Read the forum code of contact
By: - 11th August 2000 at 22:15 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: Worst NATO Air Forces and Why?
Hungary probably takes the cake as it was just recently added to NATO and has hardly any combat capability. And with the economic problems of the country i dont think the air force will improve anytime soon.
By: - 12th August 2000 at 15:43 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: Worst NATO Air Forces and Why?
I think the worst air force in NATO is the Portuguese FAP, untill recently it only operated old A-7 and G-91's. The new F-16A's are an improovement, however 40 aircraft aren't enough to contribute to NATO. They also lack modern transport/attack/assault helicopters, no CSAR capability, modern transport aircraft or even trainers. The Alpha Jet are old ex-Luftwaffe aircraft and it's hardly a strike fighter. Even though 3 F-16's were deployed to the Balkans there is no real combat capability in this air force, and I hardly think it contributes anything to NATO but the Azores AB.
By: - 13th August 2000 at 23:14 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: Worst NATO Air Forces and Why?
humm...i may be wrong, but i thought they didn't participate in the most recent NATO "plot"...anyways, i would be glad to hear some info on what they have been doing in the past 10 years...
By: - 14th August 2000 at 22:21 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: Worst NATO Air Forces and Why?
Don't quite understand the scepticism about the Turkish Air Force. If we only take the training of simple Turkish army soldiers as example, the life of recruits in Germany or France is a vacation in comparison. The THK trains at least as hard as Greeks (waiting only for "Fantasma336" to come back and tell us more) and also have quite a few operational experience from operations against the PKK (something Greeks are missing so far, if you don't count all the interceptions of Turkish aircraft flying over Greeks islands).
I'm on a brink of stating that the Italians are having lots of more problems actually. Their Tornados still don't have "intelligent" ammunitions, and when some part of the air force wents to war, most of the other aircraft have to be keept "down", in order to secure supplies of spare parts for those in Action (well, OK, the prolbem was not that bad last year, but in 1991...). Soldiering with 30 years old Starfighters shouldn't be simple too. Even Turks replaced those with F-16s...
By: - 16th August 2000 at 02:39 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: Worst NATO Air Forces and Why?
Turkey is defintely NOT the worst air force in NATO. They are one of the better equipped. They operate some of the best fighters on the planet. Their two primary combat types are the F-16 and the F-4. The F-16's are highly advanced and the F-4's are currently going through a major upgrade to make them a capable modern fighter. These two aircraft have plenty of combat experience and have proven themselves time and again. Turky also operates the good-old F-5. Those are going through an upgrade as well. They also operate some of the best training aircraft in the world. The SF.260 and T-41 Mescalero are basic trainers. The T-37 Tweet and T-38 Talon are the advanced trainers. They operate the C-130 Hercules, UH-1 Huey. Those two aircraft need no description as to why they are good. They also operate the KC-135. Their air force has many of the aircraft the USAF has. Turkey has combat experience. They have been involved in wars with Greece. As for Italy, the F-104 does need replacement, but with the latest upgrade it is still a very useful aircraft. The Aspide and AIM-7 missiles give it quite a punch and it has the fastest scramble time of ANY modern fighter. I would love to see and F-16 or Mirage 2000 beat 3 minutes! The Tornado is a great aircraft and the AMX recently proved that it has what it takes. (Nice looking plane I might add.) Italy also operates the AV-8B
By: - 16th August 2000 at 20:50 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: Worst NATO Air Forces and Why?
Well ... I´m portuguese and I have to defend my country! First off all let me say that I don´t agree with this question because NATO it´s about unity! And NATO don´t have any ... devisions in it´s airforces! S( SOrry )
Now... the PAF the worst off all??? Hey we received the first F-16 batch in 1994... the G-91 were witradaw from service in 1991!!! We have 6 C-130H ( they are not modern TA but they are good! )... We have 40 F-16´s MLU in service ( in 2001 ) ...
And do you wañt to know 1 thing??? Our Air Force has avalieted his deploement capabilities in 1998 ( in that time we only had 20 F-16A Block 15 ) ... and thãt was for 8 aircrafts .... we didn´t participed with more then 3 F-16´s in Allied Force because of policy reasens ! ... What are a litlle AIR FORCE for sure ... but we have some of the best pilots in NATO! ( in 1987 an Fiat G-91 in exercicies near Montijo ( Tigeer Meet 87 ) "shoot down"an US F-16 ( simulated of course ! ) ... and we deplowed a P-3P Orion to Italy during the Bosnian crisis...
Our Air Force is the one of the most well trained Air Forces in the world ! We participated in Angola, Cazaquistan, Iraq, Congo, Moçambique, East Timor, Guné-Bissau and the list goes on! We participeted in RED FLAG 2000 with 6 F-16´s and in the Dynamic Mix 2000 with 8!
Well I don´t think that we are the worst! We are small for sure!
Alpha-jets? We have 50 and... only 25 are for CAS role the others are for trng!
Our Air Force has some contests going on - the order for 12 CSAR helicopters and the Army wants to buy betwwen 20 to 40 Transport helicopters!
Best regards
Richa ( Portugal - Lisbon )
By: - 27th May 2004 at 20:30 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Me being from Canada i hate to say this but i think Canada is the worst airforce in NATO.Our CF-18 are gettin old and the number of operational CF-18 is being cut back even more.We lack any real viable air - air refueling capablity.Are Sea King helicopters are fallin out of the sky and there replacement is still many years away.There is no heavy transport aircraft in service we need to use the americans or civilian contractors to transport equipment. No attack helicopter in inventory.I could go on
By: - 27th May 2004 at 20:40 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Welcome to the forum ;)
By: - 27th May 2004 at 21:01 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Vortex, Vortex, Vortex, where have you been
worst Nato members is probably the newest members
which include BULGARIA.. but this time around the worst may well be the Baltic state with literally NO Air force :( other than a few trainer and helicopters.
But in terms of an Nato Air Force that do have combat aircraft, Bulgaria is the worst.. so much problems with maintenance issues, crashes and bad upgrade deals make you go tsk tsk.
By: - 27th May 2004 at 21:05 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I think we should merely compare the existing NATO airforces, and also take into considerations the money they spend/their capabilities. One of the lousiest Airforces is probably Canada, they have a pretty good budget and a crappy military. Italy is pretty bad too.
By: - 27th May 2004 at 21:46 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Hey Big Mac, this thread is 4 years old. Many familiar names here that unfortunately don't post here anymore...
By: - 27th May 2004 at 22:19 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I think the worst air force in NATO is the Portuguese FAP, untill recently it only operated old A-7 and G-91's. The new F-16A's are an improovement, however 40 aircraft aren't enough to contribute to NATO. They also lack modern transport/attack/assault helicopters, no CSAR capability, modern transport aircraft or even trainers. The Alpha Jet are old ex-Luftwaffe aircraft and it's hardly a strike fighter. Even though 3 F-16's were deployed to the Balkans there is no real combat capability in this air force, and I hardly think it contributes anything to NATO but the Azores AB.
WHAT?!?!?!?!??!
First of all, its not Portuguese FAP, is Portuguese Air Force or in portuguese Força Aérea Portuguesa(FAP).
Yes, we have a small air force, but some of the best pilots in Europe/World.
We have 19 F-16 A/B block 15 in service, we also have already a F-16 MLU in service and 20 more are in modifications to MLU standards. in 2010 we will have 40 F-16 MLU. For the MLu Portugal is buying JDAM and AIM-120 AMRAAM and Rafael Lintening pods.
We have AlphaJets in service, yes, old aircrafts, but they still fly.
Epsilon for training as well as 6 Chipmunk in Air Force Academy for future pilots.
10 SA-330 Puma, from 1970s, but they have had many modifications over the years, like new avionics and new motors in the 90s. They will be replaced by 12 EH-101, this Eh-101 will have several missions, 6SAR and transport, 4 for CSAR/SAR, they will have AAR capacities and weapons in the rear ramp and 2 for fishiries protection.
Alouette III, they will be replaced but there's not a substitute yet.
CASA C-212-100 that are going to be replaced soon by CN-295 or C-27J.
6 Hercules also to be replaced by C-130J, or to be upgraded.
6 P3-P to be upagraded or to be replaced by newer(probably ex-Netherlands Navy P3), but there is not yet a solution.
One Falcon 20 for navigation support and calibration(of something, dont remember), and 3 Falcon 50 for VIP transport.
Not a GOOD Air Force, but a GOod air force.
By: - 27th May 2004 at 22:26 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I think the airforce of Iceland is the worst ! They don't have anything. Not one aircraft, soldier... only airfields. In fact they are the only NATO member without an Army. They send an civilian to the staff in Brusselles (Huh, spelling)
By: - 27th May 2004 at 23:02 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I don't think Italy is that bad, beside the delay of the Typhoon, we got an air force that ca cover almost all activities
CAP : F16, F104, Typhoon
Bombers : Tornado
Wild Weasel : Tornado ECR
CAS : AMX
Attack Helicopter : A129
Cargo : C130J-G222-C27J
Transport Helicopter : CH47, EH101, NH90
Marine Airplanes : Harrier
MP : Atlantique, ATR MP
What is reallt missing is an AEW capability, beside it Italy in all international crisis Italian Air Force and Italian Navy has proven itself very good and in Kosovo were italian AMX to do CAS and not British Harriers ;)
By: - 27th May 2004 at 23:19 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Island, if they ever had one?! Followed by the new Baltic members. But does it matter?
Does every member takes it share of burden? Not every member is in need of a full-size AF and does not make real sense at all. The BENELUX shows the modern way of participation. If it is small, but well trained to the state of art, it will be ok.
Our main AEW assests comes nomimal from Luxembourg.
By: - 27th May 2004 at 23:37 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Canada? You don't know what you're talking about. Canada has 122 CF-18's which are being upgraded to unbelievable standards (better than F/A-18C). Canada will be the first nation to have the AIM-120C in its inventory.
If you look at recent NATO operations, Canada is usually one of the top 2 or 3 contributors. For example in Allied Force, Canadian Hornets flew more missions than any other country except the US, the UK, and France (I'm not saying that's something to be proud of, just making my point that Canada's current airforce is in a state to contribute more to NATO operations than most other NATO countries).
By: - 28th May 2004 at 05:16 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Canada the worst. Funny. :confused:
Canada will be the first nation to have the AIM-120C in its inventory.
Not true. I believe the EPA has begun taking deliveries of the 120C5.
In general every country does what it can.
By: - 29th May 2004 at 01:42 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Sadly I think that Bulgaria is on the list for worst, what it has they can't contribute to and NATO action because they don't comply with NATO standards and they don't have the money to get that fixed. The only thing that they have that they can spare is one of three old C-130B's which were a gift from the US.
Other candidates would have to be any country cutting back their line up, such as the Netherlands, Denmark, Canada even poor old Belgium.
If you are a part of a greater good, cutting back on important things means that you either cut back on your commitment or you cut back on your own defence needs, sadly I can't see anyone cutting back on homeland security thus it must come from the NATO commitment. Now when that goes, the greater ideal of good will also diminish as no one will be left to enforce it, or we put a country in a position of global authority (can anyone think of which country this might be?), and as such global hostility would be pent up and directed to that one place, thus you have the global situation today.
If we all elected governments that had some military background in them and not just civilian knobs who think they know it all, you'd have a much better system and understanding in the world.
By: - 29th May 2004 at 02:19 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Yahh but look at Bulgaria's budget. It's true that the new NATO members have problems but look at the other members that have been in NATO for a while. I think Canada is not bad but they are getting worse and worse and the military is being depleted slowly by the ruling gov'ts and that includes the AF.
Posts: 3,131
By: Vortex - 11th August 2000 at 21:31
Ok...you guys seems to like this best thing...so, why not the WORST? What is the worst NATO air force and why? If i say the worst in the world then i might get answers like those pak/indi duos again, so limit ourselves to NATO ok?
I'm pointing my fingers at Turkey...i understand that Turkey got some impressive lineups and numbers, but in terms of real experience???it was left out in the Gulf War and the Balkans while others have these "small" wars to practice and know their weaknesses while Turkey just sits there....whada you think?