as proven in the Falklands when Mirage 111 & 5 lost out to Sea-Harriers However Mirage 111 DNA is still very much around today in Kfir Blk60 which proves what a good design it was

When exactly did they loose against the Sea Harrier ? As i remember it, the British fleet was placed out of their effective range (probably for a reason)

Is there something i don’t know ?

As has been pointed out earlier, the absolute numbers are bound to be wrong in a general study, due to the many variable factors in local use. Janes however, gives a good idea on how costly one platform is, related to another.

If any of you who does not LIKE the Janes study can give a better source of information, then please do so.

France share this low threat environment with Brazil so France could safely turn Rafale into reinventing the wheel type of tech demonstrator for the domestic industry. Many other buyers would consider bang for the buck. I’m quite fed up with “since you only do airpolicing gripen is ok”. I look forward to follow some of the other threads to see if we see some progress on Meteor integration, datalinks and MAWS.

I guess i see your point here, since F-18 is the lesser fighter to the Gripen, by his argument, the USA must do with “less than a police aircraft.”

I want a serious and honest behaviour from people who says Gripen C/D has lower operational costs than other air fighters, but refuse to show a recent official data to support their claims.

Where is the official data from Sweden ? USA, France, Brazil, South Africa, England, Austria, etc, show the air fighters operational costs.

From the way you have expressed yourself about this topic, i suggest you came here smelling for a rat. I think you want it so bad that you will create it, if you cannot find it.

About the Janes data, it might not be the correct numbers for a specific user with specific costs. But rather it uses average numbers to indicate cost difference, thus more useful for comparison.

Blitzo

There’s no contention that they cannot generate a modest sortie rate but there are hard limits on what can be achieved with a circa 24 cab airgroup, with a carrier not designed for efficient strike generation and without critical force multipliers that CATOBAR enables. What the aircraft can takeoff with is almost an irrelevence by this point. This is the point I was making earlier about the PLAN not visibly equipping to head west.

The limitation here is more the lack of development of relevant aircraft. The US is the only party that has the full range of carrier aviation. This does not mean that STOVL capable support aircraft can not be developed. However since the US is the only nation that is willing to put up the funding, this is likely to continue, Unless China goes at it in a major way.

F16xl is the most known example, but there has been others. Even if the “French solution” has been the favored design in service aircraft, it is clear that the Draken has inspired more designers, and therefore is more future oriented than the others.

I say draken because the wing design was modern enough to be copied in later designs. Also because it had the first datalink system.