Hammer’s talking about people’s minds in brasil, not their politicians ones…

population may not well see the need of modern weapons systems, even if politicians do.

In france, we have similar opinions.. many people wondering why spending so much on the military… sometimes even saying,; if they did well with what they had until now, why don’t they keep their stuff instead of buying new one?

all “specialists”, of course 😉 )

The thing is, you won’t get anything more than “appropriate ToT” from the US, according to Hillary Clinton and Boeing (which means, what the US consider enough regardless of your opinion) and in any case, they’ll keep the capability to veto any export of technologies they don’t want to see exported to a particular nation.

That’s what already was a big no-no for Lula. Gripen NG uses a US engine (not to speak of all other stuff coping from there as well)… that itself may be enough to prevent it from being “fully exportable” by brasil… (see above)

The was it’s formulated gives the feel its “open”, but in fact, by the simple “will of independance from the USA” claimed previously, two out of three proposals would have little chance to get through

range? altitude of operation? ability to get to action faster? ability to deliver smart weapons like LGBs, evading threats
like SAMs as well as small weapons fire…

I have always been under the impression that engine cowlings are designed to contain an engine failure and this is because if an engine failure is uncontained the debris from the failure might penetrate the pressure cabin. Such a penetration could be disastrous.

If my impression is true, and I’m pretty sure it is, then this incident signifies a really serious engineering problem, one which could impact on the certification of the aeroplane.

Regards

actuallky, the nacelles are part of engine design, so it’s still RR to blame…

companies flying GE engines kept their aircraft flying

fixing a pod with a turret would bring a lot of new problems like:

– recoil when firing out of axis – as you can’t put lateral fixations (or the pod would be an aerodynamical disaster) it would be ripped away as soon as you’d start firing (not to speak about lack of accuracy due to “soft fixation points” – just look at the video of the F-4s pod which fire in line with the fighter (no lateral recoil).. they are dangling all over the place, making them highly imprecise as weapons. now imagine if they had to fire laterally

– energy feed: most gunpods are streamlined and use an internal ram air turbine to feed them elecrtically. They need the aircraft to fly at certain speeds to be efficient. If you use a mobile turret, your pod will have to be fed by the power circuits of the fighter.. ath’ts a lot of energy that you’ll have to produce by a generator that will ad weight in your fighter, while occupying space you’d be able to use for other purposes

– aircraft stability

etc..

actually, it was already a made decision to have it built by the british… with no particular protest from french workers.

but the defence budget here in france was also cut in lots of places, and the second carrier has been “postponed” for that reason.

what I do find strange is that statement that the french would be somehow more dangerous for US secrets than others…

when the F-117 want to paris airshow, I was in the crowd, took pics of it from barely a few feet away… the only thing I didn’t do is touch it… as any other visitor to the airshow..

every time the french launch their ariane rocket from french guyana, there is always a whole bunch of antennas in the US “listening to it”… and also a few that don’t just “listen”… enemies spy on each other, and allies (or at least , nations pretending to be) do the same, and it works both ways.

when the french deploy rafales to a foreign country, there are usually also french guards surrounding it on the ground. everybody has his secrets, and wants to keep them secret.. it’s the part of the “game” plain and simple

Edit:

oops, posted that before seeing there were two other pages..