At this moment in time and looking at the problems of weight afflicting the program i would have to say the VTOL JSF (not the JSF general but just the VTOL version). They are trying to get too much..

also add to this i think the Eurofighter, its Swing role as aposed to multi role function is just nonsense even when we get it we are not going to use it for even 60% of its capability! They really are just making a mess of this one.

the Jaguar is a great idea and excuted nicely.. the EFA is just bloated

i like how he is still argueing this point after 5 pages.. either very stubborn or just out for a argument

Well what about the Gripen? J-10? FC-1? LCA? Latest Block F-16s are still pretty useful…. There really is still a decent choice out there.

the latest block F-16’s are pretty good, maybe even above good.. but the price tag is also that good.

Any news on COCO island?

damn no vids of things being blown up..

are we talking about a X29 derivative today? What the hell’s with all those ridiculous claims about not enough fuel or the size of the FCS. The X29 was developed in the days where FCS’s processing speed is particularly lacking…why would you have a problem today with it? Any advanced FCS is good enough for it, that means the room in the fuselage is back for the same volume as in the F20. Also, the X29 uses F16 parts….which F29 are we talking about? :confused: The X29 i know of is almost all based on the F5/T-38 series and is quite similar to the F20. No fuel in the wings…now IIRC the F5 doesn’t have it either. The only thing similar to the F16 is probably the landing gear. As to the “political” questions….i don’t think it was Mr. Hamburger’s intent here to simply look at the aircraft ifself, so no need to get all excited and start the usual US/US allies bashing….Garry. :rolleyes:

aahh my bad then, i thought it used ejector seats , landing gear etc from F-16 and a few other bits, getting mixed up with the X-31 i think.

But anhue i wouldnt want to fly one in combat..

It’s of course very dependant, like radar, on the conditions, although I’d say it’s more important for sonar than it is for Radar… Pressure differences are much larger in the water, pollution is also there… Other factors are salinity and temperature, which also differ a lot on area. These factors affect the speed of sound in that medium, slow it down or make it faster. This difference in speed allows it to bend (refract) down or up. So, it’s very important to have a good measure of them before you start transmitting. Submarines do this by pushing a probe from a tube in the ship’s hull. the probe then measures pressure, temperature etc. and sends its results to the sub. Then they have a good sight on what their sonar can and can’t do.
So a straight “RANGE” for sonar is very hard to predict and probably the range given, is the direct range, not bouncing on the bottom, watersurface etc. But I still wouldn’t dare to say that new Sonar gives the advantage to the surface ship.

*scratches head*

was that meant for me?