Azerbaijan vs Armenia

Kirjoittanut Khal.eesi, 11.04.2016 at 04:11

Kirjoittanut Skanderbeg, 10.04.2016 at 16:43

Kirjoittanut Khal.eesi, 10.04.2016 at 16:18

So Bulgaria has better airforce than Europe's finest? Even from France and Uk, who make their own and top all the global firepower rankings? Not to mention combat experience and training, since the five countries i mentioned have actually deployed and taken part in Nato missions. When did Bulgaria ever fly its fighters? (if it even has, sorry didnt bother to click the link you provided!)

Global firepower ranking is like World University ranking - biased. MiG-29 is easier to handle, easier to pilot, easier to learn, it has simple parts, easy to mount(parts, guns), dismount and repair, better aim, stronger radio, better electronics, safer seat. 30 Bulgarian are definitely more efficient in combat than 100 Panavias or F-16.

I don't have time to post links and quotes but half of the world knows this for the last 20 years, google is available to you.

Try to find about Russians taking MiG-29 radio and radars from the Serbs in 1999 when they lost Kosovo and US army arrived. That was on Pristina airport and Americans saw how Russian technicians and mechanics are taking out tech from MiGs nose.. i was there.. Because that tech allow MiGs to find, recognize and aim enemy planes faster than NATO, thus MiG can shoot in range of 80km, F-16 need get close to 60km to aim and shoot.

p.s.
Even other Soviet aeroplanes are better than NATO, for example MiG-25 stolen from USSR and examined by Japan reported it was superior than NATO, faster and cheaper. There are many reports like that, even with tanks like t-55 examined in English embassy in Hungary during 1954 revolution, report it was superior than M48.

You have to dettach yourself from deep-rooted belief that pouring money into military industry equals strong war machines. Point is to create cheap war machines, which you can easy learn, use and repair, like Soviets did.

You are right in your last sentence, Saudi is a good example of this. But not Nato.

Anyway i googled

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/air-space/air-force/2015/04/29/bulgaria-air-force-mig-russia-fighters-service-repair-nato/26594971/
http://www.novinite.com/articles/171220/Bulgaria+Needs+New+Fighter+Jets+-+Air+Force+Chief

Bulgaria has to replace its MIG's cause they suck. Their soviet era airforce is old and not reliable. They will either buy f-16's, eurofighters or swedens gripens. Or they will make the same deal with Nato that Baltic countries made, meaning pay European Nato AF to police their airspace.

How is that the best AF in Europe, for the life of me i dont get it Tito wtf



Checking wikipedia as well, lets just see how Bulgaria fares against Greece, im not even gonna mention UK and France, for obvious reasons.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgarian_Air_Force
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hellenic_Air_Force

"The Bulgarian Air Force's inventory numbers around 137 aircraft, including 55-56 combat jets, but only the MiG-29s, about a dozen Su-25s and a few MiG-21s are flight worthy. Personel 6.500 "

"Greece owns 444+ aircraft, of which 318 fighters, 205 of them are modern jets. Around 150 F-16's, most of them advanced type (block 50+).Greece is constantly modernizing its fleet of older Fighters (Mirages and F-4s). Greece most probably operates the most dense air defense system infrastructure among NATO states. Personel 33.000"

** A safe conclusion is that Bulgaria cant even dream of handling their own against Greece, so dont even bother making the comparison with the top 3 European Airforces.

oh good old thracian-greek hatred

If Russia didn't get involved, Azer would have taken Armenia long ago. It all really depends on how much the Turks want a war. And they seem to be upping their game in pissing off the bear.