Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 3 of 17 FirstFirst 123456713 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 501

Thread: Which attack helicopter for Iraq?

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    778
    Hi All...

    with regards to the defence contracts with Russia, there's a lot of contradictory information coming from official sources in Iraq...

    From the defence ministry they state that 7 main types were to be part of the 1st deal ($4.5Bn) including:

    1- Mi28NE helicopters
    2- Mi17v5 helicopters
    3- Pantsir S1
    4- Tor-M2
    5- BMP-3 IFVs
    6- MiG29M/M2 (russians promising delivery of the first 8 by June 2013... something the Iraqis were desperate for - I presume these were some of the MiG29M built for Syria and undelivered)
    7- SU-30MK2


    With regards to selection process... the defence minister stated:
    -we made a sub-selection of the following types: Ah-64D, Tiger, Mi28, KA-52, Mi35. and they selected the Mi28NE for the army aviation.
    -The Mi17v5 was selected in lieau of the UH-60 blackhawk

    -In addition to those helos... they're looking to buy UH1-Y and AH1-Z helos for the Basra Operations Command in support aof the army / marines due to their specific requirements for operations over water / salty water.

    -The Iraqis made a request for a "second deal" which contained several "strategic weapons" that the Russians had not approved for sale and included several "missile complexes which cost $210M per battalion".

    The payment for the deal is supposed to come from the 2013 budget, but since Iraq has not yet passed the 2013 budget... everything is on hold until the budget is passed.

    most of these details are from the official MOD newspaper. archives are available online www.mod.mil.iq


    oh, and if you all think that inducting the MiG29M + F16IQ + L159BQ + SU30MK2 is bad enough... an interview with the commander of the air force stated that they are in very advanced negotiations in finalising a fighter purchase deal from "Europe" and will announce details once the contracts are agreed and signed. It looks like they are planning on having 30 odd fighters from every staple

    The commander of the Air Defence command, also in the MOD magazine stated that they will induct the Russian SAMs, in addition to the SAMs that the US offered on Excess Defence Articles (for free, AVENGER and I-HAWK), they are also evaluating air defence systems from France, South Korea and People's China... There's no news if the Iraqis will take the I-HAWKS, but they do have 8 AVENGERs now.
    Last edited by sheytanelkebir; 24th February 2013 at 00:06.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    778
    Quote Originally Posted by Fedaykin View Post
    On a serious note it makes me wonder of Greece might be interested in increasing defence relations with Iraq if it puts Turkey's nose out of joint.

    I would think the Iraqi airforce would have plenty to learn from Greece in respect of F-16 Block 50/52 operations. Greece also operates a mixed Western/Eastern equipment portfolio.
    Iraq sent 300+ technicians for training in Jordan. There was a plan before to cooperate with Turkey, but right now relations are sour...

    PS. Balad AB is being prepared as the MOB for the F16IQ...

    DJ Elliot has a very nice blog about the Iraqi new forces developments... http://home.comcast.net/~djyae/site/?/blog/

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    9,127
    Why Su-30MK2 and not Su-30MKI (perfect nomenclature ) ?

    And better yet, why interest in both Flanker and Fulcrum?
    That is the one thing that is weird to me about all this.

    I am guessing the "strategic" weapons were for either Antei-2500 or Iskander.
    http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/9098/rsz11rsz3807.jpg

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,232
    Interesting sheytanelkebir, considering the budget is not set then everything listed has to be taken with a pinch of salt.

    The Mi-28N is an interesting one really, an all weather day and night capable attack helicopter is quite a jump. Considering the Mi-28N is still in development vs the mature AH-64D presumably cost is a major deciding point. As I said I take it with a pinch of salt...

    As for the missile complexes I presume S300 and BUK-M2E? Placing those on the northern border would certainly cut down on Turkish incursions if they can get the radar net sorted out.
    Because sometimes in life we need a bit of fun

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXNAp3mKepc

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,232
    Quote Originally Posted by TR1 View Post
    Why Su-30MK2 and not Su-30MKI (perfect nomenclature ) ?

    And better yet, why interest in both Flanker and Fulcrum?
    That is the one thing that is weird to me about all this.

    I am guessing the "strategic" weapons were for either Antei-2500 or Iskander.
    Which is what bugs me, it is such a scatter-gun set of choices.

    Weigh that against the clear procurement of the F-16 and L159.
    Because sometimes in life we need a bit of fun

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXNAp3mKepc

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    778
    Quote Originally Posted by Italy View Post
    why is China not popular with Iraq? I would imagine they would be indifferent.
    China and Russia have huge investments in Iraqi oil and power infrastructure nowadays... Iraq is keen on diversifying its arms suppliers, and making payments via the CNPC / LUKOIL oil concessions is practical and safe for both sides and eases cashflow issues. Win Win really.

    Big losers seem to be europeans... Eurocopter has a permanent stand at the Iraqi Army Aviation HQ (they are there nearly every week), but so far have sold just some EC-635s and trying to sell some EC-725s (for the upcoming VIP squadron) and some AS-565s for the coastal duties...

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    778
    Quote Originally Posted by TR1 View Post
    Why Su-30MK2 and not Su-30MKI (perfect nomenclature ) ?

    And better yet, why interest in both Flanker and Fulcrum?
    That is the one thing that is weird to me about all this.

    I am guessing the "strategic" weapons were for either Antei-2500 or Iskander.
    I don't know. I am as surprised as you...

    Of course the Iraqis are taking the MiG29M for the obvious reason of quick delivery of the planes undelivered to Syria. really a stopgap measure... but still with good teeth.

    The SU30s they need as their more "medium term" development plan to match up to the saudis F15s and the like...

    I don't know what they mean by "strategic weapons that russia has not exported before" - very vague language they used.. with the exception of mentioning that each complex costs $210M. there you go... trying to decipher their language
    Last edited by sheytanelkebir; 24th February 2013 at 00:27.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    778
    Quote Originally Posted by Fedaykin View Post
    Interesting sheytanelkebir, considering the budget is not set then everything listed has to be taken with a pinch of salt.

    The Mi-28N is an interesting one really, an all weather day and night capable attack helicopter is quite a jump. Considering the Mi-28N is still in development vs the mature AH-64D presumably cost is a major deciding point. As I said I take it with a pinch of salt...

    As for the missile complexes I presume S300 and BUK-M2E? Placing those on the northern border would certainly cut down on Turkish incursions if they can get the radar net sorted out.
    The minister of defence stated "we can get two Mi28NEs for the price of one Apache" - so yes cost was a deciding factor...

    since the budget has not even been approved... it may even be possible (but unlikely) that none of these weapons are delivered... though I'd expect a mutiny from the military, all statements by the MOD and Chief of Staff down to some division commanders stated how desperate they are to get these weapons and how vulnerable Iraq is right now.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cataclysm
    Posts
    8,722
    Quote Originally Posted by Fedaykin View Post
    Interesting sheytanelkebir, considering the budget is not set then everything listed has to be taken with a pinch of salt.

    The Mi-28N is an interesting one really, an all weather day and night capable attack helicopter is quite a jump. Considering the Mi-28N is still in development vs the mature AH-64D presumably cost is a major deciding point. As I said I take it with a pinch of salt...

    As for the missile complexes I presume S300 and BUK-M2E? Placing those on the northern border would certainly cut down on Turkish incursions if they can get the radar net sorted out.
    Have you seen recent prices for ROC? AH-64E $82mil a pop, UH-60M $56mil. That is hardly in the league of countries like Iraq.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    778
    Once the Iraqis get all their armed helos in operation:

    ARH407
    EC635s
    Mi28NE
    AH-1Z

    they'll be operating Ingwe, Hellfire, ATAKA-V anti tank missiles... but I wonder is it possible to also fit the the MI28NE or Mi171s with the VIKHR system?

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    778
    Quote Originally Posted by MSphere View Post
    Have you seen recent prices for ROC? AH-64E $82mil a pop, UH-60M $56mil. That is hardly in the league of countries like Iraq.
    iraqi army aviation people spent many years working alongside US Army and US Marines Apaches and AH-1Z... I am guessing they learnt about some of the difficulties in operating these helos in Iraqi conditions (even with ideal supplies of unlimited cash/parts and Boeing contractors on site!)... still they did like the AH-1Z after all... (and it is cheap and cheerful )

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,232
    I agree AH-64E is rather pricey unless America subsidised the procurement. I think the AH-1Z Viper is a better fit personally.
    Because sometimes in life we need a bit of fun

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXNAp3mKepc

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,133
    I am really not convinced Iraq is getting Su-30MK2's. Til i see some definitive proof anyway. There has not even been rumors about it or seemingly interest from the iraqi side.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    778
    they may not get ANY of those items at all... or all of them and even more... when (if) the budget is approved by parliament it will be clear. but the armed forces made their feelings clear to the parliament about their needs.

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Schimatari, Greece
    Posts
    683
    Quote Originally Posted by Fedaykin View Post
    On a serious note it makes me wonder of Greece might be interested in increasing defence relations with Iraq if it puts Turkey's nose out of joint.
    Greece has had excellent bilateral ties with post-Hussein Iraq (just like we had with pre-Desert Storm Iraq), in fact we donated them a few hundred refurbished BMP-1s.

    I would think the Iraqi airforce would have plenty to learn from Greece in respect of F-16 Block 50/52 operations. Greece also operates a mixed Western/Eastern equipment portfolio.
    For the time being HAF spends time and resources training with IAF. I'm not sure they would be happy with us training sharing with an Arab nation. Moreover, Iraq asking for assistance and advisers in F-16 training has never come to my attention.

  16. #76
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    712
    For what it's worth...........my 20-cents worth...............

    I think Iraq as a military has had the #%it knocked out of it as a professional force, after all these decades.
    I do not know if they have the infrastructure or professionalism to operate, let alone maintain such sophisticated / maintenance intense beasts like the Ka-52, AH-64, Mi-28, let alone the likes of the Mi-24/35 Hind
    I think the Iraqi Air Force is going to have to learn to crawl before it walks for a long time yet. I'm very dubious about the way in which they are going to operate the F-16's!!
    For me I would say that the A-129 Mangusta would be a cost effective platform in both terms of purchase and maintenance costs and capability!
    But saying this, I think for at least a decade to come, the Iraqi Air Force (if it survives) would be better off simply operating the versatile, cost effective and workman-like Mil Mi17V5 in both the transport and fire-support role!

    P.S. In regards to Fedaykin’s
    WZ-10 ... not a chance. Iraq has no defence relations with China as it stands and the WZ-10 isn't even in full service with the China Army yet. The WZ-10 production will probably be busy for a long time meeting domestic needs.
    I’m not so sure we should under estimate the PRC. Even though as you state that Iraq and PRC has no defence relations. I would be very cautious to in the PRC’s ability to smell an opportunity to capitalise on such known shortfalls. The PRC has again and again shown that it is more than willing to gift money, engineering and expertise in helping a down and out nation. It places very little want in return, is willing to disregard concerns like human rights and ethnic hatred. In return the PRC’s offer of friendship, and defence relations with Iraq could be a powerful and effective tool , which
    1/ could jump-start the WS-10 foreign exposure and sales! (not to mention follow on weapon’s sales of PRC origin)
    2/ Undermined the United States
    3/ Secure strategic resources (Oil)
    4/ Put PLA personal and facilities into the Middle East

    Regards
    Pioneer

  17. #77
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    NI, UK
    Posts
    490
    Quote Originally Posted by Pioneer View Post
    I think the Iraqi Air Force is going to have to learn to crawl before it walks for a long time yet. I'm very dubious about the way in which they are going to operate the F-16's!!

    ...
    But saying this, I think for at least a decade to come, the Iraqi Air Force (if it survives) would be better off simply operating the versatile, cost effective and workman-like Mil Mi17V5 in both the transport and fire-support role!
    Concur; the Air Force's formidable capability in the 1980s was achieved through the retention of French, East German and Yugoslav technicians. Not to diminish the efforts of Iraqi personnel but from what I've read those groups were vital and they seemed to work together quite well!

    Without that technical support base I think anything beyond L-159 and Mi-17 is going to be too much for the near future.

  18. #78
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    778
    the iraqi AF and army aviation has in place maintenance and support contracts with all its new suppliers. But they are at the same time building up their new capabilities very quickly through training of hundreds of engineers, technicians and field staff in Iraq and abroad. Some of these are veterans from the 1980s-90s, and others are new graduates.

    They inducted the C130J-30 recently... and Iraqi Airways has in service / on order over 70 brand new aircraft (airbus 320/330, Boieng 738, 777, 787, CRJ900) for which huge new maintenance facilities are being built / training conducted (traditionally Iraqi Airways maintenance had supported the Iraqi air force for maintenance and overhaul).

    actual key weakness right now is lack of qualified (young!) fighter pilots!

  19. #79
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Limousin France
    Posts
    951
    if I was looking for a battle field helicopter I would go for Lynx wildcat not a true attack helicopter but it is all weather day and night capable has a good weapon system can carry troops and under slug loads plus operate off the back of a ship its an outstanding all round helicopter

    I also think F-16 is a good start and they should get a good number of SU-30 I just feel if you are building an air force from the ground up as they are the fewer types the better


  20. #80
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    NI, UK
    Posts
    490
    Quote Originally Posted by sheytanelkebir View Post
    the iraqi AF and army aviation has in place maintenance and support contracts with all its new suppliers. But they are at the same time building up their new capabilities very quickly through training of hundreds of engineers, technicians and field staff in Iraq and abroad. Some of these are veterans from the 1980s-90s, and others are new graduates.
    That is good news, but classroom training doesn't address the key problems of understanding how systems integrate on modern aircraft. That has to be learned gradually, building a corpus of practical knowledge.

    A good example would be the trials and tribulations encountered by Poland when introducing the F-16, and that was for a force with a strong independent technical base.

    As for Iraqi airways: same problem in my opinion. Too many new types too soon. 737 Classics and 767s would have been a sound start to build on the knowledge of existing engineers. Let's check again in five years.

  21. #81
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    4,359
    Quote Originally Posted by Fedaykin View Post
    You know you are right JSR the Iraqi F-16IQ are downgraded vs base model Block50/52. But only in detail areas for example some strike modes deactivated and old block AIM-9M and Sparrow rather then AIM-9X and AMRAAM.
    The problem is not only AAMs. but slow implementation of contract and lack of long range standoff weopons.
    This is not unusual when it comes to purchases off the US and what they are being given is more then adequate to defend against the Syrian (who are rather busy at the moment) and the Iranian air forces.
    It ur opinion that Iraq only need defend against thiese two countries..
    As for a purchase in limited numbers, Iraq is already pushing forward with another batch, that is the nice thing about the F-16 Lockheed Martin can service contracts very quickly!
    any sign contract.
    As for an airforce numbering 300-400 types, interesting number what drew you to that conclusion? Why do they need it?
    They need very large airforce as they are surrounded by two hostile powers in north and south.


    I realise that as you must still be at school you probably don't understand how these things work but that is a corrupt way of doing things. Sadly that is how things have been done in the East and West for many years. The Iraqi president and government should be commended for stopping this highly dubious process. I truly hope it can be worked out so we can see some Russian equipment inducted into the Iraqi armed forces. Again unlike you I have no problem with the concept.
    Again more opinion without any facts. Infact Russia is pressuring kurds to make compromise with Baghdad. Now a days even fighters have powerfull ground survellence radars and add to that long range artillery like Smerch. battlefield can very quick change.
    http://www.interfax.com/newsinf.asp?id=398105
    Sergei Lavrov called on the Kurdistan leader to continue playing a constructive role in the establishment of a non-confrontational inter-Iraqi dialogue for settling disagreements and achieving the soonest stabilization in the country," the report said.
    You make lots of nice statements about the wonders of the Mig-29, modern avionics, modern simulators and low maintenance. Maybe that would happen...who knows. What we do know is the Iraqi Airforce is deep into the induction process for the F-16 a type they have been keen to procure. A type known to be reliable, cheap to operate and widely supported. They have six pilots in the US converting to type and have just ordered two new simulators from L3. You are right buying US comes with restrictions BUT what they are getting is proven and more then adequate for their regional defence needs. You make many sweeping statements about US parts restrictions but rather ignore the dire reputation Russia has for providing spares in a commercial sense for their fighters in recent years.
    Iraki airforce will be much bigger than few F-16s which may not show up when it is needed. Russia has excellent reputation for parts supply. See refurbishing/reengining IL-76 for China. second batch of MIG-29K delivery to India.


    Oh dear oh dear! Events have rather proven the acting defence minister over stretched himself your bluster doesn't change that. As I KEEP ON SAYING I have no problem with Iraq buying Russian, I think it makes good sense! I just question this particular $4.2 billion deal and the logic of buying a single fighter type the Mig-29. If they do buy the Mig-29 it is no skin off my nose, it will make future editions of AFM more interesting!
    frankly $4.2b is small amount for such large purchase. I believe training, parts and weopons will separate than capital expenditure.

    So when you are shown to be coming up with silly ill conceived bluster you switch to the childish attack and bring up the Saudi Typhoon deal... kel surprise! OK lets talk about the Saudi Typhoon deal and BAE Systems vs the Goshkov saga. Errrrr let me see has the Goshkov finished acceptance trials and been inducted into the Indian navy? Is it not running years and billions over time and schedule? Now lets see about Saudi Typhoons. 24 delivered and in service, 48 on order. Negotiations on further batches being negotiated. The major delay so far is the switch of production back to the UK because Saudi Arabia doesn't have the local skills base to assemble fast jets. Lack of skilled workers in Saudi Arabia is hardly BAE Systems fault and their ability to switch production back so quickly is to be commended. So hardly in a worse state then Gorshkov saga.
    Actually BAE deal is much worse than Gorskov saga. All financial matters regarding Gorskov are settled. and Russia got valuable experiance in Aircraft carrier operations and certifiying new multirole MIG-29K.
    BAE deal is price dispute. so there is only payment for 24 aircraft after 6 years. and those 24 aircrafts are standard not some specially developed version. so no new learning experiance. It is BAE fault of not knowing the skill levels of Saudi despite been in that country for 50 years in business. now it want to renegotiate at higher price.
    I jump on this topic JSR because interests me, I am genuinally interested in Iraq buying all sorts of stuff from all over the world. It makes for more interesting things to read about. Correcting your childish, ill thought out nationalistic posts is part of the fun.
    I didnot say you should not participate in this topic but atleast some background home work why it needs all those weopons.

    Big losers seem to be europeans... Eurocopter has a permanent stand at the Iraqi Army Aviation HQ (they are there nearly every week), but so far have sold just some EC-635s and trying to sell some EC-725s (for the upcoming VIP squadron) and some AS-565s for the coastal duties...
    Europeans will ultimately be big loser as rest of EU economic goes down and Germanic economic depends more and more on Russia/China. alot of military related export contracts will be embargoed where those two countries have interest.. see Taiwan example or Syria. where Germany is major hinderance.

  22. #82
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,232
    I didnot say you should not participate in this topic but atleast some background home work why it needs all those weopons.
    I am not going to bother with a longish reply as it is frankly the same old same old!

    You see I have done some back ground homework, you are some teenage troll sitting in his bedroom who doesn't have a clue what he is talking about.

    Who is the one here that has been banned before for trolling the forums?

    As I have repeatedly said I have no issues with Iraq buying Russian, you on the other hand like to spend plenty of time inventing all sorts of scenarios if it supports your world view. Remember your silly idea that strike aircraft need widely spaced engines and a fuselage spine! Many a good forum member sunk that with good well cited rebuttals and all you could do is blather on about unrelated issues!

    That you don't understand that closed door contracts with no oversight is a corrupt way of operating is rather sad. How is it BAE Systems fault that Saudi Arabia has a poor engineering skills base. Saudi Arabia stipulated it as part of the contract, BAE tried to accomodate and when it clearly wasn't to be production was shifted. That you are comparing it to the omni-shambles that is the Gorshkov contract is pitifully funny.

    Whilst you can't play nice and generally disrupt the forum the rest of us are getting on with an interesting debate. The new member sheytanelkebir has made some very interesting cited posts about why Iraq is interested in Russian defence procurement and is open to debate you on the other hand are only interested in hearing ... "RUSSIA GREAT"

    People have asked me before why I reply to you and it is simple, I enjoy rebutting your childish posts. You do realise that the rest of us laugh at you?
    Last edited by Fedaykin; 24th February 2013 at 17:24.
    Because sometimes in life we need a bit of fun

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXNAp3mKepc

  23. #83
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    4,359
    Quote Originally Posted by Fedaykin View Post
    As I have repeatedly said I have no issues with Iraq buying Russian, you on the other hand like to spend plenty of time inventing all sorts of scenarios if it supports your world view. Remember your silly idea that strike aircraft need widely spaced engines and a fuselage spine! Many a good forum member sunk that with good well cited rebuttals and all you could do is blather on about unrelated issues!
    when airplane does not have big spine relative to others. so where ur going to store fuel and electronics. not every plane has large wings. see F-16 example. wide space fuselage is necessary for efficient utilitization of space. see Flanker example of 4 AAMs between engines.
    That you don't understand that closed door contracts with no oversight is a corrupt way of operating is rather sad. How is it BAE Systems fault that Saudi Arabia has a poor engineering skills base. Saudi Arabia stipulated it as part of the contract, BAE tried to accomodate and when it clearly wasn't to be production was shifted. That you are comparing it to the omni-shambles that is the Gorshkov contract is pitifully funny.
    Agains its pricing dispute. BAE should have signed a contract with much higher price in begining as they would have known they are not going to be built inside KSA. now they are asking for higher prices.
    also Euro has appreicated compared to pound. and alot of parts/subsystems are from Euro zone. with slow implemention this is becomeing a factor. even Oman will get first Eurofighter after 5 years. see things are slowing down. every country in the world will see that Eurofighter are slow in delivery.
    Whilst you can't play nice and generally disrupt the forum the rest of us are getting on with an interesting debate. The new member sheytanelkebir has made some very interesting cited posts about why Iraq is interested in Russian defence procurement and is open to debate you on the other hand are only interested in hearing ... "RUSSIA GREAT"
    well he only provided the list of weopons with only one new information that MIG-29M advantage is sooner delivery. which is known fact as MIG-29 line is operational. There is alot of improvement in MIG-29 radar for ground survellence. This is going to be hard bargain for kurds.
    http://kurdpress.com/En/NSite/FullSt...#Title=Barzani says is ready to purchase weapons from Russia

  24. #84
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,232
    when airplane does not have big spine relative to others. so where ur going to store fuel and electronics. not every plane has large wings. see F-16 example. wide space fuselage is necessary for efficient utilitization of space. see Flanker example of 4 AAMs between engines.
    You carry on showing your lack of understanding of aircraft design...it gets funnier each time you type out the same silly stuff!

    Agains its pricing dispute. BAE should have signed a contract with much higher price in begining as they would have known they are not going to be built inside KSA. now they are asking for higher prices.
    also Euro has appreicated compared to pound. and alot of parts/subsystems are from Euro zone. with slow implemention this is becomeing a factor. even Oman will get first Eurofighter after 5 years. see things are slowing down. every country in the world will see that Eurofighter are slow in delivery.
    Nobody is denying that there is a pricing dispute over further Typhoon batches for the Saudi Airforce. That is different from saying the whole program is in a worse state then the Gorshkov refit shambles. BAE Systems have met their contractual obligations for the first batch and the type is in Saudi service unlike the INS Vikramaditya which is billions over budget and years behind with significant penalties to boot! Again keep on digging!

    well he only provided the list of weopons with only one new information that MIG-29M advantage is sooner delivery. which is known fact as MIG-29 line is operational. There is alot of improvement in MIG-29 radar for ground survellence. This is going to be hard bargain for kurds.
    http://kurdpress.com/En/NSite/FullSt...#Title=Barzani says is ready to purchase weapons from Russia
    So now it is about arms sales to the autonomous Kurdish region is it. So back to your old tricks switching subject...sigh.

    Why don't you read the article you posted, Putin stated he is happy to sell to Iraq but not to fuel a civil war.

    That the Mig-29 line is open is not disputed, that Iraq might well have a desire for the type is not disputed. I dispute the closed door deal made by the deputy defence minister and I tire of your statements about how Lockheed Martin can't meet delivery targets for the F-16 one of the most successful fighters in history with a very mature fully open production line.

    Keep digging
    Because sometimes in life we need a bit of fun

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXNAp3mKepc

  25. #85
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,755
    There's nothing wrong with combining the F-16 and Flanker - apart from the lack of engine commonality (and I'm not sure how big an issue that is - consider that none of the forces with both F-15s and F-16s have standardised on one engine type!) it's no different to having a two-tiered fleet of F-15s and F-16s after all. Hell, the Flanker is in fact the second most popular high-end complement to the Falcon after the F-15 and conversely the F-16 is the second most popular low end counterpart to the Flanker after the MiG-29 Granted, in both cases the classic F-15/F-16 and Su-27/MiG-29 combinations have a huge lead, but I'd submit that's primarily because the overlap between potential F-16 and Flanker customers is pretty narrow for *political* reasons, NOT because it doesn't make *military* sense.

    In the specific case of Iraq (assuming for a moment that the rumours are accurate) there are two questions which come to mind though:

    1. Can they afford a split high/low fleet? Arguably not, but then the same point could be made about Venezuela and Indonesia.

    2. Why is the variant in contention a relatively obsolete version, rather than the Irkut Su-30MK or the Su-35? It could be a schedule thing, as with the purpoted MiG-29M2 interest, but I doubt Irkut's timeline would be appreciably worse.
    Last edited by Trident; 24th February 2013 at 19:57.

  26. #86
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,232
    Point 2 you make there is what bugs me, it is like someone has hit the Su30 or Mig-29 wiki page and just randomly selected variants. That the Iraqi defence department website lists it kind of shows the fractured nature of their government.
    Because sometimes in life we need a bit of fun

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXNAp3mKepc

  27. #87
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,755
    Yes, that and the fact that the MiG is in there at all! Taking the F-16 acquisition as a given, Flanker/F-16 makes sense whereas MiG-29M2/F-16 (let alone Flanker/MiG-29M2/F-16!) doesn't. Venezuela evaluated the MiG-29M2 and we know how that turned out (not because there's anything wrong with it per se, but it's just not as good a complement when you already have F-16s).
    Last edited by Trident; 24th February 2013 at 19:36.

  28. #88
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    4,359
    Quote Originally Posted by Fedaykin View Post
    You carry on showing your lack of understanding of aircraft design...it gets funnier each time you type out the same silly stuff!
    what so funny about it. Aircraft with spine usually have more fuel and electronics space. see Su-34 compared to F-15E. or MIG-29K vs Rafale.


    Nobody is denying that there is a pricing dispute over further Typhoon batches for the Saudi Airforce. That is different from saying the whole program is in a worse state then the Gorshkov refit shambles. BAE Systems have met their contractual obligations for the first batch and the type is in Saudi service unlike the INS Vikramaditya which is billions over budget and years behind with significant penalties to boot! Again keep on digging!
    It seem you have very little understanding from manufacturer perspective.
    Slow implementation of Saudi deal is directly impacting BAE revenues. more over it is delaying delivery to new customers see Oman example. and it is not contributing to new development.
    while INS Vikramaditya is one off project of refurbishing 30 year old ship it does not impact anything else but all money has been received and experiance has been gained.

    So now it is about arms sales to the autonomous Kurdish region is it. So back to your old tricks switching subject...sigh.

    Why don't you read the article you posted, Putin stated he is happy to sell to Iraq but not to fuel a civil war.
    The problem is thise too issues are interlinked. South of Irak has more easy oil and free to market anywhere. Kurds have much less Oil and dont control the pipeline. so they cannot possibly afford such scale of weopons and training. and once this weopons flow through to Centeral Iraki government. they can overrun Kurdish region.
    That the Mig-29 line is open is not disputed, that Iraq might well have a desire for the type is not disputed. I dispute the closed door deal made by the deputy defence minister and I tire of your statements about how Lockheed Martin can't meet delivery targets for the F-16 one of the most successful fighters in history with a very mature fully open production line.

    Keep digging
    This is ur opinion not a fact that this closed door deal. otherwise why they are pursuing it because it is there own interest. F-16 is most succesful fighter in the past it does not mean it will be in future. LM may have redirect workers to F-35 or other projects where US government buy in bulk.
    MIG-29 line has this advantage that within a year after signing they can potentially get the fighters. which certainly no one from Europe can provide at such speed.

  29. #89
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Cemetery Junction
    Posts
    13,417
    Quote Originally Posted by MSphere View Post
    Have you seen recent prices for ROC? AH-64E $82mil a pop, UH-60M $56mil. That is hardly in the league of countries like Iraq.
    Iraq is a net external creditor. It has more foreign reserves than foreign debts. The last full year trade figures I've seen showed it exporting 50% more than it imported, by value.

    It's still a pretty poor country per head (poorer than at the end of the 1970s, before all the wars), but it has some money to spend. It can pay cash for weapons, which usually allows one to negotiate discounts.
    Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
    Justinian

  30. #90
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    2,114
    Regarding why the possible buy of MiG-29M2 and Su-30MK2. Let's face it the F-16 IQ on order now are basically useless in the contemporary world. They will be so downgraded and stuffed with bugs, and they will fly with refurbished outdated AIM-7 and AIM-9Ms, whose production stopped, i don't know, 15-20 years ago(!), that it ain't funny. I find it actually humiliating, i don't know why the iraqi government buys these very expensive junks, i guess only to appease the americans...

    Btw i would also not discount that they will be specifically tempered with so that if the israelis will want to carry an attack against Iran through iraqi airspace (or even on Iraq proper), the F-16 or their weapons systems will be disabled on command.

    The MiG and Su offer a capabilities from another world comparably. First there will be no restriction what Iraq can and cannot do (or touch!) with them. Second they will offer a full array of AAMs (including R-77) and AGMs, far exceeding whatever those F-16 will come with. It is a HI-LO mixture , with the Su-30MK2 (to be chosen probably because of the lower price) being sort of a poor man F-15E, and offering a decent strike or deterence capability. Also, Iraq should be well versed with using russian gear and knowing it's pros and cons. (and if what sheytanelkebir says in other places is true, then perhaps the iraqis are not that dissatisfied with russian gear).

    Oh btw, looking at pics of iraqi aircraft taken after the american invasion, and seeing all those aircraft vandalized by "liberating" thugs (some of them with inestimable historical value!), i think the iraqis should ask for compensation for each an every one vandalized. All things being equal, many of them could have been refurbished and today Iraq would have already one or two squadrons capable of QRA missions.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

- Part of the    Network -

KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS

MAGAZINES

AVIATION FORUM

SHOP

 

WEBSITES