Someone asked, and someone found 😀

Manufacturing cost, Gripen ~250m SEK or ~$39m
http://www.svd.se/naringsliv/reservdelar-saknas-jasplan-star-still_3372318.svd

Out of 20 aircrafts 2 are usually in the hangar for maintenance due to the crappy logistics system PRIO. I’d say 90% of the fleet availiable despite long delivery times for spares is pretty decent.

On average they fly 225 hrs per Gripen. 4500 hrs with 20 jets every year.
http://www.forsvarsmakten.se/sv/organisation/blekinge-flygflottilj-f-17/

Any photo wiz can make this countable ?

A quick calc gives 988, ofc with a margin of error of a few %

Here is a higher rez pic http://www.aviationweek.com/Portals/AWeek/Gripen%20Radar.jpg <– Obviously they run DotNetNuke 🙂

Speaking of the radar, this graphic show why a moving dish is so important during sc gimbal turns.

If it isn’t emitting then how is it going to even know that the target is there? Something will have to be.

Same way that fighters today get target data from AWACS and only use their radar when they are close.

Forgot to say, as Clement Ader flew before the Wright brothers, this is a definitive clue about french designs are ahead of US no?

Yes. After all, the French have had longer time to perfect the understanding of aerodynamics. But I think Greece are the best in the world considering their history of flying goes back to Ikaros, not to mention the rocket scientists of India who have been pioneers in weapons grade rockets since Hyder Ali in 1792…

It may be possible.

If the weight is kept low, if the engines are cheap cots and the avionics are second tier…

Cost increase as you make the aircraft more survivable. Ironically stealth in the form of shaping is the cheapest approach as it allows for less sophisticated avionics without sacrificing survivability.

An enlarged manned global hawk could do the trick and get it right for less than $100m (in 2005 flyaway cost was $35m).

Would that fit your bill?

Internal payload for an enlarged RQ4 could easily reach some 10’000 lbs. Especially if fuel was sacrificed.

Or is it this other “example” of an SR-71 with a radar cross section the size of a large conventional fighter being seen by a static S-band radar site in Sweden from the side that means stealth is a laughable concept?

Who is saying that?

Oh, and do you have a source for the SR-71 RCS?

What we know is that a fairly well designed LO aircraft (at least from the sides) could be tracked at 400km+ (the second PPI incident) from a radar @4GHz and 20KW average (Vostok E is 30KW avg, 40dB SP over noise enhancement etc).

Does this mean stealth is a laughable concept? No.

But it does show the fanboys that what is great in one frequency might not be as good in others. And with more intelligent missiles (like Meteor) a very aproximate position is more than enough for the missile to be useful.

The playing field is constantly changing, stealth is one advantage, but so is speed, the weapons carried and the avionics. Relying one one feature is a laughable concept. Dont you agree?

1. The SR-71’s level of stealth relative to the radars of the era is nowhere near where the F-117/B-2/F-22/F-35 are.

This is evident in the fact that the both the F-22 and F-35 HAVE to carry special RCS enhancers to ensure that civilian radars can see them when needed.

2. That picture shows not a track, put two points where the SR-71 was seen, from the SIDE where the RCS of a VLO aircraft is HUNDREDS of times larger than from the front.

Once again, no relevance for a mission where the VLO aircraft is attacking the radar site.

1. I gave you the source, it’s a solid track, even when it turns head on towards the radar. Or rather the track is at its strongest head on an while banking. I was just kind enough to mark two spots.

2 You are right, it’s not relevant because today’s VHF radars have much better signal processing. Heck, 10 years after the PS 66 the radars had gone from 10 dB in signal over noise improvement to over 40dB. How much did RCS go down in the same time? I know, it’s a trick question.

Could you please give me the RCS numbers for the SR71 from the sides? You seem to have numbers that dont support reality so I would be happy to see them.

EDIT; Yes. The F117 was an improvement, but obviously not good enough. A radar of the same era could track the F117 before it reached the coast (Source Zoltan). Considering the location of the shoot down we are talking about weak signals out to 100 km + and strong signals at some 40km despite some jamming. F35 is said to be fairly close in RCS.