I wonder, in a second or third tier country, would a Phantom still be a legitimate tool for self defense?
Like if you were, say Ghana, or Peru, and you needed a decent but not super expensive Air Force, and didn't have to worry about going up against a first tier country, would a fleet of Phantoms be legit?
As an example, the A-10 would be immediately shot out of the sky if going against the Russians, or Chinese - countries with up to date air defenses, but they sure work well against low tech enemies like the Taliban, or ISIS.
Same principle?
Them's Turkish AF I believe.
ReplyDeleteTurkish AF, indeed. During my second tour in Turkey their F-16 assembly line had just turned out the second ever "zero defect" F-16 (the fighters had to first be accepted by the USAF, then turned back over to the Turkish AF/THK under the requirements of our Foreign Military Sales). As to the 2nd and 3rd world air forces and legacy fighters, the cost to operate per hour would probably far exceed the cost to buy and operate the F-16. Just my opinion, though. regards, Alemaster
ReplyDeleteThe birds are nice, but I'd rather have that castle.
ReplyDeleteBe far cheaper and better for a small country to get a rebuilt and modernized Mig-21. Designed for grass or tarmac, new electronics and engine, much lighter on mechanical replacement needs.
ReplyDeleteCuriously, Israel has made a reasonable amount of money refurbishing and modernizing Mig-21s.
Using Western engines?
DeleteThere is a place for older tech in the less-than-first-world airforces. They are flying militarized Tucanos as ground attack aircraft with great success in A-stan and other places as an example.
ReplyDeleteAs such an F-4 with a cannon pod would be more than a match for AC like that.