Rafale and JF-17 Thunder to compete in Serbia.

[Sinnerman108]

It shall not be F-18,
F-18 was designed to be aircraft carrier capable,
Thus the airframe is built to withstand the extreme forces.
F-18's engines need an increase in thrust to be able to thrust to weight ration of > 1.
If the serbians do not plan on fielding the required aircraft on aircraft carrier they shall not consider F-18s.

F-16 and Thunder left, well sure F-16's new blocks will be far better than thunder.

however problem arises with two factors
1. F-16s are on their way out of production lines.
2. american maintenance cost is always very high

If the serbians choose thunder, they will have a platform which is NOT as developed and proven as americans
but it will be easy on the pocket and will give them a chance to evolve the aircraft with time since thunder is actively being improved.

 

[Luftwaffe]

Again current Serbia Government is pro west, F-16 is the strongest contender by far followed by russians. There are conflicting reports that Serbia is not operating any combat aircraft due to sub-region arms control agreements but hardly believable since if they are not operating and agreement is enforced then no point in floating tenders for multi-role aircrafts. The actual number of replacement requirement for the Serbian Air Force is around 52 (squadron of Mig-21s, all mig-29s and all Suko J-22) but I suspect Suko were grounded long time ago due to bad conditions and poor maintenance issues.

 

[untitled]

It shall not be F-18,
F-18 was designed to be aircraft carrier capable,

Ahem....

List of country's that operate the F-18 and have no aircraft carriers

Australia, Switzerland (no coast hence no air craft carrier), Finland, Canada, Kuwait and Malaysia

If an Air Force has chosen the F-18 over the F-16 is because they can afford it and give priority to safety because of Hornets two engines.

In fact the only country that uses the F-18 in a Naval role is the US

All the other country's that operate air craft carrier don't fly the F-18

 

[MiG-21]

What kinda BS article is that? Written by a novice at best and on a free website which kept trying to open up pop-ups! Isn't it absolutely senseless even considering the fact that China was trying to sell the Jet without detailed performance parameters and demo's? Quite a stupid author!

Blaming the article now, just because both JF-17 AND J-10 got it's asss handed to it by the Mig-29 in that deal? If you don't like that that link, then how about this-
"In 2009, China lost a major bid for a fighter aircraft deal to Russia. The Myanmar government chose to enter into a $570 million deal with Russia for 20 MIG-29 fighter jets, turning down China's offer of its latest J-10 and FC-1 fighters."
Asia Times Online :: South Asia news, business and economy from India and Pakistan

Or this - What the Russian papers say | What Russian papers say | RIA Novosti

Or this - More MiG-29s for Myanmar

Or this - Myanmar to buy 20 MiG-29 fighters for $570 mln - paper | Business | RIA Novosti

Or this - Russian experts say Myanmar to give up because the MiG-29 J-10 is excellent quality « Military of China, force comment.

Or this - Russia To Sell 20 MiG-29 Fighters To Myanmar - Defense News

 

[Zabaniyah]

@Zabaniya
eh? J-10 was indeed offered. It's a known fact.
And tell that to the guy who said it has fired a bvr.

Yeah, says some spoof article

The fact is, it was never offered to anyone. And considering Myanmar's deterioration in relations with China, the deal was extremely unlikely.

 

[foxbat]

JFT has already knocked out Eurofighter and F-16 in various mockup fights.

If the subject country is not blindly anti Pakistan that he would like to give a fair competition.

You mean anti China.. I dont think the Primary party would be Pakistan anyway..

---------- Post added at 11:28 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:26 AM ----------

so Rafale be the butterfly and JF-17 be the Bee?

hehe

seems like the butterfly got shortlisted for India's MMRCA competition.

Both butterfly and bee are being used to refer to the JFT (kind of a girly comparison in my eyes )

^^^ i agree completely. Even Indian navy loved it that they decided to post it on the cover of their website. Who would not love this beauty that flies like a butterfly and stings like a bee.

 

[Mav3rick]

Blaming the article now, just because both JF-17 AND J-10 got it's asss handed to it by the Mig-29 in that deal? If you don't like that that link, then how about this-
"In 2009, China lost a major bid for a fighter aircraft deal to Russia. The Myanmar government chose to enter into a $570 million deal with Russia for 20 MIG-29 fighter jets, turning down China's offer of its latest J-10 and FC-1 fighters."
Asia Times Online :: South Asia news, business and economy from India and Pakistan

Or this - What the Russian papers say | What Russian papers say | RIA Novosti

Or this - More MiG-29s for Myanmar

Or this - Myanmar to buy 20 MiG-29 fighters for $570 mln - paper | Business | RIA Novosti

Or this - Russian experts say Myanmar to give up because the MiG-29 J-10 is excellent quality « Military of China, force comment.

Or this - Russia To Sell 20 MiG-29 Fighters To Myanmar - Defense News

I did not rubbish the news, merely the article author's abnormal understanding and determination of outcome without calculation of evaluation parameters. How else in the world was a single engine fighter in competition with a dual engine fighter? Look at the differences in parameters of the Jets before you even suggest that J-10 lost to Mig-29 on performance! And weren't Mig-29's already being fielded by Burma (Myanmar now)?? Could the deciding factor be previous experience, training of the pilots and so on??

 

[MiG-21]

Yeah, says some spoof article
The fact is, it was never offered to anyone. And considering Myanmar's deterioration in relations with China, the deal was extremely unlikely.

wow. fan boys are in denial even after providing links. Just because your favorite Israeli-Chinese fighter lost.

Re-post:
Blaming the article now, just because both JF-17 AND J-10 got it's asss handed to it by the Mig-29 in that deal? If you don't like that that link, then how about this-
"In 2009, China lost a major bid for a fighter aircraft deal to Russia. The Myanmar government chose to enter into a $570 million deal with Russia for 20 MIG-29 fighter jets, turning down China's offer of its latest J-10 and FC-1 fighters."
Asia Times Online :: South Asia news, business and economy from India and Pakistan

Or this - What the Russian papers say | What Russian papers say | RIA Novosti

Or this - More MiG-29s for Myanmar

Or this - Myanmar to buy 20 MiG-29 fighters for $570 mln - paper | Business | RIA Novosti

Or this - Russian experts say Myanmar to give up because the MiG-29 J-10 is excellent quality « Military of China, force comment.

Or this - Russia To Sell 20 MiG-29 Fighters To Myanmar - Defense News

 

[MiG-21]

I did not rubbish the news, merely the article author's abnormal understanding and determination of outcome without calculation of evaluation parameters. How else in the world was a single engine fighter in competition with a dual engine fighter? Look at the differences in parameters of the Jets before you even suggest that J-10 lost to Mig-29 on performance! And weren't Mig-29's already being fielded by Burma (Myanmar now)?? Could the deciding factor be previous experience, training of the pilots and so on??

eh? The author did make a twin engined and a single engined fighter comparison. Why is that wrong? Why can't a single engined fighter compete with a twin engined? Ever heard of the Indian MMRCA deal?

 

[MiG-21]

There could be many factors, including Myanmar already fielding Mig-29s. However, after the collapse of the soviet union, spares always became a problem. If Myanmar chose the Mig-29 despite that huge dis-advantage, and the Chinese highly favorable payment conditions for their jets, and Myanmar being much close to China(there is a chinese base in that country), than with India and Russia put together, I suspect it had more to do with the performance of the jet rather than other factors.

 

[foxbat]

I did not rubbish the news, merely the article author's abnormal understanding and determination of outcome without calculation of evaluation parameters. How else in the world was a single engine fighter in competition with a dual engine fighter? Look at the differences in parameters of the Jets before you even suggest that J-10 lost to Mig-29 on performance! And weren't Mig-29's already being fielded by Burma (Myanmar now)?? Could the deciding factor be previous experience, training of the pilots and so on??

Didnt F16 and Gripen (both single engine) compete with the F 18, Rafale, EF and Mig 35 (double engine) in the recent mother of all deals for fighter planes?

 

[Zabaniyah]

wow. fan boys are in denial even after providing links. Just because your favorite Israeli-Chinese fighter lost.

Me? Fanboy? I am sorry but my country do not use J-10s or anything

China offering J-10s on 2009 is very unrealistic. Notice, this kind of news is coming from Russian sources.

Anyways, this is about Serbia, not Burma.

 

[MiG-21]

You don't need to have that fighter in your country's airforce to be labeled a fanboy. Fanboy is one who rants and protects his fav object even after links are posted before him which tells otherwise. In any case, your outdated airforce buys Chinese stuff and also your country views china as a counterweight to India in that region, so its natural for you to root for china.

Ofcourse it came from russiansources, because only Russia and China participated in that deal. China having lost the deal didn't put out any news because of the shame. They also didn't deny that the news about their fighters defeat is wrong. No denial came.

 

[Zabaniyah]

Ofcourse it came from russiansources, because only Russia and China participated in that deal. China having lost the deal didn't put out any news because of the shame. They also didn't deny that the news about their fighters defeat is wrong. No denial came.

Let me ask you something. The J-10 on 2009 was very new. Why would they market their newest product that soon to another country considering that PLAAF was busy acquiring them?

 

[Mav3rick]

eh? The author did make a twin engined and a single engined fighter comparison. Why is that wrong? Why can't a single engined fighter compete with a twin engined? Ever heard of the Indian MMRCA deal?

Surprise surprise, the 2 finalists on MMRCA both happen to be ........ you guess it, they are both twin engined! It probably goes to tell you that you make a purchase based on your requirement and no based on what's on offer! And that apples can only be compared to apples! Who in their right minds would compare the safety and other advantages held by dual engined Jets over single engined ones? One either has to be excruciatingly stupid or blatantly biased.