It should be able to put on better displays than Vipers and Super Hornets, so I doubt it will be too shabby at airshows.
Well, w.r.t. the Vipers, at least one expert disagrees with you:
– F-35 is not built for air show
F-35 will never manage to do what a clean F-16-machine can do in an air show. But the F-35 can do much more.
(translation above by Loke)
Col. Charles Svensson has worked on the F-35 program since 2006.
Where are the F-35 fanboys!?
Joint Strike Fighter acing tests, pilots report
By Dave Majumdar – Staff writer
Posted : Saturday Feb 26, 2011 9:53:22 ESTThe F-35 is getting a thumbs-up from the test pilots flying it.
Both military and civilian aviators give the Joint Strike Fighter high marks on speed, altitude and vertical takeoffs and landings, as well as for its avionics.
…
The test pilots also raved about the JSF’s maneuverability, calling it a nimble machine. For example, the F-35 can handle better than a 40-degree angle of attack, which is related to the amount of lift.
“It flew great on its first flight and it’s flying great now, and we’re tweaking it to make it even better,” Taylor said.
Nelson said: “It’s not quite what an F-22 is, but it’s better than any legacy I’ve seen.”
…
The pilots especially praised the plane’s synthetic aperture radar, which takes photo-quality images of the Earth’s surface, as well as the electronic warfare suite and the communications systems.
…
Not all has been perfect, though.The JSF has an engine “screech,” a disturbance in airflow; a phenomenon called “transonic wing roll-off,” in which it can roll unexpectedly; and a helmet-mounted display prone to latency and smearing. The problems have either been corrected or are being addressed, according to the test pilots.
http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2011/02/air-force-jsf-acing-tests-pilots-report-022611w/
JSF will not be able to compete with the Eurocanards in airshows — however as a combat aircraft it seems to come around nicely…
Never saw it. I simply haven’t been to the site for quite a while, being busy in the real world…
I will have a look and post my thoughts later.
Regards,
AD
No worries mate, take your time. 😉
I am looking forward to your response….
Eurofighter sales pitch:
http://livefist.blogspot.com/2011/02/mmrca-final-stretch-eurofighter-typhoon.html
.
The compagny, no, the aircraft division, yes.
I don’t think so… 🙂
Gripen operators: Sweden, South Africa, Hungary, Czech Republic, Thailand.
And I know also that Saab is about to close is they don’t found new export customer fast. When you are on the corner, you can say anyting, even thing that you know are false.
yeah, right… :rolleyes:
RBS raises target price
(Bloomberg) RBS raises target price on the Saab 20 kronor to 150 kronor to reflect the vision that the company now stands on a stable platform, in terms of fundamentals such as earnings and cash flow.
According to a market letter on Friday.
RBS raising their estimates for Saab’s operating profit for the full years 2011 and 2012 to 1.69 (1.55) and approximately 1.82 (1.60) billion, in part because of the savings expected from restructuring measures.
RBS do not think Saab will take home some really big Gripen export orders for a while yet, but notes that the company secured other key export contracts.
The recommendation remains Buy.
http://www.privataaffarer.se/aktier/analyser/analys/index.xml?stock_analysis_id=14852
Saab does not depend on export sales of Gripen NG to survive as a company…
The pdf is a leat 2 years old. And from what i can recall, it was already old two years ago.
This thing hasn’t been updated for ages.
M88 4E is the latest version worked on and will be delivered at the end of the year. We are far away from the eco demonstrator
Yes, but that was not my point. My point was that since this number referred to a demonstrator it may or may not apply to the final product — i.e. we cannot draw firm conclusions from it.
Just like the number of T/R elements on the earl RBE2 AESA prototypes does not tell us how many T/R elements the production version will get.
Nope.
You forgot that the -C and -B land version of the rafale retain a lot of navalisation capability wich are on these versions for community and industrial reasons. The weight difference bettween -C and -M don’t picture what the difference between a land fighter and a navalised fighter would be. Strictly speaking, -C is not really a land fighter, it’s a -M with some difference (especialy, a lighter landing gear, but the structure remain the same)
Saab has done detailed studies and concluded that weight of Gripen would increase by around 400 kg. Keep in mind the current Gripen already meets (or partially meets) many of the requirements for a carrier capable aircraft.
jaming a 190mmics 27 years old L-band radar is easy sport for today’s systems! 😉
low cost countries buys low costs products!
Saudi Arabia low cost?
Why did France never develop an AEW&C?
Or you simply take off with minimum fuel and refuel it in air. 🙂
.
That works great when operating from land bases but is less ideal when operating from an aircraft carrier.
Check the chart once again:
No it says ECO Demonstrator.
1. The Eurofighter today has three wet pylons, which means the maximal number of external fuel tanks it can carry now is “Three”.
2. The RAF’s Typhoon has only one kind of external fuel tank for using now: 1,000L class.
OK if you say so…
I am really surprised that a large twin-engine jet has such tiny external fuel tanks! Even the much smaller Gripen NG will get 1700L fuel tanks, and with half the number of engines!
Funny I thought the site I linked to would be kind of reliable (given the name) but it seems not!
AFAIK there are three diferent official documents that confirm the 5 tons of internal fuel for the Phoon, two by Eurofighter themselves (including the latest comparison with the F-22 in the “Eurofighter World 2010/3” publication, you can find that in the Eurofighter site) and another one by the Luftwaffe, that has been posted severall times here.
It is indeed 5 tons, and its official.
I am surprised that with 5 tons internal and with drop tanks the ferry range is still only 3700 km? Or is that number wrong?
Edit: seems that number is wrong:
http://www.armedforces.co.uk/raf/listings/l0028.html
5.382 km is more like it (with 4 drop tanks).
GP are you using Google translate? I don’t understand what you are trying to say.