Christopher Teoh

Oh yeah I used to fly them, IIRC NW69/70. The routing is DTW-KIX-KUL. The DTW-KIX is always full (747-451) while the onwards to KUL is near empty (DC-10-30). The route is sold as DTW-KUL with stop and equipment change in KIX, all the while maintaining the same flight number. I think NWA would have done better if they routed it via NRT instead. Sadly they pulled-out (but NWA vowed to return someday) in around 2001 or 02.

The Dornier SeaStar was also there back in 93/95. I remember being all excited when news broke that Dornier will shift SeaStar's production line to Penang. Guess nothing happened. BTW is LIMA losing its stature? In the early days ('93) they would bring the MD-11 down for the show - Swiss HB-IWE to be precise. Today we turn the clock and get IL-86!!!

I have photos from LIMA'91/93/95. You will have to wait a while before I can scan them and have it posted because my albums are tucked away in Malaysia (I'm in the US right now). I am planning on visiting home in around June, only then will I be able to post them up. Yes, the Russian Knights were here during 91/93. Sadly I watch their last aerial display in '93 before their ill-fated departure back for Russia. The Russian Swift were right there too with their Mig-29As if I recall correctly. Anyway, reflecting back on the old LIMA's it is ironic to note that all the main Russian fighters on display there (except for the Mig-31) are now part of the RMAF inventory!

Yes indeed the RMAF is a fragmented force. The only thing Malaysian government is consistent about is for NOT placing follow-on orders. I'm crossing my fingers that in the near future Malaysia will get realistic and swap the Hornets for the Super Bug and either go for more Super or Su-30MKM to meet the requirement for a second MRCA squadron. In the mean time I am prepared to jump out of my window just in case Malaysia pulls a 'Malaysian' stunt by ordering something as obscene as the Rafale or Typhoon for the second MRCA squadron. Cheers

Sweet-sweet goodies there, especially those from Sukhoi! Back in LIMA'93 the Russians were actually selling their flight gears and badges under the wing of a Mig-29. I bought a Russian flight badge from the Mig-29 Tochka Opori pilot for RM5. Some dude bought the pressure suite for RM150! cheers

Wow, interesting. From the wheel print it indicates that this is the former USAF SAC FB-111A nuclear bomber that was downgraded to a conventional 'G' before selling them to RAAF.

RMAF fleet plan may be disjointed, with a bit of everything. However, the choice of aircraft class is fundamentaly sound - long range, twin engine with overwater capability. Thailand or Singapore does not have a vast presence of water to cover unlike Malaysia. There's always debate on single-engine light weight fighter versus twin-engine heavier fighter. For Malaysia, the pros and cons of single-engine versus twin-engines: Single-Engine Pros 1) Quick turn-around during war time 2) Better geared for sustained attrition warfare 3) Cheaper purchasing cost Cons 1) Lacks capability for over water operations (war & peace) 2) Generaly lacks 'first-punch' capability during war 3) Higher operating cost during peace time - as Malaysia will require greater force multiplier (tankers etc) to keep the less capable aircraft longer legged or have its effectiveness envelope expanded Twin-Engine Pros 1) Generally cheaper peace time direct operating cost 2) Twin engine safety for overwater flight 3) Genuine first-strike capability Cons 1) Twin-engines aircraft generally becomes less combat capable in the long run during attrition war. Face it, twin-engine always raises the statistical chance of engine failure. You may have two but all it takes is to have one engine dead to scrub a mission 2) More complex and more labour intensive during war 3) More expensive to buy Yours to pick but as for me I think Malaysia is on the right step - in terms of aircraft class. However said, RMAF ought to sell off those MiGs and trade-off those 'Bugs' for 'Super Bugs'. Should concentrate on Super Bugs and Flankers, atleast two FULL squadron for each type. Cheers

Correct me if I'm wrong about this. IIRC shortly before the '97 financial crisis, AK was in advance negotiation for a fleet of 763 (10?) to begin Mid East/European routes.

Hi, don't mind that I respond to this. The Mig-29B is the downgraded export version of the Mig-29A. The Mig-29UB is the corresponding two-seater.

Horror

Not the arming code but the Threat warning Code. RMAF, if I'm not mistaken, did a Harpoon, Maverick firing exercise. The Hornets are fully capable of combat operations 24/7. Malaysia do not need uncle sams head nod everytime we want to fire something. Someone posted a link a year back or so on another forum that included a video of RMAF Hornets firing AGM-65s and CRV-7. I am going to look for that link again or try to find the wherebouts of it. iwan, Let both the MKM and Super Bug take over...rid of everything else.

Looking at the cockpit thank-god it is not painted in the typical Russian puke-green color. Notice the Thales HUDWAC, Rafale style. The MKI is equiped with food storage and waste disposal system, I wonder if the MKM is the same.

Adrianqcs, thanks for the post. It is incredible how adamant RMAF is in wanting a disparate fleet of aircraft. I agree in the Super Hornets and I will also agree in a second batch of MKM. Everything else should go. RMAF seems to want different aircrafts for every different itsy-bitsy mission. RMAF, the jack of all trade and a master of none.

Here's one Low cost carrier = No Frills Ultra low cost carrier = BYOK (Bring Your Own Kerusi)

That was how most folks thought. Technology had become so high and mighty that a fighter is merely a launch platform and void of guns and close-in turn capabilities - so they just stand-off and shoot BVR. The result? Vietnam. Guns were quickly installed (F-4Es), turn slats were quickly scabbed-in (F-4E,G,N,S) so they could close-in and turn with the Migs. What was the lessons learned in Vietnam? Stand-off will never result in 100% kill, you will end up mixing-in in an old fashion grind out dogfight. Uncle Sam swore never to repeat itself again and produced the awesome F-15/F-16/F-18 - fighters that not only will shoot BVR but also tango with you up close. Today's successors, the F-22/F-35 (count the Su-30 in as well), adheres to that same principle as well. Why F-22/Su-30 thrust vector? So it could turn when needed to. If people think that today is all about stand-off and shoot BVR we will have an F-4 incarnation all over again. For every measure there is counter-measure. Offensive technology progresses and so does defensive measures as well. Most pilot will swear to you up and down that it is easier to out-turn and counter a missile than it is to engage up-close. Once the smoke clears form a BVR volley hell you know its time grind it out. BVR and old fashion dogfight goes hand-in-hand.