nhamptonGood Lord, nhampton is on a roll tonight.
I am just doing my small part in trying to raise the standards of this forum.
I, as an American, have zero trouble with it being the primary aerial defense of the CONUS………which it will be. I have no problem with being the primary tactical manned strike airplane within the next 20 years for all services. None. It does more better and farther than any airplane since the F-4 Phantom for the money.
Amen to that.
nhamptonNo, I don’t think the US would have to offer the F-22 to everybody in the neighborhood. Regardless, South Korea is not really serious and Australia already has committed to the F-35…………Israel maybe but I doubt Obama would ok it! Unless, as a reward for some kind of Middle East Peace Deal. (i.e. not likely)
Also, I am surprised you believe Japan would take the F-35C over the landbased F-35A???? Not that I am against it………Personally, I think its a better choice. As a matter of fact I’ve always said they should have canceled the “A” Model and just offered a Land based “C” Model instead.
Yet, I think our views are closer together than apart………..:cool:
It would very much be considered an insult if one important, longtime friend where offered the plane and it was denied to another who desired it as well. I am thinking specifically here of Japan and Korea. Also their relationship is very much like that of the Greeks and Turks. There is much rivalry and animosity between the two.
Right now it’s easy to say no to Israel since no one is getting the Raptor. Once it is offered to Japan the Israel lobby would put on a full court press and rightfully so. They live in just as dangerous a neighborhood as Japan and Korea.
Australia would be the least problematic since those that know what they are doing (MOD and RAAF) don’t see the need for the Raptor. It would stir up Kopp and his army of Internet trolls.
I think the F-35, due to it’s greater range would make the best interceptor of the three. They need a cruise missile killer with lots of gas so it can go far, fast. F-35C does that better than F-35A.
Yes, I agree with you F-35C is the better overall choice as well but it will cost several million more each. Instead of 80 or so million it will be closer to 90 – 95 million.
nhamptonSo fictional, in fact, that even the RAF have been taken in!
I don’t think Beesley has said anything truly incredulous at all,
Sure about that?
Guess we can chuckle at Beesley too, then, because if he’s anything like this guy he obviously has no freaking clue what his aircraft can and can’t do.
I guess it was some other CommanderJB that posted that.
and neither do I think that Wg Crd. Bennett has either. Certainly I’d put his knowledge of the Typhoon’s capabilities ahead of yours or Scooter’s (or mine, for that matter).
I suspect this is not your native tongue. What does that article that you posted have to do with all of this. I never doubted his existence. I doubted he said what you quoted. Would you care to post the quote. I am having a hard time believing he would say NO degradation of performance because if he did say that he is either spouting pure rubbish or he really has no clue. Physics is physics.I don’t need a PhD in aeronautics to know that additional weight and drag will result in a performance penalty of some kind on ANY airplane.
nhamptonWithout having flown the aircraft, how would you either of you know what’s ‘on par’ or ‘similar’ and what isn’t?
Whatever are you rambling about? You said:
Guess we can chuckle at Beesley too, then, because if he’s anything like this guy he obviously has no freaking clue what his aircraft can and can’t do.
And I asked you to point out what he said that was as ridiculous as the fictional quote of some wing commander. Give an example. Tell me what Beesley said that you think is as incredulous as your quote.
nhamptonIf you sell it to Japan, then US will get under substantial pressure from Israel,S.Korea and Australia … two of those are very unhappy participants of JSF programme…
Absolutely true. If it’s offered for sale to Japan it would also have to be offered to Korea, Australia and Israel as well. It would also have to be highly modified to make them tamper/ripoff proof. At the end of the day none of those nations need or really want the F-22. The Japanese and Koreans are merely willy wagging at each other. No one in Australia who has a clue thinks they need and can afford it and the Israelis know that the Saudis, Kuwaitis and perhaps Egyptians will eventually by flying F-35s and they want something better.
In the end it’s F-35 blk 4/5s with 6 internal AMRAAMs for all and perhaps a few Silent Eagles thrown in for Japan and Korea as a stopgap. Look for Japan to go with the F-35C due to it’s increased range and or the F-35B for their baby carriers.
nhamptonGuess we can chuckle at Beesley too, then, because if he’s anything like this guy he obviously has no freaking clue what his aircraft can and can’t do.
How so? What has Beesley said that is on par with Bennets remarks in the suspension of physics?
nhamptonScooter. Reading this statement above really, truly highlights your ignorance for the Typhoon.
A quote from Wg Cdr LoI Bennet OC 3 (F) Squadron;
“The fact that I can fly throughout the full flight envelope with two tanks and eight missiles with no reduction in performance, gives us the key edge.“
I think it would be worth while for you to fly to Europe, see an typhoon, then eat your own words. And the rest of you ignorant “Euro-canard bashing” chaps.:)
I like, even if you do believe ridiculous claims like yours, how the Typhoon has dominated any US teen 4th gen fighter it has come across yet. Makes you think doesn’t it?
I tried to stay away from this circus of a forum, i really did but this one takes the cake.
If wing commander Nigel whateverhisnameis had said
The fact that I can still out fly any other contemporary fighter with two tanks and eight missiles
I could believe that he either really thought that was the case or another Typhoon fan boy was making things up. But for you to quote him as saying that there is
no reduction in performance
is just sheer idiocy. What? Has Typhoon found some way to defy the laws of physics? Are you trying to tell me that two tanks and a gaggle of missiles hanging off of a wing impose absolutely no drag penalty?
Yes the Typhoon has wonderful performance. Yes the Typhoon will outperform fighters designed and built 30 years earlier in some categories. But now here is the big but. It does not change the game. It’s margins of performance in the areas that it excels are not enough to overcome an outdated radar and medium range missiles. It is still going to come down to training and the circumstances of the engagement. It is not a quantum leap ahead like F-22 and F-35. Bolt ons and upgrades to F-16 and F-15 make them easily a match and the Super Hornet in many ways it’s contemporary is miles ahead of it in things that matter.
Write something intelligent and back it with with facts and I may reply. Otherwise don’t bother.
nhamptonYes well just a I thought.
nhampton, don’t quote me anymore, skip my post and have a nice life 😀
Cheers, Cola
Don’t post nonsense and I won’t have to reply.
nhamptonWhat Gripen did was to give Norway an fixed prize to go, only thing that could change the prize is the Valuta.
Sweeden and Norway have a deecent stable valute level.LM have not done such a thing yet..
Also Gripen did not receive all the requirements form the Norway(RNAF), don’t know who messed up..
Thanks
LM quoted the price in constant (2003??)dollars.
What would the Swedes have done different if what you say is true and they did not get all the requirements? Could they have changed the Gripen in any material way to meet those requirements? If they could have how much more would it have cost?
nhamptonWithout knowing the exact specifications of both the CAPTOR and APG-79, there is no way on Earth you can make such a claim with certainty. The latter probably is superior, but ‘by far’?
Aside from the fact that an AESA radar is superior in target discrimination, useful range, and flexibility, there are three letters that make the APG-79 far superior to CAPTOR. LPI.
Your evidence for that is your own belief of total American superiority
No, they are based on facts. Meteor may or may not be IOC in 2015. Do you rally think that Raytheon will be standing still between now and then? Conformal missile carriage in no way offsets the radar reflections of those two barn door canards. Super’s engine inlets, and leading edges have been given LO treatment and redesign. Rather than that nice large radar reflector/antenna that points (and reflects) at whatever it is tracking the AESA radar is offset and by nature makes the front of the aircraft even harder to detect. Further, Super can carry 2 AMRAAMS semi recessed as well. Super’s greater degree of stealth can be used by clean Supers acting as tracking and targeting units while the rest of the squadron carry’s a full load out of missiles. Super not only is versatile in A2A it has the ability to refuel other aircraft and has a ground attack capability far superior to Typhoon. In short it brings more to the table than Typhoon at a much lower price.
Obviously you are enamored with those 72 computers but that doesn;t change the fact that 1.WVR combat is generally a crapshoot. 2. Nothing has the nose pointing ability of the Super including the Raptor.
It has nothing to do with platform bluster and everything to do with facts. That you don;t like them or choose to ignore them is your misfortune but don’t for a minute think has anything to do with anything else.
And lastly, yes American stuff is generally going to be better. Why? Well their R&D budget dwarfs everyone else. They have had a head start of up to 15 years in a lot of these areas of technology. They have more expendable drones (F-4s, F-16s) to test live fire exercises than most air forces have planes. They have vast and varied test ranges that can test and simulate on a scale others can only dream about. I really don;t see why this seems to upset so many here. Those are the facts.
nhamptonHey nhampton,
Apart from being in the same knowledge class with pfcem, are you perhaps payed by LM or US to “advertise” F35? (no need to elaborate. Yes or No will sufice)
Thanks for the complement. pcfem is a respected member on several other forums as well.
Have you gone off your meds? No need to eleborate, just your usual mindless babble and drool will do.
Hey nhampton,
I mean, most of your posts end up with statements that claim F35 is “far superior than” pretty much everything else, but American goods and you hardly, IF EVER back it up with some aerodynamic, electronic, medical or some other argument.
I’m sorry, I know I sometimes use big words and I rarely use pictures so it may be hard for you to understand but I always do back up the claim with relevant facts. I often even cite those facts. Something few here seem to be able to do. Sorry if all of htis is difficult for you. You may want to consider a forum more suitable for someone of your caliber such as http://www.someidiots.com/ as I and others are trying to raise the level of technical discourse on this forum.
I’m not merc per se. I’m only interested in finding out what’s going on in modern aerial warfare and I don’t take sides apart from neutral.
As you can imagine, I’m having hard time in making progress, with some of you obstruct any reasonable and meaningful conversation.
Try and pay attention. Read the post twice and if there are big words you dont understand just ask nicely and someone I am sure would be more than happy to explain using simple one syllable words you can understand.
Cheers!
nhamptonEurofighter is superior than F/A-18E in the domains of speed, operational altitude, climbing performance, acceleration from subsonic to supersonic, supersonic maneuverability/agility, and T/W ratio / SEP.
F/A-18E today is superior than Eurofighter in the domains of striking range/radius, weapon load and choice, radar for multifunctions, HMD, post-stall maneuverability, low speed & high AoA flight performance, and possibly frontal LO performance.
In other words in the categories that count in real world air to air combat the Super is superior. It’s got a better radar by far, a lower RCS even with missiles, a better missile with the AIM-120D and if you are in the F variant two sets of eyes hooked up to two fully functioning helmet mounted sights. It points better at close range and it will see the Typhoon before Typhoon sees it at long range. First look, first shot, first kill.
nhamptonnhampton, your wishful thinking aside, JSF will never be less costly than a Gripen. Your only really strong point why Norway chosed JSF has nothing to do with it being superior, rather the wish to be cosy with the Americans.
It isa clear logic eludes you. Anytime you have a production run ten times as great your numbers are going to be lower. Its a simple concept really, its called economies of scale. Maybe you should google it.
Why would I want yesterday’s aircraft made from assorted 4th generation parts from the American Aviation industry parts bin when I can get their latest equipment as well as part of the economic benefit of producing parts for the entire 2000 unit plus production run?
On every level, capability, political, economic, F-35 is far superior to Gripen and the rest of the Euro canards.
nhamptonYou obviously do not know what obligated means, or blame for that matter.
If it was superior it would not be any problem to defend a higher price, or at least the same price. It wasnt, it was sold as cheaper. Significantly cheaper than a Gripen.
Yes, it will be significantly cheaper than Gripen due to the very simple fact that even with the most pessimisticit’s production run it will dwarf Gripen in numbers. A far larger production run will result in lower unit costs, and lower upgrade costs and lower maintenance costs. Don’t believe me? Just look at the stink the Germans made when the UK was thinking of dropping out of Eurofighter.
Besides being cheaper, F-35 is going to be better in A2A. In clean condition it carries as much fuel as a comparable fighter using external tanks. It can carry up to 4 AMRAAMs internally day one and it is possible to modify the bay to accommodate up to four more of there is interest. It can carry another 10 AMRAAMs externally if stealth is not desired. Oh did I mention stealth? What about AESA and its ability to operate in LPI mode? What about DASS and EOTs? All in a package with the performance of a clean block 50 Viper. Simply put it is designed to be the best air to air fighter in the world after the Raptor.
Oh, and what plane would Norway’s most likely and powerful ally be using to help defend Norwegian airspace?
nhamptonYou obviously do not know what obligated means, or blame for that matter.
If it was superior it would not be any problem to defend a higher price, or at least the same price. It wasnt, it was sold as cheaper. Significantly cheaper than a Gripen.
Wrong, there was considerable resistance in Norway in some (socialist) circles of government to no buy American. The Air Force was ready, and the previous government was ready to buy it on superior capabilities alone. they where forced to have a competition that included price as one of the key criteria.
Sign In
