The Air Forces of non-Western nations and their capabilities

[tigisfat]

People love to dog the AF's of countries outside the west. The common one is "yeah, they HAVE that equipment, but they can't afford to keep it flying and there are only a few that can even get off the ground" or something similar. Another common remark states that Western nations are the only ones with any appreciable technology.


Nothing could be further from the truth. Anyone who truly follows foreign and international air capabillities knows that many nations have formidable air arms. Iran is one I've heard mentioned repeatedly as 'incapable' and poor. Their F-14 program is touted as dead after the lack of Grumman support.

I'm sure some of you have seen these, but for those who haven't:

http://i595.photobucket.com/albums/tt32/walkeramerican/forum%20commentary%20pictures/iraniantomcat.jpg

[Allen]

I'm sure by now Iran can make any parts needed for there F-14 with out Grumman support. When I get to Barnes and Noble I look at the Aircraft magazines. I'm surprised to see countries still using F-5s and some times geting a "Kills" on F-16s.

As for Iran, they been cut off from military equipment so long that they have bought license to make planes and tanks in Iran or just made it with out the licenses.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4022/4580087483_acf74bd34c_o.jpg

[TARPSBird]

As part of the F-14 package to Iran we trained a whole bunch of their maintenance personnel so I'm not surprised the Tomcats are still flying with whatever homegrown mods they've applied. As for dogging the capabilities of non-Western countries' air forces, the present administration here in good ol' USA is planning potential cuts in all branches of our military based on the assumption that we will never face an opponent who's competent enough to pose a real threat. Big assumption, and dangerous too.

[wombat666]

As part of the F-14 package to Iran we trained a whole bunch of their maintenance personnel so I'm not surprised the Tomcats are still flying with whatever homegrown mods they've applied. As for dogging the capabilities of non-Western countries' air forces, the present administration here in good ol' USA is planning potential cuts in all branches of our military based on the assumption that we will never face an opponent who's competent enough to pose a real threat. Big assumption, and dangerous too.

With all due respect gentlemen, so-called 'Terrorist Actions' are far more cost effective, more than difficult to defeat and have a massive impact on civilian morale.
Not to be flippant but a single suicide bomber really gives you more bang for your buck ....:kilroy:

[deathfromafar]

a single suicide bomber really gives you more bang for your buck

So does Nuclear Weapons.:salute::israel:

[jmig]

With all due respect gentlemen, so-called 'Terrorist Actions' are far more cost effective, more than difficult to defeat and have a massive impact on civilian morale.
Not to be flippant but a single suicide bomber really gives you more bang for your buck ....:kilroy:

Our potential for getting into a "real" war with a country like Iran is more likely to happen through our support for a third party like Israel or Iraq.

Also, I am not saying that Iran hasn't the ability to keep their F-14s at fully effective combat readiness. However, there s a big difference between being able to fly an airplane for a photo shoot and being able to be an effective weapons platform.

I can recall many a sortie not meeting its training requirements because of radar failure or something like that. The weapon systems of modern combat aircraft are some of the more complex systems on the entire aircraft.

[cheezyflier]

I can recall many a sortie not meeting its training requirements because of radar failure or something like that. The weapon systems of modern combat aircraft are some of the more complex systems on the entire aircraft.


i remember a recent thread where nearly everyone said that the computers used in todays fighter jets were little more than glorified calculators, as complicated as a bag full of hammers. now they are suddenly complex?
frankly i don't know one way or the other, but i have a hard time seeing the iranian airforce as much of a threat to our own. i don't see isreal sweatin too much over it. their real danger lies not in their airforce but in their quest for nuclear arms, and their support of terrorism.

[tigisfat]

i remember a recent thread where nearly everyone said that the computers used in todays fighter jets were little more than glorified calculators, as complicated as a bag full of hammers. now they are suddenly complex?
frankly i don't know one way or the other, but i have a hard time seeing the iranian airforce as much of a threat to our own. i don't see isreal sweatin too much over it. their real danger lies not in their airforce but in their quest for nuclear arms, and their support of terrorism.

If Israel wasn't sweating it, they wouldn't have all the latest gear we don't have. (which they do, they're just not dumb enough to buy golden hunting bullets coughF-22cough).

Iran currently employs the most advanced and active foreign air defense system there is. Their missile system is called 'god's fly swatter' and could easily knock down an SR-71 like it was something to do.

[jmig]

i remember a recent thread where nearly everyone said that the computers used in todays fighter jets were little more than glorified calculators, as complicated as a bag full of hammers. now they are suddenly complex?
frankly i don't know one way or the other, but i have a hard time seeing the iranian airforce as much of a threat to our own. i don't see isreal sweatin too much over it. their real danger lies not in their airforce but in their quest for nuclear arms, and their support of terrorism.

Don't confuse complexity with state of the art. They don't need to compute Pi to the mullioned place. Mostly basic trig. Aircraft computer systems are built for reliability. Realibility usually means older proven system components. Still, there are a lot of things in a weapons system that have to work together. It only takes one failure to bring down the system.

[safn1949]

I'm not a pilot,I was a tanker.I look at this the same way I look at any other weapons system.Recently the Russians finally junked tens of thousands of armored vehicles,they simply couldn't keep them running with out spare parts and the money and personal to fix them.

And a T-62 is a lot easier to maintain then an F-14, I am willing to guess.The Russian armored force is a shadow of it's former self,the truth is they went broke trying to keep all of that equipment and most of it didn't even run.

I would guess you would have to look at availability of the equipment.Do they have fuel and spare parts,maintenance personnel with the knowledge and ability to keep things moving.I was also an ASE auto tech.

You can send a guy to school to learn how to fix something but....if he doesn't have some inherent skill,what we called the touch,he will be a lousy mechanic.I've seen it time and time again,guys with all kinds of training and schooling who couldn't fix a bicycle.

They understood the theory but couldn't make it happen.I can't type.....same thing.I have been thru typing class in college and can't type to save my life.

[OBIO]

Someplace on one of my CD/DVDs, I have a picture of the entire air force of Patagonia: It's a C-172 with two fat Alpaca farmers leaning out the side windows with double barrel shotguns. Now that is an air force that I would not want to square off against.

OBIO

PS: Any air force still flying the F-5 is ALRIGHT in my book. One of my favorite hair dryers.

[kilo delta]

Remember that the most modern airforce, with all of the latest toys, stealth, manoeuvrability, huge weapons load,tactical nukes etc etc can be rendered useless in an urban guerilla type war where the enemy is free to mingle amongst the general populace.
Air superiority is all well and good....but when the good guys need to go in by road/foot things get messy very quickly. As Wombat has already mentioned....a couple of guys with a dirty bomb is a lot more effective in any perceived "war" than a wing of B-2's,squadron of F-22's,etc.


I've always been impressed at the ingenuity of those nations that, when sanctions have prevented new stocks of weapons/parts, have reverse engineered the items to keep their armed forces running. The Russians,Chinese,Iranians are pretty good at it.

[jmig]

Technology will allow the few to even the odds against the many. Israel is a case in point. Their technology superiority in weapons has allowed them to stand against overwhelming numbers on three sides.

Technology will take you only so far. The machine gun proved very effective against large numbers of charging troops in WWI. It didn't do so well against 10,000 charging Chinese in the Korean War. There were just too many.

One F-22 may handle 5-10 F-5s but, against 100 it hasn't a chance, in a fight. It must use that hi-speed reverse gear and get out of Dodge.

[Toastmaker]

This subject (more specifically, the Iranian Air Force of today) has come up before. I will repeat a short part of what I posted back then -

The current Iranian F-14A fleet consists of about 12 flyable examples (out of an original delivery of 79) and of those 12, seven are combat capable (meaning; capable of carrying, launching and guiding A to A missiles). This information is less than one year old and comes from Iranian national sources.

In conflict with Israeli or US air forces, they may last as long as 15 to 20 minutes. Maybe.

The Iranians have wisely put more money into ground to air defenses but have not received TOR-300 systems from Russia, regardless of their internal propaganda.

[MaddogK]

Iran builds their own version of the F-5 (under license IIRC), and it aint no slouch. The original F-5 was NOT a second rate A/C either, but the AF and it's 'croneyism' ensured the F-5 (F-20 Tigershark) didn't have a market as it was directly competing against the F-16 for marketshare.

[cheezyflier]

If Israel wasn't sweating it, they wouldn't have all the latest gear we don't have. (which they do, they're just not dumb enough to buy golden hunting bullets coughF-22cough).

Iran currently employs the most advanced and active foreign air defense system there is. Their missile system is called 'god's fly swatter' and could easily knock down an SR-71 like it was something to do.

precisely why they're not sweatin it. because they've done what's neccessary to stay on top. i'm not saying there aren't things that might worry them, i'm just saying iran's airforce is not among them.


Don't confuse complexity with state of the art. They don't need to compute Pi to the mullioned place. Mostly basic trig. Aircraft computer systems are built for reliability. Realibility usually means older proven system components. Still, there are a lot of things in a weapons system that have to work together. It only takes one failure to bring down the system.

i'm not confusing them i quoted directly when i used the word complex. someone mentioned the complexity of the weapons systems as a suggestion as to why a particular aircraft was not combat ready. as if to say the complexity of it kept them from making neccessary repairs. it's either complex or it ain't. some say it ain't some say it is. all i'm saying is, right up front i don't know, but i see different answers to that question.


This subject (more specifically, the Iranian Air Force of today) has come up before. I will repeat a short part of what I posted back then -

The current Iranian F-14A fleet consists of about 12 flyable examples (out of an original delivery of 79) and of those 12, seven are combat capable (meaning; capable of carrying, launching and guiding A to A missiles). This information is less than one year old and comes from Iranian national sources.

In conflict with Israeli or US air forces, they may last as long as 15 to 20 minutes. Maybe.

The Iranians have wisely put more money into ground to air defenses but have not received TOR-300 systems from Russia, regardless of their internal propaganda.

that pretty much mirrors my suspicions, and i didn't have any cool informational sources. :icon_lol:

[Skittles]

i'm not confusing them i quoted directly when i used the word complex. someone mentioned the complexity of the weapons systems as a suggestion as to why a particular aircraft was not combat ready. as if to say the complexity of it kept them from making neccessary repairs. it's either complex or it ain't. some say it ain't some say it is. all i'm saying is, right up front i don't know, but i see different answers to that question. :icon_lol:


We said the flight computers were simple, not the weapons computer!

[djscoo]

Sorry, it was just too obvious...
6951

[tigisfat]

Sorry, it was just too obvious...
6951

It wasn't a shoop dude, look closer and see the different markings on each one. They have regular air parades in Tehran, and there are frequently pics of it.

[djscoo]

It wasn't a shoop dude, look closer and see the different markings on each one. They have regular air parades in Tehran, and there are frequently pics of it.
Yeah, I know. Remember when Iran released a picture of some missiles being launched and it turned out 2 of them were just done with the clone tool? That photo was just too easy for me not to do that...
6957

[tigisfat]

I'm not a pilot,I was a tanker.I look at this the same way I look at any other weapons system.Recently the Russians finally junked tens of thousands of armored vehicles,they simply couldn't keep them running with out spare parts and the money and personal to fix them.

And a T-62 is a lot easier to maintain then an F-14, I am willing to guess.The Russian armored force is a shadow of it's former self,the truth is they went broke trying to keep all of that equipment and most of it didn't even run.We are talking about Iran, right? Iran is not broke and has no lack of scientists, training and facilities. Their F-14 program was set up by the US Navy and Grumman. Iran's government is one of the richest on the planet, and they are more than capable of funding their programs.


I would guess you would have to look at availability of the equipment.Do they have fuel and spare parts,maintenance personnel with the knowledge and ability to keep things moving.I was also an ASE auto tech..Fuel? Holy cow, they are an oil producing nation. They built their strategic stockpiles off of the illegal Iraqi oil that was smuggled into Iran at rock-bottom prices. That's why our embargoes didn't hurt Saddam. Since the revolution, their F-14 program has gone indigenous. They can manufacture whatever they want in-country, and their research has lead them to upgraded components. We're not sure exactly what their Phoenix missiles are even capable of anymore because they've been upgraded. As far as maintenance knowledge, again, their program was set up by us and they have the money to keep it going and keep training new guys.


You can send a guy to school to learn how to fix something but....if he doesn't have some inherent skill,what we called the touch,he will be a lousy mechanic.I've seen it time and time again,guys with all kinds of training and schooling who couldn't fix a bicycle.Let's be positive that we don't assume other countries are filled with dumb people that can't learn just because we see their huddled masses on TV. Iran is home to some extremely well respected universities, and contributions by those of Iranian descent in fields such as science and medicine are recognized around the world.


They understood the theory but couldn't make it happen.I can't type.....same thing.I have been thru typing class in college and can't type to save my life.the Russians or the Iranians? The Russians recieved a bad rap after copying the B-29 directly, and it's been assumed forever that they copy our work. Nothing could be further from the truth. Most often, we've copied their work in a race to provide a counterpart for weapons systems they've built. Many prominent cold war aircraft were a response to a similar Russian design. The west has had some pretty large advances in avionics, but the Russians have always been extremely effective in aerodynamics and reliability. Have we forgotten how much of the space race they lead?

As for the Iranians, underestimating them could be costly. They aren't dumb, plus they have money and decent equipment.

[Toastmaker]

We are talking about Iran, right? Iran is not broke and has no lack of scientists, training and facilities. Their F-14 program was set up by the US Navy and Grumman. Iran's government is one of the richest on the planet, and they are more than capable of funding their programs.

Fuel? Holy cow, they are an oil producing nation. They built their strategic stockpiles off of the illegal Iraqi oil that was smuggled into Iran at rock-bottom prices. That's why our embargoes didn't hurt Saddam. Since the revolution, their F-14 program has gone indigenous. They can manufacture whatever they want in-country, and their research has lead them to upgraded components. We're not sure exactly what their Phoenix missiles are even capable of anymore because they've been upgraded. As far as maintenance knowledge, again, their program was set up by us and they have the money to keep it going and keep training new guys.

Let's be positive that we don't assume other countries are filled with dumb people that can't learn just because we see their huddled masses on TV. Iran is home to some extremely well respected universities, and contributions by those of Iranian descent in fields such as science and medicine are recognized around the world.

the Russians or the Iranians? The Russians recieved a bad rap after copying the B-29 directly, and it's been assumed forever that they copy our work. Nothing could be further from the truth. Most often, we've copied their work in a race to provide a counterpart for weapons systems they've built. Many prominent cold war aircraft were a response to a similar Russian design. The west has had some pretty large advances in avionics, but the Russians have always been extremely effective in aerodynamics and reliability. Have we forgotten how much of the space race they lead?

As for the Iranians, underestimating them could be costly. They aren't dumb, plus they have money and decent equipment.



Are you kidding ?? Do you really think the Iranians are building F-14A's. . . completely "reverse engineered" from the ones the Shah's government bought -or even Phoenix missiles ?? Have you even thought about the materials and design/engineering skills and manufacturing nuances (proprietary to Grumman at the time) that would be needed ?

No one is saying the Iranians are stupid, quite the contrary, but you seem to have bought Iranian propaganda hook, line and sinker ! If you want to stand in awe of and fear of their air force - go ahead. Those who are going to have to eliminate them do not.

And the Russians have all this reliability in their hardware ?? The RUSSIANS ? Have you forgotten how many cosmonauts were killed in all their "reliable" spacecrafts and heavy-lift rockets ? How about how advanced and aerodynamic the Mig-25 turned out to NOT be !!

[tigisfat]

Are you kidding ?? Do you really think the Iranians are building F-14A's. . . completely "reverse engineered" from the ones the Shah's government bought -or even Phoenix missiles ?? Have you even thought about the materials and design/engineering skills and manufacturing nuances (proprietary to Grumman at the time) that would be needed ?!!They are not building F-14s, they are building F-14 parts.


No one is saying the Iranians are stupid, quite the contrary, but you seem to have bought Iranian propaganda hook, line and sinker ! If you want to stand in awe of and fear of their air force - go ahead. Those who are going to have to eliminate them do not.It was implied earlier that Iranians are stupid. (yes, I know a flurry of post editing will follow this post, that's probably a good thing)They have a very capable and modern military. I don't "stand in fear and awe of it" though. :salute: Please don't question my sanity or credibility, sir. Between the two of us, I'm the only one that recieved years of regular intel briefings about Iran until two months ago.


And the Russians have all this reliability in their hardware ?? The RUSSIANS ?Yes, the Russians.


Have you forgotten how many cosmonauts were killed in all their "reliable" spacecrafts and heavy-lift rockets ? How about how advanced and aerodynamic the Mig-25 turned out to NOT be !!We've all lost a few brave space pioneers. I'm simply saying that we can't dismiss the Russian achievements in aerospace........because they paved the way for a while. Their Germans were better than our Germans.

[Willy]

Gentlemen, I would suggest carrying this discussion to the Quartermoon Saloon (aka Oso's) before it gets out of hand.

http://quartermoonsaloon.com/forum/

[jmig]

Gentlemen, we are getting close to a war amongst ourselves here.

A word to the wise.

Careful!

[Bone]

I had read somewhere that when the F-14's were retired from the Navy, that they were virtually stripped of any component that could be black marketed to Iran, and these components were destroyed...dats wat i red, annyhoo. Fox fox fox!

[tigisfat]

Gentlemen, I would suggest carrying this discussion to the Quartermoon Saloon (aka Oso's) before it gets out of hand.

http://quartermoonsaloon.com/forum/

Dually noted. Now, I disappear into the night not to reappear in this thread. May I also suggest that I was never here, and I never made a single post that could've escalated things. Also, these aren't the droids you're looking for.

http://i595.photobucket.com/albums/tt32/walkeramerican/forum%20commentary%20pictures/Youwillforget.gif

[Toastmaker]

Tigisfat - sorry if I came across a bit too snotty. I mean you no disrespect.



(but you might be surprised at information sources available to me. . .)

[Ken Stallings]

All I want to say is there is a world of difference between putting three or four F-14's in a formation for an airshow vice fielding a modern and effective air force. So, I'm not truly impressed with the Iranian Air Force. They were a lot better before internal politics there lead to a number of their best pilots and commanders being killed in political purges!

Now, with regard to the overall theme here, there are many non-Western Air Forces that have been first rate for many decades. The Indian Air Force is likely the best air force in the world flying mostly Russian made aircraft. They have the money and the desire to train, and train well.

The Japanese Self-Defense Air Force is top shelf also, and truly always has been except for when near total financial ruin harmed it after the end of World War II.

For a relatively small force, I also think the Taiwanese Air Force is pretty solid.

Though small, certainly the forces of Pacific Rim allies like Australia are excellent, though I presume most folks would include the ANZUS powers as being "western."

The Royal Saudi Air Force flies well maintained and well piloted F-15's. So, I would rate them superior to the Iranians right now and have no qualms about it.

And no one will likely ever discredit the Israeli Air Force, and for very good reasons!

Cheers,

Ken

[Panther_99FS]

Anyone know how the IIRAF faired against the IQAF in the 80s :ques:

[Ken Stallings]

If Israel wasn't sweating it, they wouldn't have all the latest gear we don't have. (which they do, they're just not dumb enough to buy golden hunting bullets coughF-22cough).

People who are paid and trained to be professional fighter pilots do not refer to the F-22 in the language you chose. When I have spoken personally with pilots of F-15C's and F-22's the universal consensus view they share with me is that the F-22 is a deadly predator of the skies, able to accomplish feats in aerial combat that should we get into a real shooting war with a viable foreign air force, will inflict damages previously considered impossible.

I also am old enough to precisely remember similar comments made around 1978 to 1981 about the F-15. Those comments ended rather briskly when the F-15 got into enough aerial engagement with an unblemished kill ratio to prove the doubters wrong.

The only problem with the F-22 is numbers and that's a reflection of our budget, not the aircraft's capabilities. Israel, despite their acute needs, also must be mindful of their budget limitations. Make no mistake though, if Lockheed Martin offered Israel substantial discounts, they would eagerly seek to purchase enough F-22's to replace their entire F-15 fleet!

Ken

[Bone]

People who are paid and trained to be professional fighter pilots do not refer to the F-22 in the language you chose. When I have spoken personally with pilots of F-15C's and F-22's the universal consensus view they share with me is that the F-22 is a deadly predator of the skies, able to accomplish feats in aerial combat that should we get into a real shooting war with a viable foreign air force, will inflict damages previously considered impossible.

I also am old enough to precisely remember similar comments made around 1978 to 1981 about the F-15. Those comments ended rather briskly when the F-15 got into enough aerial engagement with an unblemished kill ratio to prove the doubters wrong.

The only problem with the F-22 is numbers and that's a reflection of our budget, not the aircraft's capabilities. Israel, despite their acute needs, also must be mindful of their budget limitations. Make no mistake though, if Lockheed Martin offered Israel substantial discounts, they would eagerly seek to purchase enough F-22's to replace their entire F-15 fleet!

Ken

Well, the Raptor still has many issues. A friend of mine who is a Guard KC-135 driver has done a number of fighter drag's accross the Pacific and the Atlantic, of which numerous have been with F-22's. According to him, the F-22 drags never go as planned. They either have to turn back or make an unscheduled landing because the F-22 isn't reliable during the long deployment leg.

[jmig]

Well, the Raptor still has many issues. A friend of mine who is a Guard KC-135 driver has done a number of fighter drag's accross the Pacific and the Atlantic, of which numerous have been with F-22's. According to him, the F-22 drags never go as planned. They either have to turn back or make an unscheduled landing because the F-22 isn't reliable during the long deployment leg.

Just about every cutting edge weapons system the US has developed had teething problems. I can remember issues with the F-16, F-15, F-111, Abrams tank, etc. These modern systems are so complex that unanticipated issues show up in full production that didn't show in testing. sort of like the Beta on software vs. production product.

Given the money and time to work out the bugs these weapons systems become outstanding examples of hardware. The F-22 is no different.

[safn1949]

Just to be clear,it's my understanding that the Persians are a highly educated people.Many years ago I knew a gentleman from that country and he was one of the finest people I have had the pleasure to know.

Ability......that's what I am talking about.Who is training the Iranian pilots and groundcrew? Of course they are smart enough to learn,but who is doing the teaching and do they truly have up to date manuals and equipment.

Also remember that Iran imports most of it's gasoline,I have no idea if they process jet fuel or not but they lack some refining capability.

I guess in the end I would have to go back to the Iran-Iraq war.They didn't manage to whip the Iraqi's in 8 years of trying.:d

[Naki]

The only problem with the F-22 is numbers and that's a reflection of our budget, not the aircraft's capabilities. Israel, despite their acute needs, also must be mindful of their budget limitations. Make no mistake though, if Lockheed Martin offered Israel substantial discounts, they would eagerly seek to purchase enough F-22's to replace their entire F-15 fleet!
Ken


The US government won't let Lockheed Martin sell the F-22 to anybody other than their own military - Japan (and I also believe Israel) wanted F-22s but the US govt squashed any sale.

[Ken Stallings]

The US government won't let Lockheed Martin sell the F-22 to anybody other than their own military - Japan (and I also believe Israel) wanted F-22s but the US govt squashed any sale.

That's a very good point and of course you are right. My point was simply that the lack of overseas sales on the F-22 is not a negative reflection on the aircraft. It is price and as you point out rightly, simple availability.

Ken

[Bone]

Operational stats aside, it's a cool looking beast. This is at Eglin AFB/Ft. Walton Beach.


http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj299/theBone11/New%20shots%201/F-22atEglin.jpg

[Bjoern]

Not to be flippant but a single suicide bomber really gives you more bang for your buck ....:kilroy:

Nice pun, lol.




And a T-62 is a lot easier to maintain then an F-14, I am willing to guess.

Russian crudity. The tolerances are measured in "width of vodka bottles" instead of mm...which by the way also makes their studd incredibly durable.

But the T-x2s are so effin' small it's got to be like hell in there. Seriously, they are no more than 2.1m high whereas the Leopard 2 tops off at 2.7m (and is quite comfy inside).
Upside: They're more likely to find hull-down positions in the field.
Downside: They can't give their main gun much of a neghative inclination, so fighting downhill gets a bit hard.




Anyone know how the IIRAF faired against the IQAF in the 80s :ques:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Air_Force_in_Iran%E2%80%93Iraq_war
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Air_Force

No exact numbers and a lot of claims.

[safn1949]

Nice pun, lol.





Russian crudity. The tolerances are measured in "width of vodka bottles" instead of mm...which by the way also makes their studd incredibly durable.

But the T-x2s are so effin' small it's got to be like hell in there. Seriously, they are no more than 2.1m high whereas the Leopard 2 tops off at 2.7m (and is quite comfy inside).
Upside: They're more likely to find hull-down positions in the field.
Downside: They can't give their main gun much of a negative inclination, so fighting downhill gets a bit hard.





http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Air_Force_in_Iran%E2%80%93Iraq_war
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Air_Force

No exact numbers and a lot of claims.



Also causes a problem in elevation of the main gun,there was a battle in one of the Israeli-Arab wars where the Arabs were in a valley and were picked off because they couldn't elevate their guns enough to engage the Israeli tanks.

The size of Soviet armor was always determined by the rail system,the Soviet Union was large and the armor moved by rail.The simple fact is they had to fit through the numerous tunnels along the way.Thus the profile you see in all of their MBT's.

[Bjoern]

Also causes a problem in elevation of the main gun,there was a battle in one of the Israeli-Arab wars where the Arabs were in a valley and were picked off because they couldn't elevate their guns enough to engage the Israeli tanks.

That too.

And the autoloader wasn't the best of the best (at first), too.


The size of Soviet armor was always determined by the rail system,the Soviet Union was large and the armor moved by rail.The simple fact is they had to fit through the numerous tunnels along the way.Thus the profile you see in all of their MBT's.

Actually, I am more of the opinion that the flat apperance of soviet tanks is more influenced by the rather flat terrain in the soviet union.