Although you are right that the Zapatistas have not been active in a while, dont forget that Mexico did use their PC-7's and their armed Defenders against them when the insurgency first rose up. The international community hardly even blinked because they correctly assumed that it was just another left wing unorganised bunch of zealots that didnt have any true leadership.
There is actually nothing that can stop a guerrila action from occurring. If the conditions are right, and in alot of parts of Mexico they are, all of the guns and planes and tanks can stop it from starting or developing. Just look at Vietnam or the current situations in Iraq, Afghanistan or Chechnya(?) for proof of that. Guerrilla groups are never defeated, they are just brought into the mainstream and given political power.
I do however agree with you that Cobra's or Apache's are overkill for Mexico's needs. And even though I think that the purchase of 100 412's is a good start, it is no where near the number that Mexico really needs to be effective. I mean look at the US for example. They have purchased over 1600 Blackhakws since its production began. I know that the size and needs of Mexico's military dont warrant such a procurement, but 100 versus 1600?? Something is not right there. I guess since Mexico only spends about 0.5% of its GDP on military spending versus the US spending 4.05%, that is to be expected...
they wont do it because its the army they never take such risk in developing tech or capability to do any thing so bold as produce helicopters in the country. The navy would for sure do something like that in licesing and buiding there own air craft.
The only way to get rid of a guerrila movement is not to allow it to start by treating all your citizens with respect and just laws.
Actually not, mate, Salinas did stop military ops, because of the critics of international comunity, the army over reacted in it´s strenght and due to media had no control a lot of news were going out the country showing not vey good stuff. Just contrary to what you said, the leadership was settled from the beginig and preciseley the "left" of the world was very interested in such events.Although you are right that the Zapatistas have not been active in a while, dont forget that Mexico did use their PC-7's and their armed Defenders against them when the insurgency first rose up. The international community hardly even blinked because they correctly assumed that it was just another left wing unorganised bunch of zealots that didnt have any true leadership.
Your right, but some guerrillas can be destroyed, for example the Lucio Cabañas one, was sucha head ache for the army, those really were combats and campaigns, that was the true last guerrilla, what wehave now as ezln or epr are just jokes, sad sad jokes.. Guerrilla groups are never defeated, they are just brought into the mainstream and given political power
License are given to builders, there must be an aviation enterprise capable of doing a production line and respect the standards, and most important such deals are lot more complicated cause they involve what is called "industrial technological exchanges" wich would call for an enourmous investment wich neither the navy and the army simply have. That´s why it´s an issue of industrial proportion.
A country wich have an indigenous aeronautical industry could have ensamble them, but a country wich don´t, then will have to buy them.
It´s not just to put pieces togheter is a matter of industry. No army or mavy in the world arms it´s own aircraft. Always is done by a third part.
And before someone mentions the lancair and the rotorx project of the navy, those were garage aircraft, not actual or real combat high performance aircraft , those are recerational, and are meant to be armed by the costumer.
With such a large order, I don't see why they wouldn't want to negotiate a production license, or in the case with the Mils, start up a regional overhaul facility. That would create more jobs and definitely give a little boost in their economy.
As a private pilot I will tell you that a Lancair is as complicated if not more so than some of the junk that the FAM is stuck using right now. You know for a little while there I felt kind of bad for you the way Gomez was so adept at picking out all of your mistakes, but now I see why. You say some of the stupidest things!!
All aircraft work on the same premise. Wether its a Robinson R-22 or an Apache, the fundementals of flight are all the same. I cant seem to understand why you would find it acceptable for an independent and private company, i.e. an individual, to have the balls to start his or her own aviation company along the lines of Cirrus or Lancair or even Cessna for that matter, but dont think that the Mexican government has the capability to do so. Traditionally in Mexico, when the people needed something the government took control of it. Doesnt matter if it was a good idea or not. There is absolutely no reason that the Mexican government cant invest in its own future and have an aviation industry. Who knows, they may even one day be able to build stuff that other countries want to buy!!
So please, dont be so arrogant as to think that you have all of the answers or know about everything. I would bet that I can jump in a Lancair and show you what a real aircraft is!
When did I said otherwise? if you want to call me stupid, at leats don´t be so stupid as to miss undertsand.All aircraft work on the same premise. Wether its a Robinson R-22 or an Apache, the fundementals of flight are all the same
Lancairs´ and rotor x are not what can call a major cosntruction, that was the only thign I said, if you want to compare building 3 of this, vs to mount a production line to buils 100 bell´s. then you are being very stupid.
Not teh balls, but the money, is not about balls it´s about money, Governament aint gonna bea private any more due to our economical system, if you think that govt should set a building plan, then once again you are being absoloutly stupid.I cant seem to understand why you would find it acceptable for an independent and private company, i.e. an individual, to have the balls to start his or her own aviation company
This si not 1967 anymore, governament is getting rid stil of being buissnes man and client.
I don´t think, I know, if you know so well dear pilot, answer em why haven´t it done it?but dont think that the Mexican government has the capability to do so. Traditionally in Mexico,
Ho yes there is, it´s called "neoliberalismo" in wich governament avoids being buissnes man and client, its one of the mistakes of last past policies. It´s soemthing goverament doesn´t want any more.There is absolutely no reason that the Mexican government cant invest in its own future and have an aviation industry. Who knows, they may even one day be able to build stuff that other countries want to buy!!
The sad true is that mexico, and mexicans doesn´t have an aeronautical industry of such magnitude in economical terms to do this job, due to the uncentantly no one is going to bet his money in such thing. Sad, but true, and I agre governament shouldn´t be involved in giving the money of the mexicans so other can build a helicopter, there are bigger priorities.
You may be a pilot, and lecture me on how to fly a plane, its ok, but as long as politics and economics are cocnerned the stupid are you.
I´d love this to happen, but by now it´s so far far away.
It´s not about "secret spy thech technology" if the aicraft holds sensitive taged technlogy, like only for US army, it can´t be selled, simple, the equipment must be replaced by another or the clients choice. This is another big problem, if a coutry like Mexico wich holds no allied status may want secret or other kind of technology it must be aproved by some of the political authorities in the US.
Like Chile who was denied of the AMRAMS then it worked eally hard to get them, almost cancelling the f-16 deal, then it was aproved under certain conditions.
Whenever a country has a self industry, and buys license, there is something called in spanish " intercambios echnologicos y coménsaciones comerciales" wich is basicly "how are you gonna pay me for the technology I´m transfering to you?"
So appart of having your own line, paying for building them, you have to setlle and bargain for all the technology, how much are going things to get compensated, so neither the US builder gets a bad buissnes and the local governament may have it´s own boost. for exmaple,: You don´t want buy bell the blades, cause there is some guy who builds them in chihuahua.
Then you bargain and compensate about not buying bell, his blades, etc etc etc
It´s a very complicated issue , it´snot just buying the license and start assembling. Sometimes this would take years.
For a coutnry like ours it´s cheaper just to buy them, sad, but true.
chile...for example, it´s one of the better examples in this. It would be absoloutly great for mexico to assemble it´s own aircraft, to promote economical´s and develop technology. But by know conditions are not there.
Last edited by Wolfpack; 08-18-2007 at 12:12 PM.
Second, Lancair has hardly remained a mom and pop garage operation. It has evolved into one of the most successful and advanced general aviation aircraft companies in the world. It makes one of the most advanced and what is currently the fastest single engine prop certified aircraft in the world. So I would venture to say that they started somewhere.
You are right about one thing, its not 1967 anymore. And that is exactly why Mexico should take the initiative and start to take care of its future. Building an aircraft is the second easiest part of aircraft ownership, next to actually flying it. The R&D is by far the most expensive and complicated part of the process. That is why I suggested that Mexico should start its aviation industry with license building a product that is tried and tested so that it can measure the gains that it makes in the field. What better way to learn if you are doing something right than to have the people who designed it and have built it for years tell you if its right.
Oh, and by the way, I apologize for misunderstanding some of your statements. Its just that your English sucks.