19 hours ago, Shroud said:

 

Dude.. let's just be honest about the fact that America for the past decade lost every war in the middle east and central asia despite any f-16s, f-18s and f22s, where they have been fighting zero air-to-air combat missions. With f35 on the horizon, imagine how many issues this piece of crap already has. 

Hey Dude its not a piece of crap its a highly sophisticated airplane with operational issues. For the money that was laid out for these "high tech" fighters it deserves a more fitting title than crap. I know you calls them the way you sees them. 

53 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Most neighbors (other than Cambodia and Laos) got Russian aircraft (Su-27, Su-30, MiG-29). Singapore is on an altogether different league with US made F-16's and F-15 (not to mention proper training).

 

And soon F35 in next 5 years. At least that was the plan if Trump reverse his rethoric to pivot away from Asia. According to Jane Defence, Singapore Airforce is ranked 1 in SEA. 

RIP the pilot.

Just a thought... the pilot pulled an incredibly 'high-g' turn. I'm guessing he blacked out and piled in in.

On 14/01/2017 at 9:47 PM, johng said:

I think this can all be blamed on that devil Thaksin and his chicken for fighter plane deal.

Blamed for what, why should anyone be blamed for buying Saab planes?

7 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Most neighbors (other than Cambodia and Laos) got Russian aircraft (Su-27, Su-30, MiG-29). Singapore is on an altogether different league with US made F-16's and F-15 (not to mention proper training).

Are you trying to suggest that the training provided by the US for their planes is better than the training provided by Saab for their purchasers and that Saab's training is not proper?

9 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Most neighbors (other than Cambodia and Laos) got Russian aircraft (Su-27, Su-30, MiG-29). Singapore is on an altogether different league with US made F-16's and F-15 (not to mention proper training).

 

Malaysia look to replace his MiG-29 by French Dassault Rafale

 

In 2015, SAAB make an offer with its ""Swedish air power package" with JAS-39 and Erieye Airborne Early Warning & Control system to Indonesia for replacement of 6 old F-5

Edited January 15, 20179 yr by than

Norway ordered 52 F-35 to replace the current F-16s, but was also considering buying Gripen planes. I am no expert on planes, but given this fact, I guess the ones writing that F-16 is superior to Gripen don't have their facts right. F-16 is at least a generation older.

WB

On 14/01/2017 at 2:45 PM, sandrabbit said:

For what Thailand needs they should have just bought more F16's, still the best all round aircraft in the world and it does most things including ground attack and in fact beat purpose built ground attack planes in bombing competitions when it 1st went into service. Maybe buy a few F18 super hornets to make up a few squadrons.

Problem with the F16 and 18 is upset Uncle Sam and supply of spares will run dry, grounding all aircraft in days

2 hours ago, Basil B said:

Problem with the F16 and 18 is upset Uncle Sam and supply of spares will run dry, grounding all aircraft in days

That's always a possibility from the nation of any supplier.

More likely upset Thailand's patron saints China and Russia should Thailand purchase from anyone else, especially from nations that are not in good standing with China and Russia.

16 hours ago, sandrabbit said:

so you just posted so you could boast, I bet the ladies love it when you talk technical.

Thanks for your comment, but my wife does not allow me around to many Bar Girls.

On 1/15/2017 at 7:47 AM, inzman said:

Why spend money on planes for a war they will never fight? Just toys for the boys and splashing a little cash around. 

 

You can similarly ask why increase the 2017 military budget by 2% when there are no threats. Conversely, Education expenditure decrease 4.7% when the urgency and importance are so obvious.  

9 hours ago, Wonderboy said:

Norway ordered 52 F-35 to replace the current F-16s, but was also considering buying Gripen planes. I am no expert on planes, but given this fact, I guess the ones writing that F-16 is superior to Gripen don't have their facts right. F-16 is at least a generation older.

WB

 

 

Norway is in the F-35 program since the beginning also Norway has reduce is order to 27 F-35 (USAF reduce from 2500 to 500 F-35), in the same way, Canada has cancel is order (more expensive and heavy delay on the program). He has launched a call for tender to another manufacturer to replace these CF-18's. 

 

Elect President TRUMP also criticized F-35 program, and warn more cut in order.

 

The F-35, which was to be the pride of the embarked aviation of the US Navy and the Marine Corps, has been transformed over the years into a financial chasm for the state budget. The program, launched in the early 1990's, continued to experience cost overruns and delays in manufacturing; Making it the most costly in American military history. The bill for the Pentagon is over $ 400 billion.

 

The F-35 suffers from many design problems, many of which have not yet been resolved : 

1 Aircraft Management Software problems
2 Serious Fire and Flight Safety Issues
3 Sagging of the wings
4 Engine problems
5 Dangerous failures of the pilot's helmet
6 Aircraft Initial Operational Capabilities restricted to USMC
7 Initial Operational Capability (IOC) for the F-35 report to the end of 2016
8 Dangerous ejection seat
9 Fragile pneumatic tires
10 Overheating inside Cargo hold

 

(Source   Defense Department's Director of Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E)

Edited January 16, 20179 yr by than

I think they ordered these aircraft because of the threat of the Chinese and their zero dollar tours.can anyone tell me when the Thai airforce last used a fighter/bomber jet in a military combat mission.or even when they are likely to use one and white who.

5 minutes ago, The man from udon said:

I think they ordered these aircraft because of the threat of the Chinese and their zero dollar tours.can anyone tell me when the Thai airforce last used a fighter/bomber jet in a military combat mission.or even when they are likely to use one and white who.

 

I will tell you just as soon as you can tell me when the Norwegians, Danes, Swedes, New Zealand. Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Switzerland and so many other countries in the west last used their air-forces on a military combat mission. Strangely enough they all seem to have air-forces with advanced fighters. Coming to Asia you could include Singapore, Japan Indonesia, Malaysia, Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, Philippines, Brunei etc none of whom have used them in a combat role.

6 hours ago, Srikcir said:

That's always a possibility from the nation of any supplier.

More likely upset Thailand's patron saints China and Russia should Thailand purchase from anyone else, especially from nations that are not in good standing with China and Russia.

 

The Gripen is Swedish, and they are not inclined to throw their weight around like Uncle Sam.

 

 

Edited January 16, 20179 yr by Basil B

12 hours ago, gdgbb said:

Are you trying to suggest that the training provided by the US for their planes is better than the training provided by Saab for their purchasers and that Saab's training is not proper?

 

No. I'm suggesting that the RSAF is, generally speaking, more "professional" compared to the RTAF. This has less to do with which aircraft are in service, and more with training practices, equipment and flight hours. The initial training provided by the manufacturer or respective country air force is one thing (and I think most major Western producers are similar on that front). My comment was more to do with what comes later.

9 hours ago, Wonderboy said:

Norway ordered 52 F-35 to replace the current F-16s, but was also considering buying Gripen planes. I am no expert on planes, but given this fact, I guess the ones writing that F-16 is superior to Gripen don't have their facts right. F-16 is at least a generation older.

WB

 

That would depend which models of F-16 are referred to. Your comment would be correct with comparison to the A/B, not so with regard to C/D (especially of later blocs).

2 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

No. I'm suggesting that the RSAF is, generally speaking, more "professional" compared to the RTAF. This has less to do with which aircraft are in service, and more with training practices, equipment and flight hours. The initial training provided by the manufacturer or respective country air force is one thing (and I think most major Western producers are similar on that front). My comment was more to do with what comes later.

"No. I'm suggesting that the RSAF is, generally speaking, more "professional" compared to the RTAF. "

But that is just not the case, generally or specifically.  What's the RSAF, do you mean the USAF?

13 minutes ago, billd766 said:

 

I will tell you just as soon as you can tell me when the Norwegians, Danes, Swedes, New Zealand. Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Switzerland and so many other countries in the west last used their air-forces on a military combat mission. Strangely enough they all seem to have air-forces with advanced fighters. Coming to Asia you could include Singapore, Japan Indonesia, Malaysia, Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, Philippines, Brunei etc none of whom have used them in a combat role.

Yes I know where you are coming from but this is Thai visa,in Thailand and the story I'm asking about is the Thai airforce.we know almost all the countries around the world waste unbelievable amounts of money on military,the uk for instance with their atomic arsenal that will sit there for a lifetime and never be used.as for Switzerland they might as well melt all their machines down and make fondue sets out of them.

11 minutes ago, gdgbb said:

"No. I'm suggesting that the RSAF is, generally speaking, more "professional" compared to the RTAF. "

But that is just not the case, generally or specifically.  What's the RSAF, do you mean the USAF?

 

If you do not know what RSAF stands for, how could you say "that it is just not the case"?

 

Republic of Singapore Air Force

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Singapore_Air_Force

I dont think the saab is a bad plane but was a bad purchase on thailands part. The biggest problem with the thai military is there are so many different weapons systems that are just a logistical nightmare. Just look at the small arms problem m16,ak,hk,tavor and the list goes on, how do they plan munitions purchases ? When they buy something new there is no thought whatsoever of integration with their current inventory.

11 hours ago, than said:

 

Malaysia look to replace his MiG-29 by French Dassault Rafale

 

In 2015, SAAB make an offer with its ""Swedish air power package" with JAS-39 and Erieye Airborne Early Warning & Control system to Indonesia for replacement of 6 old F-5

 

I guess it is safe to assume Malaysia don't have a very effective early warning system. A Boeing 777 (MH370) cruised unnoticed through their airspace.

I dont think the saab is a bad plane but was a bad purchase on thailands part. The biggest problem with the thai military is there are so many different weapons systems that are just a logistical nightmare. Just look at the small arms problem m16,ak,hk,tavor and the list goes on, how do they plan munitions purchases ? When they buy something new there is no thought whatsoever of integration with their current inventory.

Every time they make a procurement purchase, be it equipment, ammunition, spare parts or maintenance support there are certain procedures to be followed. Those "certain procedures" have to involve rather a lot of people". Procurement is a complex multifaceted business.

On 14/01/2017 at 9:27 PM, rooster59 said:

Thailand aims to become a leading power in Asean by having one of the strongest air forces in the region by the end of this decade.

 

That explains the g-force centrifuge training for their minivan drivers.....

On 2017-01-15 at 5:26 PM, elgordo38 said:

Hey Dude its not a piece of crap its a highly sophisticated airplane with operational issues. For the money that was laid out for these "high tech" fighters it deserves a more fitting title than crap. I know you calls them the way you sees them. 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1Z_DuF87Sc