If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 08:58:49 -0700, Steven DeMonnin wrote:
The real Asymmetry is in the quality of the pilots. I don't know the Israeli training tempo, but I read a piece by Victor Hanson that said it was comparable to the US training tempo, and that most dictatorial states have a training regimen that is about 5% of the time the US devotes to its pilots. In military training, marginal quantitative difference can lead to huge qualitative differences. Presumably, if Egypt and Saudi Arabia were prepared to pay large amounts of money for Typhoons, they would also be prepared to pay for pilot training. These days a lot can be donev with simulators; the UK has the JOUST simulator hookup which links 8 simulators together allowing multi-pilot simulated dogfights; presumably this is useful in developing tactics. The reality is, these airplanes are to be used on the local population when they get fractious. I doubt it. If Saudi Arabia just wanted to prevent rebellions, they could have bought something a lot cheaper than the F-15. -- A: top posting Q: what's the most annoying thing about Usenet? |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
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). ASRAAM already has the staring array. IIRC the ASRAAM has the longer range, and the Python goes for shorter range but greater maneuverability. Peter Kemp |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 18:14:03 GMT, Chad Irby wrote:
Steven DeMonnin wrote: The real Asymmetry is in the quality of the pilots. I don't know the Israeli training tempo, but I read a piece by Victor Hanson that said it was comparable to the US training tempo, and that most dictatorial states have a training regimen that is about 5% of the time the US devotes to its pilots. In military training, marginal quantitative difference can lead to huge qualitative differences. Not to mention ,of course, the ground troops maintaining the planes. Those brand new Eurofighters are going to be combat-effective for a month, maybe two, and if they go into a heavy training regimen, it'll be shorter than that. And since they'll be "new" planes, they're going to have the normal teething problems, without a good crew to do the updates and fixes that any plane suffers off of the assemby line. 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. Peter Kemp |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
(phil hunt) wrote: Presumably, if Egypt and Saudi Arabia were prepared to pay large amounts of money for Typhoons, they would also be prepared to pay for pilot training. Not from past history. The Saudis are notoriously bad at enforcing training their pilots. -- Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations. Slam on brakes accordingly. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
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." -- Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations. Slam on brakes accordingly. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
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. -- 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 |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
phil hunt wrote: On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 08:58:49 -0700, Steven DeMonnin wrote: The real Asymmetry is in the quality of the pilots. I don't know the Israeli training tempo, but I read a piece by Victor Hanson that said it was comparable to the US training tempo, and that most dictatorial states have a training regimen that is about 5% of the time the US devotes to its pilots. In military training, marginal quantitative difference can lead to huge qualitative differences. Presumably, if Egypt and Saudi Arabia were prepared to pay large amounts of money for Typhoons, they would also be prepared to pay for pilot training. These days a lot can be donev with simulators; the UK has the JOUST simulator hookup which links 8 simulators together allowing multi-pilot simulated dogfights; presumably this is useful in developing tactics. The reality is, these airplanes are to be used on the local population when they get fractious. I doubt it. If Saudi Arabia just wanted to prevent rebellions, they could have bought something a lot cheaper than the F-15. You would think that. They spend the up front money, they should pay for the training. It dosn't actually work that way. That article I referenced (If I could find it, I would post it.) made the point that dictitorial regeimes (not specificly middle eastern regeimes, this applies to all regiems of this type) have a different military with a different objective than the militaries of the democratic states. The military is mostly used to keep the most volitle part of the population (single unemployed males under 25) under close supervision. They aren't interested in a military that actually shoots at a forign enemy. The best trained and highest motived part of the army is usually the praetorian gard. (like the Republlican Guard of Iraq) An effective air force requires intense training and independent thinkers. In most dictitorial regeims, independent thinkers have their independent thinking apparatus blown out. The history of all Israel's wars shows that the Arab leaders fear their air forces more than they fear Israel's. This usually means that within the first day of a way the IAF is busy shooting up the opposing airforces on the ground, and the remainer of the war Israel has the skies to itself. This may also be the reason why regeims such as this devote so much of their budget to SAM missles. A missle dosn't give back chat, and it is the only way to stop the IAF after the air force gets blown up on the tarmac. -- Wherever there is a jackboot stepping on a human face, there will be a well-heeled Western liberal there to assure us that the face enjoys free health care and a high degree of literacy.\ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\ John Derbyshire http://www.aracnet.com/~reynard/blogbog.htm} |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
(phil hunt) wrote in message ...
On 13 Sep 2003 04:51:07 -0700, Quant wrote: (Jack White) wrote I'm not an air force expert but it is clear from your post that neither do you. Lets post your claims at rec.aviation.military and watch the replies. [I'm not an expert either, but I'll wade in nevertheless...] thanks for your post The Eurofighter Typhoon will give the Saudi Armed Forces the capability maintain air superiority over any country in the Middle East including Israel. Hang, on, who's saying thre Saudis are buying the Typhoon? If they are, I haven't heard of it. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/2274194.stm BAE Systems has denied a report that it is in talks with Saudi Arabia about the sale of Typhoon Eurofighter jets. The Observer newspaper said that the company was in talks with Saudi Arabia about the sale of 50 jets in a deal worth at least £1.5bn ($2.3bn). And the paper added that Saudi Arabia might make some of the payments for the jets through oil shipments, similar to the al-Yamamah oil-for-arms deal struck in the 1980s. The Eurofighter Typhoon has the Meteor Mach4+ Ramjet Powered air to air BVR missiles with OVER 100km range. It will have in the future; currently Meteor is still under development. So? The US AIM-54 is operative for many years now and has a range of at least 135 km. That's a theoretical range; what's a typical engagement range, and what's the furthest range it's been successfully fired at? Bear in mind that planes under attack aren't going to just sit there. They could run away, hoping to outrange the missile. Or the could manouvre. Or use electronic countermeasures. If the missile depends on a radar from the firing aircraft illuminating the target, the target aircraft can fire a missile of its own, to make the firing aircraft turn away and stop illuminating (obviously this won't work for fire-and-forget missiles). The target aircraft can also fire flares to confuse IR-homing missiles, or trailing pod to give a false radar image (the Typhoon does this; I'm not sure if any other fighters do). Some people have suggested that a defending aircraft could fire a laser beam to confuse/destroy the sensors in a missile. Elbit systems (Israel) already have such an operative system, but people in this NG suggested that appropriate modification to the missiles can neutralize this system. Therefore this system is more appropriate to defend from more primitive missiles that terrorists. http://www.elbit.co.il/news/arch/June2003a.html Why do you think that future American or Israeli made missiles won't have those capabilities? Why do you think that in the tiny Israeli airspace medium/long range missiles are more important than short range ones? Clearly, if there was a long-range missile that was immune to all those countermeasures, it would be very useful. Then again, the ability to turn lead into gold woulds be useful too. In the past, people removed guns from fighters, claiming they'll never be used because all engagements would be long range. This prediction turned out to be false, and the guns were put back in. (incidently, the RAF's Typhoons won't have a gun, but the other countries' variants will). Israel clearly has superiority in the short range. Also, successful tactics, good pilots and electronic measures and counter measures are very important. Good pilots are probably the single most important factor. While Israel will know the exact characteristics of the systems Saudi Arabia and Egypt will have Why? Buying parts of systems through friendly countries - Austria for example, and researching the system. Then developing appropriate algorithms/devices to deal with this system effectively. and would fit its planes with appropriate counter measures, the Saudis won't have a clue about Israel's unique technological modifications because Israel is doing a lot of those modifications itself. I don't see why SA and Egypt couldn't make modifications ot their aircraft too, even if they don't have a large electronics industry. Israel for example can develop a special decoy to deal with specific system it knows the Arabs have. Israel could develop measures to disrupt specific communications. On the late 70's Israel developed UAV's especially to solve the SAM's problem - and in 1982 they proved themselves. The Arabs doesn't have an electronic industry at all. Not even a small one. The Eurofighter Typhoon has the capability to destroy F-15Is and F-16Is before the F-15I or F-16I even knows that the Eurofighter Typhoon is there. This may or may not be the case. Typhoon is almost certainly a better plane than the F-15 or F-16; it's more manouvrable, has a better thrust-to-weight ratio, can supercruise, is partially stealthed, and has better avionics making the pilot's job easier. However, until it has seen combat, it's to early to say definitievely what its capabilities are. The info will probably come from early warning systems. Israel is relying upon its own early warning systems while Saudi Arabia and Egypt will have to rely upon inferior systems, unless the US will sell its best technology to these Arab countries Or unless the Europeans do. (and I doubt it will happen). and again, electronic measures and counter measures are important here and Israel's own industry gives it the technological superiority over its neighbors. I doubt if Israel's electronics industry is better than Europe's; Europe's is certainly a lot bigger. And size counts: how many models of anti-aircraft missile does Israel produce? Python 5 and Derby. The US is using Israel's ITALD. US and many European countries use Israel's litening syustem. Elbit will develop and produce the JSF HMD, etc. It's true that Israel's industry is smaller but many of its products are the best in the world. Europe produces more variety. So even if the best Israeli missile is better than a typical European one, it might not be better than the best European one. Europe doesn't develop measures especially to counter Israeli weapons. Israel is devloping measures especially to counter weapons that Arabs are buying. They can't buy everything. The F-22 Raptor is the only aircraft that performs better than the Eurofighter Typhoon in an air superiority capacity. From what I've read I don't think even the JSF is up to the Eurofighter Typhoon's level in the air superiority role. The JSF isn't designed to be a pure air superiority aircraft, it's, as its name suggests, designed to be multi-role. The JSF would certainly be a huge improvement for Israel over F-15Is and F-16Is though. An Israeli pilot plus a JSF would probably be better than a Saudi Pilot with a Eurofighter Typhoon, but with equal pilots, ONLY the F-22 Raptor is better than the Eurofighter Typhoon from what I've read. This may well be right; certainly the DERA study suggests it is. Summing this subject I think that none of us could answer the hypothetical question about air force superiority in the Middle East in case the Arabs will have Eurofighters. There are lots of hypotheticals. For example, if SA is buying Eurofighters they will also probably buy an anti-runway cruise missile in the Apache / SCALP / Storm Shadow family, which might enable them to shut down Israeli airbases. It is clear though that the Egyptian army, and maybe also the Saudi Army pose a real threat on Israel. This is not new. My understanding is the Saudi army is rather small. Dunno about the Egyptian army. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 13:19:35 -0600, Scott Ferrin wrote:
Let's not forget the recently announced Python 5. Is there any independent assessment of how good it is? I mean, the manufacturer's web site says it's good, but they would say that wouldn't they. Ditto for other missiles. -- A: top posting Q: what's the most annoying thing about Usenet? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |