%
LOL! Did TR mention that same exact number of missiles? Or anything close?
I don't know, but it just seems like something you would read on there.
That's right. Which is why any clause in CISMOA that would allow advanced (not even sensitive, just advanced) weapons would get overridden by QME. 100% spot of again which kinda brings up another point, the importance of CISMOA? How useful could it really be if it's almost always trumped by QME? Could've also been the reason for the EAF's stagnation in signing it. They had resigned to the fact that it wouldn't make much difference to the things they really wanted, which were much more component-oriented than comms related.
I think a good part of it is the logistical dependency it would create. Basically, the army would have to rely on US support for maintaining the sensitive tech. Unless we know the specifics of the deal, this is all speculation.
I heard this or something similar which made me think if the Yemen issues were real or not, since there are basic methods of communications anyway that can easily be used, especially when fighting an enemy such as the Houthis. I don't mean to denigrate them whatsoever, not my intention. It's just that they don't represent the typical enemy army that such comms were designed for. Much more elaborate battlefield schemes & positions and objectives and targets and how to attack those. That's what those comms that enable more fluid interoperability are and what the CISMOA clause emphasises.
But when fighting an enemy such as the Houthis, how much of that level of sophistication and technology do you really need? Am I undermining it a bit too much, or does that kinda make sense? They have radar, radio, IFF and many other things they could still use and not be hampered by not having that interconnectivity. Or it could actually be primarily an IFF issue. What do you think?
Exactly! The Egyptian military has produced its own IFF systems since the 80's. They now produce even more advanced variants, so IFF would not be the main issue. In addition, the tech restrictions are not on IFF systems so it would not make a difference.
That's a great point. The only thing I can think of is the benefit of having the proper IFF hardware & software so they get plugged into the same network. As a result, it took them out of the circle, so to speak? That's the only thing I can think of aside from perhaps they couldn't get in on the specific GPS guidance because they don't have the guidance systems needed to plug into the Saudi & UAR network? Getting plugged in would allow them to be part of that network-centric environment which then facilitates objectives and missions etc. That might actually be it.
@The SC , what's your opinion, bro? About this alleged Yemen problem? SC, having Saudi heritage might be able to fill us in on some juicy details lol.
But again, why would they have to rely on other jets. Egyptian F-16's are equipped with GPS systems but simply commercial code. Again, it does not make sense.
That's what I'm saying, no offense to the great & honorable Houthis (considering the tremendous effort they're taking to disrupt zionist shipping in obligation to the Palestinians), but they're not exactly an army as per definition of the term. I'm 100% with you on that.
exactly.
looooooooool! So true
And speaking of the harpoon missiles, there's another weird story about them speaking of CISMOA. I just need to investigate the story first but it's something along the lines of either the latest harpoon that the EN ordered was blocked because of certain components or something I forget what the reason was exactly and then there were some pictures that appeared online showing large tubes of something completely wrapped in tarps being unloaded from an EAF C-130 alleged to be those harpoon missiles finally haven been approved and delivered. Your fun-poke at the "laser-guided harpoon" looool reminded me of that. I'll look it up and post it, see what you think but no, again, your point is spot on, ma man.
Think you're talking about the modification of the harpoon block II missiles for the Ambassador MK and type 209 not remove ground targeting based on Israeli objections.
Yes, you are correct indeed. I forget why I lumped the SCALP into that conversation. There was a reason but can't think of it now. Too much brain fog from information overload ATM.
No problem! I was actually trying to correct one of the articles that claimed that.
Where's that guy who used to give me a super hard time about the Egyptian Su-35? Remember all that mumbo jumbo jive buuuuuulllllssshhhhiiiitte? He would jump ugly all over me simply for saying "I think the Su-35 deal is finished" lol and he would blow a gasket! Forget his username, claimed to be an naval officer or something like that OH YEAH, the joke of the day JOKER88! loool. What a joke is more like it.
I actually have a lot respect for joker! He knows his stuff really well. And yeah, he was navy and works in the Suez Canal now I believe. He just twitter a bit too seriously and because most of his interactions on arab forums are with idiots, he has a really short fuse. I still believe that the best (and frankly only) option for the EAF to operate an air superiority platform is the Su-35, but it will simply take time.
Too bad also that the Su-35S is UNFAIRLY getting a bad name in Ukraine. People all over this forum claiming it's doing bad which is far from the truth. They keep peddling the BS narrative that it's old Russian avionics and it's not what the Russians claim it is and all this stuff. I think much of that is driven by the PAF vs IAF riff that's been going on for many decades, now. I can see why they would feel that way but truth is, the VKS has only lost 6 Su-35Ss in Ukraine to date. I also went over the whole reasons for the Russians having a hard time with Patriot missiles and all that in the IRIAF thread I don't wish through all that again. Just that it's one hell of a fighter and pretty sure the EAF would jump on aquring it in a heartbeat if it was possible without being hit with sanctions. But that's over with now we just need to see what the replacement is, eagerly!
Russian losses have to do mainly with close-range engagements and the use of dumb munitions. Now that they're mass producing glide munitions, their aircraft losses have drastically fallen.
BTW, what do you think about the Barracudas and that latest bit of news? Do you think Marker is jumping the gun a little bit? lol
He's patriotic, but he uses the same sources we all have access to. He's a journalist/reporter. Why would he have access to sensitive information?
As for the Barracudas, they comfortably fall into the category of game-changing weapons, especially when paired with the Type 209s. The reason why this deal is taking so long, in my opinion, is that it would provide they Egyptian navy with both a quantitative and qualitative edge over other regional peers. In addition, there seems to be demand for domestic construction, which would further enhance the domestic industry. In addition, the other side providing such deals will always be concerned about the military's diversification doctrine. If they get western subs, what assurance do they have that they would not also acquire russian Kilos or Chinese 039's to fill the eastern quota. I believe the military can succeed in acquiring it, but it will take time to pursue it.
