Some of the others will definitely look at the Gripen E for its cheaper operating costs at a time of reduced military budgets and because you can buy more of them for the same money than the F-35

The Gripen is of course cheaper than an F-35 – and cheaper than the Rafale and Typhoon. But Gripen is not as capable as these 3 aircraft. What else is new?

Because the operating hourly cost of the F-35 is projected (projected because not enough real life data available and won’t be for years) to be comparable to be just under cost of the twin-engine F-15…..look at the detailed breakdown (Spudman (a gentleman like Bring-it-On even if batting for the dark side!) posted it in F-35 thread), it has a lot of estimated and projected costs, with the chief unknown being software development and maintenance…..we know all software problems of the F-35 will be eventually solved, such as only one F-35 out of six being able to take off in a recent test due to software problems.

I presume the Rafale and typhoon are also almost as expensive as the F-15E – but then again they are almost as capable, especially when they are equipped with AESA. Did you know that the F-15E is a successful CAS aircraft?

Unfreaking believeable!

Vnomad, you are a freaking Lockheed Martin bot, along with a whole lot of others (I hope some of them eventually get proper jobs!)….we know who you lot are!

Nothing wrong with taking LM’s schilling but please don’t think people don’t know who the bots are! Just be honest!

I think that’s a bit unfair – and uncalled for.

Don’t talk about 20 year projections because in the real world they don’t mean **** other than in general trends. For example, a big component of the projected operating costs of the F-35 are on-going software development and maintenance….anyone that can be certain of future software costs has never worked on a real project…..that is aside from the fact that there aren’t enough F-35s flying over many years with a fleet that can give actual operating costs to work out meaningful hourly rates…..buying it is one thing and operating it is another (something to consider for smaller countries not spending $600 billion a year with a 500 tanker fleet as part of its operating doctrine).

All of this applies to every other combat aircraft programme in every other country – what are the estimated operating costs of Gripen E, Su-35 etc?

Are Russian AF Su-35 and Su-30SM still being based in Syria?

It is entirely plausible they felt the Mi-28 suited their requirements better. Indian requirements =/= God’s word.

If I recall Indian AF tender requirements specified that the helicopter be armed with fire & forget anti-tank missiles – which the Mi-28N has not got, but the AH-64E has.

Let’s leave this riveting discussion on flat Earth beliefs for another day.

did you read your own link?

I did. It doesn’t contradict what Scar said.

But it’s better to read the discussion page of this wiki-page – far more illuminating. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Myth_of_the_flat_Earth

The BBC are absolutely rubbish when reporting on Russia. It’s hardly a secret anymore. I would have thought you’d know tha…oh wait.
You avail yourself of the free Moscow Times they have to give away because nobody in their right minds would actually buy something so obvious, so no point really.

Nobody outside the Expat community in Moscow has ever heard of the “Moscow Times” why are you so worried about it? What has the Moscow Time got to do with the BBC anyway?