Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Arab Defence Forum' started by Amir_Pharaoh, Apr 13, 2011.
The first appearance of an Egyptian special forces from the Interior Ministry armed with Russian sub machine gun Vityaz-sn
Looks good. Gonna be tough to find a better replacement to the Mp5. There's a reason why it's so popular and used by many SF's. The reviews on this thing are decent and the only downside is without a forward grip it gets hot on the hand. lol, so many weapon choices out there these days. It's like going to a pharmacy for some pain killer and you have 8 million choices.
EAF Rafales with Saudi F-15's.
New pic of Egyptian MiG-35 carrying R-77 missiles.
Read the title of the thread!
The Czechoslovak Scorpion was one of the best too, but yes the Mp5 was German..that adds to its qualities..
SVD Dragunov forward grip
There is also a new Russian sniper gun with the Egyptian forces now
Also, Egypt added the new Russian assault rifle AK-12
And the Very powerful Russian AK 103
And the Russian PKM
The Paratroopers were using the Russian Ratnik personal equipment system and their small arms for this Ex.
Indeed. I think the problem they might be facing with SMGs like the EVO is its 4.6mm caliber and the Drugo is 5.6 if I'm not mistaken and the others are also other calibers other than 9mm which makes the amo not standard with the common 9mil pistols, hence the attraction of the Mp5 and maybe other SMGs like the Vityaz. The Mp5's accuracy and low recoil and compactness and so many other excellent attributes are hard to beat, but the 9mm caliber I think is important.
Are you still sketchy about the MiGs or have the problems gone away with them growing on us? Especially the camo on these ones. They are looking good.
And of course the huge BVR advantage.
Why would they do that in an ex..?
Apparently this is the final Egyptian Mig-35 cammo!
Part of joint Ex is getting familiar with the kit and weapons the other side uses. If you're familiar with your ally's kit and capabilities then you're more interoperable. It's a fairly common occurrence.
The Russians will also be looking to export their kit. It would be the wrong move to introduce Ratnik imo to the Paratroopers alone. Wouldn't solve their overarching problems either.
I don't think I've knocked its capabilities or argued they weren't filling gaps. It's just that to call it a good addition I would have to view it in a vacuum on its own.
We've already gone through the drawbacks in terms of connectivity, maintenance, and training across the Air Force. But I think my largest doubt is about it is its future. Is the MiG - 29 platform going anywhere in the next 30-40 years, or even the next fifteen?
We already know the Rafale F - 4 upgrade is planned for 2025 and there will be a user base in both France (which will skip 5th gen) and India who will push development constantly beyond that tranche.
Well, there is a light stealth fighter being worked on by Russia and the UAE, it was said that it will be based on the Mig-29, and that Sukhoi will get involved in it as well..
I'm talking about the MiG - 29 being introduced now specifically.
The proposed Russian light stealth fighter is what is meant to replace the Fulcrum and will be a completely different fighter.
But Bro, this is no ordinary Mig-29..this is a MIG-29 M/M2, export name Mig-35.. and this Egyptian special edition has the Tag "Advanced"..
You make a good point with regards to the future of the platform itself. I haven't really given that much thought since I've been looking more at the immediate application. Besides the urgent need to replace the old aircraft, I think 'filling the gaps' and addressing long-standing and long-lacking needs was probably the other main focus of the EAF. This is just my opinion, but I really think that the restrictions on the F-16 in terms of not only operational requirements but also weaponry strongly influenced the purchase of this aircraft.
We know the AIM-120 wasn't and most likely isn't coming to the EAF's F-16's. Despite the MICA with the Rafales, that's been very nicely taken care of with the R-77 (which many will argue is more effective than the AIM-120.)
I also think it's safe to say that the AIM-9X is not coming to the EAF either, and that has also been effectively addressed with the R-73. Assuming that the EAF is getting the HMCS with these MiGs (based on one of those recent pics,) and with the missile's off-boresight capability, this could easily be the best short range missile in EAF inventory. As a matter of fact, the development of the AIM-9X was prompted by the Russian R-73. That speaks volumes as to the Russian A2A missiles capabilities.
So the introduction of the most advanced MiG to date to the EAF has effectively taken care of those two major dilemmas that have essentially hampered and neutered the EAF's F-16 fleet and its other fighters for over 3 decades.
Granted the Rafales and the MICA have solved that problem prior to the MiGs, but this adds another dimension and more importantly another source for the EAF which I think is very valuable. I also feel the Russian missiles are slightly better than the MICA in range and maybe better in short range maneuverability also.
The cost in comparison to the Rafale is obviously much better. It makes sense to have a utility fighter which not only has lower procurement costs and comes with excellent and highly effective weaponry, but also has lower operational costs. Plus I don't think the Russians will be breathing on the back of our necks about what we're doing with the aircraft like maybe the French and most certainly the Americans would do. Another plus?
Connectivity/interoperbility with a largely Russian based radar and SAM system in country probably has its advantages. I also think this aircraft, for the price tag has excellent defensive capabilities with its MAWS and ECM systems. It has grown on me, for sure.
One of these Mig-35s replaces 3 Mig-21..and this is a very conservative estimate due to the new tech, engine power, weapons load, reach..etc.. So 50 Mig-35 are replacing 150 Mig-21s.. and with much up-to-date tech..
This is another dimension to take into account..
Which is something I always have an issue with. In my opinion the future of aircraft is just as important as what it provides now.
I reckon someone was having this very same conversation when the Air Force was introducing more MiG-21s, F-7s, Phantoms, and Mirages.
At least three of those hit a dead end in terms of development as early as 1990 yet they remained in service in some capacity or another till now and gave us this replacement headache.
Which is a result of flawed strategic planning. The EAF continued its investment well into the 21st century when it was apparent that restrictions weren't going to be lifted - unless there were drastic changes in policy - in the 1990s and early 2000s.
They knew that the Israelis would always object but did sod all to help themselves either.
Not signing memorandums to help with interoperability, racking up 3rd party violations, and not deploying on UN sanctioned missions with conflicted air spaces. Egypt has not given the United States a reason to release the AMRAAM, if anything it has put up more hurdles.
From those with actual inside connects (@MICA) it seems the EAF is more than confident in the Rafales missile package, perhaps more than the Russian one.
I also think that the French being confident enough in fielding the MICA alone with the prospect of going up against the Russians is important.
Also have to remember the MICA NG - which promises better range, detection and acquisition - is right around the corner (2023-2025) and the Meteor may be a possibility.
Obviously we don't have the numbers but I suspect operating three different types is a damn sight more expensive. Especially when it has already been proven we can absorb the Rafale quickly without changing much and even use weapon systems already in service on it.
As for operating costs, buy more and fly more, economies of scale. The F-35 is the most expensive thing out there but the order numbers it has will make it incredible value for money.
I think Russian frame and engine life is being overlooked here. They need overhaul and replacement far more often than their western counterparts.
Plus unless the MiG - 35 becomes an export success we may have to front the development cost - like we did for this bird already - alone at some point if the Russian replacement materializes as they'll obviously priorities that.
We may pay less cash upfront but the lifetime cost may just be higher than that of introducing the Rafale alone.
The Russians are already using the return of flights to Sharm as leverage when the entirety of their security demands were met several years ago.
I think people are also forgetting the Russians like to keep nations dependent on their depots and factories for overhaul, engine replacement, and repair. Without the Ukraine and several other former Soviet states many of the MiGs and Su that are still flying around today wouldn't have been.
They have also been the most difficult to deal with in regards to funding. Unwilling to offer soft loans or long term contracts. The prospect of offsets also doesn't exist.
They will eventually want to undermine our attempts to export energy to Europe and continue to find things to leverage until they get what they want; the naval base they wanted since the fifties.
I think distaste for the US is somewhat unfounded. The support infrastructure the EAF has for the -16 is pretty good, I don't think the Russians would agree to anything similar.
France has a long history of arming morally questionable regimes and are also open to transfer of tech/support infrastructure given the cash is right.
Say what you want about the Eu, US, and UK but the three have been among the largest investors in Egypt. What are the Russians doing?
It may be growing on you but I'll always remain a critic of something that smacks of short term planning.
Question is, why does the EAF need a 350+ fighter air force?
What about the Dabaa project as far as Russian investments are concerned? Not only in money matters but technologies far beyond what any other country, including the US are willing to provide Egypt to realise its over 60 years dream of Nuclear power plants..And not to forget who has helped Egypt to Build the Aswan Dam, a National project that has saved Egypt from the most devastating floods it was known for..
So all in all Russia has always been geared to help Egypt realise its most vital Mega-projects, more so than any other country.. the US opposed the plan as well as Europe at that time.. can you imagine now why Egypt hangs on to Russia? So I won't go into small details.. this is the big picture of things, and of course every nation that wants to invest in the Egyptian new projects is welcome to do so..
A simple answer is because of the size of Egypt and also because potential adversaries of Egypt have much more that that, qualitatively as well as quantitatively..