Concorde used afterburners only to save fuel. Accelerating through the transonic drag hump with afterburner used less fuel with afterburners than in dry thrust, because of the much smaller length of time spent in the high-drag zone if AB was used. After that, it was dry thrust to accelerate to – and stay at for a couple of hours – Mach 2.

The Blackbird had an engine designed for maximum efficiency in afterburner. At high speed, only the afterburners operated, the turbojet core being throttled back & mostly bypassed. It then functioned more like a ramjet than a turbojet. A one trick pony – but very good at that trick. It is known to have flown 3870 km at an average speed of 3420 km/h, in 67 minutes. That was afterburner (if that’s the right term for what those engines did) all the way.

also the concord uses ab for take off
i didnt know that about the bbird, thanks for that

with max burner time, the service life of a jet engine is counted in minutes, full military power isnt much better
99% of the time everyone goes subsonic

for years the f111 had to have hornet escort, so it couldnt go anywhere the hornet couldnt go, so your point is mute
the SHornet can self escort its longer range than the hornet, as can the f-35
then we add tankers, as had to be done with the hornets

Scorpion, they are gems arent they, it was nearly as good as the phoon sims list that was hawked around
PR guy’s play by their own rules

SH was pulled out by Boeing who cited that the requirements for this F-5 replacement were too easy and they felt that the SH was overkill and consequently wouldn’t be chosen. The 3 contenders who were evaluated were the Typhoon, Rafale and Gripen D.

you’re right boeing did consider the SH overkill
i heard that it was 2 fold, first was the allowed budget and second was the mission set required
on allowed budget and mission set, the gripen is the likely winner

Canada to spend $9-billion in sole-source deal for U.S. fighter jets
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-set-to-spend-9-billion-on-65-us-fighter-jets/article1595525/

well thats going to upset the phoon and rafale fanboys, they were arguing not long ago which one was going to sell to canada

are you available for a contract to teach our defense dept how to do their job ?
the f-135a ~au75m flyaway is as good as the ~au60m flyaway for the Sh’ornet
we have padded the price to the current projected us65m flyaway for the f-135a
i didnt see the flyaway for the f-135b but that would be more
the partners prices dont reflect the USprice debate that is happening, as their obligations to R&D have been met in the original contract
the usa is paying more than the partners

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN0111242120100601
Lockheed F-35 to beat Pentagon estimate by 20 pct