Algeria People's National Armed Forces

I think Alamo is trying to say that they stopped working on MiG-25s in Russia (and therefore working on upgrades and improvements) 25 years ago in Russia.

I am not sure Algeria wants Kinzhal missiles.

I meant that keeping a Mach3.0 plane operational is a huge challenge.
If your supplier removed those from operation 30 years ago, there is hardly any stock for it left.
Kiznhal is a specific weapon designed to deal with the most demanding targets, both on land and sea.
It is an imperial type of weapon, if you know what I mean.
Algeria remains two levels under that status.
Having it would be considered grotesque. There are no tasks to be executed.

Its ability to reach almost any target gives it the power many nuclear weapons don't possess... there are lots of things that are restricted for export for a lot of reasons... things like MANPADS and landmines and anti ship missiles.

The west are being arseholes, but handing out powerful weapons like lollies... especially when they are not being asked for, sounds a bit too brave when brave is not always called for.

ATM I would say even their cruise missiles and club family missiles would be of interest to many countries, along with their air defence systems and drones too of course... when this conflict ends they will likely continue making weapons for a while, both to restore stocks, but also meet international demand.

Depending on how this ends perhaps even Hungary and Turkey might want to get rid of their crap and buy some decent weapons... perhaps even a few joint ventures to make some new stuff even...

The Turkish had an attack helicopter that had a 20mm three barrel American gatling gun... I always thought it would be much better with the twin barrel 23mm cannon used on the current Hinds.... helicopter guns don't need massive velocity, in fact lower velocity means less recoil and potentially a higher rate of fire which delivers more rounds on target per burst. The 23x115mm Soviet gun fires about 55 shells a second which are quite heavy for its calibre, and the round it fires has a moderate muzzle velocity of about 700m/s and is rather a compact round you should be able to carry a lot of rounds for.

I would say a long term ally like Algeria wouldn't be a risk and they are a good customer for Russia.

I have every confidence in the country of Algeria, and they certainly are a good customer... rejecting MiG-29SMTs not withstanding... but who doesn't want Su-30s for the price of MiG-29SMTs?

What I am worried about is that this would make Algeria a real target for the west and it would create pressure and stress where there really does not need to be any.

Equally there are cases where the Israelis flew in to arab countries and captured SA-8 vehicles and flew them out for intel, and by paying a few locals the CIA might get hold of some new technology to make western weapons better... for no real gain.

Honestly I look forward to the day when Algeria can buy 200 Su-75 Checkmate fighters and totally dominate their airspace in a way that makes their European neighbours very jealous and probably angry that they can have a 5th gen light fighter that is affordable and capable at the same time... while Europe will still be flying 4th gen aircraft.

that's when the sales will come flooding in, and Russia should grab the opportunity not only will it help with production costs for it's own domestic purchases, but help fill the coffers for the Russian economy as well as the possibility of new customers.

Export orders are where the Russian MIC actually make money on their products because they can often earn 20-30% profit margins, which they are not allowed to do with domestic orders, and this really does provide money for tooling upgrades and R and D work to improve design and development procedures etc etc.

On another thread it was discussed that Iskander is probably rather more missile than they actually need and a smaller lighter simpler missile that does not manouver but still hits its target would be an interesting addition. They could use some Iskanders to take down the enemy air defence systems and then the cheaper basic models to hit targets once the defences were defeated.

Iskander is almost 4 tons with a flight range of 500km... a rocket that goes up and the engine burns out and then it falls down... a bit like throwing a rock... with control surfaces to allow it to steer into the target on the ground after the rocket motor has run out would either make it half the weight or even lighter, with the same range, or double or triple the flight range of the missile. Considering the air launched model and the ground launched model can evade air defences and still hit SAMs and their radar and control centres then the follow up missiles could be less capable and much cheaper and follow up that initial attack in enormous numbers.

A ground launched 4 ton cheap missile might reach 2,000km, so it could be used in the ground launched version with the air launched version that gets there first and takes out major SAM defences, while a 1 or two ton missile could be loaded four to a launcher and operate with a normal Iskander battery, where the normal Iskander missile does the SEAD prep of the enemy position and then the cheaper lighter smaller missiles clean up the targets on the cheap.

You could even have an air launched version of both cheap missiles that reach rather further and would be effective against unprotected or unaware targets...

As well as the monumental task of rebuilding Ukraine (hopefully with BRICS nations investment as well) China may well expand the one belt one initiative/silk road into Ukraine. We pretty much know that Europe will eventually go back to trading with Russia.

Well the irony is that there is a lot of trade and work in rebuilding a country, which western companies have made look bad because they **** it up and just use it to steal from the locals and their own governments with substandard materials and workmanship... it is just an extension of the corruption of the US MIC.

If you do it right not only do you transform these regions, but it encourages growth and development and pretty soon these regions will be generating tax revenue and the places come alive. Chechnia seems to be transformed... you can bet if there were areas there still broken and damaged the west would be there filming crying about how bad Putin is still punishing the Chechens etc etc. I mean all that group of nutters did was murder people going to a theatre and some primary school children and their families and Russia tries to make them out to be the bad guys.

Well enough good guys step up and take control and steer things in a much more positive direction and everyone on the ground benefits.

Weren't there jokes about how if the US could get Russia to bomb Chicago that the Russians would come in and fix everything up afterwards and the region would be transformed... it would be worth having a war to get the end of war makeover and repair.

But westerners have taken the US lead... when something breaks or is no longer useful you throw it away and get a new one... Iphones,.. old people... young people...

The point about the rejection of SMT was because Russia sold worn airframes not new which I think Algeria had every right to complain about but they did years later buy Mig-29M2

SMT is an upgrade, not a new aircraft build, and the aircraft they applied the upgrade were several years old but had not left the factory and had never flown... they were to be the next off the serial production line when the orders stopped, so essentially they are new as in unused.

It was just an excuse to get out of the contract so they could get Flankers instead.

Agreed of most it, apart from the point on CIA stealing tech etc, if that was the worry then wouldn't Russia have refused the sale of TOR-M2, Pantsir S1 SM and S-400, the latter is far better than the western AD systems.

The funniest thing is it is not about technology... the TOR and Pantsir are simple cheap command guided missiles... the radar and EO systems are sophisticated and expensive (relatively), but nothing the US doesn't have, and the missiles themselves are command guided... there is nothing in either system beyond Americas technology capacity.

The problem is that in the US air defence is the job of the air force and they prefer to use fighter aircraft and AWACS platforms to deal with enemy air power.

US Army air defence is mediocre because they expect their air force to take and maintain air control.

What the Ukraine conflict shows is that Soviet systems are dangerous even on their own, and devastating linked and working together... and newer systems coming on line just make things worse because SOSNA very small and reaches up high and does not need a radar, while 2S38, with its 57mm gun will be a serious threat to CAS and helicopters and low flying aircraft including drones.

Western air defence is massively underfunded and under represented on the battlefield... the Russians have a complete range of SAMs for its Army and a different set of SAMs for its Air Force/PVO and Naval forces... Igla-S and Verba for MANPADS, Kornet/SOSNA for drones, TOR, Tunguska, Buk, Viking, S-300V4... and S-500 for long range ballistic weapons which might be used against HQs and comms centres or major installations for the Army, while Igla-S and Verba and SA-13 being replaced by SOSNA, shelterised TOR and Pantsir and S-350, and S-400 and S-500 for the Air Force and air defence... and very much related missiles and gun systems for the Navy too.

Add to that all the electronics systems... sensors and radars and networking and management systems coordinating everything together for efficient and effective use... and they are only getting better with this new conflict.

In a Report from France a senior French military officer said that sending French troops to the conflict in the Ukraine would be like sending cheerleaders to a sports game. An admission that the Russian forces are formidable... that will of course be ignored in the west because it does not suit their agenda.