Talk:Royal Saudi Air Force

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

History[edit]

The first part of this article doesn't talk about the the history

of the Saudi Air Force at all. == 

Britain’s BAE Systems To Upgrade Saudi Tornado Jets: Report

By AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE, LONDON 11 Sep 06 http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?F=2095874&C=europe British defense company BAE Systems has won a major contract to upgrade Saudi Arabia’s aging Tornado fighter jets, weekly financial newspaper The Business said Sept. 10. The deal, worth 2.5 billion pounds ($4.6 billion), comes three weeks after the sale of 72 Eurofighter Typhoon planes to Saudi Arabia in a contract worth 10 billion pounds. ”It is not appropriate for BAE Systems to make any comment on discussions between these two parties,” a spokeswoman for the firm told The Business. However, an unnamed Saudi source told the newspaper: “This will add a lot to the Tornados. ”The old ones with the new technologies will become de facto new aircraft. They will be the new generation of Tornados with the inside configuration completely changed. ”It will be mostly done in the UK and then all the know-how will be passed on to the Saudis. And with such a cost, it makes sense.” The Business said the Royal Saudi Airforce hopes to keep its 80-strong fleet of Tornados flying until 2020. 81.86.144.210 21:10, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]


French orders cancelled? What French orders - none are referred to!JohnC (talk) 05:53, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tail Inscription[edit]

When discussing the tail inscription and how religion is important i think this is a BIT inaccurate. The article says how it has the declaration of faith on it. Well ... its not that it has it on the fin but its more the fin has the FLAG of saudi arabia on it, which also has that text on itJnusaira 18:25, 27 December 2006 (UTC)jnusaira[reply]

RSAF inventories[edit]

I have asked that the warring editors bring their debate on aircraft inventory quantities here, instead of disrupting work on their article by all the constant reverting (and breaking of the 3RR rule (which can get you suspended). It is usual for sources to disagree on numbers of aircraft in service. Where there is major disagreement (as for the F-15s here, for instance), it is proper for disagreeing editors to go to the talk page, present their numbers and identify their sources. It is possible that examination of multiple independent sources will lead to a consensus.

I have looked at Jane's World Air Forces and its entry (last updated 2006-11-28) gives a total of 150 F-15s in service (57 F-15C, 25 F-15D, and 68 F-15S). The quantity of 195 that at least one editor has given is actually higher than the total number of F-15s that Saudi Arabia has acquired altogether (74/24 F-15C/D and 72 F-15S = 170 aircraft in all). I haven't looked at the other disagreements yet, but I would ask that those editors who have been edit-warring post their information and identify their sources here. Askari Mark (Talk) 23:20, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image for public use[edit]

i recently made this flag below and i hope it would be useful. Ammar (Talk - Don't Talk) 10:30, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Which one is accurate? I see two. – Illegitimate Barrister, 20:20, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Is a comment seven years later a record? - only one image here. MilborneOne (talk) 20:47, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
File:Flag of the Royal Saudi Air Force1.png

EuroFighter Survey[edit]

Feel free to state your position on ( Adding Flags of the Four Manufacturer countries of EuroFighter into the Table) *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~ ,Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons. Ammar (Talk - Don't Talk) 21:26, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Comment: Ammar, you are right in sensing that this issue needs to be resolved diplomatically, but it is an issue with broader application than just the RSAF – or even Eurofighter GmbH, for that matter. If you don't mind, I've raised the issue on the WP:AIR talk page so that it can receive the broader coverage it deserves. Askari Mark (Talk) 23:07, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes , Good idea Ammar (Talk - Don't Talk) 07:11, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
We still didnt reach a final answer Askari . what now ?Ammar (Talk - Don't Talk) 19:10, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, "attendance" has been light ever since school started back up. Anyway, the next step is to be bold and see what it looks like. Don't worry, if someone doesn't like it, they'll soon let us know – well, fairly soon. Askari Mark (Talk) 01:39, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I see that MarlboroOne is not against the idea , but he removed the French flag for some reason :) . In fact , France is a GmbH member . Ammar (Talk - Don't Talk) 17:12, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it's an honest mistake. When people think of France and "fighter", they think Rafale, but then they forget that the French aero industry is larger than Dassault. I suspect we may have to tweak the order in terms of ownership share, though. Askari Mark (Talk) 17:21, 2 October 2007 (UTC
Not against the idea if it has consensus, although on smaller screens it gets a bit busy. Could help the small screen users if we removed the images from the right of the table. Sorry I have to disagree the French have nothing to do with Eurofighter, if you read the [Eurofighter website] and not the wiki article it clearly says: Alenia Aeronautics 21%, BAE Systems 33%, EADS CASA 13%, EADS Deutschland 33%. Perhaps confused because people lump the EADS shareholding together but in reality it is only the Germany and Spanish bits that are part of the consortium. So can I remove the French flag again please? MilborneOne 18:10, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, you're confusing workshare splits with ownership, and they're very different on this program. Before the DaimlerChrysler share dump in 2006, the ownership division of EADS was 30.35% French, 30.29% German, 5.53% Spanish, and 33.83% public shareholders. Given EADS’ 46% share of Eurofighter, this means the net ownership of Eurofighter was 33% British, 21% Italian, 14% French, 13.9% German, 2.5% Spanish, and 15.6% public. After the “rebalancing”, the ownership split for EADS became 24.81% French, 22.5% German, 5.53% Spanish, and 47.16% public. This means the revised ownership shares for Eurofighter became 33% British, 21% Italian, 11.41% French, 10.35% German, 2.54% Spanish, and 21.7% public. However, hidden in this public amount (and this is the kicker) is the fact that Russia acquired 6% of EADS through Vneshtorgbank; this means that Russia owns 2.76% of Eurofighter – more than production partner Spain (with only 2.54%)!! Wouldn't that really stir up the hornet’s nest?! Imagine the howling if I added the Russian flag! :o
I think in the end, though, we’ll probably want to list only the Eurofighter production partners in order of diminishing shares: UK, Germany, Italy, and Spain. (To avoid debates over the same percentages allotted to Germany and the UK, the tie-breaker should be the number of aircraft ordered.) The key question remains, though, does it look acceptable? Askari Mark (Talk) 21:14, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Improvement needed[edit]

The current aircraft inventory is a mess, its hould be tabled with categorization for fighter-bombers, trainers, transports, helicopters, etc!

Considering the possibility of an aerial-refuelled long distance Tornado + F-15E retaliatory airstrike on Switzerland over the recent mosque ban, soon there will be a lot of interest in the saudi air force article! 91.82.138.189 (talk) 22:53, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Should the Saudi Arabian Airlines aircrafts (Royal Flight) be included as Air force inventory or mentioned below? Same thing about F-15SE, UH-60, AH-64 or navy helicopters or ministry of health or Red Crescent Movement aircrafts.SojerPL (talk) 19:55, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is 87 F-15C + 25 F-15D in this list, i think SA received 47+15 C/D around 1982, 20+4 C/D in 1991 and 9+3 C/D up to 1992...--SojerPL (talk) 01:30, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

without even considering the accuracy of the numbers, the structure of the table itself is bad. the category called "transport helicopters" should either exclude the apache attack helicopters, or be changed to just "helicopters". it would be nice.... to redo the table.

Eurofighter[edit]

The Eurofighter is not a British aircraft, its an European aircraft. Pls change the flag.--78.43.37.96 (talk) 11:18, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Europe is not a country so a flag is not appropriate, many parts of Europe have nothing to do with the Eurofighter company, the origin normally indicated which country the aircraft originated from, all the RSAF aircraft are built at Warton in the UK. MilborneOne (talk) 19:47, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Royal Saudi Air Force. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:23, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Request for addition of PSATRI (a center established by Royal Saudi Air Force) in the See Also Section[edit]

I would kindly request you to add about PSATRI (Prince Sultan Advanced Technology Research Institute | معهد الأمير سلطان لأبحاث التقنيات المتقدمة) in "See also section" of your article.

I would also like to inform you that PSATRI is a defense research and development center established by King Saud University and Royal Saudi Air Force. This interlink from the founder's article to PSATRI's article and vice-versa will certainly prove beneficial for both of us.

Thank you.

Hnhusain (talk) 10:25, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:22, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:07, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Royal_Saudi_Air_Force&oldid=1208877322"