|
|
Reply #79 johngage's post
Drawbacks of European systems:
Expensive.
Always delayed thanks to frequent strikes in the various nations eg. France and Germany.
Expensive spare parts.
Which was partly why the Eurofighter and the Rafale lost out to F-15SG over here. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Originally posted by mentosonline at 10-3-2008 10:20 PM 
Drawbacks of European systems:
Expensive.
Always delayed thanks to frequent strikes in the various nations eg. France and Germany.
Expensive spare parts.
Which was partly why the Eurofighte ...
Drawbacks of US systems:
1) US Congressional restrictions on Foreign Military Sales to countries who are not Tier I or Tier II US partners which includes Malaysia. There will be lengthy delays trying to get US Congressional approval for weapons sales, a good example is the long negotiations for AMRAAM approval for Malaysia.
2) Absolutely no chance that the US will offer weapons with latest specifications to Malaysia, or even weapons that will match specifications given to US allies in the region (Australia, Singapore, Thailand, Phillippines). Expect a system with significantly downgraded capabilities, for e.g. AIM-120C, but no chance of AIM-120D. Forget about sensitive technology like APG-79 AESA or Stealth.
3) Integration problems- Forget about getting permission to integrate non-US systems from countries who do not maintain friendly relations with the US. For e.g. perfectly ok to integrate Israeli technology but forget about Russian tech. Forget about Malaysia getting anywhere near to US source-code.
4) Delays- Why are delays occurring for just France and Germany? Look up the history of the JSF:
http://www.defensetech.org/archives/002542.html
http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,110679,00.html
http://www.sbac.co.uk/community/cms/content/preview/news_item_view.asp?i=10529&t=0
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/f-35-jsf-hit-by-serious-design-problems-04311/
If European suppliers are so bad, why did the USAF select the Airbus KC-30 over the Boeing Kc-767 for a $35 billion contract? Could it be because Airbus proved to be the more reliable supplier? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply #82 johngage's post
The military technology for the airbus would come from northrop grumman.
Besides, it is possible that USAF did not want to give Boeing a monopoly and could be using this deal to force Boeing to offer more competitive prices. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kenapa TUDM dan TLDM nak pakai MPA? Bukan ke MPA untuk Navy je? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Originally posted by mentosonline at 11-3-2008 09:05 AM
The military technology for the airbus would come from northrop grumman.
Besides, it is possible that USAF did not want to give Boeing a monopoly and could be using this deal to force Boeing to ...
Though it's suggested the purchase might be in batches and Boeing might have their luck next time, still the first round is 1-0 in favour to Airbus. And that's one big contract indeed. Besides, I guess tanker doesn't really requires that much of sophisticated technology as opposed to AEW or even MPA per sey.so what technology that you think will be poured in by northrop?the airframe and probably the system still airbus with exception to avionic i think. Already selling the airframe and its subsequent system to US is their greatest win. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply #84 curryjames71's post
|
TUDM ada expertise. TLDM tak pernah ada fixed wing aircraft. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Agaknya bila RMN boleh pakai MPA ni? Airframe baru atau lama (i.e. BT2000) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply #87 curryjames71's post
|
slow and steady. kasik depa proficient dlm rotary wing aircraft operations dulu. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply #88 tin's post
|
Yup, slow n steady... Tp better tgs MP bg ler kat TLDM, so TUDM bole focus on air defence 100%... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply #89 yaminz's post
yaaa... kasik je Tu-142. boleh depa jenjalan jejauh sket  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aku dah fly BeecH B200T for almost 6 tahun, memang kita perlu platform baru. Setakat ni baru upgrade AMS (Avionic Mission System) kita dah migrate ke Thales radar dan FLIR yang baru. Speed dan Endurance tuperlu. Low speed untuk buat rigging.hi speed untuk egress kluar dari hostile territories.
Memang banyak benda dalam RMAF wishlist. Navy pun nak MPA pun bagus laa, ni satu skuadron nak kawal 3 lautan mana tahan....Dah lah x de protection apa pun... setakat yang aku tahu high echelon dok tgh eyeing on SAAB 2000 utk mixture of Aew&C plus maritime.... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Originally posted by wishpilot at 14-3-2008 11:34 AM
Aku dah fly BeecH B200T for almost 6 tahun, memang kita perlu platform baru. Setakat ni baru upgrade AMS (Avionic Mission System) kita dah migrate ke Thales radar dan FLIR yang baru. Speed dan En ...
Kalau ada pilihan, apa platform MPA yang saudara gemar? Apa pendapat saudara tentang radar ini (Thales Searchwater 2000MR:
http://www.janes.com/extracts/extract/jav/jav_9657.html |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-double post-
[ Last edited by StealthTuah at 14-3-2008 12:39 PM ] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply #92 wishpilot's post
|
Menarik.tapi aku tak suka the idea of buying aircraft yang dah tak produced |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply #95 StealthTuah's post
|
tapi kalo dia bagi pakej dan jaminan yang sama dengan pakej yg ditawarkan untuk AEW&C, apa salahnya. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Originally posted by yaminz at 14-3-2008 09:13 AM 
Yup, slow n steady... Tp better tgs MP bg ler kat TLDM, so TUDM bole focus on air defence 100%...
Sokong 100%:pompom: :pompom: :pompom: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply #90 tin's post
Huh..hang ni wakil Tupolev kat Malaysia ke? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balas #98 alphawolf\ catat
eheheheh....
me just love Tu-142. 
they can outran any fighter anytime, anywhere... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply #99 tin's post
Tu-142 boleh outrun fighter?  Ke hang confuse Tu-142 dengan Tu22M/Tu-26? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Post time 10-3-2008 10:20 PM
