Iraq to buy F-16s

Feel free to discuss anything here - as long as it is F-16 related.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

jnt11593

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 24
  • Joined: 09 Aug 2009, 07:17

Unread post26 Nov 2009, 06:55

Iraq’s military has made significant strides in recent months, and the country is beginning to order more advanced military equipment to match. A slew of 2008 requests would spend over $10 billion to buy advanced armored vehicles, strengthen its national military supply chain, build new bases and infrastructure for its army, and even buy advanced scout helicopters.

That last purchase was significant, because an Air Force that had once been one of the strongest in the region is currently reduced to few dozen planes and helicopters, with no front-line fighters, or attack helicopters with precision munitions. The ARH order would be a significant step forward in aerial combat power, though they will be employed in the internal anti-terrorist battle rather than acting to secure Iraq’s sovereignty against neighboring countries.

That level of security requires the ability to control the air over one’s own country, which is why the USAF has always planned to remain in Iraq for a number of years as a guarantor. Anxious to complete its transformation and stand fully on its own, Iraq is pushing to begin flying its own fighters within the next couple of years – and is looking to buy American F-16s, rather than the Soviet and French fighters that made up Saddam’s air force. Recent statements from Lockheed Martin say that Iraq’s F-16 buy will be delayed – and recent Arabic reports indicate what the gap-filler might be…


here's the full link: http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/Ira ... #more-5057
Offline

StolichnayaStrafer

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 886
  • Joined: 20 Jan 2008, 16:50
  • Location: Dodge City, Moscowchusetts

Unread post26 Nov 2009, 18:09

Well, if any of their old air force pilots are still around they might have had some experience in the Mirage F1. At the least they could help train new pilots in the airframe. As for the F-16 purchase, guess we will have to wait and see about that one.
Why is the vodka gone?
Why is the vodka always gone... oh- that's why!
Hide the vodka!!!
Offline

callsignthumper

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 78
  • Joined: 03 Nov 2009, 01:21

Unread post26 Nov 2009, 20:22

That would be sweet helps our economy, and enforces our will with that countries government.
Offline

discofishing

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1373
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2008, 22:15
  • Location: USA

Unread post27 Nov 2009, 05:32

I'd like to see 5 years of unassisted security and development once US troops leave for good before we let them buy advance military hardware.
Offline

silversmok3

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 56
  • Joined: 01 Oct 2009, 22:24
  • Location: Chicago, IL

Unread post28 Nov 2009, 17:19

discofishing wrote:I'd like to see 5 years of unassisted security and development once US troops leave for good before we let them buy advance military hardware.


I would actually encourage foreign sales of aircraft to Iraq ,and leave ourselves out of the criteria.

Not just to prevent history repeating itself regarding advanced American technology being in potentially enemy hands,but this way Iraq will be forced to budget, economize, and responsibly use their own air force with their own money, to their own priorities.

This way as well, the US cannot be held responsible for Iraq's future in terms of air defense in any future regional conflict.
Offline

VarkVet

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1443
  • Joined: 30 Oct 2006, 04:31

Unread post28 Nov 2009, 21:39

I'm for it ... they can get their feet wet on the Viper with some blk 25's

With a good logistical support package, may create some boost for the economy :shrug:

Better than putting them in the Bone Yard!
My eyes have seen the glory of the Lord and the esthetics of the Flightline
Offline
User avatar

That_Engine_Guy

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2271
  • Joined: 14 Dec 2005, 05:03
  • Location: Under an engine somewhere.

Unread post28 Nov 2009, 22:36

Would be an excellent opportunity for a 3rd party civilian company to perform JEIM on their F100 engines too! :cool:

I'll be sure to post the jobs here first. :cheers:

TEG
[Airplanes are] near perfect, all they lack is the ability to forgive.
— Richard Collins
Offline

VarkVet

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1443
  • Joined: 30 Oct 2006, 04:31

Unread post29 Nov 2009, 01:21

That_Engine_Guy wrote:Would be an excellent opportunity for a 3rd party civilian company to perform JEIM on their F100 engines too! :cool:

I'll be sure to post the jobs here first. :cheers:

TEG


Falcon-up and some 229's will be a sweet package ... may even cause the DOW to rise 8)
My eyes have seen the glory of the Lord and the esthetics of the Flightline
Offline
User avatar

That_Engine_Guy

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2271
  • Joined: 14 Dec 2005, 05:03
  • Location: Under an engine somewhere.

Unread post29 Nov 2009, 02:44

VarkVet wrote:Falcon-up and some 229's will be a sweet package ... may even cause the DOW to rise 8)


I agree! :cool:
[Airplanes are] near perfect, all they lack is the ability to forgive.
— Richard Collins
Offline

ghettobird

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 302
  • Joined: 10 Nov 2004, 22:59
  • Location: Martinsburg WV

Unread post29 Nov 2009, 15:00

Not just to prevent history repeating itself regarding advanced American technology being in potentially enemy hands,but this way Iraq will be forced to budget, economize, and responsibly use their own air force with their own money, to their own priorities.

This way as well, the US cannot be held responsible for Iraq's future in terms of air defense in any future regional conflict.



Yes we cannot be held "responsible" but if we arm them with OUR aircraft and weapons systems and they in turn decide to go with their own "agendas" , when and if we finally leave their country to themselves, and decide to either turn aggressor on a neighboring country again or turn against us with our own techonology ( yes it would more than likely be older block aircraft, but still better than what they EVER had before ) we would be up a creek..

Yes we "train against ourselves and our equipment" but it would be something entirely foreign to us to bring to arms against our own aircraft sold to a foreign country, whom we still can't be entirely certain of what their future agendas would be. Yes I realize our government is "careful" and has strict policies on foreign arms sales.. but I can see this one biting us in the rear

I know some of you have done much more research and insight on this than I have.. but this is just off the top of my head at 9am on sunday morning.. haha
If it aint broke dont fix it, and yes Sir its supposed to leak like that ;)
Offline

callsignthumper

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 78
  • Joined: 03 Nov 2009, 01:21

Unread post29 Nov 2009, 18:09

Come on guys, you think that we wouldnt own them? Im pretty sure even if they turned agianst us, not only would our ADVANCED network, of our airforce would crush there's. The22, and 35 would own a hand-full of f-16, esecialy if they are say block 25's or 30's hell even 52's.
Offline

discofishing

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1373
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2008, 22:15
  • Location: USA

Unread post29 Nov 2009, 21:24

Perception is reality, "responsibility" can be shifted around as people, governments and the MEDIA see fit. We thought Iran was stable and we ended up giving them all sorts of hardware that was advanced for its time. They turned on us. I don't want to see Iraq turn on us. So, we need to see how well Iraq can behave on its own. I understand we destroyed most of their military hardware, but we can't just go tossing F-16s or any other advanced equipment around without thinking it through. If we had thought things through in the beginning, Iraq would be a non-issue right now.
Offline

-blaze-

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 4
  • Joined: 29 Nov 2009, 18:59

Unread post30 Nov 2009, 01:38

discofishing wrote:I'd like to see 5 years of unassisted security and development once US troops leave for good before we let them buy advance military hardware.

Yeah I agree when they have full control over their OWN country then lets hand them the advanced military hardware.
Offline

geogen

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2940
  • Joined: 11 Mar 2008, 15:28
  • Location: 45 km offshore, New England

Unread post30 Nov 2009, 02:22

Unfortunately guys, that's not how things work (usually the mil/security aspect gets servicing first, prior to the complete civil resolution, something never-ending to begin with). And in a perfect world, we'd all hold hands and mow eachothers lawns. There would have been no war to begin with, etc, etc. But the position being faced with now perhaps, is that Iraq will be requiring and seeking SOME kind of modern Air Defense capability in the immediate future. And they will likely be receiving it one way or another. The possible unease and surprise factor in all this comes from the apparent expectation at least some VIPs in planning had, that USAF Air Defense elements would set up permanent camp in country (along with other long-term US basing)? In my opinion, what's going on now is the unfolding of plan B - as it develops. And these things you usually don't steer at every turn.
The Super-Viper has not yet begun to concede.
Offline

StolichnayaStrafer

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 886
  • Joined: 20 Jan 2008, 16:50
  • Location: Dodge City, Moscowchusetts

Unread post30 Nov 2009, 04:49

I was thinking... would it really be THAT bad for Iraq to get some early model/block F-16s?

If we have a bunch sitting in the boneyard at Davis/Monthan, chances are good that they will be used as spare parts for foreign countries that still have the oldest ones in their inventory. Either that or they will most likely be refurbished to a QF-16 operational level and become target practice for the USA, right?

Now- say we wind up selling some to Iraq after all. That is really no worse than the fact that Chavez has some from when they were sold to Venezuela way back when. Any "secrets" pertaining to their old model F-16s have probably been leaked to any other not so savory countries out there that were not privy to that information before.

So- if we sell some to Iraq and they remain as a somewhat stable nation, that is good. Keeping them as the older tech versions should provide them with an adequate air defense platform that will suffice for plenty of time in the interim. We would also benefit by getting paid for spare parts and tech support as well. However, should they backslide into an unacceptable level of instability we wouldn't be losing anything as far as secrecy for the most part. On the other hand- should we have to combat said aircraft at a later date or render them "inoperative", it would not be a difficult task at all. Then we have still made money from the sales AND still get to use them for target practice without having to pay for conversion to QF-16s as well!

It could really be a pretty good Win-Win situation after all, if you look at the big picture. Call me crazy, but it seems like a pretty good idea to me after pondering this.

Ok, now please don't blast me - I'm only a civie that added his :2c:

(I did put a lot of thought into my hypothesis)
Why is the vodka gone?
Why is the vodka always gone... oh- that's why!
Hide the vodka!!!
Next

Return to General F-16 forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest