• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

The Air Forces of non-Western nations and their capabilities

T

tigisfat

Guest
People love to dog the AF's of countries outside the west. The common one is "yeah, they HAVE that equipment, but they can't afford to keep it flying and there are only a few that can even get off the ground" or something similar. Another common remark states that Western nations are the only ones with any appreciable technology.


Nothing could be further from the truth. Anyone who truly follows foreign and international air capabillities knows that many nations have formidable air arms. Iran is one I've heard mentioned repeatedly as 'incapable' and poor. Their F-14 program is touted as dead after the lack of Grumman support.

I'm sure some of you have seen these, but for those who haven't:

iraniantomcat.jpg
 
I'm sure by now Iran can make any parts needed for there F-14 with out Grumman support. When I get to Barnes and Noble I look at the Aircraft magazines. I'm surprised to see countries still using F-5s and some times geting a "Kills" on F-16s.

As for Iran, they been cut off from military equipment so long that they have bought license to make planes and tanks in Iran or just made it with out the licenses.

4580087483_acf74bd34c_o.jpg
 
As part of the F-14 package to Iran we trained a whole bunch of their maintenance personnel so I'm not surprised the Tomcats are still flying with whatever homegrown mods they've applied. As for dogging the capabilities of non-Western countries' air forces, the present administration here in good ol' USA is planning potential cuts in all branches of our military based on the assumption that we will never face an opponent who's competent enough to pose a real threat. Big assumption, and dangerous too.
 
TARPSBird said:
As part of the F-14 package to Iran we trained a whole bunch of their maintenance personnel so I'm not surprised the Tomcats are still flying with whatever homegrown mods they've applied. As for dogging the capabilities of non-Western countries' air forces, the present administration here in good ol' USA is planning potential cuts in all branches of our military based on the assumption that we will never face an opponent who's competent enough to pose a real threat. Big assumption, and dangerous too.
Click to expand...

With all due respect gentlemen, so-called 'Terrorist Actions' are far more cost effective, more than difficult to defeat and have a massive impact on civilian morale.
Not to be flippant but a single suicide bomber really gives you more bang for your buck ....:kilroy:
 
wombat666 said:
With all due respect gentlemen, so-called 'Terrorist Actions' are far more cost effective, more than difficult to defeat and have a massive impact on civilian morale.
Not to be flippant but a single suicide bomber really gives you more bang for your buck ....:kilroy:
Click to expand...

Our potential for getting into a "real" war with a country like Iran is more likely to happen through our support for a third party like Israel or Iraq.

Also, I am not saying that Iran hasn't the ability to keep their F-14s at fully effective combat readiness. However, there s a big difference between being able to fly an airplane for a photo shoot and being able to be an effective weapons platform.

I can recall many a sortie not meeting its training requirements because of radar failure or something like that. The weapon systems of modern combat aircraft are some of the more complex systems on the entire aircraft.
 
jmig said:
I can recall many a sortie not meeting its training requirements because of radar failure or something like that. The weapon systems of modern combat aircraft are some of the more complex systems on the entire aircraft.
Click to expand...


i remember a recent thread where nearly everyone said that the computers used in todays fighter jets were little more than glorified calculators, as complicated as a bag full of hammers. now they are suddenly complex?
frankly i don't know one way or the other, but i have a hard time seeing the iranian airforce as much of a threat to our own. i don't see isreal sweatin too much over it. their real danger lies not in their airforce but in their quest for nuclear arms, and their support of terrorism.
 
cheezyflier said:
i remember a recent thread where nearly everyone said that the computers used in todays fighter jets were little more than glorified calculators, as complicated as a bag full of hammers. now they are suddenly complex?
frankly i don't know one way or the other, but i have a hard time seeing the iranian airforce as much of a threat to our own. i don't see isreal sweatin too much over it. their real danger lies not in their airforce but in their quest for nuclear arms, and their support of terrorism.
Click to expand...

If Israel wasn't sweating it, they wouldn't have all the latest gear we don't have. (which they do, they're just not dumb enough to buy golden hunting bullets coughF-22cough).

Iran currently employs the most advanced and active foreign air defense system there is. Their missile system is called 'god's fly swatter' and could easily knock down an SR-71 like it was something to do.
 
cheezyflier said:
i remember a recent thread where nearly everyone said that the computers used in todays fighter jets were little more than glorified calculators, as complicated as a bag full of hammers. now they are suddenly complex?
frankly i don't know one way or the other, but i have a hard time seeing the iranian airforce as much of a threat to our own. i don't see isreal sweatin too much over it. their real danger lies not in their airforce but in their quest for nuclear arms, and their support of terrorism.
Click to expand...

Don't confuse complexity with state of the art. They don't need to compute Pi to the mullioned place. Mostly basic trig. Aircraft computer systems are built for reliability. Realibility usually means older proven system components. Still, there are a lot of things in a weapons system that have to work together. It only takes one failure to bring down the system.
 
I'm not a pilot,I was a tanker.I look at this the same way I look at any other weapons system.Recently the Russians finally junked tens of thousands of armored vehicles,they simply couldn't keep them running with out spare parts and the money and personal to fix them.

And a T-62 is a lot easier to maintain then an F-14, I am willing to guess.The Russian armored force is a shadow of it's former self,the truth is they went broke trying to keep all of that equipment and most of it didn't even run.

I would guess you would have to look at availability of the equipment.Do they have fuel and spare parts,maintenance personnel with the knowledge and ability to keep things moving.I was also an ASE auto tech.

You can send a guy to school to learn how to fix something but....if he doesn't have some inherent skill,what we called the touch,he will be a lousy mechanic.I've seen it time and time again,guys with all kinds of training and schooling who couldn't fix a bicycle.

They understood the theory but couldn't make it happen.I can't type.....same thing.I have been thru typing class in college and can't type to save my life.
 
Someplace on one of my CD/DVDs, I have a picture of the entire air force of Patagonia: It's a C-172 with two fat Alpaca farmers leaning out the side windows with double barrel shotguns. Now that is an air force that I would not want to square off against.

OBIO

PS: Any air force still flying the F-5 is ALRIGHT in my book. One of my favorite hair dryers.
 
Remember that the most modern airforce, with all of the latest toys, stealth, manoeuvrability, huge weapons load,tactical nukes etc etc can be rendered useless in an urban guerilla type war where the enemy is free to mingle amongst the general populace.
Air superiority is all well and good....but when the good guys need to go in by road/foot things get messy very quickly. As Wombat has already mentioned....a couple of guys with a dirty bomb is a lot more effective in any perceived "war" than a wing of B-2's,squadron of F-22's,etc.


I've always been impressed at the ingenuity of those nations that, when sanctions have prevented new stocks of weapons/parts, have reverse engineered the items to keep their armed forces running. The Russians,Chinese,Iranians are pretty good at it.
 
Technology will allow the few to even the odds against the many. Israel is a case in point. Their technology superiority in weapons has allowed them to stand against overwhelming numbers on three sides.

Technology will take you only so far. The machine gun proved very effective against large numbers of charging troops in WWI. It didn't do so well against 10,000 charging Chinese in the Korean War. There were just too many.

One F-22 may handle 5-10 F-5s but, against 100 it hasn't a chance, in a fight. It must use that hi-speed reverse gear and get out of Dodge.
 
This subject (more specifically, the Iranian Air Force of today) has come up before. I will repeat a short part of what I posted back then -

The current Iranian F-14A fleet consists of about 12 flyable examples (out of an original delivery of 79) and of those 12, seven are combat capable (meaning; capable of carrying, launching and guiding A to A missiles). This information is less than one year old and comes from Iranian national sources.

In conflict with Israeli or US air forces, they may last as long as 15 to 20 minutes. Maybe.

The Iranians have wisely put more money into ground to air defenses but have not received TOR-300 systems from Russia, regardless of their internal propaganda.
 
Iran builds their own version of the F-5 (under license IIRC), and it aint no slouch. The original F-5 was NOT a second rate A/C either, but the AF and it's 'croneyism' ensured the F-5 (F-20 Tigershark) didn't have a market as it was directly competing against the F-16 for marketshare.
 
tigisfat said:
If Israel wasn't sweating it, they wouldn't have all the latest gear we don't have. (which they do, they're just not dumb enough to buy golden hunting bullets coughF-22cough).

Iran currently employs the most advanced and active foreign air defense system there is. Their missile system is called 'god's fly swatter' and could easily knock down an SR-71 like it was something to do.
Click to expand...

precisely why they're not sweatin it. because they've done what's neccessary to stay on top. i'm not saying there aren't things that might worry them, i'm just saying iran's airforce is not among them.

jmig said:
Don't confuse complexity with state of the art. They don't need to compute Pi to the mullioned place. Mostly basic trig. Aircraft computer systems are built for reliability. Realibility usually means older proven system components. Still, there are a lot of things in a weapons system that have to work together. It only takes one failure to bring down the system.
Click to expand...

i'm not confusing them i quoted directly when i used the word complex. someone mentioned the complexity of the weapons systems as a suggestion as to why a particular aircraft was not combat ready. as if to say the complexity of it kept them from making neccessary repairs. it's either complex or it ain't. some say it ain't some say it is. all i'm saying is, right up front i don't know, but i see different answers to that question.

Toastmaker said:
This subject (more specifically, the Iranian Air Force of today) has come up before. I will repeat a short part of what I posted back then -

The current Iranian F-14A fleet consists of about 12 flyable examples (out of an original delivery of 79) and of those 12, seven are combat capable (meaning; capable of carrying, launching and guiding A to A missiles). This information is less than one year old and comes from Iranian national sources.

In conflict with Israeli or US air forces, they may last as long as 15 to 20 minutes. Maybe.

The Iranians have wisely put more money into ground to air defenses but have not received TOR-300 systems from Russia, regardless of their internal propaganda.
Click to expand...

that pretty much mirrors my suspicions, and i didn't have any cool informational sources. :icon_lol:
 
cheezyflier said:
i'm not confusing them i quoted directly when i used the word complex. someone mentioned the complexity of the weapons systems as a suggestion as to why a particular aircraft was not combat ready. as if to say the complexity of it kept them from making neccessary repairs. it's either complex or it ain't. some say it ain't some say it is. all i'm saying is, right up front i don't know, but i see different answers to that question. :icon_lol:
Click to expand...


We said the flight computers were simple, not the weapons computer!
 
tigisfat said:
It wasn't a shoop dude, look closer and see the different markings on each one. They have regular air parades in Tehran, and there are frequently pics of it.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I know. Remember when Iran released a picture of some missiles being launched and it turned out 2 of them were just done with the clone tool? That photo was just too easy for me not to do that...
View attachment 6957
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top