then its about 2000kgs to spare for racks and other things before hitting max takeoff weight with full internal fuel. .
16500-(7100+3500+4000)~2000kgs
i have no idea of the runway required, but it´s not the standard 800m gripen strip (550m gripen C takeoff with AoA).

Gripen lifts alot of its size, reliable or not, this you must ask the AFs using it, and i dont believe we see this in real life maybe not even flight tested, not even on bigger fighters like EF or Rafale, due to its rare in its usability. But for flexibiliy its doable, and i know those racks is being integrated.

This thread is academic either way, most pics here are not real life pics.

And for drag, small diameter bombs is made for exactly that reason, lowering drag. So instead of lowering drag, this config uprating the capacity.

Yes, an SDB has much less drag than a legacy bomb of equal size, such as Mk series. However, in the pic there is no one to one comparison, but rather four to one. So, arguably four SDBs have more drag than one Mk bomb.

I don’t think that those were SDBs on the Gripen, no wiglets and more than 4 to a launcher (unless this is a new Saab bomb/rack).

True, they don’t look like SDBs, but something in the same class definately.

this is a marketing slide for cruch the the prejudice of gripens loadout.

the additional fuel of the NG will be a good thing for such a loadout thats for sure. this makes it have more fuel than a /C/D gripen with one EFT, this comes with NG better aerodynamics and better bodylift.
But for longer trips or loitering it would probably be sensible to have a tanker nearby or switch one or to stations for fuel.

So, you are implying that it will actually manage to take off?
I’m impressed :diablo:

Brain f@rt moment but wasn’t the Saudi Tornado upgrade done with the Thales Damocles pod due to them not being able to use Litening 3 or Sniper? Just interesting considering Sniper is part of this F-15 contract.

When the saudis were considering buying the strike version of the eagle, Israel was receiving its own or had received them all, not really sure. They objected the deal all along, but to no avail. But at least they managed to lobby against and eventually stop any export of items more advanced than their own. The original targeting pod the saudis could get was codenamed Sharpshooter, and was vastly inaccurate in comparison with the LANTIRN the F-15Is would get.

USAF bought F-15Es until 2000 or 2001. That’s one decade, not two.

Technically it’s a different thing; the F-22 has no bomber version, if it did the F-15E’s production would had stopped even earlier. F-22s are not successors to the F-15Es, even though they have some bombing abilities (but are not F/A-22s).

No comparison?

You are aware that this a first in seventy years?
The P-51D didnt outproduce the F-86, who didnt outproduce the century fighters line, who didnt outproduce the F-4 Phantom, who didnt outproduce the F-15 Eagle…
If you said that by reason of political interference (no exports policy by example, thats a first for the primary USAF air defence fighter since the creation of the USAF) the Raptor production line was curtailed, that would be correct, but “not comparable”? On that you are wrong, a comparison with with its predecessors its eminently sensible.

When the USAF felt didn’t need any more F-15s, they stopped the orders. When they felt they didn’t need any more F-22s, they stopped the orders.

It’s the same thing, really.

The fact that the one was available for export while the other one not, makes the whole difference in terms of production duration. If they had orders for the F-22 and they were willing to sell it, the F-15 line would had closed down years ago. It doesn’t have to do with the aircrafts per se, or the production line per se.

By the same logic, the fact that the latest export F-16s are more advanced than USAF’s own, is totally incomprehensible, let alone ironic.

The obvious question his why in the hell wasnt the Raptor allowed to be exported to Japan and South Korea, two allied countries who expressely asked for it? Because of security issues? If thats the answer then is a lousy one…

We may never really know for sure; fact is that for the next decades Lockheed will be busy producing F-35s and supporting F-22s, while Boeing will be busy producing F-15s, marketing F-18s and supporting both of them.

Somehow it looks like everyone’s happy. Now consider the opposite, the F-22 being available for export… :p

Really when did it do that, thought there is still along way to go in testing before getting round to carrying a full weapons load let alone releasing them

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showpost.php?p=1832212&postcount=15

Personally I think it is and will remain in the sphere of extreme theory.

more science fiction for over G to get his canines into:

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3abca8e6e2-70ef-40a3-8c56-f83aa6fc7ade&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest

for everyone else its specific information from the US side of things:)

Interesting link in comments:
http://essential-intelligence-network.blogspot.com/2011/12/rq-170-anatomy-of-failed-cybernetic.html

If we here of a new contract awarded in the next few months to some US company for the design, development, testing and implementaion of some new self-destruct ability for UAVs personally I won’t be too surprised.