Defenc(s)e analysis frommy corner ofthe Internet.
If this is anywhere close to reality, the Gripen should be a world beater.It's 1/3 the operating costs of any similar aircraft.
Amazing.Sweden,population 9.4 million and GDP 381 billion.Thriving long term aeorspace sector with world beating products and viable exports.Australia,population 22.4 billion and GDP 1500 billion.Aerospace import and overseas outsourcing program.Negative input from those who believe it must be from overseas and or maintained by industry outside Australia to be any good.(DMO?)Briliant
--Australia,population 22.4 billion and GDP 1500 billion.--VP, I am sure you meant "million" for the population.Hi Matthew. Hope you are doing well.
No, I could be correct, with the number of illegal immigrants arriving by boat.
Michael, can you not count?
A great fighter becomes an even better fighter, and it stills remains the most affordable.If I was the USMC (still in the JSF waiting line with the "others") I'd be taking a serious look at the Gripen NG. Here is a plane that "really" operate near the front lines flying from available roadways. And you don't need to bankrupt the service with crazy high O&S costs.I love the new widescreen display.Note to Lockmart: No defective helmet display needed!
Kind of shows one how silly the issue of the F-35 vs mainstay aircraft is right now. The latest version of an F-16 would be one hell of a plane that would be even more capable than the Gripen NG and still have low operating costs to perform most missions well.
@Canuck.The entire digital infrastructure of the Gripen is superior and it is also a much lighter airframe so I doubt that. The latest F-16 versions are also very heavy so the improvements haven't worked well for it.
@ Anon 10.59No one should criticize SAAB for decades of ingenious fighter building. They arguably have a proven way of kilo for kilo making the best possible platform with incorporating the most affordable given off-the-shelf tech of the day, be it foreign make or domestic. I don't think that's the point Canuck would ever make.Although, whether the next-gen F-16V's mission computer will be superior to the Gripen NG's, or whether or not the F-16's AESA radar and EW suite will be superior is probably not publicly known at this time.No question though, the Gripen NG should prove to be a highly respectable cost-effective NG platform, despite it's own heavier weight, once it completes the development phase. And personally, I would not want to see it flown even in a simulated gun-fight with an F-16.Overall however, perhaps the F-16V (with CFT) and longer range (with EFT), a potentially superior AESA and heavier class IRST (assuming Gripen customer doesn't integrate LM's dedicated IRST pod) could be assessed as the more strategic platform... but then maybe not. We'll have to make that assessment later ;)
First para ^^ above post, last sentence should read... "I don't think DOUBTING that point is what Canuck was trying to make".But I'll let Canuck elaborate for himself if he wishes, lol. (sorry for putting words into your mouth or not into your mouth). My bad.
Post a Comment