Bangladesh Air Force

[Destranator]

Question is does Bangladesh really needs a twin engine and if a compromise in quantity for twin engine worth it? I don’t think so tbh

Mainly needed for:
- breaking naval blockade. BN Subs and ships alone cannot sustain themselves against aircraft carriers, IAF and land based artillery on Indian coasts and Islands (A-N, etc.)
- Disabling bases/assets in enemy territory.
- taking on Rafales/Su-30s WVR.

Single engine fighters cannot effectively fulfill these roles.

No need to compromise quantity. Restrict twin engine fighters to zero to 2 squadrons until 3-4 squadrons of single engine 4+ gen fighters are inducted.

 

[BlackViking]

Apparently baf thinks gripen engine is underpowered and not worth the money

 

[Michael Corleone]

Apparently baf thinks gripen engine is underpowered and not worth the money

What’s better than an airforce?
bd experimental prototype, we will have a space force at last

 

[Destranator]

Apparently baf thinks gripen engine is underpowered and not worth the money

That is exactly what BA and BN think of BAF.

 

[mb444]

Apparently baf thinks gripen engine is underpowered and not worth the money

It is probably is as a maritime jet.... but we could do worse...

 

[The Ronin]

https://www.facebook.com/DefsecaBD/posts/245839493642228

 

[Destranator]

It is probably is as a maritime jet.... but we could do worse...

There is no need for the entire fleet to be maritime strike capable.
Gripens connected by network are decent platforms for air defence.
If BAF starts working with Saab this year they can be in a position to replace the F-7s (besides raising new squadrons) with locally assembled Gripens by 2035.

Don't be hopeful though.
Chances are that we will only get 8-16 additional fighters by 2030 for 16 December acrobatics.

 

[UKBengali]

There is no need for the entire fleet to be maritime strike capable.
Gripens connected by network are decent platforms for air defence.
If BAF starts working with Saab this year they can be in a position to replace the F-7s (besides raising new squadrons) with locally assembled Gripens by 2035.

Don't be hopeful though.
Chances are that we will only get 8-16 additional fighters by 2030 for 16 December acrobatics.

Who says that Gripen is not maritime capable?

With it’s inflight refuelling capability and ability to launch anti-ship missiles like RBS-15F with a range of 300 km, it can loiter for 1-2 hours deep in the Bay of Bengal protecting BN assets.

The single GE/ Volvo engine has not had a single engine failure in over 20 years of operation and so no worries there.

 

[Destranator]

Who says that Gripen is not maritime capable?

With it’s inflight refuelling capability and ability to launch anti-ship missiles like RBS-15F with a range of 300 km, it can loiter for 1-2 hours deep in the Bay of Bengal protecting BN assets.

The single GE/ Volvo engine has not had a single engine failure in over 20 years of operation and so no worries there.

Well, although not incapable, Gripen is not designed for dedicated maritime strike role in the traditional sense.

Ideally you would want longer range and dedicated sea corrosion-resistant airframes for maritime strike role. Due to Gripen's limited range, BAF would have to expose its refuellers to significant risk when supporting maritime strike against an Indian naval blockade near A-N islands.
However, attaining such deep strike capabilities should not be top priority as we need to sort out aerial air defence first which network connected Gripens can ensure.

 

[UKBengali]

Well, although not incapable, Gripen is not designed for dedicated maritime strike role in the traditional sense.

Ideally you would want longer range and dedicated sea corrosion-resistant airframes for maritime strike role. Due to Gripen's limited range, BAF would have to expose its refuellers to significant risk when supporting maritime strike against an Indian naval blockade near A-N islands.
However, attaining such deep strike capabilities should not be top priority as we need to sort out aerial air defence first which network connected Gripens can ensure.

Gripen will fly at 10-15,000 feet cruise altitude when supporting the BN out deep in the Bay of Bengal. No chance of corrosion from sea water at these altitudes as the Gripens will use stand-off anti-ship missiles to attack their targets from hundreds of kms away.

Refuellers would operate no more than 3-400 kms out from BD coastline near Myanmar and not India and would be protected by fighters from nearest BAF airbases. The fighter protection can stay with the refuellers for many hours as they themselves can be refuelled from the same refuellers.

BD needs to think of Gripen as a true multi-role fighter that can do it all, when supported by other assets like AWACS and Refuellers.

PS - BAF should look to purchase around 2 A330 MRT refuellers from Airbus at a cost of around 300 million US dollars each. They are monsters that can stay on station for several hours and refuel a dozen or so Gripens on each station.

 

[Avicenna]

Well, although not incapable, Gripen is not designed for dedicated maritime strike role in the traditional sense.

Ideally you would want longer range and dedicated sea corrosion-resistant airframes for maritime strike role. Due to Gripen's limited range, BAF would have to expose its refuellers to significant risk when supporting maritime strike against an Indian naval blockade near A-N islands.
However, attaining such deep strike capabilities should not be top priority as we need to sort out aerial air defence first which network connected Gripens can ensure.

The images say it all.

Lotta info in those 2 pics.

Also, would need to do Ghusl if I ever saw the above pic in BAF colors!

@UKBengali

 

[Michael Corleone]

Well, although not incapable, Gripen is not designed for dedicated maritime strike role in the traditional sense.

Ideally you would want longer range and dedicated sea corrosion-resistant airframes for maritime strike role. Due to Gripen's limited range, BAF would have to expose its refuellers to significant risk when supporting maritime strike against an Indian naval blockade near A-N islands.
However, attaining such deep strike capabilities should not be top priority as we need to sort out aerial air defence first which network connected Gripens can ensure.

Tbh with the limited depth of Bay of Bengal I wouldn’t sweat about deep strike. Bangladesh’s posture will always be defensive (in this case preventing a blockade) easily solvable by gripen
BAF current approach to get the “latest cutting edge” is a wet dream at best since EFT doesn’t guarantee technological edge for the next 30 years. 4th gen is increasingly obsolete. Force multiplication should be the focus and gripen does it properly probably better than j10

 

[Destranator]

Gripen will fly at 10-15,000 feet cruise altitude when supporting the BN out deep in the Bay of Bengal. No chance of corrosion from sea water at these altitudes as the Gripens will use stand-off anti-ship missiles to attack their targets from hundreds of kms away.

Refuellers would operate no more than 3-400 kms out from BD coastline near Myanmar and not India and would be protected by fighters from nearest BAF airbases. The fighter protection can stay with the refuellers for many hours as they themselves can be refuelled from the same refuellers.

BD needs to think of Gripen as a true multi-role fighter that can do it all, when supported by other assets like AWACS and Refuellers.

PS - BAF should look to purchase around 2 A330 MRT refuellers from Airbus at a cost of around 300 million US dollars each. They are monsters that can stay on station for several hours and refuel a dozen or so Gripens on each station.

Still streched range wise (800 km) as A-N is 1100 km away. It would be quite painful to refuel so many times.

I would rather use Gripens to protect the refuellers and let a twin engine fighter take on the blockade.

Again, to reiterate, attaining deep maritime strike capabilities is not a top priority strategically speaking.

 

[Destranator]

The images say it all.

View attachment 702745

View attachment 702747

Lotta info in those 2 pics.

Also, would need to do Ghusl if I ever saw the above pic in BAF colors!

@UKBengali

Does not replicate the BoB context:

We need to keep the line of blockade clear for our ships to sail in and out..

Tbh with the limited depth of Bay of Bengal I wouldn’t sweat about deep strike. Bangladesh’s posture will always be defensive (in this case preventing a blockade) easily solvable by gripen
BAF current approach to get the “latest cutting edge” is a wet dream at best since EFT doesn’t guarantee technological edge for the next 30 years. 4th gen is increasingly obsolete. Force multiplication should be the focus and gripen does it properly probably better than j10

An Indian Naval Blockade would not be constrained by depth (see image above). The idea of a blockade is to block ships from sailing in and out of Bangladesh. India can enforce this 1100 km away from BD coast just to stretch out Bangladesh's military capabilities. You see what moronic leaders of 1947 deprived us of when they let go of A-N islands?

As for fifth gen: IAF will be a predominantly 4th gen fleet till 2040 so let us not worry about obsolescence just yet.

 

[UKBengali]

Still streched range wise (800 km) as A-N is 1100 km away. It would be quite painful to refuel so many times.

I would rather use Gripens to protect the refuellers and let a twin engine fighter take on the blockade.

Again, to reiterate, attaining deep maritime strike capabilities is not a top priority strategically speaking.

Gripen C has combat range of 800km and so it can fly this distance, carry out whatever it needs to and then return back to be refuelled.
As to anti-ship strike it can stay hundreds of kms out from the Indian ships and still hit them with missiles and so more likely would need to fly 5-600km.

Why would BAF need the massive expense and logistical headache of a twin-engine fighter when just 2 A330 MRTT refuellers can turn Gripen into a fully-capable deep-strike aircraft?
Each refueller can stay out beyond Teknaf at 300km, stay on station for 4 hours and refuel twice a dozen Gripen Cs.

It is a no brainer to eventually add refuelling capability if BAF wants this capability against IN using a single fighter like Gripen. Yes BAF needs to focus on air-defence first as you say but deep strike in Bay of Bengal against IN is the logical next step.