually a juicier rumour doing the rounds at the time: that a little pressure was being brought to bear for Colombia to select the Raytheon T-6 over Embraer’s product.

It’s really a completely moot point though: maybe those interested in this should wade through some Congressional Budget Justification documents to see how fiscal funding is allocated and approved 🙂

Steve Rush

Panel Seeks F-35 Production Delay

Panel Seeks F-35 Production Delay

Senate Armed Services Committee is calling for a one-year production delay and a $1.2 billion cut in Lockheed Martin’s F-35 joint strike fighter, dealing another congressional setback to the Pentagon’s most expensive acquisition program.

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, a member of the panel, said he will fight the proposal on the Senate floor and joined other supporters in warning that the recommendation could have the unintended effect of escalating production costs and endangering international support for the next-generation fighter.

“This may be penny-wise and pound-foolish,” Cornyn said in a telephone interview Wednesday.

The panel’s May 4 decision, outlined in documents that began circulating this week, constitutes the latest signal that the F-35 program, a mainstay for Fort Worth-based Lockheed Martin Aeronautics, faces growing scrutiny on Capitol Hill. The House Armed Services Committee is proposing a $241 million cut in the program.

The program’s total cost is now projected at $276.5 billion. A manufacturing team led by Lockheed Martin is building three variants of the aircraft for military services in the United States and Great Britain, with current plans calling for a total of 2,443 aircraft.

Eight foreign countries are participating in the $40.5 billion development program and are engaged in negotiations with U.S. officials to decide their participation in the decades-long production phase.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., a presumed 2008 presidential contender who is in line to become Senate Armed Services Committee chairman next year, is leading efforts to slow F-35 production amid criticism that the developmental aircraft is being moved toward full-scale production without adequate testing.

In a report reflecting McCain’s concerns, the committee cited a Government Accountability Office study, which said that the F-35 program will begin low-rate initial procurement in 2007 “with less than 1 percent of the flight test program completed.”

Cornyn, in a written dissent to the committee’s decision, said a one-year delay in production could “drive up costs” and postpone planned deliveries of operational aircraft to the military, now scheduled to begin in 2012. A production slowdown could also “adversely affect our international partners,” Cornyn said.

The first flight of a developmental F-35 is scheduled for this fall.

Tom Jurkowsky, chief spokesman at Lockheed Martin’s corporate headquarters in Bethesda, Md., and Kathy Crawford, spokeswoman for the government’s F-35 program office, echoed Cornyn’s concerns.

“Once you start building in delays, you’re going to add to the cost of the program,” said Jurkowsky. “If this were to come to pass, a slowdown of production would unnecessarily delay deliveries … and make the program more expensive overall.”

Lockheed Martin plans to build 1,763 F-35s for the Air Force and 680 for the Navy and Marines. Britain, which has a $2 billion stake in the development program and consequently represents the most influential international partner, plans to buy 150 for its Royal Navy and Marines.

Supporters pointed out that the committee recommendations represent only the first phase in the congressional budget process and face further consideration by the full House and Senate.

A joint House-Senate negotiating committee will shape the final 2007 defense budget.

By Dave Montgomery, Fort Worth Star-Telegram, Texas (11th May, 2006)

Flex (and anyone else here with similar roots or background),

how keen do you think some of the WP aircrews would have been to throw themselves headlong into a full-scale war with NATO at that time? Having spoken to plenty of service personnel from the former WP nations I’ve become less and less convinced of their loyalty to the Soviet Union. I’ve often wondered if this would have been a decisive factor in the event of a conflict.

The other indefinible quantity in all of this would be serviceability of aircraft assets.

Steve Rush

Are you implying there are Flankers on the South American continent??

I’d say swerve was rightly pointing out that Mexico isn’t on the South American continent at all.

Steve Rush

Oops, I did not realize that Bulgarians are in NATO. Stand corrected.. Thanks..

No problem, Flex: I often have to check the lists to see who’s recently joined either NATO and/or the EU too.

Although this following news item dates back to last September, it’s probably worth inserting into this thread.

If anyone has an update regarding this proposal to upgrade 20 Bulgarian Su-25s (as Georgia is mentioned, presumably it would be to TAM’s Scorpion standard), I’d definitely be interested in hearing more:

Russia: Sukhoy Chief Skeptical Over Su-25 Upgrades by Foreign Companies

Akhtubinsk (Astrakhan Region), 21 September: The general director of the Sukhoi aviation holding company, Mikhail Pogosyan, has voiced scepticism over the possibility of Su-25 ground-attack aircraft being modernized by foreign companies.

“In actual fact, no effective modernization programme is possible without the involvement of the designers of the aviation equipment,” Pogosyan told journalists on Wednesday [21 September] in reply to a question about Georgia’s intention to modernize around 20 Su-25 ground-attack aircraft for Bulgaria with the involvement of an Israeli company.

According to Pogosyan, “only the primary manufacturer knows all the subtleties that can ensure the interlinkage of the complex of equipment that aircraft have”.

“We have a full-scale programme for the modernization of fighting machines which involves the modernization of the Su-25, among others,” Pogosyan continued. “The main set of tests on this machine was completed recently. We believe that in terms of combat effectiveness this modernization option will surpass all possible options offered by foreign firms.”

According to Pogosyan, “our modernization programme is the optimum one”. “But at the same time, we cannot legally ban any third country from working with an equipment supplier, but we do renounce all responsibility as the primary organization,” he added.

Original source: Agentstvo Voyennykh Novostey (21st September, 2005)

Steve Rush