Spain joins France, Germany on new combat fighter

Military aircraft - Post cold war aircraft, including for example B-2, Gripen, F-18E/F Super Hornet, Rafale, and Typhoon.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

f4u7_corsair

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 126
  • Joined: 27 Apr 2015, 17:28

Unread post13 Feb 2019, 02:08

Considering HAL isn't even capable of properly upgrading aircraft with pre-established instructions (see Dassault pulling their hair when they see HAL's work on Mirage 2000Is), I doubt it regarding India. And I have a lot of reserves for Turkey as well. They'll get either get in the Tempest boat or they won't design anything relevant to compete with serious Chinese, European and American manufacturers.
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1124
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post13 Feb 2019, 02:12

vilters wrote:NH 90 = fiasco for each and every client so far
Tiger attack heli = Fiasco => is the ban to fly lifted yet?
Tornado = Holy cow, how stupid can one get


There are some complaints with NH90 but the main issue with NH90 was the super-expensive and ultra-slow mess regarding the ASW variant (for which it was not originally designed, btw). Which seems to finally be getting its' shish together at this time. Wow ... get some Romeos next time guys.

The Tiger was and is a great capability in a battle. The ADF was dissatisfied with it in service because it was intended to be predominantly a night time RECON capability for Army, but its IR sensor was incapable of providing the level of imagery and video desired for the RECON role and was never upgraded. Thus it never became a fully operational capability within the ADF, and is going away as a 'failure' to perform. But if you wanted a battlefield attack helicopter capability it has the punch, but AH-64 would have done it allm and we'll probably end up getting a newer version of them instead (like we damned well should have in the first place). And RECON can now be done with a drone.

Tornado was a terrific low-level attack jet, IMHO. BVR Interceptor? Now that's an unconvincing stretch for me. But it made a great contribution to European fire-power and deterrence, and survived well once used with sensible tactics and weapons. I sure would not want to be on the receiving end of those. It impressed me more than Typhoon has, because it could really hurt the opposition fast, and Typhoon was much less convincing, until quite recently.
Last edited by element1loop on 13 Feb 2019, 02:17, edited 1 time in total.
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
Offline

marsavian

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1152
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2018, 21:55

Unread post13 Feb 2019, 02:17

Corsair1963 wrote:
marsavian wrote:The Europeans will sell to themselves, the Middle East and other countries not on good military terms with the US.


Europe has struggled to sell the Rafale and Typhoon against American Competition. In addition in the coming decades there will be more countries entering the market place. (Turkey, South Korea, India, etc.)


Europeans don't need to sell in thousands just hundreds to be viable, how long have Gripen, Rafale and Typhoon been in continuous slow production ? I'm pretty sure too that Tempest and NGF will be a cut above the other non-US competition. Remember because of Israel the F-35 isn't being sold to other ME countries. How many other countries around the World with old kit are not going to be sold F-35 ?
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7676
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post13 Feb 2019, 02:20

element1loop wrote:Tornado was a terrific low-level attack jet, IMHO. BVR Interceptor? Now that's an unconvincing stretch for me.

IIRC Tornados were routinely being swatted down in A2A until they were datalinked to AWACS and were actually beating Eagles BVR.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline

f4u7_corsair

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 126
  • Joined: 27 Apr 2015, 17:28

Unread post13 Feb 2019, 02:24

popcorn wrote:
element1loop wrote:Tornado was a terrific low-level attack jet, IMHO. BVR Interceptor? Now that's an unconvincing stretch for me.

IIRC Tornados were routinely being swatted down in A2A until they were datalinked to AWACS and were actually beating Eagles BVR.

As long as you didn't need to ask too much from the RB.199s, the F.3 was an OK A2A platform indeed, especially w/ Skyflash, as I don't think they were ever wired for AMRAAM midcourse guidance.
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1124
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post13 Feb 2019, 02:29

popcorn wrote:
element1loop wrote:Tornado was a terrific low-level attack jet, IMHO. BVR Interceptor? Now that's an unconvincing stretch for me.

IIRC Tornados were routinely being swatted down in A2A until they were datalinked to AWACS and were actually beating Eagles BVR.


It was more the interceptor part that I thought was non-ideal.
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1124
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post13 Feb 2019, 02:39

marsavian wrote:Remember because of Israel the F-35 isn't being sold to other ME countries. How many other countries around the World with old kit are not going to be sold F-35 ?


Same occured with SH, only RAAF got it until USN was sure F-35C was going to succeed, then offered to others. Malaysia for instance wanted SH when RAAF got them (despite having mighty invincible MKIs and MiG29s ... so why on earth would they evah want some ultra-crappy "dog" of a "superbug"?! ... Carlo? ... Peter? ... /crickets). It's likely F-35 will not be sold to anyone but the inner circle of NATO and Asian allies until there's real competition and actual 5th-gen proliferation, and something better about to enter service.
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1515
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post13 Feb 2019, 03:16

Last generation strike preference was low level ingress to avoid radar detection. The ADVs were designed for low level interception. If I remember, the low level performance was better than even the eagles.
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1124
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post13 Feb 2019, 03:54

weasel1962 wrote:Last generation strike preference was low level ingress to avoid radar detection. The ADVs were designed for low level interception. If I remember, the low level performance was better than even the eagles.


Yes, perhaps it's more efficient than other aircraft down low, but down low is anything but an efficient place to be, or a good place for sensors, comms or missile range or use, or for longer flight range and better high speed cruise.
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
Offline

firebase99

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 66
  • Joined: 03 May 2017, 21:47

Unread post13 Feb 2019, 04:24

weasel1962 wrote:Last generation strike preference was low level ingress to avoid radar detection. The ADVs were designed for low level interception. If I remember, the low level performance was better than even the eagles.


Wait, what? I thought the IDS were the Mud Movers, ADV were the Air Defence Variant of InterDiction Strike, no?
Offline

f4u7_corsair

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 126
  • Joined: 27 Apr 2015, 17:28

Unread post13 Feb 2019, 04:33

He said that ADV was tasked to intercept low-level mud movers.

But I don't think it was its primary design mission. The ADV, and its Foxhunter radar, was primarily design to detect and intercept long range bomber raids and was required to be LD/SD capable.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5394
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post13 Feb 2019, 04:36

element1loop wrote:
Same occured with SH, only RAAF got it until USN was sure F-35C was going to succeed, then offered to others. Malaysia for instance wanted SH when RAAF got them (despite having mighty invincible MKIs and MiG29s ... so why on earth would they evah want some ultra-crappy "dog" of a "superbug"?! ... Carlo? ... Peter? ... /crickets). It's likely F-35 will not be sold to anyone but the inner circle of NATO and Asian allies until there's real competition and actual 5th-gen proliferation, and something better about to enter service.



Best to spread out the F-35 orders. As we need the production line rolling for many years to come.... :wink:
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1515
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post13 Feb 2019, 05:03

f4u7_corsair wrote:He said that ADV was tasked to intercept low-level mud movers.

But I don't think it was its primary design mission. The ADV, and its Foxhunter radar, was primarily design to detect and intercept long range bomber raids and was required to be LD/SD capable.


Google AI-24 look down shoot down. Don't need LDSD for long range bombers. Agree handling long range bombers like backfire was important but just as critical was the then "new" birds like the fencers.
Offline

f4u7_corsair

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 126
  • Joined: 27 Apr 2015, 17:28

Unread post13 Feb 2019, 05:23

Indeed, but my point was why put an emphasis on LDSD for an interceptor that was supposed to operate at low level as you implied. But you got a good point indeed!
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1515
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post13 Feb 2019, 06:11

f4u7_corsair wrote:Indeed, but my point was why put an emphasis on LDSD for an interceptor that was supposed to operate at low level as you implied. But you got a good point indeed!


Good points raised yourself. The missiles in the 80s are not the same all aspect missiles like today. May not tolerate a large altitude delta for a firing solution.

P.s. just read that skyflash was one of the missiles that actually had a large altitude delta (better than Sparrow). So there...Nevertheless, still think low level pursuit was an intentional design. Seeker performance would have improved the shorter the range to target.
PreviousNext

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests