If you can get the first shots off and make the other guy turn first then you’ve just dictated the terms of an engagement. These fighters do not fly solo, they operate in groups of fours called a flight. The typical Red Flag involves a series of pitched battles that begin with 8 or more blue fighters flying line abreast to secure the air. I’m sure eight F-15’s wouldn’t like to wander into four MiG-31’s slinging long range missiles at them while a second flight of Flankers move in to engage with R77’s. The F-15’s are free to throw AIM120’s back wildly as they maneuver to survive. The MiG-31’s are free to continue slinging the R33’s while the Su-30s or Su35S’s engage at a closer range.
This is not an optimal engagement to push. At least with F-22’s the blue force has a good chance to pick off the Flankers without being themselves engaged.
Good post. By itself the Mig-31 is to much of a one trick pony against agile opponents. However if you use its best abilities in combination with the other assets the Russians has, it makes for a deadly cocktail. Even deadlier when the T-50 enters service. I wager, even the F-22 will have its hands full with that one.
Then again i wonder, what is the bail set for detonating a firecracker, in other words an “explosive device” at an airport. By no means a smart thing to do, but you have to consider if this is a overreaction by the police. He has already made sure he has lost his security clearance, thereby his job. I say, leave it at that.
This is Airbus breaking the door in on a market Boeing has dominated utterly for more than 60 years. Massive blow is entirely appropriate.
For what it is worth, i grew up among Norwegian 104 pilots, and the Mirage was highly regarded by them. (they also claimed to eat F4’s for breakfast 🙂
Did not say that USA needs the Gripen. But most of its allies, in reality, needs a fighter of similar capability.
To put it short and sweet : If the Gripen was a US made fighter, it would sell in ****loads.
On the other hand, you can use the same tooling, and retraining ground and air crew is far more cost effective and easy.
For an interim solution, this is far more important.
Swerve,
As both Norway and Denmark operate the F16, a late mark of the same aircraft makes more sense, especially as they are allies of the USA, more than Sweden.
Tempest,
I do not think a Scandinavian thinks of the Netherlands as a nordic country 🙂
You forget that Sweden is the only nordic country that has the know how to build a fighter jet of any generation.
I find it unlikely that Denmark and Norway are willing to fund that.
Besides, it will take a decade to develop it. I think the need is more urgent than that.
AR-196
At the first of …..
Thing is,
A mix of F-16 and Tucano can do the same job as a Mix of F-16 and A-10
But the Tucano does it at lesser cost.
Paper thin weight margins…. and no one has published an operational empty weight for each variant.
So now you can dismiss anyone raising weight issues, right up to service introduction.
Clever.
Maybe they downed the RQ-170 with this…
It’s clearly a fake, the poor quality finish and paint scheme screams of Iranian propaganda… it also looks a lot like the rivets have been drawn on.
Your argument sounds more like a hooker turning tricks, than anything truth related.
Jamming yeah ofc. Its more the landing in such good shape that I find shocking.
Yes, but remember that quite a few prominent members of this board made an absolute ridicule of the T-50 as a paper plane, right up to the day we got the photos.
The T-50 is a high profile product from a well known manufacturer, but what do we know about the goings on in Iran ? It has ben written of as rubbish, but do we actually know ?