Gripen - Red Flag
- Thread starter chrishorne
- Start date
- Status
Aussi Digger,
ehm ok i might have lack of knowledge, but the only thing you can do, is to assume, you can never back it up with facts before F-35s tries to gain airsupiority over an airspace that is protected by gripen NG.
until then, i keep my guirilla army with "bees" Gripen, and you can keep your "bombtruck" F-35
fear enough!
ehm ok i might have lack of knowledge, but the only thing you can do, is to assume, you can never back it up with facts before F-35s tries to gain airsupiority over an airspace that is protected by gripen NG.
until then, i keep my guirilla army with "bees" Gripen, and you can keep your "bombtruck" F-35
fear enough!
Last edited:
Well
Take some more beer - I´am sure you can transform a "filur"(UAV) to a dozen F-22, then
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
Depends. Is the F-35 being flown by the USAF/USN/USMC or someone else?
How many of each are being employed? What is the intent behind trying to gain air superiority over Sweden? A prelude for invasion, ala "shock and awe"?
What supporting capabilities are being employed, ie: air to air refueling, AEW&C, J-STARS, complementary "joint" capabilities? The use of EW support assets? Standoff weapons?
Does any of this start to indicate to you why 1 v 1 fighter comparisons are worse than useless?
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
I have provided plenty of facts. I even provided the details of the engine your beloved almight Gripen NG will most likely use, which you seemed unaware of despite your unsupported boasting...Aussi Digger,
ehm ok i might have lack of knowledge, but the only thing you can do, is to assume, you can never back it up with facts before F-35s tries to gain airsupiority over an airspace that is protected by gripen NG.
until then, i keep my guirilla army with "bees" Gripen, and you can keep your "bombtruck" F-35
Here is another one for you however.
No matter what is done to the Gripen, short of "starting again" building an LO design from the ground up (and simply calling it Gripen), as L-M have done with the F-35, it will always possess a significant capability advantage over the Gripen and indeed every other Euro-Canard, teen series fighter or current generation Russian, Chinese and Indian fighters.
For the type of LO inherent in the F-35 to be "overcome" you must assume that LO technology is also incapable of evolving to address new threats. Yet the design principles inherent behind LO "treatments" and "measures" allow for adaptability. Find GF's treatise on the history of "LO" in aircraft and hopefully you will see what I mean.
Now even if some new technology is developed, proven and deployed and ANY LO measure (because radar cross section reduction measures are only ONE type of LO reduction inherent in "stealth" aircraft) is rendered useless, you STILL have a fighter aircraft with outstanding thrust, excellent agility and maneuverability, an aerodynamically "clean" airframe, thanks to it's internal weapons bays, an outstanding fuel fraction, the best avionics and sensor fits that the USA can develop, the best weapons fit the USA can come up with, an excellent support base, outstanding reliability and "availability".
All in an aircraft that is likely to be cheaper than it's competitors...
Unfortunately you don't seem satisfied with the fact that Sweden and other forces have a good capable air combat aircraft with an excellent upgrade path ahead of it and need to try and make it into something it is not...
Is there any qualified guesstimation today how much an F35 is going to cost ?.All in an aircraft (F35) that is likely to be cheaper than it's competitors...
A comparison to Gripen and Predator UAV would be nice to get too.
Grand Danois
Entertainer
F-35 UFC stated to Denmark (2007/08): 50.8 mn USD
F-35 UFC stated to Norway (2006?): 48 mn USD
JAS-39C UFC (est.): 35-40 mn USD
JAS-39 Gripen NG UFC: ??
Predator: ?
F-35 UFC stated to Norway (2006?): 48 mn USD
JAS-39C UFC (est.): 35-40 mn USD
JAS-39 Gripen NG UFC: ??
Predator: ?
cheaper than all its comepetitors hahaha very funny..
btw i´m not the one who is a big fan of any specific aircraft, you´re the one who is the fan, of an aircraft that never been proven what so ever...
and F-35 is already more expensive than it was meant to be, and first it was supposed to build 3500 of them now is down to 2400 ops wonder why? wake up, everthing from america aint best at everything, and you can still only assume, and look at nr. you couldnt care less about nr dude, show me facts.
we can go on and on like this forever it´s no point, you´ve your fav. and i got mine.
end of story!
btw i´m not the one who is a big fan of any specific aircraft, you´re the one who is the fan, of an aircraft that never been proven what so ever...
and F-35 is already more expensive than it was meant to be, and first it was supposed to build 3500 of them now is down to 2400 ops wonder why? wake up, everthing from america aint best at everything, and you can still only assume, and look at nr. you couldnt care less about nr dude, show me facts.
we can go on and on like this forever it´s no point, you´ve your fav. and i got mine.
end of story!
Grand Danois
Entertainer
Easy now, expected US plus partner orders are down to 3100 iirc.GRAND Danois
he said overall, that means lifecycle cost as well
Also, other costs have to be included. E.g. If you buy 40-48 Gripen NG you also need 12-14 Litenin/Sniper pods @ 2-2.5 mn USD each and more fuel tanks. This is already "included" in the JSF cost.
And low life cycle cost is an attribute of all "4-5 Gen" jets over legacy jets.
The JAS-39 costs 2/3 the maint hrs of a JAS-37. The F-22A has a similar advantage over the F-15.
Last edited:
Aussi Digger.
for small countries isee Gripen as the best choice
those who need a pure airsupiority fighter isee EF as the best choice
if you want to bomb or help usa overseas in the war against terror, than F-35 is the best, with support of F-22
because it´s better on paper, doesnt mean it´s the best plane for certain needs some countries have. that just foolish to think.
for small countries isee Gripen as the best choice
those who need a pure airsupiority fighter isee EF as the best choice
if you want to bomb or help usa overseas in the war against terror, than F-35 is the best, with support of F-22
because it´s better on paper, doesnt mean it´s the best plane for certain needs some countries have. that just foolish to think.
Last edited:
no that is not what LM and USAF says
and F-22 raptor doesnt even have one hour flight time inbetween maintaince so ithink F-22 is quite expensive but i don´t know for sure.
if you look what they sold the last F-16 for i doubt one F-35 will cost less than 50, overall F-35 is more expensive no one have ever argued about that. but i think Rafale is the most expensive of them all
take a look at this [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIvgBbXKL5E"]YouTube - The real F-22 Raptor - a high-flying Enron[/ame]
and it seems like the whole story repeats itself according to the news about F-35
and F-22 raptor doesnt even have one hour flight time inbetween maintaince so ithink F-22 is quite expensive but i don´t know for sure.
if you look what they sold the last F-16 for i doubt one F-35 will cost less than 50, overall F-35 is more expensive no one have ever argued about that. but i think Rafale is the most expensive of them all
take a look at this [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIvgBbXKL5E"]YouTube - The real F-22 Raptor - a high-flying Enron[/ame]
and it seems like the whole story repeats itself according to the news about F-35
Grand Danois
Entertainer
I believe Mr. Gates recently quoted 77 mn USD as the "unit cost" of the F-35. Going by memory this would be the weapon system cost - which is not applicable to the partners, as it is an accounting term used inside the USAF budget. It is probably also an average of the A-,B and C-versions. Amortized UFC/UPC will probably apply to partner nations - hence UFC of ~50 mn USD.
Edit: Btw, that video is total selective and out of context BS. Example - it was always the plan to leverage technology from the F-35 to the F-22. Example - out of date microprocessors. As long as they perfom the task they were meant to do they aren't out dated - case in point; look into what is certified in the space industry. etc. etc. Program cost tells you nothing of the UFC...
Edit: Btw, that video is total selective and out of context BS. Example - it was always the plan to leverage technology from the F-35 to the F-22. Example - out of date microprocessors. As long as they perfom the task they were meant to do they aren't out dated - case in point; look into what is certified in the space industry. etc. etc. Program cost tells you nothing of the UFC...
Woo Hoo Hoo seven, you just agreed F35 is best for Denmark in regard to its
situation:
(in regards to exchanging favours with US).
Its not consistent IMHO.
A man gotta do what a man gotta do, and same goes for Country.
As for me, Clausewitz famous dictum: "military means is just a continuing of politics" became crystal clear when i read :
Denmark's need for fighter aircraft - a strategic analysis of the future need for Danish fighter aircraft
p.29f in particular.
situation:
Next post:Grand Danios
when i see the purpose for your airforce, i do agree with you on all points
so hands down there
So why are you questioning Denmarks defence policy now ?
(in regards to exchanging favours with US).
Its not consistent IMHO.
A man gotta do what a man gotta do, and same goes for Country.
As for me, Clausewitz famous dictum: "military means is just a continuing of politics" became crystal clear when i read :
Denmark's need for fighter aircraft - a strategic analysis of the future need for Danish fighter aircraft
p.29f in particular.
Last edited:
BS maybe maybe not. is still facts from the government.
Grand Danois
Entertainer
Yes, I've been over just about every GAO, CBO, etc. report there is on the subject of the F-35 and F-22.
I know the quotes and context.
This is deliberate misuse and disingenous presentation of material. "Facts" have a context. This case is so clear-cut that there is no doubt on the intent of character assasination.
- Status