the greek one have systems turned off!

it’s exactly the same cockpit!

yoonngg well it seems that somes here ares comparing tests limits and operational limits!

when tests pilots test a F22 they put it at max trotle and to the limit “of course because the plane was pbuilt to do only that”

so the limit test speed in the press ares quite impressing “and that’s why the press is made, propaganda”

now the serie planes ares quite differents, and knowing that a test F22 did 1.98 while test , WHO CARE’SaBOUT?

with combat payload and with a serie plane, the max speed of the F22 will be hoping to reach will be 1.8, and with the dream to sniff it one time.

now why did yanks put 2D TVC? just becaue the stealth design isn’t very aerodynamic, and even with 20% more angle that TVC allow, F22 isn’t a great agility bird! as could be this kind of monster as the SU30, who was designed around agility and with a plus, 3D TVC to give abilities of a mosquito and not only a bird!

first, the F22 is limited at Mach 1.8 at 40000ft and supercruise at 1.5 max almost empty!

so if they ares over 1.8, the F22 is empty and at exercises!

second, it was reported in the debreifing room of ADLA registered that a Mirage of adla did launched successfully a Magic to 11G extrem maneuvring!

and that a max G rate for Mirage 2000 was 13G in a exercise! impressing!!!

http://www.mirage-jet.com/AIRFRAME/Fly_by_wire/fly_by_wire.htm

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-145-start-45.html

yoooooooo

Wrong, chinese ares interested by the Rafale, not by the 2005!

anyway, while the USA and british sell weapons to Lybia , saudies,and Pakistan!

why French will don’t sell to china? because US will sell China too, the only question is when!

USA and UK provided to Saddam to dirtiest weapons, biologic, chimical and bacteriologics technologies and virus! when french sold only fews mirage and anti tanks missiles!

Bush admin promised to discover french “vilains” weapons, for 2years they still ares reseaching, as WMD the French evil saddams weapons was in neo cons dreams of bashing! lol

bad

Bad day for the british, not only the eurofighter is turning from a 9.7t fighter into a 12t fat cat, but the badly designed F35B is far from deliveries!

JSF Program Alters Layout To Meet Performance Parameters (Posted: Wednesday, September 01, 2004)
[Defense Daily, Sept. 1, 2004]
By Lorenzo Cortes

Apart from tackling weight and propulsion issues to meet key performance parameters (KPP) for the short takeoff, vertical landing (STOVL) variant of Lockheed Martin’s [LMT] F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), the JSF program executive officer also said that the program reconfigured the weapons layout for STOVL.

“It was clear to us that with the weight overages that we have seen that we weren’t going to get there just by reducing weight in the airplane,” Rear Adm. Steven Enewold said yesterday in a interview with Defense Daily. The government/industry steering group for the JSF program thus looked at weight, the propulsion performance, the ways the aircraft would be used in combat and also explored the possibility relaxing some of the requirements for the aircraft.

KPPs for the STOVL JSF include a combat radius of 490 nautical miles and the ability to take off from a 550-foot flight deck for U.S. aircraft and 450 feet for the British version. Earlier this year the Pentagon said it was restructuring the JSF, adding about $5 billion and one year to the development program. The problems were largely associated with weight growth in the STOVL variant of the aircraft.

In June, the Pentagon’s Defense Acquisition Board (DAB) signed off on a two-year delay to fielding the planned multirole fighter (Defense Daily, June 29). In addition to the STOVL variant, Lockheed Martin is also building a conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL) aircraft for the Air Force and a carrier variant (CV) for the Navy.

Relaxing requirements in this case center on the way the STOVL version of JSF stores weapons for combat operations. “Specifically, we’ve asked to move away from a common internal weapons bay and go back to a weapons bay that is smaller,” Enewold explained. “We had a unique STOVL weapons bay when we started. It was a smaller weapons bay to carry two 1,000-pound JDAMs (Joint Direct Attack Munitions) and two AMRAAMs (Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missiles) as the KPP load out. Because we thought we could reduce the amount of flight testing and certification and a whole bunch of other good things in the STOVL airplane, we decided to go to a common weapons bay that was common with the conventional and the CV airplanes and we found out we couldn’t.”

Other modifications include reducing the number of dual-carriage weapons the STOVL could mount externally. “The airplane doesn’t look like it has the ability go real fast, real low,” Enewold noted. “And so we backed off on the max airspeed of the airplane to match what we think the airplane aerodynamically will do.”

The Air Force recently had considered developing an internal configuration of the 25mm cannon for the STOVL JSF. Presently, the program plans to equip STOVL aircraft with a missionized gun on the centerline. In 2002, Lockheed Martin decided to change the cannon for JSF, dropping the longstanding BK 27 27mm gun offered by Alliant Techsystems [ATK] and the Mauser subsidiary of Germany’s Rheinmetall and going instead with General Dynamics’ [GD] GAU-12 25mm gatling cannon (Defense Daily, Nov. 18, 2002).

“The Air Force is interested in integrating the internal gun into the airplane, predominantly to preserve the signature,” Enewold said. “We did some initial looks at it. It looks possible, but not easy. It would add weight and drag to the airplane, we think. So right now we have recommended we not do that in the STOVL design right now.”

The steering group, which includes government and industry personnel and is co-chaired by Air Force acquisiton chief Marvin Sambur and his Navy counterpart John Young, approved the STOVL modifications earlier this month.

The next big step for the JSF program is a meeting of the DAB in mid-October. During this meeting, the DAB will ascertain the program’s progress.

yaaaaaaa

The lifetime and production-cost will not stay at such a low level for ever. (Russia/Ukraine) Secure costumer support is still in question.
Such tpt will last for 40 years. Tax-payers money spend at home, when it comes from Airbus.
Maybe a dozen C-17 will bolster the European-Task-Force, when it comes to outsize cargo. UK has already started with some. At the moment it is cheaper to hire an AN-124 for that. Russia has allowed military ground-transport to Afghanistan.
By the way, the A-400M remembers me on YC-14 and YC-15, when it comes to capabilities.

well problems, Antonov is Ukrainian and not russian! thank you!

Ukrain is a free republic now

lol

aircrafts carriers! uhmmm

i mean airplanes carriers! if this poor F35B is released one day!

i still can’t define the F35B, a helo? a airplane? ???

well!!!

As far as the official story goes, they were simple iron boms. The way we know they attacked the reactor, and the films and pictures they took, shows that it was a CCIP aiming strike.
I’m not ignoring the other theories though. But I find it hard to believe that a French engineer had help us. Jews were not allowed to build the reactor in Iraq, in a direct order by Saddam. Unless of course that engineer was given a whole lot of money.
Also, the strike was made in Sunday, because we didn’t want to harm French workers. So a transmitter had to be placed at least a day before, though I don’t know how long the signal could last.

That’s the main reason we didn’t use F-4s, even though the attacking formation was escourted by a formation of F-15s. And we also wanted to boast a bit with our new toys 😀

French israel Nuke reactor and detterence was another level than osirak!!

because osirak wasn’t a great threat, technically osirak was a tiny nuke experimental reactor, nothing to compare with israel centrale nuke facilities! and AIEA was regulating it!

osirak havent capacities to produce nuke bombs! anyway saddam could have bough a nuke head more easily than trying to produce it with a reactor that can’t do it! osirak!!

F16 is the politacal plane of USA!

when British actually ares selling weapons to Lybia, and USA selling all over the dangerous world places weapons, i don’t see why pointing french only!

thx