New fighters for Greece.

[sierrahotel]

Greek Goverment is one step from deciding the type of the new fighter aircraft for the Hellenic Air Force (HAF).Eurofighter,Rafale,Gripen,JSF or more F-16B 52+?What do you think?

[Costas]

Greek Goverment is one step from deciding the type of the new fighter aircraft for the Hellenic Air Force (HAF).Eurofighter,Rafale,Gripen,JSF or more F-16B 52+?What do you think?


Hopefully Rafale or EF2000. Gripen is too small, We already have plenty of F-16s and need something even better, JSF no way.

[sierrahotel]

There is an exhibition about defence technology taking place this weekend in El.Venizelos Airport called "Athens International 08".French brought a Rafale for demo and Lockheed Martin arranged an F-16 (perhaps a Greek one) in order to promote a deal for F-16B52+ Advanced for now and F-35 for 2014.In addition French signed a contract for Rafale electronics with greek Miltech,while HAF and FAF arranged a joint F-16/Rafale exercise called "Aegean Gust".On the other hand EADS couldn't manage to bring an EF2000 for demo as it was planned, while a part of the greek press asserts that the deal with the Germans lacks supporters in the Goverment and looses ground.

[ROCK45]

A friend pass this onto me is this the same event?

From May 12 to 16th 5 Rafales ( 2 c's and 3 B's) will be visiting 337 sqdr and do some common exercises.

In other words, this is Rafale vs F-16 blk52, so the results will be more than interesting....

In a parallel event, 2 F/A-18 E from carrier Truman, will pay a visit in Tanagra air base and do some exercises along with Greek M2000 EBG....

[sierrahotel]

Yes,I was talking about the common training between 337 "Ghost"Sqn and 1/7 "Provence".I will post an update on that in a couple of days.The 2 F-18 from Truman were landed last Sunday at Andravida AFB (F-4 AUP)but I don't think that the DACT with M2000 took place.The really interesting news is exercise "Glorius Spartan" begining at the end of the month.A joint HAF-IAF training including 50+ F-16I and F-15Is performing bomb runs in greek fire ranges,DACT with HAF F-16B52+ from Suda AFB and CSAR demo with IAF CH-53/HH-60 and HAF AS-332s along with special forces.

[Atilla [TR]]

Any of you guys think that Greece could get Russian airplanes?

[sierrahotel]

Russian fighters are out of the question.New infrastructure,new weapons,different training philosophy and of course new tactical employment will raise the cost and the time that Sukhois will be fully operational.

[dk706]

The exercise between the Mirages and the 2 F-18e/f did happen and I heard a comment that the Americans saw everything (ta idan ola) the Greeks understand the expression.

No there is no chance that we are buying Russian fighters for the reasons mentioned above and for the simple reason that such a program with such a huge budget also has political significance. I think that the fighters will go to the Germans while the frigates will go to the French this way we keep everyone happy except the Americans of course that have been pulling our leg for a long time and now will pay the price....or should I probably say that the wont get paid... They will have to wait till 2014-15 for us to buy another American fighter and of course I am referring to the JSF that we will buy sure as hell....

[IrishHitman]

Well, Greece is part of the EU, so politically speaking it should favour European defence companies, unless the Americans offer them JSFs at a favourable price.

Greece buying Russian? Not likely..

[ROCK45]

Greece I think will go EF2000 or Rafale I would rate it at 60/40 toward the EF2000. Greece will lean toward the slightly better fighter of the two I think and the EF2000 has a better rep for that. I don't know if the two ever met in mock combat? I'm interested in reading about all the different fighters the EF2000 and Rafale went up against, so if anybody knows please post it. I like reading stuff like that. I can't find it but I think USN Hornets and Rafale's mixed it up off Frances coast years ago.

Greece buying Russian I don't think so I know a huge natural gas/pipeline contract was just sign between the two and Greece bough I think 400+ BMP-3s but aircraft are a different story. Like other posters mentioned the cost of adding a different type: weapons, training, maintenance & repairs, etc, is just too great. A interesting bit if it did happen t would be another nearby country would have to train against a "third" type of radar guided missile MICA,AIM-120, AA-12, but it won't happen.

[Feanor]

What roles are the fighters meant to perform?

[sierrahotel]

It will be a multi-role fighter like all the existing F-16 , with air superiority to be the key role for the new fighter.

[BLACK SHIP]

Please explain to me why my message was deleted.My apologies in advance if offended anyone but since strongly believe that I didn't because IT WAS A GENERAL STATEMENT, with no offending wording , a simple explanation will help clarify if I did broke forum rules .

[IrishHitman]

Please explain to me why my message was deleted.My apologies in advance if offended anyone but since strongly believe that I didn't because IT WAS A GENERAL STATEMENT, with no offending wording , a simple explanation will help clarify if I did broke forum rules .

Clearly the mods thought otherwise.....

Anyway, the Greeks can buy all the armour they want from Russia, but aircraft are a whole different league.

[ROCK45]

Feanor -What roles are the fighters meant to perform?

What sierrahotel said is perfect multi-role fighter but leaning toward air superiority the reason is Greece already a bunch of F-16s for that and F-4s for AG missions. Maybe even A-7s but they might already be in reserve. I believe they use there Mirage 2000-5s in more of a air to air role with some anti-ship duties mixed in. In a way if makes sense the nearby country who has more F-16s then they do would know the F-16 inside and out right? So using the Mirage 2000-5 is different, kind of like having a ace (playing cards) in the hole. It would be some interesting reading hearing a Greece Block-52 pilot and Mirage 2000-5 mk2/3 pilot talk trash about there machines, against each other. I would sit back with a cold one and listen carefully.

[zeven]

Hopefully Rafale or EF2000. Gripen is too small, We already have plenty of F-16s and need something even better, JSF no way.
On you it sounds like the performence of an A/C depends on the size.
will you please eleborate this further?
Gripen NG, may be, a tiny A/C but it still has an impressive paylaod and range.
Can´t see how Gripen NG is to small for Greece?
Greece is not a very huge country population aprx 5 mill??? so the military budget, can´t be very huge? i think a low LCC would be essential for Greece, gives your pilots more hours in the air. and Turkey goes for the JSF,
Rafale is too expensive for what it can do. and greece might be the only customer. scary and expensive upgrades. EF, sure i love it. would be the best choice, but i still think Gripen NG gives more bang for the bucks

[windscorpion]

Its not that small, over 11 million people according to wiki.

[BLACK SHIP]

It seems that after past weeks performance of the Rafale at 110 Fighter Wing at
Larisa the slim chances the French had should be consider now non existent.

[ROCK45]

BLACK SHIP do you think that has anything to do with how it might how done testing against a Block-52? I'm sure Greece put the Rafale through tests I know I would have. My two cent for Greece to spend the big money on a Rafale it would have to beat the Viper like 7-3 in air to air to take it on. I think the Mirage 2000-Ds are still marking targets for the Rafale in 2008, think about that a little Block-40 right? Even know the Rafale has a good range and payload, AG would still be the Greece's Vipers main role so it's air to air where the Rafale needed to stand out and shine. Greece has a lot invested in there Viper fleet I can't see them not using them where there suited so well.

[zeven]

Its not that small, over 11 million people according to wiki.
Yes you´re right. my fault.
but 11 mill, is still small its about the same size as sweden. and greece and sweden have good relations and greece have purchased alot of military equipment and platforms from sweden before IREYE for exampel.

[dk706]

Blackship do you know anything about what happened in larissa?? I haven't heard anything about it and I would love to.
Zeven the gripen does not stand a chance in the Greek competition. As you said the gripen due to its low cost and low maintenance cost is an ideal aircraft for small countries with small defense budgets and is certainly great for countries like Sweden and Switcherland that do not have any real threats to their integrity basically anything else would be an overkill..... The thing though is that nothing is an overkill for Greece. Talking about Greece as a small country and assuming that its defense needs can be covered with something that is not much of an improvement to what we already have is pure ignorance.

Just so you know greece scores some of the highest flying hours per pilot and has one of the highest per capita defense budgets in the world. If you had any clue about what goes on above the aegean every single day you would realize that greece and turkey have two of the most combat ready airforces in the world and they both require the best aircraft they can get since they are essentially facing each other and not some third work country airforce like the US and Nato in general have been facing in resent combat.

[BLACK SHIP]

BLACK SHIP do you think that has anything to do with how it might how done testing against a Block-52? I'm sure Greece put the Rafale through tests I know I would have. My two cent for Greece to spend the big money on a Rafale it would have to beat the Viper like 7-3 in air to air to take it on. I think the Mirage 2000-Ds are still marking targets for the Rafale in 2008, think about that a little Block-40 right? Even know the Rafale has a good range and payload, AG would still be the Greece's Vipers main role so it's air to air where the Rafale needed to stand out and shine. Greece has a lot invested in there Viper fleet I can't see them not using them where there suited so well.

The main concern is to have an air superiority aircraft.There are enough vipers around for the Air to Ground missions .The 52+ in service and in order are suitable for the requirements and with the conformal tanks are the long reach of the HAF.The Rafale simply ,while a very good weapons platform, has nothing exceptional to offer in the air to air performance but the EF does.

[BLACK SHIP]

Yes you´re right. my fault.
but 11 mill, is still small its about the same size as sweden. and greece and sweden have good relations and greece have purchased alot of military equipment and platforms from sweden before IREYE for exampel.

The fighter choice has nothing to do with the good will between Sweden and Greece.Orders of that magnitude are also political and should viewed as such.If you take into consideration the EF backing and the impressive performance of the aircraft itself is clear what choice will be made.

[BLACK SHIP]

dk706 in Larisa simply they didn't make an impression to our Vipers .Also 3 out of 5 had mechanical problems .As I said good performer but not exceptional.

[dk706]

In the official Eurofighter site a comparison of the performance of modern western aircraft is given measured against the Su-27 and the Eurofighter in the Air to Air role comes second only to the f-22. I have seen such comparisons elsewhere and they all seem to put Eurofighter just after F-22. This will probably be the biggest advantage of the aircraft in the greek competition.

Under any sircumstances i think the greek airforce sould test all the compiting aircraft against the F-16 brock52+ in realistic combat missions.

[zeven]

Blackship do you know anything about what happened in larissa?? I haven't heard anything about it and I would love to.
Zeven the gripen does not stand a chance in the Greek competition. As you said the gripen due to its low cost and low maintenance cost is an ideal aircraft for small countries with small defense budgets and is certainly great for countries like Sweden and Switcherland that do not have any real threats to their integrity basically anything else would be an overkill..... The thing though is that nothing is an overkill for Greece. Talking about Greece as a small country and assuming that its defense needs can be covered with something that is not much of an improvement to what we already have is pure ignorance.

Just so you know greece scores some of the highest flying hours per pilot and has one of the highest per capita defense budgets in the world. If you had any clue about what goes on above the aegean every single day you would realize that greece and turkey have two of the most combat ready airforces in the world and they both require the best aircraft they can get since they are essentially facing each other and not some third work country airforce like the US and Nato in general have been facing in resent combat.
Yes i Know.
i knew, greece have like 4.5 per cent spent on their military budget. and are 6th or 5th biggest in europe after turkey.
but why waste the money. if you can use them on smarter way.
And to say, gripen NG is inferior to rafale, EF and jsf, no i don´t agree. all of them havet their things.
so to say that gripen NG couldnt defend Greece but rafale could is BS.

First you guys (genarlizing) says gripen has to small legs and payload. and now when thats fixed, you found something els to misscredit the platform for.

gripen NG is almost an entirely new aircraft. all the avionics (the brain) and EW suits are upgraded,
technology speaking. the advantage, jsf had, will be rather limited when Gripen NG gets operational. ok they still has stealth, but inferior datalink. and so on.
and if you look at rafale and EF, i really cant find something that is so superior to gripen NG.
but i would go for EF anyway and i think EF is the best option for greece, but gripen NG need the credit it deservs.

[sierrahotel]

At the moment all HAF F-16 Sqns are 100% multirole.All sqns get full air to air and air to ground training and take on AD readiness duties.The advantage is clear:one single sqn can provide a COMAO package and at the same time perform AA warfare,giving the Ops Director plenty of choices.Only the 2 M-2000 sqns have clear AD role with 331 sqn to have secondary antiship role.

[zeven]

In the official Eurofighter site a comparison of the performance of modern western aircraft is given measured against the Su-27 and the Eurofighter in the Air to Air role comes second only to the f-22. I have seen such comparisons elsewhere and they all seem to put Eurofighter just after F-22. This will probably be the biggest advantage of the aircraft in the greek competition.

Under any sircumstances i think the greek airforce sould test all the compiting aircraft against the F-16 brock52+ in realistic combat missions.
Ehm.
the official EF website.
give us, an independent compareson, and how the comparesion was made.

i trust the EF website as much as the gripens or jsfs for that sake. in other words NOT MUCH. thay are all commersial businesses, you cant think for one second they would talk average about themselves?

i dont think EF is so superior to others. only reason they got so much attention is because of the countries operates it. all huge military aviation countries.

i would love to read about all this different exercices, you talking about.

ps.
don´t get me wrong here, i do agree with you, that EF is the best choice availeble for the greece airforce..

[dk706]

In general it seams that the Eurofighter is a great aircraft but what i personally think it lacks is a mature and sophisticated AESA radar. An active version of the captor radar was on the papers and i hope that if Greece goes for the Eurofighter it will also prerequisite the AESA captor instead of the normal.

Blackship do you know of any actual results in the air to air training in larissa? Just a reminder here that the Eurofighter won every single battle in the simulations for the equivalent program for the Singaporean airforce. Actually in one scenario a single Eurofighter scored 3 simulated kills against Singaporean airforce F-16s. Despite of that Singapore went for the f-15 some suggesting due to its better air to ground performance.

[dk706]

Zeven dont get me wrong either Gripen NG is a great all around performer and very cost effective and i never discredit it. what i was suggesting was that it is wrong to degrade the needs of the greek airforce because greece is only 11million... I think in the end we both agree that the EF is the best choise for greece and will actually be the final choice due to both operational and political reasons.

[zeven]

In general it seams that the Eurofighter is a great aircraft but what i personally think it lacks is a mature and sophisticated AESA radar. An active version of the captor radar was on the papers and i hope that if Greece goes for the Eurofighter it will also prerequisite the AESA captor instead of the normal.

Blackship do you know of any actual results in the air to air training in larissa? Just a reminder here that the Eurofighter won every single battle in the simulations for the equivalent program for the Singaporean airforce. Actually in one scenario a single Eurofighter scored 3 simulated kills against Singaporean airforce F-16s. Despite of that Singapore went for the f-15 some suggesting due to its better air to ground performance.

Maybe not now, but when tranch 3 comes out. around the time Greece will make the purchase, it will be a mature plattform.
and the advantage of JSF, technology wise, will be none existing.
im still suprised that lockheed martin with a budget of over 300 bill usd. can´t achive something better.

[zeven]

Zeven dont get me wrong either Gripen NG is a great all around performer and very cost effective and i never discredit it. what i was suggesting was that it is wrong to degrade the needs of the greek airforce because greece is only 11million... I think in the end we both agree that the EF is the best choise for greece and will actually be the final choice due to both operational and political reasons.

Yes we do. :)

im looking forward to see, jsf vs eurofighter in upcomming exercices. its gonna be like christmas for me :)

[dk706]

Zeven I honestly hope that what you are saying will be true.... after all we all know that greece is bound to buy the f-35 at some point... I would guess right after 2014 when it becomes available to us. If f-35 proves to be inferior to the EF we wont need to buy f-35 at the end...this way we will break the greek tradition of investing in two aircraft designs at the same time...

[zeven]

Zeven I honestly hope that what you are saying will be true.... after all we all know that greece is bound to buy the f-35 at some point... I would guess right after 2014 when it becomes available to us. If f-35 proves to be inferior to the EF we wont need to buy f-35 at the end...this way we will break the greek tradition of investing in two aircraft designs at the same time...

Very true, and i do believe thats the way it will turn out.
because nothing yet indicates that F-35 will be superior.
it that was the case, no one would never even concider EF in the first place, because of the twin engine aint enough by itself to buy EF.

[Grand Danois]

and the advantage of JSF, technology wise, will be none existing.
im still suprised that lockheed martin with a budget of over 300 bill usd. can´t achive something better.

because nothing yet indicates that F-35 will be superior.

Look to the exercise kill ratios of the F-22A vs "3th/4th" gens to get an idea. ;)

But I suggest you take it to the Will latest F-35 problems push Norway towards an European solution? (http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7135), if you want more on that topic. The Greek aren't going to buy F-35A's this time around.

[zeven]

Look to the exercise kill ratios of the F-22A vs "3th/4th" gens to get an idea. ;)

But I suggest you take it to the Will latest F-35 problems push Norway towards an European solution? (http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7135), if you want more on that topic. The Greek aren't going to buy F-35A's this time around.

We didnt talked about F-22

No Greece will not. but if it turns out, EF, can do the job better than F35 why use 2 plattforms? thats what we´re talking about.
and turkey will purchase F-35, so its hard to leave F-35 out of this debate.

[Sintra]

Look to the exercise kill ratios of the F-22A vs "3th/4th" gens to get an idea. ;)


Grand Danois

If we go by the exercise kill ratios against Vipers, Hornets, Eagles, Tornados, etc, then the Eurofighter Typhoon his directly competitive with the F-22 Raptor (i´m not talking about "chance" encounters with F-15E´s over GBritain). And before someone starts throwing rocks (:tomato ) i´m not saying that these two aircrafts are equivalent, with the kind of money that was spent on the ATF program, Lockheed Martin and the Pentagon would have made the "Blunder of Century" if the Raptor wasn´t superlative (wich it his).
I´m talking about "Sky Lance 2007", "Typhoon Meet", "Wycombe Warrior 2007 1/2/3", "Lone Eider", the exercises between the Italian Air Force 37 Stormo and the 4/36 Stormos, or their Spanish equivalents.
This list his a small selection of what hapened in 2007, and by every account it has been a one sided "baby seal clubing".
Even the 48th USAF fighter jocks will (grudgingly) acknolage that sometimes a "Eagle" might get on the wrong end of a (simulated) "slammer" (sometimes on a massive scale, see Sky Lance kill ratios).
Bottom line, without knowing the ROE´s of the exercises it´s impossible to measure ATA performance, that his true for the Raptor, the Typhoon, or any other fighter.
On that most discussed internet topic the "Dave versus Phoon", my own "prediction" his... chill out, have a beer and wait to 2018 untill they are flying actually with RAF and AMI colours.
I would just love to have access to the reports of the 17(R) Sqn RAF, more specifically to the China Lake detachment.

Cheers

[Grand Danois]

Zeven & Sintra,

The reason I tried to direct the F-35 discussion towards the Norway thread, was because this is the thread where the sniping at the F-35 takes place. No reason to make every fighter procurement thread a pro/con F-35 discussion. :)

People generally underestimate how potent an A2A fighter the F-35 is. Just because it doesn't go Mach 2+, top speed is overestimated IMV. The F-35 doesn't need to do the energy fight, though certainly capable of it. It fits with previous paradigms as well as those of the future that can be discerned (no, LM didn't pay me to write this, it is how I perceive things :D).

I'm aware of DACT rules; the Raptor has demonstrated what matters to get lopsided: sensors, networking, STEALTH and speed (and persistence). It's the combo. The F-35 is excellent at the two first and has reasonable balance of the two latter.

The US describes the F-35A this way in the FY08 budget item justification:

The F-35 is the next generation strike fighter which will increase aero performance, stealth signature and countermeasures. Its advanced avionics, data links and adverse weather precision targeting will incorporate the latest technology available. The F-35 has increased range with internal fuel and includes superior weaponry over existing aircraft. The highly supportable, affordable, state-of-the-art aircraft commands and maintains global air superiority.

http://www.saffm.hq.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-080204-081.pdf

It's no slouch in A2A and stealth is probably a bigger asset than top speed. How about displacing into an advantagous position without your enemy noticing you? Or being able to do a more fuel efficient intercept, because you need to worry less about being spotted? This translate to better use of the speed and fuel that is available.

But of course the F-35 should be discussed in the Greek context. However, they're not up for this round, but future purchases should be taken into account when discussing the current situation and more immediate acquisitions.

[Atilla [TR]]

Speed does not make a difference when you found out that you are locked on, by an enemy plane which you do not see both with your own 2 eyes or on the Radar, I am pretty sure you will not have enough speed to out run the missile which came from a invisible plane! Another note the stupid thing is still a concept, U.S is not going to release all the facts about it to everyone!

I found this qoute on another blog website, they where discussing the same thing!

Sadly for the UK, Spain, Germany, Italy, Saudi Arabia and whoever else has made the disastrous mistake to purchase this relic of a by-gone era, the Typhoon will soon be almost, but not quite, as irrelevant as the so-called Super Hornet. The F-35 will exceed the Typhoon at all levels, including maneuverability. Despite the latter's canards, I am astounded by how very little people on this board understand the very peculiar yet very unbeatable aerodynamic configuration common to both the F-22 and F-35. The enormous control surfaces, set far behind the axis of gravity in both as well as far behind the engine, provide a degree of maneuverability unmatched by any comers. Again, the USAF is being coy about the F-35 in this regard, but this aircraft will not be beaten by any aircraft now flying except for the F-22. Were the F-35 to be fitted with thrust-vectoring, however, it would be more maneuverable yet than the F-22.


My guess as to what Greece is going to buy is one of the 3 Euro delta's.

[ASFC]

;143591']
I found this qoute on another blog website, they where discussing the same thing!
Have you got a link, as I'm quite interested in reading the rest of that.


My guess as to what Greece is going to buy is one of the 3 Euro delta's.

I know it is 0430 in the UK for me at the moment, but i'm sure there are only 2 Euro Delta designs available for purchase. :confused:

[Atilla [TR]]

Have you got a link, as I'm quite interested in reading the rest of that.



I know it is 0430 in the UK for me at the moment, but i'm sure there are only 2 Euro Delta designs available for purchase. :confused:


http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-5525.html

Scroll down a little past halfway. Also 3 delta's Typhoon, Rafale, Gripen.

[rjmaz1]

It's no slouch in A2A and stealth is probably a bigger asset than top speed. How about displacing into an advantagous position without your enemy noticing you? Or being able to do a more fuel efficient intercept, because you need to worry less about being spotted? This translate to better use of the speed and fuel that is available.
Yes having extra fuel/range over the enemy aircraft translates into a speed advantage.

Fuel = speed.

Adding further to your points.

If you dont have enough fuel you have to remain subsonic to perform the mission as efficiently as possible. Stealth also allows the F-35 to take a more direct route to ground targets which is the same as your intercept scenario. This gives a further increase in combat radius that cannot be calculated by a simple fuel consumption calculation that members like Dr Freud was so fond of. Atleast we now have a 30 day break until those calculations return :)

A Eurofighter for example may be able to cruise dry at Mach 1.3, however it may have to cruise at Mach 0.8 to reach a distant target to improve its range. On the other hand the target may be close enough for the Eurofighter to cruise at Mach 1.3. But with the F-35 extra fuel its can fly 30-50% further than that target. The extra fuel allows the F-35 to hit the burners over enemy territory turning the speed advantage in favour of the F-35 now travelling at Mach 1.5. Technically this is not "supercruising" as afterburners are being used but it is travelling fast and just as efficient if you average across the entire mission.

If an aircraft had a huge amount of fuel then it could be classified as cruising regardless of the fact that afterburners are used. Its only in fighter aircraft where fuel capacity limits afterburners to mere minutes of usage. This is why a generic fighter definition of crusing meant no afterburners. It is more of a range issue. If an aircraft cannot travel far enough to perform its mission even if it can exceed Mach 1 without afterburners then it is not supercruise capable. It will cruise subsonic to be meet the requirements. Even the F-22 takes a massive range hit when supercruising compared to transiting subsonically this would be even worse for the Eurofighter.

Getting off topic a now. The Rafale, Gripen and F-35 sit right in the high drag transonic regime (Mach 1.1). It would be stupid to "supercruise" as you could simply cruise 20% slower (Mach 0.8) and get a 50% increase in range. Its not worth it for taking such a massive hit in range for such a small increase in speed. This is why these aircraft should never be classified as supercruising aircraft. The F-22 should be classified as a supercruising aircraft as it can fly twice as fast as Mach 0.8 yet its range is only approximately halved halved. If a Gripen, F-35, Rafale or Suhkoi were to travel at Mach 1.6 their range would be less than a quarter of their subsonic range. Now thats definitely not cruising.

I do admit that the Eurofighter is a border line supercruiser though.

Stealth is great but speed is still very important though. If an aircraft was extremely stealthy but could only transit at 200 knots it would not survive. However as the F-35 is just as quick as every other fighter except for the Eurofighter and F-22 then it has no problem here.

;142996]I am pretty sure you will not have enough speed to out run the missile which came from a invisible plane!
Actually in a tail chase an F-22 could hit Mach 2 within a few seconds making it extremely difficult for a medium range mission to hit. By reaching half the speed of the missile itself you effectively halving the range of the enemy missile.

[ASFC]

I know it is 0430 in the UK for me at the moment, but i'm sure there are only 2 Euro Delta designs available for purchase. :confused:

Apologies Atilla you were quite right there are three, I knew it was too early in the morning to post :dunce

[Atilla [TR]]

Apologies Atilla you were quite right there are three, I knew it was too early in the morning to post :dunce


That`s ok I have those moments as well. :D :D

[Atilla [TR]]

Maybe not now, but when tranch 3 comes out. around the time Greece will make the purchase, it will be a mature plattform.
and the advantage of JSF, technology wise, will be none existing.
im still suprised that lockheed martin with a budget of over 300 bill usd. can´t achive something better.



Just curious, but how do you know? Do you know the exact RCS on the F-35? Well then you must work for Lockheed martin! On top of that Eurofighter Tranche 3 has not even come out yet, only people who work for Eurofighter would know what the Tranche 3 is going to have! So you must work for both Eurofighter and Lockheed Martin well i strongly doubt that.

[swerve]

..
If an aircraft had a huge amount of fuel then it could be classified as cruising regardless of the fact that afterburners are used. Its only in fighter aircraft where fuel capacity limits afterburners to mere minutes of usage. This is why a generic fighter definition of crusing meant no afterburners. ....

There is also the question of the efficiency of the afterburning engine. The SR-71, XB-70, MiG-25 & MiG-31 were designed to be relatively efficient with afterburners, as well as having large fuel loads, enabling sustained high speeds. They "cruised" (& the MiG-31 still does) supersonically in afterburner. The term supercruise was used for this phenomenon, in the days before the quasi-religious idea that any use of afterburner sullied the purity of supercruise. The term was used in a purely functional way. Could the aircraft sustain supersonic speed? If so, then it was cruising supersonically, & therefore supercruising. Whether afterburner had been used to get through the high-drag transonic zone (it can actually be more efficient to do so in some cases, a quick burst of burner to accelerate quickly using less fuel than more gradually acceleration through the transonic zone at peak dry thrust), or whether it cruised with afterburners, didn't affect that.

[Feanor]

So is it correct to call those aircraft supercruise capable? Or will I be torn to pieces by a mob of religious F-22 fanatics? :)

[rjmaz1]

Could the aircraft sustain supersonic speed? If so, then it was cruising supersonically, & therefore supercruising.

Every aircraft that ever broke the sound barrier using afterburners would then be classified as a supercruising aircraft. They could sustain supersonic speed. Sure it might only be 50 miles, 100miles or 1000 miles, but where do you draw the line?

An SR-71 can fly further with afterburners than most aircraft can without afterburners. It is cruising at Mach 2+ as thats the speed it travels on a mission. Is that supercruising?

An unarmed F-111 can travel at mach 1.6 approximately the same distance that an F-22 can, however the F-22 doesn't require afterburners. Does the F-111 have supercruise then?
So is it correct to call those aircraft supercruise capable? Or will I be torn to pieces by a mob of religious F-22 fanatics? :)
Draw the line where you want.

However if you do draw a line prepare to be critisied by the mobs of Eurofighter, Gripen and F-22 fanatics.

If you draw the line of any aircraft that can sustain Mach 1+ with or without afterburners then you have hundreds of aircraft types that can supercruise. So it would be incorrect to draw the line here.

However if you draw a line where an aircraft supercruising has a range no less than half of its most effecient cruising speed then that only leaves one combat aircraft above that line.

[swerve]

Every aircraft that ever broke the sound barrier using afterburners would then be classified as a supercruising aircraft. They could sustain supersonic speed. Sure it might only be 50 miles, 100miles or 1000 miles, but where do you draw the line?

As you say, it's all a question of where you draw the line. There is no absolute answer.


Draw the line where you want.

However if you do draw a line prepare to be critisied by the mobs of Eurofighter, Gripen and F-22 fanatics.

And if you draw a line which differs from the One and Only Eternally (since ca. 2005) True and Holy Line, As Decreed by the Most Revered Lockheed Martin, be prepared to be torn to pieces for your heresy by the mobs of F-22 fanatics. :D

C'mon, just accept that there isn't One True Number.

[rjmaz1]

C'mon, just accept that there isn't One True Number.
You must accept that there is not one level of supercruise. There are many levels, each with difference degrees of value.

The 4th generation aircraft producers are trying to market their aircraft in a way so that potential buyers associate their speeds with that of the F-22. Saab is effectively trying to cash in on the "supercruise" buzzword that was unheard of until the F-22 was created. Its original intent was to highlight the speed advantage that the F-22 has over every other fighter. Saab is effectively lowering the definition to a level that most 3rd and 4th generation fighters can reach.

The uneducated reader on here may see the words "supercruise" in a thread for the Rafale, Gripen, Eurofighter or even a future Suhkoi. They will then associate it with the speed of the F-22 where the term for the last 5 years has been associated with. This is false and i will continue to post in every thread with the goal of pointing out that they aren't even in the same class. Aircraft like the Gripen should not be associated with the word Supercruise in any shape or form. We never used the term previously on other aircraft with equal performance to the Gripen.

[swerve]

You must accept that there is not one level of supercruise. There are many levels, each with difference degrees of value.

I've been arguing that for a few years, against the quasi-religious fervour of the F-22ists, who constantly repeat their mantra "Only the F-22 supercruises!".

1. The term supercruise is merely a shortening of supersonic cruise, a term which was around long before the F-22. I don't know how old you are, but I'm old enough to remember it being used about Concorde, when it entered service, & it was neither a new term, nor a new concept, at the time. The USAF previously used it about the (afterburning) SR-71, for example. The shortened form "supercruise" wasn't the voguish term it now is, but was used back then. It wasn't invented for the F-22.

2. In case you haven't noticed, Saab recently (last month, at the Gripen Demo roll-out) said about the JAS-39C that it might supercruise "only on a cold day in Sweden". That's been quoted on this forum, & you should easily be able to find the original. I've never seen supercruise touted as one of the selling points of the Gripen. Can you show me where you've seen this done, by Saab.

[rjmaz1]

I've been arguing that for a few years, against the quasi-religious fervour of the F-22ists, who constantly repeat their mantra "Only the F-22 supercruises!".
Out of curiosity where do you draw the line?

Or are you of the belief that you can draw the line anywhere or that you shouldn't draw a line at all?

Im arguing the same argument but at the other end of the scale. Too many aircraft are desperately trying to obtain the "supercruise" label. It may not be the manufacturers directly but fan clubs of the aircraft.

You may dislike that the F-22 fan club is pegging the scale too high to make the F-22 the only supercruising combat aircraft. I however, dislike if someone pegs the scale too low so that aircraft not representative of its combat configuration can be labeled as a supercruising aircraft.

At least we both agree the scale can be pegged anywhere between these two extremes and that its unwise to even draw a line at all. :)


Can you show me where you've seen this done, by Saab.
"With an output of over 22,000lb (98kN), the F414G (below) produces 20% more thrust than the Gripen's current Volvo Aero RM12 powerplant, and will enable supercruise performance of Mach 1.1 with air-to-air weapons, says marketing director Magnus Lewis-Olsson. Ground testing up to full afterburner use has been completed, and aircraft integration took place in March."

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2008/04/25/223299/saabs-demo-aircraft-to-highlight-gripen-ng-capabilities.html

[SlyDog]

Well...but if the future technological development make it easy to achieve what everybody today would call "supercruise" - did it mean that definition for "supercruise" have to change - so just a few types of aircraft can "achieve" it?

On the other hand, 1.1 Mach (as SAAB stated) are maybe a bit low to call "supercruise". But at least they gave a "figure" (1.1 Mach).

[Feanor]

So can we all agree that supercruise is the ability to cruise at supersonic speed (above Mach 1) within it's mission profile?

[JohanGrön]

"With an output of over 22,000lb (98kN), the F414G (below) produces 20% more thrust than the Gripen's current Volvo Aero RM12 powerplant, and will enable supercruise performance of Mach 1.1 with air-to-air weapons, says marketing director Magnus Lewis-Olsson. Ground testing up to full afterburner use has been completed, and aircraft integration took place in March."

Now you're not comparing with the current Gripen 39 C/D! The stats above is for the Gripen 39 NG with the F414G powerplant :p:

[swerve]

Out of curiosity where do you draw the line?

Or are you of the belief that you can draw the line anywhere or that you shouldn't draw a line at all?

Im arguing the same argument but at the other end of the scale. Too many aircraft are desperately trying to obtain the "supercruise" label. It may not be the manufacturers directly but fan clubs of the aircraft.

You may dislike that the F-22 fan club is pegging the scale too high to make the F-22 the only supercruising combat aircraft. I however, dislike if someone pegs the scale too low so that aircraft not representative of its combat configuration can be labeled as a supercruising aircraft.

At least we both agree the scale can be pegged anywhere between these two extremes and that its unwise to even draw a line at all. :)


Yep, more or less my position. I don't think you can draw a line, only establish a roughly-defined area of transition. My preferred definition of supercruise is that it's supersonic cruise (i.e. exactly what it says on the tin), however achieved. The ability to sustain supersonic speed long enough for it to be considered cruising. That's a fuzzy definition, but the only problem I see with that is the people who demand precise numbers, e.g. how long is long enough. I don't care how that supersonic speed is achieved, & how an aircraft gets to it. E.g. anyone who says "Concorde wasn't supercruising when it flew at Mach 2 for 2500 miles on dry thrust, because it used afterburner to accelerate through M1, & it's only supercruise if you never switch on your afterburners". That sort of idiocy is what makes me call some of the F-22 fans quasi-religious. In a different context, they'd argue about angels & pins.

I object to the F-22 fan club because its definition is derived from what the F-22 can do, and has changed over time to exclude other aircraft which have demonstrated the ability to meet the definition as it was. That is crudely, blatantly dishonest. Their behaviour offends me, & I cannot accept the validity of any definition which has been arrived at through such intellectually dishonest means. If they used a generally accepted pre-existing definition, & fortuitously only the F-22 met it, I wouldn't complain.


"With an output of over 22,000lb (98kN), the F414G (below) produces 20% more thrust than the Gripen's current Volvo Aero RM12 powerplant, and will enable supercruise performance of Mach 1.1 with air-to-air weapons, says marketing director Magnus Lewis-Olsson. Ground testing up to full afterburner use has been completed, and aircraft integration took place in March."

Gripen NG, not current Gripen. Future capability. BTW, GD pointed out elsewhere that Gripen should have a narrow transonic "hump", because of its shape, which points up the vaguenes in the definition of supersonic flight. Different aircraft have different upper limits to the transonic zone. Aircraft A could be flying faster than B, but A could be solidly in the transonic high drag zone & burning fuel like mad, & B far enough out of it to be cruising, to be able to sustain its speed comfortably. The quasi-religious lot demand absolute purity, complete supersonic airflow over the entire airframe, regardless of functional criteria.

[Vivendi]

According to a recent posting at keyforum, it seems the Greek Defence Minister has said in an interview that they now have a short list consisting of F-16, SH, and Typhoon. Rafale did not make it to the short list according to this report.

There was a link: http://www.defencenet.gr/defence/index.php however my Greek is not that good...

Could anybody from Greece confirm this report?

If true, it is rather interesting that Rafale again has lost -- OTOH perhaps not entirely surprising. I may be wrong but my understanding was that Greece is looking for a multirole but with main focus on the a2a role and for that the Rafale may not be the strongest.

My guess would be F-16 or SH would be the most likely choice -- although many claim the Typhoon is stronger a2a than at least the F-16, the Typhoon is probably too expensive.


Comments from the experts?


V

[eliaslar]

You are right Vivendi, according to Greek media, yesterday there were some announcements made from the defense minister. From those announcements it seems that Rafale didn't make it to be in the short list, which now includes F-16 (maybe a version with AESA radar and new engine if it is possible), the F/A-18E/F Super hornet and the Eurofighter.

Most analysts here in Greece agree that great role in the final decision, about the new fighter, will play the upcoming meeting that Greek Prime Minister will have with President Obama, maybe in 2-3 months. If the US change their stance and start supporting the Greek positions in certain matters, then i'm sure the new fighter will go to US companies.

About the Rafale case, i would like to see it in service in Greek colors. But because it is politics after all and there is a big pie to share, from that pie the French side took the new frigate program with the 6 FREMM and the 15 new Super Puma SAR helicopters. Also Greece is a member of the Neuron UCAV consortium, which also is a French program. So i don't think it would be fair if the French took the Rafale also.

[harryriedl]

You are right Vivendi, according to Greek media, yesterday there were some announcements made from the defense minister. From those announcements it seems that Rafale didn't make it to be in the short list, which now includes F-16 (maybe a version with AESA radar and new engine if it is possible), the F/A-18E/F Super hornet and the Eurofighter.

Most analysts here in Greece agree that great role in the final decision, about the new fighter, will play the upcoming meeting that Greek Prime Minister will have with President Obama, maybe in 2-3 months. If the US change their stance and start supporting the Greek positions in certain matters, then i'm sure the new fighter will go to US companies.

About the Rafale case, i would like to see it in service in Greek colors. But because it is politics after all and there is a big pie to share, from that pie the French side took the new frigate program with the 6 FREMM and the 15 new Super Puma SAR helicopters. Also Greece is a member of the Neuron UCAV consortium, which also is a French program. So i don't think it would be fair if the French took the Rafale also.
It not a failure for the French gov but is for dassult through as its another failure to export the Rafale which is deeply troubling

[falcon7x]

According to a recent posting at keyforum, it seems the Greek Defence Minister has said in an interview that they now have a short list consisting of F-16, SH, and Typhoon. Rafale did not make it to the short list according to this report.

There was a link: http://www.defencenet.gr/defence/index.php however my Greek is not that good...

Could anybody from Greece confirm this report?

If true, it is rather interesting that Rafale again has lost -- OTOH perhaps not entirely surprising. I may be wrong but my understanding was that Greece is looking for a multirole but with main focus on the a2a role and for that the Rafale may not be the strongest.

My guess would be F-16 or SH would be the most likely choice -- although many claim the Typhoon is stronger a2a than at least the F-16, the Typhoon is probably too expensive.


Comments from the experts?


V

this article sounds strange, it looks like a misreading. it would be surprising that greece defense minister do such formal statement during this meeting. such decision would be inconsistent. If greece AF priority is a2a aircraft, ok eurofighter is in the lead but rafale is quite similar even he is supposed to be a bit less competitive but this remains to be proved. in any case he is better than F16 whatever the version, F18 super hornet and even more with gripen, so wait and see.

[wimpymouse]

You are right Vivendi, according to Greek media, yesterday there were some announcements made from the defense minister. From those announcements it seems that Rafale didn't make it to be in the short list, which now includes F-16 (maybe a version with AESA radar and new engine if it is possible), the F/A-18E/F Super hornet and the Eurofighter.

Most analysts here in Greece agree that great role in the final decision, about the new fighter, will play the upcoming meeting that Greek Prime Minister will have with President Obama, maybe in 2-3 months. If the US change their stance and start supporting the Greek positions in certain matters, then i'm sure the new fighter will go to US companies.

About the Rafale case, i would like to see it in service in Greek colors. But because it is politics after all and there is a big pie to share, from that pie the French side took the new frigate program with the 6 FREMM and the 15 new Super Puma SAR helicopters. Also Greece is a member of the Neuron UCAV consortium, which also is a French program. So i don't think it would be fair if the French took the Rafale also.

Anybody who can speculate why the Greeks would be looking at the SH and thus keeping 4 different platforms, istead of reducing them to three, now that the A7's are going out of service, by aquiring more F16's?

And what are the major perfomance differances are there between those new F16's (block +52's?), the SH, and the EF?


So will the FREMM's be with that Aster 15's and poor radar, or the Aster 30's and better radar? What definition will they have; AAW (what Greece really wanted) or multi use?

[eliaslar]

@wimpymouse
There is a different thread about the FREMM :)

What do you mean with "what are the major perfomance differances are there between those new F16's (block +52's?), the SH, and the EF?"

Maybe one of the reasons why the Rafale was rejected, if it is rejected, is because in some years the Mirage 2000's will need replacement and at about 2015 according to the HAF planing some 80 new fighters will be needed.

I don't think that the article is a misreading, but maybe it is a misunderstanding of what the minister said. An article in the reuters http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssIndustryMaterialsUtilitiesNews/idUSLM66288720090122
doesn't reject the Rafale but it rejects the Super Hornet...we have to wait and see what will happen and which is the official short list. We will have the winner of this tender soon, during 2009.

[Aussie Digger]

this article sounds strange, it looks like a misreading. it would be surprising that greece defense minister do such formal statement during this meeting. such decision would be inconsistent. If greece AF priority is a2a aircraft, ok eurofighter is in the lead but rafale is quite similar even he is supposed to be a bit less competitive but this remains to be proved. in any case he is better than F16 whatever the version, F18 super hornet and even more with gripen, so wait and see.

And why exactly is the Rafale better for Greece than any of the competing aircraft?

AESA radaar? No.

Towed airborne decoy? No.

USAF munitions and sensor compatibility? No.

Orphan aircraft system? Yes.

Aerodynamic performance equal to or greater than Eurofighter Typhoon? No.

Cost? No...

I'm having a hard time seeing it's advantages for Greece...

[wimpymouse]

@wimpymouse
There is a different thread about the FREMM :)

Cheers, I'll look in the naval forum then.



What do you mean with "what are the major perfomance differances are there between those new F16's (block +52's?), the SH, and the EF?"

I'm mean like those pros and cons that Aussie Digger in the post above mentioned, including thrust/weight ratio (and what not), between the various AC that you're looking at, in context that they have to perform well against Turkish F-35's. And how are the importance of these rated inbetween them?

And what type of models of the various competitors are you looking at (EF Trache 2 or 3, F-16 +52, etc)?

Lots of questions, I know...



Maybe one of the reasons why the Rafale was rejected, if it is rejected, is because in some years the Mirage 2000's will need replacement and at about 2015 according to the HAF planing some 80 new fighters will be needed.


But but but but you recently bought some 25 or so M2000-5's? But otherwise you're right, here's a chanse to slim down logistics.

Second thought, have the logistics by keeping 4 different platforms been any (outspoken) trouble for the HAF?

[eliaslar]

About the pros and cons Aussie Digger mentioned.

AESA radar : Yes from 2012, with export permission to Greece, according to Dassault. That also means that the French side offered the F4 configuration to Greece.

Towed decoy : Not yet, but i don't know how useful it is in dogfights above the aegean sea.

USAF weapons and sensors : HAF is always looking for something different than Turkish Air Force has and which is an operator of only USAF sensors and weapons, that's one of the reasons we have Mirage 2000 and F-16's :) Don't you think it is a tremendous advantage to have something your opponent doesn't have?

Orphan aircraft system? Yes (could you please explain me what you mean? :) ) If it means that France is the only country to operate the aircrafts, i would like to remind you that Greece ordered the Mirage F1 in 1974 just a year after it became operational in France. If this sounds stupid, it didn't proved stupid in the Mirage F1 case. Also we were one of the first countries which ordered the Mirage 2000 (1985), which also didn't proved so stupid.

Aerodynamic performance equal to or greater than Eurofighter Typhoon : Maybe but who really can prove that? Have the two aircrafts dogfighted? :)

Cost : that's something interesting, according to French side, if we choose the Rafale they will be built in Greek factories (eg. HAI), that means something beyond cost as money themselves, it means more jobs, more production and transfer of technology.

Unfortunately (for others) or...fortunately (for us) HAF has lots of useful French weapons, including some Scalp EG and some AM39 Exocet Block 2.
To tell you the truth i don't know if those weapons can be used from other than French aircrafts, but on the other hand if they could be used i would have known if a HAF F-16 bl 52+ could carry some.
Wouldn't it be ashame if we didn't have the way to use those weapons?

About the types of the competitors i am sure that we are looking for an even improved version of F-16 bl 52+ and the EF2000 tranch 3, if it comes into production.

About the logistics, if there was a real logistics problem i am sure this tender would have other options and candidates :)

[chris]

this article sounds strange, it looks like a misreading. it would be surprising that greece defense minister do such formal statement during this meeting. such decision would be inconsistent. If greece AF priority is a2a aircraft, ok eurofighter is in the lead but rafale is quite similar even he is supposed to be a bit less competitive but this remains to be proved. in any case he is better than F16 whatever the version, F18 super hornet and even more with gripen, so wait and see.

Let me try and answer that as well for clarity.
Greece needs a new fighter. Rafale was and still is in the competition.

Last year, France made a proposal for replacement of our M2000 fleet with rafales. That offer was outside the new fighter program. That is the offer the greek minister rejected, mainly because it referred only to our recently upgraded -5Mk2.

On the other hand, that offer was one of rafale's greater points. If you combine the new fighter purchase with a M2000->Rafale exchange, you have a very nice deal. Officially rejecting that offer, is probably a sign that the rafale is in a very week spot in that competition. Some say though, that it was just a bargaining move.

[METEORSWARM]

1) efa t1 and rafale in dogfight luftwafe comment:

"it is gratifying to know that the engines of the typhoon is better than the Rafale, our engines reach a much smaller time mach 2, but the radar of the Rafale is better than typhoon"

2)Meteor.Rafale can charge meteor missiles specifically designed to your system, it means that even if the meteor missile is different from the standard software and can not charge the other meteor missile platforms efa / Gripen.

[Sintra]

And why exactly is the Rafale better for Greece than any of the competing aircraft?

AESA radaar? No.

Towed airborne decoy? No.

USAF munitions and sensor compatibility? No.

Orphan aircraft system? Yes.

Aerodynamic performance equal to or greater than Eurofighter Typhoon? No.

Cost? No...

I'm having a hard time seeing it's advantages for Greece...

Actually, Dassault offered the RAFALE F3+ with an AESA to Greece. To Greece, Switzerland, Brasil and UAE.
And the HAF has an hawfull lot of french munitions in their inventory, from MBDA MICA´s to Exocet´s, that dont fit with a Typhoon or Viper.

[Aussie Digger]

About the pros and cons Aussie Digger mentioned.

AESA radar : Yes from 2012, with export permission to Greece, according to Dassault. That also means that the French side offered the F4 configuration to Greece.

Not that Dassault actually has an operational AESA radar, the first examples of the RBE2 are in LRIP, but are most definitely not operational.

The F4 standard is "yet" to be developed. Therefore any acquirer takes on significant risk in acquiring an orphan aircraft (an aircraft in a configuration NOT operated by any other Country).

The RBE2 AESA is also only intended for future Rafale examples. Even Dassault admits there is NO plan to equip existing French Rafale aircraft with this radar.

In my opinion, this shows that the radar has been developed specifically to improve the chances of Rafale success in markets where they are forced to compete against fighter variants with CURRENT operational AESA radar systems, (F-16 and F/A-18E/F variants and MiG-35's with new AESA's).

Hardly a risk free approach, IMHO...

Towed decoy : Not yet, but i don't know how useful it is in dogfights above the aegean sea.

Air Combat has been increasingly moving away from "dogfights" into the "Beyond Visual Range" since the development of long ranged radars and effective beyond visual ranged air to air weapons. Both Countries are equipped with AMRAAM missiles and Greece maintains Mica AAM's apparently too.

Both are effective BVR weapons and if you believe that Turkey and Greece would be forgoing the capability inherent in such weapons, I'd suggest you might want to read up a bit on ATA combat. NO pilot wants to get into a "knife fight" if it all possible.

On a non-LO airframe, an active towed decoy is rapidly becoming a MUST have item.

USAF weapons and sensors : HAF is always looking for something different than Turkish Air Force has and which is an operator of only USAF sensors and weapons, that's one of the reasons we have Mirage 2000 and F-16's :) Don't you think it is a tremendous advantage to have something your opponent doesn't have?

This could be done by choosing a Gripen or Typhoon combo with ASRAAM/IRIS-T and Meteor ATA combo too. Hence why I asked earlier what specific advantages Rafale has over these other fighters? Some weapons and sensor commonality with M2K fighters in existing inventory is about it as far as I can see and the M2K's will be replaced sooner or later...

As to wishing to differentiate itself from Turkey, the fact that the F-16, AMRAAM and AIM-9 Sidewinder combo is comprising (and attracting the newest existing orders) the bulk of the HAF air to air combat force, I don't really see this as a relevent question...

Is it an advantage? Perhaps depending on the efficacy of the differing platforms... Whichever platform HAF chooses, it will be differentiating itself from Turkey as Turkey is moving onto the F-35 VLO fighter. I would suggest HAF would be looking for a more potent ATA combo than it presently maintains in order to strategically counter such a move. I'm not sure the Rafale necessarily provides such a capability.

Personally I think HAF would be wise to look at the Eurofighter/ASRAAM/IRIS-T/Meteor combo and look at eventually replacing it's F-16's over time with the F-35 as well.

(could you please explain me what you mean? :) ) If it means that France is the only country to operate the aircrafts, i would like to remind you that Greece ordered the Mirage F1 in 1974 just a year after it became operational in France. If this sounds stupid, it didn't proved stupid in the Mirage F1 case. Also we were one of the first countries which ordered the Mirage 2000 (1985), which also didn't proved so stupid.

No, but other Countries subsequently ordered those aircraft and there was a significant support base to draw upon. Rafale is ONLY operated by France and in a significantly different configuration than that offered to the HAF. In a country that already maintains a significantly different fighter force, adding new types is going to be expensive, but worse if you operate an orphan. Eurofighter, F-16, Gripen or even F/A-18 Super Hornet if you wanted, offer significantly greater support bases.

Aerodynamic performance equal to or greater than Eurofighter Typhoon : Maybe but who really can prove that? Have the two aircrafts dogfighted? :)

They have on exercise and successes have been claimed on both sides. I don't think too many outside France, truly believe the Rafale is a better performing aircraft than the Eurofighter, however...

Cost : that's something interesting, according to French side, if we choose the Rafale they will be built in Greek factories (eg. HAI), that means something beyond cost as money themselves, it means more jobs, more production and transfer of technology.

Indeed, it means significantly MORE cost and for a build run of 30 or so aircraft (at least initially) I don't see this as a realistic prospect...

Unfortunately (for others) or...fortunately (for us) HAF has lots of useful French weapons, including some Scalp EG and some AM39 Exocet Block 2.
To tell you the truth i don't know if those weapons can be used from other than French aircrafts, but on the other hand if they could be used i would have known if a HAF F-16 bl 52+ could carry some.
Wouldn't it be ashame if we didn't have the way to use those weapons?

Another name for the Scalp EG is the Storm Shadow, a missile that is intended to be operated from the Eurofighter by the RAF and the Italian Air Force... However I have no doubt that if HAF wished, the missile could be relatively easily integrated on ANY modern fighter it chose to operate...

Exocet's eh? I'm pretty sure RAF Tornados can be armed with them too, meaning Eurofighter could if necessary...

About the types of the competitors i am sure that we are looking for an even improved version of F-16 bl 52+ and the EF2000 tranch 3, if it comes into production.

About the logistics, if there was a real logistics problem i am sure this tender would have other options and candidates :)


Perhaps, which is why I asked my initial questions...

[eliaslar]

First of all i have to admit that i am a pro rafale supporter for HAF, i think that's obvious :) My second choice would be the Eurofighter.

The majority of air "combats" over the Aegean end in a dogfight, no matter what the fighter pilots want (and i am sure all of them would like to end the "knife fight" situation using the BVR capabilities they have).

This happens because in the present situation when a Turkish aircraft, or...formation to be more exact, enters the Greek airspace and the Greek readiness squads or CAP's have to react the distances aren't so long, take a look in a map of Greece and the bases where the readiness squads are and where the RADARs are located and you'll see that the time to use your BVR capabilities isn't that big and eventually it ends up in a dogfight. Although a dogfight always depends on the intentions of the intruder. The defender just do what he has to do, right? :)

Just a statistic, in 2007 there were 207 dogfights over the Aegean and in 2008 there were 240, i think they are enough for two "allied" and "friendly" countries.

http://www.enet.gr/online/online_text/c=110,dt=16.01.2009,id=90839564 unfortunately the link is in Greek.

The above though doesn't mean that i neglect the BVR capabilities of an aircraft.

About the French offer to construct the aircrafts in Greece, i would like to remind that in 2015 there would be another tender for new fighters (if i remember right 80 aircrafts) so if the rafale is chosen now the final number to be constructed will be 110 or 120, enough i think for a production line.

The bulk of HAF air to air combat force is comprised from IRIS-T as well.

To integrate a missile into an aircraft which is not integrated, means...more money right and more...risk.Right? I haven't read somewhere that Eurofighter can be armed with Exocet missiles.

[swerve]

Another name for the Scalp EG is the Storm Shadow, a missile that is intended to be operated from the Eurofighter by the RAF and the Italian Air Force... However I have no doubt that if HAF wished, the missile could be relatively easily integrated on ANY modern fighter it chose to operate.....
Indeed. The UAE operates a range-limited version called Black Shahine. The only reason it has not been integrated onto the F-16E is that the USA refused permission. There was no technical problem. But that was the UAE - for a NATO ally, there should be no problem with permission to integrate Storm Shadow/Scalp EG on US fighters.

The similar German/Swedish Taurus KEPD-350 has been integrated onto Spanish F-18s.

[METEORSWARM]

Storm Shadow is one scalp stealth (100km+)for first day,open fisures in barrier radar enemy,bunkers,baterry misiles,etc,etc,etc combo(aircraft furtive/stealth + storm shadow).

taurus is one scalp (100km+)no stealth for second day:),very more low cost.

1 aircraft charge= 2 storm shadow/2 taurus or mix 1 storm/taurus

efa,gripen,f-35 can charge storm.rafale dont have infos.

[Aussie Digger]

First of all i have to admit that i am a pro rafale supporter for HAF, i think that's obvious :) My second choice would be the Eurofighter.

And there's nothing wrong with that. I however beg to differ for the reasons below. I believe the Eurofighter to be the BEST current choice available to the HAF. It certainly isn't the only one and aircraft acquisitions rarely ever come down to a simplistic view of the "best" aircraft...

The majority of air "combats" over the Aegean end in a dogfight, no matter what the fighter pilots want (and i am sure all of them would like to end the "knife fight" situation using the BVR capabilities they have).

I'm sure they do, however modern high "off-boresite" missiles, helmet mounted sights and superior situational awareness is more relevant than sheer aerodynamic performance for modern dogfighting situations and I (and most everyone else) believe the Eurofighter has superior aerodynamic performance over most current aircraft, with the exception of the F-22 and possibly the F-35 anyway...

IRIS-T is also integrated on the Eurofighter...

About the French offer to construct the aircrafts in Greece, i would like to remind that in 2015 there would be another tender for new fighters (if i remember right 80 aircrafts) so if the rafale is chosen now the final number to be constructed will be 110 or 120, enough i think for a production line.

Enough for an assembly line perhaps. Not an entire production line. I suspect that if Rafale were to be chosen, they'd be delivered in "knock down kit" form and assembled in Greece, but manufactured in France...

The bulk of HAF air to air combat force is comprised from IRIS-T as well.

A plus for Eurofighter...

To integrate a missile into an aircraft which is not integrated, means...more money right and more...risk.Right? I haven't read somewhere that Eurofighter can be armed with Exocet missiles.

Indeed it does. However an aircraft acquisition is unlikely to be decided on the basis of whether one single weapon system is currently integrated onto a platform or not. There is not one reason why Exocet couldn't be integrated onto the Eurofighter or Gripen that I am aware of. Would additional expense be incurred? Perhaps.

Perhaps Exocet won't even be used by the time this aircraft is in-service anyway. HAF has Scalp EG and AGM-154 JSOW (on order) as standoff weapon options. Both weapons will be provided with maritime attack capability in due course...

[eliaslar]

Eurofighter was chosen from HAF in 2003-2004 to be it's future aircraft. At that time the number of aircrafts in need was 90 planes and everything looked that Eurofighter would be HAF's next generation aircraft.

That time, if the aircraft was chosen, there was the offer to Greece to be a partner in the program with a percentage in the co-production of the aircraft, if it was chosen.

Unfortunately, this didn't go any further because of the Olympic Games in Athens in 2004 and the cost the had. It wasn't feasible for the Greek economy to make both things happen. So the governments which followed chose the most economic, if we can say so, F-16 Block 52+ Advanced.

About the Rafale production or assembly line, the Rafale site says Taking advantage of their experience with the Mirage 2000-5 programme, Rafale International offers to major Hellenic defence companies as Hellenic Aerospace Industry and others, as well as to small and medium enterprises, an ambitious industrial package based on high value technology exchanges and equal partnership for development and co-production of one of the most modern fighter in the world, thus, leading to the creation of a substantial number of jobs.

http://www.dassault-aviation.com/en/aviation/press/press-kits/2008/rafale-international-moves-a-step-forward-in-greece-by-reinforcing-its-presence-in-athens.html?L=1&cHash=8328870e9f

The latest news in Greek defence media about this phrase, confirm that Greece would be an equal partner in Rafale with a 50% production for every plane that would be sold in the world. Isn't that tempting?

The fact is that whichever be the winner of the tender, the pros are obvious.

[Vivendi]

My understanding was that the main challenge facing Greece is the situation with Turkey. Is this still correct?

Turkey is a bigger country, has more resources. AND they are getting F-35. A hundred of them.

In my mind, this means that it does not matter much whether Greece buys SH, Rafale or Typhoon -- I believe none of those will be a match for F-35.

Therefore I suggest that Greece should buy more F-16 as a stop-gap, until they can obtain their own F-35s. They are already familiar with the F-16. If they can get the latest upgrades and an AESA it is a pretty good plane. And Greece should lobby President Obama very hard to obtain those F-35s as soon as possible. Presumably it will not be in the interest of the US that the situation between Turkey and Greece de-stabilises.

Or can Turkey as an F-35 partner block the sales to Greece? In that case, I think Greece will find itself in a difficult situation. The F-35s can operate in the vicinity of the Greek double-digit SAMs, and they can also establish air superiority quite easily, no matter which 4.5 gen jet Greece decides to buy.


V

[chris]

My understanding was that the main challenge facing Greece is the situation with Turkey. Is this still correct?

Turkey is a bigger country, has more resources. AND they are getting F-35. A hundred of them.

In my mind, this means that it does not matter much whether Greece buys SH, Rafale or Typhoon -- I believe none of those will be a match for F-35.

Therefore I suggest that Greece should buy more F-16 as a stop-gap, until they can obtain their own F-35s. They are already familiar with the F-16. If they can get the latest upgrades and an AESA it is a pretty good plane. And Greece should lobby President Obama very hard to obtain those F-35s as soon as possible. Presumably it will not be in the interest of the US that the situation between Turkey and Greece de-stabilises.

Or can Turkey as an F-35 partner block the sales to Greece? In that case, I think Greece will find itself in a difficult situation. The F-35s can operate in the vicinity of the Greek double-digit SAMs, and they can also establish air superiority quite easily, no matter which 4.5 gen jet Greece decides to buy.


V

The only problem with that idea, is that it makes US the only supplier of HAF (with the exception of the 25 M2000 -5Mk2). This is very important if your adversary is their ally as well. For US, US interests come first. If Greece losing a war is in their interest, they could easily ground our whole air force. This is why we usually diversify our sources.

[Scourge]

The best thing Greece can do now is getting 12-16 F-16s (completing another squadron and making up for attrition loses) and upgrading the older ones to a common configuration.

Or can Turkey as an F-35 partner block the sales to Greece? In that case, I think Greece will find itself in a difficult situation.


I don't think Turkey has the right to do this. Even if there is a possibility, I don't think the US would accept it. This could seriously harm our relations.

[wimpymouse]

Indeed. The UAE operates a range-limited version called Black Shahine. The only reason it has not been integrated onto the F-16E is that the USA refused permission. There was no technical problem. But that was the UAE - for a NATO ally, there should be no problem with permission to integrate Storm Shadow/Scalp EG on US fighters.

The similar German/Swedish Taurus KEPD-350 has been integrated onto Spanish F-18s.

If I'm not mistaken, the US has a history of blocking/not going with Greece's wishes.



Eurofighter was chosen from HAF in 2003-2004 to be it's future aircraft. At that time the number of aircrafts in need was 90 planes and everything looked that Eurofighter would be HAF's next generation aircraft.

That time, if the aircraft was chosen, there was the offer to Greece to be a partner in the program with a percentage in the co-production of the aircraft, if it was chosen.

Unfortunately, this didn't go any further because of the Olympic Games in Athens in 2004 and the cost the had. It wasn't feasible for the Greek economy to make both things happen. So the governments which followed chose the most economic, if we can say so, F-16 Block 52+ Advanced.

About the Rafale production or assembly line, the Rafale site says

http://www.dassault-aviation.com/en/aviation/press/press-kits/2008/rafale-international-moves-a-step-forward-in-greece-by-reinforcing-its-presence-in-athens.html?L=1&cHash=8328870e9f

The latest news in Greek defence media about this phrase, confirm that Greece would be an equal partner in Rafale with a 50% production for every plane that would be sold in the world. Isn't that tempting?

The fact is that whichever be the winner of the tender, the pros are obvious.

I've read that Greece has like the second, or so, highest % of university attendants/per capita, but still a very high unemployment (maybe that's why so many study?). High tech jobs sure must be greatly needed there..

If you speculate, what if France had offered to swop all M-2000, and not only the -5 models, for Rafales, would Greece go for that?



My understanding was that the main challenge facing Greece is the situation with Turkey. Is this still correct?

Turkey is a bigger country, has more resources. AND they are getting F-35. A hundred of them.

In my mind, this means that it does not matter much whether Greece buys SH, Rafale or Typhoon -- I believe none of those will be a match for F-35.

Therefore I suggest that Greece should buy more F-16 as a stop-gap, until they can obtain their own F-35s. They are already familiar with the F-16. If they can get the latest upgrades and an AESA it is a pretty good plane. And Greece should lobby President Obama very hard to obtain those F-35s as soon as possible. Presumably it will not be in the interest of the US that the situation between Turkey and Greece de-stabilises.

Or can Turkey as an F-35 partner block the sales to Greece? In that case, I think Greece will find itself in a difficult situation. The F-35s can operate in the vicinity of the Greek double-digit SAMs, and they can also establish air superiority quite easily, no matter which 4.5 gen jet Greece decides to buy.


V

That would probably be the cheepest thing to do, however it may go against Greece's policy to divert their orders to various countries out of political reasons.


The US is an empire, and those have always conquered and ruled by deviding their enemy into factions (great example of that is hot sh*t right now in Palestine BTW, as various players try to leave out Hamas from taking any part in stuff). And as for relevant historical fact (correct me if I'm wrong), when the US first sold AMRAAM's to Turkey, Greece was denied out of the very reason that it would "destabilize" the region.

[Vivendi]

The US is an empire, and those have always conquered and ruled by deviding their enemy into factions (great example of that is hot sh*t right now in Palestine BTW, as various players try to leave out Hamas from taking any part in stuff). And as for relevant historical fact (correct me if I'm wrong), when the US first sold AMRAAM's to Turkey, Greece was denied out of the very reason that it would "destabilize" the region.

Are you suggesting that the US is considering Turkey and Greece to be enemies of the US? Or did I mis-interpret?

Although the US may consider the relationship with Turkey a "special" one, both Greece and Turkey are after all NATO members and therefore considered allies of the US. The US therefore does not want military conflict between Greece and Turkey.

As you wrote above, the US is probably going to carefully consider moves that can destabilize the region. My point is that Turkey getting 100 F-35 would probably be destabilizing, given the leap in offensive and (and defencive) capabilities this would provide. The Greek S-300 would no longer pose a serious threat to the Turkish air force, neither would the Greek AF pose a threat to the Turkish AF, no matter what planes Greece would choose to buy (other than F-35).

That's how big the gap in technology is between F-35 and all 4.5 gen planes, including SH and Typhoon.

Of course there could be alternatives for Greece -- perhaps they can strengthen other parts of their military (e.g., UCAVs, long-range missiles, more subs) to make sure that they will have a credible deterrent. However missile bases would of course be a relatively easy target for Turkish F-35s. And buying a lot of equipment in an effort to "balance" the loss of air superiority would become expensive.

My guess is that the US will consider the military balance in the region and either let Greece buy F-35, or give them an advantage in another way, to compensate for the Turkish superiority in the air that we will witness once the Turkish F-35s becomes operational. At least that's what I think the US ought to do.



V

[greg68]

Not even close to being funny and just a lame attempt at flame baiting.
That report was proven to be bogus, if you'd do a search on this forum you'd find that.

[macman]

Think you're overestimating the F-35 here...

If Greece doesn't go for the F-35 themselves to keep strict parity, then they can look to seriously upgrade their radar capabilities with the likes of Nebo 3D UHF AESA radars or similar, as well as larger radar such as Green Pine, etc., & upgrade their air-defence systems further..

Add some fast modern fighters with solid datalinking & a good ECM suite (ie. a squadron or two of Eurofighters), as well as further upgrades or their regular fleet, good mix of cruise missiles...


Won't have the offensive punch of the Turks, but they will be enough to cause serious damage as well as protecting their own airspace, while being a lot cheaper than the F-35's.

If they feel the need later down the track when the money situation improves, the Russian/Indian FGFA variation will undoubtedly be for sale.


The F-35 will probably not be in service in Turkey until 2017 or later (ie. all planes delivered & in operation) which give the Greeks plenty of time to look at options.
As money is pretty tight for the Greeks at the moment, imagine they will be taking their time..

[Vivendi]

Think you're overestimating the F-35 here...

If Greece doesn't go for the F-35 themselves to keep strict parity, then they can look to seriously upgrade their radar capabilities with the likes of Nebo 3D UHF AESA radars or similar, as well as larger radar such as Green Pine, etc., & upgrade their air-defence systems further..

Add some fast modern fighters with solid datalinking & a good ECM suite (ie. a squadron or two of Eurofighters), as well as further upgrades or their regular fleet, good mix of cruise missiles...


Won't have the offensive punch of the Turks, but they will be enough to cause serious damage as well as protecting their own airspace, while being a lot cheaper than the F-35's.

If they feel the need later down the track when the money situation improves, the Russian/Indian FGFA variation will undoubtedly be for sale.


The F-35 will probably not be in service in Turkey until 2017 or later (ie. all planes delivered & in operation) which give the Greeks plenty of time to look at options.
As money is pretty tight for the Greeks at the moment, imagine they will be taking their time..
The Norwegian evaluation committe looked at several scenarios; the F-35 passed all with flying colors, a 4.5 gen jet (Gripen NG) did not. The gap between the two was surprisingly large according to the evaluation committee. Details are lacking however some information has leaked, in particular: F-35 will be capable of operating in the vicinity of double-digit SAMs relying on passive stealth only; F-35 will be capable of engaging and winning a2a fights with a future (as of today imaginary) 5. gen PAK FA relying on passive stealth only.

I am sorry but I don't see any technologies in the immediate future that will be able to handle the F-35 adequately. Good for Norway and Turkey, not good for countries facing an opponent with the system.

Some radars may be able to detect the F-35 at a distance but that's not good enough; you also need to track it, and be able to fire a missile that can hit it. That's the tricky part.

In addition to VLO, the F-35 also has other advantages, in particular sensors that will be much more advanced and with a longer range than anything else out there; 360 degrees EO coverage (the EO DAS system), world class EWS, etc. The F-35 will be able to detect potential threats and decide to engage or evade long before the potential threat is capable of engaging the F-35.

Of course it is neither invisible nor invincible. However I do assume that Turkey will put the F-35 into a complete system, and develop tactics that use the advantages of the F-35 to the fullest. If they do, it will be a very difficult system to beat. Unless you got something at a similar level. UCAVs would certainly help, however they are not there yet.

You also misjudge the costs involved; the F-35 will be cheaper than any 4.5 gen jet, including the SH and Gripen NG. The only issue with the F-35 today is that of availability...:)

V

[wimpymouse]

Are you suggesting that the US is considering Turkey and Greece to be enemies of the US? Or did I mis-interpret?

Although the US may consider the relationship with Turkey a "special" one, both Greece and Turkey are after all NATO members and therefore considered allies of the US. The US therefore does not want military conflict between Greece and Turkey.

As you wrote above, the US is probably going to carefully consider moves that can destabilize the region. My point is that Turkey getting 100 F-35 would probably be destabilizing, given the leap in offensive and (and defencive) capabilities this would provide. The Greek S-300 would no longer pose a serious threat to the Turkish air force, neither would the Greek AF pose a threat to the Turkish AF, no matter what planes Greece would choose to buy (other than F-35).

That's how big the gap in technology is between F-35 and all 4.5 gen planes, including SH and Typhoon.

Of course there could be alternatives for Greece -- perhaps they can strengthen other parts of their military (e.g., UCAVs, long-range missiles, more subs) to make sure that they will have a credible deterrent. However missile bases would of course be a relatively easy target for Turkish F-35s. And buying a lot of equipment in an effort to "balance" the loss of air superiority would become expensive.

My guess is that the US will consider the military balance in the region and either let Greece buy F-35, or give them an advantage in another way, to compensate for the Turkish superiority in the air that we will witness once the Turkish F-35s becomes operational. At least that's what I think the US ought to do.



V

No you didn't misinterpret me, I wrote that at a very late hour and failed to give a complete thought on the matter. The way the US has handled the Greco-Turkish issue over the years resembles (naturally to a much lesser extent) with the old technique of "divide and conquer", or rather, and in your case, "divide et impera".

In the book "Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II" William Blum explains, in chapters 3 and 35, very well documented how the US dealt with Greece in a similar manor. The word "ally" is the last thing that comes to your mind.

http://www.killinghope.org/

I know, lovely site, not a penny spared on commercial apearance. :D
But if I was to recomend one single book to people with interests as such you guys in this forum have, it would be that. Specially the chapter 5, Korea. It will make you realize that the winner does indeed write the history, still today.


The US might not want a military conflict between them, but they sure keep the tention up, and they surely will continue to sell them arms (even F-35, but maybe not too soon or as well equiped [to judge from the past]). :dollarrain:




The Norwegian evaluation committe looked at several scenarios; the F-35 passed all with flying colors, a 4.5 gen jet (Gripen NG) did not. The gap between the two was surprisingly large according to the evaluation committee. Details are lacking however some information has leaked, in particular: F-35 will be capable of operating in the vicinity of double-digit SAMs relying on passive stealth only; F-35 will be capable of engaging and winning a2a fights with a future (as of today imaginary) 5. gen PAK FA relying on passive stealth only.

I am sorry but I don't see any technologies in the immediate future that will be able to handle the F-35 adequately. Good for Norway and Turkey, not good for countries facing an opponent with the system.

Some radars may be able to detect the F-35 at a distance but that's not good enough; you also need to track it, and be able to fire a missile that can hit it. That's the tricky part.

In addition to VLO, the F-35 also has other advantages, in particular sensors that will be much more advanced and with a longer range than anything else out there; 360 degrees EO coverage (the EO DAS system), world class EWS, etc. The F-35 will be able to detect potential threats and decide to engage or evade long before the potential threat is capable of engaging the F-35.

Of course it is neither invisible nor invincible. However I do assume that Turkey will put the F-35 into a complete system, and develop tactics that use the advantages of the F-35 to the fullest. If they do, it will be a very difficult system to beat. Unless you got something at a similar level. UCAVs would certainly help, however they are not there yet.

You also misjudge the costs involved; the F-35 will be cheaper than any 4.5 gen jet, including the SH and Gripen NG. The only issue with the F-35 today is that of availability...:)

V

Marketing is a phenomena.

[wimpymouse]

First of all i have to admit that i am a pro rafale supporter for HAF, i think that's obvious :) My second choice would be the Eurofighter.

The majority of air "combats" over the Aegean end in a dogfight, no matter what the fighter pilots want (and i am sure all of them would like to end the "knife fight" situation using the BVR capabilities they have).

This happens because in the present situation when a Turkish aircraft, or...formation to be more exact, enters the Greek airspace and the Greek readiness squads or CAP's have to react the distances aren't so long, take a look in a map of Greece and the bases where the readiness squads are and where the RADARs are located and you'll see that the time to use your BVR capabilities isn't that big and eventually it ends up in a dogfight. Although a dogfight always depends on the intentions of the intruder. The defender just do what he has to do, right? :)

Just a statistic, in 2007 there were 207 dogfights over the Aegean and in 2008 there were 240, i think they are enough for two "allied" and "friendly" countries.

http://www.enet.gr/online/online_text/c=110,dt=16.01.2009,id=90839564 unfortunately the link is in Greek.

The above though doesn't mean that i neglect the BVR capabilities of an aircraft.

About the French offer to construct the aircrafts in Greece, i would like to remind that in 2015 there would be another tender for new fighters (if i remember right 80 aircrafts) so if the rafale is chosen now the final number to be constructed will be 110 or 120, enough i think for a production line.

The bulk of HAF air to air combat force is comprised from IRIS-T as well.

To integrate a missile into an aircraft which is not integrated, means...more money right and more...risk.Right? I haven't read somewhere that Eurofighter can be armed with Exocet missiles.




I use google translations (it ends up semi understandable).

The generals don't see any crisis

Giorgos TSAKIRI

Uneasy and puzzled monitor what is done or not done, but allowed to leak to the media that were in the Aegean recently officials and officers of the Ministry of National Defense.

For one month, has created a climate of crisis in the Aegean, crisis can become a new Imia minute by minute, with the Greek Armed Forces in increased alertness and other side generals determined to «conquer» Agathonisi in the context of , for decades, but their claims to the region.

Crisis «giok» for the military. «It may be something else that still have not identified, but there is no crisis» Our sources say the Ministry of Defense and justifying: «military crisis means diversifying data yesterday, the day before yesterday, a week ago, but last year and before. It misled military movements, movements of forces, support units, except the usual regular exercises and especially the top tier and, finally, data obtained at least not today ».

At any time

According to the same sources, the data are analyzed and in no way lead to an imminent crisis, as always accept that nothing will change, and given that a military crisis or communicated in words and acts clearly not prepared to give the adversary the opportunity to prepare. Crisis in the Aegean officers can happen at any time. There are, however, neither the precursor of yperptiseis or violations in the air and sea. This course, as they said, does not mean that the violations, breaches and violations yperptiseis territorial waters should be left without response, but this is totally different from what military means crisis or tension.

Commenting on the climate created in recent times, the generals insisted that crisis is only verbal and especially in the losses to the Greek media, including those in Turkey this time have not dealt with either a line at what is happening in the Aegean. The uniformed acknowledging that the information is not a fiction of journalists, but left some information to leak, argued that:

Offenses, and violations were yperptiseis in 1974 after almost daily. The numerical difference infringements Turkish fighter in the Greek FIR last year and before that was only 180 and only one (1) violations of Greek airspace. In 2007 we had 868 violations against 688 in 2008 and recorded 1,289 violations of Greek airspace in 2007 versus 1,288 in 2008. Also in December of 2008 were 6 fewer violations than the previous year. Thus the volatile activity of the Turkish Air Force does not show great diversity. Particularly for yperptiseis: according to the same figures in 2007 were recorded over 48 yperptiseis Greek islands, while in 2008 almost half, just 25. Reduction in 2008 and had reinforced the Turkish aircraft were involved in breaches and violations. According to the data, 2007 were 464 armed formations to enter the Greek area of responsibility, and in 2008 fell to 339 formations.

What makes the so-called quality differentiation, the expression used by the National Defense Minister Vangelis Meimarakis statements during the day before yesterday at the Greek-Turkish, is that the Turkish fighters, according to the data, have hardened their regular, which means that the interceptions from the Greek leave but prefer not to engage in a virtual dog. In 2007 during the 207 interceptions were made jams, and the following year was 240. The second difference is the number of aircraft made by violations and abuses. In 2007 the Turkish aviation placed in the Aegean in the Greek airspace 2,780 fighters, and last year the number increased to 3,041 aircraft. Finally, there is diversification in practice in recent days regarding the yperptiseis more than Agathonisi and Farmakonisi. The Turkish aviation perform movements bombing on the island by bombing aircraft accompanied by support aircraft, as they would if they were real.

About maritime activity in Turkey in the Aegean, Navy sources said that there is tension. The exercises are scheduled in Turkey without something different that would reflect. Serious violations of rules are not by Turkish warships and in no case so far we have registered challenges by Turkey. Even the presence of the Turkish frigate Sounion not be described as escalating tension, but not be passed unnoticed. It is a challenging sailing a war and thus should be considered and evaluated along with all other data.

The difference

What makes the difference, according to officials of the Ministry of Defense, and is a serious distinction from last year and before that is the fact that the latest search and rescue was in the area between Agathonisi and Farmakonisiou was Turkish intervention radar operator reported to the International frequency that they are Turkish airspace and the Greek helicopter should be removed otherwise it will halt.

In response to question why impressions created tension in the Aegean from the information allowed to leak, the officials refrained from replying. Some have said only that «should synaxiologithei and the time when the crisis was the first pages of newspapers and that in Turkey there were no reports of internal events and the two countries that formally end the crisis diapsefstike several days after the alleged launch ».

However officers are concerned about what is happening in the Aegean. Not about whether there is a crisis, but what will be the day of the claims. *


ELEFTHEROTYPIA - 16/01/2009



What does "yperptisis", "diapsefstike" and "synaxiologithei" mean?

Have I understood it correctly that is says that, while Greek papers reported the crisis the Turkish papers did no such thing? And if, why wouldn't papers that are all about selling copies not report it?


What I wonder is if all those naval and airial space violations are perfectly planned by the Turkish generals, or are they cowboy acts of individual pilots and commanders? Because it seems to me that these acts surely must be planned, and that is out of an expansionistic doctrine that's seemingly begging for confrontation, confiding in Turkeys quite numerical overhand in materials and men. Your thoughts?

[eliaslar]

yperptisis = fly over terrain (in this case over Greek islands which obviously are Greek terrain)
diapsefstike = denied
synaxiologithei = be evaluated with more evidences

About what this article says. Would you let your media write that you provoke someone, or fly over his terrain, or dogfight with his planes? From what i know the Turkish papers wrote only some incidents when things turned really ugly and there were some lives lost.

This phrase you wrote is maybe the best way to depict part of the situation.

The US might not want a military conflict between them, but they sure keep the tention up, and they surely will continue to sell them arms (even F-35, but maybe not too soon or as well equiped [to judge from the past]).

To tell you the truth, i don't think it's the right thread to discuss the situation between Turkey and Greece :)

[ROCK45]

I'm not sure if I got this right but I'll throw it out there. I remember reading some place that Greece's older Mirage 2000s are anti-ship missiles capable but not the newer Mirage 2000-5mk2? So both types are needed I wanted to know is there any truth to that?

Thanks

[Zeus II]

I'm not sure if I got this right but I'll throw it out there. I remember reading some place that Greece's older Mirage 2000s are anti-ship missiles capable but not the newer Mirage 2000-5mk2? So both types are needed I wanted to know is there any truth to that?

Thanks

You are right. It is pretty weird actually.

Not modernised M2Ks (EGM/BGM) are Exocet capable, while both new and modernised M2000-5s are not. The French asked for way too much money in order to certify the missile for use with the new M200-5s.

Pure blackmail if you ask me.

On the other hand, M2000-5s are destined to carry the new SCALP-EG cruise missile (also still not certified), but legacy M2Ks are not, nor will be, again-for financial reasons, the French just ask for too much.

Regards.

[wimpymouse]

yperptisis = fly over terrain (in this case over Greek islands which obviously are Greek terrain)
diapsefstike = denied
synaxiologithei = be evaluated with more evidences

About what this article says. Would you let your media write that you provoke someone, or fly over his terrain, or dogfight with his planes? From what i know the Turkish papers wrote only some incidents when things turned really ugly and there were some lives lost.

This phrase you wrote is maybe the best way to depict part of the situation.



To tell you the truth, i don't think it's the right thread to discuss the situation between Turkey and Greece :)

Right, thanks for the explanations and all, and about Swedish media, it's not controlled in by the government...

[metalkat 77]

I do not know in your personal opinion what is the most convinient for your country

[wimpymouse]

i Do Not Know In Your Personal Opinion What Is The Most Convinient For Your Country

Admin: Text Deleted. Post reported by Forum Member to Moderators