Fictional inventory of modern airforces

It's actually dificult, tbh. At the time the Marut came out, much of it was obsolete: 4 cannons, poor payload for a twin-engined plane, no radar... it could, at most, be a daytime point-defence interceptor, or an expensive air-support aircraft. Everything it did, every other aircraft could do either better or cheaper... or both. So, while a good engineering exercise that could have been used as a basis and example of what could or could not be done (specially at the level of the horrendous management...), as an atual combat plane it wasn't very good.

If we are talking about contemporary airplanes or jets that came immediately after, the IAF had a rather good one in the HAL Ajeet (itself a version of the Folland Gnat). The Gnat, which had been procured in large numbers for the IAF and produced under license by HAL, had acquitted itself favourably during its Indian service, including in active combat roles during multiple conflicts with Pakistan, including the Indo-Pakistani War of 1965 and the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971 (was especially effective against PAF sabre jets, so much so that it was nicknamed the Sabre slayer). As such, the IAF had a positive attitude towards the type, despite observing shortcomings in maintainability and some subsystems, thus, during 1972, the service issued a requirement calling for the development of an upgraded and more capable variant of the Gnat, leading to the development of the Ajeet by HAL.

The HAL Ajeet was a jet-propelled light fighter, primarily intended to function as a low-level interceptor aircraft, while also being capable of ground-attack missions. Being a derivative of the earlier Gnat, the aircraft appeared to be visually similar to its predecessor; the presence of a pair of extra underwing hardpoints being amongst the only obvious distinguishing features from the older Gnat. In general, the Ajeet was equipped with a variety of more capable avionics and onboard systems than the original design. However, the addition of these extra subsystems and features was not without consequence, as the Ajeet was less agile than the original Gnat.

One of the more significant changes made for the Ajeet was the addition of a wet wing, housing aviation fuel in the interior space within the wing. This had several effects on the overall design, including the substantial expansion of its internal fuel capacity and the freeing up of several underwing hardpoints that had been previously occupied by external fuel tanks, allowing for their use in the carriage of other equipment and armaments. Furthermore, the carriage of even-greater payloads was also enabled via the installation of an additional pair of underwing hardpoints.

Certain aspects of the aircraft were heavily redesigned from the Gnat, such as the much enhanced hydraulic systems, the improved landing gear arrangement, and refined control systems, to produce superior performance, compared to their original counterparts.[8] The control surfaces were enhanced via the adoption of a slab tail configuration, which was unique to the Ajeet. It was also decided to outfit the aircraft with improved Martin-Baker GF4 ejection seats for improved survivability.

E2426.jpg


(Picture sourced from google images)

Again, if the Indian government had continued with the program, and kept on improving it, in my opinion, the current generational version would be comparable to the Gripen or F-16.
 
I mean the f-16 had so many versions (blocks), as did the Mig, from Mig 1 to now Mig 35.

The various MiGs weren't different versions of the same aircraft, they were actually different designs from the same design bureau (Mikoyan-Gureivich, thus 'MiG'). If you would like evidence of this claim, consider some of the later members of the MiG family - the MiG-25 is clearly different to the MiG-27, which is clearly different to the MiG-29.
 
The various MiGs weren't different versions of the same aircraft, they were actually different designs from the same design bureau (Mikoyan-Gureivich, thus 'MiG'). If you would like evidence of this claim, consider some of the later members of the MiG family - the MiG-25 is clearly different to the MiG-27, which is clearly different to the MiG-29.

Agreed. Perhaps I phrased it wrongly. What I meant by versions was that each model would be radically improved from the preceding model and for the better. In essence, I suppose that would make them a different model/design altogether, with just the name being common.
 
PHANTOM's A Go-Go!

Although this isn't about a specific Air Force I was wondering about a greater sale of F-4 Phantoms if there was a larger budget for the MAP (Military Assistance Program), and earlier breaking of the Lockheed F-104 scandal before any non US sales and a better performing economy of the nations stated.

AUSTRALIA

116 F-$'s purchased instead of Mirage III/5 (114 license built)

BRAZIL

68 F-4's purchased instead of F-5's
30 F-4's purchased instead of Mirage III/5

CANADA

58 F-4's license built instead of F-5's
58 F-4's license built instead of F-101 Voodoo's
118 F-4's license built instead of F-104 Starfighters

COLOMBIA

40 F-4's purchased instead of Mirage III/5 & Kfir's (purchased in two batches over twenty year period.)

ECUADOR

Purchased in two batches

12 F-4's purchased instead of Mirage III/5
12 F-5's purchased instead of Kfir's

IRAN

166 F-4's purchased instead of F-5's

JAPAN

230 F-4's license built instead of F-104's

MEXICO

12 F-4's purchased instead of F-5's

PERU

40 F-4's purchased instead of Mirage III/5

PHILLIPINES

37 F-4's purchased instead of F-5's

SOUTH KOREA

214 F-4's license built instead of F-5's

TAIWAN

306 F-4's license built instead of F-5's
282 F-4's license built instead of F-104's

TURKEY

86 F-4's purchased instead of F-5's
200 plus F-4's purchased 2nd hand over twenty year period.

UNITED KINGDOM

24 F-4's purchased on top of the 170 as in original timeline to replace last two EE Lightning Sqns

VENEZUALA

46 F-4's purchased instead of F-5's (two batches)
 
Last edited:
If we are talking about contemporary airplanes or jets that came immediately after, the IAF had a rather good one in the HAL Ajeet (itself a version of the Folland Gnat). The Gnat, which had been procured in large numbers for the IAF and produced under license by HAL, had acquitted itself favourably during its Indian service, including in active combat roles during multiple conflicts with Pakistan, including the Indo-Pakistani War of 1965 and the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971 (was especially effective against PAF sabre jets, so much so that it was nicknamed the Sabre slayer). As such, the IAF had a positive attitude towards the type, despite observing shortcomings in maintainability and some subsystems, thus, during 1972, the service issued a requirement calling for the development of an upgraded and more capable variant of the Gnat, leading to the development of the Ajeet by HAL.

The Ajeet was a neat little fighter, and would have been much easier a cheaper to keep on upgrading...

BRAZIL

68 F-4's purchased instead of F-5's
30 F-4's purchased instead of Mirage III/5

Just a head's up, I doubt Brazil would be able aford aquisition and operation of the F-4...
 
While it's minor as feck given it's the Irish Air Corps, some POD's and ramifications:
If in the 80s the original decision on the Lynx rather than the Dauphin's ideally teamed with the original planned Eithne buy ends up with 6-12 airframes.
Same time the plan for procuring the Puma helicopters goes ahead instead of just the lease of 1 giving the Air Corps a combination of capable helicopters in the 80's.

Into the 90's instead of just the 2 CASA's the AC manages to get 3 MPA variants along with their massive attempt to keep the one on Lease for transport operations. Meanwhile as a "Peace Process" buy perhaps Dublin decides to order 8-12 Short Turcano's in the earlier 90's retiring the older trainers.

Into the 00's, under pressure from the UK and the rest of the EU after 9/11 Ireland moves towards a leasing arrangement with Sweden for Gripens*, along with the Air Corps proposal for procuring 2 C130's for transport and humanitarian operations.

* OTL the RAF covered Irish Airspace immediately after 9/11 and a inter-governmental agreement was made without the DF's involvement to agree for this to continue.
 

Riain

Banned
Although this isn't about a specific Air Force I was wondering about a greater sale of F-4 Phantoms if there was a larger budget for the Military Assistance Program, and earlier breaking of the Lockheed F-104 scandal before any non US sales and a better performing economy of the nations stated.

AUSTRALIA

116 F-$'s purchased instead of Mirage III/5 (114 license built)

BRAZIL

68 F-4's purchased instead of F-5's
30 F-4's purchased instead of Mirage III/5

CANADA

136 F-4's license built instead of F-5's
132 F-4's license built instead of F-101 Voodoo's
236 F-4's license built instead of F-104 Starfighters

COLOMBIA

40 F-4's purchased instead of Mirage III/5 & Kfir's (purchased in two batches over twenty year period.)

ECUADOR

Purchased in two batches

12 F-4's purchased instead of Mirage III/5
12 F-5's purchased instead of Kfir's

IRAN

166 F-4's purchased instead of F-5's

JAPAN

230 F-4's license built instead of F-104's

MEXICO

12 F-4's purchased instead of F-5's

PERU

40 F-4's purchased instead of Mirage III/5

PHILLIPINES

37 F-4's purchased instead of F-5's

SOUTH KOREA

214 F-4's license built instead of F-5's

TAIWAN

306 F-4's license built instead of F-5's
282 F-4's license built instead of F-104's

TURKEY

86 F-4's purchased instead of F-5's
200 plus F-4's purchased 2nd hand over twenty year period.

VENEZUALA

46 F-4's purchased instead of F-5's (two batches)

In terms of purchase price and operating cost an F4 would be equal to maybe 2 Mirages and 3 F5s, so Australia would swap 116 mirage III for 58 F4s and so on.

I'd also add that many countries used the F4 as a strike aircraft rather than a fighter, certainly the RAAF and Israel did.
 
This is for my ASB TL that involves a SI into the Cambodian Prime Minister Norodom Sihanouk in 1967 and represents the inventory of the Air Force following my attempt to consolidate the types operated. Where possible I also attempted to find types that made sense from the Non Aligned movement.

  • The Royal Flying School at Pochentong operated an Advanced Training Squadron consisting of eight Yakolev 18 Max and four L - 29 Delfin.

  • The Intervention Group operates twelve MiG-21F 13 fighter jets and eighteen North American T-28D Trojan fighter-bombers.

  • The Observation and Combat Accompanying Group operates eight Cessna L-19A Bird Dog observation light aircraft.

  • The Transport and Liaison Group operated one DC 9 (VIP transport), twelve DHC 4 Caribou, and six PC 6 Porters.

  • The Helicopter Group employs eight Mil Mi-4 Hounds transport helicopters, plus six Sud Aviation SA 316B Alouette III light helicopters.
 
Into the 00's, under pressure from the UK and the rest of the EU after 9/11 Ireland moves towards a leasing arrangement with Sweden for Gripens*, along with the Air Corps proposal for procuring 2 C130's for transport and humanitarian operations.
I have to ask where Ireland would get the pilots for the Gripens, you don't jump straight out of a trainer into such an aircraft.
 
I have to ask where Ireland would get the pilots for the Gripens, you don't jump straight out of a trainer into such an aircraft.
A fair question, given Irish defence procurement even if this decision happened circa 2002-03 it would most likely be closer to the end of the decade for it to be developed, which would allow for training experience in friendly nations, I mean hell two AC pilots right now have managed to get 2 years down in Australia with the RAAF for training, so maybe as the "Nordic Battlegroup" idea was developing a deal with Sweden? Even before that point if the suggestions I'd made happened you'd be talking a much larger AC with more manpower already.

EDIT: To be clear I'm only talking about something like the current leases to some of the Eastern EU nations, about a squadron of planes.
 
Last edited:
In terms of purchase price and operating cost an F4 would be equal to maybe 2 Mirages and 3 F5s, so Australia would swap 116 mirage III for 58 F4s and so on.

I'd also add that many countries used the F4 as a strike aircraft rather than a fighter, certainly the RAAF and Israel did.
This is why the RCAF never "went there".
The equivalencies presented in the post that you quoted are entirely unsupportable.
The F-4 (as I have stated many times on this board) would have been a far better solution for Canada once we dropped the Nuclear role in our NATO posture.
It could have also replaced the CF-101B/F in NORAD and given us a "one fits all" mentality fleet.
Problem is PET. Who doesn't want to spend a dime on the Military...unless he can use it to buy Political Capital in Quebec.
This is why we spent a ton of money "re-configuring" the CF-104 as a (less than adequate) ground attack aircraft. This is why we dumped another ton of money into Cartierville to build a fleet of aircraft (CF-116) that the:
-1: RCAF did not want/have use for
-2: Subsequently became a huge Political problem when we tried to divest ourselves of this stupidity...See the Venezuela sale.

The GOC has been basically retarded since the mid 1960's, when it comes to buying aircraft.

Arrow? Good decision. Kill it. Irrelevant.
Overpriced white elephant.
The 66 101's (in two batches) more than fulfilled our NORAD obligation.
Fleets coming onboard in 1959-1963?
CP-107 Argus. The most potent ASW platform at the time. Win!
CC-130E Hercules. Say no more.
CC-106 Yukon. Turboprop driven and highly efficient for long haul transport. Flexibility in terms of cabin configuration is a bonus.
CF-104 program? Total win in NATO's eyes (which is what really mattered back then).

After that we start sliding downhill...
The NORAD aspect was always maintained and supported throughout the stupidity of the Trudeau (Mk 1) years however and this was all about how good McDonnel's F-101 actually was.

Thoughts?
 
If it was nonaligned suppliers I'm surprised they didn't consider the SAAB landen, draken and viggen? Or did they ?
Mirage F1 in 1970s could have been an option rather than buying jaguar/mig27 and even mig23/ 29

Non aligned is not the same as natural. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-Aligned_Movement

Sweden, while natural, is mostly consider as part of the West.

Also, Sweden is unlikely to offer a comprehensive deal including tech transfer to India. France and Sovier did so in order to try to bring India into their circle for straregic purpose, so they are willing to sweeten the deal beyond simple commerical gain. Sweden not so much.

Also, SAAB did pitch the Viggen to IAF, but the IAF want a deep penetrator. The then Indian PM and a pilot himself, Rajiv Gandhi, was interested.

At the end, US eliminated the possibility of any deal by refusing to issue expoet license for the engine:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab_37_Viggen

In 1978, the United States blocked a major prospective sale to India, which would have involved selling a number of Swedish-built Viggens in addition to a licensed production agreement under which the Viggen would also have been built in India, by not issuing an export license for the RM8/JT8D engine and other American technologies used.[100][101] India later opted to procure the SEPECAT Jaguar in its place.[102] According to leaked United States diplomatic cables, India's interest in the Viggen was reported to be entirely due to Rajiv Gandhi's influence, and had alleged have been without any input from the Indian Air Force.[100][103] According to author Chris Smith, the Viggen had been the favoured candidate for the Indian Air Force prior to the deal being blocked by the US.[/QUOTE]

Remember what I said about US pressure in my previous post? It is wise for the Indians to diversify their sources of equipment.

The Mirage F1 was also considered, but in the end IAF choosed Jaguar.
 

Riain

Banned
This is why the RCAF never "went there".
The equivalencies presented in the post that you quoted are entirely unsupportable.

The RAAF evaluated the F4C as a long range strike aircraft in 1963, but rejected it because it lacked range. The RAAF operated F4E on a 3 year lease from 1970, again in the long range strike role.

So are there countries who bought other aircraft for the long range strike role that could be replaced by Phantoms?
 
I have to ask where Ireland would get the pilots for the Gripens, you don't jump straight out of a trainer into such an aircraft.

The RAF's the obvious training partner for them - relations between the UK and the Republic are good enough by the 2000s and the UK actually has a couple of Gripens with the Empire Test Pilot School. The other option would be the Americans. I doubt it makes any sense for the Republic to try and develop their own fast jet pilot training scheme.
 
A fair question, given Irish defence procurement even if this decision happened circa 2002-03 it would most likely be closer to the end of the decade for it to be developed, which would allow for training experience in friendly nations, I mean hell two AC pilots right now have managed to get 2 years down in Australia with the RAAF for training, so maybe as the "Nordic Battlegroup" idea was developing a deal with Sweden? Even before that point if the suggestions I'd made happened you'd be talking a much larger AC with more manpower already.

EDIT: To be clear I'm only talking about something like the current leases to some of the Eastern EU nations, about a squadron of planes.

It would cheaper if Ireland can get F-16 through the US FMS program.
 
Top