Let’s get some things straight here:

# F-22 is designed to supercruise fully loaded and at low flight levels — max Mach 1.8 — and it is the only fighter to do so.
# EF2000 will be able to supercruise at about M1.2/.3, but not with underwing pylons, only with semiconformal-carried AAMs in thin air and a good percentage of fuel burnt off. Same goes with Rafale. Missiles like the Sidewinder or Iris-T have dreadful supersonic drag characteristics (also a problem the F-16 had before they started using AIM-120 on wingtip pylons).
# Neither EF nor Rafale have real radar stealth characteristics, they have somewhat reduced observability at certain wavelength.

Originally posted by m.ileduets
It’s interesting to see the F-16 is lobbied so openly.
One would think that behind closed door lobbying would be more effective.
The way it is most Czechs will feel that their expert commitee’s evaluation decision is wiped asside by the Americans as incompetent. I wouldn’t be suprised if this raised anti- American feelings there.

It also seems that the US- admin. take this tiny sell quite seriously. They might fear that the Czech’s decision might encourage other nations with far more purchasing power to opt for the Gripen.
By making it a political issue the US- administration also demonstrates that they don’t want to leave the arms trade to free market. (Or is it more: free market please, as long as you buy our products?)

I wish the U.S. government would have been as supportive in Austria…

Currently I think – yes! And so for the next 15 to 20 years. By then stealthy (long endurance) swarm-flyer UAVs will dominate aerial combat. I think in the long term manned military aviation is again heading towards more speed, hypersonic air/(sub)orbital to be precise. And that means almost no maneuverability at all. A lot depends on how the AL-1 system works. If direct energy weapons really work they will make all current systems obsolete, it will simply not matter how agile you are. But the reasons why highly agile fighters will still be in use in the next two decades or so are politically motivated rules of engagement, the fact that a lot of older equipment will be around, and the obstruction of the fighter community.
And btw with thrust-vector-control, pulse-controls and LOX-injection for the engines you can make almost any fighter super-maneuverable.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=15625

The best thing is, that those Russians were on the Hawkeye’s radar for almost 40 minutes but nobody reacted. During the following weeks it was extratime for the F-14s intercepting every single sportsplane, airliner and bizjet.

Originally posted by SOC
I find it hard to believe that they would have weighed just enough without the gun to use the F404…the weight we’re talking about isn’t all that much comparitively speaking. Now I do rememebr the German’s considering the APG-65, another Hornet part…

Ja, but it is not only the extra weight of the gun, it is also the extra weight resulting from a larger airframe to accomodate that gun and the extra drag from the larger airframe.

Most important achievements in flight:
1.) Thinking about aerodynamic and transforming those thoughts into an engineered apparatus — Lilienthal had a lot to do with that.
2.) Building aeroplanes that could be flown repeatedly and calculable — Americans were very active here, even though their general influence on the development of airframes soon declined and reached an all-time low between the wars. Various people contributed here, but WW1 was the catalyst.
3.) Exploring aerodynamics and hi-speed aerodynamics — mostly Germans, motivated by the restrictions in engine power after WW1. Lots of work done on gliders and fast planes in the late 20s, throughout the 30s and the war. To some extent Britain with the Schneider-Cup.
4.) The axial-flow turbojet — BMW and Junkers.
5.) Flights into orbit and to the Moon.
…
X.) Journeys to other star sytems with some nonrelativistic apparatus.

In the history of flight the two world wars were the main reason for progress. WW1 brought the reliable engine and deepened understanding what works in flight. WW2 brought the jet and opened the door for things to come (it is an interesting subject to speculate, where flight would have headed if Germany’s R&D – which was ten to fifteen years ahead of the rest – would have continued and not been brought to an absolute halt). The Cold War brought electronics and spaceflight.

We’ll see if commerce and capitalism has enough vigor to continue the progress or will be content with ever cheaper tickets to fly even the last bum to some tropical island.
But perhaps the next challenge already looms on the horizon. China and the second space race. Bringing hypersonic air-travel, cheap access to orbit and regular manned flights within the solar system.

Do you remember when it was still called “EFA” or “Jaeger 90”? Back then they said the Eurofighter could as well use the F404 engine, if it wasn’t for the extra weight of the gun plus ammo. Therefore they needed a new engine. And now, after all the extra development and extra money spent, they decide to leave the gun out? Or even worse, fly around with the dead weight and not maintain it? It’s unbelieveable. How much can it possible cost to train some groundcrews in gun maintainance and buy a truckload of ammo?

Some years ago at a hearing at the German Parliament the EF2000 fly-away price was stated as EUR32.5mio which is absolutely hilarious. It is really hard to tell what the actual fly-away price of a jet is. Usually those stated acquisistion costs are system plus spares/training package and nobody really knows what’s exactly included.