Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 4 of 17 FirstFirst 1234567814 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 120 of 501

Thread: Which attack helicopter for Iraq?

  1. #91
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,232
    Quote Originally Posted by JSR View Post
    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.


    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.


    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.

    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.
    Yep not a clue when it comes to the matters at hand...funnier and funnier
    Because sometimes in life we need a bit of fun

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

  2. #92
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    778
    The issue with buying both MiG29M and SU30 is delivery times from what I understand. Iraq does not have a single air defence fighter at the moment, and the first F16s won't be in Iraq for another year... and SU30s can't be built very quickly... whereas I understand there's a batch of undelivered MiG29M/M2 for Syria that the Iraqis can take up...

    the choice of SU30 variant is strange... of course Iraqis stipulate no israeli parts, so something like the MKI is not an option. Once again, most probably component availability / delivery schedule played a major role... Iraqis are looking for initial operational capability as they are starting from 0... once they have a few squadrons in service they can begin thinking of "luxuries" like upgrading capabilities and long lead times...

    With regards to why they are also talking with a "european" side for supplying fighters (either rafale or eurofighter), I really don't know... though in an interview with the air force commander he did mention interest in the METEOR and ASTER missiles. (means nothing, can simply be a ruse to get the americans to deliver AMRAAMs)

    with regards to the old planes... you mean things like this... if you spend years and billions on patrols and can't shoot it down get revenge some other ways...

  3. #93
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    778
    With regards to the F16IQ... the Iraqi planes will, in the medium-long term end up as strike fighters, and their equipment for that role is pretty good... they get the full APG68v9 with ISAR, SNIPER pods for every aircraft, a mix of 12 singe + 6 twin seaters for each batch (2 batches only) and CFTs for extra range (also some recon pods, and lots of LGBs and older PGMs)... very much an attack aircraft oriented setup. the abysmal AAMs mean that they can hardly defend Iraqi airspace at all (and that is not even considering the lack of AEW&C in the Iraqi Air Force).

    Anyhow, the future iraqi air force is a purely defensive setup, and whatever planes they buy will be only in small batches... they will spread orders around as many "major powers" as possible and basically do their best to avoid ending up like saddam's Iraq by pi*sing off too many powerful people...

  4. #94
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,232
    I agree sheytanelkebir the only way the Mig-29 can beat the F-16IQ delivery wise is if they take the Syrian examples. Problem is the pilots, the first ones for the F-16 are in the US converting to type others would have to be found to go to Russia to convert to the Mig. I think it would be a couple of years at least until and Mig purchase could be declared fully operational and that is with an aggressive adoption schedule. Now add in the pilots needed to continue working up the F-16IQ and the L-159 and the idea that a Russian Mig purchase could be declared operational in under a year is absurd!

    The cynic in me says this is more about screwing a good deal out of the Americans and internal turf wars within the Iraqi government.
    Because sometimes in life we need a bit of fun

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

  5. #95
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    778
    Iraqis using the russian deal to drive bargains with the americans is of course one aspect... (they are doing the same with threats of buying a european plane / METEOR if the americans dont deliver AMRAAMs in future).

    I don't know how they intend to IOC the MiG29M quickly... but basically the planes will be flown and maintained by "contractors" for a year or two at least...

    understand that they have huge number of infrastructure projects going on now in iraq... ramping up oil production massively with the largest increase in incremental oil production in the world as well as associated ports, pipelines etc under construction... and plenty of conflicts and enemies outside and within... to get an idea why they are so openly buying weapons. The Iraqi government has foreign exchange reserves of $130Bn so there's no shortage of money to pay for "contractors" and early delivery premiums.
    Last edited by sheytanelkebir; 24th February 2013 at 22:08.

  6. #96
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,232
    Thing is I wouldn't call the AIM-9M or the AIM-7M-F1/H Sparrow abysmal, they are perfectly good air to air missiles and more then adequate to deter incursions. The jet is already compatible with more advanced missiles and the rail launchers are the same regardless. Getting several hundred missiles fairly cheaply to start off with is not to be sniffed at. As pointed out the F-16IQ are mainly needed for their ground attack capabilities at the moment. More advanced missiles can be considered down the line.
    Because sometimes in life we need a bit of fun

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

  7. #97
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    2,114
    The issue with buying both MiG29M and SU30 is delivery times from what I understand. Iraq does not have a single air defence fighter at the moment, and the first F16s won't be in Iraq for another year... and SU30s can't be built very quickly... whereas I understand there's a batch of undelivered MiG29M/M2 for Syria that the Iraqis can take up...
    Weren't the first F-16s supposed to arrive in Iraq next month? Christ it takes LM 4 years to build a damn F-16?! They're dragging their feet big time are they.

    Btw, the pic you posted of the M1 climbing on a MiG-25, it's a PS.

  8. #98
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Cemetery Junction
    Posts
    13,420
    Quote Originally Posted by mack8 View Post
    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.....
    AIM-9M production ended 15-20 years ago? AIM-9X didn't reach IOC until 2003 - ten years ago. Full rate production was approved in 2004. What do you think was being built up to then?
    Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
    Justinian

  9. #99
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    2,114
    Quote Originally Posted by swerve View Post
    AIM-9M production ended 15-20 years ago? AIM-9X didn't reach IOC until 2003 - ten years ago. Full rate production was approved in 2004. What do you think was being built up to then?
    I was referring to both. Would be interesting to find out when was the last lot of AIM-9Ms built for the US (because most likely that's where the missiles will come from). As for the AIM-7M, the newest ones must be indeed about 20 years old.

  10. #100
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    9,149
    Regarding Su-30 and Israeli parts, the Malaysians had similar reservations, hence the Su-30MKM. Of course by now there is the (almost) fully Russian Su-30SM , so that would not be a problem.

    Irkut can make Su-30s pretty fast too, probably a decent batch could be ready 1.5 years after contract is signed.
    http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/9098/rsz11rsz3807.jpg

  11. #101
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,756
    Yes, an Irkut-built Su-30 includes only as much Israeli equipment as the customer wants, there is no requirement to fit any. And if the MiG-29M2 is supposed to be a stop-gap solution to tide them over until Su-30s arrive there is even less justification for selecting the least advanced model. Since there is no rush thanks to the interim MiGs, why settle for anything less than a Su-30MKM or Su-35?

  12. #102
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cataclysm
    Posts
    8,742
    Quote Originally Posted by mack8 View Post
    I was referring to both. Would be interesting to find out when was the last lot of AIM-9Ms built for the US (because most likely that's where the missiles will come from). As for the AIM-7M, the newest ones must be indeed about 20 years old.
    The first AIM-9M-1 came in 1982 and the last AIM-9M-8/9 mods were fielded in 1995. It is by all means a three decades old technology but it is still in production, AFAIK. At least based on a 2012 contract, Naval Air Systems Command is getting up to 1,200 MK36 Mod 11 and Mod 13 rocket motors for AIM-9M yearly.

  13. #103
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    778
    Quote Originally Posted by mack8 View Post
    Weren't the first F-16s supposed to arrive in Iraq next month? Christ it takes LM 4 years to build a damn F-16?! They're dragging their feet big time are they.

    Btw, the pic you posted of the M1 climbing on a MiG-25, it's a PS.
    oh I didn't realise its a PS ...

    yes the first 2 F16s will arrive in Iraq in March 2014. The full 36 planes will arrive by 2018... in the meantime wars are raging all around Iraq and Iraq's oil production increase is beginning to step on many toes (OPEC quotas, oil price wars etc...). Hence they need aircraft urgently, and most probably need "contractors" to operate them initially... perhaps its easier to find russian contractors to take on these operational tasks in the interim than US/european contractors. Also for air defence the Iraqi air defence command was only established in december 2011 (when the US withdrew)... and so far all they have are some S60 / ZU23-2 and 8 AVENGER launchers to defend all of Iraq's airspace


    with regards to the AiM9M / AiM7s... by 2018 when the last F16s are delivered all of Iraq's neighbourhood (Israel, Turkey, Jordan, Saudi, Kuwait, Qatar etc...) will have Aim120-C5 / C7 armed fighters and AiM9-X-II AAMs... Iranians will most probably have some locally made chinese AAMs (PL12?) on their refurbished fighters... saudis probably also some METEORs and other advanced AAMs for their fighter fleets (lets discount the SA advantage of operating AEW&C aircraft) and its quite clear that Iraq as a country that by that time will be producing 6-7M barrels of oil a day, and all the neighbours above being both economic competitors (oil) as well as political/religious/regional rivals would be in a position to politically and economically blackmail Iraq into doing their bidding as Iraq will be in no position to even defend its border (not that any of them would attempt an outright invasion, but certainly military/political blackmail and shunning as is happening now)...
    Last edited by sheytanelkebir; 25th February 2013 at 00:53.

  14. #104
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Limousin France
    Posts
    951
    Maybe a better stopgap fighter would have been Mirage F1 MF2000 from the french as it was a type they had operated in a lesser form before and would have been a good multi-role platform and could have been there in numbers by now and given them time to think what next


  15. #105
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    778
    I believe Dassault tried selling these to Iraq but wanted about $1Bn for 18 planes so the Iraqis said no.

    Anyway, the Iraqi parliament passed a resolution (to prevent corruption) which states that weapons purchased have to be "brand new"... which discounts these types out of hand. Now the only "second hand" weapons the Iraqis can get are of the "Excess Defence Articles" type... or for example in the case of the L159 deal they were "free" (the first 4 airframes)... ditto for the 6 gazelles they received (they were "free" with the order for 24+26 options EC-635s).

    So If france offered to Iraq some Rafales, they could "donate" some F1s for interim use until Rafales can be delivered... it would be the only "legal" way for Iraq to obtain them.

  16. #106
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Limousin France
    Posts
    951
    Only a foreign adviser with something to gain would come up with that law madness oh well there loss could been doing there own QRA by now with F1’s and they would have been more capable than the Migs

  17. #107
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    443
    Quote Originally Posted by Tempest414 View Post
    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 think a multirole helicopter like Lynx wildcat combined with a UAS like the Gray Eagle would be a good solution. More flexible than a dedicated attack helicopter.

  18. #108
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    443
    US Army completes initial tests on Block III Apache [Flightglobal]

    Any Block III can accept either radar or UTA - or neither, if the commander so chooses, according to Lt Col Dan Bailey, the army's Block III product manager.

    The system allows Block III pilots to control the sensors and weapons on a Gray Eagle or direct its path. Eventually pilots will be able to control an AAI RQ-7 Shadow UAV, once it is upgraded to use the Ku-band data-link, Bailey adds.
    Its unlikely that the US will export this kind of technology though..

  19. #109
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    9,149
    Quote Originally Posted by Tempest414 View Post
    Only a foreign adviser with something to gain would come up with that law madness oh well there loss could been doing there own QRA by now with F1’s and they would have been more capable than the Migs
    F1s more capable than MiG-29s? Especially MiG-29Ms?

    That's ridiculously wrong.
    http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/9098/rsz11rsz3807.jpg

  20. #110
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    295
    Quote Originally Posted by TR1 View Post
    Regarding Su-30 and Israeli parts, the Malaysians had similar reservations, hence the Su-30MKM. Of course by now there is the (almost) fully Russian Su-30SM , so that would not be a problem.

    Irkut can make Su-30s pretty fast too, probably a decent batch could be ready 1.5 years after contract is signed.
    hm indeed, an MKM or MKA variant for Iraq makes good sense.. especially since IAPO is not getting as much love as KNAAPO these days..

    a MiG-29, Su-30, F-16 mix is not sensible either. ideally they should just stick to the Su-30. but we know the US will shove down the F-16 regardless, down their throats.
    No to MiG-29, it doesn't offer anything radically different than the F-16 while the Su-30 provides range and payload the other two can't.

    As for Mi-28 being selected.. its not surprising.. the Iraqi's probably got discouraged from Apaches after seeing how farmers can shoot one down.

  21. #111
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    778
    MiG29M offers the following advantages over the F16 for Iraq.

    1- rapid delivery schedule
    2- R77 AAMs vs Sparrows
    3- can be used against countries the US doesn't allow Iraq to use the F16s against

    F16s are destined to become dedicated attack aircraft from what's been happening and the Iraqi configuration (as stated earlier).

  22. #112
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    295
    Quote Originally Posted by sheytanelkebir View Post
    MiG29M offers the following advantages over the F16 for Iraq.

    1- rapid delivery schedule
    2- R77 AAMs vs Sparrows
    3- can be used against countries the US doesn't allow Iraq to use the F16s against

    F16s are destined to become dedicated attack aircraft from what's been happening and the Iraqi configuration (as stated earlier).
    it doesn't matter because Iraq is getting the F-16s anyways.
    Also Su-30 will do all those things the MiG-29M can do, but better.
    only the rapid delivery schedule could be a problem.

  23. #113
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cataclysm
    Posts
    8,742
    Funny that procurement and operating cost are not even mentioned in this debate. If you guys manage your private finances the same way you pick up fighter aircraft then I am slowly starting to grasp why almost everyone on this planet is in debt.

  24. #114
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    4,368
    Quote Originally Posted by sheytanelkebir View Post
    Hence they need aircraft urgently, and most probably need "contractors" to operate them initially... perhaps its easier to find russian contractors to take on these operational tasks in the interim than US/european contractors.
    MIG-29M is new plane with glass cockpit. It will have to come with newly trained and higher priced factory pilots
    with regards to the AiM9M / AiM7s... by 2018 when the last F16s are delivered all of Iraq's neighbourhood (Israel, Turkey, Jordan, Saudi, Kuwait, Qatar etc...) will have Aim120-C5 / C7 armed fighters and AiM9-X-II AAMs... Iranians will most probably have some locally made chinese AAMs (PL12?) on their refurbished fighters... saudis probably also some METEORs and other advanced AAMs for their fighter fleets (lets discount the SA advantage of operating AEW&C aircraft) and its quite clear that Iraq as a country that by that time will be producing 6-7M barrels of oil a day, and all the neighbours above being both economic competitors (oil) as well as political/religious/regional rivals would be in a position to politically and economically blackmail Iraq into doing their bidding as Iraq will be in no position to even defend its border (not that any of them would attempt an outright invasion, but certainly military/political blackmail and shunning as is happening now)...
    Iraq will not have to worry about 2018 or any kind of quotos. These countries will not even matter.

    hm indeed, an MKM or MKA variant for Iraq makes good sense.. especially since IAPO is not getting as much love as KNAAPO these days..

    a MiG-29, Su-30, F-16 mix is not sensible either. ideally they should just stick to the Su-30. but we know the US will shove down the F-16 regardless, down their throats.
    No to MiG-29, it doesn't offer anything radically different than the F-16 while the Su-30 provides range and payload the other two can't.

    As for Mi-28 being selected.. its not surprising.. the Iraqi's probably got discouraged from Apaches after seeing how farmers can shoot one down.
    Su-30 does not make any sense. It is inferior fighter to MIG-29M in flight performance. MI-29M with RD-33MK engine will be comparable to Su-35. and it is already has radar fully developed for ground operations. MIG-29M is sufficient for airdefence task. and nothing preventing integrating RVV-BD into it.

  25. #115
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Limousin France
    Posts
    951
    Quote Originally Posted by TR1 View Post
    F1s more capable than MiG-29s? Especially MiG-29Ms?

    That's ridiculously wrong.
    Sorry about making such a statement as more capable

    We all know that the Mig 29m is better in the A2A role and it has a A2G capability I just felt that F1-FM2000 with western guided weapons and recce-pod plus French A2A missiles would be better in the A2G and recce role with the ability to hold its own in A2A in the right hands might be a better all-rounder

    But I am not that up on the A2G and recce capability of Mig-29m

  26. #116
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    778
    Quote Originally Posted by MSphere View Post
    Funny that procurement and operating cost are not even mentioned in this debate. If you guys manage your private finances the same way you pick up fighter aircraft then I am slowly starting to grasp why almost everyone on this planet is in debt.
    as the famous iraqi poet al mutanabi wrote:
    "oh nation whose ignorance is the cause of laughter of nations" (bad translation!)

    iraqi government / defence committee is full of imbeciles... but this is off topic.

  27. #117
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,232
    JSR
    Su-30 does not make any sense. It is inferior fighter to MIG-29M in flight performance.


    And you want us to respect your well* researched points with statements like that! Geez!

    *As in not a foggy clue about aircraft, flight dynamics, avionics and engines!
    Because sometimes in life we need a bit of fun

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

  28. #118
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    4,368
    Quote Originally Posted by Fedaykin View Post


    And you want us to respect your well* researched points with statements like that! Geez!

    *As in not a foggy clue about aircraft, flight dynamics, avionics and engines!
    Why do u think MIG-29K exist when its production line practically went offline compared to Flanker in late 1990s. MIG-29M is further light weight with superior TWR than Su-30. which is more like trainer/bomb truck. Su-30 top speed/altitude is all reduced compared to baseline Flanker.
    MIG-29M has 5 weight points. similar capability to Su-30 in most situation. Above all AESA upgrade is practically certified for MIG-29 upgrades.

  29. #119
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    954
    Quote Originally Posted by JSR View Post
    Why do u think MIG-29K exist when its production line practically went offline compared to Flanker in late 1990s. MIG-29M is further light weight with superior TWR than Su-30. which is more like trainer/bomb truck. Su-30 top speed/altitude is all reduced compared to baseline Flanker.
    MIG-29M has 5 weight points. similar capability to Su-30 in most situation. Above all AESA upgrade is practically certified for MIG-29 upgrades.
    Sorry to jump in here, I am a bit puzzled, isn't the Su-30MKI production line still open, and isn't there still another 100 odd aircraft left to be delivered to India, meaning that there is plenty of scope for ordering Su-30 for Iraq as it's very much an active production line? Plus as of date there appears to be far more Su-30MKI alone in service than Mig-29M's, so surely from the point of view of lower upgrade costs it would be better to buy a modern Su-30 variant without Israeli systems than the Mig-29M which has only been built in small numbers as then there will be a bigger user base to support the cost of future upgrades? Plus according to Wikipedia (less than 100% accurate I know) India is replacing the Su-30MKI’s PESA radar with an AESA radar, so presumably Iraq could procure a Su-30 based fighter with AESA radar without too much trouble?

    While JSR may well be correct that the Mig-29M's kinematic performance is better, I cannot see any good reasons why Iraq wouldn't buy the SU-30, so what am I missing !?!

    PS what is a weight point?
    If having a little knowledge is dangerous then I must be bloody deadly

  30. #120
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,151
    Noob question : why not a eurocanard?
    But i thought the thread title was about choppers? Lost in translation.

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