Bangladesh Air Force

[PoondolotoPandalum]

The former is correct, not the latter part. It's just unfortunate for Pakistan and U.S. to have different national interests. We wanted to be neutral and have good relations with both China and West. But when one warmly embraces and understands you while the other shuns you away and pick your archrival (India) as their favorite, it is natural to become closer to the one you get along with.

What about Russia?

As much as I know, there has been a slight warming of relations with Russia of recent. Though there are some issues. Russia is still a major arms supplier to your arch-nemesis, and Russia didn't like the fact that your intelligence services supported militant activities in the caucuses (perhaps you'll disagree, but that's what the Russians think of you anyway, it's them you want to persuade)

But that won't stop them from selling military equipment to you or work with you in Afghanistan. Though they tend to target countries that can afford very large defence contracts.

 

[PDF]

What about Russia?

As much as I know, there has been a slight warming of relations with Russia of recent. Though there are some issues. Russia is still a major arms supplier to your arch-nemesis, and Russia didn't like the fact that your intelligence services supported militant activities in the caucuses (perhaps you'll disagree, but that's what the Russians think of you anyway, it's them you want to persuade)

But that won't stop them from selling military equipment to you or work with you in Afghanistan. Though they tend to target countries that can afford very large defence contracts.

Pak-Russia relations are in works. It will take some time (years) but they are in good direction. We are having good relationship with them especially in military domain. But with their main partner as India who has long strategic and huge economic clout, and our past with Soviet Union, Pakistan and Russia won't have anything too valuable, atleast for near future. We do have robust CT cooperation though now. (Through RATS ==> SCO, and Druzbha Special Forces Exercises Annually and alternatively in our respective countries)

The Conflict with India is inevitable in the near future, Feb 19 was a reminder. Mind you, but India has a very strong military and I can not overstate that. It is only by the grace of Allah that we come out successful and safe. But we need to prepare all the time and next time, India will hit us hard. Due to short distance, it is difficult to avoid any damage. Pakistan needs imminent deterrence so that if we do get hit, we hit them harder.

We can neither depend on Russia nor U.S. And to be frank, not even China, but atleast the most close help we might get will be from China (thanks to us having perfect scores old relationship with China.

Lucky for you, BAF doesn't have the same issues as us with Russia and U.S. and thus, you should try to capitalize on that. And Even though China has helped Myanmar, I would still say you guys can have good understanding and manage China well for your benefit. Bangladesh should be more active both diplomatically and militarily with the these 3 powers directly and indirectly. Secure U.S. and you shall have Europe at your side too. Engage with more exhanges with China while carefully mantaining Indian ties especially in military domain. With Russia, you guys don't have too much of an issue.

And the good news is, despite political mess rn, the economy is good. You guys are in really good and better position.

Let's just say on intellegence point, Pakistan took revenge on KGB through Afghanistan USSR mess.

But, past is past, both Russia and Pakistan are moving forward. These things are part of life.

 

[Destranator]

BAF should closely monitor how J-10C performs with PAF. I don't see BAF being able to afford a sizeable fleet with Western jets alone.
A combination of say 3 sqd each of Gripens/Vipers and J-10Cs would be good. This could be topped off with 1-2 sqd EFT for air superiority and maritime strike.

 

[PoondolotoPandalum]

Pak-Russia relations are in works. It will take some time (years) but they are in good direction. We are having good relationship with them especially in military domain. But with their main partner as India who has long strategic and huge economic clout, and our past with Soviet Union, Pakistan and Russia won't have anything too valuable, atleast for near future. We do have robust CT cooperation though now. (Through RATS ==> SCO, and Druzbha Special Forces Exercises Annually and alternatively in our respective countries)

The Conflict with India is inevitable in the near future, Feb 19 was a reminder. Mind you, but India has a very strong military and I can not overstate that. It is only by the grace of Allah that we come out successful and safe. But we need to prepare all the time and next time, India will hit us hard. Due to short distance, it is difficult to avoid any damage. Pakistan needs imminent deterrence so that if we do get hit, we hit them harder.

We can neither depend on Russia nor U.S. And to be frank, not even China, but atleast the most close help we might get will be from China (thanks to us having perfect scores old relationship with China.

Lucky for you, BAF doesn't have the same issues as us with Russia and U.S. and thus, you should try to capitalize on that. And Even though China has helped Myanmar, I would still say you guys can have good understanding and manage China well for your benefit. Bangladesh should be more active both diplomatically and militarily with the these 3 powers directly and indirectly. Secure U.S. and you shall have Europe at your side too. Engage with more exhanges with China while carefully mantaining Indian ties especially in military domain. With Russia, you guys don't have too much of an issue.

And the good news is, despite political mess rn, the economy is good. You guys are in really good and better position.

Let's just say on intellegence point, Pakistan took revenge on KGB through Afghanistan USSR mess.

But, past is past, both Russia and Pakistan are moving forward. These things are part of life.

Eventually, Bangladesh will be forced to choose between the Western sphere or the ever-increasingly powerful Chinese sphere. It'll be a tricky diplomatic art to pull off.

I reckon by the 2030s, China will be the no1 global power on earth, with an economy possibly TWICE that of the US in nominal terms (mind you, they only need to reach South Korean per capita level to have an economy twice the size of the US, easily possible, and maybe quite soon).

And I bet you, they'll achieve that in the most Chinese way possible. Without firing a single shot. In the best traditions of sUN tZ

Any political leverage India has right now when it comes to land dispute negotiation will vanish. China will be less compelled to play diplomatically or even pretend to.

The west, which still has no realistic strategy to deal with rising China. The punitive actions they're taking now, have been predicted by Chinese planners decades in the past. They are more than capable of dealing with them. Like replacing the US as a major trading partner, within some of the most heavily traded regions in the world (like ASEAN)

The west will eventually acknowledge the new global order and face the reality. They are huffing and puffing now, as do all superpowers once they see someone replace them. But eventually, they WILL have a working relationship with them eventually.

Even Western military power projection isn't what it used to be. War on Iraq weakened their position in the middle east and made their real enemy (Iran) far more powerful in the region. Afghan war... most creative way of burning $3 trillion. Syria, if it wasn't for Russian intervention, black flags would've waved over Damascus a while ago. Russia kept splatting every single one of "America's assets" in that theatre like they don't give a ****. They turned the status quo of that theatre. Not the US. Fall of Syria would've been America's final checkmate of the middle east. But that didn't happen. They called America's bluff. And show they can no longer go around the world completely unopposed anymore.

China will try its best to stay out of any military confrontation, even for soft power means. Their strategy is much more economically orientated. They are already planning on using blockchain, advanced AI to control the terms of global finance (even competition) in their favor. They are just well ahead of the game.

While I welcome better ties with west and western defense equipment, we need to also realize the very real possibility of the Asian Century. The world today is much different than it was even 10 years ago.

 

[PoondolotoPandalum]

Would like to ask you, why Americans are so stubborn for not using features like canards?
When Europeans have used them but later abandon them on new Gen platforms and settled on sleek boring designs.

Quite simply, stealth.

Euro-canard designs did not place as much of an emphasis on frontal aspect stealth, they are all semi-stealth airplanes. They rely more on advanced ECM/EW than low RCS as a defensive measure.

It's a similar case with the Su-57. Russians explored a canard-delta design prior to the Pak-fa (MiG 1.44), which had phenomenal performance (over Mach 2.8, and said to be extremely maneuverable, especially at high speed), even higher than that of the Su-57. But its large frontal canards compromise the radar cross-section.

But there is a reason why euro-canards are so widely used (J-10, RFT, Rafale, Gripen, J-20 (though not really a delta), MiG 1.44 prototype). They are optimized for supersonic agility, high acceleration, and supercruise.

As for 6th gen European designs, like a tempest, etc, they are fully stealth airplanes, hence no canards. In fact, many of them don't even have tailplanes, including the "Checkmate" fighter. There's a chance they'll be equipped with TVC's, and use other aerodynamic trickery to achieve high agility

 

[PoondolotoPandalum]

The above only applies for older gen BVR.
New gen BVR can fly at different velocity at different phases of flight.They also do tracking and re-tracking.

Then BVRs like AIM120 has multishot capability, firing first missile and firing second one with delayed response.

Older gen, newer gen, physics remain the same. The higher and faster you are, the higher the energy state of your missile/bomb

F16, F15 and F18s also did not feature canards, what are your thoughts on it.

Making delta-canards work is extremely complicated from a flight control & stability perspective.

Only possible with the advent of next-gen digital FBW from the late 80s. The flight control system of the EFT was a quantum leap ahead of any 4th gen FBW control system, for instance. It was one of the most challenging aspects of the whole program actually. Also, the EFT/ Rafale used more advanced computer-aided design and simulations, and to a much higher extent than 4th gen platforms. Which ment a much higher degree of aerodynamic optimization and refinement, than made possible during the development of 4th gen platforms.

Also bear in mind, Europeans and Russians always placed a higher emphasis on acceleration and climb-rate, because their airforce was/are expected to operate much closer to the front-line, than US airplanes. Especially after WW2. European airforces like the RAF had to rapidly scramble to meet German threats. USAF operated from bases much further away. Hence they emphasized range/endurance over climb rate and acceleration.

 

[PoondolotoPandalum]

The Aim-120D comes with a dual pulse motor designed to extend its kill zone as much as possible. A large motor to accelerate it up to speed, and a smaller, long-burn motor, to preserve its energy. But it's still a solid-fuel rocket motor, and its burn time is measured in a couple of seconds, not minutes. And the more the missile turns, the more energy it losses. Ramjet missiles like the Meteor have an even higher Killzone, as it's powered throughout almost the entire duration of its flight. Ramjets have this amazing ability to produce quite a lot of thrust, with very little fuel

Regardless, an Aim-120D fired at 50,000ft, will always have an advantage over an Aim-120D fired at 45,000ft. Especially if it was launched at a higher speed. You want to avoid firing from low and slow, as it severely degrades your missile's energy. It'll only work if your opponents are full or half a generation behind you at least. So a low and slow F-16 firing an Aim-120C7 can most likely take out a high and fast flying Su-27, firing a 1980s R-27ER. But it's much more difficult against a J-15/16 equipped with PL-15, for example.

So the Eurofighter will always have a theoretical advantage on BVR shots over any F-16 variant, based on kinematics alone, assuming they're both equipped with comparable BVR missiles (though METEOR is in a league of its own). The F-16 would have to rely on tactics and opportunism, to minimize its disadvantages. But that may not always be possible.

You have to remember, the Eurofighter was designed with an interception in mind (primarily an RAF requirement, to intercept Russian bombers). It was designed to excel at high-altitude BVR combat.

The Rafales in comparison were more ground-attack orientated, and of course, had the ability to operate from carriers. It has its own advantages over EFT, particularly in A2G operations. But virtually non in interception and BVR combat (though the margins aren't massive)

 

[Destranator]

I thought BAF sent pilots for training in China according to BDMilitary?

Sending pilots for training and monitoring aircraft performance over long periods are two different things. China is very good at suppressing information about equipment failures. We need to monitor the performance of J-10C with export clients who are relatively less adept/motivated at suppressing information.

 

[leonblack08]

Defseca claiming their "civil sources" confirmed the MRCA deal will be announced before Feb 2022.

On a reliability scale of 1 to poop, this smells like a fart.

 

[Michael Corleone]

large motor to accelerate it up to speed, and a smaller, long-burn motor, to preserve its energy.

But the missile will have the velocity of the fighter jet, why does it need a motor that brings it up to speed when it’s momentum is whatever speed the fighter is traveling when it’s launched from the get go?

 

[F-6 enthusiast]

Defseca claiming their "civil sources" confirmed the MRCA deal will be announced before Feb 2022

they will confirm it after the 2018 elections

 

[Destranator]

Defseca claiming their "civil sources" confirmed the MRCA deal will be announced before Feb 2022.

On a reliability scale of 1 to poop, this smells like a fart.

I am still waiting on the December 2018 elections to be over as Amra said BAF will announce the MRCA deal "already signed" right after.

 

[F-6 enthusiast]

Sending pilots for training and monitoring aircraft performance over long periods are two different things. China is very good at suppressing information about equipment failures. We need to monitor the performance of J-10C with export clients who are relatively less adept/motivated at suppressing information.

The truth is Chinese and Eastern combat training is nowhere near good as their western counterparts let alone the USAF,USN (which is light years ahead of everyone else). The training is very rigid and hierarchical compared to west.

This is a 40 min long video discussing Chinese airpower and its advances. The Guest is a RUSI think tank analyst. Discusses J-10, J-16,J-20, command and training , doctrine.
I urge everyone to watch the full video.

also see for example at 21:59 where they explain how the AWACS is used.
At 25:16 in the AWACS what they've done is put the regimental Brigade controller (who used to sit on the control tower, giving sequential orders to the fighter pilots during their sorties ). They've moved him to the AWACS. He can see much better what's actually happening but he still has authority to talk to his unit's fighters. He also mentions issues with coordination between ground based SAMs and fighters, Joint engagement zones.

00:00 - Intro 00:28 - Expert: Justin Bronk
01:02 - The Chinese (Army) Air Force until now
04:33 - Why should we care?
07:50 - The J-10: The Return of the Light-Weight Fighter(?)
11:13 - The J-16: The Best Flanker?
16:01 - The J-20: Stealth but not really?
20:52 - China overtaking Russia in basically everything?
27:22 - Crews and Command & Control
30:30 - How could China use their (Army) Air Force? 35:40 - Recommendations

 

[UKBengali]

But the missile will have the velocity of the fighter jet, why does it need a motor that brings it up to speed when it’s momentum is whatever speed the fighter is traveling when it’s launched from the get go?

As BVR missiles typically have a cruising speed of Mach 4 and may be launched from a fighter at around Mach 1.5-2.

Yes, it is best for very long-range BVR shots to get as high and fast as possible to give the missile the maximum energy(potential and kinetic).

 

[Avicenna]

"Also bear in mind, Europeans and Russians always placed a higher emphasis on acceleration and climb-rate, because their airforce was/are expected to operate much closer to the front-line, than US airplanes. Especially after WW2. European airforces like the RAF had to rapidly scramble to meet German threats. USAF operated from bases much further away. Hence they emphasized range/endurance over climb rate and acceleration."

"The higher and faster you are, the higher the energy state of your missile/bomb". This probably was the case in the early 90s but not in the present day. BVRs are able to reach the intended altitude quickly.

Physics has changed from the early 90's to the present day?