# Mig 35 for Iraq



## Doritos11

The Chief of the Office of Security Cooperation between the US and Iraq has mentioned a possible deal between Iraq and Russia for MIG 35 fighters. Currently the Iraqi defence ministry is not confirming the details of the Russian deals, only giving hints.

What do you think about this aircrafts capabilities ?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Falcon29

The aircraft is basically and upgrade of the Mig-29M2, the Russian Air Force hasn't ordered any because the Su-35 can perform all the same tasks. But what does Iraq look at it for? As an alternative to F-16? Are they getting any F-16?


----------



## Doritos11

Hazzy997 said:


> The aircraft is basically and upgrade of the Mig-29M2, the Russian Air Force hasn't ordered any because the Su-35 can perform all the same tasks. But what does Iraq look at it for? As an alternative to F-16? Are they getting any F-16?



Wiki says Russia ordered around 30.
Alternative + they do not put restrictions on weapons like the US, f16 comes next year.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Falcon29

Doritos11 said:


> Wiki says Russia ordered around 30.
> Alternative + they do not put restrictions on weapons like the US, f16 comes next year.



I think that what would be a good decision, the maneuverability of the aircraft is better than the alternatives and it carries longer range missiles, more powerful radar, and a complete avionics suite. Not all things compare but it still would be a decent choice also depending if export or domestic version.

Do you know how much they plan to order? What do you say? For it or against it?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Doritos11

Hazzy997 said:


> I think that what would be a good decision, the maneuverability of the aircraft is better than the alternatives and it carries longer range missiles, more powerful radar, and a complete avionics suite. Not all things compare but it still would be a decent choice also depending if export or domestic version.
> 
> Do you know how much they plan to order? What do you say? For it or against it?



Its better then the F16 block 52 which Iraq is receiving, also they will supply BVR missiles and not restrict spare parts or weaponry, at least unlike the US they have a strong record in supplying countries whenever they need it. Iraq learned this during the embargo.
But why not SU 30 as multi role fighter ? which would be better.

From this we can see that the Rafale would be better, only it will most likely bring restrictions to Iraq as France is close to the US.
Indian MRCA competition - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Though this still does not fill the need for fighter jets, there is a need for heavier jets like the SU 30 or SU 35.


----------



## Falcon29

Doritos11 said:


> Its better then the F16 block 52 which Iraq is receiving, also they will supply BVR missiles and not restrict spare parts or weaponry, at least unlike the US they have a strong record in supplying countries whenever they need it. Iraq learned this during the embargo.
> But why not SU 30 as multi role fighter ? which would be better.
> 
> From this we can see that the Rafale would be better, only it will most likely bring restrictions to Iraq as France is close to the US.
> Indian MRCA competition - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Though this still does not fill the need for fighter jets, there is a need for heavier jets like the SU 30 or SU 35.



Rafale is expensive, and like you said it may see restrictions. As for multi role fighter, wouldn't the F-16 do the job? Depending on how many they're receiving and what it's coming with. If Iraq is looking for a cheaper alternative for a multi role fighter whilst also being effective maybe look at the Jf-17 or Gripen Jas 39 but the Mig is also a multirole fighter. 

The Su-30 could also be one. Depending on what the Iraqi Air Force is looking for.


----------



## Doritos11

Hazzy997 said:


> Rafale is expensive, and like you said it may see restrictions. As for multi role fighter, wouldn't the F-16 do the job? Depending on how many they're receiving and what it's coming with. If Iraq is looking for a cheaper alternative for a multi role fighter whilst also being effective maybe look at the Jf-17 or Gripen Jas 39 but the Mig is also a multirole fighter.
> 
> The Su-30 could also be one. Depending on what the Iraqi Air Force is looking for.



US does not want to sell us AIM 120 and the latest version AIM9X sidewinder.
Also they will restrict spare parts and ammo whenever they want, Iraq is trying to get the same type of weaponry from 2 sources to make sure an embargo will only be from 1 side.

JF 17 is also in consideration.


----------



## Kompromat

MIG-35 is hardly anything but sexed up Mig-29 [A historic failure]. Buy more F-16s instead.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Kompromat

Doritos11 said:


> US does not want to sell us AIM 120 and the latest version AIM9X sidewinder.
> Also they will restrict spare parts and ammo whenever they want, Iraq is trying to get the same type of weaponry from 2 sources to make sure an embargo will only be from 1 side.
> 
> JF 17 is also in consideration.




Lt Gen Anwer Hamad Ameen Ahmed Commander of Iraqi Air Force with JF-17 Thunder during their visit to Pakistan Aeronautical Complex.






Lt Gen Anwer Hamad Ameen Ahmed with CATIC official [JF-17 partner].









JF-17 is a good deal for Iraq if it wants a relatively larger fleet to supplement the F-16s with unrestricted weapons access. The Iraqi Commander also tested MFI-Super Mashak basic trainer air craft.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Doritos11

Aeronaut said:


> MIG-35 is hardly anything but sexed up Mig-29 [A historic failure]. Buy more F-16s instead.



But an F16 without amraam is not so usefull

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Falcon29

Doritos11 said:


> But an F16 without amraam is not so usefull



Then Su-30 would be best alternative, the MKI is also pretty reliable because its a mix if Russian, Indian and Israeli technology. The r-77 missiles will be a good alternative to the AMRAAM.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Serpentine

Will U.S sell any F-15 to Iraq? It would be great. Also Iraq can look for Rafael or Typhoon. Su-35 also can be a good choice.With these options, Iraqi army can become third best air force in ME after RSAF and IAF in terms of equipment.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Doritos11

Serpentine said:


> Will U.S sell any F-15 to Iraq? It would be great. Also Iraq can look for Rafael or Typhoon. Su-35 also can be a good choice.With these options, Iraqi army can become third best air force in ME after RSAF and IAF in terms of equipment.



F15 is too high tech, Israel will not allow it.
I like the F15 but its out of reach for us + useless without AIM 120.

SU 35 is possible, its an upgraded SU 27, they have offered it to many countries, Iraq should negotioate for this 1.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

The French DR is crazily expensive, remember that Iraq is under the first stages of development. You may go after the Su-30, it's better than the MiG-35 anyway. 




Doritos11 said:


> Its better then the F16 block 52 which Iraq is receiving, also they will supply BVR missiles and not restrict spare parts or weaponry, at least unlike the US they have a strong record in supplying countries whenever they need it. Iraq learned this during the embargo.
> But why not SU 30 as multi role fighter ? which would be better.
> 
> From this we can see that the Rafale would be better, only it will most likely bring restrictions to Iraq as France is close to the US.
> Indian MRCA competition - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Though this still does not fill the need for fighter jets, there is a need for heavier jets like the SU 30 or SU 35.





Serpentine said:


> Will U.S sell any F-15 to Iraq? It would be great. Also Iraq can look for Rafael or Typhoon. Su-35 also can be a good choice.With these options, Iraqi army can become third best air force in ME after RSAF and IAF in terms of equipment.



The F-15s are exclusive.. Aside from the USAF, only three main customers are flying the F-15s.. It's a killing machine, so to speak.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Super Falcon

i think mig 35 far superrior to Su 30 sir and i bet on it go for Mig 35 you will get air superiority in the air with this jet better zuck radar it has as similar to F 15 but better than F 15 i think as today


----------



## LiberalAtheist

It's better for you guys to go with a different European fighter or American fighter as the Russians have a shoddy after sale history when it comes to spares and engine problems, that is unless you can produce your own spare parts which I doubt Iraq has the industry to do so. the Eurofighter and F-18 are the best choices imo if your looking at capability and after sale commitments.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

Are you seriously putting the US industry in par with the shitty stuff Russia make  


LiberalAtheist said:


> It's better for you guys to go with a different European fighter or American fighter as the Russians have a shoddy after sale history when it comes to spares and engine problems, that is unless you can produce your own spare parts which I doubt Iraq has the industry to do so. the Eurofighter and F-18 are the best choices imo if your looking at capability and after sale commitments.


These Aircrafts cost an arm and leg bro, for a nation in the making like Iraq things are totally different from your traditional allies.


----------



## Doritos11

Yzd Khalifa said:


> Are you seriously putting the US industry in par with the shitty stuff Russia make
> 
> These Aircrafts cost an arm and leg bro, for a nation in the making like Iraq things are totally different from your traditional allies.



Its not the money which is the biggest obstacle as they can spread it over the budget of several years, its that the west is not willing to sell Iraq the latest BVR weapons, the US is not willing to which probably means France will be the same. As Iraq is buying from Russia the US suddenly is willing to sell Iraq Apaches which first they would not, now Iraq is asking for more weaponry to control its airspace if the US wants them to stop Iranian flights said in a news report, they probably try to use this to get weapons.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## LiberalAtheist

Yzd Khalifa said:


> Are you seriously putting the US industry in par with the shitty stuff Russia make
> 
> These Aircrafts cost an arm and leg bro, for a nation in the making like Iraq things are totally different from your traditional allies.



Not exactly in terms of long term future requirements countries like the US France and Germany are/would be willling to give the necessary tools to support a local Iraqi industrial base the Russians regardless of their aircraft capability have issues with spares themselves and their export countries. The reason this would be is because they may to give Iraq a decent air capability to act as a counter force against Iran in the region. I believe KSA uses the eurofighters as well and for good reason because of the capability and long term support agreements with Eurofighter gmbh

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Doritos11

According to this its able to compete in 5th generation


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

Well, 

If money doesn't remain to be an obstacle for Iraq to acquire hi-tech equipments, the US will choose either to match Iraq's need, otherwise the Iraqis will go after Russian equipments for sure. This is the only way to settle the score. China offers a wide range of equipments as well. 



Doritos11 said:


> Its not the money which is the biggest obstacle as they can spread it over the budget of several years, its that the west is not willing to sell Iraq the latest BVR weapons, the US is not willing to which probably means France will be the same. As Iraq is buying from Russia the US suddenly is willing to sell Iraq Apaches which first they would not, now Iraq is asking for more weaponry to control its airspace if the US wants them to stop Iranian flights said in a news report, they probably try to use this to get weapons.


----------



## Banglar Lathial

Go for Su-35. 

Superior than Mig-35 in almost every aspect, you get weapons and spares without restrictions. Same supplier country (Russia), less reliant on the West.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sinnerman108

Serpentine said:


> Will U.S sell any F-15 to Iraq? It would be great. Also Iraq can look for Rafael or Typhoon. Su-35 also can be a good choice.With these options, Iraqi army can become third best air force in ME after RSAF and IAF in terms of equipment.



Joke ?

IAF has equipment (that works) ?
I thought UAE had a decent list of birds and resources after RSAF.
 @Topic Iraq is already integrating some US planes (F-16 and transport). It is a task enough to integrate one platform rather than to open another front and try to integrate a russian platform at the same time.


----------



## BDforever

Banglar Lathial said:


> Go for Su-35.
> 
> Superior than Mig-35 in almost every aspect, you get weapons and spares without restrictions. Same supplier country (Russia), less reliant on the West.



Su35 is more multi role capable than Mig35 but Su35 price is about 70 million where Mig35 about 35-40 million.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

Salman  he meant the Israeli Air Force, not Iran's 



salman108 said:


> Joke ?
> 
> IAF has equipment (that works) ?
> I thought UAE had a decent list of birds and resources after RSAF.
> 
> @Topic Iraq is already integrating some US planes (F-16 and transport). It is a task enough to integrate one platform rather than to open another front and try to integrate a russian platform at the same time.



It doesn't matter how many Aircrafts Iraq gets, what matter is that will Iraq get the equipments it needs from the US?


----------



## Doritos11

@ Salman

All our neighbours with NATO equipment have the latest air to air weapons while the US does not want to sell those to Iraq, therefor its a bad choice to order more ( currently 36 ).

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sinnerman108

Yzd Khalifa said:


> Salman  he meant the Israeli Air Force, not Iran's
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn't matter how many Aircrafts Iraq gets, what matter is that will Iraq get the equipments it needs from the US?



Ah ... fasting is getting to me ....



Doritos11 said:


> @ Salman
> 
> All our neighbours with NATO equipment have the latest air to air weapons while the US does not want to sell those to Iraq, therefor its a bad choice to order more ( currently 36 ).



I doubt that will be the case. There must be more to this story than this.

I have great hopes from Iraq, many many hopes. Iraq will not need weapons. One day.


----------



## Doritos11

salman108 said:


> Ah ... fasting is getting to me ....
> 
> 
> 
> I doubt that will be the case. There must be more to this story than this.
> 
> I have great hopes from Iraq, many many hopes. Iraq will not need weapons. One day.



Since Iraq gone to Russia the US is willing to sell more weapons, they need to try to get the US sell AIM 120 and AIM9X, by then the F16s will be effective, ofcourse its still the US we are talking about, there has to be a 2nd fighter from a different source as we cannot rely on them for spare parts and weaponry. We have a bad recent history with them compared to the other Arab states.
We in the heart of the middle east man.. no weapons means we will be a proxy war, atleast now they got control and the terrorists are only doing hit and run attacks, we need a lot of weaponry mostly to deter.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## bdslph

mig35 is more like a trial plane it is not full operational 
better go for su30 35


----------



## rockstarIN

LiberalAtheist said:


> Not exactly in terms of long term future requirements countries like the US France and Germany are/would be willling to give the necessary tools to support a local Iraqi industrial base *the Russians regardless of their aircraft capability have issues with spares themselves and their export countries*. The reason this would be is because they may to give Iraq a decent air capability to act as a counter force against Iran in the region. I believe KSA uses the eurofighters as well and for good reason because of the capability and long term support agreements with Eurofighter gmbh



It ended with Mig series I believe. The latest Su-XX series are giving good performance without any service problems.


----------



## Manindra

Doritos11 said:


> The Chief of the Office of Security Cooperation between the US and Iraq has mentioned a possible deal between Iraq and Russia for MIG 35 fighters. Currently the Iraqi defence ministry is not confirming the details of the Russian deals, only giving hints.
> 
> What do you think about this aircrafts capabilities ?



This is very good aircraft with super maneuverability, AESA radar, advance EW suite etc. It is inferior to Su-35 but superior to Su-30. Its way superior F-16 Block52.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## shree835

bdslph said:


> *mig35 is more like a trial plane it is not full operational *
> better go for su30 35



How do you know that....?


----------



## ptldM3

Aeronaut said:


> MIG-35 is hardly anything but sexed up Mig-29 [A historic failure]. Buy more F-16s instead.



How is the Mig-29 a failure when It does everything better then the JF-17 and actually has sales? The Germans, Malaysians, Bulgarians, ect have at worst had draws with their NATO counterparts while operating the Mig-29 and at their best have flat out humiliated their counterparts.

The Mig-35 has some major design differences between the Mig-29, redesigned nose, internally much of the aircraft has been redesigned to accommodate for additional fuel, addition of a WSO. The mig-35 has had so many changes that it is 30% heavier then a mig-29. Mig-29 is to F-16 block 1 as Mig-35 is to F-16 block 60.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## dee

go for pak fa......


----------



## Yabgu

I dnt know if we ever will but I hope TuAf buys some SU-35. We bought Russian transport helicopters in the past. Im not sure if Russia will sell it too. 

F-16
Su-35
F-35

That looks like deadly combo.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## bdslph

MIg 35 and Mig 29 series are not all bad 
the Mig29 series which was shot down are inferior to the enemy (the spec i meant)

Mig35 was not exposed to full potential what i meant 
Mig35 is not produced in big quantity only 1 or 2 are there 
it don't come cheap c it is better then some other aircraft


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

MiG-35 - Russia&#39;s Answer to the F-35 ? - YouTube


----------



## BDforever

Yzd Khalifa said:


> MiG-35 - Russia's Answer to the F-35 ? - YouTube



that is typical youtuber post, Mig35 is a 4th gen fighter and F35 is a 5th gen fighter

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

BDforever said:


> that is typical youtuber post, Mig35 is a 4th gen fighter and F35 is a 5th gen fighter



 How funny some youtub-poster can really be  

Just wanted to share it with you guys 



Yabgu said:


> I dnt know if we ever will but I hope TuAf buys some SU-35. We bought Russian transport helicopters in the past. Im not sure if Russia will sell it too.
> 
> F-16
> Su-35
> F-35
> 
> That looks like deadly combo.



Can Turkey get its hands on Russian Aircrafts  

Turkey is a NATO member.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mosamania

Getting a Fulcrum while also having F-16s on order? Boy this is what happens when politicians buy weapons instead of Soldiers.


----------



## Cat12345

BDforever said:


> that is typical youtuber post, Mig35 is a 4th gen fighter and F35 is a 5th gen fighter



No Mig-35 is a 4++ Gen. fighter. F-35 is a 5th Gen with great systems. F-35's advantage is beyond visual range only. Mig-35 would kick the F-35's but in a dogfight

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BDforever

Cat12345 said:


> No Mig-35 is a 4++ Gen. fighter. F-35 is a 5th Gen with great systems. F-35's advantage is beyond visual range only. Mig-35 would kick the F-35's but in a dogfight



yes , comparison should be between F-35 and Pak-fa


----------



## Cat12345

BDforever said:


> yes , comparison should be between F-35 and Pak-fa



PAK FA would enjoy the F-35 being a sitting duck in a dogfight too  F-35 with enhanced upgrades should be able to kill the PAK FA at 100km


----------



## BDforever

Cat12345 said:


> PAK FA would enjoy the F-35 being a sitting duck in a dogfight too  F-35 with enhanced upgrades should be able to kill the PAK FA at 100km



LOL do you think PAK-FA has 10 km range ?


----------



## Cat12345

BDforever said:


> LOL do you think PAK-FA has 10 km range ?



We have to see when they meet in combat. 10km is too close lol


----------



## madmusti

No match against the F-35 !!!


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

Aeronaut said:


> MIG-35 is hardly anything but sexed up Mig-29 [A historic failure]. Buy more F-16s instead.



A historic failure against airforces with monkey models minus BVR,ECM, awacs and poor pilots.
When luftwaffe used east german migs in exercises it cleaned NATO clocks.
F-16 would certainly be an excellent option particularly in BVR,but as our iraqi friend mentioned and as a pakistani u would know only too well..strings.And also price.
With 3d TVC,Good radar and superb manuevrability mig-35 is excellent fighter for its price.



Doritos11 said:


> Its better then the F16 block 52 which Iraq is receiving, also they will supply BVR missiles and not restrict spare parts or weaponry, at least unlike the US they have a strong record in supplying countries whenever they need it. Iraq learned this during the embargo.
> But why not SU 30 as multi role fighter ? which would be better.
> 
> From this we can see that the Rafale would be better, only it will most likely bring restrictions to Iraq as France is close to the US.
> Indian MRCA competition - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Though this still does not fill the need for fighter jets, there is a need for heavier jets like the SU 30 or SU 35.



Heavy fighters are good for countries needing long range strike missions or large countries that need to cover lot of space like india or china.Iraq is compartively smaller and has no distant enemies needed for high endurance strike missions requirement.


----------



## Doritos11

AUSTERLITZ said:


> A historic failure against airforces with monkey models minus BVR,ECM, awacs and poor pilots.
> When luftwaffe used east german migs in exercises it cleaned NATO clocks.
> F-16 would certainly be an excellent option particularly in BVR,but as our iraqi friend mentioned and as a pakistani u would know only too well..strings.And also price.
> With 3d TVC,Good radar and superb manuevrability mig-35 is excellent fighter for its price.
> 
> 
> 
> Heavy fighters are good for countries needing long range strike missions or large countries that need to cover lot of space like india or china.Iraq is compartively smaller and has no distant enemies needed for high endurance strike missions requirement.



Sure but if you look at the map and our location, look at our neighbours and what is happening you would understand there is a need for a powerfull air force, heavy fighters can be usefull making it unneeded to acquire a large number of light multirole jets.


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

Doritos11 said:


> Sure but if you look at the map and our location, look at our neighbours and what is happening you would understand there is a need for a powerfull air force, heavy fighters can be usefull making it unneeded to acquire a large number of light multirole jets.



But u don't have depth,for small airspace mig-35 can do just about everything a heavy fighter can.Heavy fighter will also cost much much more and more maintainence.For larger countries like india,china we need heavy fighters as they can fly from one end of country to other in long endurance missions.In iraq a medium aircraft can easily do this.It can do most roles ,except deep strike role in enemy territory for which u need heavy fighter.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Doritos11

AUSTERLITZ said:


> But u don't have depth,for small airspace mig-35 can do just about everything a heavy fighter can.Heavy fighter will also cost much much more and more maintainence.For larger countries like india,china we need heavy fighters as they can fly from one end of country to other in long endurance missions.In iraq a medium aircraft can easily do this.It can do most roles ,except deep strike role in enemy territory for which u need heavy fighter.



But we need the right jets to deter neighbours, our neighours air forces are quite large.

36 F16
100 mig 35

I doubt this is sufficient. ^^


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

Doritos11 said:


> But we need the right jets to deter neighbours, our neighours air forces are quite large.
> 
> 36 F16
> 100 mig 35
> 
> I doubt this is sufficient. ^^



That'll deter most regional air forces mate.But defensively only.
U'll need good pilot training[150+ hrs/yr].Take part in exercises.And don't get too many types,will create logistics nightmare.
Try to add force multipliers instead like maybe an AWACS from russia or china.
Also create a modern Air defnce network with state of the art sams to complement ur air force.
Iraq has the oil so u got the money.
We incidentally are doubling our oil exports from iraq.Iraq is probably our biggest oil supplier now.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cat12345

AUSTERLITZ said:


> But u don't have depth,for small airspace mig-35 can do just about everything a heavy fighter can.Heavy fighter will also cost much much more and more maintainence.For larger countries like india,china we need heavy fighters as they can fly from one end of country to other in long endurance missions.In iraq a medium aircraft can easily do this.It can do most roles ,except deep strike role in enemy territory for which u need heavy fighter.



There's no such thing as more maintenance cost for $100m. You need a low cost aircraft and low maintenance objectives. If you want a heavy A2G striker choose the F-15E for a high 10,000ft interdiction striker. It has been proven with great A2G strike ability. But it's going to cost the hours of flight $70,000 for each flight hour. 

Or your Indian government should've picked the Super Hornet instead. It's A2A capable just like the SU-30MKI or SU series. Also able to due the heavy strike ability too. It's #1 thing is to survive a threat and survive a battle against enemy aircraft. Super Hornet would've be a great choice for India if they hadn't picked the SU-30MKI. It's low cost $60m would make the Indian government buy about 100-200 SH in a defense fleet. Has low maintenance and flight cost. It's able to get the job done also either air superiority, striking, tanking.


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

Cat12345 said:


> There's no such thing as more maintenance cost for $100m. You need a low cost aircraft and low maintenance objectives. If you want a heavy A2G striker choose the F-15E for a high 10,000ft interdiction striker. It has been proven with great A2G strike ability. But it's going to cost the hours of flight $70,000 for each flight hour.
> 
> Or your Indian government should've picked the Super Hornet instead. It's A2A capable just like the SU-30MKI or SU series. Also able to due the heavy strike ability too. It's #1 thing is to survive a threat and survive a battle against enemy aircraft. Super Hornet would've be a great choice for India if they hadn't picked the SU-30MKI. It's low cost $60m would make the Indian government buy about 100-200 SH in a defense fleet. Has low maintenance and flight cost. It's able to get the job done also either air superiority, striking, tanking.



Hornet would have been great IF we didn't have MKI.
But rafale proved newer and better.Though cost is higher.


----------



## Cat12345

AUSTERLITZ said:


> Hornet would have been great IF we didn't have MKI.
> But rafale proved newer and better.Though cost is higher.



Rafale is a small better striker than the Hornet. It has better combat radius 1,000+mi on penetration mission compared to the Hornet 390mi. Although if Boeing had made the option for a CFT and EPE while talking to the Indian ministers they would've selected the Hornet. I doubt they will pick a new fighter since you guys have MKI. Rafale costs more actually. Doesn't the Indian Navy want a Mig-29K replacement?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

Cat12345 said:


> No Mig-35 is a 4++ Gen. fighter. F-35 is a 5th Gen with great systems. F-35's advantage is beyond visual range only. Mig-35 would kick the F-35's but in a dogfight



Only a desperate fanboy will compare the F-35 to the " 4++ Gen MiG-35 " or even the PAK-FA. Operational desert storm had proven how crappy some Aircrafts are, not to mention the Kosovo war  ..



AUSTERLITZ said:


> Hornet would have been great IF we didn't have MKI.
> But rafale proved newer and better.Though cost is higher.



I was thrilled when India announced that it will go after the Rafael buddy  Congrats

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Cat12345

Yzd Khalifa said:


> Only a desperate fanboy will compare the F-35 to the " 4++ Gen MiG-35 " or even the PAK-FA. Operational desert storm had proven how crappy some Aircrafts are, not to mention the Kosovo war



Dude i know about the F-35 and it's advantages is BVR only


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

Cat12345 said:


> Dude i know about the F-35 and it's advantages is BVR only



Not its stealthiness?


----------



## Mosamania

Yzd Khalifa said:


> Not its stealthiness?



/Facepalm


......


----------



## Kompromat

@ptldM3

Mig-29 is a historic failure, as every single time it has faced an F series, it has gone back to what it really is "a pile of junk metal."

Iraqis are better off with getting more vipers instead of buying MIG-35, which no one else is willing to take.


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

Mosamania said:


> /Facepalm
> ......



 trolling Trolololololololollololololololo.

Suffice to say that Germany gave them away to the Polish.


Aeronaut said:


> @ptldM3
> 
> Mig-29 is a historic failure, as every single time it has faced an F series, it has gone back to what it really is "a pile of junk metal."
> 
> Iraqis are better off with getting more vipers instead of buying MIG-35, which no one else is willing to take.


----------



## Cat12345

Yzd Khalifa said:


> Not its stealthiness?



Dude read it only has BVR advantage and i was always meaning stealth


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

Cat12345 said:


> Dude read it only has BVR advantage and i was always meaning stealth



Hmmm


----------



## Cat12345

Yzd Khalifa said:


> Hmmm
> 
> Interesting, Okay



Uhhh yea 

F-35 shot down in dogfight

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Doritos11

Iraqi F16

- Overpriced for Iraq
- No BVR delivered, no AIM 9 X but L/M
- Friend/Foe system most likely shows almost all our neighbours as friendly... ( unable to fire ? )
- US will cut the weapons/spare parts supply line in case of war

The order of F16s for Iraq most likely ends at 36.

I&#8217;m not sure why so many are negative about the mig 35. the F16 first block series are also a joke when comparing them to the block 52/60. The airframe and maneuverability of the mig 29 have not been a problem therefor modernized electronics and weaponry make a big difference.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

Dude, I like flipping with people! You probably are one of few coolest members here  


Cat12345 said:


> Uhhh yea
> 
> F-35 shot down in dogfight

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cat12345

Yzd Khalifa said:


> Dude, I like flipping with people! You probably are one of few coolest members here



Yea...... 

More F-35 shot down 

Failure 35 engine down

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

Hahaha 

I'm afraid! You haven't seen anything yet!  

Discovery Channel - Ultimates - Explosions - Tsar bomb segment - YouTube



Cat12345 said:


> Yea......
> 
> More F-35 shot down
> 
> Failure 35 engine down





No one is bad mouthing the MiGs out of the bule, but its records suck. 

If you think that Russian Aircrafts are better for Iraq, then be it. Keep in mind that both of Algeria and Malaysia had encountered wide range of technical issues with the MiGs. 


Doritos11 said:


> Iraqi F16
> 
> - Overpriced for Iraq
> - No BVR delivered, no AIM 9 X but L/M
> - Friend/Foe system most likely shows almost all our neighbours as friendly... ( unable to fire ? )
> - US will cut the weapons/spare parts supply line in case of war
> 
> The order of F16s for Iraq most likely ends at 36.
> 
> I&#8217;m not sure why so many are negative about the mig 35. the F16 first block series are also a joke when comparing them to the block 52/60. The airframe and maneuverability of the mig 29 have not been a problem therefor modernized electronics and weaponry make a big difference.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Doritos11

Ofcourse Rafale, F18, Typhoon are preferred but they need to pressure them to sell Iraq the BVR weapons.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cat12345

Yzd Khalifa said:


> Hahaha
> 
> I'm afraid! You haven't seen anything yet!
> 
> Discovery Channel - Ultimates - Explosions - Tsar bomb segment - YouTube



Ohh hahaha  

Bomb exploding on an F-35   It's like standing beside an F-35 than when you fart... it gets destroyed easily

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

Doritos11 said:


> Ofcourse Rafale, F18, Typhoon are preferred but they need to pressure them to sell Iraq the BVR weapons.



Now you're talking bud!


----------



## ptldM3

Aeronaut said:


> @ptldM3
> 
> Mig-29 is a historic failure, as every single time it has faced an F series, it has gone back to what it really is "a pile of junk metal."




I expect these type of empty comments from fanboys that want to pound their chests at how their aircraft can shoot down the enemy (in this case Indian Mig-29s) If you did a little research you would know that during the Gulf War several Mig-29 locked onto F-15s, the only thing that prevented the Mig-29s from killing the F-15s was the fact that the Iraqi Mig-29s killed themselves. And the F-15s took credit for the Mig-29s accidentally crashing. 

in one particular incident a Mig-29 locked onto an F-15; however, the Iraqi pilot got scared and broke off, the Mig-29 then turned and merged head on with a pair of F-15s at this point the mig-29s tighter turning radius, higher thrust to weight radio, HMS, and archers had a major advantage over the F-15 yet the Mig-29 pilot failed to capitalize and instead crashed his Mig-29 while trying to pull out of a dive shortly after the merge.


Ask yourself why every Iraqi Mirage was shot down as well, or why every Argentinian mirage has been shot down or why Iran had so many Mirage kills. On the flip side why have Mirages performed well when flown by Israelis? Or why did the F-4 perform poorly when flown by American pilots yet when flown by Israeli pilots the F-4 was nearly untouchable.

Put NATO pilots in mig-29s, give them numerical superiority and AWACS and the results would have been different.





Aeronaut said:


> Iraqis are better off with getting more vipers instead of buying MIG-35, which no one else is willing to take.



No one is willing to take the JF-17, so what is your point? Why would Iraq want more overpriced F-16s with old PESA radars when they could get cheaper Mig-35 with AESA as well as the same ECM that equips the Typhoon.

So it's AESA vs PESA radar, a western self Protection jammer with AESA technology, either a Thales targeting pod or a newer Russian targeting pod and the advantage of a weapons system operator.

But you are correct Iraq is better off buying older, more expensive and inferior F-16s.


----------



## Kompromat

@ptldM3

None of your talk can defy the established record in A2A combat. MIG-29 has always lost to an F series, its like flying a coffin, when you are flying against an F series.

I am not discussing JF-17s here, so please quit trolling. Its better for Iraq to stick to vipers, they are time tested machines, instead of buying another sexed up Mig-29 that no one is willing to buy,not even India, Russia's closest ally.


----------



## StormShadow

Aeronaut said:


> @ptldM3
> 
> None of your talk can defy the established record in A2A combat. MIG-29 has always lost to an F series, its like flying a coffin, when you are flying against an F series.
> 
> *I am not discussing JF-17s here, so please quit trolling.* Its better for Iraq to stick to vipers, they are time tested machines, instead of buying another sexed up *Mig-29 that no one is willing to buy,not even India, Russia's closest ally*.



Me too not intending to troll but regarding red part, did China induct JF-17s? Then why pak did? There is some reason rite...same is the reason regarding India rejecting mig-35, it's not coz of it's capabilities.. there are other reasons.


----------



## ziaulislam

StormShadow said:


> Me too not intending to troll but regarding red part, did China induct JF-17s? Then why pak did? There is some reason rite...same is the reason regarding India rejecting mig-35, it's not coz of it's capabilities.. there are other reasons.



nope, pakistan developed jf-17 for own use while china never intended to do so, they developed j-10 for light catergery aircraft why would they need jf-17?..


----------



## rockstarIN

Aeronaut said:


> @ptldM3
> 
> None of your talk can defy the established record in A2A combat. MIG-29 has always lost to an F series, its like flying a coffin, when you are flying against an F series.
> 
> I am not discussing JF-17s here, so please quit trolling. Its better for Iraq to stick to vipers, they are time tested machines, instead of buying another sexed up Mig-29 that no one is willing to buy,not even India, Russia's closest ally.



Mig-29s have its own problems, be its maintenance savy, engines (less life for early models etc)...but its "performance" is matched by the F series. Mig-29 did not do well in export market due t numerous reasons such as USSR collaps, Su-27/30 entrance etc. 

German pilots did well in mock battles against NATO pilots. So is IAF Mig-29s against USAF in exercises. 

In case of real battle, all F series has got AWCS support and faced poorly maintained Mig-29s. The scene was quite different when IAF Mig-29s faced Pak F-16s in Kargil once as the Mig-29 was BVR capable anf Pak F-16 was not. MiG-29 got a radar lock on two Pak F-16s simultaneously who came to take on on Jaguar who were bombing Pak side of the LOC. F-16s tried to break the lock but MiG persisted with lock and finally F-16s ran away from the scene.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheThreePashas

Buy F-16s Iraq. Then you can't get the stupid idea of trying to intercept our airstrikes in the North (if hostilities resume, that is)


----------



## bdslph

after buying the current F16 which has string attached Iraq should go for like Russia / China planes or other planes

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cat12345

bdslph said:


> after buying the current F16 which has string attached Iraq should go for like Russia / China planes or other planes



Why? Iraq wants IOC for the F-16. That's when the F-16 gets effectively right for a country. Russian planes are waayy to overrated to buy. China i say go with J-10. Or worse get the F/A-50


----------



## ptldM3

Aeronaut said:


> @ptldM3
> 
> None of your talk can defy the established record in A2A combat. MIG-29 has always lost to an F series, its like flying a coffin, when you are flying against an F series.



And you can continue to believe that the mig-29 is junk based on flawed understanding and umfaforable circumstances. As stated earlier Mig-29s have achieved radar lock, the only thing that prevented the Mig-29s from scoring kills were the Mig-29 pilots killing themselves.


going back to your empty claim that About the mig-35, the Mig-35 is about as sexed up as an F-16 block 10 vs an F-16 block 60. In other words as much as someone can hate on the Mig-35 it has zero similarities to the mig-29, different radar, navigation, electronic counter measures, engines, flight controls, targeting pod, OLS, ect. So in case you still don't get it, it's an entirely different animal, neither aircraft share *anything* in common other then general appearance.




Aeronaut said:


> I am not discussing JF-17s here, so please quit trolling.




I'm strolling? Were you not the one that came into the thread and started saying (and I'll summarize), the mig is a flying coffin, the Mig-35 is a sexes up mig-29, it has horrible performance, no one wants to buy it, ect. You have not contributed anything positive or technical or even rational.

So what gives you the right to come into a thread, ruine it up and accuse others of trolling? when I mentioned the JF-17 I had a valid reason to do so, since your logic was 'the mig-35 is bad because no one wants the mig-35', I countered by stating that no one has purchased the JF-17 either.



Aeronaut said:


> Its better for Iraq to stick to vipers, they are time tested machines, instead of buying another sexed up Mig-29 that no one is willing to buy,not even India, Russia's closest ally.




And that can be countered by saying that those old F-16 are outdated compared to the Mig-35. By your logic why even bother with the JF-17? just stick to F-16s. Most Pakistanis claim that the JF-17 is at least as good as the F-16 even though much of the avionics are based on 1990s Chinese and Pakistani know how. Ironic though that a Mig-35 equipped with AESA, OLS, TVC, and one of the best ECM suites today can't Mach up to the F-16 but a JF-17 that lacks AESA radar, aerial refueling, TVC, WSO, AESA self defence suit, and posseses inferior kinetic performance is at least as good as the F-16. Mind you all of this is with avionics that are a good 2 generations behind whatever the Mig-35 has.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Yabgu

TheThreePashas said:


> Buy F-16s Iraq. Then you can't get the stupid idea of trying to intercept our airstrikes in the North (if hostilities resume, that is)



Iraq isn't our enemy, erdo&#287;an is our internal enemy. He's picking wrong sides all the time.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Cat12345

ptldM3 said:


> And you can continue to believe that the mig-29 is junk based on flawed understanding and umfaforable circumstances. As stated earlier Mig-29s have achieved radar lock, the only thing that prevented the Mig-29s from scoring kills were the Mig-29 pilots killing themselves.


 Mig's were popular when several F-15's shot em down. Mig-29 appeared as the deadliest aircraft in 1990, but bam became a fiasco in A2A combat. It's still a popular aircraft today. I think it was the pilots that weren't trained enough because the countries who owned the Mig-29 couldn't afford much to train pilots. It costs too much to train your buddy or you GIB properly.  




> the mig is a flying coffin, the Mig-35 is a sexes up mig-29, it has horrible performance, no one wants to buy it, ect. You have not contributed anything positive or technical or even rational.


 No it isn't  We know the Mig has a horrible kill ratio , but the trained pilots can easily make the Mig-29/35 great in combat. I'm no Mig fanboy but if it's a flying coffin or piano then why did Russia sell and produce it?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Doritos11

Mig 25 had better combat records during the first gulf war, it forced several F15s and AWACS to abort their mission after firing missiles, the F15s could not get the MIG 25 because of its speed and missile range.

Mig 29s are inferior to the coalition used aircraft supported by AWACS and Electronic warfare pods, its not fair to compare that, integrate a mig 35 squadron in the US air force and im sure it will do good against their F16s.


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

The F-15 107-aces record speaks for itself, my friend. 


Doritos11 said:


> Mig 25 had better combat records during the first gulf war, it forced several F15s and AWACS to abort their mission after firing missiles, the F15s could not get the MIG 25 because of its speed and missile range.


----------



## Doritos11

Yzd Khalifa said:


> The F-15 107-aces record speaks for itself, my friend.



Air engagements of the Gulf War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The air engagements of the gulf war though, you cannot use it to simply compare aircrafts, not mentioning superior NATO training, the US has used AWACS and electronic warfare to blind Iraqi aircraft.

1 of this incident is when 2 Saudi F15 shot down 2 Mirage bombers, a US awacs was involved which could have been using electronic jamming .


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

The RSAF has been operating AWACS for more than 4 decades, I don't think they would need someone else's help. 

Anyway, we don't have to look at the Gulf war air combat accounts to evaluate the F-15's outstanding performance. 


Doritos11 said:


> Air engagements of the Gulf War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> The air engagements of the gulf war though, you cannot use it to simply compare aircrafts, not mentioning superior NATO training, the US has used AWACS and electronic warfare to blind Iraqi aircraft.
> 
> 1 of this incident is when 2 Saudi F15 shot down 2 Mirage bombers, a US awacs was involved which could have been using electronic jamming .


----------



## Doritos11

Yzd Khalifa said:


> The RSAF has been operating AWACS for more than 4 decades, I don't think they would need someone else's help.
> 
> Anyway, we don't have to look at the Gulf war air combat accounts to evaluate the F-15's outstanding performance.



Its an example of why electronic warfare was responsible for them not responding to the 2 F15s.


----------



## Ceylal

Doritos11 said:


> Mig 25 had better combat records during the first gulf war, it forced several F15s and AWACS to abort their mission after firing missiles, the F15s could not get the MIG 25 because of its speed and missile range.
> 
> *Mig 29s are inferior* to the coalition used aircraft supported by AWACS and Electronic warfare pods, its not fair to compare that, integrate a mig 35 squadron in the US air force and im sure it will do good against their F16s.



Mig 29 were not inferior to the coalition aircraft in the hand of a good pilot. Saddam killed all the best pilots but the mediocre one. Even, with all the technology that the west put against them, they took to the skies ....that balls!

For the MIG 35, The mig complex is dead with the MIG 35...You have better chance to see the SU35 in the Iraqi sky than the MIG 35.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

Doritos11 said:


> Its an example of why electronic warfare was responsible for them not responding to the 2 F15s.


Point taken. I would love seeing Iraq going after a European-made Aircraft though  not a Mig-35 ..



Ceylal said:


> Mig 29 were not inferior to the coalition aircraft in the hand of a good pilot. Saddam killed all the best pilots but the mediocre one. Even, with all the technology that the west put against them, they took to the skies ....that balls!
> 
> For the MIG 35, The mig complex is dead with the MIG 35...You have better chance to see the SU35 in the Iraqi sky than the MIG 35.



Why did Algeria return a few MiG-29s to Russia? Was it because they were a bit inferior compared with the Su-30s they have in hand?


----------



## anonymus

Yzd Khalifa said:


> The F-15 107-aces record speaks for itself, my friend.



The have this record against $hitty air forces, ones which had no AWACS or BVR.

Russian planes are usually superior in Aerodynamic characteristics while Western one's in Avionics.( F-22 not counted)




Yzd Khalifa said:


> Why did Algeria return a few MiG-29s to Russia? Was it because they were a bit inferior compared with the Su-30s they have in hand?



MIG 29 and SU 3o is built around different concept. SU30 is considered better because it could do most of the jobs that MIG could do but not vice versa.




Ceylal said:


> For the MIG 35, The mig complex is dead with the MIG 35...You have better chance to see the SU35 in the Iraqi sky than the MIG 35.



MIG could have a future in Naval Aviation iff Russia decide on Ski Jump carriers instead of CARTOBAR as Sukhois are too heavy to fly from a Ski Jump Carrier.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

anonymus said:


> The have this record against $hitty air forces, ones which had no AWACS or BVR.
> 
> Russian planes are usually superior in Aerodynamic characteristics while Western one's in Avionics.( F-22 not counted)



It could be, yes.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cat12345

Doritos11 said:


> Mig 25 had better combat records during the first gulf war, it forced several F15s and AWACS to abort their mission after firing missiles, the F15s could not get the MIG 25 because of its speed and missile range.


 Mig-25's weren't air superiority fighters remember. Mig-25 sure were better in the combat ratio area than the Mig-29. F-15's and AWACS pilots were scared going up against the Mig-25 Foxbat due to the R-40 and R-37. They were extreme long range missiles ready to kick a$$. Wonder why every pilot were scared of the Mig-25? When was there a AWAC's plane forcing to the F-15's to retreat? Many were pilots were  when they saw a Mig-25 



> *Mig 29s are inferior* to the coalition used aircraft supported by AWACS and Electronic warfare pods, its not fair to compare that, integrate a mig 35 squadron in the US air force and im sure it will do good against their F16s.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheThreePashas

Yabgu said:


> Iraq isn't our enemy, erdo&#287;an is our internal enemy. He's picking wrong sides all the time.



Surely he is however, what happens when you need to have an offensive in Iraq and the central government is threatening to try to do something? Obviously we'll take their guys down fairly easy but its a bit aggressive and would make our government think twice about doing it.


----------



## Ceylal

Yzd Khalifa said:


> Why did Algeria return a few MiG-29s to Russia? Was it because they were a bit inferior compared with the Su-30s they have in hand?


They were flawed. Body was made from old frames and old parts refurbished to look new. I did not fool the maintenance technicians. Hey were returned and replaced with SU-30s...It took the VVS two years to corrects the flaws before incorporating them in their forces. Even though they were flawed, the ex Algerian MIG29 SMT's were the most advanced aircrafts that the Russian airforce fielded to this day.That was a cold blizzard in the Algerian-Russian relations that lasted quite awhile, until the Russians made amend and jailed the culprits.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

Yabgu said:


> Iraq isn't our enemy, erdo&#287;an is our internal enemy. He's picking wrong sides all the time.



PM Erdigan with all his goods and bads, played a vital role to boost up Turkey's economy, heavy industrialization, and military machine build up. 

However, PM Erdogan couldn't do that on his own, those were the remarkable efforts, aspirations, and strong will been carried out by the Turkish people. 

Hopefully, Iraq and Turkey will have better relations in near future.


----------



## bdslph

as i said the Iraq back then did not have the right things for the fight 
but during the Iraq Iran was that was perfect match 

and also if u put F7 pg or BG1 it cannot fight a Su30 mk 
F7 models are good for the Mig21 Bison or any other relative model

a well trained pilot with a latest Mig29 model put it against F16 CD or F18 there is a match 
dont bring the Mig29 from 80s or 90s


----------



## BDforever

bdslph said:


> as i said the Iraq back then did not have the right things for the fight
> but during the Iraq Iran was that was perfect match
> 
> and also if u put F7 pg or BG1 it cannot fight a Su30 mk
> F7 models are good for the Mig21 Bison or any other relative model
> 
> a well trained pilot with a latest Mig29 model put it against F16 CD or F18 there is a match
> dont bring the Mig29 from 80s or 90s



F-7BG1 is bangladeshi version of A-10 Thunderbolt II

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Manindra

Aeronaut said:


> @ptldM3
> 
> Mig-29 is a historic failure, as every single time it has faced an F series, it has gone back to what it really is "a pile of junk metal."
> 
> Iraqis are better off with getting more vipers instead of buying MIG-35, which no one else is willing to take.



Because F-16 face always heavily downgraded, inexperience pilot , poor maintainence & without AWACS support MIG29.

How about MIG29 locked F-16 during Kargil 1999 skirmish.

If those foces have typhoon but NATO pitted against them with MIG-21


----------



## Manindra

Aeronaut said:


> @ptldM3
> 
> None of your talk can defy the established record in A2A combat. MIG-29 has always lost to an F series, its like flying a coffin, when you are flying against an F series.
> 
> I am not discussing JF-17s here, so please quit trolling. Its better for Iraq to stick to vipers, they are time tested machines, instead of buying another sexed up Mig-29 that no one is willing to buy,*not even India, Russia's closest ally*.



What is MIG29K


----------



## asad71

I suppose the Americans would encourage allies / proxy regimes to acquire some - only some, new eqpt from China and Russia so that they can study their performance against what America has, and also for own R&D .


----------



## The SC

Since America has recognized its lies and mistakes for starting a war against Iraq, it should replace all Iraqi armaments for free if it wants to be fair and even pay some extras and pay the rebuilding of Iraq, not to mention to repay all the lost revenues from oil, this should be the outcome, and the same for Afghanistan, now that the whole world knows that Israel was behind the New York 9-11 attacks, it is Israel that should pay for those Iraqi and Afghani losses and ultimately be dismantled.
In the reality of today, Iraq should go for Chinese technology like the J-10 -a few hundred- and add some squadrons of JF-17 from Pakistan, that will be enough for fighter aircraft price and technology wise, with highly trained and motivated pilots, Iraq should mostly go for the best air defences available like the S-400, the Pantsir, the Buk and the Tor systems or their equivalents from China, it should also build a sophisticated small navy with a few sophisticated warships and submarines , they can also get these from China, for the land forces it can by from Europe, the US ,Russia or China, some of the best quality tanks and equipments, and it should start relying on itself for producing and ameliorating these weapons in the future, by building a medium sized heavy industry, produce short and medium range ballistic missiles and cruise missiles, and invest heavily in the human factor in education and R&D.

I am saying this because one can talk as much as he wants but the US didn't face Russia or China, it faced some Russian equipments but in an incomplete war system; against let us say Russia, the US would face live satellite imagery sent to the troops on the ground and the air and sea crews of all the American war machine movements, on the tactical scale, the American air force would face the Russian AWACS information technology used by the Russian pilots, the Americans would also face electronic jamming and electronic warfare at a big scale, in other words they will face defeat eye to eye with an eye for an eye.

So it is not rational to talk about American equipment's superiority while it was tested against a small country with no integrated war systems whatsoever, that just came out of a bloody and exhausting war two years earlier and that was sanctioned to the teeth afterwards, it had all the right ingredients including its flat and dry terrain -since mountain warfare was to be tested in Afghanistan- to be a test bed for some western equipments and technologies, to showcase, test and ultimately sell to the naive world where we live.
End of the story.


----------



## flamer84

Yzd Khalifa said:


> trolling Trolololololololollololololololo.
> 
> Suffice to say that Germany gave them away to the Polish.



The germans loved them,they've said that Mig's are the best invention in the world after sliced bread.The next day they gave them for nothing(as a donation) to the poles.


----------



## Tshering22

flamer84 said:


> The germans loved them,they've said that Mig's are the best invention in the world after sliced bread.The next day they gave them for nothing(as a donation) to the poles.



The Soviet product support was a pain otherwise MiG-29s were some of the finest jets.

We use it in our Navy and they love them even our older IAF versions are pretty good by the tech of those days. 

Former East German pilots were the deadliest in the Fulcrums when they trashed NATO pilots after unification of Germany.


----------



## Tshering22

The MiG-35s will be a good choice for the Iraqis considering that they have to first revive their oil-rich economy to return back to normal. Also, it would be important for them to focus on basic defences. While F-16IQs were decided, apparently it would be a better choice for them to go with Russian products as they already are used to using Russian jets.

Once their economy recovers, they will be strong enough wield heavier jets like the Su-35BMs. 

Swedish Gripens also make good jets but it is unlikely that they will order from a country that has little geo-political say even if it is a neutral country like Sweden.



asad71 said:


> I suppose the Americans would encourage allies / proxy regimes to acquire some - only some, new eqpt from China and Russia so that they can study their performance against what America has, and also for own R&D .



Which is natural.

The price of F-16IQs was such a rip-off, I was shocked when the deal was announced.

Iraqis could have easily bought a slightly lesser number of BMs in that price which would have been more effective.


----------



## flamer84

Tshering22 said:


> The Soviet product support was a pain otherwise MiG-29s were some of the finest jets.
> 
> We use it in our Navy and they love them even our older IAF versions are pretty good by the tech of those days.
> 
> Former East German pilots were the deadliest in the Fulcrums when they trashed NATO pilots after unification of Germany.



If the Mig 35 was so good you would have picked it in the MMRCA,but you choose to spend almost double the money for a superior product.Don't say "we wanted to diversify the supplier",Russia never failed you and complete ToT was on the table,you had experience with russian fighter jets.The simple truth is that you wanted a far better piece of equipment.


----------



## Tshering22

Aeronaut said:


> @ptldM3
> 
> Mig-29 is a historic failure, as every single time it has faced an F series, it has gone back to what it really is "a pile of junk metal."
> 
> Iraqis are better off with getting more vipers instead of buying MIG-35, which no one else is willing to take.



When was the last time two jets of the same class fought?

Let me refresh your memory;

the first war game between unified Germany and US allies. 

The then defunct East Germans flew the MiG-29s that were transferred to the Luftwaffe collectively. 

They trashed all the Fs and European jets in combat. 

Also, when was the last time an F series has been used against a well-trained air force by NATO? 

Iraqi military of Saddam just gave up without even trying anything real.

Even back in the Vietnam war days, the MiGs flown by Vietnamese pilots thrashed squads of F series of jets. Heard of the MiG Alley? There are dozens of such incidents that NATO will never tell.


The only drawback of Russian jets of yester-years was that they were very, very unforgiving. 

They were designed to peak combat performance and little thought was given for pilot fatigue or comfort for that matter.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tshering22

Cat12345 said:


> Rafale is a small better striker than the Hornet. It has better combat radius 1,000+mi on penetration mission compared to the Hornet 390mi. Although if Boeing had made the option for a CFT and EPE while talking to the Indian ministers they would've selected the Hornet. I doubt they will pick a new fighter since you guys have MKI. Rafale costs more actually. Doesn't the Indian Navy want a Mig-29K replacement?



MiG-29Ks are brand new, buddy. They were only delivered from 2008-09 onwards. So they will be staying in for quite some time before which we will be replacing them.

Stealth combat has an edge but is not the complete picture of how air warfare is fought. It is for the same reason that Raptors were stopped to be produced because of their cost. They are lethal but cannot be used over a sustained period of time which would only weaken the using air force.

Rafale is an excellent blend of typical French aeronautics that give us an excellent edge over our present threats and will be serving well into the next generation of warfare.

Any replacement of the Ks will be home-made jets (by then).


----------



## Tshering22

Hazzy997 said:


> Rafale is expensive, and like you said it may see restrictions. As for multi role fighter, wouldn't the F-16 do the job? Depending on how many they're receiving and what it's coming with. If Iraq is looking for a cheaper alternative for a multi role fighter whilst also being effective maybe look at the Jf-17 or Gripen Jas 39 but the Mig is also a multirole fighter.
> 
> The Su-30 could also be one. Depending on what the Iraqi Air Force is looking for.



It is unlikely that Rafale can see any restrictions. The French are pretty neutral and even in our toughest of times, have ever sanctioned us. When NSG blocked us, they continued their supply of weapons support to our air force. Also, their quality is very good in terms of product support, maintenance solutions and other things. 

But yes, they are expensive.

The Sukhoi jets will give them unprecedented edge over rest of the Middle East (barring probably Saudi which has a state of the art air force and of course, Israel which is a different case altogether). Weapons range, radar's range, supermaneuverability, aircraft range, aircraft payload, number of weapons stations... you name it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

flamer84 said:


> The germans loved them,they've said that Mig's are the best invention in the world after sliced bread.The next day they gave them for nothing(as a donation) to the poles.



What do you expect?  they've got the Tornados in hand back in the day

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tshering22

Yzd Khalifa said:


> What do you expect?  they've got the Tornados in hand back in the day



But you got to admit, Germans make the finest tech pieces in the world.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

Tshering22 said:


> But you got to admit, Germans make the finest tech pieces in the world.



Word!!!! It's like India when it comes to IT industries!! - Im very optimistic about the future of India's IT industries -


----------



## Cat12345

Tshering22 said:


> But you got to admit, Germans make the finest tech pieces in the world.



Can they make a robot or a flying car?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

Cat12345 said:


> Can they make a robot or a flying car?



I just wanted them to make a Mercedes tank

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tshering22

Cat12345 said:


> Can they make a robot or a flying car?



Check the number of robotics applied in German industries. In BMW's plants alone, you will find industrial robotics everywhere.

Saw this documentary on TV sometime ago; Germans are just the European version of the Japanese.

No wonder them two get along so well.


----------



## Cat12345

Tshering22 said:


> Check the number of robotics applied in German industries. In BMW's plants alone, you will find industrial robotics everywhere.
> 
> Saw this documentary on TV sometime ago; Germans are just the European version of the Japanese.
> 
> No wonder them two get along so well.



 So....... where do you buy a robot?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Doritos11

I have a feeling the only way for us to get sophisticated western systems is to shake hands with Israel like the rest of the Arab world does secretly.


----------



## Ceylal

flamer84 said:


> The germans loved them,they've said that Mig's are the best invention in the world after sliced bread.The next day they gave them for nothing(as a donation) to the poles.


They gave them to the poles after the laters integrated NATO. Here what, the one who are most likely to meet the MIG29 , think about the airplane.



> The Sting has landed
> In recent months, Russia negotiates the sales of MIG-29 fighter jets to Syria. This is a good time to recall that in 1997, under a heavy cloud of secrecy, three MIG-29 Fulcrum ("Sting" in Russian)) landed in Israel. For several weeks, Israeli test pilots learned the plane and its weapon systems inside and out, flown numerous hours, and tested the jets abilities when facing Israeli fighter jets
> Noam Ofir | Udi Ezion | Nikolai Avrutov
> In terms of its abilities, the MIG-29 equals those of the F-15 and F-16 jets. In some respects it even surpasses the two, said Major N, Chief Experimental Pilot of the MIG.
> 
> 
> 
> Three single seat MIG-29s stayed at one of the Israeli Air Force bases for a few weeks. The MIGs were secretly brought to Israel, and it was a rare opportunity for the air force to study up close what of the main interception jets used by Iran and Syria.
> 
> Lieut. Col. M was in charge of the test centre of the air force, and one of the few Israeli pilots to fly the MIG: we are used to test foreign aircraft, as part of our purchasing procedure, but the MIG-29 was an out of the ordinary kind of test flight, he said. Not even for a moment did we forget that this aircraft is the most advanced strategic threat that exists at the arena today".
> 
> In order to fly the MIG-29s, the test-pilots had to undergo a special course. At the first stage, the crew learned of the special structure and systems of the jet. The language barrier was the main difficulty: the study material was all written in Russian, forcing the Israeli pilots to use a translator, and at times to improvise.
> 
> The language post a great challenge, as the voice warning system in the aircraft, who alerts the pilot of potential malfunctions, spoke Russian, says Lieut. Col. M. The visual warning, that appear on screen, were all displayed in Cyrillic script as well".
> 
> Upon successful completion of the theoretical part, each pilot performed three flights with the jet.
> 
> Since we are used to fly unfamiliar aircraft, it wasnt a great challenge to fly the MIG-29 by ourselves right from the first time, says Lieut. Col. M. Within minutes sitting in the cockpit, I was comfortable. While everything around me was written in Russian, we labelled most of the instruments with English translation".
> 
> One of the things that caught the pilots attention was the difference in the Eastern approach to jet construction, characterising the MIG, and the western kind, typical of the F-15 and F-16. One of the greatest tools available to the pilot in this jet, is its ability to land by itself, without the need for pilots involvement", Says Major N. landing destination is entered into the computer before takeoff. In case of bad weather, or any other difficulty, hampering pilots ability to land, he simply needs to press a button, and the jet will land by itself. When testing the jet, we did not use this system for several reasons, but no doubt, it is a nice system. Another system worth of mentioning, is the one that stabilises the jet in case the pilot is affected by Vertigo disease, and loses his orientation in space. Such systems do not exist in western aircraft, counting on the pilot to handle such situations independently".
> 
> A serious opponent
> 
> The three jets were received at one of the air force bases, where they were thoroughly studied, and the first solo flights conducted. I wasnt too excited about the first solo flight on the MIG, describes Lieut. Col. M. What exciting, is the fact that so many people watched that premiere flight. Its not every day that a MIG takes off the squadrons runway. Everyone at the base stopped what they were doing to watch that jet fly".
> 
> There were several flights every day at which the weapon systems of the jets were tested. Each test flight began with a brief on the expected simulation, and each flight concluded by a thorough debrief, where both MIG pilots and those who simulated the enemy in Israeli jets.
> 
> The debrief is the most serious part, tells Lieut. Gen. G, one of the MIG-29 pilots. This time, they were even more serious. After each flight, which last an hour, there was a two to three hours de-brief, sometimes even more. Each of the test pilots accumulated 20 flight hours, gaining significant experience in operating the aircraft.
> 
> Studies of the aircraft confirmed it as a serious opponent in air combat. MIGs abilities equals and sometimes even exceeds those of the F-15 and F-16 jets, says Major N, a test pilot. The aircraft is highly manoeuvrable, and its engines provide higher weight to thrust ratio. Our pilots must be careful with this aircraft in air combat. Flown by a well trained professional, it is a worthy opponent".
> 
> Lieut. Gen. M shares the appreciation for the Russian aircraft: flying the MIG was one of a kind type of experience for a test pilot. Now I know that the result of an air combat between the MIG and an Israeli fighter jet depends on how the combat develops. In a tight battle, it is a real threat. Its an advanced aircraft, and in close manoeuvring engagements it is absolutely terrific. It makes sharp turns, its quick, and to my opinion, as a platform, it does not fall short of our advanced fighter jets".
> 
> Advantages and disadvantages
> 
> Test-Flying the MIG provided a lot of useful information regarding its weapon systems. I was positively surprised by its systems, says Lieut. Gen. G. The different parts (Radar, helmet mounted display, and the missiles) are very well combined. The jet is equipped with an advanced air-to-air guided missiles, as well as radar guided missiles. The jet features an IRST (Infra Red Search and Track) system, which identifying targets by their heat signature, without using radar. All these, combined on a relatively good platform, result in an advanced weapons system. The MIG turned out to be an advanced fighter jet, similar to the F-15 and F-16 aircraft".
> 
> The MIG has an excellent radar system, says Major N. I was also very impressed with the IRST system. The missile systems provide the jet with significant advantage. I made a good use of the Russian helmet, and I can say that it works fairly well. Having said that, it is less convenient than the Israeli system, and in some ways it falls short of it. Overall it works well".
> 
> There is a major disadvantage: difficulty to fully utilize the jets abilities. One of the greatest problems of the MIG is its human engineering, explains Major N. Most of the systems installed are good overall, but their combination, and the user interface is cumbersome, and begs for an improvement. On several occasions, I needed a certain piece of information which was not showing on any of the cockpit instruments".
> 
> Trustworthy, Strong, Massive
> 
> Major H., an F-16 pilot underwent the MIG training course along with the test pilots, so in case of an emergency or a malfunction, he could guide the pilots over the radio on how to proceed. During the course, he also had flown the plane.
> 
> It is a great experience for an Israeli jet pilot, he says. I was positively impressed with the overall simplicity of the jet. The important things are proper and simple. The ignition for example, is done with a single push of a button, following which there are only a few tests the pilot needs to perform. Its manoeuvrability was also very impressive".
> 
> For a long time, the MIG was regarded a replica of the American F-18. Major N. Had an opportunity to fly both, and to compare:
> 
> You can see from the first glance, that there is a great resemblance between the two, he says. They both have a twin engine, a double tail, and an IRST system. But in contrast to the American jet, the MIG was designed with air combat as its main mission in mind. According to its designers, it can also serve as an attack aircraft as a secondary role, and it cannot carry a large amount of air-to-surface ammunition.
> 
> Lieut. Col. G. Concludes: The jets had very few malfunctions, and like other Russian products the MIG-29 is trustworthy, strong, and massive. The F-15 and F-16 are much more delicate, compared".



source:IAF Magazine Articles

If you know how to read a graph...


----------



## rockstarIN

For the MiGs, the disadvantage was the work load of the pilot. With the upgrade of MIG to SMT/PUG standard, it is now okay.


----------



## vostok

This babe is made for EW for MiG-29 (don't know about MiG-35)












Options BKO "Talisman" Threat type Name
"Talisman Block-1" (8.0-12.0 GHz) radar of the Su-27, Su-30, MiG-29, MiG-35, F-15, F-16, F-18, F-22 , Mirage-2000, Rafale, Eurofighter, JAS-39 Gripen, Tornado
Aircraft missiles R-27, AIM-7 Sparrow, AIM-120 AMRAAM, MICA, Skyflash, Aspide, MATRA
Anti-aircraft missile systems S-125, S-300, MIM-23 Improved Hawk
"Talisman Block 2" (12.0-18.0 GHz) Aircraft missiles R-77 (RVV-AE)
Anti-aircraft missile systems 9K33M3 OSA-AKM, 9K331 Tor-M1, Roland-2, Crotale-NG
Anti-aircraft missile and gun complexes 2K22 Tunguska
Anti-aircraft artillery systems ZSU-23-4 Shilka, Gepard, Loara
"Talisman Block 3" (6.0-8.0 GHz) Anti-aircraft missile systems 2K12M3 (4) Cube-M3 (4) 9K37M1 (2) Buk-M1 (2)
"Talisman Block-3E» (4,0-6,0 GHz) Anti-aircraft missile systems MIM-104 Patriot PAC-2 (3)
Marking GER "Mascot block-12R» means that secures BKO airplane 8,0-18,0 GHz frequency range (wavelengths 2 and 3 cm.)
Index «R» means that the BKO "Talisman" is completed with a barrier for radar detection and warning of approaching aircraft crew or anti-aircraft guided missiles with optical (thermal) homing.
Maximum configuration of GER is configured to "Talisman Block-123ER».

The principle of the BKO "Talisman" is based on the re-emission (relay) probe signals from enemy radar endowing them with a special phase, frequency, amplitude and polarization modulation.
Modulated re-radiation leads to a distortion of the wave front, the perceived radar antenna systems (homing) of the enemy that has an impact on the angular, dalnostnye and speed (Doppler) gauges and radar tracking systems of the enemy. BKO "Talisman" affects the basic element of all modern radar - monopulse direction finder and violates his work.
BKO "Talisman" radio controlled fuses influences Aviation (anti-aircraft) missiles causing it to fire prematurely (undermining the attacking missiles at a safe distance from the protected aircraft).
Protection of aircraft from missiles with optical (thermal) homing, such as R-73 9M37 "Strela-10», AIM-9 Sidewinder, AIM-132 ASRAAM, is provided by means of the barrier radar. Barrier radar detects incoming missiles and defines its coordinates (bearing and distance) and issues a command to shoot a false thermal targets (LTC).


----------



## Ceylal

rockstarIN said:


> For the MiGs, *the disadvantage* was the work load of the pilot. With the upgrade of MIG to SMT/PUG standard, it is now okay.


Its short flying time ,which is 29 min, before running out fuel..Other than that, it is deadly even in the hand of a so so pilot.


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

Doritos11 said:


> I have a feeling the only way for us to get sophisticated western systems is to shake hands with Israel like the rest of the Arab world does secretly.



No, only KSA has an open access to Western weapons due to its military doctrine, all nations have failed. We only take our own customizations as a self-defense mechanism.


----------



## Doritos11

Yzd Khalifa said:


> No, only KSA has an open access to Western weapons due to its military doctrine, all nations have failed. We only take our own customizations as a self-defense mechanism.



Yes but the main reason for the US not to equip Iraq and Egypt with high tech systems is Israel, the 2 countries have been in too many wars ( against Israel ). So I think relations with them would ease that, its not that they would sell us F15 strike eagles directly, but they would probably allow AIM 120. Egypt borders Israel so even though they have relations they do not want to sell AIM 120, I do not believe in not signing CISMOA as they always say.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

Doritos11 said:


> Yes but the main reason for the US not to equip Iraq and Egypt with high tech systems is Israel, the 2 countries have been in too many wars ( against Israel ). So I think relations with them would ease that, its not that they would sell us F15 strike eagles directly, but they would probably allow AIM 120. Egypt borders Israel so even though they have relations they do not want to sell AIM 120, I do not believe in not signing CISMOA as they always say.


I guess you're right bro. Salute


----------



## Cat12345

Doritos11 said:


> Yes but the main reason for the US not to equip Iraq and Egypt with high tech systems is Israel, the 2 countries have been in too many wars ( against Israel ). So I think relations with them would ease that, its not that they would sell us F15 strike eagles directly, but they would probably allow AIM 120. Egypt borders Israel so even though they have relations they do not want to sell AIM 120, I do not believe in not signing CISMOA as they always say.



This time you got yourself right for the 1st time on this thread.  Good Job!


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

Cat12345 said:


> This time you got yourself right for the 1st time on this thread.  Good Job!



The US is being pragmatic here, they wanted to make sure that no country would pose a threat to their key allies in the region. Another issue is that the GOP believes that Iraq is being hijacked by Iran for the time being, and that's why they turn down Iraq's requests.


----------



## Doritos11

Yzd Khalifa said:


> The US is being pragmatic here, they wanted to make sure that no country would pose a threat to their key allies in the region. Another issue is that the GOP believes that Iraq is being hijacked by Iran for the time being, and that's why they turn down Iraq's requests.



Kuwait used to resist F16 sales, Qatar went to Russia last year to try to sabotage the Russian deals ( from various sources though not sure if true ).

AIM 120 did not pass congress full of Israelis.


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

Doritos11 said:


> Kuwait used to resist F16 sales, Qatar went to Russia last year to try to sabotage the Russian deals ( from various sources though not sure if true ).
> 
> AIM 120 did not pass congress full of Israelis.


No, you're right. 
In 2011, both of Qatar and KSA tried to lure the Russians by purchasing various military equipments, but the Russians didn't change their view on Syria.


----------



## Ceylal

Yzd Khalifa said:


> No, only KSA has an* open access* to Western weapons due to its military doctrine, all nations have failed. We only take our own customizations as a self-defense mechanism.


Doubt it...For them, you are, A* Moslem* + *Arab*....DANGEROUS and that's apply to all MENA countries.



Doritos11 said:


> I have a feeling the only way for us to get sophisticated western systems *is to shake hands* with Israel like the rest of the Arab world does secretly.


 Even, if MENA countries lick their @sses, they won't get them.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ceylal

TALISMAN: the airborne defence suite for the MIG.


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

Not really, what we want is what we will get... (; 


Ceylal said:


> Doubt it...For them, you are, A* Moslem* + *Arab*....DANGEROUS and that's apply to all MENA countries.
> 
> 
> Even, if MENA countries lick their @sses, they won't get them.


----------



## Malik Alashter

they should refuse the falcon once the american refused to supply the the amraam and the x9. go to the russian for to planes that end with the 35. But its the Oedipus we arab and muslims have!!! the mig-35 way ahead of the falcon for to main things 1- the aesa radar which is far better than pulse Doppler radar + ols that can detect fighters from tens of kilometers. Also the other advantages that we look for like spare parts and the medium long range missile that are equivalent to the amraam and the r-73m2 and the latest r-74 get real and get the mig-35 or the su-35 to make some 
prestige to the country.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Doritos11

According to Piotr Butowsky of Air International (latest issue covers PAK-FA and MiG-35), Iraqi pilots have made familiarization flights in MiG-35 bort 747.


----------



## Doritos11

Much better then Iraq&#8217;s F16, could be a good deal IMO, MIG 35 comparable to F18 super hornet.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

Doritos11 said:


> Much better then Iraq&#8217;s F16, could be a good deal IMO, MIG 35 comparable to F18 super hornet.



The Russians had already placed an order of 37 MiG-35. Let's see who's next.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sinnerman108

Buy what you like, 
BUT buy whatever you can make in your OWN country as much as possible.


----------



## Doritos11

salman108 said:


> Buy what you like,
> BUT buy whatever you can make in your OWN country as much as possible.



You mean local production ?

Such efforts are being made for the automotive industry & tanks.


----------



## Malik Alashter

So @Doritos11 is there any news so far?.


----------



## Doritos11

Malik Alashter said:


> So @Doritos11 is there any news so far?.



According to Piotr Butowsky of Air International (latest issue covers PAK-FA and MiG-35), Iraqi pilots have made familiarization flights in MiG-35 bort 747.


----------



## Malik Alashter

If so that means we may see it in Iraq soon may be next year since familiarization takes time it's not days or weeks it takes longer time good luck to my country IRAQ is a name so old so big so great so precious.


----------



## Doritos11

Malik Alashter said:


> If so that means we may see it in Iraq soon may be next year since familiarization takes time it's not days or weeks it takes longer time good luck to my country IRAQ is a name so old so big so great so precious.



Next year ? no.

Deal is not even made yet, they are still looking for fighter jets and MIG 35 is a candidate.
After a deal is signed the new MIG 35&#8217;s would have to be built and pilots have to be trained, 3 years if you ask me but the MIG 35 would be way superior to the block 52&#8217;s especially Iraq&#8217;s without BVR missiles.
It&#8217;s not expensive but really good to fill in the numbers of fighter jets for Iraq, since Iraq is beginning with new fighter jets our numbers of jets will be lower then most countries whom have a huge number due to not only modern but also a large fleet of older jets.
Iraq&#8217;s airforce commander pointed out that the minimum fighter jet number for air deterrance is 96 but the air force requires 200 fighter jets.
Fighters like the MIG 35 could put that number ( 200 ) higher like over 300 since the pricetag is good for Iraq as the budget is growing.
If they order the MIG 35 they should go between ~70 to ~130 to form 4 to *7 squadrons ( preferably )* *each 18 fighters* including the double seater trainer versions.

Still 200 fighter jets is too little for Iraq, they will be able to solve that problem after gov budget grows.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Doritos11

Aside from MIGs and F16&#8216;s a number of heavy air superiority jets can be bought to fill in smaller number of jets with air superiority jets.

SU 35


If the air force would get built like this then more US F16&#8217;s would have to be bought as well to keep the 2 source policy of the military.


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

Malik Alashter said:


> If so that means we may see it in Iraq soon may be next year since familiarization takes time it's not days or weeks it takes longer time good luck to my country IRAQ is a name so old so big so great so precious.



No, it will take longer than you think. I hate to say it but the Russians can't be relied on much in this.


----------



## Informant

SU 35 for a new airforce would be work intensive, baby steps man. You guys have no enemy apart from sectarianism.


----------



## Doritos11

Informant said:


> SU 35 for a new airforce would be work intensive, baby steps man. You guys have no enemy apart from sectarianism.



Not now ofcourse, Mig 35&#8217;s and F16&#8217;s for now, I am talking about years ahead.


----------



## flamer84

Doritos11 said:


> Next year ? no.
> 
> Deal is not even made yet, they are still looking for fighter jets and MIG 35 is a candidate.
> After a deal is signed the new MIG 35&#8217;s would have to be built and pilots have to be trained, 3 years if you ask me but the MIG 35 would be way superior to the block 52&#8217;s especially Iraq&#8217;s without BVR missiles.
> It&#8217;s not expensive but really good to fill in the numbers of fighter jets for Iraq, since Iraq is beginning with new fighter jets our numbers of jets will be lower then most countries whom have a huge number due to not only modern but also a large fleet of older jets.
> Iraq&#8217;s airforce commander pointed out that the minimum fighter jet number for air deterrance is 96 but the air force requires 200 fighter jets.
> Fighters like the MIG 35 could put that number ( 200 ) higher like over 300 since the pricetag is good for Iraq as the budget is growing.
> If they order the MIG 35 they should go between ~70 to ~130 to form 4 to *7 squadrons ( preferably )* *each 18 fighters* including the double seater trainer versions.
> 
> Still 200 fighter jets is too little for Iraq, they will be able to solve that problem after gov budget grows.



200 to small number for Irak ? You do realise that France fighter fleet is to have 225 fighters,Germany's 228 ,Spain-159,and you want 200 fighters and still not happy if you reach those numbers ?


----------



## Doritos11

flamer84 said:


> 200 to small number for Irak ? You do realise that France fighter fleet is to have 225 fighters,Germany's 228 ,Spain-159,and you want 200 fighters and still not happy if you reach those numbers ?



200 fighter jets is lower then many other ME states who have ( close ) to 400 due to older jets as well, it&#8217;s not about the size of Iraq, if Iraq was near Hawai 50 jets would be enough.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## flamer84

Doritos11 said:


> 200 fighter jets is lower then many other ME states who have ( close ) to 400 due to older jets as well, it&#8217;s not about the size of Iraq, if Iraq was near Hawai 50 jets would be enough.



Don't pay attention to "older jets",those are there to boost numbers only without great effect,I fail to see how some modified iranian F4'S or syrian mig 21's can pose a threat to F16 block 52's or MIG 35's if you want.My point is that you can't match old fleets of fighter jets in the same parity in numbers,even China isn't doing that,maintenance is more expensive,etc..12 F16 bl 52's/SU 35 will pawn 60 mig 21's any day.

Turkey has some 240 F16 bl 52's but they've built that fleet in decades and have the support of powerful home industry plus an 800billion $+ GDP.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Malik Alashter

flamer84 said:


> Don't pay attention to "older jets",those are there to boost numbers only without great effect,I fail to see how some modified iranian F4'S or syrian mig 21's can pose a threat to F16 block 52's or MIG 35's if you want.My point is that you can't match old fleets of fighter jets in the same parity in numbers,even China isn't doing that,maintenance is more expensive,etc..12 F16 bl 52's/SU 35 will pawn 60 mig 21's any day.
> 
> Turkey has some 240 F16 bl 52's but they've built that fleet in decades and have the support of powerful home industry plus an 800billion $+ GDP.


You right but we like to look big Lol. my friend this number is not official yet the official number is 96 until 2020, by the way neither Iran nor Syria are our enemy our enemies unfortunately in the north and south of the country its Turkey and Saudi! as you know they possess big numbers of of advanced fighters and Syria could be another one if al qaeda get over there so ys we need big numbers in both Q&Q.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Doritos11

96 is minimum, 200 is what the general seeks, official numbers <<.



Malik Alashter said:


> You right but we like to look big Lol. my friend this number is not official yet the official number is 96 until 2020, by the way neither Iran nor Syria are our enemy our enemies unfortunately in the north and south of the country its Turkey and Saudi! as you know they possess big numbers of of advanced fighters and Syria could be another one if al qaeda get over there so ys we need big numbers in both Q&Q.



Enemy is everyone and no one, Syria & Iran are not allies.


----------



## flamer84

Malik Alashter said:


> You right but we like to look big Lol. my friend this number is not official yet the official number is 96 until 2020, by the way neither Iran nor Syria are our enemy our enemies unfortunately in the north and south of the country its Turkey and Saudi! as you know they possess big numbers of of advanced fighters and Syria could be another one if al qaeda get over there so ys we need big numbers in both Q&Q.



I'm not going to argue this,you know better the threats that Irak faces,i've given Syria and Iran as examples because those two countries have large fighter fleets with somehow limited capabilities.I think Irak it's facing a dillema : armament or funds for the country's economic growth.Reaching a 200 fleet of fighters will suck up billions of $ plus this is a long time commitment.Doesn't the final Mig 35 variant come out in 2016 ? Now ,let's say that from 2016 you acquire some 120 fighters,it will take at least 10 years to induct them.It's a long shot.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Malik Alashter

flamer84 said:


> I'm not going to argue this,you know better the threats that Irak faces,i've given Syria and Iran as examples because those two countries have large fighter fleets with somehow limited capabilities.I think Irak it's facing a dillema : armament or funds for the country's economic growth.Reaching a 200 fleet of fighters will suck up billions of $ plus this is a long time commitment.Doesn't the final Mig 35 variant come out in 2016 ? Now ,let's say that from 2016 you acquire some 120 fighters,it will take at least 10 years to induct them.It's a long shot.


2 thumps up my Romanian friend so how many plane in your inventory as Romania I know you have no problem with no one but just for the sake of curiosity?.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Doritos11

flamer84 said:


> I'm not going to argue this,you know better the threats that Irak faces,i've given Syria and Iran as examples because those two countries have large fighter fleets with somehow limited capabilities.I think Irak it's facing a dillema : armament or funds for the country's economic growth.Reaching a 200 fleet of fighters will suck up billions of $ plus this is a long time commitment.Doesn't the final Mig 35 variant come out in 2016 ? Now ,let's say that from 2016 you acquire some 120 fighters,it will take at least 10 years to induct them.It's a long shot.



Gov budget grows with ~15 billion each year, they can cover the fighter jet purchases over the MoD budget of several years if needed "special budget" for funding the jets.

But beside jets thousands of high end tanks, artillery, ATGW and maybe missiles will have to be purchased, it&#8217;s billions of weaponry that has to be boguht which will take decades.


----------



## Doritos11

flamer84 said:


> I'm not going to argue this,you know better the threats that Irak faces,i've given Syria and Iran as examples because those two countries have large fighter fleets with somehow limited capabilities.I think Irak it's facing a dillema : armament or funds for the country's economic growth.Reaching a 200 fleet of fighters will suck up billions of $ plus this is a long time commitment.Doesn't the final Mig 35 variant come out in 2016 ? Now ,let's say that from 2016 you acquire some 120 fighters,it will take at least 10 years to induct them.It's a long shot.



Gov budget grows with ~15 billion each year, they can cover the fighter jet purchases over the MoD budget of several years if needed "special budget" for funding the jets.

But beside jets thousands of high end tanks, artillery, ATGW and maybe missiles will have to be purchased, its billions of weaponry that has to be boguht which will take decades.


----------



## flamer84

Malik Alashter said:


> 2 thumps up my Romanian friend so how many plane in your inventory as Romania I know you have no problem with no one but just for the sake of curiosity?.



Currently 48 Mig 21 Lancer (Mig 21 upgraded with israeli avionics amd western missiles...Python 3,Magic Mantra 2)...they will be phased out entirely by 2018-2020.We've bought 12 F16 SH from Portugal to be upgraded to blk 52 standard by the americans with the option and intent to do the same with other 36 within 2 years time.Ofcourse,we live in a more peaceful neighborhood then Irak but we have our problems to...mainly a big bad bear in the East 

Theoretically our defence needs called for some 72-96 fighters but ,you know...money,money,money ...Anyway for our area some 48 F16 blk 52 or even 48 modernised Migs are enough..neighbours -Ukraine-some 80 flyable Mig 29(many in poor standard),Hungary-14 Gripens,Bulgaria-15 Mig 29's,Serbia -3 Mig 29's and around not so modernised Mig 21's....nio immediate threats.

No problems man,ask away,happy to answer.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Malik Alashter

Doritos11 said:


> 96 is minimum, 200 is what the general seeks, official numbers <<.
> 
> 
> 
> Enemy is everyone and no one, Syria & Iran are not allies.


At least they don't send terrorists to blow up Iraqis they don't help alqaeda and baath to keep the country unstable!!! yes they're not allies but not enemy too, why we should mix between those who trying hard against our will with those who don't?.


----------



## Doritos11

Malik Alashter said:


> *At least they don't send terrorists* to blow up Iraqis they *don't help alqaeda* and baath to keep the country unstable!!! yes they're not allies but not enemy too, why we should mix between those who trying hard against our will with those who don't?.



Wrong.

Syria & Iran were meddling in Iraq after 2003 in every way including armed terrorism trying to put a part of Iraq under Katai&#8217;b Hezbollah and similar groups creating the Lebanon situation here.

Just a small part, much more happened, these 2 regimes are far from good for Iraq, could be enemy anyday.


----------



## Malik Alashter

Doritos11 said:


> Wrong.
> 
> Syria & Iran were meddling in Iraq after 2003 in every way including armed terrorism trying to put a part of Iraq under Katai&#8217;b Hezbollah and similar groups creating the Lebanon situation here.
> 
> Just a small part, much more happened, these 2 regimes are far from good for Iraq, could be enemy anyday.


Your opinion, but you know the real enenmy is Turkey and Saudi regimes plus Qatar.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Doritos11

Malik Alashter said:


> Your opinion, but you know the real enenmy is Turkey and Saudi regimes plus Qatar.



Yes ^^, only neighbor that is no trouble is Jordan, not the topic anyway.


----------



## Malik Alashter

Doritos11 said:


> Yes ^^, only neighbor that is no trouble is Jordan, not the topic anyway.


Jordan is no trouble??????. as I said your opinion but remember Alzarqawi they released him from his jail just to send him to the country for the case of sectarianism.


----------



## Doritos11

Malik Alashter said:


> Jordan is no trouble??????. as I said your opinion but remember Alzarqawi they released him from his jail just to send him to the country for the case of sectarianism.



I think they also helped for finding him, their government has not been a trouble for iraq.


----------



## Malik Alashter

Doritos11 said:


> I think they also helped for finding him, their government has not been a trouble for iraq.


Have you ever used jordan as an access point iave ever see them how they treat Iraqis and how they use sectarian words we had alot


----------



## Doritos11

Malik Alashter said:


> Have you ever used jordan as an access point iave ever see them how they treat Iraqis and how they use sectarian words we had alot



No, only visited twice 10/11 years ago don&#8217;t know of that.


----------



## Malik Alashter

Doritos11 said:


> No, only visited twice 10/11 years ago don&#8217;t know of that.


Then ask to know we should stop been so nice the world respect those who are not unfortunately.


----------



## Doritos11

Malik Alashter said:


> Then ask to know we should stop been so nice the world respect those who are not unfortunately.



I just said Iraq had no trouble with their gov, I don&#8217;t like that gov who was drinking free oil in the 90&#8217;s then betrayed Saddam giving USSF place to invade Iraq, couldn&#8217;t care about the after 2003 military training or hosting refugees which are the *result* of the invasion. Neither am I against them, I don&#8217;t care.

Let&#8217;s return to topic.


----------



## Malik Alashter

Doritos11 said:


> I just said Iraq had no trouble with their gov, I don&#8217;t like that gov who was drinking free oil in the 90&#8217;s then betrayed Saddam giving USSF place to invade Iraq, couldn&#8217;t care about the after 2003 military training or hosting refugees which are the *result* of the invasion. Neither am I against them, I don&#8217;t care.
> 
> Let&#8217;s return to topic.


I'm waiting on your good news pics plze post asap.


----------



## Black Eagle 90

If IRAQ will need then they will go for Z-10s...


----------



## Doritos11

Black Eagle 90 said:


> If IRAQ will need then they will go for Z-10s...



That&#8217;s a helicopter, this is about fighter planes.


----------

