They’re flying F-14s by cannibalizing bits of their fleet for parts for other aircraft, and manufacturing simple components themselves. It’s not a sustainable approach, and the only reason they’ve been able to do it for 30 years is because they’ve flown only a handful of combat missions since the Iran-Iraq War (when the aircraft were new.)
The F-5s are a different story; they were well behind the leading edge of fighter technology when they were delivered, and they were sold to everyone, so spare parts are easy to find.
Did you seriously call it an unsustainable approach and then admit they’ve been doing it for 30 years? The aircraft were hardly all new at the beginning of the Iran-Iraq war, with initial deliveries having begun in 1976, and the war lasted 8 years. That they were able to keep a sizable percentage flying for all 8 years of war with no proper source of spares tends to sink the idea that the US can control the fly ability of aircraft it exports by controlling the source of spares.
They’ve obviously not flown many combat missions since the Iran-Iraq war; they haven’t been at war since. They have been flying plenty of non-combat missions since the end of the war, and in terms of sustainability the number of operational aircraft has in fact increased from 20 to 25 in recent years, hardly a sign that reverse engineering is an unsustainable approach. Again, the F-14 has only ever had two operators, the US has gone to extremes trying to keep spares out of the hands of Iran, yet Iran has kept them flying for 34 years after being cut off from US spare parts, fought an 8 year long war with them during which they scored 160 aerial kills and shows no sign of intending to retire or replace them in service. And yet you call that an unsustainable approach with a straight face?
Again, compared to the F-14 the F-16 would be a piece of cake to keep operational without a ‘proper’ source of spare parts; it is one of the most widely used combat aircraft in the world today.
Sounds like a great reason to get a few F-16s. So, since there are many operators, could the Egyptians find training and other support from sources other than the United States if relations were to sour? Has the US ever faced F-16s in combat?
We have and still do lease complete systems to allies/other nations. One example I worked on was returning HAWk missile systems (missiles, launcher, radars, command modules, and support equipment) from Norway after the lease period was up. I bleieve it was for 20 years initially then extended.
Some PATRIOT systems are leased to countries. It’s more expensive for them initially but usually included is software/hardware updates in the lease. To the country, it’s insures an up-to-date system throughout the lease rather than buying a couple of billion dollars of something that becomes a door stop with some new radar/stealth breakthrough.
No it has not. As it is, the Egyptians spare parts bit is misconceived, the Egyptians have a relatively advanced Aerospace Industry and IIRC they do make several spares themselves.
They also can get access to spares through the Turks, who had/have an F16 production line of their own.
Since you must’ve missed it, that’s an article from 2012, before the military coup against Morsi. AFAIK the most recent news as of five days ago is thatObama announced he would be delaying the transfer of F-16s until a through review of whether or not a coup is a coup is completed.
There’s an article here from Smithsonian Air & Space magazine entitled Persian Cats:How Iranian air crews, cut off from U.S. technical support, used the F-14 against Iraqi attackers, the author of the article also wrote Iranian F-14 Tomcat Units in Combat. Notable bits:
It’s a bit odd to think about, but the F-14 has been in service with Iran longer than it was in service with the US Navy. Iran also claims to have made the only confirmed kills with AIM-54 Phoenix missiles. Only two were fired in anger by US Navy F-14s and neither resulted in a confirmed kill. I found this kind of amusing: 4 F-14s seized at Southland airports
It’s as reliable as it’s going to get. DoD estimates were
Note the 25 F-14s assembled for a fly-over of Tehran in 1985 is the same number the Air & Space article says Iran kept operational in 1986. 25 is also the same as the 40% operational rate of the some 60 F-14 airframes they initially tried to keep in operational condition during the war (it works out to 40% of 62.5 airframes).
This is hardly anything new or unique to Iran. During the Battle of Britain overall the RAF over claimed losses it inflicted on the Luftwaffe by 155% while the Luftwaffe over claimed the number of RAF fighters it shot down by 334%. On specific days the RAF over claims were as great as the Luftwaffe’s; the RAF claimed to have shot down 185 German aircraft on September 15, 1940 while German records only show they suffered 60 losses. If I may quote J.F.C. Fuller in the introduction to the first edition of The Second World War
Italics added.
I’d just like to interject at this point that this quoted graf, particularly the italicized sentences, is one of the most comical I’ve ever seen in a work claiming to be historical.
Reportin’ and finding out stuff about stuff sure makes your puzzler hurt. It’s just plain to darn hard to fight ignorance.
US Navy pilots ferrying F14’s to Iran. http://flitetime.net/iran.html
the logic is that the small country won’t need skils and equipment to ferry them huge distances, so the USA’s pilots do the ferry trip.
Maybe the F16’s would land in Germany for refueling, and maybe not.
They don’t like to ship the planes… too much risk of damage ? Neither the F16 nor the carriers are setup for F16’s on carriers.
Point taken about the use of propaganda. Maybe it’s just my cultural bias to believe that any information coming out of a totalitarian regime is more suspect than most.
