make it foldable… wouldn’t be the first time 😉

such an aircraft could probably be really cheap to navalise, and very easy to land (those straight wings give you so much lift you’ll land almost vertically on an advancing carrier… 😀

it would, except if LM states that’s there’s no such issue (which is what they more or less are saying anyway)

now, if it appears that the issue is there, and LM lied, I wonder if they will have to pay some compensation for the investment from users which won’t be able to get the promised product

you swing a pad under a landing aircraft? that’s really easy, for sure… not to speak about marines who need an aircraft that can land anywhere (or almost)…

I doubt we’ll see a marine soldier running with a 5 ton concrete slab on his back to put it under a landing F-32B when it comes from a mission..

actually, who did what to whom is less relevant than the fact that serbs and bulgarians have a history of conflicts that can make them both feel unsecure about their neighbour.. and right now, serbia is at a disadvantage in the air to air department, which is the whole point D.J. was making:

they need a competent air force, not to take on NATO as a whole (might be a bit difficult task for a 6 million people country:D ), but to deter any eventual “neighborhood tension”, of which the most probable are the one with bulgaria and, eventually, croatia (considering what happened by the end of the 20th century)

Reading that NY-Times articel, it makes me wonder if those Senators had know about the F-35 delays and cost overruns earlier would they not have voted for the F-22A prod stop..:confused:

Seems to me LM would have their sugarstraw deeply into the US MOD Cash safe.. eighter way:confused:

This cant be good for the US MOD, wonder how popular LM are within the hallways of US MOD…:rolleyes:

Thanks

if you read the article it says:

“Last summer, Mr. Gates promoted the new jet, called the F-35, when he urged Congress to halt production of the F-22 fighter plane. Some senators now say they might not have made that decision if they had known about the problems with the F-35. “

so, that confirms your doubts, they’d thought twice, had they known it at the time.

for now, well, the production line isn’t closed yet AFAIK, they still have the opportunity to maintain it, if they consider it a better option, but still, considering the cost per airframe of the F-22, I’m not sure the USAF would get enough of these if it was their only purchase and the F-35 got cancelled… they’d have no other option but to find another cheaper airframe, either a completely new one (meaning, a new rfp, development etc…), or keep older ones in production (f-16 probably, considering that the F-22 takes over the missions of the F-15 and possibly extends its missions range to ground attack as well as their numbers increase)

there is probably a full text of what he said, but i have no doubt it wasnt selectivly part quoted
as i read it, its a normal rafale using aa-10c missiles, dont you read it this way ? or is ATLC SOP significant

as you read it: “normal rafale with lesser missiles and radar than normally used” (no multi-trageting and lesser missile range). While it had a better SA than a Su-27 or a mig 29 would have had, thanks to its more advanced systems, it was still limited compared to its normal capabilities… and did very well (to say the least) in that configuration..

What does it show? that it is a very good fighter, for certain… better than typhoon? maybe yes maybe no, one or two confrontations aren’t enough to draw a clear conclusion, but it definitely appears as a strong contender one has to take into consideration

it’s is supposed to have it, indeed

and if it has it, and the computing power to “clean the signal of parasitic echos and use it efficiently (which would sound logical, but you never know… 😀 ), any “stealth” aircraft may suddenly need to rely much more on its agility than its stealth to avoid getting shot at and, even, shot down