dynamoGripen C range
Combat radius: 800 km internal fuel (431nm)
Combat radius: 1,550 Km with external fuel (837nm)
Ferry range: 3,200 Km(1727nm)Gripen NG Range
Range is increased an average of 40% over the JAS 39C as both the internal and external fuel capability is expanded.
Combat radius: 1,300 Km + 30 minutes on station with A2A weapons. (702nm)
Range (one-way): 2,500 Km on internal fuel(1350nm)
Ferry range (one-way): 4,075 Km with external fuel(2200nm)
Combat Radius estimate: 1,800 km with A2A weapons(972nm)One drop tank (450 Gal) gives the Gripen NG an extra range of approximately 1000 km.
Courtesy of signatory who gathered the info..
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showpost.php?p=1321013&postcount=1
:p:p:p:p:p:p:p
BTW, the internal fuel increase doesn’t translate in the same combat radius increase.
But, as always, the posts of Gripen fans are the funniest…
________
party Cam
dynamoInsideDefence:
http://defensenewsstand.com/newsstand_latest.asp
Ooops. And still a lot of testing to be done.
Do you know what “COULD” means in English?
dynamoAnd as for Gripen, Signatory wrote this in the same thread Dynamo was linking to:
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showpost.php?p=1363875&postcount=15
:p with 2.4 tons of fuel? :p
dynamoer, it was stated on these boards already, the F-35 has a combat radius of ~600 nautical miles clean and ~750 nautical miles with external tanks, similar to the Typhoon, The rafale has a combat radius of over 1000 nautical miles with external tanks, which is over 30% more than the F-35 with external fuel.
F-35:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-35_Lightning_II
Typhoon:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurofighter_Typhoon
Rafale:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dassault_Rafale
now, while it has comparable range as the typhooon when both use external fuel, it doesn’t come clos to the rafale. “Clean” it can’t beat any of these in the range department if the other use external tanks.
The 600 Nmiles figure is with 1 hour of CAP. :D. OTOH, if you read carefully the link I put, you’ll notice that the mission’s profile for all these aircrafts is: “the aircraft took off with a weapon load, remained at high altitude and returned after about a minute of combat”
So, yes, the F 35 has a grater radius clean than EF with 3 EFTs…
dynamoNo, i am questioning its combat endurance. If you look at my post again, you will see that i gave an example.
The F-35 will do deep strike in Iran fine, but stealth Gripen (???:p:p)is a better design for point defence, you can still do stand off in the strike role.
I attached a link where you can see the combat radius of F 35 compared with ordinary fighters such as EF, Rafale, Gripen, Su 30. It’s might be a shock, but a clean F 35 outranges all those planes even when they carry 3 EFTs !
Discussing maximum mission radius, Mazanowski presented an air-to-air mission profile in which all the aircraft took off with a weapon load, remained at high altitude and returned after about a minute of combat. All but the F-35 and Su-30MKI were carrying three external fuel tanks.
Under this scenario, the Rafale had a maximum mission radius of 896 n miles, the F/A-18 816 n miles, the F-35 751 n miles, the Eurofighter 747 n miles, the Su-30MKI 728 n miles and the Gripen 502 n miles.
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=88277
BTW, the “stealthy Gripen” was a good joke…
dynamojust like the 55° of the hornet? 😀
The 55 was for the F 35; The SH is 48-50. But guess what, they are sustained. 😀
dynamoWhat does sensors have to do with maneuverability and controlability?
Your posts sound more and more like a propaganda brochures, but I think nobody actually buys here, so you my try some Gvt.’s official pages. 😀
BTW, how do you know, all of this?
Got access to actual flight data? (I don’t think LM even has it)
Judging by 240-3 performance, I’d say LM can be grateful if manage to match medium powered F16, let alone -132 models.
Except that test pilots declared that clean F 16 had to use AB to keep with F 35
You still don’t get it, do you? 😀
Rafale (I assume you’re talking about it), flew at alpha 120°, so that’s over 2 times over F18, if you insist on making dumb comparisons.
LOL, even EF with beta FCS, flew more than 55° alpha.
How is Hornet any good then?
120 deg. is transient (i.e. in a Cobra -like pitch maneuver, for a few seconds) not sustained.
dynamoNo need to get emotional about EU issue, but speaking about general economical growth and putting NATO-military alliance membership ahead EU-laws and business and legislation synchronization is something inherently very wrong, and in realm of religion.
I’m afraid that’s you are not very well informed. There is no obligation from Romanian side to use a competitive procedure when buying defense items. In fact, unless the funds are from EU, we are not even obliged to use a competitive procedure for an aquisition.
It’s funny, Romania struggled to enter EU, most of EU members were against it, pressure was made and entering EU was controversial (…), and now EU is to blame :D.
Again, you missed the point. We didn’t underplay the EU admission for the future of Romania. However, EU did reap some benefits too. Remember the ~ 3 billion Euro trade deficit with EU in 2009 alone, vs surpluss before admission.
My impressions about Romania are first hand impressions of my ex coworkers Romanians, believe much older than people here form Romania, those are people who lived and worked with their families under SU.
We were not under SU. It was a hard core communist regime, but there were no Soviet troops in Romania from 1958.
Fear form Russian invasion is, I would say, paranoid, and US is exploiting it. But I understand why Romaninas see USA as “liberators”.
Fear from Russian invasion is based on some facts:
-from 1711 until 1944 Russians invaded us 18 times;
-last time we also lost ~ 50,000 sq. km of territory together with ~ 1,800,000 ethnic Romanians; many of those were deported by Stalin in Siberia and Central Asia;
-they impose an communist regime that transformed a rather prosperous country (per capita GDP in 1938 was higher than Greece or Portugal) into one of the least developed in Europe.
But yes, to many it may seem paranoia.
BTW, we weren’t always friends with US. In fact, for ~ half year in 1944 we clashed with USAAF (USAF ancestor). But today situation is different.
________
MUTUAL INSURANCE FORUMS
dynamono, I don’t… I just come from eastern europe myself… hum, on second thought, well, maybe I do have a slight idea…
as for “paying moral debt”, in international politics there’s no such thing as “morality”… if you believe in such crap, you’re obviously too naive for it.
Future security relations with US are considered much more important than with European countries.
Internationally, it’s everybody for himself.. even the “allies” spy on each other and try regularly to take advantage of each other… for masses there are nice speeches on TV but behind the scenes, every nation is in competition with the other ones, and when you say “they helped me so I need to return favor”, unless you signed something (and even then, many don’t hesitate to reconsider their position), you’re a puppet indeed
It’s OK for me…
________
Lovely Wendie99
dynamoso, basically, because the US did you a favor (or at least something you see as one) you want to play their puppets for the next 30-40 years?
Paying a moral debt automatically make a country a US puppet…Intersting.
For a country that got out of some 45 years of foreign influence, you seem in a great hurry to get under someone else’s one…
You clearly don’t know what you are talking about.
________
Ship Sale
dynamoSo by buying used American F-16’s, it’s payback time for…
… NATO for not letting Romania join the alliance
OR
… EU for letting them join the union
I’m sorry, I don’t see the logic.
For US for pressuring other NATO members to let Romania join the alliance. I use payback as compensation/recompension/reinbursement not as retaliation.
________
Asian lesbian
dynamoDo you really think the US would help Romania just because it uses F-16’s? Would there be no help from the US if Romania we’re using Gripens, Eurofighters or Mirages?
Unlike, say, Hungary or Czech Republic, Romania did not meet many of the demanded criteria when admitted in NATO in 2002. It was US pressures to the European members that allowed us to become full members. So, it’s payback time
________
Montana marijuana dispensary
dynamoUh… Except Sweden can, and could probably turn a profit off leasing fully supported Gripens at the maintenance cost of Block 20 F-16s, whose support infrastructure isn’t included in that lovely “free” price. Regardless of the merits you suppose, they weren’t given a chance to present their best offer because Romanian MinDef didn’t make an open RFP.
So RoAF may very well end up with some Block 20s and Block 52/60s “when they can afford it”. Further violating transparent procurement standards probably isn’t going to help them their standing in EU and as seen in Bulgaria, there can be consequences. In any case, getting work share for probably the most exportable european fighter jet seems a half-way decent thing the government could do if it’s spending a chunk of change, up front or not. if romania doesn’t want a partnership, it should withdraw from EU. saves everybody some hassle..
There is no obligation under any EU laws to apply any procedure when buying military stuff. And, again, it’s outrageous to see that this is loudly demanded only when we buy from US, and when we buy from EU is OK to not have a biding procedure. It’s pure hypocrisy.
Yes, you can even get governments to promote military treaties and missile bases their own populations don’t remotely support.
And how do you know that Romanians do not support US missile shiled ? I’m curious.
________
Extreme Vaporizer
dynamoDidn’t Romania send out an RFI some years ago? The American’s announced the free F-16 platforms in their DSCA announcement in 2008. Are you honestly going to argue that nearly 2 years is not long enough for SAAB to realise that if a competitor is offering a free platform for the initial stages of a contract all the way back then, then perhaps they’d better update their proposals to match?
As to your other ideas, will Sweden provide an upgrade to base infrastructure, air traffic control systems, the physical strutures for maintenance, support and training facilities for free as well or in reality, will Romania have to pay for this stuff irrespective of which fighter is chosen?
Instead of having a massive whinge, when an opportunity is lost, perhaps they’d be better off concentrating on making the best offer in the first place…
Aside those logical arguments, there is a more important one: what benefit would bring an aquisition from Sweden, a small neutral country? Would Sweden help Romania if an agression will occur? Because US will, according to article 5.
________
Upload replays starcraft
dynamoYes, and a lot.
You sirs obviously do not understand open market and mega corporation type of capitalism.
1. Profit is a king
Correct. What I want to point is that it’s not a one way street and at least for now, EU countries profited more than us.
Romania was more like some poor Africa country by it’s economy and infrastructure after fall of SU.
Yeah, sure…
Almost all of those investments, and foreign corporations making profit in Romania are western. They claim profit, but they pay taxes to Romania, and they employ Romanian people.
Stop patronizing, please.
This is how your government and people are getting money. Not by money gifts form EU, but with investors employing your people. But to lure investors to country, you have to make certain conditions. Synchronizing with EU business system and law system is one of conditions foreign investor likes to have…
The biggest increase in foreign investments, has nothing to do with EU admission, but with NATO admission. Before NATO admission foreign investments in Romania were ~ 700 mil. After 2002 (when Romania was invited; formal entrance in 2004) the total was over 5 billion/year.
Entering EU helped Romania. And entering EU was by strong USA push.
Another reason to be greatfull to US and not to nEU :diablo:
But don’t be fooled, everyone is there for interests, money, profit, and cheap labor, not because they like Romania, corporations will bribe weak government…
Thank you for these great news, but we already know this, since we bribed EU governmets too 😀
________
Kitchen Measures
Sign In
