New player on the board? Poland wants the F-35 too.

Program progress, politics, orders, and speculation
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

Pilotasso

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 532
  • Joined: 29 Oct 2006, 03:35

Unread post29 Mar 2007, 10:32

Sundowner wrote:We already have multirole fighter capable of more missions than Gripen (SEAD), do you want us to make a step back ? :wink:

What's the point of buying new different jet that is doing the same job in the same way ? If make a step, let it be forward, into 'stealth' technology.


Its not a step back. It may be lighter and carry less payload but its a particularly smart plane. It could be used for air Defense where it could carry the meteor, and its lighter weight wouldnt matter much because it can carry as many of the same A-A weapons of the F-16 but with a smaller radar Signature.

Not only that but it would make much more sense to have a plane that is better in one thing complemented by another that is better at another thing, not 1 that is much more expensive and better in all things to make the already existent F-16 fleet redundant.

I wouldnt mind to see the falcon fleet in my country Replaced by the Gripen, as long as its the best avaiable version of it and with a weapons package to match.
Offline

dwightlooi

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1170
  • Joined: 02 Aug 2006, 00:14

Unread post29 Mar 2007, 11:06

Pilotasso wrote:Its not a step back. It may be lighter and carry less payload but its a particularly smart plane. It could be used for air Defense where it could carry the meteor, and its lighter weight wouldnt matter much because it can carry as many of the same A-A weapons of the F-16 but with a smaller radar Signature.

Not only that but it would make much more sense to have a plane that is better in one thing complemented by another that is better at another thing, not 1 that is much more expensive and better in all things to make the already existent F-16 fleet redundant.

I wouldnt mind to see the falcon fleet in my country Replaced by the Gripen, as long as its the best avaiable version of it and with a weapons package to match.


Actually, I don't know how much of a difference the RCS between the two are. The F-16 is about 1~1.5m class. The Gripen is at best 0.5~1m class. That is not much really, not enough to affect detection ranges significantly, especially with all the pylons and external weapons adding their not insignificant share to the total signature.

The f-16 has a larger radar aperture compared to the Gripen's smallish 500mm class PS/05. The F-16 radar antenna has roughly 1.5 times surface area of the Gripen's. This affects the radar's range as well as sensitivity. There is every reason to believe that contemporary APG-68(v)9/10s will outperform the PS/05. Regardless of the F-16 or the Gripen's own RCS a more powerful radar allows you to detect and engage enemies at a longer range. And this is not to mention that the APG-80 AESA is available now whereas the PS/05 AESA successor is still a big question mark.

The Gripen is also shorter on range and payload. With about 18000 lbs of thrust pushing a 6.6 ton fuselage its power to weight ratio (hence things like acceleration, etc) is also behind the advanced F-16 variants with its 8.3~8.7 ton weight and 29,000~32,000 lbs engines. I doubt the dynamic performance differences matter much though.

The Gripen's biggest advantage is its superior datalink architecture. This supports networking, data sharing and co-operative engagements better than the NATO standard Link-16. The problem is that this is a proprietary standard which is supported only by other Swedish equipment which a client may not have and may not intend to ever use. The Gripen can also play Link-16, but in doing so it also loses all the capabilities not available in the F-16's Link-16 based system. The F-22 has exactly the same problem. In fact, in the early days it was even worse because the F-22 only supported its own standard and not Link-16 at all until more recent software builds. The F-35 will again introduce yet another generation of datalink architecture which is different from the F-22s, but at least this time backup Link-16 is supposed to be integrated from day one.
Offline

Sundowner

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 69
  • Joined: 23 Nov 2005, 01:29

Unread post29 Mar 2007, 12:30

First a total war in central Europe is very unlikely, but, history likes to repeat itself. Our potential enemy's have lot's of Flankers armed with R-27, and soon never generation R-77. Configuration of both the carrier and armament are really deadly, Su-27 can see first and shoot first against both F-16 and JAS-39. Buying another jet that will need to begin fight from defensive position is foolish at least.

F-35 will have enough stealth to fly well into Flankers engagement zone unnoticed, fire their missiles, wrecking havoc in enemy formations, leaving them prone to finishing strike from less technologically advanced Vipers. Thats the composition we need.

Sorry the 39 lost its fight to F-16 already, there is no need for another multirole fighter, what we need is stealthy strike fighter, or really good air superiority fighter, the 39 is not one of them.
Offline

Driver

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 185
  • Joined: 13 Aug 2005, 18:14

Unread post29 Mar 2007, 15:27

Now I heard something about the F-16 being better then the gripen, wont throw arguments at you but shame on you.

Polands Economy is growing very fast even for global standards, ditto for the Czech Rep. etc. so affording something like that shouldn't be a big deal in the future.

Also the F-16 Block 60 is 80 mln NOW but when the F-35 comes out, it would be ALOT lower due to the fact that the F-35 is more capable, Im sorry to say but the F-16 (even the 60) won't be competetive for very long (and Im a big F-16 fan... but a realistic one and not one who denies something hoping that it will become the truth) for Poland, and any EU nation for that matter, I think a European jet is the way to go. One day EU nations will have to so the sooner the better.
Offline

elp

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3143
  • Joined: 23 Sep 2003, 20:08

Unread post29 Mar 2007, 17:30

The real question is how is going to be paid for? The F-16 deal for Poland had a huge amount of offsets both direct and indirect. The JSF is a different purchase model. Vendors for most of the components have been picked already and those are JSF partners. Poland has not signed up as a JSF partner and is also too late to get any production contracts for JSF. The JSF program for the most part is based on "best value" contracts and not the traditional political graft of "offsets", hence some politicians in JSF partner countries whinning about a contract their country signed expecting "offsets". So the real question for Poland is: "How are they going to pay for JSF?" ; with no traditional "offset" type of purchase agreement.
- ELP -
Offline

Sundowner

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 69
  • Joined: 23 Nov 2005, 01:29

Unread post29 Mar 2007, 17:50

I think F-16-60 is so expensive, because it is the swan song of that aircraft, the best it can be, and the last to come. If India take MiG-35, than the F-16 will simply die. The successor is flying, soon will be in serial production, most air forces that would buy the Viper now, are in JSF program as active, or passive member. The Block 60 will not get cheaper, if the production line get closed, than in 8 years it will go only higher.

European jet... I wouldn't mind a Typhoon Tranche 3 or Rafale F3, but these will by available in the future... probably. Not to mention that if they will go to production, they will cost as much as Lightning II. The choice is simple.

We have Panther target pods - the same components will be in F-35.
We have signed contract with P&W, their engines are in F-35.
We have F-16s - F-35 is its natural successor.

The introduction and maintenance costs will be the smallest with F-35.

For the F-16C/D-52+ we pay 80mln USD per airframe, because of introduction costs - we have to buy new maintenance equipment, modify our bases, train people etc. etc. Most of what we are spending money today will work for F-35, so the cost per airframe will be lower to us than for example to Australia.

Oh boy, I gave you lots of reasons why we want that particular aircraft, let's add one more: it is the only gen.5 aircraft that we can both afford and US is willing to sell to us :wink:


@ elp, that part need to be discussed, but I don't think it will be any problem. Like I wrote in first post, our Ministry of Defense said it is the aircraft we want and we'll try to get into the program - what we could do for it, when, for how much etc etc. - thats up for discussion with the program members.
Offline

Pilotasso

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 532
  • Joined: 29 Oct 2006, 03:35

Unread post29 Mar 2007, 19:14

Sundowner wrote:First a total war in central Europe is very unlikely, but, history likes to repeat itself. Our potential enemy's have lot's of Flankers armed with R-27, and soon never generation R-77. Configuration of both the carrier and armament are really deadly, Su-27 can see first and shoot first against both F-16 and JAS-39. Buying another jet that will need to begin fight from defensive position is foolish at least.

F-35 will have enough stealth to fly well into Flankers engagement zone unnoticed, fire their missiles, wrecking havoc in enemy formations, leaving them prone to finishing strike from less technologically advanced Vipers. Thats the composition we need.

Sorry the 39 lost its fight to F-16 already, there is no need for another multirole fighter, what we need is stealthy strike fighter, or really good air superiority fighter, the 39 is not one of them.


Poland is not a global player. Besides russias R-27 missiles severly lack in reliablity not to mention that those missiles been suplanted for almost 20 years. While the flanker is an overal more powerfull fighter the Gripen is smarter, muscle over brain and muscle looses. Russia has nothing to match a meteor, while you can argue that the meteor is not yet operational russia hasnt even have anything going to match it. By the time meteor enters the flanker will be severly outgunned even by the nimble Gripen.

On another note just because Poland has a great economic growth rate doesnt mean it can go on purchase frenzy. Actual economic standards are something entirely different (Believe me I know, my country has gone through the same and look at us now...still poor :D ), and in my view Poland is still too much empoverished to buy something like F-35 without immensly favourable (unlikely) offset deals.

Gripen is still much more a sane purchase to go even if its not ideal, but then again what ideal deals can you make for little money? ;)
Offline

Sundowner

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 69
  • Joined: 23 Nov 2005, 01:29

Unread post29 Mar 2007, 20:13

hehe, don't underestimate the muscle :wink:

If you enter a battle where the enemy have at least twice as much planes, and 4 times more missiles than you, then brain did a miscalculation somewhere before that event :wink:

No matter how old those missiles are, if there are 4 of them coming at you, you're pretty much screwed ;) that forces you to make a move that will throw you into defensive position.

The R-77M is getting close to finishing, when that thing comes to play, the Meteor will not be the solution, especially fired from the 39, Typhoon would be better, it could throw it further away.

No we are not global player, we need just assure our place here, we're well to experienced by history to stand on faith in EU and NATO alone. We need an ace in the sleeve, F-35 is one... F-22 would be better, but who can afford it ?

Offset profits are virtual, you have to be very lucky to have something good from it - Finland Nokia is good example of that, the Polish F-16 deal is not. What could give some profits is cooperation in making such peace of machinery like F-35 is. We're already making a lot of work for Bell, Agusta Airbus, Boeing, Northrop-Grumman and soon Sikorsky. We're also making undercarriage and putting together engines for F-16s we bought... so there is something we could do for F-35 too.
Offline

Pilotasso

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 532
  • Joined: 29 Oct 2006, 03:35

Unread post29 Mar 2007, 21:27

Sundowner wrote:hehe, don't underestimate the muscle :wink:

If you enter a battle where the enemy have at least twice as much planes, and 4 times more missiles than you, then brain did a miscalculation somewhere before that event :wink:



You mean a battle where one side has a plane that can target 6 fighters at one time and the other has more planes but that can target only 1 at a time? Im still with the brain ;)

Sundowner wrote:No matter how old those missiles are, if there are 4 of them coming at you, you're pretty much screwed ;) that forces you to make a move that will throw you into defensive position.


What makes you think you will be fired first? What makes you think that with a active radar missiles the brain will keep on flying torwards smi active missiles wich have proven to have about 10% probability of kill?

Make the math... 6 multi attack capability with active missiles versus a superior force that can only fire 1 smi active at a time but only 10% of them capable of hiting anything?

the 10% figure comes from combat records of Su-27's VS Mig-29's in Eritrea VS Ethipia. Consider that any western fighter of the same generation as the gripen is going to be more modern than those export migs and sues thus, even harder to hit, so 10% of PK is a generous figure and the Gripen not so a bad proposal after all.

I dont mean Poland would win (infact it would loose in a total confrontation) but the deterrence here is the key not raw force measurement.

Sundowner wrote:The R-77M is getting close to finishing, when that thing comes to play, the Meteor will not be the solution, especially fired from the 39, Typhoon would be better, it could throw it further away.


R-77M was a project going in the mid 90's. It wont be resumed because it needs to be researched over again to keep up with new technologies. It has been stated that russians want a completely new missile with a new seeker different of current R-77's wich have disapointing perfomance according to russian own designers (you can imagine what is "disapointing perfomance" on western standards then!)
Even if the new missile gets to be named as R-77M it will be a differtent project (much like mid 90's Su-35's and the "new" Su-35's russians want to bring operational but wich are infact completely different in terms of avionics)

NOT ONLY THAT but much of the stock of current Russian missiles are examples wich were researched in russia but built in ukranian factories before USSR breakup. So the redesigns has even more to do with having a missile produced in russia than due to the obsolescence of them. That also may explain why R-27's are so falible. They are running short of usefull lifetime FAST, if they aready havent so. (R-77's currently made in russia for the handfull of Su-27SM's are now called RVV-AE's, unsure about what the differences are, if any)
Offline

skrip00

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 557
  • Joined: 03 Jul 2006, 23:15

Unread post29 Mar 2007, 22:42

How could LockMart come up with a reason NOT to sell the F-35 to the Polish? You'd think theyd love to have a boatload of sales.
Offline

Thomas_Poland

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 15
  • Joined: 18 Feb 2006, 20:05
  • Location: Rzeszów - Poland

Unread post30 Mar 2007, 09:09

Sundowner wrote: We're also making undercarriage and putting together engines for F-16s we bought... so there is something we could do for F-35 too.


I hope so, WSK Rzeszow waits for next engines after PW-F100-229 :P
Offline

Neotopia

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 67
  • Joined: 27 Sep 2006, 01:12

Unread post01 Apr 2007, 04:43

Driver wrote:Now I heard something about the F-16 being better then the gripen, wont throw arguments at you but shame on you.

Polands Economy is growing very fast even for global standards, ditto for the Czech Rep. etc. so affording something like that shouldn't be a big deal in the future.

Also the F-16 Block 60 is 80 mln NOW but when the F-35 comes out, it would be ALOT lower due to the fact that the F-35 is more capable, Im sorry to say but the F-16 (even the 60) won't be competetive for very long (and Im a big F-16 fan... but a realistic one and not one who denies something hoping that it will become the truth) for Poland, and any EU nation for that matter, I think a European jet is the way to go. One day EU nations will have to so the sooner the better.


WRT the economies of Europe, Europe has done an almost about-face in the last 50 years, with the Eastern countries becoming free-market capitalist countries and the Western powers for the most part becoming overburdened socialist welfare states. The economic growth rate of the Eastern European countries is in the 4-5% range, and western Europe is struggling to manage even 2%. In PPP terms the Polish economy is about the Size of the Dutch economy now; In Nominal Exchange-rates terms it is about Austria's size and nipping at Sweden/Belgium/Switzerland's heels. I'm sure that by 2016 Poland will have sufficient funds to make an F-35 purchase.

On European jets, the truth is outside the Gripen, The Eurofighter and Rafale are really just subsidy programs to insure that Europe's domestic fighter industry doesnt die altogether. For what they do, the Eurofighter and Rafale are both *heavily* overpriced, and they have been losing competitions to US F-teens for a reason.

Now, back to the subject at hand; Poland is fast bcoming one of the US' better allies, I would be very pleased to see the Polish airforce equipped with them in the future.
Offline

marsavian

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1129
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2018, 21:55

Unread post18 Jan 2019, 20:05

F-35, F-16, F-15, F/A-18, Gripen and Typhoon: These Are The Contenders In The Race To Replace Polish MiG-29 and Su-22 jets. 60 new aircraft to replace the ageing fleet of Polish MiG-29 and Su-22 jets as part of the Harpia program.

https://theaviationist.com/2019/01/18/f ... u-22-jets/
Offline
User avatar

steve2267

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2112
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2016, 17:36

Unread post18 Jan 2019, 22:25

Harrumph!

No Rafale!?!

I thought the Rafale was the piece de la resistance, the creme-de-la-creme of the 4th gen world!?! Slayer of dragons... master of active stealth... denier of WVR supremacy?
Take an F-16, stir in A-7, dollop of F-117, gob of F-22, dash of F/A-18, sprinkle with AV-8B, stir well + bake. Whaddya get? F-35.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 22682
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post19 Jan 2019, 00:12

:devil: "...derrier of WVR supremacy?" FIFY :doh:
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
PreviousNext

Return to Program and politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests