I think you've summed up the arguments well AD.
Actually much of this technology flew for the first time on the SH.
The facts do not support that conclusion. In fact it is a combination of the new airframe, new engines, and new fire control/defensive countermeasures (none of which the legacy hornet posses) that make the Rhino a great 4.5 gen AC that is in fact one of the newest designs in production today.
In most cases either they have much less of it, they do not have it, use an older less capable version, are still developing it.
No what I am saying is that if your opponent sees you first and takes the first shot chances are you are dead and all the speed and manueverability in the world will not help. Fact is the Rhino is fast enough and is in fact pretty much the most manueverable ac in production. This is especially true at low speed.
http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/images/smilies/confused.gif
By whom I wonder?
How so? Equal (sometimes) weapons (same model slammer), SH better radar and FCS. I would more likely tend to agree close in but not beyond visual range.
On top of it's superiority in the A2A area the SH is fully carrier capable, is clearly a superior attack package, can act as a tanker, and can be modified for EW. The only reason why India will not buy it is the sanctions red herring and the fact that their support infrastructure screams Russian.
Good one! I'm starting to find it never pays to take people's opinions lightly in this forum, especially when they are members of the blue group.
Now if you'd be so kind and read my posting you'd notice I didn't say it wasn't a different airframe, I said it shares the same aerodynamic layout, which even you can't deny.
Well hello Mr. navy-spokesman. Thank you for the link, interesting read indeed. It shows me what is said by people who chose the SH and have to live with it.
Would you be so kind and prove this in any way? Give some sources or anything? It's not exactly that the SH is widely recognised as the hottest dogfighter around.
Remarks:
Am I doing alright?Except for their Jaguar and Mirage fighters of course, a considerable portion of their force...
Who funds the website? Why isn't there an "about us" link. Frankly it looks like a site for Eurofighter cheerleaders. Not much dissent/discussion.
So how come it's the only AC to have recorded (albeit under unusual circumstances) a "kill" on the Raptor at close range?
Yeah and now after extensive operational combat experience they want to buy even more of them.
Yup, twin tails, swept wings two engines. Same as about a dozen other AC. So what was your point?
Well Falstaf I could say that discussing this with you is like having a discussion with a rock but I won't stoop to your level, instead I will reply- My Grandma always drove her pink beetle to church on Sundays.
Agree and planned to be in the fleet by 2010. Unlike many trench options on the tiffy AMRAAM D is funded.
Very significant. Dont forget to add likely better overall RCS and you have a system that see first and shoots first.
BVR see above. WVR, helmet mounted sight ASRAAM/AIM9-x, its generally a tossup but SH has better low speed handling and pointing ability.
Yes Tiffy with Meteor or AMRAMM D it makes a fine interceptor. It still would not be what I would base my airforce on. Hell I would even argue the Rafael is better for that role since it can be used at sea.
True. That's why I said in a previous posting it will be very interesting to see what the contenders will offer to sweeten the contract. Offsets, technology transfer, production lines, weapon packages, political gifts. Gentlemen, start your engines!
F-106 Mach 2.3 57K ceiling climb rate 30k/min In Production 1959
One word AESA. Do some research on it Jaffo and then get back to me. Fact is neither Eurocanard has all of the toys or as effective the toys as the SH. They arent even netcentric because there is no net for them to plug in to. Just imagine you are flying your brand new F/A-18 in the Indian Ocean on patrol for some bad guys (Chinese, Pakistan, whatever) and those bad guys happen to be on our shit list too. You use your datalink and you get not only th information from your fellow squadron mates sensors but the entire grid. Satalite data, sub contacts, AWACs contacts, everything. Did the light bulb go on in your head yet?
Well, I won't have to as my bookshelf bursts from information about these programs. And I wasn't talking about your stupid we-could-have-built-this-and-that argument (btw, please do some research about european fighter development, e.g. the Lightning and others), but your still unproven SH performance claims. Please, I am really curious about it. Perhaps then we can get back to topic?
Oh dear. The F-18E is now getting AESA. It is currently in OPEVAL. Yes, that's ahead of Typhoon & Rafale, whose AESA radars are still in development (flying, but not ready for production yet), but you appear to be implying that the F-18E has had AESA from the start, & that none of the European fighters will ever get it. Not so.
I implied nor said no such thing please do not put words in my mouth. APG-79 is in full production. There is plans and funding to equip the entire fleet of SHs with the radar, new builds as well as retrofits.
Code for idiots like you who try to make an issue out of something so trivial.
Maybe. But then again thats not link I was talking about I was talking bout the targeting and tracking information you get by satelites, ships, submarines or other US or allied forces in the Indian Ocean. Do you really think that Swedish netthingy will be able to do that?
How do you post a picture here? One HUD shot is worth 1000 words.
Not a datalink for your squadron mates targeting queus, but one that works for the entire military machine. Big difference.
It was actually several and beleive what you want I ws not going to mention the "victim" was a Raptor since the actual circumstances that it happened where pretty unrealistic. What I wanted to point out was the speed and angle of attack that the SH.