IAF has no BVR capability?
-
.lol fewer? But ultra extremely massive on human loss.
In the past an army was for a city, a city like a today village. Even civilian loss was way much low.The thing is we humans don’t understand that we have to live with what we have. No need to prove to the whole world which has it bigger. We talk about bullying in schools when we "the grown-ups " enforce on and blackmail, maybe not on a personal state, but for sure on as nation.
-
…just because you don’t notice, don’t mean it isn’t being done. And/or that fighter pilots aren’t worried about having jobs…
Well, show me an airforce equipped with lots of “cheap artillery platforms” for air-to-air combat. That’s what we’re talking about here.
-
…. As far as F-4s in Vietnam, I wonder what the dogfights would have looked like if they had had AIM-9Xs instead of AIM-9Bs/Ds (or, God forbid, AIM-4s). My bet is on “rather different”.
Well, yeah. Not the least of which would have to include the equivalent MiG with their HMCS-capable, HOBS SRM …. AA-11 or equivalent. You can’t postulate only one side having the technology and have a meaningful analog.
So, yeah, ‘rather different’.
-
Well, show me an airforce equipped with lots of “cheap artillery platforms” for air-to-air combat. That’s what we’re talking about here.
Show me a security clearance [emoji14]
Whilst its a poor argument, I know, there is still a pretty good chance there is more stuff like the RQ-180 waiting in the wings.
-
…if I were to bet, I’d bet you see it at sea before you see it in an air force…but give the world about ten years and I bet you see change.
-
Show me a security clearance [emoji14]
Whilst its a poor argument, I know, there is still a pretty good chance there is more stuff like the RQ-180 waiting in the wings.
It’s not such a poor argument : RQ-180s might be more potent that we suspect. But there aren’t “lots” of them.
Well, yeah. Not the least of which would have to include the equivalent MiG with their HMCS-capable, HOBS SRM …. AA-11 or equivalent. You can’t postulate only one side having the technology and have a meaningful analog.
So, yeah, ‘rather different’.
In the fictional example I gave, it was obvious to me that if F-4s had AIM-9Xs then MiGs would have AA-11s, but I guess I should have mentioned it. So we must actually have the same vision of what I meant by “rather different”.
-
It’s not such a poor argument : RQ-180s might be more potent that we suspect. But there aren’t “lots” of them.
The point being, in 2008 we didnt know about it… what stuff do we not know about in 2015? Could be an RQ-290 which is air to air artillery. Could be 5,000 of them.
Its a poor argument because it relies on the assumption that there is something that meets my expectations but which is by definition unknowable.
-
Well, I can fully accept that we don’t know some secret unmanned prototypes. That’s how things usually roll. But I think that 5,000 of them would be pretty difficult to hide. I guess we’d know about them if there were so many.
-
Hence “by definition unknowable” and then “poor argument”
-
Hey.
-
however, during the F-16 upgrade program (“Barak 2020”) it was decided, to not give them that ability. the exact reason is probably classified, but from the little we could gather, the costs where significant and the added capability of the AIM-120 over the “Near BVR” ability of the python 5 deemed that ability “un-necessary”.
The reasson that Barak 2020(both blocks 30/40) didn’t get the AIM-120 ability is pure politics, AIM-120 is 100% import from the US unlike the Python’s and the US DOD decided not to alow new AIM-120 to be sold to the IAF (only to replace old/used ones on the I’s) therefore the IAF decided not to push the issue and keep the “2020” as IR only.
BTW, due the fact that the “Barak 2020” program moved both blocks closer to the Sufa, all the hardwear is installed to alow AIM120, just the software is “non AIM-120”, my guess is that both FCR and FCC are upgraded to handle AIM120 just that it was never tested in flight due the US DOD limits on AIM120 for the “I” models only.
-
It’s more than reasonable what you’ve stated, WarDog, thanks for the update.
Best regards,