The HALE that Korea’s shopping for will replace the USAF U-2’s missions. Accordingly, this HALE needs to fly like a U-2, at 65,000 feet.

missle will reach there you need to fly low not high.

Rubbish.

You said that:

Ignoring the level of drivel in such a statement, Sweden, with an economy much smaller than Mexico and South Korea, have designed many different aeroplanes, and aeronautical programmes.

Let me ask you 2 questions, just to get a feel for things.

1.Is China the smartest country in the world?
2.Is China the most powerful country in the world?
3.Is China the best country in the world?

topic on this thread is about korea not china.

Without the STOVL requirement, the JSF competitors would have been completely different airplanes. They probably would be much, much larger, twin engined and have a 1200-1500 NM combat radius. Basically, it would replace the F-111 and Navy’s failed A-12.

in other words like this :diablo:

What about Sweden, Tigershark?

How do they fit into your little world?

its expensive for sweden, thats why they are working with other richer countries to make uavs. look it up.

I’d bet my money on a Eurofighter Typhoon FGR4 equipped with the CAPTOR-radar, PIRATE and DASS (with the CAPTOR-E AESA & Meteor well on their way) over any JF-17 or J-10.

What do you mean with “Typhoon doesn’t even have AESA”? Neither does the J-10 nor the JF-17. Seeing as the RAF has already eyed the option of implementing the CAPTOR-E before the implementation of the Meteor, the Typhoon would have its very capable AESA long before any reverse-engineered AESA radars on any JF-17 Block II or J-10B.

I have a feeling that the Gripen will be eliminated. It’s a great choice, but even though being the cheapest of the three and providing the best industrial off-set (or atleast on par with Boeings offers) it should have been the most reasonable choice if Brazil is on a strained economy, which is why they’ve post-poned the decision oh so many times. But because they’ve postponed it due to financial reasons, I have a feeling they want something more expensive, i.e. Boeing or Dassault.

I don’t see why they can’t choose two types though. The Super Gripen for the FAB and the Super Hornet for the Navy. They use the same sort of engine aswell as weapons and you can’t have a common training either way due to the large differences in the way they’re operated. Since the FAB has in mind a larger number of fighters (36), a cheaper alternative might be preferred, whilst the Navy, that eyes a smaller number (10-16 fighters), a heavier and more expensive option might be justified.

j10 already has aesa. typhoon 0.

Obviously. After all, it’s not as if there are any countries with much smaller economies than either making UAVs, let alone exporting them.

*** no need to keep pictures in quotes***

israel not a good example because they get money from the us. without the us israel cannot make the things they do.

Excuse me?

it is true, typhoon has slight advantage over jf17 because jf17 is a smaller fighter that needs some upgrades but very good for most south american air forces. j10b and j31 is obviously what you need if the country needs typhoon killers. typhoon doesnt even have aesa.