Impact of Eurofighters in the Middle East

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
om...
(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*.

Who is "anyone", Chad?

I find it estranging that you put yourself into a position of representing
anybody but you here, and then, based on "educated guessing" about "what we
all know" about the Arab air forces, you conclude that the Saudis have a
poor air force "too"....

How much do you actually know about their air force, if you don't mind me
asking?

I mean: do you know the sellection process for their pilots? How many hours
Saudi, Syrian, Egyptian pilots get per month, or annually? What is their
training sylabdus looking like? Do you at least know where do they learn to
fly?

Tom Cooper
Co-Author:
Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988:
http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php
and,
Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat:
http://www.osprey-publishing.co.uk/t...hp/title=S6585

"Paul Austin" wrote in message
...

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.

It has been argued that the USAF has avoided longer ranged missiles because
of the fear that they could be used as a justification to cut funding for
F-22

wrote in message
news
the Pakis did not fly against the IAF at any time. the story stating it
was
nothing more then some chest puffing BS......

You have already informed the group that Iranian F-14s have been grounded
for years. Pakistani Air Force pilots did indeed fly combat missions against
Israel. The Pakistani Air Force recognised those pilots along with the
various Arab nations that they flew with. There is more than one Pakistani
combat pilot who was honoured with bravery medals, from Syria for example,
for participating in combat. Are all those Pakistani combat vetrans of those
Arab-Israeli wars simply lying in their recounts of participation? Take your
blinkers off! There is far too much research been done and interviews
conducted to verify Pakistani pilot participation.

TJ

Peter Kemp peter_n_kempathotmaildotcom wrote in message . ..
On 14 Sep 2003 14:58:02 -0700, (baffet) wrote:

[snip]

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 (and I doubt it will
happen).

Both Israel the Arab nations use US early warning systems, including
E-2s, and in the case of SA, E-3s (which the Israelis *don't* have.


What about IAI Phalcon 707, "The world's most advanced AEWC&C system"
according to Federation of American Scientists?

Well, the FAS is a nice resource, but has many flaws, and AFAIK the
Israelis have not built any Phalcons for their own use, and are merely
trying to flog them around the world.


As far as we know indeed. The Israelis tend to hide their military
equipment and technologies, from the simplest gun to spy satellites to
nuclear weapons. The arabs, on the other hand, show off the best shiny
equipment their oil can buy.

It's unlikely Israel will design and develop such an expensive system
and not use it.

Peter Kemp

wrote in message . ..
who cares,

Most do.


As I said read Janes, they have it all,

Translation: "I got caught in a falsehood, and knowing I can't support
it with real evidence, I'll try to bluff by dragging in Janes..."


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

That laughing you are hearing is from the gallery of folks who realize
that your statement regarding Iranian F-14's having been grounded for
years is utter bovine excrement.

Brooks

R.J. Goldman

http://www.usidfvets.com
"phil hunt" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 14:59:40 -0400,
wrote:
check with Janes.........

Can you bev more specific?

BTW, please don't top-post, it makes it hard to read and is
against Usenet conventionds.

--
A: top posting

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

"L'acrobat" wrote in message
...

"Paul Austin" wrote in message
...

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.

It has been argued that the USAF has avoided longer ranged missiles
because
of the fear that they could be used as a justification to cut funding for
F-22



Huh ?

How would that work ?

Keith

In article ,
"Tom Cooper" wrote:

I find it estranging that you put yourself into a position of representing
anybody but you here, and then, based on "educated guessing" about "what we
all know" about the Arab air forces, you conclude that the Saudis have a
poor air force "too"....

How much do you actually know about their air force, if you don't mind me
asking?

Read my other posts. Nobody outside of the Saudi press thinks the Saudi
air force is any good.

Since you're the expert, give us some of your sources for claiming that
they're any different from any *other* military in the Arab world.

--


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

On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 01:29:51 -0400, wrote:
who cares,

*plonk*

--
A: top posting

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

On 15 Sep 2003 05:31:50 -0700, Kevin Brooks wrote:
wrote in message . ..
who cares,

Most do.


As I said read Janes, they have it all,

Translation: "I got caught in a falsehood, and knowing I can't support
it with real evidence, I'll try to bluff by dragging in Janes..."

rgoldman is a bull****ter. Furthermore, out of either rudeness or
stupidity, he won't format his posts so others can easily read them.
Consequently, I won't be reading anythinmg more of his.

--
A: top posting

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

Tom Cooper wrote in message ...

wrote in message
.. .
who cares,

As I said read Janes, they have it all,

As a matter of fact, if at all, the Jane's has the least useful information
about the Iranian Air Force: their recently published book of "World Air
Forces" is very poor to this topic.

To keep the long story short: no, it wasn't the "Irangate" nor Oliver
North,
but many other factors which kept the Iranian F-14-fleet afloat, in working
order, and extremely useful and dangerous. Approx 60 airframes remain
serviceable: while a number is circled through storage, so to better
distribute the number of hours flown per airframe, and also always have an
attrition reserve in peace, the IACI (Iranian Aircraft Industries) and
other
Iranian companies, as well as the so-called "Self-Sufficiency Jihad Team"
of
the IRIAF - meanwhile developed the capability to produce no less but 95%
of
spare parts for their Tomcats. Consequently, the fleet not only massively
participated in the IPGW against Iraq (scoring at least 130 kills against
Iraqi MiG-21/23/25s, Mirage F.1EQs, Su-20/22s, and Tu-22s), but is still
very much active and operational.

Hm. How was it from Iraqi side? I've read Somewhere that Mig 21Bis and
MiGs-23ML(?) took heavy toll of Iranian AF (mainly F-5s and F-4s, but also
got some F-14 in a dogfight).


As a matter of fact, just last year the Iranians started production of a
reverse-engineered AIM-54, which even the USN considers equal to its latest
AIM-54Cs.

Hmm... how it was effective against 3m head-on RCS of MiG-21? During tests
of AIM-54A, one -missed- the drone because its 5m-RCS reflector failed...

Cheers,

Nele

NULLA ROSA SINE SPINA