Get a grip with reality.
http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/showthread.php?t=48072

You shoud get a grip with reality: Israel will not pay for the F 35!
They are concerned that for the billions US will give they will be able to get 50-75 F 35 instead of 100-150 F 16. That’s all. As I already said, if they don’t like it, let’s them buy whatever they will like-EF, Rafale etc. But you won’t see this, because regardless how much the F 35 will cost, it would be cheaper for them to stick with this solution.

Irrelevant. American fighters should be banned as an option for European air forces, except cases where European don’t have an equivalent (VTOL F-35 comes into my mind)

That’s plain stupid. Military stuff aside, US imports more from UE than UE from US.

No, it is a different way of procurement. The development cost are fix and 13,2 bn €.
After that each Tranche (Lot) has a fix fly-away cost for every example built.
The related money is freed step by step.
Just for exports a part of the developments costs is priced in.
Try the same with the Raptor. 😀

Again, cheap diversion. Because, regardless the way LM or EF calculate the costs, the more they built, the cheaper the unit price.

The news that he is a “specialist in digital networks” will probably come as a major surprise to Mr Sweetman! Or perhaps that is a reference to Mr Kopp, and it is Mr Sweetman who is the “aviation journalist wannabe”.

The journalist is Sweetman, and the specialist in digital networks (and journalistst wannbe) is Kopp.

So what exactly were LM promising on the F-22 at the same stage of development the JSF is at??..:)

IIRC LM was promising 277 aircraft for the congressional cap price.. its now only 183…

So if they keep their word as history has shows the JSF will be ~at least 30% more expensive than its guesstimated at now

Or we could go on the number to be bought ie. the F-22 was ~750 final result 183 using that ratio the JSF ~3000 – So that’s a healthy 720 beating the Typhoon into second place by a dozen aircraft..:D

So don’t start getting all starry eyed about track records and credibility.. if you look into it then its non too pretty.

Cheers

Cheap diversion. Mabie was talking (and for a good reason) about the capability of LM to deliver a good A/C. Up to now they don’t fail to do this.

BTW, if only 183 EF will be built, it would result in a higher price than the raptor :diablo:

And after that there were a number of kills of the Raptor, one by an F-16, one by a SuperHornet.

1)The Superhornet “kill” was made by ignoring the safety rules (it’s strictly forbidden to get closer than 1000 feet). The second (F 16) was the mistake of air controllers: the Red Air force can regenerate many times. When they were “killed” by Raptors they leave the area, then they came back “alive”. But the air controller forgot to tell the Raptor pilot that that F 16 was “alive”.

Both situations very unlike to happen in real life; :diablo:

2) If the Raptor pilots will put decals after each training “kills”, these beautiful planes would look like hell;:diablo:

3) A “small” detail: the Growler has APG 79…:diablo:

Let’s have a forum poll.

Who do you believe?

(a) Bill Sweetman

(b) Scooter

(c) Neither.

Let’s have another:
Who do you believe?

a) Bill Sweetman & Carlo Kopp (credentials: journalist, respectivelly a specialist in digital networks and aviation journalist wannabe)

b) LockheedMartin (credentials: F 104, F 16, SR 71, U2, F 117, F 22, fell free to complete), NorthropGrumman (credentials: F14, YF 17, F 18, YF 23, B 2, APG 77, APG 80, etc.) USAF/USN/RAF/RN/8 Air Forces.

c)neither

But that is not related to it being an AESA, but to it being newer, & using newer electronics. How much weight would be saved by replacing the back end of the old MSA with new LRUs?

Note that many updates have been marketed for old radars, & weight saving is usually one of the claimed benefits – while keeping the MSA.

Nope. In the SABR case, the back end is kept. The only changes consist in combining two previous separate LRUs (Receiver Exciter and Processor) in one and using the space created to install the Antenna Power Converter and the Heat exchanger. So, just by replacing the MSA with an AESA array while keeping the existing backend the weight will be reduced.

Which, considering BVR tactics, can explain why M-Scan is currently still the better solution for the Typhoon (or any other sub-5th-gen fighter with an A-A emphasis), while AESA can already be put to good use on the Raptor (and legacy types with an A-G emphasis).

Yeah, sure…I can bet than when EF will have an AESA, the EF consortium will proclaim that AESA is the only decent radar for a fighter and the MSA is primitive…