From his blog:

I come from the Swedish-speaking minority in Finland, meaning that I have the possibility of following the discussion in both countries without the problems of a language barrier.

All people in Finland are taught swedish and finnish, but this fellow clearly isn’t able to see the situation in Finland, besides in the swedish minority news..which actually isn’t the main media here. Sorry he seems to write good finnish too…so it was a typo in the text I read.

There is also a gross mistake…Finland never bought a single Messerschmitt 109 G…I mean not a phennig was paid of those. Germany sorta gave’em to finns in order to protect Finland during Barbarossa ( or as a payment of using Finland as a military ground )….OR EXTENTING THE FLANK ( sorry caps lock on) and keeping the finns longer in the game.

A Finnish blogger on the Finnish fighter replacement:

https://corporalfrisk.wordpress.com/2015/06/29/the-hx-project-preliminary-report-pt-1-reports-politics-and-money/

https://corporalfrisk.wordpress.com/2015/06/30/the-hx-project-preliminary-report-pt-2-capabilities-and-fighters/

It seems to me that it will be very difficult (if not impossible) to find an a/c that meets some very important criteria (to Fin:

1. number of a/c similar to today (64)
2. maintenance done locally
3. stealth a/c is preferred

1 and 2 would favor Gripen; however 3 would favor the F-35.

Norway, a much richer country, is struggling to find money to purchase 48 F-35 (+ 4 training a/c). The Finnish economy is somewhat smaller than Norway’s, and much weaker at the moment. Also, my understanding is that only very limited maintanence will be done locally with the F-35.

Seems to me the Finnish would have to compromise on some of their requirements. It will be interesting to see what they decide to do. 30-35 stealthy F-35 that cannot be fully maintained locally, or a higher number of non-stealthy Gripen that can be maintained locally?

That cannot be a finnish blogger as the only finnish word was faulty finnish in the text.

How ever I see also the extension of the Hornet lifetime via AN/APG-79 AESA radar and second MLU as an option. Greece flew Corsairs ( A-7 ) for 49 years.

Unless….. ( we go for missile defence alltogether ) !

This would require strong leadership as the military seem to have taken the initiative concerning the choices ( backed up by the techno geeks ).

NO IT WAS NOT…..

Stop sniffing the glue 😉

That is what wikipedia claims….

:applause:

From wiki…..

Cooperation with Lockheed[edit]

Following the announcement by the CIS on September 1991 that it could no longer fund development of the Yak-41M, Yakovlev entered into discussions with several foreign partners who could help fund the program. Lockheed Corporation, which was in the process of developing the X-35 for the US Joint Strike Fighter program, stepped forward, and with their assistance 48-2 was displayed at the Farnborough Airshow in September 1992. Yakovlev announced that they had reached an agreement with Lockheed for funds of $385 to $400 million for three new prototypes and an additional static test aircraft to test improvements in design and avionics. Planned modifications for the proposed Yak-41M included an increase in STOL weight to 21,500 kg (47,400 lb). One of the prototypes would have been a dual-control trainer. Though no longer flyable, both 48-2 and 48-3 were exhibited at the 1993 Moscow airshow. The partnership began in late 1991, though it was not publicly revealed by Yakovlev until 6 September 1992, and was not revealed by Lockheed until June 1994.[1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakovlev_Yak-141

Fixed it for you 😉

That Logic is truly fault.. what is the point of having TVC Integrated, and then only allow for test pilots to utilize them..?

There are several interview of Sukhoi test pilots that say the New FBW in the Su-35S makes the handeling included the TVC(it is after all Integrated into the Fligh Control System) just as easy for the mainstay fighter pilot, and not only for Test pilots!

The difference here is that the Test pilots perform display at Critical low altitude over 50.000 People, which gives them very little room for pilot error.
And at the same token, the New FBW on Su-35S is actual helping increase flight safty of ordinary fighter pilots. The Controlability of this jet is second to none.

How about YAK-141 ?

Wasn’t this the only supasonic VTOL jet before F-35B ?

Why can’t the air go supersonic through the engine? The aircraft flies mach 2 doesn’t it?

That is not how the jet engine worx..it ( air flow ) is slowed down to sub sonic speed and then accelerated into supersonic speed…which creates thrust.

– The Gripen E was offered to the Dutch at €56.4 million each in 2008. And the price to Sweden itself was €62.5 million ($80 mil in Nov 2012). The gap is not even enough to bridge inflation. Effectively, you’re arguing that an export Gripen E with all the additional expenses (offsets, training etc) is still cheaper than the Gripens supplied to the Swedish Air Force.

:facepalm: :very_drunk:

Maybe swedes don’t enjoy inflation at all…strong economy.

Sure it does, especially as interceptor… But the original claim was it has double range.. which it doesn’t.

Didn’t it also carry weapons internally like F-35 ?

Combat radius of the F-106 is the same as of MiG-31 – 900 miles.

F-106 flies one mach number faster than F-35 and ½ slower than Mig-31…does that make a difference ?