Do note that USAF F-35 procurement will be cut. Most probably this will happen by the way of reduced acquisition rate, this will drive the unit cost up.
l.

The program of record has not changed, the procurement schedule has been extended. Even with the reduced buy rate, the production ramp up coming in the 2020’s is more critical for driving down unit cost than overall numbers (which again, have not changed).

Nah, if you’re not interested in the actual lift force because you’re just taking it for granted that the aircraft can generate the required lift coefficient and has sufficient thrust to overcome the resulting drag, there’s no need to worry about bank angle. You’re doing it right – what’s so wonky about 26deg/s in that scenario?

Yeah, sure. I assumed by the question he was looking at comparing corner speeds of different aircraft.

@ Inst [/QUOTE]This roughly indicates that if the F-22 is G-limited at 9G, it can perform 28 degree / sec turns at up to 650 km/h, or mach .56 at 15000 ft [/QUOTE]

It probably can but you need the E-M diagram to be sure of the aircraft envelope. BTW- you really don’t need to know the equations anymore, just go to one of the online pilot references that have turn rate calculators.

What are they doing? well, flying gently in peaceful skies, I’d say… they don’t go nowhere near China or Korea with it

Where are F-35’s deployed right now as part of a TSP deployment? Your prone to making generalizations that are flatly incorrect.

F-35 will be ranked first on technical specifications, and it will be cheaper than either Rafale or Typhoon. The question remains; will be “sufficiently cheap”? Dassault tried to argue that a smaller nunber of Rafale could do the same work as the specified number of Gripen. LM can use the same argument, however with a smaller delta in costs it will be more likely they will succeed. Politics may stop F-35 of course (if it is perceived as “too agressive”). The SH could be a compromise between cost and technical requirements if politics prevents F-35 from winning.

TBH- It very much depends on the RFI and how Swiss structure the competition. If they require a “fly-off” with Swiss pilots flying the competitors in a technical evaluation, that would work against the F-35. The Swiss aren’t going to qualify a pilot to fly the F-35 and there is no two seater (an issue Spud pointed out). The F-35’s flight simulator is highly realistic, but isn’t going to replicate a butt in the ejection seat. This is all speculation as L-M might offer the F-16V instead.

Based on nothing but opinion, I’d say this is a European race. The US offerings will be very much the dark horse. Still give the Gripen E the best odds, and the Rafale having a reasonable chance.

Which Eurofighter Consortium nation would be leading the sales pitch in a Swiss race? That might play a factor.

@ Hallow:

About cost, iwont bother answering, plaiin lie. Linked hdar hundreds of times the actual official costs of Rafale… WAY lower than actual F-35 cost (using SDD value for example). Not to talk about maintenance costs..

Because you can quote the “actual official costs” of the Rafale via Senat docs all you want. The fact is, those numbers are vague. As I’ve pointed out before, you’ve claimed those cost represent Rafale F3 deliveries that year, yet the RBE2 deliveries didn’t even start until the end of that fiscal year. You constantly point out the “hidden costs” of the F-35, dispute the URF for the F-35 as inaccurate (despite having URF, total flyaway, APUC, PAUC costing made public every year). Yet with no cost breakdown, no itemization available for the Rafale, you assume those senat figures represent procurement cost.

Easy solution, ignore function.

Believe me, the last thing I want is a reply from you. Go play with ur friends on “russiastronk” forum. There are posters who can engage in discussion without crying every time someone thinks a poster is bashing Russia. I’m not, but it does show your personal inferiority complex.

Go run to the ignore function to save your delicate psyche. I’ll stay here and any other thread I please thank you.
(Apologies to others on thread, I was responding to article posted by Austin. Certainly was not looking for our nationalistic friend to jump on response with such vitriolic fervor toward a different point of view)

be honest, even accounting for the significantly free-er nature of the press in the US, the coverage of Russia is anything but balanced in the US, even if we only stick to the question of Syria.

– Broadly agree with what your saying.

What I find worrisome is that this isn’t a reporter’s OpEd, or even a poorly sourced clickbait article. Viktor Bondarev is the former head of one of the major service branches and still the chairman of the Federation Council’s Defense and Security Committee.