Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Hortlund on December 17, 2003, 05:00:28 PM
-
Yesss!
-
Wooohoooo!cares?
-
sheit happens sometimes, they will get it right the next time ;)
btw....they are only renting 14 of them :D
-
It's a saab. It will look really trendy for 5 years and then you'll realize you just have a POS with a bad water pump that doesn't hold more than 2 pieces of luggage.
MiniD
-
Originally posted by Mini D
It's a saab. It will look really trendy for 5 years and then you'll realize you just have a POS with a bad water pump that doesn't hold more than 2 pieces of luggage.
MiniD
LOL
-
It's got an American engine. :)
-
Yeah, its got american weapons too...
But still this is a big deal for our aviation industry.
-
Yep you guys have now surpassed 1970 USA technology!
J/K :D
WTG, Nice airplane.
-
Mini... Saab is a GM company.
Hey! GM water pumps suxor too!!!!
hmmmmmmmmm
-
Norway also was considering getting 48 JAS planes, but now it looks like its gonna be the JSF with the Eurofighter as a possible outsider.
I'm putting my on JSF even if Eurofigheter has 2 distinct advantages....supercruise and 2 engines.
-
The Gripen is one nice looking plane, I've always liked the looks of canard type planes.. but the Gripen is the best looking one I've seen.
Isn't it also uber-manueverable?
-SW
-
Isnt surprising. Even the U.S. is in the beginning stages of getting rid of the F-16. It was a good aircraft that did well in roles it wasn't originally intented for. Just don't stall it above 30 degree AoA :cool:
-
I guess Lockheed didn't grease right palms in Praga, the way they did in Warsaw...
Congrats.
-
Originally posted by fd ski
I guess Lockheed didn't grease right palms in Praga, the way they did in Warsaw...
Congrats.
At LEAST your consistent in your hate for corporate America, who ironically happens to employee you.
-
Originally posted by Toad
Mini... Saab is a GM company.
Hey! GM water pumps suxor too!!!!
hmmmmmmmmm
My bad, but aint water pumps supposed to suck (on one side)
Love the line about catching up with 70's technology Funked.
We are getting rid of them also replaceing them with the JSF.
-
Dude, he's Polish, what makes you think that he would hate bribery? :D
-
Originally posted by FUNKED1
Dude, he's Polish, what makes you think that he would hate bribery? :D
LOL!
A philippine gal I work with says when her mother came to America, she was asking for a drivers license and asking "who she needed to pay" to get it, you know, no test, under the table.
-
Originally posted by Scootter
My bad, but aint water pumps supposed to suck (on one side)
Love the line about catching up with 70's technology Funked.
We are getting rid of them also replaceing them with the JSF.
Not to nitpick, but I believe the JSF is the future replacement for AV-8's and F-18's (however, the newer F18's will go another 20 years, and they're slowly replacing the F-14's) The F-22 is ultimately the replacement for the F-15 and F-16, fewer are needed as the Pentagon plans to spend 14 billion over the next 10 or so years in completely revamping warfare as we know it today. Think Drone. ;) Nice boost for Boeings military division I might add.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Not to nitpick, but I believe the JSF is the future replacement for AV-8's and F-18's (however, the newer F18's will go another 20 years, and they're slowly replacing the F-14's) The F-22 is ultimately the replacement for the F-15 and F-16, fewer are needed as the Pentagon plans to spend 14 billion over the next 10 or so years in completely revamping warfare as we know it today. Think Drone. ;) Nice boost for Boeings military division I might add.
nope
While we is picken nits the F-22 is to replace the f-15 the USAF is replacing the A-10 and the F-16 with the JSF the Navy the FA-18a-c and The USMC the AV-8b and the Fa-18. Just saw it on Discovery Wings
you should know this stuff :)
http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/jsf/
http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/jsf/jsf12.html
The Joint Strike Fighter, the JSF, is being developed by Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company for the US Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps and the UK Royal Navy. The stealthy, supersonic multi-role fighter is to be designated the F-35. The JSF is being built in three variants: a conventional take-off and landing aircraft (CTOL) for the US Air Force; a carrier based variant (CV) for the US Navy; and a short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL) aircraft for the US Marine Corps and the Royal Navy. A 70 – 90% commonality is required for all variants.
The requirement is for: USAF F-35A –air-to-ground strike aircraft, replacing F-16 and A-10, complementing F-22 (1763); USMC F-35B – STOVL strike fighter to replace F/A-18B/C and AV-8B (480); UK RN F-35C – STOVL strike fighter to replace Sea Harriers (60); US Navy F-35C – first-day-of-war strike fighter to replace F/A-18B/C and A-6, complementing the F/A-18E/F (480 aircraft). In January 2001, the UK MOD signed a memorandum of understanding to co-operate in the SDD (System Development and Demonstration) phase of JSF and, in September 2002, selected the STOVL variant to fulfil the Future Joint Combat Aircraft (FJCA) requirement. Following the contract award, other nations signed up to the SDD phase are: Australia, Canada, Denmark, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Singapore and Turkey.
-
Originally posted by Scootter
nope
While we is picken nits the F-22 is to replace the f-15 the USAF is replacing the A-10 and the F-16 with the JSF the Navy the FA-18a-c and The USMC the AV-8b and the Fa-18. Just saw it on Discovery Wings
Don't give Rip too hard a time. He lost his marbles when he found out Boeing wasn't going to build its homesick abortion of a plane as the JSF.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
LOL!
A philippine gal I work with says when her mother came to America, she was asking for a drivers license and asking "who she needed to pay" to get it, you know, no test, under the table.
This explains a lot of driving I see in the south bay...
-
Did a bit of research on the JAS-39
NICE AC
I see why they chose it, fantastic short field performance.
Seems like a great AC, nice job!!
Looks great, in a kick prettythang kind of way, not flowing lines as much as bulked up knife fighter.
Congrats. on your sale, hope you get more.
-
Originally posted by Scootter
nope
While we is picken nits the F-22 is to replace the f-15 the USAF is replacing the A-10 and the F-16 with the JSF the Navy the FA-18a-c and The USMC the AV-8b and the Fa-18. Just saw it on Discovery Wings
you should know this stuff :)
http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/jsf/
http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/jsf/jsf12.html
The Joint Strike Fighter, the JSF, is being developed by Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company for the US Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps and the UK Royal Navy. The stealthy, supersonic multi-role fighter is to be designated the F-35. The JSF is being built in three variants: a conventional take-off and landing aircraft (CTOL) for the US Air Force; a carrier based variant (CV) for the US Navy; and a short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL) aircraft for the US Marine Corps and the Royal Navy. A 70 – 90% commonality is required for all variants.
The requirement is for: USAF F-35A –air-to-ground strike aircraft, replacing F-16 and A-10, complementing F-22 (1763); USMC F-35B – STOVL strike fighter to replace F/A-18B/C and AV-8B (480); UK RN F-35C – STOVL strike fighter to replace Sea Harriers (60); US Navy F-35C – first-day-of-war strike fighter to replace F/A-18B/C and A-6, complementing the F/A-18E/F (480 aircraft). In January 2001, the UK MOD signed a memorandum of understanding to co-operate in the SDD (System Development and Demonstration) phase of JSF and, in September 2002, selected the STOVL variant to fulfil the Future Joint Combat Aircraft (FJCA) requirement. Following the contract award, other nations signed up to the SDD phase are: Australia, Canada, Denmark, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Singapore and Turkey.
Whoops! Okay, I haven't keep active on whats what, I was going of the top of my head (not much there anymore as Mathman points out!)
The strategy regarding the 14 billion dollar contract Boeing just received from the Pentagon using new technologies and drone aircraft should be interesting to watch.
-
I find the Grippen looks similar to the F-20 Tigershark. Both beautiful aircraft.
Grippen:
(http://www.canit.se/~griffon/aviation/img/saab/gripen/gall98/gripen-g34-70.jpg)
F-20:
(http://members.aon.at/mwade/f20d.jpg)
(http://members.aon.at/mwade/f202640.jpg)
-
I just wonder why our AF chose F-18 instead of those beauties. I guess the reason was greasing and/or Gripen couldn't be delivered when we needed them. We could still use a squadron of those but that will never happen.
-
I belive the reason for your choise mora was greater range and the security of two engines....something that was important for the finnish airforce because of climatic and range issues.
I read it on Jane's a few years ago.
-
Yeah that's what they said when the selection was made.
There were several reasons:
-counterbuys
-assembly
-a very good offer
-2 engines
-range
But I still think that Gripen would have been a better solution.Hornets are much more expensive to operate and that limits our pilots flight hours.
-
I get the impression that the US is pricing itself out of future global markets with planes like the JSF and F-22. There are some fantastic next generation aircraft to fill the price/performance void.
Charon
-
The F-16 and F-18 are really the only two fighters in the last 30 years that the U.S. has offered up to the global market. Both were designed to be cost effective to maintain and serve in multi-role capacities. For the specialized planes, this hasn't usually been a consideration.
MiniD
-
Well, good news for Sweden but bad news for me. I work on the F16 production line. But we have enough orders to last almost 10 years. The Czechs could of bought the Block 60 model and would of still saved money and had a great aircraft for at least 20 years.
But I have to say the Gripen is a nice aircraft. Then I love just about any airplanes.
-
The Gripern is Beautiful.
I never forget the first landing,,,hmmmm,,,in 1989,,,was in Swededn then...:D :D
-
The F-16 is sex embodied in an airplane. Comparatively that gripen is ugly.
(http://www.f-16.net/PhotoGallery/album10/ajs.jpg)
(http://www.f-16.net/PhotoGallery/album10/amy.sized.jpg)
(http://www.f-16.net/PhotoGallery/album10/aae.sized.jpg)
-
So how do the Gripen and latest F-16 compare? I think they are pretty much equal, but Gripen is stealthier and has better manouverability and STOL qualities.
-
Originally posted by mora
I just wonder why our AF chose F-18 instead of those beauties.
Because the US made it clear that if you bought JAS-39 Gripen, you would not be allowed to buy US weapons for it.
That put quite a strain on the US-Swedish relations back then...although not in public of cource.
-
The US aslo gave some not very nice ultimatums in the JSF / Eurofighter choise, and when it came to support to the iraq war just before it started.
They had to back of tho.
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
Because the US made it clear that if you bought JAS-39 Gripen, you would not be allowed to buy US weapons for it.
That put quite a strain on the US-Swedish relations back then...although not in public of cource.
I'm sure Israel or France would have gladly sold us some.:) On a serious note, that would make sense.
-
Well, after that we teamed up with a British company. So Gripen is now a joint Swedish-British venture. That way the Yanks cant try to hardball customers again without wreaking havoc on the US-UK relations. Since then we have sold Gripen to South Africa, Hungary and now the Czechs.
-
who cares what they buy? they will probably never use them in combat anyway.
our fighters are battle tested...and I think the Iraqi's can testify to the fact that they passed the test.
if it aint an f22 its obsolete anyway...
-
Originally posted by Zapkin72
who cares what they buy? they will probably never use them in combat anyway.
our fighters are battle tested...and I think the Iraqi's can testify to the fact that they passed the test.
if it aint an f22 its obsolete anyway...
Ahhhh ...youth.... to be young again
:rolleyes:
-
Should've leased new F-15's, or F/A-18 Superhornets until F-22 were available for export (assuming they were made available for export)
Tronsky
-
The F-16 and F-18 are really the only two fighters in the last 30 years that the U.S. has offered up to the global market.
RAF considered buying the F-15 before it settled on the Tornado.
-
F-4, F-5, F-14, F-104 were also exported in the last 30 years.
How do people think that it makes any sense for a small country to buy F-22? If you have to choose between 10 or 100 fighters what will you pick? The US can't even afford sufficient numbers themselves. Besides these coutries will never meet them in combat.
-
Originally posted by firbal
Well, good news for Sweden but bad news for me. I work on the F16 production line. But we have enough orders to last almost 10 years. The Czechs could of bought the Block 60 model and would of still saved money and had a great aircraft for at least 20 years.
But I have to say the Gripen is a nice aircraft. Then I love just about any airplanes.
Firbal, where do you work out there? I am an inspector in FWD fuse assembly, SWBS 1121. Give me a shout sometime, there are only two Lupers in the LMAERO phone directory, look for Leon, my wife is the other one :).
-
Originally posted by Dowding
RAF considered buying the F-15 before it settled on the Tornado.
Always loved the tornado, especially the GR models....those desert storm a/c always looked the buisness!
(http://www.flyingzone.co.uk/tornadoinfocus/images/sideviews/gulfmigeater.jpg)
Tronsky
-
Originally posted by mora
F-4, F-5, F-14, F-104 were also exported in the last 30 years.
How do people think that it makes any sense for a small country to buy F-22? If you have to choose between 10 or 100 fighters what will you pick? The US can't even afford sufficient numbers themselves. Besides these coutries will never meet them in combat.
Add to that list the F-111, A-4, and T-38. T-37, also only for export the F-20.
The F-22 will be to costly for export even if it was allowed (and it wont be) for anyone to buy it.
-
None were designed in the last 30 years. And... I don't believe the F-111 was in the last 30 years unless they bought it used or it was an EF-111. Same for the A-4 and F-104.
The F-14 and F-15 have been sold to how many countries? 2? Same for the F-5 (though I don't know the tail numbers on those... might be over 30 years too.)
MiniD
-
Originally posted by Mini D
None were designed in the last 30 years. And... I don't believe the F-111 was in the last 30 years unless they bought it used or it was an EF-111. Same for the A-4 and F-104.
The F-14 and F-15 have been sold to how many countries? 2? Same for the F-5 (though I don't know the tail numbers on those... might be over 30 years too.)
MiniD
Correct, I said in my post "exported in the last 30 years" as that was the jist of the discussion. Mora's post set the tone as to export.
Keep in mind aircraft are in design for many years as many as 10 or more before they are produced. The F-22 started on the drawing board in late 80's to replace the then fairly new F-15.
Back in the 50's design was much quicker, Kelly Johnson and team designed and built the F-104 in less then 2 years from concept to production (with the first few flights flown with the J-57 engine as the J-79 was not yet ready). You will need to check with the Ausseys on the F-111 as to if they bought them new or pre owned.
Regards
-
I'd add "built" to that too scooter. Very few of the aircraft you listed with the exception of the trainers were built before '73. Maybe '75 for the F-111F (Think that's what Australia had). The F-14 and F-15 would be the two fighters built afterwards that have seen VERY limited "sales". The F-16 and F-18 are the only two fighters that have been available on the world market for the last 30 years.
MiniD
-
AFAIK the number of F-15's exported to Israel and Saudi Arabia is in the hundreds. Also the last batch of F-104's was built in the mid 80's.
-
Originally posted by mora
AFAIK the number of F-15's exported to Israel and Saudi Arabia is in the hundreds. Also the last batch of F-104's was built in the mid 80's.
Saudi and Israel are the only two countries that have the 15's that I know of (Maybe Japan and SK too). Dunno who had the 14s but there weren't many of them. As for 104's... who the hell bought them?
And... I notice the F-111 and F5 portions have been dropped...
There's a reason I said last 30 years. Nitpick it all you want, but the only modern offered up have been the F-16 and F-18 with VERY FEW exceptions. Compare that to how many Mirages and Migs populate the air defenses of most countries and the whole "evil U.S. arms companies" thing is put into perspective.
MiniD
-
Iran had f14's and japan has f15's mora
-
"Saudi and Israel are the only two countries that have the 15's that I know of (Maybe Japan and SK too). Dunno who had the 14s but there weren't many of them. As for 104's... who the hell bought them?"
79 F-14's to Iran. F-104 to NATO coutries in Europe, the last ones to Italy and maybe some others.
"And... I notice the F-111 and F5 portions have been dropped..."
Well I haven't dropped anything...
"There's a reason I said last 30 years. Nitpick it all you want, but the only modern offered up have been the F-16 and F-18 with VERY FEW exceptions. Compare that to how many Mirages and Migs populate the air defenses of most countries and the whole "evil U.S. arms companies" thing is put into perspective."
We seem to have a different outlook to this question. You seem to think that a sale of under 500 is insignificant and I don't.
-
F-104's were transfers in the 80's. The last s model was made in 79... made by Fiat.
None of the fighters you listed are considered advanced fighters with the exception of the F-15 and F-14 which went to a grand total of 4 countries. Compare "all those sales" to F-16's and F-18s. It is insignificant and it matters that they were not available to everyone.
Besides... the statement was in regards to F-22 sales being hampered. It's completely irrelevant. The F-22 will not be geared towards the world market. We have specific fighters that are presented to the global market. Not the advanced aircraft. The F-16 and F-18 are pretty much it. If the best you can do is present aircraft sales from 20 years ago... you're really working towards proving my point yourself.
MiniD
-
crap plane...runs on aquivit.
RAvs
-
The deal is not set yet... they want investments from swedish companys in Czechoslovakia if they decide on the JAS....
-
who needs fighters anyway?