MILAVIA Forum - Military Aviation Discussion Forum

Author Topic: best air force in south america  (Read 34596 times)

Offline Webmaster

  • MILAVIA Webmaster
  • Administrator
  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 2842
  • Country: nl
Re: best air force in south america
« Reply #24 on: May 05, 2007, 09:09:21 PM »
Hehe, but Globe, they can carry Exocets  ;)

France is just trying to get rid of them. Anyway, M2K or MF1, both will be short-term solutions. If M2K proves to expensive, the supersonic F-1 is still a better option than to let your fighter pilots keep their currency on the Pampa or prolong MIII/5 life till Argentina can buy some new jets. Anyway, it's just an option offered by France, it didn't say Argentina is considering the F-1.
  • Interests: Su-15, Su-27, Tu-22, Tornado, RNLAF
Niels Hillebrand
MILAVIA Webmaster

Offline Globetrotter

  • Hero of Flight
  • ******
  • Posts: 838
  • Country: ar
  • I'm Thomas (now Globetrotter)
Re: best air force in south america
« Reply #25 on: May 05, 2007, 09:55:36 PM »
Yes, well, they can carry the Exo, but the Super Etendard too. I know, Super etendard specifications are completely not awesome, but we have it.

And if France is trying to get rid of them, maybe they are not as good as you may want. I dont know but in the F-16-60, F-35 and F-22 ((not that we can get that!!! ;D)) it seems not right to buy a plane 7-8 years younger than the one we have.

I have nothing against Mirage 2000, in fact I believe it is a very powerful machine, although it can become pricey, you know, even more than the F-16 and much more than MiG-29!

I `prefer less airplanes of the second option :)

What about the J-10? I think it must be cheap, and how good would it be?
"Ad Astra Per Aspera"   (5º Grupo de Caza ≈ A-4AR Fightinghawk)

 ~ MALVINAS ARGENTINAS ~


Offline tigershark

  • News Editor
  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 2025
Re: best air force in south america
« Reply #26 on: May 09, 2007, 03:16:44 AM »
When talking about Peru, I see that the Su-22, Su-25, A-37 are often forgotten because they are not fighters but bombers/strike aircraft. The conflict with Ecuador showed it needed a better air defense capability, but that doesn't mean these jets are completely useless.
> I agree the Poland Su-22M4 upgraded models are useful and Peru having the tooling equipment and maintenance in place could support these little striker for years and keep the cost down.   I have never read a bad thing about Su-17/20/22 series aircraft everybody seem to like this aircraft a lot.   I assume a lot of second hand engines and other important parts could be bought from old stocks or retired aircraft in Russia and other countries as well.    The Peruvian models shot down during the war I think didn't have radar warning devices on them and didn't know they were picked up. 

> Su-25 is one of my favorite attack jets and beside it's slower overall speed could replace the Fritters outright.   A more modern design and very battle proven and in the land of cheap hand held SAMs a better investment.   There's a newer upgraded model called the Su-39 that according to Russia does everything but slice bread.   Anti-radar, AA-11, smart bomb+missiles, and even anti-ship missiles too.   I think if you put that little radar from the Mig-21/93 and should be able to shoot AA-12s.  Not that you would use a smaller slow attack/striker for long range radar guided missile shots, but it could be done.   

> A-37B a fine aircraft but just as sadly as the Su-20/22 Fritters old and come with maintenance issues and lack of spares made anymore.   At least with Fritters there are hundreds of ex-models made and laying around this isn't the case with the A-37Bs.   Unless the US comes up with a large supply of spare parts I might drop this type first.   Peru's air force have too many different types
to support and maintain droppings a few would be useful overall. 

The Mirage F1 isn't as far fetch of an idea as one may think.   You know a RC400 radar can fit into it's nose so MICA missile could be used?    Not bad for an old design that's easy to maintain and many second hands models to be bought.   

> It nice hearing about Peru's air force getting a few Mirage 2000-P's up plus a number of Mig-29s on paper until Venezuela's Flankers are operational Peru could be third on the list.   

Offline Globetrotter

  • Hero of Flight
  • ******
  • Posts: 838
  • Country: ar
  • I'm Thomas (now Globetrotter)
Re: best air force in south america
« Reply #27 on: May 09, 2007, 12:59:47 PM »
Do you know when the Ven's Flankers are going to be operational?

Are they planning to buy more of them? Or another type?
"Ad Astra Per Aspera"   (5º Grupo de Caza ≈ A-4AR Fightinghawk)

 ~ MALVINAS ARGENTINAS ~


Offline Gripen

  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 1390
  • Country: au
  • WHATEVER YOUR PAST, THE FUTURE IS GRIPEN!
Re: best air force in south america
« Reply #28 on: May 11, 2007, 08:05:18 AM »
What about the RAF? They have the Falkands.. and im guessing they'd have some type of plane there to keep an eye on their people, and maybe Argentina, incase they try to take the Falklands/Isla Malvinas (the proper name, Globetrotter knows what i mean)

Offline Globetrotter

  • Hero of Flight
  • ******
  • Posts: 838
  • Country: ar
  • I'm Thomas (now Globetrotter)
Re: best air force in south america
« Reply #29 on: May 11, 2007, 08:56:22 PM »
What about the RAF? They have the Falkands.. and im guessing they'd have some type of plane there to keep an eye on their people, and maybe Argentina, incase they try to take the Falklands/Isla Malvinas (the proper name, Globetrotter knows what i mean)

Oh no :-X :-\ They are not a south american air force. They are just occuping something that we had before 1833. They came and took it, don't know why, neither them know. They have a handfull of Tornados ADV and Hercules I guess, maybe some helos. But They are an European Air force, not South American.
"Ad Astra Per Aspera"   (5º Grupo de Caza ≈ A-4AR Fightinghawk)

 ~ MALVINAS ARGENTINAS ~


Offline Gripen

  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 1390
  • Country: au
  • WHATEVER YOUR PAST, THE FUTURE IS GRIPEN!
Re: best air force in south america
« Reply #30 on: May 13, 2007, 07:22:43 AM »
but they are based in South America.

Offline Globetrotter

  • Hero of Flight
  • ******
  • Posts: 838
  • Country: ar
  • I'm Thomas (now Globetrotter)
Re: best air force in south america
« Reply #31 on: May 13, 2007, 05:11:55 PM »
Yes, but they are not a south american Air Force.
"Ad Astra Per Aspera"   (5º Grupo de Caza ≈ A-4AR Fightinghawk)

 ~ MALVINAS ARGENTINAS ~


Offline terminator

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 154
  • Country: us
Re: best air force in south america
« Reply #32 on: June 29, 2007, 04:22:08 AM »
hell yeah globe u tell em who's south american and whos not ,even if the brits have harriers in the malvinas(falklands sounds weird) they really wouldnt make much of a difference in anything ,they are better suited as support aircraft and this time iam sure argentina will own the RAF in south america ,but then again u cant underestimate the RAF pilots
'711 I shall nerver forget you.......

Offline tigershark

  • News Editor
  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 2025
Re: best air force in south america
« Reply #33 on: June 29, 2007, 06:10:47 AM »
Doesn't have Tornado F.3 there now armed with Slammers or I think Sykflash missiles?   I didn't think Argentina pick up any better fighters then what they had.  As a interceptor the Tornado does well but the numbers still favor Argentina.   Don't get me wrong England could fly down Typhoon's in less then two days now they have better tanker assets.   I think Argentina's upgraded  A-4s have in flight refueling probes now plus tankers now so the range issue is gone for them.    The range issue hamper there efforts in 1982 war and they weren't really equipped correctly to operate at such ranges.  I think even a hundred miles closer and the whole layout of the war would have changed for Argentina.    I just watch the Falkland Island war on Wings or or one the military channel shows just a few days ago.  It was the show where there's an older guy and a younger guy talking.   They use cool blue and red colored graphics on flat maps I saw a couple of shows about different battle/wars.   I saw one about the battle of Midway it's a pretty good show overall sorry can't think of the name right now.   

Offline Globetrotter

  • Hero of Flight
  • ******
  • Posts: 838
  • Country: ar
  • I'm Thomas (now Globetrotter)
Re: best air force in south america
« Reply #34 on: June 29, 2007, 02:37:40 PM »
I am not saying we can retake the islands, not anything like it either ::)

It was said by term.... and yes, they have some tornados there, so that would make it "more impossible"

Obviously there is still the pacific way which is leading us to nowhere,cause UK friend's (USA) owns the place whre we disscuss..(UN).. ::) ::) ::)


Not much could have changed for Argentina... if they just got bored of kidding, they would just let a bomb in Buenos Aires, our capital city, where 1/3 of the Argentines live.... ANd believe me they really would have done so.... (They sunk a ship out of the war zone....)
« Last Edit: June 29, 2007, 02:42:36 PM by Globetrotter »
"Ad Astra Per Aspera"   (5º Grupo de Caza ≈ A-4AR Fightinghawk)

 ~ MALVINAS ARGENTINAS ~


Offline tigershark

  • News Editor
  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 2025
Re: best air force in south america
« Reply #35 on: June 29, 2007, 07:48:44 PM »
I totally agree if Argentina would have cause anymore damage England's next move would have been Argentinean mainland targets.  You could debate the war zone issue I guess, I wouldn't, because war is war and any military target is just that a target.   That English sub alone could have caused havoc along Argentina's coast just by itself.   Even a very modern navy has problems dealing with subs there just one of the nastiest weapons platform out there period.   I'm glad it didn't come to mainland attacks because over time tanker assets would have been made available.    Military wise I can disgust this but politically I can't really to be honest, I can't see what the war was even started for.   Military wise I think Argentina did many things well and a few more breaks there would have prolong this.  But it would have only been prolonged until either more English assets were moved into the region or US involvement.   Logically (I work with computers) certain things would have to happen to hold and keep the islands.   Argentina's armed forces: didn't have the right aircraft for the mission, lack tanker support, had little or no AWACS assets, with meant they operated blindly.   In modern warfare you don't last long without these things.   Argentina's navy like most would be was ill equipped to deal with England's well trained sub force.  They only have a handful of boats can you imagine how good a Captain has to be to get a boat or command?   Long range missile defense system would had to setup, anti-sub capabilities tripled for around the islands and Argentina's coast.   If the missile equipment fighters with tanker support would have been in place on the islands before England's fleet got there if would gave the Argentinean ground forces a shot.  It is always a 100 times easier after the fact to say this way "would have been better" or "they should have done that", it much harder when its real.   Being a outsider on this which I know I am I would say the Argentinean government at the time forced the military into something they couldn't do or weren't equipped for.   I hope I came across in a neutral way that's what I was trying for a lot of very brave men died in the war.   

 



AVIATION TOP 100 - www.avitop.com click to vote for MILAVIA