Name one shittier memeplane. >shit range >shit payload

the Obsolete-10

>>32610806
At first I was ready to object, but then I saw it's a picture of Gripen. So yeah, pretty accurate.

My country could have got old F-16s from US, but they got bribed to RENT fucking shitpens. They keep FALLING OUT OF THE FUCKING SKY!

>>32610877

Czech?

>>32610806
Mig-25. The orginal meme plane that turned out to be shit.

File: IMG_0686.png (9KB, 208x243px)

9KB, 208x243px

So it's basically slavshit with computers?

>>32610832

At least its still capable of doing its niche mission. What is the Gripen supposed to do? Shoot down shitty old MiG-21s and helicopters?

What about the new ones? E/F.

>>32610925
Create factory jobs and sell the innovative swede meme

>>32610932
It's exactly the same, they just tick more boxes of what systems a 4,5th gen fighter should possess, without actually doing anything better than any other planes beside being less than 10% cheaper at flyaway.

>>32610894
I'm guess Hungarian.

>>32610969

Can they use Meteor at least?

>>32611012
Yes, but although the Meteor is better than the AIM-120D on a few points, it's also inferior on others and is at least 20% more expensive.

>>32610806
the Gripen is an ikea discount fighter for poverty nations who can't afford f-16 or rafales

>>32610925
intercept Soviet fighters and drop ASMs.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (64KB, 1280x720px)

64KB, 1280x720px

>>32611202
Good luck intercepting any modern russian fighter with your Gripen.
Here's a fighter carrying more of better AShMs than the Gripen, that has also superior range/endurance once you put a centerline fuel tank and maybe also even some CFTs, and with a better radar.
It also costs barely more but is still superior on every aspect.

>>32611168
but, muh STOL, my short turn and burn

>>32610806

>no AMRAAM integration

It does have AMRAAM m8

>size constrained AESA

Its got a 1,200t/r module AESA with 200 degrees of FOV from a traversing plate. Thats 30-50% larger than the Rafale's with significantly more FOV. It's not a small one. Not the biggest, but definitely not a size constrained one.

Not that being bigger than the Rafale's teeny weeny radar is hard.

>>32611156
>it's also inferior on others

Which is

>>32610806
see
>>32611798

I'm not shilling for the plane - it has it's drawbacks, but there are other aspect where the newest gripen actually excels:

One the most "stealthy" non-stealth fighters (RCS around 0.1)

Arguably the best data-link in the world

Very low cost pr. flight hour - which translates into more training and sorties for the same money. It is estimated $4,700 per hour (2012 USD). The F-16 is around $7000 and other western planes way, way beyond that

Supercruise

Fires METEOR, AMRAAM, IRIS-T and AIM-9 missiles.

File: fa-50.gif (51KB, 675x584px)

51KB, 675x584px

>>32610806
>Name one shittier memeplane.

Pic related.

>>32612181
This. Autists on internet are quick to make assumptions by comparing "stats" on wikipedia.

In real life you can have the fastest and most armed fighter ever, and still get less performance out of it than an objectively worse fighter which just happens to be cheaper to fly and has a lower maintenance to flight hour ratio.

I've nothing against it per se, but one of the biggest problems with Gripen advocates is their tendency to discuss Gripen-E capabilities while claiming it costs as much as a Gripen-C did ten years ago.

>>32612619
True. Discussing about any other Gripen that E is moot anyways. They are about as relevant as legacy F16s or Mirage2000s.

>>32612619
True.

Gripen E is actually cheaper.

File: ORD_Meteor_BVRAAM_lg.jpg (56KB, 1024x723px)

56KB, 1024x723px

I dunno, doesn't the gripen have that new neato Meteor missile?

>>32612796

Yes.

>>32612197
They didn't pretend that it's a super advanced combat aircraft tho. In fact, it's target markets is primarily countries that are looking for cheap Mig-21/F-5/Mirage III replacement

At its price bracket, the only competitor that it had is
>third hand F-16
>trainer aircraft turned into make-believe fighter aircraft

>>32612762

A new Gripen E in 2016+ dollars costs less than a Gripen-C new in mid 2000s dollars?

Got a source on that?

>>32611287
>angled pylons
Leave and take your garbage plane with you. At least the Gripen can do a weapon separation correctly.
Also the harpoon is possibly the worst AShM in western service.

>>32610806
>Name one shittier memeplane
HAL-Tejas
PAK-FAilure
Ez
Also, you got some facts wrong in your haste to wank off your hate boner. All gripens has AIM-120 support, options for common NATO weapons, the AESA is superior to the one on the Rafael and there is no possible way you can know the specs of the IRST.
Not a super plane but not shit either.

>>32612197
I do want to see FA-50 flying side by side with Gripen. Last I checked Thailand is going to get T-50 (and they've already had Gripen). Prolly we can see that in the future

As it stands today, FA-50 would roughly the same capability of Gripen D version.

>>32610806

t. butthurt Frog about Rafale losing to Gripen in Brazil

>>32614717
They didn't even have any solid chance in Brazil.

Them brazillian already had enough of french stuff with their Mirage 2000. In fact, they've retired their Mirages earlier than F-5, even tho the F-5 are older and one generation behind the Mirages.

The hues were actually looking at F/A-18 for their new combat aircraft but wikileaks happened and they chose Gripen instead

>>32611815
Not that guy. From what I remember the Meteor has a better active seeker and longer range, but the 120D has a better data-link and a quicker speed.

Both are better than current model 120B/C but one is geared more towards a 4.5 gen using a missile in a standoff capacity while the other is geared more towards a 5th gen fighter ambushing an opponent

>>32614541
>PAK-FAilure
How so?
>Rafael
lol

>>32614772

Still didn't stop Dassault's enormously butthurt response though to basically go "W-WELL YOU MISSED OUT ON A R-REAL PLANE"

>>32614840
They butthurt about everything, anon

>>32614825

> and a quicker speed.

That one is a definite no. AIM-120 is still a burn and coast missile, the Meteor has a much more persistant high speed that drops off much slower.

The AIM-120D supposedly has a longer total range, but neither aircraft has confirmed that and "speed at which range" makes it basically impossible to tell. Meteor is likely the more aggressively agile when it reaches the target.

Datalinks and seekers are basically unknown on both accounts. Far too complex to even think about guessing for.

Unless the UK/Japanese version with the AESA comes about. THEN it'll be more clear.

>>32610900
More like the US falling to their own memes.

>>32614831
>PAK-FAilure
Hilariously inferior in regards to the competition, the J-20, F-35 and F-22.
RCS on the level of a super bug, no weapons ready for it, inferior engines straight edges on weapon bay doors, huge visible gaps in the same doors, you name it. The shilling to reality ratio is far worse for the PAK-FAilure than the Gripen-E.

File: greipen_e_weapon_2340_modif.jpg (366KB, 2340x1656px)

366KB, 2340x1656px

>>32610806
Butthurt surrender monkey detected.
>lacks all of the cool new US weapons (SDB II, JSM, MALD-J, SLAM-ER, JSOW-ER, laser JDAM, you name it)
>sniper pod

Grabbed this pic from the Saab page on the Gripen.
Gripen has a FAR superior loadout capability than the Rafale.

File: f0acba33b38ed9486ac654f7136698b4.png (417KB, 800x461px)

417KB, 800x461px

>>32614902
>Meteor is likely the more aggressively agile when it reaches the target.

Well, considering that Meteor was design to have a huge No scape zone, it is reasonable.

>>32610806
F-35

Literally a meme

>>32614909
Nope, just the us treating the russians like equals.

>>32615361
Sorry you could not meme the F-35 out of existence anon. I guess being the best multirole in existence was just too much!

>>32613313
How about that chink shit fc17

>>32614772

Brazil wanted to build and develop a new plane together. Shit that US would never allow.

>>32610806
stfu

>>32614429
>Also the harpoon is possibly the worst AShM in western service.

Funny, because it is the only AShM in western service that has been used in combat.

>>32617613
>wanting a malware plane

How about no?

>>32610806
>no amraam integration
gay as fuck, not a problem. nice p(k) your glorious 120 love has

>>32618604
Exocet.

>>32618876
so entendard still relevant too? Lol i like the penguin :))))

>>32615361
This

Can't turn, can't fight, can't run. 1.5 trillion spent for nothing.

File: you tried.jpg (8KB, 250x238px)

8KB, 250x238px

>>32614946
Well memed, have a star.

>>32617613
What about them

If yo country is poor as fuck but aren't buddies with america (subsequently the whole NATO bloc), sure JF-17 is a good choice

Last I checked argies are looking at them but seems like the interest died down because china won't sell them ASMs

File: Swiss_eval_NWA2_appreciations.png (58KB, 958x675px)

58KB, 958x675px

Swiss evaluation of the Gripen, Rafale and Typhoon

>>32615379
You don't make sense. The Soviets built the MiG-25 according to their own requirements, not the US ones.

>>32614946
>I don't know shit but I like to pretend I do

>t. triggered vatnik

>>32618938
Going all in on the bait?

>>32620157
I am laughing at Eurofighter being worse than Rafale at air policing. That's some bullshit going there.

>>32612181
I can guarantee you the cost per flight hour is way more than $4,700 for the gripen or $7000 for the F-16. Those figures are probably for the fuel cost alone. I know that the F-16 flight hour cost is around 20,000$, probably more.
Also, you don't take in account the number of planes when you acquire them, but their capabilities, otherwise we'd have as much B-1 as F-16 or F-15E.
You're going to need more gripens than F-16 to do the same thing (like establishing a 24 hour CAP, delivering x pounds of JDAMs everyday y nm away from the base, basically to do any mission except maybe reconnaissance) since the F-16 can carry heavier loads farther/for longer.
More gripens needed = more pilots and personnel to train, more things needed (drop tanks, targeting pods, ladders to climb to the aircraft, chocks, hydraulic fluid, explosive charges for store separation, oxygen for the pilot, basically anything that a fighter needs), more fuel used, etc.
In the end, it obviously depends on the user and what the aircraft is used for, but you can't just give an incorrect figure and claim the gripen is cheaper.
In some cases I don't doubt it's going to be cheaper than other fighters, but in a lot of others it's also going to be more expensive than other fighters.

File: swiss.png (438KB, 669x473px)

438KB, 669x473px

>>32620446
From the full evaluation :
http://files.newsnetz.ch/upload//1/2/12332.pdf

>The Rafale has been considered as the preferred candidate in the air policing mission in regard to fleet persistence due to its overall time on station, lack of operational restriction (gun, fuel difference between single seat and two seat aircraft) and dash performance.


Pic related is the detailed evaluation of air policing.

>>32620498
Yeah, I probably should trust them, but i think that Eurofighter has better dash performance (t/w ratio, climb rate, max speed, max altitude) and more potent low drag AA loadout compared to Rafale.

>>32620479
You can guarantee it how? Based on what? You're trying to say that the number isn't true because you don't want it to be. Your imagination doesn't determine costs of technology. Can you guarantee me that the cost of an iPhone s wrong too?

Stop talking out of your ass.

>>32620157
Ah the one comparing the Gripen C when they would be getting the Gripen E.
That is like comparing a F/A-18C to the F/A-18E, not fair at all.

>>32615215
>sniper pod
I thought it was some mounted rifle able to headshot bearded rebels... I'm disappointed.

File: CvD20n9WAAAM3_t.jpg (61KB, 1200x841px)

61KB, 1200x841px

>>32612796
"totally dominates"

File: aaq.jpg (19KB, 500x333px)

19KB, 500x333px

>>32620823
If you had any idea what the average flight hour cost of a 4th gen fighter is you'd know that $4,700 dollar is awfully low, a modern fighter can use that in fuel only in one hour.

>>32620837
The range and endurance of the Gripen E isn't that much improved and still highly inferior to other fighters, same for the amount of missiles carried.
The sensors and electronics are improved, but so are the one of the aircrafts the Gripen E is supposed to encounter.

>>32620994
Nah, it's still in the works.
The F-16 gun pod (pic related) is supposed to be integrated to the Gripen E by 2020 though.

>>32611798
https://hushkit.net/2016/04/24/top-ten-fighter-radars/

>>32620177
Your right, they set the bar real nice and low.

>>32621053
>missiles carried
Still superior to the Rafale that currently lacks BVRAAMs. The fact that the french insisted on not integrating US munitions has made the Rafale a pretty neutered fighter which has severely impacted its sales.

>>32621084
>PS-05/A
That's the old radar, the Gripen E will have an AESA on a rotating mount.
The ability to guide a missile in a 200 degree arc is a pretty nice thing to have.

>>32610806
Why do those planes have RMRs on them?

>>32621124
The MICA isn't a BVRAAM ?
It's obviously not in the same class as an AMRAAM but it's still a BVR missile.
And the Meteor is supposed to be coming in a year anyway.

>>32621146
>That's the old radar
No that's the current one.
It "will have" something better, and its opponents too...

>>32621168
BVRAAM by definition is 51km and more, so MICA that has operational range of only 50km is not, but AIM-120A/B with 55km is

>>32621529
Lmao do you have any idea how these numbers work ?

>>32621529
>by definition

By whom exactly? Don't tell me you pull that shit out of yo ass?

>>32620157
>>32620498

Neck yourself, Rafalefag. You're fully aware of the issues of that evaluation.

>>32621053
You're still talking out of your ass. You have zero credibility. I trust you as much as i trust the guy who wants to sell me a steamer at the mall.

You're talking like you know what you're taljing about but you have no facts.

>>32620541
>better dash performance
Swiss airspace is so small, you don't need a lot of speed.

File: BOEING-FA-18-SUPER-HORNET61.jpg (160KB, 1600x1065px)

160KB, 1600x1065px

>>32620157
>>32620498

>Rafalefag still pushing his M-MUH SWISS

It was fucking ages ago and features effectively completely different aircraft from what all three are today. Your "MUH PROOF" is as obselete as the Rafale's data-link.

>>32621168

MICA is not a BVRAAM. It never has been. "Muh maximum range" means jack shit compared to the missile's actual threat envelope in defining what is and isn't BVR capable. MICA loses its acceleration at around 20km, after that it just bleeds. By the time MICA runs out of juice, an AIM-120 will still be accelerating.

THAT is the difference between a short range MICA and a true BVR missile. Not debating over max range, it's about how far away you can actually make effective kills. An M16 can fire a round out much further than its actual effective listed range, but it doesn't mean it'll be any fucking good at it.

>>32610806
>Name one shittier memeplane.
Any plane developed, built, bought, and never deployed in combat is a memeplane.

>>32623523
No, fuck both of you, no plane is a meme if it has no memetic properties. Kill yourselves and stop abusing the word meme.

>>32620837

This.

Most people doing Gripen comparisons are using numbers from the Gripen C/D instead of E/F that hasn't even flown yet.

>>32610806
I mean, its better than a Typhoon and most slav birds, but that's about it.

File: gripen-e5.jpg (58KB, 800x533px)

58KB, 800x533px

>>32610806
Since you said AESA im assuming you meant Gripen E

>>shit range
Meh, its okay but Ill give you this one
>shit payload
16 SDBs + 2 droptanks + 4 Meteor + 2 IRIS-T isnt what Id call shit
>no AMRAAM integration
It has had AMRAAMs in service with SwAF since the 39A you retard
>lacks all of the cool new US weapons (SDB II, JSM, MALD-J, SLAM-ER, JSOW-ER, laser JDAM, you name it)
Can be integrated if needed, why waste money integrating it into the software if no customer has requested it?
>size constrained AESA
Same size as the F/A-18Es nose cone
>IRST inferior to the Rafale/Eurofighter
Its newer and by the same company so I doubth it, sauce?
>Targeting pod inferior to other like the sniper xr
Current 39C carries that funky Israeli pod and other pods can be integrated when any customer wants it
>can't make contracts without bribes
SA deal was shit, but to be fair, all fighter jet deals to shit tier corrupt nations are done by bribes in various forms today.
>T/W ratio inferior to all other 4,5th gen fighters
Might be true, not going to claim otherwise as I dont have the data right now.
>HMD not delivered before at least 2022 while they're already standard on all other 4,5th gen fighters
Nobody requested it earlier, so why would saab bother?
>barely cheaper fly away price than a Rafale/late block F-16/Super Hornet
Not when you take maintanance costs into consideration.
>way more expensive than a KAI FA-50
And way more capable

>>32611156
AIM-120C is integrated, 120D shouldn be a difficult step

>>32611287
A Gripen E can carry up to 6 NSM missiles. The Gripen C could however only carry 2 RBS 15F.

>>32612181
>Arguably the best data-link in the world
This x1000, Sweden had a better datalink than the current Link 16 back in the early 90s.

>>32618604
>Muh combat

Judging by that factor the entire nuclear arsenal of the US is shit because it has never been used in combat.

File: MdFUuUU.jpg (46KB, 634x422px)

46KB, 634x422px

swedish POS

basically a discounted fighter jet for the BRICS/poor eastern yuro countries

stick to cuckshed building

>>32620479

The largest cost involved is personel costs. And Gripens needs less people to support use/them compared to the other aircraft wich gives them a lower overall cost.

>>32623523
So all nuclear bombers/weapons are memeplanes? Good to know.

The best weapons are those o keep peace, not those who create war.

>>32620157
Swiss need to replace their F-5s

It literally makes no sense for them to get anything else than the Gripen, unless they also would want to get rid of the F-18s which they are not planning to anytime soon

>>32611168
>>32625224
I'm going to laugh at you, once Austria sells their criminally overpriced second-hand Typhoons, and get Gripen NG instead.

File: F-5EM-painel-com-telas-multifunção-foto-Poder-Aéreo-Nunão.jpg (187KB, 1280x960px)

187KB, 1280x960px

>>32613313

Just like any other aircraft FA-50 isn't as cheap as flyaway cost implies. It is unlikely that it will cost anywhere close to usually cited 30 million. Iraq paid 45 million a piece for theirs.

>>32614655
>As it stands today, FA-50 would roughly the same capability of Gripen D version.

No. Have they even completed AMRAAM integration yet on FA-50?

>>32614772
>Them brazillian already had enough of french stuff with their Mirage 2000. In fact, they've retired their Mirages earlier than F-5, even tho the F-5 are older and one generation behind the Mirages.

That mostly because Dassault behaved like stereotypical French when it came to extending maintenance contract for Mirages. They were total dicks about it and they basically hoped that would make Brazilians buy Rafales faster if maintenance extension contract was offered on absolutely unacceptable terms.

>They didn't even have any solid chance in Brazil.

They had chance, they just destroyed it by themselves.

Also ironically HUE F-5EM is more capable fighter than Mirage 2000's they had at least when it comes to short range air to air missions. They have done pretty extensive modernization on 'em about decade ago. New Grifo-F radar and Israeli Python 4 and Derby AAM's.

>>32625546

Who modernized it?

>>32625682
Embraer

>>32625735

Don't they only work on Regional Jets?

>>32625682

Embraer. Major foreign suppliers being Selex, Elbit and Rafael.

>>32625758
They also do a lot of work in modernizing military planes. They modernized all of the Tucanos the hues have.They are also making that KC390, but I don't know what stage it's at.

>>32625762

I see.

>>32625810

Aren't tucanos like from early 2000's?

>KC-390

What is it?


>too drunk to look out for

File: kc390.jpg (59KB, 960x720px)

59KB, 960x720px

>>32625834
Tucanos, Super Tucanos, all same shit.
KC390 is a C130 replacement. (pic related)

File: KC-390-em-Gavião-Peixoto-São-Paulo-Foto-–-Sgt-Batista-Força-Aérea-Brasileira-3.jpg (354KB, 2000x1333px)

354KB, 2000x1333px

>>32625834
>What is it?

About C-130 sized twin jet air lifter and tanker.

When it comes to what Embraer produces, they can produce pretty much any kind of aircraft, it just that market for bigger airliners is so heavily competed that it isn't worth the risks involved. Fighters are pretty much same thing. Amount of countries that develop fighters or training aircraft has reduced due to that. Lower risk to import or produce foreign designs under license.

>>32625867

Looks like a C-2

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kawasaki_C-2

>>32625896
Damn, they do look a lot like each other.

>>32625888

I know that they dominate the Regional Jet market. Always asked myself why they never made a 747 like airplane.

If they can make comfy Regionals, they can make comfy globals.

But Boeing and Airbus would probably eat them alive.

>>32625940

They just have a few more wheels and have a bit bigger payload.

>>32625943
They have a confy niche they are really good at, why bother.

>>32625980

They only have Bombardier as competition and Bombardier is pretty much fucked after they received a lawsuit for receiving help from the govt or some shit.

Sukhoi and Mitsubishi are coming now.

>>32612181
>has it's drawbacks
>has it is drawbacks

>>32610900
Unjammable radar. Pilots forbidden to turn on while on ground, cook a rabbit @ 1000 metres.

>>32626941
Whoops. English is not my native language so these things happen

>>32622494
>Implying if they were actually needed they would only operate in Swedish airspace

Its like 200-250km across.

If you really wanted to do any serious air policing you would have to be proactive and be engaging outside of your airspace unless you want people launching missiles from outside your country all the fucking way across it

File: F-35-Money.jpg (346KB, 935x718px)

346KB, 935x718px

>>32610806

>>32629521
I don't think any modern plane built with a hint of sanity allows the radar to transmit with weight on wheels

What kind of a process is it to integrate weapons? Funland air force recently bought JSOWs and JASSMs which are not yet compatible with the Gripen

>>32625546
>No. Have they even completed AMRAAM integration yet on FA-50?

That depends on the radar. T-50/TA-50 uses the old APG-67, which obviously couldn't shoot AMRAAM on the fly and Lockmart is doing their part in making sure the damn thing wouldn't be as capable as KF-16/F-16 block 40. In fact, they've blocked the deal between KAI abd Raytheon to supply more capable radar for the programme. Basically, if they wanted the radar for FA-50, they need to to put it on their KF-16 as well

That's why the korean are developing their own AESA radar for the FA-50 (with assistance from Thales)

Interestingly, for export customers, they could get israeli-made radar so the aircraft could shoot Derby BVRAAM missile