Russian rocket technology were far ahead US after ww2
These remain till now.

and this is why Russian Iskander missile > any US, IDF, Europe tactical missile combined

just asking about the mkms, why so far i never seen our mkms equip with weapons?? i wonder why

already on the net

Go to mymil you can find tons of mkm picture including heavily armed and also some pic on mkm doing carpet bombing.

ok thanks bro, btw looking forward to 2014 for airforce budget and gowind class lcs finalize weaponry

http://ajw.asahi.com/article/behind_news/AJ201312140033
http://news.yahoo.com/japan-security-plan-...-095029931.html

and perhaps more Akizukis

This post has been edited by ChaNzy: Dec 17 2013, 06:41 PM

Mirage F1 yes

mirage 2000 no

Dunno if slowpoke or not but dat scream

Tudm ace pilot pakai sukhoi ker hornet ?

Mig...

if lease for 30 year cost about 3 Billion,

but if buy Sh or rafale cost less than or equal to 3 biilion,

so lease is more costly and it is Gripen C/D.

This post has been edited by waja2000: Dec 17 2013, 11:06 PM

18 sh + 4 aew =usd 2 Billion is abit too optimistic， SH block3 cost usd 80～90m some more price increase year by year. 4 AEW not cheap if want better performance.

This post has been edited by waja2000: Dec 17 2013, 11:06 PM

Do you have any article to back the figure?

Because recent quoted flyaway cost were around 56mil.
http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?i...1-01-611097.xml

I do recalled somewhere that e2d flyaway cost were around usd200mil.

miss aaahhhhhh holy fck

Well, they pioneered the supercavitation torpedo technology thanks to that...

any idea which aew that are most likely candidate 18 SH + 4 AEW package?
if look at the choice, option 1 and 3 is the most likely purchase.

ofc made in us aew (most possibly E-2. them bloody yanks are too cheapskate to sell us E-3.... and then singapore bising lg.....)

singapore need to understand

our common enemy is just down below

thing is, the us view my/sg situation like jordan+egypt+saudi arabia/israel in the middle east

they're trying to stabilize the region by rearming it's closest ally with the best weaponry possible, while also re-arming other allies in the region. the latter won't have qualitative edge to invade the former but are adequately armed just in case shyt happens. the former are better armed qualitatively but will not have clear quantitative edge to launch strategic-scale open war against its neighbors (which are also US allies).

it's a way for the US to stabilize the region. any imbalance in term of military acquisition will definitely destabilize the whole region.

try going through jordanian military assets. they are at least 1 generation behind the israeli, yet better than anything the syrian or iraninan have at the moment. same goes with egypt. they are the strongest military power in the whole of africa

the only way to bypass this logic is by buying other countries' equipmentd. but then it will make us farther from the us. as much as we hate it we still have to rely on unker sam just in case shyt happens