Tragedac ? Tragedy ?

Not a good name for a new study:p

Without Tranche 3B, the RAF will have no more than 160 Typhoons after 2018 ~ 24 Tranche 2 that were original for RAF have already been sold to Royal Saudi Airforce without compensation.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakistan-strategic-forces/131692-difference-between-aim-9l-aim-9l-i-1-aim-9m.html

AIM-9L

The next major advance in IR Sidewinder development was the AIM-9L (“Lima”) model, introduced in 1978. This was the first “all-aspect” Sidewinder with the ability to attack from all directions, including head-on, which had a dramatic effect on close in combat tactics. In its first combat use by Israel over Lebanon and by the United Kingdom during the Falklands War, the “Lima” reportedly achieved a kill ratio of around 80%, a dramatic improvement over the 10-15% levels of earlier versions. In both initial combat uses of AIM-9L, the opponents had not developed any tactics for the evasion of a head-on missile shot of this kind, making them all the more vulnerable. The AIM-9L was also the first Sidewinder that was a joint variant used by both the US Navy and Air Force. The “Lima” was distinguished from earlier Sidewinder variants by its double delta forward canard configuration and natural metal finish of the guidance and control section. The Lima was also built under license in Europe by a team headed by Diehl BGT Defence. There are a number of “Lima” variants in operational service at present. First developed was the 9L Tactical, which is an upgraded version of the basic 9L missile. Next was the 9L Genetic, which has increased infra-red counter counter measures (IRCCM); this upgrade consisted of a removable module in the Guidance Control Section (GCS) which provided flare-rejection capability. Next came the 9L(I), which had its IRCCM module hardwired into the GCS, providing improved countermeasures as well as an upgraded seeker system. Diehl BGT also markets the AIM-9L(I)-1 which again upgrades the 9L(I)GCS and is considered an operational equivalent to the initially “US only” AIM-9M.

EF shouldn’t be shy to show their charts ?

1. From brake-off to breaking sonic barrier: less than 30 secs.

2. From 200 kts to mach 0.9, altitude unknown: less than 20 secs (Two-seater with one 1,000 L tank and two AAMs, the A/B had been switched off in the medium of acceleration in order not to break sonic barrier, Flight International 2007/04/27).

I think the purpose of that video is very clear: Gripen NG shall be a useful and capable machine for intervening a local confliction of the 3rd world in the near future. And if the enemy has the outnumbered Su-35S or PAK-FA with the complete fighting capability, then it shall not be just a local confliction of the 3rd world……..

All T1s have been Block 5 with so-called “Austere” A2G capability now.

The maximal speed of F-CK-1 was once thought to be 1.2 Mach only during early 1980s. Because at that time, USA government only allowed the maximal thrust of 16,800 Ib class for F-CK-1.

However, as time went by, the maximal thrust for F-CK-1 allowed by USA government was gradually increased to 18,500 to 19,000 Ib class.

Therefore, the maximal speed of F-CK-1 today shall be no less than 1.7 Mach ~ A F-CK-1’s pilot declared that he had reached that speed many years ago.

1. The datas from the previous AW&ST and AFM declared that APG-77 can “track” RCS = 1 m2 target at the range of 200 to 250 km.

2. It is said that the maximal output of APG-77 is limited for the sake of EM stealth, so the American fighter AESA radar which has the longest detective / tracking range today is APG-63V3, not APG-77.

3. Range of IRBIS-E PESA radar for Su-35:
* RCS = 3 m2 target: 350 to 400 km (Official declaration).
* RCS = 1 m2 target: 266 to 304 km (Estimation according to the basic formula).
* RCS = 0.01 m2 target: 90 km (Official declaration).

So personally, I think it is still possible for RBE-2 AESA radar to “track” RCS = 1 m2 target at the range of near 168 km away according to the recent French declaration of doubled range….