Impact of Eurofighters in the Middle East

On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 20:23:55 GMT, Chad Irby wrote:

In article ,
Peter Kemp peter_n_kempathotmaildotcom wrote:

We're not talking some of the less able Arab nations, but Egypt, who
has no problems keeping it's F-16s at a fairly high availability, and
the Saudis, who also manage to keep their E-3s and F-15s in the air.

Not according to, well, everything I've ever read, heard and seen. The
current mission-capable rate on the Saudi F-15s is supposed to be less
than 50%, and that's just birds they can get into the air, not what the
US calls "combat capable."

Cite?

Iran's F14's have been grounded for years and have not flown at all due to
lack of spares etc.

--
"I have seen the worst that man can do.and I can still laugh loudly"
R.J. Goldman

http://www.usidfvets.com
"phil hunt" wrote in message
. ..
On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 16:38:25 +0100, Big Dave
wrote:
Aaaah but isn't the AIM 54 being retired as the only plane that can carry
it
is the F14 which is also nearing it max flying hours so will also be
retired?

Aparently, Iran (the only F-14 operator apart from the USA) is
building its own copy of the AIM 54.

--
A: top posting

Q: what's the most annoying thing about Usenet?

On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 10:43:50 -0400, wrote:
Iran's F14's have been grounded for years and have not flown at all due to
lack of spares etc.

Don you have a cite for that? And for the general servicability of
aircraft in the Iranian Air Force? The impression I had was that
Iran was having some success in making its own spare parts and/or
buying new components, e.g from China.

On a more general note, why was there a fashion for swing-wing
aircraft in the 60s and 70s -- F-14, F-111, Tornado, MiG-23, etc --
and why did they go out of fashion?

--
A: top posting

Q: what's the most annoying thing about Usenet?

(Quant) wrote:

Chad Irby wrote:

Look, for example, at every other Arab military unit in the Middle East.

btw, the Jordanian pilots are said to be well trained and tough opponents.

....by the Syrians and the Egyptians.

Not by anyone *good*.

--


Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 22:31:02 +0100, "Paul J. Adam"
wrote:

In message , Passerby
writes
I hope that every country surrounding Israel will purchase full complements
of
those EF2000. It will deplete their budgets and will render their airforces
useless
without Israelis haveing to shoot a single antiaircraft missile. According
to all reports
EF2000 is the most expensive heap of non-airworthy trash ever built.

No, it's cheaper and easier to maintain than the F/A-22. (Notice the
hasty redesignation? This aircraft can carry two 1000lb bombs, it's a
mighty attack platform! Never mind that the P-47 was doing the same in
1943... that's progress for you). If you _really_ want to cripple the
Arabs, sell them Raptors.

Whether either is 'trash' will be a matter for squadron service to
prove.

Well, it has the RCS of a steel barn door, with or without outboard
stores. And "cheaper" is generally not "better" when it comes to
weapon systems. The Raptor could eat the Eurobird for breakfast.

Al Minyard

In article ,
Peter Kemp peter_n_kempathotmaildotcom wrote:

On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 20:23:55 GMT, Chad Irby wrote:

In article ,
Peter Kemp peter_n_kempathotmaildotcom wrote:

We're not talking some of the less able Arab nations, but Egypt, who
has no problems keeping it's F-16s at a fairly high availability, and
the Saudis, who also manage to keep their E-3s and F-15s in the air.

Not according to, well, everything I've ever read, heard and seen. The
current mission-capable rate on the Saudi F-15s is supposed to be less
than 50%, and that's just birds they can get into the air, not what the
US calls "combat capable."

Cite?

Years of hanging around guys who have worked with the Saudis. A couple
of old friends went to work training their techs. The general view is
that they just plain don't have any good flightline techs, except for a
handful of expatriates.

Saudi Arabia is kinda like a guy who buys a top-line Mercedes, never
reads the owner's manual, doesn't change the oil, and lets their cousin
Bob do the tuneups...

--


Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

wrote in message
...
Iran's F14's have been grounded for years and have not flown at all due to
lack of spares etc.



Iran's F-14 are still operational and still generate a healthy sortie rate.
If they are grounded then try telling that to Coalition forces stationed in
the Gulf who have observed shadowing by Iranian F-14s even in 2003. In
addition to their operational F-14's the Iranians also generate a healthy
F-4 Phantom sortie rate. If you pick up past copies of Air Forces Monthly
you will see various photographs of F-14 exhibited in Iran and also
undergoing indepth maintenance. Sorry, but your claim that Iranian F-14 have
been grounded for years is simply untrue.

TJ

"phil hunt" wrote
Peter Kemp wrote
The Meteor is still a few years from deployment though, but when it
arrives, it should handily outrange AMRAAM which is the longest
spear
in the IAF armoury (Derby is alleged to have a much shorter range).

Incidently, why is Israel naming this missile after an English city?

Why do you think that future American or Israeli made
missiles won't have those capabilities?

Because there are no current projects publicly announced that have
the
capabilities of the Meteor. Could there be one in development?
Maybe,
but there's no evidence for it.

IIRC a successor to the Phoenix was planned, but was scrapped in
the 1990s.

Yep, the USAF isn't convinced there's a real mission for AAMs with
that range.

It's going to be interesting watching Meteor's schedule slip to the
right. Here's why. Meteor's main claim to fame is very loooong range,
courtesy of rocket-ramjet propulsion. What comes with is a
built-from-scratch active AAM seeker. As anyone who's paid attention
knows, the reason AMRAAM took so long to enter service was the
difficulty in engineering that seeker to fit into a 7 inch airframe.
AMRAAM's seeker, with the best RADAR seeker designers in the world
working on it, took many more years to develop than planned. Since
I've seen nothing about special emphasis in Meteor development being
placed on risk reduction in the seeker, I expect a series of schedule
slips due to vague reasons that will push IOC out about ten years.

"phil hunt" wrote
On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 15:44:56 -0400, Peter Kemp
peter_n_kempathotmaildotcom wrote:
On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 13:19:35 -0600, Scott Ferrin
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 11:56:58 -0400, Peter Kemp
peter_n_kempathotmaildotcom wrote:

Python 4 is indeed supposed to be very good. Now look up ASRAAM,
which
is a handy little performer itself.

Let's not forget the recently announced Python 5.

Indeed, although IIRC the 5 is basically a 4 with a staring array
(please correct me if my memory's going).

Yes. Python 5 is new guidance system, same everything else.

ASRAAM already has the
staring array.

Python 5 is said to have 100 degree off-boresight aquisition, and
lock on after launch which IIRC ASRAAM doesn't have.

I'm really unkeen about an AAM that locks on after launch. Both the
Python and ASRAAM airframes have much better kinematics than AIM-9X
with comparable (identical in the case of ASRAAM) seekers. The USAF
seems to see little utility in long range, which is odd.

In message , Alan Minyard
writes
On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 22:31:02 +0100, "Paul J. Adam"
wrote:
No, it's cheaper and easier to maintain than the F/A-22. (Notice the
hasty redesignation? This aircraft can carry two 1000lb bombs, it's a
mighty attack platform! Never mind that the P-47 was doing the same in
1943... that's progress for you). If you _really_ want to cripple the
Arabs, sell them Raptors.

Whether either is 'trash' will be a matter for squadron service to
prove.

Well, it has the RCS of a steel barn door, with or without outboard
stores.

Have you seen the plots, Al, or just LockMart propaganda? What aspect
and frequency are we discussing?

And "cheaper" is generally not "better" when it comes to
weapon systems. The Raptor could eat the Eurobird for breakfast.

Equivalent value, the Raptor is outnumbered: it's better but not _that_
much better.

On current trends the RAF will get more Typhoons than the USAF will
Raptors...

--
When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill

Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk