Where Is The Western JF 17?
- Thread starter Berkut
- Start date
Yes the Mirage 2000 is a low cost option when compared to the F16 (U$44 million). The Mirage price is US$23 million in Europe (Welcome to Aircraft Compare). It is rated as a MRCA so could appeal to the bean counters. Mirage 2000 Multirole Combat Fighter - Air Force Technology has data on the aircraft. I do not know enough to evaluate it on a CAS role which would be what NZ would look at first and foremost in an operational context. Price would of course take absolute priority in the minds of the pollies and Nigels.
It's not just the cost of the airframe, NZ has to build the entire capability from scratch - new pilots, ground crews and associated supporting infrastructure.
They would be better off sending a select number of NZ passport holders to the UK or Aussie to train and embed as 'long look' pilots paid for by the NZ government.The Five Powers Defense agreement necessitates both Aussie and UK provide military support to NZ when threatened, so by having a pool of trained NZ pilots serving in both airforces should allow for the rapid rasing of an air-wing utilizing leased aircraft flying out of Aussie air bases or one of New Zealand's national airports. The NZ embeds could learn to fly SH/Typhoon and eventually the F35 series. Fortunately both Aussie and the UK use the same lead in fighter/trainer and NZ could also leverage off the flight school in Canada (also equipped with Hawk).
During periods of armed conflict airframes are not the problem, trained pilots are because of the length of time it takes to bring them up to full competency. Kill the pilots and the airframes will just sit there gathering dust.
The only fixed wing airframe I would invest in for NZ would be Reaper (or similar) capable of providing surveillance and CAS support to NZSAS deployments at a fraction of the cost of a manned airframe, but one which would give the NZ military a huge leap in capability.
True. I wonder if the Reaper is being looked at. Also your idea on long look pilots is very good. It makes a lot of sense.
the concerned
Active Member
Why can't Bae buy the mako design off Eads and market it as a hawk replacement
What about all their boiling mud?!
:Who wants their mud badly enough to go to war for it? :karWhat about all their boiling mud?!
IMHO if NZ abolished their armed forces hardly anyone would notice and even fewer would care.
That price is nonsense.Since it's been out of production for several years, there is no price for new-build Mirage 2000s. Secondhand aircraft price depends on age & condition. The only secondhand sale, ever, was much less that that - but for very old airframes with not much life left.
Why did EADS stop trying to sell it? Same reason.
The Hawk doesn't need to be replaced, it's still a popular LIFT with a very good track record. The EADS Mako on the other hand is a "paper plane".
exported_kiwi
New Member
Of topic, I know and apologies but had to respond.
NZ would know, as would Australia and neighbouring countries. This is not an option for us, not now, not tomorrow and not in the future. It's too institutionalised and the military has a long (for such a young country) tradition of service.
I fear that Hawk won't get any more sales. BAe is no longer building it, only making parts for Indian-built Hawks. Apart from the Indian top-up order from the Bangalore line, the last sale was in 2006.
Ananda
The Bunker Group
If I may corrected it, The Hawk 'used' to be the popular LIFT choices. However if you see the latest ordered for LIFT in the market, the Hawks does not even made the cut. The latest LIFT market from UAE, Singapore, Indonesia, etc and now Israel only put either KAI T-50 or Aermacchi M-346. Not counting also Yak 130, but Yak got the market that traditionally more inclined for Russian stuff.
After India, I'm afraid the days for Hawks as LIFT already numbered. I Know BAe still hoping to entered US T-X competition (replacing T-38). However with T-50 and M-346 already becoming more matured, the chances for Hawk is keep sliding down.
Since we're on the subject of LIFTs. On the MBB-339, there are what appear to be pods on the end of both wings. What purpose do they serve?
As for the Hawks, I think the main problem facing a lot of countries that want Hawks, is the price of the Hawk and the cost of spares. I'm not sure how the MBB-339 compares as a LIFT to the Hawk 100 or Hawk AJT but it is cheaper - having no radar. The more nimble design of the Hawk would probably make it better than the MBB-339 for the point defence interceptor and light attack roles.
As for the Hawks, I think the main problem facing a lot of countries that want Hawks, is the price of the Hawk and the cost of spares. I'm not sure how the MBB-339 compares as a LIFT to the Hawk 100 or Hawk AJT but it is cheaper - having no radar. The more nimble design of the Hawk would probably make it better than the MBB-339 for the point defence interceptor and light attack roles.
Wing tip fuel tanks.
Thanks. Any idea why the designers would place fuel tanks in such a peculiar position, wouldn't it cause drag?
Which is very interesting and shows just how politicized the weapons market is, since the M-346 and Yak-130 are almost the same aircraft.
the concerned
Active Member
I would say that the FA-50 is going to win the T-x contract because not only do they get an aircraft with similar capability's to what they already got and by producing the light strike variant they could satisfy the looming ANG fighter shortage and sell it like they did the F-5 to its allies especially in South America
Ananda
The Bunker Group
But, the weapons market is always politized, whether global/international politics, or just simply trade politics. In the end of 80's early 90's, BAe Hawks 100/200 series crushed Aermachi AMX in the SEA market with the order from Indonesia and Malaysia (and I believe also from Brunai, although I don't know what happen to those Hawks in the end). It's simply because BAe done much better lobbying and not due to the better quality of Hawk. In fact (at least in Indonesian case) the technical score for AMX is (rumoured) slightly higher than Hawk. In such that when the ordered for Hawk being made, the Air Force told the reporter the Hawk win because the engine (Ardour) is newer design than AMX Spey. Talk about 'lame' reason
. Afterall in that time the population of Spey in Indonesia is considerable high (due to large number of Fokker F-28 population used by the Flagship Airline Garuda). Back to more recent deal. The TNI-AU technical score for C-27J is higher than C-295. However EADS has truff card, which is their long term relations with DI. The current administrations will not make political blunder by agree on buying an Aircraft over another Aircraft that DI already being contracted to participate in manufacturing. This situation is so obvious, sometime I wonder why Lockheed/Alenia bother to participate in the tender anyway.
In such if the technical score is not differed significantly, politics will win the day. That's the nature of the game for this Industry I believe.