Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 120 of 384

Thread: Serbian Air Force has started lookig in to new fighters

  1. #91
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Schimatari, Greece
    Posts
    657
    Quote Originally Posted by Rimmer View Post
    In about 1-2 years there will be 100-150 F-7P and soon F-7PG airframes available from PAF.

    Advantges include

    1) Relativleycheap to make NATO compatable as already have Grifo Radar and AIM-9M

    2) Serb pilots know the MIG-21well

    3) Ideal for policing role

    4) PAF will certainly not want alot of money
    How many years have they been flying and how many flying hours do they have left?

  2. #92
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    552
    Quote Originally Posted by HAWX ace View Post
    How many years have they been flying and how many flying hours do they have left?
    First F-7s were delivered in early 90s and last ones in late 90s. So certainly not old. Not sure of hours on the frame though.

  3. #93
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Schimatari, Greece
    Posts
    657
    Quote Originally Posted by Rimmer View Post
    First F-7s were delivered in early 90s and last ones in late 90s. So certainly not old. Not sure of hours on the frame though.
    So, PAF received in the nineties a copy of the MiG-21 of the fifties? That's odd. What's more, some of them should be just 10 years in service, so indeed not old at all. Why would PAF want to get rid of them so early, one might wonder?

    Of course, SeAF wouldn't buy all of them, but they would probably ask for some of the latest airframes, not the earliest.

  4. #94
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    552
    Quote Originally Posted by HAWX ace View Post
    So, PAF received in the nineties a copy of the MiG-21 of the fifties? That's odd. What's more, some of them should be just 10 years in service, so indeed not old at all. Why would PAF want to get rid of them so early, one might wonder?

    Of course, SeAF wouldn't buy all of them, but they would probably ask for some of the latest airframes, not the earliest.
    Not odd, many air forces are receiving F-15s, Jaguars etc.These are 70s designs.

    They are being replaced by JF-17s. First F-7s then Mirage ROSEs are being phased out. In fact PAF now has 40 surplus A-5s that JF-17 has replaced.

    The newer F-7s have plenty of life left. PAF may offer them for sale. The only problem maybe Pakistan is very pro Bosnia-Herogovina.

  5. #95
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Sydney NSW AU
    Posts
    497
    Quote Originally Posted by Rimmer View Post
    Not odd, many air forces are receiving F-15s, Jaguars etc.These are 70s designs.

    They are being replaced by JF-17s. First F-7s then Mirage ROSEs are being phased out. In fact PAF now has 40 surplus A-5s that JF-17 has replaced.

    The newer F-7s have plenty of life left. PAF may offer them for sale. The only problem maybe Pakistan is very pro Bosnia-Herogovina.


    I hope they end up in Bosnia or Albania... anything being "replaced" by JF17 can be safely assumed to be old, obsolite and useless. Since JF17 is rated at 15-20 Million, and can be equiped with Israely,Russian,Chinese or Western radar avionics might as well go for that.. taking mig21 derivetives even for free would be terrible idea.

    We could probably equip j22s with AAMs and have good enough AC for "policing". I think SrAF is looking for maintaining culture and capability of modern AF, at limited budget... which is why getting limited number of modern units if better way to go, than getting a lot of old and obsolite. 40-50 mig 21 derivatives will cost you over 10 years more than 12 Mig 29/35s yet provide nowhere near same cabability.. even if we were to get them for free.

    Maintanence , upgrades, training 40-50 crews and service personel... all costing fortune, yet offering 0 capability.

    Might as well get 40-50 spitfires and use that... would make the Arifroce one hell of a tourist attraction.

  6. #96
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    552
    Quote Originally Posted by DJ. View Post
    I hope they end up in Bosnia or Albania... anything being "replaced" by JF17 can be safely assumed to be old, obsolite and useless. Since JF17 is rated at 15-20 Million, and can be equiped with Israely,Russian,Chinese or Western radar avionics might as well go for that.. taking mig21 derivetives even for free would be terrible idea.

    We could probably equip j22s with AAMs and have good enough AC for "policing". I think SrAF is looking for maintaining culture and capability of modern AF, at limited budget... which is why getting limited number of modern units if better way to go, than getting a lot of old and obsolite. 40-50 mig 21 derivatives will cost you over 10 years more than 12 Mig 29/35s yet provide nowhere near same cabability.. even if we were to get them for free.

    Maintanence , upgrades, training 40-50 crews and service personel... all costing fortune, yet offering 0 capability.

    Might as well get 40-50 spitfires and use that... would make the Arifroce one hell of a tourist attraction.
    Funny how you talk down unducting such planes. Yet anyoen can see 40-50 Grifo equipped and AIM-9L F-7PGs would be a quntam leap in capability in forSerb AF. Right now anyone could fly over Serbia almost unchallanged. If you do wish Bosnia or Kosovo took these planes, that would gives thme a much better equppied air force, and I dont see Serbian pilots in Rafales or Typhoons anytime soon....

  7. #97
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Sydney NSW AU
    Posts
    497
    Quote Originally Posted by Rimmer View Post
    Funny how you talk down unducting such planes. Yet anyoen can see 40-50 Grifo equipped and AIM-9L F-7PGs would be a quntam leap in capability in forSerb AF.
    How is 30y old Chinese copy, of 50y old Russian design, with 20y old radar, and firing 32y old AIM 9L ... a "quantum" leap over current MiG29 (few as they are) and MiG21 Bis ??? JF17 would hardly be a "quantum leap" over those, let alone AC it replaces.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rimmer View Post
    "Right now anyone could fly over Serbia almost unchallanged." .
    Not quite, but not far from the truth. However F7s would hardly help that situation. Like i have said, if they wanted to go down that path why not upgrade existing MiG21s to Bison??? Get proper BVR capability. Because they are not interested in spending money on obsolite design. Rather stick with what you have until you can procure something worthwile. .


    Quote Originally Posted by Rimmer View Post
    If you do wish Bosnia or Kosovo took these planes, that would gives thme a much better equppied air force,.
    Read above.


    Quote Originally Posted by Rimmer View Post
    and I dont see Serbian pilots in Rafales or Typhoons anytime soon....
    Neither do I... ever. MiG29/35 on the other hand makes perfect sense. Heck we even have facilities to conduct complete overhaul and maitenece in Serbia.

    You also seem to not reading what ive said. Gripen would be perfect for us.. but the problem is US content and weapons... so why would you suggest 30y old AIM9L which made by which country????

    Only reasonable thing to do with all versions of MiG21/F7s at this point in time, is scrap metal. Cheap models like JF17,LCA, T50 (FA50) with much better preformance and equipment levels nulify only reason that justified those aircraft being kept in existance .... which is cost.

  8. #98
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    flying high
    Posts
    4,594
    Quote Originally Posted by Sens View Post
    A reliable advice. "One of the cheapest aircraft to operate for one of the wealthiest Balkan countries?!"
    Serbia should think twice before going cheap on defence. Albania and Kosovo are still a serious threat to the country. they need a force that could at least down a few NATO fighters before being wiped out. Anything less is a waste of money.
    Member of ACIG

    an unnamed Luftwaffe officer:"Typhoon is a warm weather plane. If you want to be operational at -20°C you have to deploy the F-4F."

  9. #99
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    552
    Quote Originally Posted by DJ. View Post
    How is 30y old Chinese copy, of 50y old Russian design, with 20y old radar, and firing 32y old AIM 9L ... a "quantum" leap over current MiG29 (few as they are) and MiG21 Bis ??? JF17 would hardly be a "quantum leap" over those, let alone AC it replaces.



    Not quite, but not far from the truth. However F7s would hardly help that situation. Like i have said, if they wanted to go down that path why not upgrade existing MiG21s to Bison??? Get proper BVR capability. Because they are not interested in spending money on obsolite design. Rather stick with what you have until you can procure something worthwile. .

    Also,since when is the AIM-9M 30 years old? What books have you been reading?




    Read above.




    Neither do I... ever. MiG29/35 on the other hand makes perfect sense. Heck we even have facilities to conduct complete overhaul and maitenece in Serbia.

    You also seem to not reading what ive said. Gripen would be perfect for us.. but the problem is US content and weapons... so why would you suggest 30y old AIM9L which made by which country????

    Only reasonable thing to do with all versions of MiG21/F7s at this point in time, is scrap metal. Cheap models like JF17,LCA, T50 (FA50) with much better preformance and equipment levels nulify only reason that justified those aircraft being kept in existance .... which is cost.


    If you look at Romanian Lancer example you will see that a MIG-21 airframe with amodern radar (which Grifo certianly is) and AIM-9M is a potent combo for basic interception duties.

    I wont reply to the cheap snipe at JF-17, its not part f this thread,and shows some ignorance.

    As mentioned, such a capability would be better then 30 year old MIG-21s and MIG29s. In fact, we dont even know if the current Serb AF would be capable of availability let alone upgrades....


    You are right, in an ideal world you should wait for Gripen, but it seems you dont have the time or money. I also doubt you have the trained manpoer to operate such adavnced aircraft without a long period of training Serb pilots and engineers.

  10. #100
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,867
    D.J.,

    If you can afford it, just upgrade/replenish your MiG-29 fleet with new MiG-29s or even updated older airframes from the Russian stockpile. Far more potent and versatile than any beat up F-7 or JF-17. The Russians have long been Serb "supporters" in the int. arena if memory serves me right so thats a plus.

  11. #101
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    belgrade, serbia
    Posts
    3,505
    Quote Originally Posted by Rimmer View Post
    in an ideal world you should wait for Gripen, but it seems you dont have the time or money
    The general thrust of my earlier post was that while the Serbian AF may not have the money, they do have the time. So no need to do anything rash like purchasing second-hand, second-rate fighters that won't provide anything in terms of capability* beyond what is already there but would bolster the numbers. Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against the F-7 but it is certainly not the right choice of aircraft for Serbia.

    * I know it is a potent aircraft in its own right but a "quantum leap" in capability it is not.
    Regards, Ivan

  12. #102
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,045
    Quote Originally Posted by Teer View Post
    D.J.,

    If you can afford it, just upgrade/replenish your MiG-29 fleet with new MiG-29s or even updated older airframes from the Russian stockpile. Far more potent and versatile than any beat up F-7 or JF-17. The Russians have long been Serb "supporters" in the int. arena if memory serves me right so thats a plus.
    Upgrade old airframe is a bad idea. Pilot still need training time/hand on time on the real plane, sharpen their skill. Old airframe can only take that much of airtime. Overstress it will shorten their life even faster and accident will bound to happen.

    Old airframe, no matter how they patch will still be old airframe. Crack will appear sooner or later. Aircraft are not like tank. Old tank breaks down and stop running. Airplane breaks down what happen? Drop from sky and that's it.

    Plus, Mig-29 running on 2 engines are high maintenance. I would rather Serbia spend the available money on new airframe which is low in maintenance.
    Take control of yrself and u will control the world!

  13. #103
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    3,476
    Quote Originally Posted by DJ. View Post
    Bulgaria has always been looked at with distrust... especially since they have historical habit of stabbing us in the back when we least expect it.

    11th century
    12th century
    13th century
    14th century
    1812
    1854
    1889
    Balkan wars
    WW1
    WW2
    .. and last year when they made firm promise to Serbia to vote on our side in the international court.. and then voted against us in the last moment...

    All of the Backstabs above came from pretense of friendship.... In fact we have had more wars with Bulgaria than any other Nation including Croats,Albania even Germany ,Austria and Turkey.


    ... All that said... right now there is no thension with Serbia and Bulgaria.. apart the above mentioned case in international court. Bulgaria - FYROM... is a whole another matter... but this time around people in Serbia do not give a damn what happens to FYROM... and rightfully so. We got our own problems.

    So in short, while in the past Kingdoms of Serbia/Kingdoms of Yugoslavia, and SFRJ (Tito) always kept a worrying aye on Bulgaria, (with good reason) and always made sure that militarily we could counter them or preferably out match... right now they are non issue for us.. and we have no need to "match them"... or anybody in the region... bar maybe Croats.
    very interesting.. yet are not the Bulgarians nearly similar in ethnicity and language to Serbians? especially more so than the Russians?

    anyways I agree with Showtunes, you people don't realize the mig-29 even if capable, is heavy in maintenance and a non-flying aircraft is more useless than a weaker single engined aircraft that can generate a high sortie rate.

    if you guys want to deter Bulgaria and their expansion via proxy with their Macedonian cousins, more single engined fighters that are cheaper to operate, like the Gripen (or the JF-17 and Tejas, which is the poor man 3rd world Gripen) will be very useful. better money can be focused on cas/trainers like Yak-130, and ground units.

  14. #104
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Sydney NSW AU
    Posts
    497
    Quote Originally Posted by J-7 Hotdog View Post
    very interesting.. yet are not the Bulgarians nearly similar in ethnicity and language to Serbians? especially more so than the Russians?

    anyways I agree with Showtunes, you people don't realize the mig-29 even if capable, is heavy in maintenance and a non-flying aircraft is more useless than a weaker single engined aircraft that can generate a high sortie rate.

    if you guys want to deter Bulgaria and their expansion via proxy with their Macedonian cousins, more single engined fighters that are cheaper to operate, like the Gripen (or the JF-17 and Tejas, which is the poor man 3rd world Gripen) will be very useful. better money can be focused on cas/trainers like Yak-130, and ground units.
    Bulgarians are slavs, but not as closely related to Serbs as say Croats. Also we have no reason to deter Bulgaria.. i dont even know how we got them involved into this debate .

    Right now Serbia does not have to rush its decision.. like Ink has explained. Regarding Mig29s , we have managed just fine with them from the last 20+ years... we have the know how, facilites and ability to maintain them. Some people are confusing sorry state of Fulcrums in 29 with Embargo and lack of help for Russia. Not so, they were in sorry state becasue Milosevic regime made sure Army was in sorry state, and Police was well funded. Yes some things have to come from Russia but majority can be done at home, which is pluss. Further more mig35 or 29k are not in the same position as early versions. Lots of engineering went into making newer models easier to live with, and yes two eingined AC is allways bit more dearer to run, but it is not a staggering difference... plus like i said above.. its better to have one squadron of modern jets, then 4-5 of obsolite ones.

  15. #105
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Schimatari, Greece
    Posts
    657
    Quote Originally Posted by DJ. View Post
    and yes two eingined AC is allways bit more dearer to run, but it is not a staggering difference...
    So many countries have been using twin engined airplanes for decades and still do (F-4Es, Jaguars, Alpha Jets and especially F-5A-Fs), noone ever complained. It doesn't make any difference really, if a country decides that it needs a specific fighter, it won't reject it because it has two engines. Other factors matter much more.

  16. #106
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Posts
    12,077
    Quote Originally Posted by seahawk View Post
    Serbia should think twice before going cheap on defence. Albania and Kosovo are still a serious threat to the country. they need a force that could at least down a few NATO fighters before being wiped out. Anything less is a waste of money.
    Neither Albania as a NATO member nor the Kosovo do field an air-force with fast jets to stay polite. The insane idea to down a few NATO fighter before being wiped out is not even ironic.
    Like Switzerland and Austria f.e. the Serbs have the right and the task to control their airspace. A small striking-force as a deterence for low scale border incidents is justified too. Just to win some time for a political solution about that. Whatever fighter Serbia may loose in that related task, the loss of that can not be ignored and is a signal to trigger a political solution.
    Another example was the use of Mi-24s by Macedonia against a minority turmoil, which forced in the European community to demand a political solution instead.

  17. #107
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    482
    Quote Originally Posted by Showtime 100 View Post
    Upgrade old airframe is a bad idea. Pilot still need training time/hand on time on the real plane, sharpen their skill. Old airframe can only take that much of airtime. Overstress it will shorten their life even faster and accident will bound to happen.

    Old airframe, no matter how they patch will still be old airframe. Crack will appear sooner or later. Aircraft are not like tank. Old tank breaks down and stop running. Airplane breaks down what happen? Drop from sky and that's it.

    Plus, Mig-29 running on 2 engines are high maintenance. I would rather Serbia spend the available money on new airframe which is low in maintenance.
    Upgrading Migs, which have a short life (certainly the engines), isn't making much better. Upgrading is not cheap and cost lot of time. We have seen certain Mig21 upgrades which were not a success. I have the same idea about mig29. Just add some more cash and get a Flanker.

  18. #108
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    3,559
    Quote Originally Posted by Insig View Post
    Upgrading Migs, which have a short life (certainly the engines), isn't making much better. Upgrading is not cheap and cost lot of time. We have seen certain Mig21 upgrades which were not a success. I have the same idea about mig29. Just add some more cash and get a Flanker.
    If you look at the IAF MIg 29 A/B upgrade underway right now, it significantly increases service life while adding capabilities that makes it equal (atleast in A2A) to the Block 50 F16s. IIRC these were the first Fulcrums sold exported to any country and are as old as they come. The cost of the upgrade is not high by any means either.
    Love Planes, Live Planes

  19. #109
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    3,476
    Quote Originally Posted by DJ. View Post
    Bulgarians are slavs, but not as closely related to Serbs as say Croats. Also we have no reason to deter Bulgaria.. i dont even know how we got them involved into this debate .

    Right now Serbia does not have to rush its decision.. like Ink has explained. Regarding Mig29s , we have managed just fine with them from the last 20+ years... we have the know how, facilites and ability to maintain them. Some people are confusing sorry state of Fulcrums in 29 with Embargo and lack of help for Russia. Not so, they were in sorry state becasue Milosevic regime made sure Army was in sorry state, and Police was well funded. Yes some things have to come from Russia but majority can be done at home, which is pluss. Further more mig35 or 29k are not in the same position as early versions. Lots of engineering went into making newer models easier to live with, and yes two eingined AC is allways bit more dearer to run, but it is not a staggering difference... plus like i said above.. its better to have one squadron of modern jets, then 4-5 of obsolite ones.
    a bit sad, rivalry with the Croats and Slovenes yet they are much closer to you than you are with the Russkis whom you consider brothers. hey sometimes siblings can dislike each other!

    and actually the MiG problems are beyond Milosevic, why do you think so many countries like Malaysia have problem with spares? fact is, MiG is very unhealthy financially, they don't produce any more classic MiG-29s, you can't get spares, but Rosobonexport is selling as if they can.. which they can't.
    and no, its better to have 4-5 jets that can be flown more frequently than 1 good one that spends much time in maintainance.

  20. #110
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    3,559
    Talking about Malaysia they have just realized that getting a new fighter to replace their not so worn out Fulcrums is more tedious and expensive even if you consider Mig 29s high operating costs. The best way for Serbia now is to upgrade their fulcrums till they are in a better position financially.

    I think the problems with MIG 29 spares is an issue of the past.

    Malaysians are keeping their 29 NS
    Love Planes, Live Planes

  21. #111
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Sydney, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    500
    Maybe Medvedev could sell the Serbs Su-35 Flankers. That'll scare the hell out of NATO. (/sarcasm)

    Lockheed Martin Boeing F-22 Raptor: World's largest distributor of Sukhoi parts!!!

  22. #112
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Westkerke, Belgium
    Posts
    415
    if they are looking for new aircraft, with the budget they propably have available, i think secondhand F-16A/B (MLU), Mirage 2000 and gripen are the best way to go.
    but if they prefer russian aircraft, there's really not much choice rather then the MIG-29/35, as the SU-35 i think is a bit overkill for such a small nation.

  23. #113
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,045
    Quote Originally Posted by Nils View Post
    if they are looking for new aircraft, with the budget they propably have available, i think secondhand F-16A/B (MLU), Mirage 2000 and gripen are the best way to go.
    but if they prefer russian aircraft, there's really not much choice rather then the MIG-29/35, as the SU-35 i think is a bit overkill for such a small nation.
    I don't think they can afford Gripen(Yes.. but not enough to form a squadron, don't believe. Ask Thai Air Force) with AMERICAN ENGINE???

    F-16A/B?? Are you joking? Who bomb Serbia in Kosovo War?
    Take control of yrself and u will control the world!

  24. #114
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Schimatari, Greece
    Posts
    657
    Quote Originally Posted by Nils View Post
    if they are looking for new aircraft, with the budget they propably have available, i think secondhand F-16A/B (MLU), Mirage 2000 and gripen are the best way to go.
    but if they prefer russian aircraft, there's really not much choice rather then the MIG-29/35, as the SU-35 i think is a bit overkill for such a small nation.
    So, is the F-15SG overkill for Singapore too?

  25. #115
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    486
    Quote Originally Posted by HAWX ace View Post
    So, is the F-15SG overkill for Singapore too?
    I believe that Singapore keeps a good portion of it's airforce in bases in the US due to lack of space at home for training.

  26. #116
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Reading
    Posts
    11,791
    It had a contingent in France until November 2008, & I think has helicopters in Australia - both for training.
    Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
    Justinian

  27. #117
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Schimatari, Greece
    Posts
    657
    Quote Originally Posted by Samsara View Post
    I believe that Singapore keeps a good portion of it's airforce in bases in the US due to lack of space at home for training.
    So I guess that makes even for the "small nation" argument. In fact, never mind the Eagles, they had the money and they wanted the best. So be it. But what about tankers? What use could such a small country have for tankers? They have some good reasons, yes, but again, it makes even for the "size" argument. Venezuela and Vietnam are both relatively very small countries, yet both operate Su-30s. The real problem for Serbia is it being landlocked, and as such, the huge range of the flanker would be of no use, except for overkill (here it applies perfectly I guess) loiter time.

    By the way, I know they have access to the seas through the Danube river (and then through the Bosporus), but obviously the same does not apply for the air space right above the river, right?

  28. #118
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    486
    Quote Originally Posted by HAWX ace View Post
    So I guess that makes even for the "small nation" argument. In fact, never mind the Eagles, they had the money and they wanted the best. So be it. But what about tankers? What use could such a small country have for tankers? They have some good reasons, yes, but again, it makes even for the "size" argument. Venezuela and Vietnam are both relatively very small countries, yet both operate Su-30s. The real problem for Serbia is it being landlocked, and as such, the huge range of the flanker would be of no use, except for overkill (here it applies perfectly I guess) loiter time.

    By the way, I know they have access to the seas through the Danube river (and then through the Bosporus), but obviously the same does not apply for the air space right above the river, right?
    I am not arguing that Serbia is too small for any aircraft...I just mentioned a fact about the Singaporean air force which fascinated me when I first learnt of it.

  29. #119
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    3,476
    Quote Originally Posted by Samsara View Post
    I am not arguing that Serbia is too small for any aircraft...I just mentioned a fact about the Singaporean air force which fascinated me when I first learnt of it.
    why does a small country like Singapore want a large aircraft like the F-15?
    Simple, the same reason why a small country like Israel has an F-15.

    First-strike policy. Their logic is, because they can be overwhelmed in a short matter of time, they adopt a policy of first strike. you need a longer range aircraft if you want to take the fight into some one else's territory.

    now does Serbia follow this same policy? people here say no, but I bet they'd be willing to do that because of the threat from Bulgaria!

  30. #120
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Reading
    Posts
    11,791
    Quote Originally Posted by HAWX ace View Post
    ...But what about tankers? What use could such a small country have for tankers? They have some good reasons, yes, but again, it makes even for the "size" argument. Venezuela and Vietnam are both relatively very small countries, yet both operate Su-30s. The real problem for Serbia is it being landlocked, and as such, the huge range of the flanker would be of no use, except for overkill (here it applies perfectly I guess) loiter time. ...
    You've said it. Serbia is landlocked. Singapore is an island, utterly dependent economically on sea-borne trade. It's also so physically small & crowded it's not deemed sensible to fight on its own territory (indefensible, to be blunt), so it plans to fight as far away as possible. It doesn't expect to have to fight its neighbours, particularly not Malaysia, but is prepared to deploy in their support. That means -
    1) a navy able to protect its trade routes.
    2) an air force able to cover the waters a long way around Singapore, & operate far enough from Singapore to provide assistance to neighbours, & especially Malaysia, if requested.

    That's where the tankers would come in handy - and the AEW aircraft, & the long-range fighters.

    Vietnam is about four times as big as Serbia (& with several times the population) & has a long coastline, with many offshore islands. Lots of territory to cover, including the sea. It's also strung out, not relatively compact like Serbia.

    Venezuela isn't 'very small'. It's as big as Romania, Moldova Bulgaria, Hungary, Albania, Greece, Hungary & the entire former (pre-1991) Yugoslavia combined. For Americans - that's as big as Texas & Oklahoma combined, & with about the same population.

    Quote Originally Posted by J-7 Hotdog View Post
    now does Serbia follow this same policy? people here say no, but I bet they'd be willing to do that because of the threat from Bulgaria!
    What threat from Bulgaria? Bulgaria is absolutely no threat to anyone.
    Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
    Justinian

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