Don’t confuse upgrade programs with service life extension programs. The latter may include the upgrades, but the former doesn’t imply the latter.

Remember the old saying that a square is always a rectangle, but the rectangle isn’t always the square.

Imagine how quick they’d of hit the 1K milestone if other projects had used its basic core. AMX, Gripen. Tornado upgrades. Lavi option for the Israelis. Regional airliners.

Edit: imagine things like partnering with Northrop on the F-18L. (Would it affect Spain, Switzerland, Finland and Australia Hornet deals?) Refitting older aircraft like German and Turk F-4’s, Italian F-104, Greek A-7’s, and British Buccaneers. Aiming for anything non-French European using F404 and Spey class engines, or turbojets like the J79’s.

I really think Typhoon is a hot rod that just needed cheaper parts via larger mass production. It definitely is high quality. No doubt Gripen piggybacks off the Typhoon’s technology.

COIN requires a fast mover in many hotspots. Slow movers are highly vulnerable to MANPADS. If you are going in low and slow it may as well be a drone. So even the low end requirements are getting much less expensive.

I expect the 1000-mile range supersonic cruise missile technology of the 80s will eventually lead to field deployed rocket-boosted to altitude drones to replace SAMs. Ski landing pads for recovery. One ARH missile and one heat speaker carried streamlined to engage bogies. (MICA?) A simple, lightweight, single tube electronic fired cannon. More emphasis on telescopic lens to identify the bogie rather than massive overkill destruction of a target. You can probable fit it into a 3-ton package.

Y-bracket was used mostly for rockets in actual operations, they just supported AIM-9 and it was a short path to the coolant in that location.

Here’s another look at a mounted Sidewinder.

The real power in negotiations is having the upper hand. If engine technology is all they can hold back then the deal is already in trouble. Brazil would be good with F/A-18A level technology at this point. They couldn’t even field something to that level of complexity yet. AMX was a relatively light fighter in comparison. Rafale would fit their personality, but F/A-18E fits the pocketbook.

The F-4 demonstrated more than what’s listed here. Looking at the list a little closer it looks like maximum speeds that are from an old newsgroup. Has anyone tried to cross check these statistics?

Is that a laden or an unladen Su-24?

European or a Pacific? /Monte Python

It was understood that MiG-23 interceptors could reach Mach 3 and pretty much self destruct in mid-air.

The MiG-23 export versions used MiG-21 weapon suites, so it was only an upgrade in raw power and the associated costs of operations. Probably not going to make a difference. We more or less debated the effects of Su-9 and Su-11 entering the Vietnam conflict. The argument is very similar, bigger targets to shoot at and higher cost to operate, but unlikely to have any change on the conflict.