If it was up to you.....

[FiannaFail]

If the Minister for Defence asked you to recommend a particular interceptor jet to purchase for the Corps which one would you recommend and how many? Over to you folks..... '>

[FiannaFail]

Silver,
Mary Harney!
Regards,
FiannaFail '>

[pilatus]

L159(sidewinders,amramms)its not to big but it can do the job.the twin seaters even have radars(to my knowledge)so 10 could be bought handy for commonality not like the hawk.only single seater hawks got radar plus 2pilots can practise their skills on a L159 in a single flight meaning utilisation of the frames i.e.use them for more flights. '>

[Silver]

While it is not the first choice of many........Would the L-159 be the most realistic option for the AC ?
- Bearing in mind that the Czech's may well be selling their surplus aircraft for c.€3-4 million each !!!

I would be interested to know if the two-seater actually has on-board radar, as pilatus has suggested.
If this was the case, and 6-8 were purchased, it would be a major step forward for the AC - i.e. their first jet with radar !!

And it would at least provide a basic intercept capability - something we don't have at present !

[n-e-foo]

I'd go for the Gripen.

But just came across this, and its news to me if no-one else:

"In August 2003, the Czech Ministry of Defence announced that it plans to reduce the number of L159 aircraft in service to between 18 and 24. The remainder of its L159 fleet is to be sold."

Now when the article had been written 58 had already been put into service. So this means even cheaper L159's on the market?

I personally wouldnt want it, but is there an appetite within the Air Corps to operate something like the L159?

[sealion]

Though you mention interceptors,which would put you in the realm of F15, AEWACS etc,as an all round aircraft with a basic military air defence capability for our purposes you would have to go for the F16.
We are not expected to have long range interceptors flying CAP 24 hours a day,but what is reuired is an aircraft capable of finding,identifying,fighting and neutralising any possible threat. The F16 would also be more flexible for whatever other roles would be asked of it,should we ever have an air arm capable of carrying out military tasks,such as arial recon,ground attack etc.
The potential payload itself should sell it,combined with its popularity among other EU air Forces.

[Turkey]

NEF, the pliots of the IAC would probally go up in expired F-86's if they got the chance now, come to think of it that would represent a massive leap foward in capablity. '>

[alpha foxtrot 07]

silver the only use for the L159 is the training role, its too slow and not agile enough to fight, even the T-38 can put fly the L159 and its use for the same job.

[IAS]

Ex-Swiss F5E/F if there are any still available (cheap, cheerfull and reportedly easy to fly and maintain).

Refurbished F16A/B (MLU), Jaguar GR3, Mirage F1C/E or Mirage 2000A/B.

Basically 12 to 16 of any modern fighter would cover IAC needs IMHO.

IAS

[tashkurgan]

F-16A/MLU/D, Gripen are all too expensive to operate. L-159 is a poor performer and the F-5 is a hanger queen. My own preference would be a mix of Hawk 100s & 200s. Hawk 200s could perform the light attack role whilst the Hawk 100s could be used a lead in fighter trainers.

The Hawk 100s can accommodate additional sensors and avionics systems, including a forward-looking infrared (FLIR). The aircraft has seven hardpoints on the wings for weapon payloads. AIM-9Ls can be mounted on the wingtip missile launchers.

The Hawk 200 is with the Northrop Grumman APG-66H radar (an upgrade of the F-16A's radar with 10 AA modes RWS, TWS etc as well as about the same number of AG modes) coupled with the Sidewinder would be more than adequate for our needs right now.

My 2c.

[alpha foxtrot 07]

if we are speaking in terms of a realistic fighter aircraft for defence then anything in the 159 category is of no use to anybody except as a lead in trainer. the simple fact is any modern fighter has to be supersonic capable. the f-22 is the perfect example. we all know about the great power the f-16 has in the climb, with a thrust to weight ratio of 1.2:1 it quite impressive but to see a stripped down version getting sent back to school by a f-22 in the climb is trully a sight to be seen. so to answer your question FF, F-16d or better, if not you best stay at home.

[Taj]

The Czech AF has agreed a 10 year lease of Gripens with Sweeden.Is this a realistic option for the IAC?

[alpha foxtrot 07]

sorry the amount would have to be at least two squadrons of 25 aircraft, with that you can expect a generation rate of about 60-70%.

[Silver]

Welcome to the forum tashkurgan - some valid points re possible fast jets.

The Hawk would be a good choice but, as ever, if it was decided to go for a 'trainer-type' jet, the cost of the Hawk would most likely cause it to loose out to the L-159.

BTW guys, have a look at http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk (Section: Modern Military Aviation) where there is a post on this very subject !  :'>

[irishsamourai]

yes the gripen is maybe the best choice for iac
it's the fourth generation aircraft and it need 5 personnels for the maintenance
and it's less expensive than eurofighter or rafale