Appartently, it was supposed to be stealthy enough to warrant being rebuilt by a US team to check out its RCS.

Nic

And by the standards of the day the Horten was a low observable aircraft.

From wiki – with footnotes to links:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horten_Ho_229#Stealth_technology

Northrop-built reproduction[edit]In early 2008, Northrop-Grumman paired up television documentary producer Michael Jorgensen, and the National Geographic Channel to produce a documentary to determine whether the Ho 229 was, in fact, the world’s first true “stealth” fighter-bomber.[3] Northrop-Grumman built a full-size non-flying reproduction of the V3, constructed to match the aircraft’s radar properties. After an expenditure of about US$250,000 and 2,500 man-hours, Northrop’s Ho 229 reproduction was tested at the company’s classified radar cross-section (RCS) test range at Tejon, California, where it was placed on a 15-meter (50 ft) articulating pole and exposed to electromagnetic energy sources from various angles, using the same three frequencies in the 20–50 MHz range used by the Chain Home in the mid-1940s.[3]

RCS testing showed that a hypothetical Ho 229 approaching the English coast from France flying at 885 kilometres per hour (550 mph) at 15–30 metres (49–98 ft) above the water would have been visible at a distance of 80% that of a Bf 109. This implies a frontal RCS of only 40% that of a Bf 109 at the Chain Home frequencies. The most visible parts of the aircraft were the jet inlets and the cockpit, but caused no return through smaller dimensions than the CH wavelength. Given the high-speed capabilities of the aircraft it would have given the British defences just two and a half minutes to respond, which would not have been enough time. It is believed that, if deployed in great numbers, the Ho 229 could have changed the course of the war.[3][8]

With testing complete, the reproduction was donated by Northrop-Grumman to the San Diego Air and Space Museum.[3][9] The television documentary, Hitler’s Stealth Fighter (2009), produced by Myth Merchant Films, featured the Northrop-Grumman full-scale Ho 229 model as well as CGI reconstructions depicting a fictional wartime scenario where Ho 229s were operational in both offensive and defensive roles.[8]

Competitions against F-16, frequent dealings with NATO air forces which operate it (especially Norway & Denmark), a sale of Gripen to a current F-16 user . . . . I reckon they should have a pretty good idea.

I seriously doubt those exercises result in a transfer of accounting data.

And did Thailand provide them with it’s operating budgets?!? I work in finance and have worked on several procurement projects and we don’t just dole out our operating budgets to prospective tenders. They get specs that we want them to meet.

I’d say they probably don’t have a good idea.

It’s also funny that people slag out Lockmart for it’s admittedly dodgy estimates but SAAB and Swedish AF are considered to be reliable.

I agree on F-5 being too old for a new Brazillian upgrade in 2025 range. My point was that the upgrade program was happening now.

For other air forces that are much poorer an F-5 upgrade in 2010s is plausible, but then I doubt this would include an AESA radar.

Given Swedish AF has a vested interest in flogging off Gripens, I’d be a bit more sceptical about any figures they publish, especially about the performance of a jet they don’t operate.

Totally agree Scooter.

F-16 is the F-5 replacement in a lot of airforces.

F-303 is completely undetectable by any means (EO, radar, IR) due to such awesome stealth features as not being able to fly. :eagerness:

True but look at the cost. FAB have paid mere $21mil for the 8+3 ex-RJAF F-5E/Fs but upgrading those to EM/FM standard has cost them another $153mil.

That’s still less than $16 million per plane.

A couple of years ago Indonesia was looking at an F-16 upgrade – $150m for 10 jets ($15 million per jet) WITHOUT acquisition cost (they already owned the airframes).

Indonesia was also quoted at $750m for 24 F-16C/D-25. That equates to $31 million a piece. It does not include a radar upgrade, whiile the Brazillians are getting new radars.

Bare in mind that F-16A-D blk 25 generally aren’t much newer than later build F-5E/Fs (last rolled off the line in 1987).

Of course the F-16 is more capable, but if you’re on a tight budget the F-5 still offers good value.

Well perhaps with the money they got on selling those Gripen, they can used it to resurrect at least a sq of Cheetah. I know is a long shoot, and I don’t know the conditions of Atlas as Aircraft facility presently, however with Cheetah badically being remanufactured in Atlas to begin with, perhaps overall operating Cheetah again still made SAF at least able to maintain 1 sq of fast jets operational.

What I’m getting at, the money from Gripen sale can be used to restructured SAF budget and by then SAF can still be operational as respectable AF (for sub sahara Africa at least).

Their problem is they can’t afford the money to fly the Gripens (or anything else). This is money for maintenance, for fuel, for spares, money for maintaining associated buildings and infrastructure, money for housing of staff etc.

This is recurrent funding and something that selling Gripens won’t fix.

Back to the topic. If really SAF going to let go those Grippen, can they still resurect the Atlas Cheetah ? From what I gathe4, they are still on reserve.

Why resurrect Cheetah? They can’t afford to operate Gripens so it’s not like they’ll be able to afford Cheetahs (especially with a thirsty turbojet). They can’t even afford to fly A109 light helicopters and part of the training syllabus has been switched to Cessnas because they can’t afford to operate PC-7s in that role.

12 of the Cheetahs have been sold to Ecuador.