Forum: F-35 Lightning II

Quote:

[...]Rafale is no longer in contention, a development reportedly confirmed by Norway's Deputy Minister of Defense to a leading Norwegian newspaper. The announcement was apparently made during a two-day visit to Saab's facilities in Linkoping, Sweden. Lunde notes that "...the Gripen so far has been the true outsider compared to the Eurofighter and the F-35 Lightning, but the recent announcements by Gripen on the prospects of a dedicated "N" version, and a long and patient process of building trust and support in Norway seems to be paying off.

Source: http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/200 ... /index.php

Rafale is out,Eurofighter Typhoon against F-35. Who is gonna win?

F-16.net Sponsor

This message from our sponsor will disappear if you log on as a member.

I'm for the F-35, its still a Lockhead Martin, even if he's twin engined...(we can't be perfect).LOL
Jeremy Suard.

Wonder what excuses there will be when Typhoon wins Laughing

Snypa I don't think Typhoon will win although it has a better chance than the F-35 imho. People forget there is still a third contender in the race.

F-35 :-
Yes ok, stealth woo woo woo. We heard it already. BUT what Norway needs is an aircraft with a short field capability (not vstol before anyone mentions the F-35B) and at this present moment in Time, no official mention has been made of being able to adapt the F-35A with a brake chute. Regardless of people saying "i believe it would be possible" on here, it isn't official therefore it doesn't exist in the public eye. Their F-16s are currently equipped with brake chutes to allow them to have this. Also, Norway will only get a workshare if they actually make an order.

Typhoon :-
Norway already have a significant work share in the program without even ordering an aircraft! The big plus for this is that there are guarranteed Norwegian job security from an order. An order will also mean them becoming a full partner nation in the program having a direct equal share into R&D development direction influence. This would also mean a much bigger work share on top of current work for the nation aswell. Also, they would have a short field capability from the start (design specification for Typhoon was STOL with full warload), the political position would also be advantageous over ordering F-35 making it a far more attractive proposition to Norways government in local and international politics/PR.

JAS-39N :-
The black sheep of the group and in my opinion a more likely candidate to the two above if you think about it. A small very cheap light fighter. It has the best short field capability of all three final candidates. Also SAAB are the only ones to have offered a completely customised aircraft. Even a fully modified aircraft may work out cheaper than both the F-35 and the Typhoon. Also it may have the most benefits for the Norwegian industry, a customised machine means the Norwegians can specifiy who supplies what on top of the bog standard kit. They would also get a workshare on future orders. Its also from a neighbouring nation which is very very good for local politics and easy maintenance arrangements. The F-35 will only have 1 european maintenance hub and that is expected to be in the UK.

So in my opinion based on the capabilities compared to what Norway want and how politics effect these desicisions... I believe the more likely candidate will be as follows.

Most Likely Winner: JAS-39N 'Gripen N'
Second Most Likely: Typhoon
Least Likely: F-35.

At the end of the day, BAE Systems comes up trumps as they are heavily involved in all 3 Smile

It also shows that Rafale must have some significant flaws compared to the rest of its export contenders, as its seem at every stage it is being dumped. There must be a very real reason for it other than "cost".

Andy

just found these btw:

p.s. Increased thrust is expected to come from fitting the EJ-200 to the aircraft, possibly with tvc.

Andy

Plus Norway has much more need for a fighter who is better at Air to Air then at A-G which is the case with the Griphen and EFA and the other way around with the F-35. Now Im not saying the F-35 isnt good at A-A and I believe its better in A-A then what the USA is saying it will be. BUT Still... And It's stealthy but not THAT sthealthy. It's not like the F-35 wont be detected when its target is in weaponsrange. It will be seen way before that the only advantage I believe it has is that the warning time is shorter.

I feel this doesnt just go for Norway but for all Small European nations alike (NL, Belgium, Denmark, Norway). But in my opinion this is the only factor holding the other nations back from going European built: All these nations work with American jets and have American maintanance tools and techniques etc. If they went European they'd have to replace all that which costs €'s. Ok that's something that all the nations can afford so thats not directly the problem, the problem is that the USA has proven that it will continue to build replacement jets as thats what they've been doing for years. Europe on the other hand has just recently jumped into the buisness. Yes they had the tornado but the tornado and EFA arent anything alike. So from the past there's no guarantee there'll be a multi-role mainly A-A fighter after the EFA or the Griphen. While there is in the USA as the USA builds a jet for every role. Meaning that if Europe would quit those nations will be stuck because then they'd have to switch to American stuff again. And doing that twice within a short time span (relatively) can become a fiscal problem that could very well be upheld by parliaments meaning that if Europe were to quit making followup jets... The Smaller airforces would have to replace their EFAs or Griphens VERY slowly or not at all. Because funding for the military is very hard to obtain in Europe unlike in the USA and large nations like the UK.

So basicly it comes down to this Do the EPAF nations feel its safe to take the risk?

boff180 wrote:

It also shows that Rafale must have some significant flaws compared to the rest of its export contenders, as its seem at every stage it is being dumped. There must be a very real reason for it other than "cost".

French fighters are made to use French weapons, with a French databus. That limits your weaponry options. Moreover, Rafale has no capability the EF cannot match, except for the carrier landing ability. Dime for dime, buy an EF, unless you use carriers.

The Finns have found out that twin-engine fighters are better if you're gonna have some 100 or less jets: http://www.f-16.net/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&p=71084#71084

So, Finland would be better with the EF. Bu I agree that the Gripen offers the best package for such a small country. The only serious drawback of the Gripen are the short legs, but it's no problem for Europe. Moreover, Gripen already has good weapons, nemely the IRIS-T (Norway is part of the pragram), Meteor is finishing its development (Norway here again), and Gripen can use the NSM (Norway's new antiship missile), JDAM and other good attack weapons.

But let's see if Uncle Sam doesn't make a good deal with Norway - stretch payment plans or the like - to sell the F-35.

They can go with the Typhoon and have an aircraft which is technically already obsolete*, but offers good performance. Or go with the F-35 which is the cutting edge in technology.

As for STOL... we wont know the F-35's current take-off distance with full warload yet. But if its comparable to the F-16 (which the Norwegians already operate), then it shouldnt be an issue.

Lastly, its situational awareness. The F-35's technology in this area is lightyears ahead of everything... except the F-22A (which needs its own DAS soon). Norway needs an aircraft with Air-to-Air, Air-to-ground, and Air-to-sea capability. Range. And duration.

For them, they might need an F-35A with a IFR probe.

*Obsolete because its planned AESA radar will not match the capabilities of the APG-88s. Because it has no stealth.

Lockheed have stated that the Noregian F-35's will have a chute if the Norwegians make it a requirement.

Typhoon lost it's short landing capability some time ago. It was the one KUR missed.

Elite Joined: May 29, 2006 Posts: 640 Status: Offline

snypa777 wrote:

Wonder what excuses there will be when Typhoon wins Laughing

ONLY scenario where Typhoon or Grippen wins is for political reasons. Socialist government wanting to stick it to Bush-led U.S. government. Otherwise, no contest. Norway trying to gain concessions, better deal for F-35.

As for the apologists of the Euro-trashy Typhoon, why don't you suggest a wager that will be settled when Norway announces its order? The Typhoon is likely to be as successful in export orders as was the Tornado Rolling Eyes

It really is quite pathetic to see such a piece of garbage as the Typhoon being pushed on unsuspecting socialist neanderthals as those who have taken over the Norwegian government.

Theyll get the F-35. Hands down.

Also, you cant guage Typhoon export success by including the aircraft built for participating nations. Even so, the Typhoon will be the only european competitor after the F-35 rolls out.

Once the F-35 enters into mass production, the Rafale project will be scrubbed. Well... Hopefully. Smile

Elite Joined: May 29, 2006 Posts: 640 Status: Offline

Driver wrote:

Plus Norway has much more need for a fighter who is better at Air to Air then at A-G which is the case with the Griphen and EFA and the other way around with the F-35. Now Im not saying the F-35 isnt good at A-A and I believe its better in A-A then what the USA is saying it will be. BUT Still... And It's stealthy but not THAT sthealthy. It's not like the F-35 wont be detected when its target is in weaponsrange. It will be seen way before that the only advantage I believe it has is that the warning time is shorter.

There are indications the F-35 will have better frontal stealth than the F-22. It will certainly be more stealthy than any manned aircraft flying with the possible exception of the Raptor. As for your truly ignorant contention that it will be detected by the time it is within weapon's range of its adversary, an aircraft like Typhoon will not detect the F-35 until it is well within the latter's Sidewinder range. Obviously, the Typhoon will be within the F-35's Amraam range dozens of miles before it is itself detected.

Quote:

I feel this doesnt just go for Norway but for all Small European nations alike (NL, Belgium, Denmark, Norway). But in my opinion this is the only factor holding the other nations back from going European built: All these nations work with American jets and have American maintanance tools and techniques etc. If they went European they'd have to replace all that which costs €'s. Ok that's something that all the nations can afford so thats not directly the problem, the problem is that the USA has proven that it will continue to build replacement jets as thats what they've been doing for years. Europe on the other hand has just recently jumped into the buisness. Yes they had the tornado but the tornado and EFA arent anything alike. So from the past there's no guarantee there'll be a multi-role mainly A-A fighter after the EFA or the Griphen. While there is in the USA as the USA builds a jet for every role. Meaning that if Europe would quit those nations will be stuck because then they'd have to switch to American stuff again. And doing that twice within a short time span (relatively) can become a fiscal problem that could very well be upheld by parliaments meaning that if Europe were to quit making followup jets... The Smaller airforces would have to replace their EFAs or Griphens VERY slowly or not at all. Because funding for the military is very hard to obtain in Europe unlike in the USA and large nations like the UK.

So basicly it comes down to this Do the EPAF nations feel its safe to take the risk?

Your arguments are about as good as your English Rolling Eyes

Elite Joined: May 29, 2006 Posts: 640 Status: Offline

boff180 wrote:

just found these btw:

p.s. Increased thrust is expected to come from fitting the EJ-200 to the aircraft, possibly with tvc.

With those loadouts, the Grippen is about as radar reflective as a B-52 Rolling Eyes

Meanwhile, its range in the case of the second picture will no doubt exceed maybe 25 miles. With one refueling.

Quote:

Typhoon lost it's short landing capability some time ago. It was the one KUR missed.

Wrong, Typhoon still has a full STOL capability, I have personally witnessed it stopping in just a little further distance than a Gripen can. The forward stabilisers move through to the (almost) verticle and act as supplementary air brakes, coupled with brake chute and braking.

Quote:

As for STOL... we wont know the F-35's current take-off distance with full warload yet. But if its comparable to the F-16 (which the Norwegians already operate), then it shouldnt be an issue.

Take-offs are not a problem, its landing distance that is!

Quote:

Lockheed have stated that the Noregian F-35's will have a chute if the Norwegians make it a requirement.

SHow me a link to this please as I can't find ANYTHING stating this anywhere.

Quote:

Typhoon will not detect the F-35 until it is well within the latter's Sidewinder range. Obviously, the Typhoon will be within the F-35's Amraam range dozens of miles before it is itself detected.

With AESA, the figures bounded about show an effective tracking range of around 26km on an F-22, so expect a more distant range for tracking F-35s. Its not like these aircraft will be up alone anyway. Its called, GCI, AWACs, passive sensors. Basically 1 on 1s are very very unlikely to happen.

Quote:

Also, you cant guage Typhoon export success by including the aircraft built for participating nations.

Total confirmed export sales are currently at 90 aircraft; this depending on the expected further announcements from the Saudi's could be as much as 218 but thats not confirmed yet. There will certainly be more customers aswell.

Quote:

Because it has no stealth.

Here we go again, no stealth = obsolete. If I've said it once I have said it a thousand times. There is more than one way to skin a cat! The US's approach to stealth may be tried and tested but who said it is the only way? No-one knows what sort of kit is being developed behind closed doors in other nations. Why would nations want to spend money on Stealth when their operational conditions do not require it as much? Governments will look at it like that.

Quote:

It really is quite pathetic to see such a piece of garbage as the Typhoon being pushed on unsuspecting socialist neanderthals as those who have taken over the Norwegian government.

Now you are the one being rediculous, trash talking something you have probably never even seen.

Quote:

There are indications the F-35 will have better frontal stealth than the F-22.

Official USAF statement: F-22 = marble; F-35 = golf ball.

Quote:

Meanwhile, its range in the case of the second picture will no doubt exceed maybe 25 miles. With one refueling.

What those images don't show is the large cft's that are planned. Hence much greater fuel load. And I believe those bombs are supposed to be SDB's.

Quote:

ONLY scenario where Typhoon or Grippen wins is for political reasons

Politics is THE NUMBER ONE reason in a fighter contest. That has been obvious for years. Also, alot of nations now don't want to purchase off the USA especially with issues over sovereignty and maintenance. Some of these nations have been previous customers of the US. Take Malaysia for instance, replacing their F-18's with Su-30s!

Quote:

With AESA, the figures bounded about show an effective tracking range of around 26km on an F-22, so expect a more distant range for tracking F-35s. Its not like these aircraft will be up alone anyway. Its called, GCI, AWACs, passive sensors. Basically 1 on 1s are very very unlikely to happen.

Again, groups of F-35s still stand the better chance. With GCI, AWACs backing them up as well. Or using a designating irradiating platform.

Also, asking if the chute will be added is kinda like you're grabbing for straws. For such a minor engineering/design issue, its pretty safe to say the aircraft can, and in the case of Norway's order, have a break chute.

Face it, Norway is better off with a multi-role fighter like the F-35A.

If it really needs to be cheaper and more useful then the Gripen is the better choice.

Forum: F-35 Lightning II

Norway choses between EF and F-35