dark light

hopsalot

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 481 through 495 (of 2,738 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Canadian Fighter Replacement #2144797
    hopsalot
    Participant

    The gripen E won’t be in service before several years and Canada would have to pay the big price to get it.

    Had Canada asked Sweeden 15 years ago to make a derivative of the gripen C, they would probably have accepted, the gripen E would already be in service and Canada would be building parts of it, including for international customers. Instead they chose to embark in the F-35 program which is not well adapted for the RCAF needs.

    The whole idea is ludicrous. (though perhaps slightly less so than suggesting the F-106…) The Gripen is fundamentally unsuitable for Canada’s requirements. It is a tiny jet with literally half the thrust of an original Hornet, itself not a particularly large plane. It simply isn’t a design that lends itself to long-range operation and it isn’t capable of carrying a large radar that would be useful when performing long-range intercepts or cruise missile defense. There is also zero economic case for participation in the Gripen program because the plane is being produced only in tiny numbers. The entire Gripen E order book is only ~100 planes.

    If Canada were interested in investing the billions of dollars it would take to develop a new variant of an existing fighter they would be far better served to just buy an F-15E variant… an aircraft that already has the range, sensors, interoperability that Canada would want. (Or obviously the F-35, which while not as long-ranged as the F-15E, is still significantly longer ranged than the F-18s Canada has been using for decades and offers a whole range of other advantages I don’t need to repeat here.)

    in reply to: SAAB Gripen and Gripen NG thread #4 #2144811
    hopsalot
    Participant

    Google translated from: http://www.corren.se/nyheter/linkoping/darfor-skjuts-premiarflygningen-av-nya-gripen-upp-om4394112.aspx

    Are other fighter a/c having “civilian” certification?

    I don’t buy it for a second. They are delaying the start of flight testing by ~6 months even though they claim they are confident in the system? Time is money… if they were really sure the plane would perform as intended they would start testing on schedule and obtain the civilian certification somewhere down the road.

    Given the flight control system related crashes they had in the original Gripen program I can’t blame them for being cautious, but a delay is a delay.

    in reply to: SAAB Gripen and Gripen NG thread #4 #2144813
    hopsalot
    Participant

    Wrong; India just did….

    When will fanboys realize that there is much more to purchasing a fighter than just the technical specs?

    India has never formally been offered the F-35… :rolleyes:

    There have been some preliminary discussions, etc, but that is all. (that is true of essentially all recent 4th generation fighter buys…. Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi, Egypt, India, Bahrain… )

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2144829
    hopsalot
    Participant

    Hat tip to Dragon029 from SPF for this. This modification covers the ceiling for the LRIP-10 and also includes any concurrency cost arising while the contract is being executed.

    F-35 LRIP-10 Contract Modification

    The engines for LRIP 10 were firmed up back in July –

    F-35 Joint Program Office Awards Pratt & Whitney LRIP 10 Contract for F135 Engines

    Looks like the production ramp is staying on track… just a quick reminder for everyone:

    http://image.slidesharecdn.com/overupdatefeb15-150320153620-conversion-gate01/95/an-update-on-the-f35-program-february-2015-3-638.jpg?cb=1426865988

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2144830
    hopsalot
    Participant

    From looking at those pictures of the F-35s stationned on the amphib carrier, it looks like the F-35 has a relatively large wingspan. With folding wings, the carrier could have carried more. Maybe if the wing had folded after the first wing pylons, it would have been a good compromise. There would have been just one light station outboard for the AIM-9X. Maybe the LHAs/LHDs could have carried about 4 more planes in aircraft carrier configuration. Depends if they want to use their amphibs as carriers regularly I guess, and it they want to use them in stealth configuration most of the time.

    The F-35 already has a remarkably small footprint for an aircraft of its size. It is bigger than a Harrier certainly, but then a Harrier is a very small fighter.

    If the F-35B were designed with folding wings it wouldn’t get much smaller and it would add weight, complexity, cost, etc.

    in reply to: SAAB Gripen and Gripen NG thread #4 #2145105
    hopsalot
    Participant

    Um… take a look at the full export contract price for Rafale (India, Egypt, or Qatar) vs the SK F-35 deal…. the Rafale was more expensive in every one of them.

    https://i.imgur.com/zirJp0F.png

    He isn’t a real big fan of “facts.”

    in reply to: SAAB Gripen and Gripen NG thread #4 #2145231
    hopsalot
    Participant

    Beacause it is “””vastly more capable””” ?

    With the F-35 becoming operational and cheaper by the year there is really no point in a buyer paying Rafale prices for Rafale level capability.

    in reply to: SAAB Gripen and Gripen NG thread #4 #2145247
    hopsalot
    Participant

    Google translated from: http://lentoposti.fi/uutiset/gripen_e_havittajan_ohjelmistovarmistukset_siirtavat_ensilennon_vuodelle_2017

    Basically first flight is delayed until the second quarter of 2017 but this is considered “optimization”.

    :rolleyes:

    in reply to: Canadian Fighter Replacement #2146228
    hopsalot
    Participant

    Looks like Canada is going to purchase 18 Super Hornets and push the start of the classic Hornet replacement back at least another 3-4 years…

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/fighter-jet-purchase-announcement-1.3862210

    What does this mean for Canadian international deployments? IMO Canada will acquire those 18 SH, would bet my house they will be F models, for the sole purpose of deploying overseas on operations and keep the classic Hornets for NORAD duties, managing the fleet to get remaining flight hours. I also expect the Canadians to use either US Navy or RAAF flight training and conduct no training themselves.

    Wow, incompetence on parade…

    Canada isn’t nearly a large enough force to operate two different types, especially if they own only 18 of one type. So either they need to pick the Super Hornet and be done with it, or they need to pick something else. Buying 18 Super Hornets as an “interim” aircraft is just an attempt to deceive stupid voters, which it seems are not in short supply.

    This whole thing is just an attempt to avoid an open competition…

    in reply to: Military Aviation News #2148312
    hopsalot
    Participant

    Canadian Govt again considering F-18E/F as a replacement for CF-18’s

    http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-politics/liberals-again-considering-sole-source-purchase-of-super-hornet-fighter-jets-to-replace-cf-18s

    Hard to believe these people are professionals. They may end up giving India a run for the title of all-time worst managed defense procurement.

    in reply to: Military Aviation News #2149189
    hopsalot
    Participant

    Why would they mothball them?
    I’ve said they are re-negotiating the deal, that’s all.
    The bloddy deal has been what.. 4 or 5 years delayed?

    Who said anything about mothballs?

    You are the one who said it “seems” the deal was cancelled.

    Now you claim it is being renegotiated.

    Do you have an actual source or is this just more of your usual?

    in reply to: Military Aviation News #2149218
    hopsalot
    Participant

    Frankly, whether 72 or 50+24, it’s still sort of a mystery what they need them for, given the fact that their current strength is exactly nine fighters. :confused:

    It may be that they decided 9 fighters wasn’t enough…

    It is a breathtaking amount of money for so small a nation to spend, but then that goes for pretty much everything they buy.

    in reply to: Military Aviation News #2149223
    hopsalot
    Participant

    That was back in August. And way before that, Boeing stated that the FBW issue had been corrected.

    Yes, way back in August… less than 4 months ago. Since you put it that way it has probably been cancelled without so much as a whisper. They are probably waiting until they have finished cutting up the planes they have already built to say something about the cancellation publicly.

    You are aware that not a singel F-15SA has yet to be delivered.
    This delay has nothing to do with Congress clearance, but there is a hold-up. And why Boeing has been so tight lipped for so many years, has to do with negotiations over the contract.

    It is late, stop the presses.

    in reply to: Military Aviation News #2149294
    hopsalot
    Participant

    Boeing and Saab are making a fighter that beats the best Russian SU-35 and would be ten times cheaper to operate than the F-35

    https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-R6nPZT8ur3Q/WCy2iB3b_gI/AAAAAAABP2Y/E-bZxa4TiKgGtay02qk9rTMf8rYmauGNwCLcB/s1600/turnratefighter.png

    This again…

    :stupid:

    I would love to know under what conditions they think a Gripen could achieve a 38 degree per second instantaneous turn where an F-16 or F-18 could achieve only 24-26.

    in reply to: Military Aviation News #2149311
    hopsalot
    Participant

    Whatever happend with the F-15SA deal? It seems it have been cancelled due to delays and high cost. Now they are negotiating for a new deal.

    Do they really not have google where you are? Seems to have been cancelled? Really?

    Saudi F-15SA basing and unit plans revealed
    08 August 2016

    The US government has revealed basing and unit plans for the Royal Saudi Air Force’s (RSAF’s) Boeing F-15SA (Saudi Advanced) Eagle fleet ahead of the commencement of deliveries.

    The details were disclosed in early August in a Federal Business Opportunities (FedBizOpps) request for information (RfI) for F-15SA support that will run from March 2017 until March 2021.

    According to the solicitation, the F-15SA will be operated by 55 Formal Training Unit (FTU) and 6 Squadron (currently an F-15S unit) at King Khalid Air Base (KKAB) in the south-west of Saudi Arabia; 29 Squadron (not currently stood-up) at King Faisal Air Base (KFAB) in the north-west of the country; and 92 Squadron (currently an F-15S unit) and the Fighter Weapons School at King Abdulaziz Air Base (KAAB) on the Gulf coast near Bahrain.

    The RSAF is to receive 152 F-15SAs, of which 84 will be new build and 68 will be remanufactured F-15S platforms. Procured under a USD29.4 billion Foreign Military Sale (the largest in US history), the F-15SA is the most advanced variant of the Eagle ordered to date. Enhanced features include upgraded avionics (with a digital ‘glass’ cockpit); a BAE Systems Digital Electronic Warfare System/Common Missile Warning System (DEWS/CMWS); fly-by-wire controls; an infrared search-and-track (IRST) system; and the Raytheon APG-63(V)3 active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar. The aircraft will also be fitted with new flight control components/surfaces from Goodrich and the F-15S Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-229 powerplant will be replaced with the more powerful General Electric F110-GE-129.

    http://www.janes.com/article/62819/saudi-f-15sa-basing-and-unit-plans-revealed

Viewing 15 posts - 481 through 495 (of 2,738 total)