Typhoon and Rafale will grow larger. Kuwait orders 28 Typh

File: 1459421174137.png (97KB, 331x321px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 331x321px

>>29500663
>canards

File: su-30sm.jpg (2MB, 2560x1707px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2560x1707px

>>29500670
Speaking of canards, Russia has ordered an additional 30 for their air force replacing older Flankers.

http://www.janes.com/article/59249/russia-orders-30-more-su-30sm-fighters

Why does Kuwait need jets for? They host a U.S. navy base.

File: 1293697665726.jpg (41KB, 783x705px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 783x705px

>>29501071
>Why does Kuwait need jets for? They host a U.S. navy base

Because you shouldn't rely on foreign aid. But mostly for sabre rattling reasons. It gives them more standing with their neighbors.

Kuwait and saudi's did 9/11 but hey, who gives a shit huh Keep aiding these terrorists because.... ?

>>29500663

So will the Gripen.
And withe the new Gripen E it will grow larger litteraly.

>>29500853
>putting canards on a fighter that already has 360degree thrust vectoring
wew lad just how much maneuverability do you need?

>>29503552
Thrust vectoring does not give you better manouverability.

File: 1459720193088.gif (3MB, 488x275px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 488x275px

of course these planes will sell they are more practical and available then anything else on the market right now. Still though they aren't that great.

>>29503793
>Thrust vectoring does not give you better maneuverability

pic highly related family

>>29503815
So all aircraft that have thrust vectoring can do that? neato!

In reality, it gives you nose authority, at the sake of dropping like a rock. A reason many F-22 pilots got killed by legacy aircraft before they learned not to use it to turn harder.

File: 1458614127139.jpg (59KB, 473x355px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 473x355px

>>29503854
I actually don't know anything about thrust vectoring. Just had that cool gif. thought it was the right time to pull it out.

Let me present to you a question that you may not care to answer but whatever. What aircraft do you think it is in the best interest of Canada to buy. We haven't pulled out of the F-35 yet but it seems inevitable.

>>29503891
By buying the F-35 you would get the most bang for your buck and whatever airforce you keep would remain relevant and easily interact with the US, though its yet to be seen exactly how cheap it would be to run.

By buying the Super Hornet you would get the benefit of a proven platform and shared logistics with the USN for however long they keep them around until the F/A-X turns up and its a familiar platform, but you would be keeping an airframe in service for longer than it could reliably be used for almost anything other than a bomb truck.

I think those are the only real options. I think if Canada wants to stay in the game, F-35s are what they should be aiming for.

>>29501071
To oppress its citizens.

>>29503949
Our current liberal government has stated that what Canada needs is an aircraft that can defend our sovereignty and our airspace. So like a long range interceptor. Don't you think the F-35 is a little slow for performing this role?

>>29503949

>lockheed boeing shill detected

the american MIC is failing!

>>29503982
long range and high speed do not go together

I don't think they will pull out of the F-35 because it would be absolutely retarded
But they might, and if so, should be arrested for treason when trudeau leaves office.

File: 1459359647378.jpg (54KB, 350x383px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 350x383px

>>29503793
>Thrust vectoring does not give you better manouverability.

nice post anon

>>29501071
there's a hell of a lot more there than just KNB also KNB is not the US nor is it predominantly US its Kuwait's we just use it same with all the bases and camps it all Kuwait we just chill there to keep Kuwait from getting there shit pushed in (was there from 2010-2011 doing contract over sight and dealing with the mutual defense agreement between the US and Kuwait and all that bull shit)

>>29504380
It doesn't.

Thinking that it does it just evidence of a flawed understanding of the term.

File: rafale, typhoon and raptor.jpg (3MB, 3437x2287px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3437x2287px

So far,

Typhoon:
Austria - 15
Saudi Arabia - 72
Oman - 12
Kuwait - 28

Rafale:
Egypt - 24
Qatar - 24
India* - 36 (not signed yet)

Gripen:
Czech Republic - 14
Hungary - 12
South Africa - 26
Thailand - 12
Brazil - 36

I wonder which Euro canard will have its production line closed the last.

What competitions are due?

>>29505825
I will say the Gripen will outlast everyone as it is very established as a plane, and that Sweden is a "neutral" power compared to America or Russia and their planes are not total shit like China.

No one wants to touch the Rafale as the French are backstabbing cunts who, on a whim, change their mind on what they want to sell and how they will support.
>see Israel, Argentina, Russia, etc.

The British aren't as bad as the French for backstabbing but they still have done it. Anyway with the British no one wants to deal with their bureaucracy, who is overly picky with who they sell too, and that British are universally hated by everyone due to past or present butthurt.

>>29505976
The French are pretty reliable as long as you don't act against their interests. Have a bad human rights record, go to France.

>>29503552
Canard are not for maneuverability. They're usually added to balance designs that are inherently unstable, or on some carrier planes to enhance takeoff and landing.

>>29504380
But he's right, it really doesn't, instant turn speed is cool but it has to be used sparingly else you become a brick.

File: Typhoon Kuwait CG.jpg (459KB, 2495x3307px) Image search: [Google]

459KB, 2495x3307px

Looks fantastic.