About questions about the f 16 Page 2
|March 29th, 2010||#11|
| || |
Re: questions about the f 16 info
I don't know all the details but, from what I have been able to read about, there are several design philosophies used in the design of the F-35 not used before in combination in previous attack aircraft. Philosophies that I don't see working well as an air to air machine? Countries such as Israel, Japan, Australia or, the USA having to use the F-35 as not only an attack aircraft but, also as an air defense fighter, I don't see how the F-35 will function effectively? If an Su-30 is probing your air defense (coming in high and fast), I don't see how the F-35 will intercept it if the big Sukhoi does not want to be intercepted. Now, if the Su-30 intends to penetrate your air defense, the Sukhoi would be coming towards the F-35 at some angle. The F-35A will replace the F-16s in the air defense role in NORAD, I have real questions?
|December 1st, 2011||#12|
| || |
Right, the F-35 will not supercruise, fair enough, but when will the thing fly???
Politicians here slumber in calm ignorance as usual, but the air-force staff has sounded a growing concern over the state of our current fleet of F-16's.
As the JSF project keeps dragging on forever, and the ordered units are just climbing in price each time we read about them, there's a question about what to do.
1.Keep the old F-16 flying untill we can buy one of the first batches of F-35's?
2.Upgrade the old F-16's untill we can buy a later and hopefully less costly batch of F-35?
3.Look for an intermediate substitute for lease while we wait for the later batches of F-35 to hit the market?
4.Buy some cheaper substitutes (Russian figthers?) while we wait for mr. Godot...?
5.Cancel the deal and opt for something else that is already airborne and on the market?
Personally I'm in favour of # 3 or #4 here, though it would seem odd to have Su-35's intercepting Russian planes breaching the souverenity over the Barents Sea.
Today we are all Norwegians! Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt. 22. July 2011
|December 2nd, 2011||#14|
| || |
Adversus solem ne loquitor
|December 2nd, 2011||#15|
| || |
Everybody has heard about him, nobody have seen him, but still they claim that he's flying around the globe in an astonishing speed...
As the US defence budget seems to be cut, the US contract for F-35's will also be cut, and the price will climb even higher before any of the customers get their planes.
And since it doesn't seem likely that the F-35 will be on the market before the flight hours of our F-16's are spendt, we could use some kind of stop gap solution in the mean time.
Now the Norwegian Air Force is tasked with two completely different operations, one of them is to maintain souvereingity over the border and territorial waters, a task that has been increasingly important as our neighbours in the east has taken up challenging that again.
The other task is to support international NATO operations.
While the latter demands NATO specs and compatibility, the first task does not.
So a squadron equipped with some high end, but reasonably cheap, Russian made fighters could keep policing in the north, while the airworthy F-16's could be saved for NATO operations.
On the other hand, I'd love to see how a Russian fighter would perform with western avionics.
|December 2nd, 2011||#17|
| || |
|February 18th, 2012||#19|
| || |
|February 18th, 2012||#20|
| || |
When the F-16 was designed it was as a "light weight fighter"
Since then its role has expanded above and beyond what its designers ever conceived.
In some air forces it is a jack of all trades. Just like the F-104 before it.
Same with the F-18.
The JSF was meant to be an all rounder from the start, but, was "designed by comitee"
It is meant to be available as either a vtol or standard take off/landing.
Its meant to have a conventional carrier borne cappability, but now there's the problem with the arrestor hook!
The whole JSF project reminds me of this:
Sempre in merda profundum