What's new

Italy, Egypt To Sign Mega Arms Deal Includes 24 Eurofighters, 24 M346 Trainers and 6 Frigates

Oct 29, 2020
3,282
0
1,830
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
its hard but not impossible to do it
if you have good Radars , network centric warfare and cooperative engagement capabilities

its like air based Air Defense System ... to intercept even stealth/low RCS targets


Turkey has developed 600+ km EIRS early warning AESA Radar to detect even stealth/low RCS targets from very long ranges

KS-172 Missile
length : 6 m
weight : 748 kg
diameter : 40 cm

KS-172 missile will flight at high altitude to engage on Boeing E7-T AEWC
and many Radar Systems will watch on the Eastern Mediterranean

-- Boeing E7-T AEWC's 600km PESA Radar in the sky
-- 600 km EIRS early warning AESA Radar on the ground
-- 450 km CAFRAD naval AESA Radar on TF-2000 class Destroyers

Long range Radars will detect KS-172 missile and to share it via data link
MIUS UCAVs which will escot Boeing E7-T AEWC will fire GOKDOGAN networked air to air missile to intercept upcoming air to air missile or anti-radiation missile

also to intercept Cruise Missiles from AKINCI UCAVs which will be in the sky 7/24

its hard but not impossible to do it
No impossible, its ok for ABM systems where target is big but not for such a low RCS target every weapon system has CEP value, which is not 100% even this weapon develop by any country which include Russia/China/ USA/UK etc etc, if you will using proximity fuse detonation method than you will have chance but HIT to KILL is not possible because every weapons have CENTRAL ERROR PROBABILITY which your target could be miss at relation to 100%
 

Total Destruction

FULL MEMBER
Oct 10, 2015
563
2
787
Country
Egypt
Location
Albania
Why dumb questions when you should know that if they removed the A70VLS..they can put it back..
And why Egypt would buy Rafale without Meteor..
don't be dumb.
Egypt has f-16 without aim-120 even tho we had sparrow at the beginning but we kept buy f-16s later without aim-120.
they can put it back? who will put it back ? don't tell me it's easy to manufacture VLS cells .. or probably you mean the italian french side can put it back , why would they put it back?
 

The SC

ELITE MEMBER
Feb 13, 2012
22,162
19
23,961
Country
Canada
Location
Canada
don't be dumb.
Egypt has f-16 without aim-120 even tho we had sparrow at the beginning but we kept buy f-16s later without aim-120.
they can put it back? who will put it back ? don't tell me it's easy to manufacture VLS cells .. or probably you mean the italian french side can put it back , why would they put it back?
Too dumb to answer again.. go play with kids somewhere else.. and stop trolling ..
 

Gomig-21

SENIOR MEMBER
Oct 16, 2016
5,449
11
10,342
Country
Egypt
Location
United States
The issue isn't about having variety of jets but having multiple jets of similar capabilities in terms of range payload subsystems but still having to have seperate training and maintenance set-up
Jacking up procurement and operations costs
We already have gone through that and it's no issue. The Mirage 2000's are quite different than all the Mirage Vs and F-16s and MiG-21s and F-7 and Phantoms (last three retired already) and Rafales and MiG-35s and Su-35s, as long as they use the Typhoons to replace the Mirage 2000's which were a special unit designed for special, intricate and highly dangerous missions. They had their own base and were considered a separate unit from the rest of the airforce. So if they use the Typhoons in that capacity, all that stuff you mentioned won't matter because their purchase serves two purposes. 1) They won't be associated with any of the other larger numbered aircraft with regular duties and upgrade their mission capabilities way beyond what the M2K is capable of doing. 2) They're also a bargaining chip from the Italians for the mega deal which include the advanced trainers and 6 Berghamini FREMMs which are GREAT and that if Egypt purchased them, they will guarantee more meteor missiles to go with them which helps us A LOT as now we'll have 2 separate platforms capable of firing the best missile in the world. How could that be a bad thing? It also strongly helps open the door for future procurements from Italy as we know very well the finicky nature of France should they stop supplies during a war, the Italians probably wont. So it's a strategy as well.

Instead large procurement of one type getting better deal from supplier and streamlining your operations is smarter way
There is also a major flaw in that strategy in that once your enemy acquires your IFF and knows your weaknesses, you've doomed you entire fleet. That's why the US have quite a few variety of platforms they use. Having a substantial variety makes if VERY difficult for the enemy to zero in on one or two or even 3 platforms and jam them all and figure out how to bring a majority of them down. For example, a pair of MiG-35s can lure an enemy fighter to try and reach their 6 and stay hidden when all of a sudden BOOOOOM! They get blown away by an R-77 from an Su-35S they never saw coming because of the Su's ability to track at 400 km and then shut the main IRBIS-E radar and use the wing edge AESA to lock onto enemy fighters and then still at BVR within 30-40km, turn on the IRST and send off a barrage of R77 and knock out the enemy.

Look as you gave example even prior with so much variety of jets Egyptian air force was considered lower then Israeli and Turkish air forces with much lower variety but more streamlined systems
I never said that. I only said I hope they use them only to replace the special unit created by the Mirage 2000's and not introduce them as part of the entire fleet. Although at first I was thinking to add them to the Rafales to increase the numbers of the delta canards since they are somewhat similar, but since this new order of 30 more Rafles has comes through, I've changed my mind and hope to replace the M2Ks with the Typhoons. They will be a special operations jet fighter wing unlike many other air force. What I might've said was not sure the J-10C would be a good option to replace the F-7s which is another problem we need to solve because it introduces a whole new and different weapon's package. With the Typhoon, the weapon's load will be slightly different than the Rafale only in the MICAs and HAMMERs as they have the IRIST A2A missile (easy to learn) and the Brimestone guided bombs a little different than the RAFALE HAMMERS but the same Meteor which is the main thing and is an excellent commonality as well as an additional supplier. Strategy, friend.

And please despite the criticism you hear from all the usual stuff, the higher brass in the Egyptian military who make these consultations and decisions are lifelong military men whom experienced battle and have huge amount of experience with more than what the entire membership on this forum know by 10,000. So respect where it's due and let's try to understand before saying it's a stupid thing to do.
 
Last edited:

khanmubashir

FULL MEMBER
Aug 13, 2014
1,881
0
1,634
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
We already have gone through that and it's no issue. The Mirage 2000's are quite different than all the Mirage Vs and F-16s and MiG-21s and F-7 and Phantoms (last three retired already) and Rafales and MiG-35s and Su-35s, as long as they use the Typhoons to replace the Mirage 2000's which were a special unit designed for special, intricate and highly dangerous missions. They had their own base and were considered a separate unit from the rest of the airforce. So if they use the Typhoons in that capacity, all that stuff you mentioned won't matter because their purchase serves two purposes. 1) They won't be associated with any of the other larger numbered aircraft with regular duties and upgrade their mission capabilities way beyond what the M2K is capable of doing. 2) They're also a bargaining chip from the Italians for the mega deal which include the advanced trainers and 6 Berghamini FREMMs which are GREAT and that if Egypt purchased them, they will guarantee more meteor missiles to go with them which helps us A LOT as now we'll have 2 separate platforms capable of firing the best missile in the world. How could that be a bad thing? It also strongly helps open the door for future procurements from Italy as we know very well the finicky nature of France should they stop supplies during a war, the Italians probably wont. So it's a strategy as well.



There is also a major flaw in that strategy in that once your enemy acquires your IFF and knows your weaknesses, you've doomed you entire fleet. That's why the US have quite a few variety of platforms they use. Having a substantial variety makes if VERY difficult for the enemy to zero in on one or two or even 3 platforms and jam them all and figure out how to bring a majority of them down. For example, a pair of MiG-35s can lure an enemy fighter to try and reach their 6 and stay hidden when all of a sudden BOOOOOM! They get blown away by an R-77 from an Su-35S they never saw coming because of the Su's ability to track at 400 km and then shut the main IRBIS-E radar and use the wing edge AESA to lock onto enemy fighters and then still at BVR within 30-40km, turn on the IRST and send off a barrage of R77 and knock out the enemy.



I never said that. I only said I hope they use them only to replace the special unit created by the Mirage 2000's and not introduce them as part of the entire fleet. Although at first I was thinking to add them to the Rafales to increase the numbers of the delta canards since they are somewhat similar, but since this new order of 30 more Rafles has comes through, I've changed my mind and hope to replace the M2Ks with the Typhoons. They will be a special operations jet fighter wing unlike many other air force. What I might've said was not sure the J-10C would be a good option to replace the F-7s which is another problem we need to solve because it introduces a whole new and different weapon's package. With the Typhoon, the weapon's load will be slightly different than the Rafale only in the MICAs and HAMMERs as they have the IRIST A2A missile (easy to learn) and the Brimestone guided bombs a little different than the RAFALE HAMMERS but the same Meteor which is the main thing and is an excellent commonality as well as an additional supplier. Strategy, friend.

And please despite the criticism you hear from all the usual stuff, the higher brass in the Egyptian military who make these consultations and decisions are lifelong military men whom experienced battle and have huge amount of experience with more than what the entire membership on this forum know by 10,000. So respect where it's due and let's try to understand before saying it's a stupid thing to do.
Mig 35 and su 35 are separated category jets
First multirole MCA second heavy air superiority fighter
USA air force doesn't use two different jets of same category
F16 single engine jet with heavier f15
 

The SC

ELITE MEMBER
Feb 13, 2012
22,162
19
23,961
Country
Canada
Location
Canada
Mig 35 and su 35 are separated category jets
First multirole MCA second heavy air superiority fighter
USA air force doesn't use two different jets of same category
F16 single engine jet with heavier f15
Actually they are perfect teams.. where the F-15 provide the cover for F-16 and the SU-35 do the same for the Mig-35..
 

khanmubashir

FULL MEMBER
Aug 13, 2014
1,881
0
1,634
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Actually they are perfect teams.. where the F-15 provide the cover for F-16 and the SU-35 do the same for the Mig-35..
Yes two different category jets complementary to each other
Not two jets of same category and capabilities burdening cost of procurement and operations
 

Gomig-21

SENIOR MEMBER
Oct 16, 2016
5,449
11
10,342
Country
Egypt
Location
United States
Yes two different category jets complementary to each other
Not two jets of same category and capabilities burdening cost of procurement and operations
If the EAF's intention is to replace the old Mirage 2000s with them, then it's perfectly fine. It's actually a good benefit against an enemy than having the same aircraft for that special unit which operates on its own almost all the time.

There are also other strategic elements to think of and that is maybe the EAF is thinking of being able to operate much more effectively with Saudi Arabia and its Typhoons within the coalition and all the Red Sea NEOM projects. This could be a major reason for the choice while replacing the old Mirage 2000s at the same time.

If you really break down the differences, the EFT is different in the sense that the canards are used more as moving surfaces or forward horizontal stabilizers while the Rafale's canards are active close-coupled surfaces that control the movement of air over the wings. Operating cost of EFT is much less than Rafale as well as its RCS is lower, but that last part is not 100% verifified.
 

The SC

ELITE MEMBER
Feb 13, 2012
22,162
19
23,961
Country
Canada
Location
Canada
If the EAF's intention is to replace the old Mirage 2000s with them, then it's perfectly fine. It's actually a good benefit against an enemy than having the same aircraft for that special unit which operates on its own almost all the time.

There are also other strategic elements to think of and that is maybe the EAF is thinking of being able to operate much more effectively with Saudi Arabia and its Typhoons within the coalition and all the Red Sea NEOM projects. This could be a major reason for the choice while replacing the old Mirage 2000s at the same time.

If you really break down the differences, the EFT is different in the sense that the canards are used more as moving surfaces or forward horizontal stabilizers while the Rafale's canards are active close-coupled surfaces that control the movement of air over the wings. Operating cost of EFT is much less than Rafale as well as its RCS is lower, but that last part is not 100% verifified.
Also..Typhoon can carry 6 anti-ship missiles while Rafale can carry only one..
 

Gomig-21

SENIOR MEMBER
Oct 16, 2016
5,449
11
10,342
Country
Egypt
Location
United States
Also..Typhoon can carry 6 anti-ship missiles while Rafale can carry only one..
That's right, I did forget about that. It seems like the Typhoon might've been the better option from the start, but I think the RBE2 AESA radar made the difference plus the whole price on the package deal with the naval ships etc.

But please clarify your post on the difference between the RBE2 on the first batch of 24 Rafales compared to the newer RBE2 on this new contract. Are you saying the original RBE2 on the first batch were not AESA but this new batch will be? I hope that's not what you meant because I'm positive that was not the case. This newer one has more modules and is just a slighter improvement of the first one. But there is no doubt the first 24 Rafales came with the RBE2 AESA radar.

I think the MICAs and MBDA and the ToT on the corvettes made the difference between the Raffy or Typhoon. Otherwise, perhaps the Typhoon might've been a better option for the main procurement of fighter jets. Just thinking our loud.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom