Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Egyptian Air Force (EAF)

    Share
    avatar
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2187
    Points : 3077
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: Egyptian Air Force (EAF)

    Post  Vladimir79 on Tue Nov 23, 2010 7:18 pm

    Egypt never got MiG-29s. From the December 2009 MILICAS World Air Forces directory.

    avatar
    ahmedfire

    Posts : 676
    Points : 846
    Join date : 2010-11-11
    Location : egypt

    Re: Egyptian Air Force (EAF)

    Post  ahmedfire on Tue Nov 23, 2010 7:37 pm

    Vladimir79 wrote:Egypt never got MiG-29s. From the December 2009 MILICAS World Air Forces directory.

    the pdf that i put is from : U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment , Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction..........
    when the deal is secret,,you will not find it in all websites,because these websites announce only the official deals (i mean when the tow countries announce the deal )...
    we made it in the tor M1 (it was ascret deal) and we know it after 2 years of delivering the system...
    i want to tell you something important,our enemy israel get help from all the world,so we are aspecial case ,we have many secret deals in our army...
    take also that
    http://dlib.eastview.com/browse/doc/7105684
    http://www.china-daily.org/Mil-News/Russia-and-China-because-the-supply-of-frozen-conflicts-of-interest-RD-33-aircraft-engine/
    http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,1784137,00.html
    Corporation "MiG" is looking to upgrade to 250 Russian MiG-29 in air in the Middle East. Fighter modernization Market operating in the countries of the Middle East region, estimated Russian aircraft Corporation MIG 200-250 cars. "One of the main operators of MiG-29 are countries of the Middle East-Algeria, Syria, Yemen, Egypt, Libya, Iran. By our estimates, the needs of those countries in modernizing the MiG-29 is measured at 200-250 vehicles, "said to Interfax on next Sunday in United Arab Emirates air show" Dubai Air Show 2005 Deputy Director RSK MIG on marketing, sales and after-sales servicing Vladimir Vyprâžkin
    avatar
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2187
    Points : 3077
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: Egyptian Air Force (EAF)

    Post  Vladimir79 on Tue Nov 23, 2010 8:07 pm

    The document you posted is from the early ninties. 15 years have past and there is no sign of MiG-29 in Egypt. It is not a secret, the deal never took place. From your own source...

    Russia, the world arms trade analysis center that Russia supplies to Egypt up to 40 MiG-29SMT fighter of the negotiations have been ongoing for several years

    http://www.china-daily.org/Mil-News/Russia-and-China-because-the-supply-of-frozen-conflicts-of-interest-RD-33-aircraft-engine/

    The competitor to this deal is JF-17. Egypt has yet to make a decision.
    avatar
    ahmedfire

    Posts : 676
    Points : 846
    Join date : 2010-11-11
    Location : egypt

    Re: Egyptian Air Force (EAF)

    Post  ahmedfire on Tue Nov 23, 2010 8:20 pm

    Vladimir79 wrote:The document you posted is from the early ninties. 15 years have past and there is no sign of MiG-29 in Egypt. It is not a secret, the deal never took place. From your own source...

    Russia, the world arms trade analysis center that Russia supplies to Egypt up to 40 MiG-29SMT fighter of the negotiations have been ongoing for several years

    http://www.china-daily.org/Mil-News/Russia-and-China-because-the-supply-of-frozen-conflicts-of-interest-RD-33-aircraft-engine/

    The competitor to this deal is JF-17. Egypt has yet to make a decision.
    we have signs of mig 29 in egypt,some times we see aircraft with 2 engines..!!
    it's picture on the website of egyptian air force.....
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16514
    Points : 17122
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Egyptian Air Force (EAF)

    Post  GarryB on Wed Nov 24, 2010 6:30 am

    Lol, high speed launch, yeah, so subtract 30% off from that 130 km and we get: just over 100 km!

    These missiles were in service since the 1980s, and the advances in electronics (making them smaller and lighter and much more reliable and effective) and rocket motors (much more powerful and longer burning) suggest a modern R-27E would still be a fairly potent family of AAMs.

    The R-77 has better terminal manoeuvre capability because its tail mounted grid fin control surfaces allow for very high angle of attack angles without the control surfaces stalling, but the latest model R-77s for internal use will have triangular fins for lower in flight drag.

    But as Vlad said, they aren't the bit maneuverable? How do you even expect to catch a F-35 if your end game kill box is tiny?

    A missile doesn't need to be super manoeuvrable when a missile comes in at 4 times the speed of sound it is moving faster than a bullet... it is not important whether the target is pulling 2gs or 12gs. What is important is where the missile is directed by its guidance system and as it approaches the target what last second manoeuvres it needs to perform to get close enough for its proximity fuse to work.
    A missile that flys directly at where the target is will need to manoeuvre hard as it approaches because the target is moving away from that point.
    A missile that anticipates the movement of the aircraft and flys to an anticipated interception point in front of the target will have to perform less terminal manoeuvres.

    In other words a highly manoeuvrable missile like the R-77 that can engage targets pulling 12g (note that is TARGETS) suggests manoeuvrability and a good guidance system. G force depends on speed so an object walking at 5km/h can't actually turn sharply enough to turn at 5gs. Travelling at mach 4 like a missile you can easily pull enormous gs in a turn and the faster you go the higher the gs of the SAME turn.

    What I am trying to say is that a new modern seeker and new electronics and new guidance algorithms and the R-27E should be able to engage 12g targets too. Personally I think the old models ability to hit targets pulling 8g was already pretty good anyway.

    BTW improvements in electronics and rocket motor etc etc should allow the 40kg warhead to be smaller which will also further improve performance.

    What one should do is purchase Aircrafts with uber IRSTs like the Su-35 to handle B-2s instead of using a surface force.

    Actually the correct solution is to buy both... and I thought this thread was about Egypt?
    The comment about JASSM made me think you were expanding it to anything.
    And you don't need S-400 for JASSM... JASSM is just another aircraft that can be shot down... Pantsir, TOR, Patriot would all do the job,

    Non-interference eh? And you say we are blind.

    Well you felt bound to step in in Kosovo where the Serbs were moving Albanians by train back to Albania, yet you were able to ignore hundreds of thousands of Rwandans getting hacked to death with machettes. It is a kind of blindness.

    Because Russians were the dominants in the Soviet system?

    Were they? The person in charge when most of the bad stuff happened wasn't Russian at all. He was from the republic of Georgia... I read a small pamphlet released by the UK government in late 1941 and in the entry for Joseph Stalin it said he was a b@stard... but he is our b@stard.
    The division of Europe and even the gift of the Kuril Islands to Uncle Joe was accepted by the west... what happened to their apology?

    And you just keep avoiding my questions, Kazakhstan, Ukraine, Belarus, etc, all fairly large countries, oppressed by the Soviet system led by Russians, yet you're asking for an apology? Yeah, right.

    The Soviet Union was a communist state made up of lots of elements. Russia did not rule the Soviet Union the Soviet Government ruled the Soviet Union. The Russian government controlled Russia just like the Georgian government led Georgia.
    Gorbachev was the leader of the Soviet Union when it collapsed and Yeltsin was the leader of Russia when the Soviet Union collapsed.

    Trying to suggest that Russia and the Soviet Union are the same thing is like suggesting that one country on the North American continent might have the balls to call itself America. Or a group of states in the northern continent of America might call itself the united states of america... assuming that other states on the continents of north, central, and south america wont do the same.

    Russia adopted the international responsibilities of the Soviet Union. That doesn't make Russia the Soviet Union... any more than England was Britain. BTW I dare you to tell a Scotsman he is English because he is British and English is British.

    Bio weapons are for those who can't fight an honorable war. And who'd be the better man then?[/quuote]

    Honour in war is for the victor to decide. Countries who care about honour in war are clearly fighting for amusement.

    Yet the OP of this thread has a computer and Egypt is still a bad boy to us?

    How generous of the US to allow Egyptians, New Zealanders and even Russians to use their computers....
    Twisted Evil

    Or do the same with a B-1B, it works.

    Yup... it could kill a B-1B at 200km too.

    Put R-37s on that C-5 and it'd kill the MiG-31 anyways.

    So your solution is bigger longer ranged missiles?

    Well seeing as the Mig-31 with R-37 missiles exists and C-5s or B-1Bs with R-37s don't...

    Vlad posted a video of a news story of a S-300 killing 10 targets in however much time, that can be confirmed, what you're saying, isn't.

    Except that exercise did not use up all the available missiles of the S-300 or the SAMs defending it. A bit like an F-22 AMRAAM missile test where it shoots down a target. Does that mean the F-22 ONLY has the capacity to handle one target?

    A S-300PMU1 battery can engage 36 targets at one time and can fire two missiles at each of those targets, which means up to 72 missiles in the air all the time.
    Any SAM co-located to protect it can also engage multiple targets too.

    Oh sure, if you were to put low-frequency long band radars to anything, you might see a reduced RCS JASSM, but by then it'd be about 50 km out and there'd be about 100 more behind each one. Good luck!

    A decent long range SAM battery like S-300 would deal with that... and the long flight range of the JASSM means that its long flight path might take it near other AD assets which can also start dealing with the mass attack. Aircraft can be launched to shoot down missiles in flight too.

    The Criminal whom I'm referring to was Russia, which you've obviously missed by cropping out my statement.

    What makes Russia a criminal? Doesn't the US sell weapons too... yet you are upset when I suggest the US is a criminal for doing the same thing Russia does.
    Ahhh, now I get it. If you have money you are not a criminal. It is the OJ Simpson defence. America has lots of money so it is good. (PS don't ask where that money came from).

    It's better than you whom only care for Russia and not for the sake of the world.

    The US cares for the world like a baked bean cares for the world. The US cares for itself and that is all.
    Russia is learning the same lesson... and if everyone else did people would have less reason to be angry.

    Jeez, I didn't realize you thought Egypt was stagnant and didn't improve or worsen relations with other countries because they could buy F-15s if they did 7 little favors.

    Egypt turned its back on the Soviet Union and got into bed with the US and the Juice. It can't expect T-50s from Russia with love just because it might have the money.

    Or maybe the Andromeda strain? Yeah, I lost my tin foil hat for a bit.

    Andromeda Strain was a movie... and fiction.
    You can consider weaponised Ebola fiction if you want.
    Marburg fever probably hasn't been weaponised either... Laughing

    Quit joking around, you obviously never had 5 tonnes on you before.

    Merkava 4 weighs about 65 tons and was not know as the flying tank. Making it a 70 ton tank would not effect its already modest mobility enough to make it noticeable... it would still be a slow heavily protected tank.

    IMO, should of just bought radios. Oh wai- we do. So again, learn the word, "Redundancy".

    And how many airliners have military band radios?

    Didn't help the Iranian airbus shot down in the 1980s...
    The AEGIS cruiser was identifying the target using the wrong IFF code so they ignored the message.

    But we've already apologized to the Natives, and what I've been saying all along is that Russia hasn't apologized to the CIS, as far as I know that is.What you've done is instead of answering my questions you just skipped over them to attack me and make me answer instead of for yourself.

    First of all the attitude of the former Soviet Republics demanding the apology... WTF would Russia want to apologise even if there was a reason for it to do so. The crap that happened in Estonia during the cold war also happened in Russia too.
    Second why should I answer for Russia... I've never even been there.

    Understand this, if America were to dissapear tomorrow, Russia will replace us.

    I doubt that very much. Russia doesn't crave controlling the world... just look at its spending. It only flirted with aircraft carriers, whereas a country bend on world domination would need lots of them. The carriers it is planning are not Nimitz class carries with strike aircraft as well as fighters. They want fighters to protect their ships. Their plans for carriers are to protect their ships from air attack. Your carriers are to invade countries or bomb them.

    Someone is always going to be the Superpower, whether you like it or not.

    I don't care. I wouldn't care if the US disappeared and I don't care that they haven't. I just try to ignore them when I can.

    The problem is when talking to Americans about Russian weapons and equipment it always comes down to whose stuff is better and why America is so wonderful. If I loved American stuff I would not bother coming to this website.

    [quot]That someone will always shove whatever Morals it has down your throat, whether you like it or not. Why is this?

    Because people are A$$holes. And people with power are the biggest a$$holes.
    I am trying to say... I am interested in Russian weapons and equipment. I am not interested in American equipment or weapons.

    America is also here to provide a reference point for morals, what is considered consensus and what is considered non sense.

    America is living proof you can have morals but if you don't actually apply those morals to your own actions, but call everyone else on when they violate YOUR morals you talk to them like they were your children... or something you just stepped in.
    Can you see why someone who is not protected from your wrath by being an American citizen might largely ignore you?

    It is like a guy who is clearly a bodybuilder sitting at a bar telling all the out of shape people around him they should eat better and get more exercise. Of course he "eats" protein milkshakes and takes steroids and will die in his 50s because of the damage he is doing to his heart and kidneys...

    So bottom line, before you call us for what you think we are (a collection of rich, belligerent, interventionist racists who only look out for ourselves) then I can only ask you to look deeper into our people and our character.

    You missed out selfish and arrogant.

    Perhaps if you bothered to look deeper into the 5.5 billion other people living on this rock you might not intervene so much, but I doubt you will take the time.

    For me, what difference would my understanding of the average American Joe make? Your government will always act in its own interests... sometimes I will benefit and other times I wont.
    Understanding that the average American Schmuck is just the same as the average Russian Schmuck or New Zealand Schmuck is a lesson America needs to learn not me. The Iraqis they have killed are probably a lot more like them than they think. I know a couple of Iranians who are the friendliest and gentlest people you could meet anywhere. Don't talk about their wonderful time under the Shah the CIA installed in Iran though. They really don't like Americans for that... and they would like an apology for your undemocratic actions there too.

    The problem with that is that the alternative is to listen to more media because your sources are mostly people educated by media anyways so if you want another Orwellian, you'd have to spend your life contemplating society in a forest.

    Actually the solution is the Internet. Go and look at Russia Today. Go look at Aljizera (Spelling). They will give you different points of view of the stories your own news agencies cover. And no, before you say it... they are not liars and it is not propaganda... If what you see on your media is news then what they see is news too. The difference is that each "news" medium has a different view. CNN will show an American perspective. The BBC will tend to show a British perspective. Russia Today shows a Russian perspective etc. None of them are lying, but they are covering things from their perspective which means you are not getting a complete picture... of course the real question is do you want the real picture. If the "BP oil spill" had happened off the coast of Africa it might have been mentioned once or twice and then buried by more important stories.
    BP have been involved in lots of oil spills yet you know which incident I am talking about because of the media coverage alone.

    Which of course could be a good thing or a bad thing for Afghanistan.

    99% of Afghans will not see a cent from it. It will be the same result as any other case of big business dealing with the natives... the natives end up screwed.

    The problem with that is that we weren't the ones in Hinds strafing.

    Those Hinds weren't strafing at random. If they didn't fight back there wouldn't have been a problem.

    Because what you're asking us is like asking Pakistan to rebuild Afghanistan after we leave because they funded most of their shenanigans.

    Pakistan didn't spend a cent of their own money in Afghanistan. The US and the Saudis needed Pakistan to get the money and weapons to the Afghans so it all went through Pakistan... well some of it probably did.

    So you'd much rather dump away a chance to look at the other side of the fence just because you don't want a hand up your ass?

    I am not a "the grass is greener on the other side of the fence" type guy. If the guy over the fence smiles and waves I will smile and wave back, but I am not going to take a hand up the arse to find out that he thinks about the same things I do.

    Because my views change, they aren't going to be stagnant, and although I do admit my arguments do come off as hard headed, you yourself is hard headed so there's no point in being soft headed in this argument because the only way I'll punch a hole through the wall you've built is to be harder than the wall itself.

    There is the problem right there.

    You think this is an argument.

    I think this is a discussion.

    Which of course, as we know, ended in nothing. America intervened, Soviets intervened, and the resulting clash; nothing.

    The British were in there about 5 times previously with the same result.
    Currently Afghanistan is a few cities and warlords. Unless you engage the warlords into national politics and teach them that they can progress more and get wealthier with peace and democracy than with bullets and guns then it will remain a feudal society that has continuous conflict and no future.

    All the while leaving the money in the hands of Russian fat cats while boys on the front line had to do with mediocre equipment? There's a reason why I supported the F-22, even though it might as well bankrupt us.

    They have a democracy now. It is not just a few powerful communist politicians controlling everything and having all the land and the power. They have democratically elected officials... and former communist party people who got very wealthy overnight and with that wealth they can buy politicians and control everything and have all the land and all the money....

    The Plane itself might be similar, but electronics are the Brains of the plane and Su-30MKIs are better in that aspect.

    Not really. The Su-30MKI design was finalised before the Su-27SM was so they probably use very similar electronics. They just have different things attached to them.
    In a strike role with an Su-30MKI with a targetting pod like Damocles will have similar performance to the Su-27SM with the same pod. The difference of course is that if the Russians wanted a target hit with a strike aircraft they wouldn't send Su-27SMs, they would send Su-24 or Su-34 aircraft. In that sense the Su-30MKI has to be better because it is both a fighter/interceptor and a strike aircraft. The Su-27SM is a fighter interceptor only though it has extensive air to ground capability.

    Because we don't call our block 60 F-16s F-16DM (deep modernization) just to make people want to the new version, we just scrap the old version and sell only the new one.

    The letters the Russian design bureaus use mean something.
    A block number means what?
    The Mig-21SMT was an upgraded Mig-21M with added fuel capacity (ie hump back) for a T to be added. The Mig-29SMT is an upgrade using components of the Mig-29M and it also adds fuel with a hump back...

    In what way is a block 50 F-16 and a block 50 F-15 similar... apart from the block numbers?

    Of course, which leads to Team killing.

    Clearly a problem for India I guess.

    Or one site has radars up giving 6 sites their radar image so we just attack those 6 sites.

    If you can detect those 6 sites RECEIVING information from a data link then there is no way the F-22 or F-35 or B-2 are stealthy. They receive all sorts of data including data from Navstar to tell them where they are.

    That's a bad analogy, it's like we're 2 boxers and I just knocked you out, so your Coach gives you a gun to shoot me, which is so unfair.

    You just wiped out Russias airforce in an unprovoked attack and you call their retaliation by detonating tactical nuclear devices on the airfields you sent your attack force from unfair?

    You need to reread the rules of war... ie there are none.

    Ahahaha, my point has been proven exactly. Honor is something lost on you.

    Well some might say stealth fighters and stealth bombers are unfair too. The US clearly has no honour either.

    But we're talking Su-35 v.s. MiG-29...the enemy is THAT way Garry!

    They wont be buying a base model Mig-29, it will be at least Mig-29SMT so both Su-35 and Mig-29 have excellent air to ground capability. Every bit as good as any block F-16.


    we have signs of mig 29 in egypt,some times we see aircraft with 2 engines..!!
    it's picture on the website of egyptian air force.....

    If you look at this page:
    http://www.egyptdailynews.com/egyptian%20airforce.htm
    Those two engine fighters could be F-4s, or F-15s belonging to other air forces.
    I find it hard to believe the Egypt Daily News website with Egyptian air force photos would miss out Mig-29s if they were in service.
    avatar
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2187
    Points : 3077
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: Egyptian Air Force (EAF)

    Post  Vladimir79 on Wed Nov 24, 2010 9:41 am

    ahmedfire wrote:
    we have signs of mig 29 in egypt,some times we see aircraft with 2 engines..!!
    it's picture on the website of egyptian air force.....

    You are more than welcome to show me a picture of Egyptian MiG-29. You will have a hard time finding it!!
    avatar
    IronsightSniper

    Posts : 450
    Points : 458
    Join date : 2010-09-25
    Location : California, USA

    Re: Egyptian Air Force (EAF)

    Post  IronsightSniper on Wed Nov 24, 2010 11:39 am

    Lol, high speed launch, yeah, so subtract 30% off from that 130 km and we get: just over 100 km!

    These missiles were in service since the 1980s, and the advances in electronics (making them smaller and lighter and much more reliable and effective) and rocket motors (much more powerful and longer burning) suggest a modern R-27E would still be a fairly potent family of AAMs.

    The R-77 has better terminal manoeuvre capability because its tail mounted grid fin control surfaces allow for very high angle of attack angles without the control surfaces stalling, but the latest model R-77s for internal use will have triangular fins for lower in flight drag.

    The problem with that is Grid Fins don't increase drag; only if what it's on is going slow.

    But as Vlad said, they aren't the bit maneuverable? How do you even expect to catch a F-35 if your end game kill box is tiny?

    A missile doesn't need to be super manoeuvrable when a missile comes in at 4 times the speed of sound it is moving faster than a bullet... it is not important whether the target is pulling 2gs or 12gs. What is important is where the missile is directed by its guidance system and as it approaches the target what last second manoeuvres it needs to perform to get close enough for its proximity fuse to work.
    A missile that flys directly at where the target is will need to manoeuvre hard as it approaches because the target is moving away from that point.
    A missile that anticipates the movement of the aircraft and flys to an anticipated interception point in front of the target will have to perform less terminal manoeuvres.

    In other words a highly manoeuvrable missile like the R-77 that can engage targets pulling 12g (note that is TARGETS) suggests manoeuvrability and a good guidance system. G force depends on speed so an object walking at 5km/h can't actually turn sharply enough to turn at 5gs. Travelling at mach 4 like a missile you can easily pull enormous gs in a turn and the faster you go the higher the gs of the SAME turn.

    What I am trying to say is that a new modern seeker and new electronics and new guidance algorithms and the R-27E should be able to engage 12g targets too. Personally I think the old models ability to hit targets pulling 8g was already pretty good anyway.

    BTW improvements in electronics and rocket motor etc etc should allow the 40kg warhead to be smaller which will also further improve performance.

    But, as we all know, it goes Mach 2.5. It all depends on where it's shot and as I've said before, if we tested our AMRAAMs in space, we could tell our export partners that it has a maximum speed of Mach 100.

    What one should do is purchase Aircrafts with uber IRSTs like the Su-35 to handle B-2s instead of using a surface force.

    Actually the correct solution is to buy both... and I thought this thread was about Egypt?
    The comment about JASSM made me think you were expanding it to anything.
    And you don't need S-400 for JASSM... JASSM is just another aircraft that can be shot down... Pantsir, TOR, Patriot would all do the job,

    Well, for cost reasons, it's smarter to buy only one right?!

    And no, Israelis could get JASSMs if they'd just ask. Pantsir, Tor, Patriot, wouldn't cut it.

    Non-interference eh? And you say we are blind.

    Well you felt bound to step in in Kosovo where the Serbs were moving Albanians by train back to Albania, yet you were able to ignore hundreds of thousands of Rwandans getting hacked to death with machettes. It is a kind of blindness.

    I didn't see the Soviet Union helping us out. If you're honestly expecting the US to do all your dirty work then go pay us some actual money because we may be the Super power and our arms may be 4 foot long but we can't police everywhere and just like the cops in your neighborhood, some things won't get checked due to budget cuts.

    Because Russians were the dominants in the Soviet system?

    Were they? The person in charge when most of the bad stuff happened wasn't Russian at all. He was from the republic of Georgia... I read a small pamphlet released by the UK government in late 1941 and in the entry for Joseph Stalin it said he was a b@stard... but he is our b@stard.
    The division of Europe and even the gift of the Kuril Islands to Uncle Joe was accepted by the west... what happened to their apology?

    But, Stalin was just one man out of a bunch of Dear leaders they had!

    And you just keep avoiding my questions, Kazakhstan, Ukraine, Belarus, etc, all fairly large countries, oppressed by the Soviet system led by Russians, yet you're asking for an apology? Yeah, right.

    The Soviet Union was a communist state made up of lots of elements. Russia did not rule the Soviet Union the Soviet Government ruled the Soviet Union. The Russian government controlled Russia just like the Georgian government led Georgia.
    Gorbachev was the leader of the Soviet Union when it collapsed and Yeltsin was the leader of Russia when the Soviet Union collapsed.

    Trying to suggest that Russia and the Soviet Union are the same thing is like suggesting that one country on the North American continent might have the balls to call itself America. Or a group of states in the northern continent of America might call itself the united states of america... assuming that other states on the continents of north, central, and south america wont do the same.

    Russia adopted the international responsibilities of the Soviet Union. That doesn't make Russia the Soviet Union... any more than England was Britain. BTW I dare you to tell a Scotsman he is English because he is British and English is British.

    The problem with your analogy is that the Soviet Government was basically Russian, it consisted basically of people from Russian descent. In effect, the Soviet Union, was Russian.

    Bio weapons are for those who can't fight an honorable war. And who'd be the better man then?

    Honour in war is for the victor to decide. Countries who care about honour in war are clearly fighting for amusement.

    Ha, maybe in the Dictatorship you live in. Talk to one historian and then to the other, you will find honor from both sides.

    Yet the OP of this thread has a computer and Egypt is still a bad boy to us?

    How generous of the US to allow Egyptians, New Zealanders and even Russians to use their computers....
    Twisted Evil

    Exactly. Thank you for conceding this point.

    Or do the same with a B-1B, it works.

    Yup... it could kill a B-1B at 200km too.

    Never heard of JASSM? Very Happy

    Put R-37s on that C-5 and it'd kill the MiG-31 anyways.

    So your solution is bigger longer ranged missiles?

    Well seeing as the Mig-31 with R-37 missiles exists and C-5s or B-1Bs with R-37s don't...

    Well since you live in fantasy land I thought I might as well play along.

    Vlad posted a video of a news story of a S-300 killing 10 targets in however much time, that can be confirmed, what you're saying, isn't.

    Except that exercise did not use up all the available missiles of the S-300 or the SAMs defending it. A bit like an F-22 AMRAAM missile test where it shoots down a target. Does that mean the F-22 ONLY has the capacity to handle one target?

    A S-300PMU1 battery can engage 36 targets at one time and can fire two missiles at each of those targets, which means up to 72 missiles in the air all the time.
    Any SAM co-located to protect it can also engage multiple targets too.

    Tohoho, so a S-300 with 4 missiles loaded can take out 10 targets in how much time? Da, we're talking realistic combat situations here comrade!

    Oh sure, if you were to put low-frequency long band radars to anything, you might see a reduced RCS JASSM, but by then it'd be about 50 km out and there'd be about 100 more behind each one. Good luck!

    A decent long range SAM battery like S-300 would deal with that... and the long flight range of the JASSM means that its long flight path might take it near other AD assets which can also start dealing with the mass attack. Aircraft can be launched to shoot down missiles in flight too.

    But Egypt doesn't have S-300s, they have Patriots, which are inferior. So, I'd also suggest that Egypt get S-300's although they wouldn't fair too well against a swarm attack, it's better then Tors.

    The Criminal whom I'm referring to was Russia, which you've obviously missed by cropping out my statement.

    What makes Russia a criminal? Doesn't the US sell weapons too... yet you are upset when I suggest the US is a criminal for doing the same thing Russia does.
    Ahhh, now I get it. If you have money you are not a criminal. It is the OJ Simpson defence. America has lots of money so it is good. (PS don't ask where that money came from).

    Da, we're talking 2 criminals in the same prison here if you didn't notice. The only country without blood on their hands is Antarctica, even though they really aren't a country.

    It's better than you whom only care for Russia and not for the sake of the world.

    The US cares for the world like a baked bean cares for the world. The US cares for itself and that is all.
    Russia is learning the same lesson... and if everyone else did people would have less reason to be angry.

    Says the New Zealander who basks in the Western life, free from worry, free from the world. The difference between Russian and the US was that we did something, be it better or bad, we at least tried. Russia, they just sat down and sold WMDs.

    Jeez, I didn't realize you thought Egypt was stagnant and didn't improve or worsen relations with other countries because they could buy F-15s if they did 7 little favors.

    Egypt turned its back on the Soviet Union and got into bed with the US and the Juice. It can't expect T-50s from Russia with love just because it might have the money.

    It's not like Egypt has to worry about anybody with T-50s because the only people who could afford such crap would be Oil Conglomerates in Iran.

    Or maybe the Andromeda strain? Yeah, I lost my tin foil hat for a bit.

    Andromeda Strain was a movie... and fiction.
    You can consider weaponised Ebola fiction if you want.
    Marburg fever probably hasn't been weaponised either... Laughing

    Fiction just like your mind.

    DID I JUST BLEW YOU AWAY?! Arrow

    Quit joking around, you obviously never had 5 tonnes on you before.

    Merkava 4 weighs about 65 tons and was not know as the flying tank. Making it a 70 ton tank would not effect its already modest mobility enough to make it noticeable... it would still be a slow heavily protected tank.

    Flying tank? LOL! Meet land mine.

    IMO, should of just bought radios. Oh wai- we do. So again, learn the word, "Redundancy".

    And how many airliners have military band radios?

    Didn't help the Iranian airbus shot down in the 1980s...
    The AEGIS cruiser was identifying the target using the wrong IFF code so they ignored the message.

    What I am trying to say is that new modern electronics should be able to engage identify friendly/foe targets too.

    But we've already apologized to the Natives, and what I've been saying all along is that Russia hasn't apologized to the CIS, as far as I know that is.What you've done is instead of answering my questions you just skipped over them to attack me and make me answer instead of for yourself.

    First of all the attitude of the former Soviet Republics demanding the apology... WTF would Russia want to apologise even if there was a reason for it to do so. The crap that happened in Estonia during the cold war also happened in Russia too.
    Second why should I answer for Russia... I've never even been there.

    "We aren't going to say sorry because they didn't ask, don't ask don't tell."

    Understand this, if America were to dissapear tomorrow, Russia will replace us.

    I doubt that very much. Russia doesn't crave controlling the world... just look at its spending. It only flirted with aircraft carriers, whereas a country bend on world domination would need lots of them. The carriers it is planning are not Nimitz class carries with strike aircraft as well as fighters. They want fighters to protect their ships. Their plans for carriers are to protect their ships from air attack. Your carriers are to invade countries or bomb them.

    Russia, meet Soviet Union.

    Someone is always going to be the Superpower, whether you like it or not.

    I don't care. I wouldn't care if the US disappeared and I don't care that they haven't. I just try to ignore them when I can.

    The problem is when talking to Americans about Russian weapons and equipment it always comes down to whose stuff is better and why America is so wonderful. If I loved American stuff I would not bother coming to this website.

    But you didn't care about America. The problem when comparing American and Russian equipment is whenever I reject your side of the argument you automatically pull the Ultra-Nationalist USA #1 card which wouldn't be much of an argument because like this entire argument, all you've been doing is going at my throat just because I'm American and I've contradicted your claims. No where has I even said anything about USA #1 yet you keep pretending I did or am going to, and whenever I am being unbiased, you claim a bias just because I tip my had to one side and not the other.

    [quot]That someone will always shove whatever Morals it has down your throat, whether you like it or not. Why is this?[/quote]

    Because people are A$$holes. And people with power are the biggest a$$holes.
    I am trying to say... I am interested in Russian weapons and equipment. I am not interested in American equipment or weapons.

    So you're going to compare Russian equipment to Chinese copies? European copies of American equipment? Lets admit it right here, America, Russia, the 2 greatest Weapon producers to have ever graced this earth, yet you deny any chance for comparison. I'd ask why, but you'd rant.

    America is also here to provide a reference point for morals, what is considered consensus and what is considered non sense.

    America is living proof you can have morals but if you don't actually apply those morals to your own actions, but call everyone else on when they violate YOUR morals you talk to them like they were your children... or something you just stepped in.
    Can you see why someone who is not protected from your wrath by being an American citizen might largely ignore you?

    It is like a guy who is clearly a bodybuilder sitting at a bar telling all the out of shape people around him they should eat better and get more exercise. Of course he "eats" protein milkshakes and takes steroids and will die in his 50s because of the damage he is doing to his heart and kidneys...

    It's seriously called a Superpower. On most scales available other than the Personal Opinion scale, America definitely has one of the better standards of living there is. Although I don't agree that's what we do (go around telling people how to be like us), I don't mind us putting the information out there for all to see.

    So bottom line, before you call us for what you think we are (a collection of rich, belligerent, interventionist racists who only look out for ourselves) then I can only ask you to look deeper into our people and our character.

    You missed out selfish and arrogant.

    Perhaps if you bothered to look deeper into the 5.5 billion other people living on this rock you might not intervene so much, but I doubt you will take the time.

    For me, what difference would my understanding of the average American Joe make? Your government will always act in its own interests... sometimes I will benefit and other times I wont.
    Understanding that the average American Schmuck is just the same as the average Russian Schmuck or New Zealand Schmuck is a lesson America needs to learn not me. The Iraqis they have killed are probably a lot more like them than they think. I know a couple of Iranians who are the friendliest and gentlest people you could meet anywhere. Don't talk about their wonderful time under the Shah the CIA installed in Iran though. They really don't like Americans for that... and they would like an apology for your undemocratic actions there too.

    "who only look out for themselves"

    See? Good. The problem I see with the average shmuck of any nationality is that they all tend to generalize the average shmuck of other nationalities. Because for some reason, there's a stereotype that the average American calls the average Iraqi sand n----, raghead, etc, and look down on them, but if you honestly do not see that there are more Americans that see Iraqis as beautiful people with a rich heritage and a powerful culture, than it would be you who are blind but not we. Because as I've said, so many times before, stereotyping is bad, and I myself have yet to do it here, while for some reason, just because our Government did some bad a time ago, we are automatically as selfish and evil as our Government. I myself am not that, I am lower-middle class, I do have a high-end computer but that's all I do have, I don't do much recreational activities because of the cost, I don't own much possessions because of the cost, I don't eat fancy food because of the cost, and all I'd like to do is to think. Yet, for some reason, to those, 5.5 billion people on this rock, I'm just another stereotype. If we seriously do think this way, then I might do what you say and give everyone a 5 kt nuke, but I don't think this way and I think we're better than that.

    The problem with that is that the alternative is to listen to more media because your sources are mostly people educated by media anyways so if you want another Orwellian, you'd have to spend your life contemplating society in a forest.

    Actually the solution is the Internet. Go and look at Russia Today. Go look at Aljizera (Spelling). They will give you different points of view of the stories your own news agencies cover. And no, before you say it... they are not liars and it is not propaganda... If what you see on your media is news then what they see is news too. The difference is that each "news" medium has a different view. CNN will show an American perspective. The BBC will tend to show a British perspective. Russia Today shows a Russian perspective etc. None of them are lying, but they are covering things from their perspective which means you are not getting a complete picture... of course the real question is do you want the real picture. If the "BP oil spill" had happened off the coast of Africa it might have been mentioned once or twice and then buried by more important stories.
    BP have been involved in lots of oil spills yet you know which incident I am talking about because of the media coverage alone.

    The problem with that, is I do exactly that, and just because I took a peek at the other side of the fence, doesn't mean I haven't been lied to. Russia today, Aljezeera English, BBC, CNN, all liars to me. The internet is a fine place to get view points, but different view points don't dictate the truth.

    Which of course could be a good thing or a bad thing for Afghanistan.

    99% of Afghans will not see a cent from it. It will be the same result as any other case of big business dealing with the natives... the natives end up screwed.

    History may agree, history may not. Capitalism hasn't always robbed from the people and given to the rich.

    The problem with that is that we weren't the ones in Hinds strafing.

    Those Hinds weren't strafing at random. If they didn't fight back there wouldn't have been a problem.

    Fighting back at 1 million Taliban? Who all coincidentally lived in villages populated by Civvies?

    Because what you're asking us is like asking Pakistan to rebuild Afghanistan after we leave because they funded most of their shenanigans.

    Pakistan didn't spend a cent of their own money in Afghanistan. The US and the Saudis needed Pakistan to get the money and weapons to the Afghans so it all went through Pakistan... well some of it probably did.

    Basically, we gave the Pakis money, told them what to do, and they didn't follow it out.

    So you'd much rather dump away a chance to look at the other side of the fence just because you don't want a hand up your ass?

    I am not a "the grass is greener on the other side of the fence" type guy. If the guy over the fence smiles and waves I will smile and wave back, but I am not going to take a hand up the arse to find out that he thinks about the same things I do.

    War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength?

    Because my views change, they aren't going to be stagnant, and although I do admit my arguments do come off as hard headed, you yourself is hard headed so there's no point in being soft headed in this argument because the only way I'll punch a hole through the wall you've built is to be harder than the wall itself.

    There is the problem right there.

    You think this is an argument.

    I think this is a discussion.

    Semantics, I'm getting through one way or another.

    Which of course, as we know, ended in nothing. America intervened, Soviets intervened, and the resulting clash; nothing.

    The British were in there about 5 times previously with the same result.
    Currently Afghanistan is a few cities and warlords. Unless you engage the warlords into national politics and teach them that they can progress more and get wealthier with peace and democracy than with bullets and guns then it will remain a feudal society that has continuous conflict and no future.

    Or teach their young boys and girls the right things and have them sort it out like in a real Darwinian society.

    All the while leaving the money in the hands of Russian fat cats while boys on the front line had to do with mediocre equipment? There's a reason why I supported the F-22, even though it might as well bankrupt us.

    They have a democracy now. It is not just a few powerful communist politicians controlling everything and having all the land and the power. They have democratically elected officials... and former communist party people who got very wealthy overnight and with that wealth they can buy politicians and control everything and have all the land and all the money....

    LOL! Russia isn't doing that well as a democracy then, hell they aren't even considered democratic by the freedom index.

    The Plane itself might be similar, but electronics are the Brains of the plane and Su-30MKIs are better in that aspect.

    Not really. The Su-30MKI design was finalised before the Su-27SM was so they probably use very similar electronics. They just have different things attached to them.
    In a strike role with an Su-30MKI with a targetting pod like Damocles will have similar performance to the Su-27SM with the same pod. The difference of course is that if the Russians wanted a target hit with a strike aircraft they wouldn't send Su-27SMs, they would send Su-24 or Su-34 aircraft. In that sense the Su-30MKI has to be better because it is both a fighter/interceptor and a strike aircraft. The Su-27SM is a fighter interceptor only though it has extensive air to ground capability.

    "Probably". Of course, as we know, due to budget cuts, the Su-27SM had to settle for mediocre equipment.

    Because we don't call our block 60 F-16s F-16DM (deep modernization) just to make people want to the new version, we just scrap the old version and sell only the new one.

    The letters the Russian design bureaus use mean something.
    A block number means what?
    The Mig-21SMT was an upgraded Mig-21M with added fuel capacity (ie hump back) for a T to be added. The Mig-29SMT is an upgrade using components of the Mig-29M and it also adds fuel with a hump back...

    In what way is a block 50 F-16 and a block 50 F-15 similar... apart from the block numbers?

    That's like asking what's different from the Su-27 and the MiG-29.

    F-16s were multirole fighters and they were usually doing striking runs.

    F-15s were predominantly air supremacy fighters and are usually doing air-to-air combat.

    Of course, which leads to Team killing.

    Clearly a problem for India I guess.

    Which is also a problem for Russia.

    Or one site has radars up giving 6 sites their radar image so we just attack those 6 sites.

    If you can detect those 6 sites RECEIVING information from a data link then there is no way the F-22 or F-35 or B-2 are stealthy. They receive all sorts of data including data from Navstar to tell them where they are.

    Or Intelligence. Eye in the sky, I have an eye in the sky!

    That's a bad analogy, it's like we're 2 boxers and I just knocked you out, so your Coach gives you a gun to shoot me, which is so unfair.

    You just wiped out Russias airforce in an unprovoked attack and you call their retaliation by detonating tactical nuclear devices on the airfields you sent your attack force from unfair?

    You need to reread the rules of war... ie there are none.

    But who said it was unprovoked? If you want to get deeper into details, maybe a Russian defector started all this. Maybe a Soviet ultra-nationalist provoked Americans to strike first. Maybe this, maybe that.

    In any case, you are of course assuming that Russia can't produce more planes.

    Ahahaha, my point has been proven exactly. Honor is something lost on you.

    Well some might say stealth fighters and stealth bombers are unfair too. The US clearly has no honour either.

    But you could see us, just use a telescope.

    We can't really do much when a nuke is launched, though.

    But we're talking Su-35 v.s. MiG-29...the enemy is THAT way Garry!

    They wont be buying a base model Mig-29, it will be at least Mig-29SMT so both Su-35 and Mig-29 have excellent air to ground capability. Every bit as good as any block F-16.

    Ah, but which one will do better against the unbeaten F-15 or the F-35 which Israel is sure to use in a conflict with Egypt? Su-35.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16514
    Points : 17122
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Egyptian Air Force (EAF)

    Post  GarryB on Thu Nov 25, 2010 5:09 am


    The problem with that is Grid Fins don't increase drag; only if what it's on is going slow.

    They have vastly more surface area than a small triangular fin... why wouldn't they cause more drag?
    Early biplanes and triplanes were not very fast because of the extra drag created by the extra wing surface area.
    For some time that extra drag was accepted because the pay off was lower wing loading and much greater manoeuvre capability.
    They gave up the ability to out run an opponent for the ability to out turn them.

    The grid fins give the R-77 excellent terminal manoeuvre performance because they have a very high stall angle so you can use them to turn harder than with conventional control surfaces.

    Seems they want range.

    But, as we all know, it goes Mach 2.5. It all depends on where it's shot and as I've said before, if we tested our AMRAAMs in space, we could tell our export partners that it has a maximum speed of Mach 100.

    An AMRAAM fired in space would not go Mach 100. Its stabilisation systems would not work in space because they use the fins so the missile could go anywhere... including spinning end over end.

    Well, for cost reasons, it's smarter to buy only one right?!

    Not really. It would be expensive keeping all your Su-35s flying around looking for targets. Land based SAMs can be located near targets and on your borders and can defend 24/7.

    And what makes JASSM such a hard target?
    And if we are going to add weapons each side CAN get then how about Egypt buys a death star and puts it in geosynchronous orbit so it can fire at Israel.

    I didn't see the Soviet Union helping us out.

    Soviet Union didn't exist for either Kosovo or Rwanda... and the Soviet Union never claimed to be the worlds police.

    If you're honestly expecting the US to do all your dirty work then go pay us some actual money because we may be the Super power and our arms may be 4 foot long but we can't police everywhere and just like the cops in your neighborhood, some things won't get checked due to budget cuts.

    The US is self appointed world policeman... no one promised money or love for that matter.

    But, Stalin was just one man out of a bunch of Dear leaders they had!

    He was the one responsible for most of the pain complained about by "new europe".

    The problem with your analogy is that the Soviet Government was basically Russian, it consisted basically of people from Russian descent. In effect, the Soviet Union, was Russian.

    The problem with this response is you don't know what you are talking about.

    Stalin ruled during the famines the Ukraine complains about being targetted at the Ukraine even though everyone in the Soviet Union suffered. He created the Gulags and the purges and the terror.
    He annexed the baltic states.

    If you are suggesting it is the fault of Russia please explain which Russian exactly was to blame?

    Which Russian controlled Stalin?

    Ha, maybe in the Dictatorship you live in. Talk to one historian and then to the other, you will find honor from both sides.

    Dictatorship? Your country had the choice of two men. Here in New Zealand we have a political system called MMP. Perhaps you might want to read a little about it before throwing terms like dictatorship. Of course Hugo Chavez gets called a dictator by the US all the time even though he keeps getting re-elected.

    It seems Americans no longer understand the English language where Dictator can mean democratically elected leader. Rolling Eyes

    Never heard of JASSM?

    I am surprised you don't spell it with an I instead of an A... you seem very excited about it. tongue

    It is just a low speed IR emitting target. For practise the Russian Army used to test Iglas by firing them at Malyutkas (AT-3) missiles. The first time they tried they only got 5 kills out of 9 missiles fired because Igla has an impact fuse only and a very small target like a little AT-3 ATGM is a tricky target to actually hit directly. The current Igla-S has a proximity fuse added so its kill rate was 9 out of 9. JASSM is a lot bigger than an AT-3 and flys higher.

    Tohoho, so a S-300 with 4 missiles loaded can take out 10 targets in how much time? Da, we're talking realistic combat situations here comrade!

    Yes, an S-300 battery consists of at least 6 launchers but just for fun Egypt will deploy single launch vehicles. Rolling Eyes

    But Egypt doesn't have S-300s, they have Patriots, which are inferior.

    Patriots got a bad rap because the US Army used them to intercept Scuds... something they were never designed for. Would you call M4 rifles crap if the US Army decided they could be used to intercept ATGMs before they hit tanks and found they weren't that effective?
    Patriot should be able to hit cruise missiles... cruise missiles are just low flying subsonic small planes. And even if they can't TOR can.

    So, I'd also suggest that Egypt get S-300's although they wouldn't fair too well against a swarm attack, it's better then Tors.

    Keep hearing about swarm attacks with cruise missiles... but the US military never seems to bother in practise... wonder why that is?

    Says the New Zealander who basks in the Western life, free from worry, free from the world.

    We didn't get that from the US. We made NZ ourselves.

    The difference between Russian and the US was that we did something, be it better or bad, we at least tried. Russia, they just sat down and sold WMDs.

    Yeah, you spent multi trillions of dollars on ways to kill them that forced them to do the same just so America didn't have to live in a world with a powerful communist country with nuclear weapons. And how is that going for you? Most of the clothes I buy these days are made in China.

    The funny thing is that you probably have more in common with Russia than you do with China, but the enemy of my enemy is my friend... the flaw in that of course is that if you can make friends with his enemies that are communist nuclear armed states run by dictators why don't you make friends with him too?

    Funny you claim to have the moral high ground yet based on your own morality shouldn't have you been the bigger man and offer a hand in friendship? Stalin wasn't going to be leader forever and whoever replaced him was not likely to be as bad as he was... or any worse than you were.

    It's not like Egypt has to worry about anybody with T-50s because the only people who could afford such crap would be Oil Conglomerates in Iran.

    And T-50 will be crap because it is Russian. And expensive crap that no one can afford?


    Fiction just like your mind.

    Yeah, I am making it all up. There is no way Gorby would approve of development of a haemorrhaging virus like Ebola or Marburg Virus to be made into a weapon...

    Marburg virus

    The Soviet Union reportedly had a large biological weapons program enhancing the usefulness of the Marburg virus. The development was conducted in Vector Institute under leadership of Dr. Ustinov who accidentally died from the virus. The samples of Marburg taken from Ustinov's organs were more powerful than the original strain. New strain called "Variant U" had been successfully weaponized and approved by Soviet Ministry of Defense in 1990.

    Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_biological_weapons_program

    The problem when comparing American and Russian equipment is whenever I reject your side of the argument you automatically pull the Ultra-Nationalist USA #1 card which wouldn't be much of an argument because like this entire argument, all you've been doing is going at my throat just because I'm American and I've contradicted your claims.

    I haven't touched your throat. I don't care you are American. You can contradict everything I say... I don't care.

    I find comparisons with foreign military equipment boring and not very useful. Russian Su-27s never fought American F-15s and I doubt Russian T-50s will meet American F-22s either. I find such discussions pointless because no one can really prove their case.

    No where has I even said anything about USA #1 yet you keep pretending I did or am going to, and whenever I am being unbiased, you claim a bias just because I tip my had to one side and not the other.

    Yeah, you are not a USA fanboi... but the T-50 is going to be crap right? And nothing in Russia can withstand a single F-35.
    I think your tin foil hat is on too tight.

    So you're going to compare Russian equipment to Chinese copies?

    What need is there to compare? The T-50 doesn't need to assist Russia in its global invasions like the F-35 will do for NATO. It just needs to defend Russia.

    Lets admit it right here, America, Russia, the 2 greatest Weapon producers to have ever graced this earth, yet you deny any chance for comparison. I'd ask why, but you'd rant.

    But they are not the two greatest anything... Russian T-50s are crap and they can't even make QWIP sensors...

    On most scales available other than the Personal Opinion scale, America definitely has one of the better standards of living there is.

    Most scales put countries like Sweden and Norway higher. Apparently they have fewer trailer parks.

    tongue

    Because as I've said, so many times before, stereotyping is bad, and I myself have yet to do it here, while for some reason, just because our Government did some bad a time ago, we are automatically as selfish and evil as our Government.

    You are judged by the actions of your government. You live in a democracy... why don't all those loving caring super americans tell their government not to act like such an arse. Or don't these caring super americans care enough to actually bother doing anything.
    It is a bit like Islam really. Some dickheads blow themselves up to kill other people and all the Islamic community care about is that they might get targeted as being part of that.
    Of course if they stood up and spoke out against the actions of these idiots and actually made some public effort to stop it perhaps everyone might cut them a break and realise their religion is being used to justify some ones agenda and that the religion and most who practise it are not at fault.
    If the US people did the same about US foreign policy people around the world might respect them more.
    But all we hear is that the US is right and Americans have rights... blah blah blah.

    If we seriously do think this way, then I might do what you say and give everyone a 5 kt nuke, but I don't think this way and I think we're better than that.

    Actually the way most of you seem to think is that the universe ends at the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans on American beaches, unless the price of oil starts going up and then you look for scapegoats to bomb to sort it out and force the price down.

    Look as I have said several times... don't know... don't care.

    Russia today, Aljezeera English, BBC, CNN, all liars to me.

    Are they really liars or are they talking about things from their perspective?

    History may agree, history may not. Capitalism hasn't always robbed from the people and given to the rich.

    There is a reason within capitalist countries why most of the real wealth is held by so few people.
    There is a reason why capitalist countries hate the idea of communism... the very thought of sharing...

    Fighting back at 1 million Taliban? Who all coincidentally lived in villages populated by Civvies?

    Taleban means Student and was not a military force till after the Soviets left.
    Afghans have customs regarding the treatment of guests and the treatment of invaders.
    Unless you can change that if you go into Afghanistan take a gun.

    Basically, we gave the Pakis money, told them what to do, and they didn't follow it out.

    No. Actually one of the demands the ISI made was that they would control who got money and weapons so the US agreed not to tell them what to do. The Taleban with their extreme views on islamic law (ie no TVs etc etc) was the idea of the Pakistani ISI. They supported them and got them into power. That is why the US is attacking Pakistan because that is where the Taleban came from and that is where its roots are... they are trying to cut off the roots.
    Of course defeating the Taleban will not get rid of Osama because he is not in the Taleban. Al Quada is a separate org. He was as guest of the Taleban and they are honour bound not to hand him over to his enemy because of their customs on guests. Even if they hated him. Isn't honour funny... I have no honour but the Taleban does!!!!

    Or teach their young boys and girls the right things and have them sort it out like in a real Darwinian society.

    And short of kidnapping those children how will you manage from 9am to 3pm to undo what their parents have taught them all their lives?

    LOL! Russia isn't doing that well as a democracy then, hell they aren't even considered democratic by the freedom index.

    Freedom index my arse. Western propaganda at its best. America might not be doing so great because of unemployment... but it would be worse... like in Russia or something...

    Great way to ignore your own problems.

    I remember about 5 years ago the usual whiners here were complaining about our lack of international competitiveness and saying we should adopt Irelands economic model because their economy was booming. Not a peep out of those people recently... and really what they should be saying now is that Chinas economy is booming so we really should be changing to a communist system of government with a capitalist market economy. russia

    [quote["Probably". Of course, as we know, due to budget cuts, the Su-27SM had to settle for mediocre equipment. [/quote]

    Nothing at all to do with budget cuts. They were spending money on the T-50 but knew it would not be ready for a decade so they also planned a deeper upgrade that would be ready in 5 years that we know as the Su-35S. The purpose of the Su-27SM upgrade was to give their Flanker fleet its first upgrade in service and to start working with more modern digital systems and weapons and cockpits. It was a simple and cheap first step to prepare the military for further improvements that were planned.
    The T-50 and Su-35S will be too expensive to buy in enormous numbers and so Su-27s and Mig-29s will continue to serve so the SM upgrade for the Flankers and the SMT upgrades for the Migs is to improve commonality and to improve performance to make them useful and cheaper to operate.

    Which is also a problem for Russia.

    If they want help with that I am sure the Russians will help them.

    Or Intelligence. Eye in the sky, I have an eye in the sky!

    Those six missile batteries are mobile. And their fake missile batteries are all over the place to potentially.
    And if your eye in the sky was so wonderful where is osama bin laden...

    But who said it was unprovoked? If you want to get deeper into details, maybe a Russian defector started all this. Maybe a Soviet ultra-nationalist provoked Americans to strike first. Maybe this, maybe that.

    If it was provoked then the Russian defences would be on alert.

    In any case, you are of course assuming that Russia can't produce more planes.

    So if the Russians blew up an entire carrier group with a nuclear mine the US would be OK with that because they can produce more carriers?
    And not in a useful timetable they couldn't.

    Ah, but which one will do better against the unbeaten F-15 or the F-35 which Israel is sure to use in a conflict with Egypt? Su-35.

    Try to shoot them down? There are plenty of F-15s that have been shot down. The Israelis freely admit to that. What they deny is that there have been any shot down by air to air... and I have no reason to believe them.
    avatar
    IronsightSniper

    Posts : 450
    Points : 458
    Join date : 2010-09-25
    Location : California, USA

    Re: Egyptian Air Force (EAF)

    Post  IronsightSniper on Fri Nov 26, 2010 12:03 pm

    Alright, this discussion has once again gone out of hand, Garry is rambling, I am resorting to idiocy, lets get back to basics.


    I support Su-35 for Egypt, he supports MiG-29s for Egypt.

    Where do you wanna start?
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16514
    Points : 17122
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Egyptian Air Force (EAF)

    Post  GarryB on Fri Nov 26, 2010 12:43 pm

    You can support Su-35 all you want but the offer so far seems to be Mig-29s.
    avatar
    IronsightSniper

    Posts : 450
    Points : 458
    Join date : 2010-09-25
    Location : California, USA

    Re: Egyptian Air Force (EAF)

    Post  IronsightSniper on Fri Nov 26, 2010 4:21 pm

    The offer so far has been offered for about a decade. D:

    Modernize with Sukhois!
    avatar
    nightcrawler

    Posts : 534
    Points : 650
    Join date : 2010-08-20
    Age : 27
    Location : Pakistan

    Re: Egyptian Air Force (EAF)

    Post  nightcrawler on Tue Nov 30, 2010 3:42 pm

    Do remember there were many Pakistan pilots dubbed Egyptians; who clearly beat the shit out of Israeils
    avatar
    ahmedfire

    Posts : 676
    Points : 846
    Join date : 2010-11-11
    Location : egypt

    Re: Egyptian Air Force (EAF)

    Post  ahmedfire on Wed Dec 01, 2010 2:56 pm

    Vladimir79 wrote:Don't forget the ending...



    Kind of reminds me of this crazy Rafale pilot, of course a Rafale can get out of it.

    yeah but he still alife.. affraid

    KRON1

    Posts : 31
    Points : 35
    Join date : 2009-08-12

    Re: Egyptian Air Force (EAF)

    Post  KRON1 on Thu Dec 02, 2010 12:49 am

    nightcrawler wrote:Do remember there were many Pakistan pilots dubbed Egyptians; who clearly beat the shit out of Israeils

    I remember there were mercenary Pak pilots. I do not remember a case where they shot down Israeli planes.
    avatar
    nightcrawler

    Posts : 534
    Points : 650
    Join date : 2010-08-20
    Age : 27
    Location : Pakistan

    Re: Egyptian Air Force (EAF)

    Post  nightcrawler on Fri Dec 03, 2010 9:07 pm

    KRON1 wrote:
    nightcrawler wrote:Do remember there were many Pakistan pilots dubbed Egyptians; who clearly beat the shit out of Israeils

    I remember there were mercenary Pak pilots. I do not remember a case where they shot down Israeli planes.

    Sir wouldn't you admire this


    READ THE RULES! NO WIKI!!


    avatar
    ahmedfire

    Posts : 676
    Points : 846
    Join date : 2010-11-11
    Location : egypt

    Re: Egyptian Air Force (EAF)

    Post  ahmedfire on Tue Dec 21, 2010 4:47 pm

    Vladislav wrote:
    Turk1 wrote:CCIP is a good upgrade. It has made us the Super Power of the Middle East and Egypt isn't far behind.

    Super Power of the Middle East? You think you can beat Usreal?
    egypt can beat israel ...
    avatar
    ahmad_elsharkawy

    Posts : 7
    Points : 14
    Join date : 2011-06-02

    need some answers please

    Post  ahmad_elsharkawy on Thu Jun 02, 2011 4:02 pm

    [b]
    any one here has any idea about the coming egyptian russian deal of su-35 & s-300&400 air defense systems

    or it is just rumors spreading all over the web dunno

    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16514
    Points : 17122
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Egyptian Air Force (EAF)

    Post  GarryB on Fri Jun 03, 2011 2:19 am

    Have not heard anything official.

    Egypt is a close friend to the US, which means it is rather unlikely Russia will sell Su-35 or S-400 to Egypt as that pretty much hands them over to US intel.

    I suspect if Egypt wants to buy Russian they might accept a large order for the Mig-35 if only to improve the situation of Mig and perhaps save the aircraft design from extinction.

    They might also be prepared to sell late model S-300s which are still very capable air defence systems when used properly and properly supported (ie Pantsir-S1 or TOR).

    avatar
    ahmad_elsharkawy

    Posts : 7
    Points : 14
    Join date : 2011-06-02

    Re: Egyptian Air Force (EAF)

    Post  ahmad_elsharkawy on Fri Jun 03, 2011 9:29 am

    GarryB wrote:Have not heard anything official.

    Egypt is a close friend to the US, which means it is rather unlikely Russia will sell Su-35 or S-400 to Egypt as that pretty much hands them over to US intel.

    I suspect if Egypt wants to buy Russian they might accept a large order for the Mig-35 if only to improve the situation of Mig and perhaps save the aircraft design from extinction.

    They might also be prepared to sell late model S-300s which are still very capable air defence systems when used properly and properly supported (ie Pantsir-S1 or TOR).


    i think we are close friends to russian people too our previous regieme used to deal with americans coz they give them 35% precentage of every deal they made
    and we donot have enough qualified fighters
    plus american congress refused f16 block 52 so i guess we are getting back to our old friends who always had supported us with scud -sam - mig 21 which have kicked the phantom fighters just under egyptian pilots control
    hope we are getting our relations back coz we had enough corruption and we need some good fighters
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16514
    Points : 17122
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Egyptian Air Force (EAF)

    Post  GarryB on Fri Jun 03, 2011 9:44 am

    There is no reason why Egypt under a new government cannot have good relations with Russia.

    I still don't think they will trust Egypt with their latest products just yet however.

    It is a bit of a myth that the Russians sell to just anyone... they used to be desperate for money and sales would have been more likely then, but now they need large production runs and large orders to set up significant production facilities and tooling.

    ...like I said, if Egypt wants to buy what Russia needs to sell then they increase their chances of also being offered to buy what they really want.

    Buy a few Frigates and a few subs and perhaps even buy a couple of hundred Mig-29M2s or Mig-29SMTs and then you can probably talk about Flankers and S-400s.

    Kornets, and Metis-M are good sellers as are Igla-S missiles, so that sort of order would be viewed as normal too.
    avatar
    ahmad_elsharkawy

    Posts : 7
    Points : 14
    Join date : 2011-06-02

    Re: Egyptian Air Force (EAF)

    Post  ahmad_elsharkawy on Sat Jun 04, 2011 3:55 am

    GarryB wrote:There is no reason why Egypt under a new government cannot have good relations with Russia.

    I still don't think they will trust Egypt with their latest products just yet however.

    It is a bit of a myth that the Russians sell to just anyone... they used to be desperate for money and sales would have been more likely then, but now they need large production runs and large orders to set up significant production facilities and tooling.

    ...like I said, if Egypt wants to buy what Russia needs to sell then they increase their chances of also being offered to buy what they really want.

    Buy a few Frigates and a few subs and perhaps even buy a couple of hundred Mig-29M2s or Mig-29SMTs and then you can probably talk about Flankers and S-400s.

    Kornets, and Metis-M are good sellers as are Igla-S missiles, so that sort of order would be viewed as normal too.


    thanks bro paratrooper
    avatar
    IronsightSniper

    Posts : 450
    Points : 458
    Join date : 2010-09-25
    Location : California, USA

    Re: Egyptian Air Force (EAF)

    Post  IronsightSniper on Tue Jun 07, 2011 1:10 pm

    AFAIK, Russia and Egypt have not made a deal for advanced Air Dominance components. Like Garry said, there's no reason why they won't engage in such a deal however. But, if I had to hazard a guess, I'd think that we'd sell Egypt those F-16s after all, as seeing the recent Revolution and change of Govts and so on and so forth. When it comes down to it though, it really just depends on what Egypt wants.
    avatar
    nightcrawler

    Posts : 534
    Points : 650
    Join date : 2010-08-20
    Age : 27
    Location : Pakistan

    Re: Egyptian Air Force (EAF)

    Post  nightcrawler on Thu Jun 09, 2011 11:04 pm

    The best option ain't American ain't Russian both are costly for the Egypt. Why not buy lot of J-10 & lots of JF-17. If they don't like Chinese SD-10 AAMs...well they can get this

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAR-1

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A-Darter_%28missile%29
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16514
    Points : 17122
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Egyptian Air Force (EAF)

    Post  GarryB on Fri Jun 10, 2011 5:09 am

    Egypt has been US focussed and US dependent for a while now.

    I suspect the new regime will want to look for other potential relationships and buying military products is one way to create ties.

    In many ways it is not so important to the countries involved what you buy or don't buy, but as the contacts are tentative and new it is very unlikely the products on offer will be the sort of thing the Russian military are only just getting now.

    Having said that the comments about the Su-35s 117S engine development and the new 117 engine for Russian AF only suggests they will not include the same stuff in export Su-35s that the Russian AF will be getting.

    While likely effecting its performance it will likely make the plane easier to get clearance for export.
    avatar
    Amir_Pharaoh

    Posts : 12
    Points : 12
    Join date : 2012-02-25

    Re: Egyptian Air Force (EAF)

    Post  Amir_Pharaoh on Sat Feb 25, 2012 3:18 pm

    msaabneh wrote:Written by Egypt News
    SUNDAY, 14 FEBRUARY 2010
    Egypt is set to produce its first fighter and drone "in cooperation with a foreign side", ..............

    The official did not name the foreign party which will take a hand at the process, ..........

    Well .. 3 Countries are to be considered ..
    France , China , Russia ..
    In 80s Egypt assembled Mirages , Gazelle, Alpha Jet , F-7 ..
    Later .. K-8e ..

    Although Hamdy Waheba didn't mention the "foreign side" ..
    But the latest deals with russia .. Mig-29 smt / buk / tor-m / kilo subs / negotiations related mig-29 m2 , su-35 .. make us believe that fighter to be co-produced w
    ith Russia ..

    Sponsored content

    Re: Egyptian Air Force (EAF)

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Thu Oct 19, 2017 5:49 am