Page 21 – Key Publishing

robban

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 301 through 315 (of 360 total)

← 1 2 3 … 20 21 22 23 24 →

Author

Posts
September 19, 2006 at 3:34 pm in reply to: Arrival of the first SAAF Gripen! #2563468

robban
Participant

Oops! I failed to see that Signatory already posted info on this subject.

Sorry about that! 😮

September 15, 2006 at 6:03 pm in reply to: Rafale and guests in flight #2566800

robban
Participant

Awesome, thanks!! 😎

September 14, 2006 at 6:16 pm in reply to: ranking of beautiful aircraft by nation and epoch #2567712

robban
Participant

Here are some shots of the Tunnan, that I took at the Kristianstad airshow last month.

How do you like this one? 🙂

September 13, 2006 at 9:53 am in reply to: What do You think of that design … ??? #2569225

robban
Participant

I like it! 🙂

September 13, 2006 at 9:25 am in reply to: ranking of beautiful aircraft by nation and epoch #2569242

robban
Participant

For true beauty, look here! 😎

September 13, 2006 at 9:17 am in reply to: ranking of beautiful aircraft by nation and epoch #2569246

robban
Participant

Beat the lines on this –

This thread is about beauty isn’t it?

Any uglier than that and you have an F-35. :p

September 11, 2006 at 8:34 pm in reply to: JAS 39 Gripen-N #2570660

robban
Participant

I remember reading in Flight Journal, when the British test pilot Dan Griffith flew the Gripen, he mentioned that fuel was displayed in percent.
Max internal fuel carried by the plane was 100%(obviously) and any additional fuel carried externaly was simply added to the 100% figure. The two seater that he flew was equipped with an external fuel tank. The fuel gauge showed 140%. Now, the external fuel tank(ex Danish Draken tanks) has room for 1200 liters of fuel. Which means that the two seater Gripen has an internal fuel capacity of 3000 liters. And the two seater has less internal fuel compared to the single seater.

September 11, 2006 at 8:19 pm in reply to: Gripen a UK design? #2570663

robban
Participant

From what I’ve been able to gather from pilots that fly the Gripen, the transonic/supersonic acceleration is simply outstanding! The Gripen has very low drag. Which is why it leaves fighters with much higher T/W ratios in its wake. 🙂

I’d love to see a Gripen fitted with the EJ200!

September 11, 2006 at 8:05 am in reply to: ranking of beautiful aircraft by nation and epoch #2570945

robban
Participant

Fw 190D! Mmmm! 🙂

September 11, 2006 at 8:00 am in reply to: Gripen a UK design? #2570950

robban
Participant

The Viggen cannot compare with the Gripen. The Gripen is simply superior in every way, especially in overall costs.
Sure, the Viggen could be built unstable with movable canards, but then what? It would still have a radar signature several times bigger than that of a Gripen. The rear view would still be poor. The Viggen had good performance. It could outaccelerate an F-16 in the transonic regime and the radar and datalink was outstanding. But even here the Gripen leaves the Viggen in the dust, especially in terms of transonic and supersonic acceleration, not to mention manouverability and turn performance at all speeds.

The Viggen was very good, but the Gripen is very much better! 😀

September 9, 2006 at 9:35 am in reply to: Rafale out of Norwegian contest #2572084

robban
Participant

Why go through such big modifications just to get one more hardpoint? Wouldn’t it be better to just re-arrange the hard points on the fuselage instead? I’m thinking Mirage 2000 and Rafale style here? Or perhaps just modify the landing gear doors so that the open differently, giving more room for multiple stores racks?
It just seems so unnecessary.

September 8, 2006 at 2:56 pm in reply to: Rafale out of Norwegian contest #2572544

robban
Participant

Keep in mind a fighter’s cost is proportional to its weight, and in that respect the Gripen N should cost more than the original Gripen. Are you sure it will be all that much cheaper compared to the Rafale? Esp if you factor in development costs of the new version.

Nic

I don’t doubt the capabilities of the Rafale(you know that 🙂 ). But because the Gripen is single engined it will most likely be alot cheaper than the twin engined Rafale either way. And while the Gripen cannot carry as much ordnance as the Rafale(or F-16), the short turn around times(and the high avaliability shown in excercises) means that the Gripen can put as much bombs on the target as most of the bigger fighters.

September 7, 2006 at 11:21 pm in reply to: Rafale out of Norwegian contest #2573169

robban
Participant

That the Gripen is a superior WVR than the F-16A MLU is more impressive than if it beats the F-16C. In BVR and netcentric warfare I feel you greatly underestimate the Gripen. I outclassed Finlands F-18 Hornets in BVR. And from what I’ve been able to gather from the Red Flag excercise the Gripen did(very) well against anything that was thrown against it. The Americans were very impressed by how difficult it was to find the Gripen on radar. And when the Gripen used ECM they couldn’t find them at all.
Unfortunatelly the Gripens were forced to use the Link 16 which is much less advanced than the TIDLS used in Sweden.

September 7, 2006 at 7:07 am in reply to: Warthog Booted Out of Airshow #2573714

robban
Participant

I can understand why this can be sensitive to some people. The accident happened recently. It’s only natural to react like this. Being an airplane wh0re, I’d still want to see the A-10 attending the airshow, but the “normal” people just might look at it differently.

September 4, 2006 at 8:57 am in reply to: Could it be? #2576010

robban
Participant

So it can do the Cobra. What’s the big deal? Really?
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 301 through 315 (of 360 total)

← 1 2 3 … 20 21 22 23 24 →