You buy F-7s while you have other better choices only when you have a worn-out, white haired moron sitting on the defence minister's position. We do not have any problems of funding man...we have the cash and expertise to run and maintain better planes. There are reasons why Hasina spent so heavily on the navy and army in her present tenure and one of them is availability of funds.
Lack of importance to air force is beyond my comprehending ability. We get billions each year from remittance and from UN missions. Taking out $50 million-1 billion each year from there and using it to modernize any of the forces is easily achievable.
However, SU-30 is still an option if we do not go for JF-17. Given both govts. have good relations with China, J-10 could also be procured in big quantity. F-7BGs can be kept for ground attack or intercepting role. Ideally, i would like to see BAF's inventory with JF-17s, J-10s and 1 of Russian planes Mig-29SMT/SU-30.
About Mig-35, i assumed that its maintenance cost would be higher. Thanks for correcting.
Cheers!!!
Here's an interesting read as far as the MiG-35 goes:
- MiG-35/MiG-35D
I don't think that remittance from UN missions are enough to run a military.
But BAF might actually have to look into it by carrying out trails and compare it to different aircraft of its class.
The F-7 is an interceptor, and can perform limited CAS (close air support). The JF-17 is a good aircraft for the CAS role. The J-10 is good for air-superiority and deep strike missions.
The SU-30, like the SU-27 and F-15 are a heavier class of fighters. That means, they are more maintenance intensive compared to lighter ones such as the F-16, J-10 and MiG-29. Would that be in the interests of the BAF? I doubt it. Single engined aircraft are always less maintenance intensive. The F-16 and J-10B come into mind.
According sources, the SU-27 approximately costs $7,000/flight hour. Whereas, the F-15 costs a whooping $17,000/flight hour.
http://www.defence.pk/forums/milita...ing-operating-fighters-its-effects-sales.html
But, it is difficult to calculate exact operating costs. Many factors come into play. One major factor is the mean time taken between engine overhauls.
Here is interesting point made by chogy, a former USAF F-15C pilot:
Very true in that the reliability and time between overhauls is a HUGE part of a cost. Early jet engines were good for 20 hours or less. Modern engines can easily run for 4,000 hours or more before needing major work. Compare this to even the very best piston engines which will fail long before 2,500 hours.
So if Jet engine "A" works reliably for 4,000 hours and costs 10 million $$, and Engine "B" costs 3 million $$ but is good for only 750 hours and breaks down all the time, engine "A" is probably a much better choice, despite the higher cost. To fully overhaul a jet engine might cost 35% to 65% of the original cost.
So, whatever the costs we incur regarding the engines, it depends just on how many sorties we carry out. Having good engines, regardless if Eastern or Western, it should always meet BAF's operational requirements.
If you ask me, I'd really eye for the FC-20 (hopefully J-10B which has AESA) or the F-16 blk 60 (given that USA is willing to offer) when it comes to procuring new aircraft.
Air force should be sufficient, but not the most important. The army and especially the navy are the most important wings of our military. Even if we had 500 F-22s, larger neighbors like Myanmar and India still won't be afraid. We are a small country after all. Therefore, Hasina's focus on army and navy is valid. But still, our air force is grossly underfunded. There were rumors that our MiGs cannibalized one another. This shows poor funding coupled with poor after-sales support from the Russians. Although, it is said that the after-sales support is improving.
Regarding our army, training is good, but equipment compared to India, Pakistan, China or even Myanmar - a bit lacking. This similarly applies to the navy, accept SWADS.
Regarding money, I agree that we do have it. It is just that it is not prioritized properly.
Fun fact: Majority of Bangladesh's rich pay little or no taxes. Especially one of those who become 'unknowingly' rich
I met one professor who said that the taxes he pays are much higher than the ones paid by those 'unknowingly' rich people
It is sad, but true
