Is there a fighter jet in production today that has decent maneuverability,

>>33003653
F-16

File: F-16 Block 60.jpg (324KB, 1600x1440px) Image search: [Google]

324KB, 1600x1440px

>>33003653

Isn't Lockheed building some Block 60 F-16 for some -Stan Country?

>>33003653
Mig?

>>33003653
>decent maneuverability
Literally everything on the market
>Isn't pig slow
Literally everything on the market
>Relatively low maintenance/operating costs
F-16s and Gripens. F-16 arguably would be the better choice there (better proliferation of parts/more people know how to service it), although that may change once F-16 production finally ends.

Of all those factors you mentioned, the only one that's really all that important in today's world is operating costs. Beyond a certain threshold that every real fighter meets today, agility and speed isn't all that important. What matters more is avionics.

File: Engines.png (195KB, 681x488px) Image search: [Google]

195KB, 681x488px

>>33003726
>MiG
>relatively low maintenance cost
pick one.

>>33003673
Kyrgyzstan, yes.

File: 1409008700392.jpg (55KB, 500x447px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 500x447px

>>33003842
>RD-33

>>33003653
Super Hornet.

>>33003653
Gripen.

File: 1023243219[1].jpg (123KB, 1000x541px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 1000x541px

>>33003726

File: gripen-e5.jpg (58KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 800x533px

>>33003653

Are you stupid for real?
Is there a fighter jet in production today that has decent maneuverability, isn't pig slow, relatively low maintenance and running cost??

>Canards
>Mach 2 (Supercruise at M1,2 if E variant)
>can be maintained by 5 conscripts in wartime
>costs about half of what a F-16 does to run

>>33004091
>isn't pig slow
>max m1.8/no SC

>relatively low maintenance
>twin engine

>>33003666
A model, specifically

>>33004099
This.

>>33004544
Even with two engines the Rhino is a maintenance God.

File: elbit.helmet.webm (475KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

475KB, 1280x720px

The HAL Tejas had a lot of promise. Too bad the Indians were involved. It would have been functional if Elbit alone made it for India.

>>33004514
>>can be maintained by 5 conscripts in wartime
>>costs about half of what a F-16 does to run
You're thinking of the first Gripen models. The NG/E/F models cost considerably more, are far more complex and require a good bit more maintenance per flight hour.

The story you're regurgitating is here:
http://www.stratpost.com/gripen-operational-cost-lowest-of-all-western-fighters-janes
>“At an estimated $4,700 per hour (2012 USD), the Gripen compares very favorably with the Block 40 / 50 F-16s which are its closest competitor at an estimated $7,000 per hour,”
and it compares a JAS-39A to an F-16C Blk 40/42 in cost per flight hour, even though the model A was significantly deficient in systems and capabilities compared to the block 40/42 birds. The JAS-39A models were basically F-16A Blk 10 analogues in capability but without NATO-compatible datalink/avionics and without integration for a wide variety of NATO munitions. A neat little bird, but nothing like an F-16C.

Current per-hour operating cost for the entire Gripen fleet worldwide (including the A, C and E models) is:
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/saab-reveals-full-gripen-e-design-cost-savings-396977/
>The Swedish air force lists its current per-hour operating cost with the type as being around SKr48,000 ($7,560).

So the current average across all models is actually higher than the F-16C, which means the Gripen E is significantly higher. This is to be expected, considering how much more advanced overall the Gripen E is compared to an F-16C Blk 40/42.

File: 1458482369896.jpg (41KB, 423x333px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 423x333px

>>33007034
>tfw your cherished meme splats on the windshield of reality

>>33007034
That comparison with the F-16 is very interesting - different nations / companies use different standards for measuring operating costs and we'll long since known that SAAB / Sweden uses a standard that results in unusually low CPFH figures; the USAF for example says the F-16C costs about $25,541 per hour.

If we (boldly) assumed that those figures scale proportionately, a Gripen C would cost about $17,149 per flight hour, which is a lot more comparable to what's expected.

File: Northrop_F-5E_(Tail_No._11419)_061006-F-1234S-070.jpg (233KB, 1800x1192px) Image search: [Google]

233KB, 1800x1192px

F5

File: p025zfk4.jpg (42KB, 1280x640px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 1280x640px

Or the Scorpion

File: reds.jpg (100KB, 700x434px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 700x434px

Crowd funded ?

>>33009507
fucking shit

>>33009819
Name another fighter you can get for $350,000

File: 1416117.jpg (408KB, 1280x865px) Image search: [Google]

408KB, 1280x865px

>>33010035
the L39 can be found for $250,000

>>33010127
>Fighter
No

>>33010138
No what ?

>>33003653
Chengdu J-10
Chengdu J-20

>>33009664
COIN all day son

>>33010195
>COIN for roughly 20 minutes, then it's shot it's load of 2 bombs and 16 gun rounds and needs to refuel

File: c8b603969743ddedc464feba8175d818.jpg (82KB, 1017x477px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 1017x477px

jaguar

File: HW-331R-60MK.jpg (22KB, 694x484px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 694x484px

>>33009778

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8ijWQt4VMU

>>33009664
I still don't understand the point of this, when you can get a super Tucano + pod for much more less.

>>33007034
Well, early Gripens do fit OP then.

>>33010168
It's not a fighter. It's a trainer.

The F-5 is a fighter. The L-39 is a trainer.

>>33010352
Super Tucano is not a mach 1+ jet

>>33009819
You take that back

>>33003803
>Literally everything on the market

Except Superbug which is pig slow

>>33003673
They are built for the UAE, and they're almost as expensive as the F-35 or Rafale

>>33010379
And a F5 with no guns is a T38 = Trainer

>>33010404
why do you want mach +1 on a COIN aircraft.

>>33010447
I'm not OP but "isn't pig slow" is in the title.
Personally i'm in the F-16 camp but I am a little bias being a F-16 crew chief

>>33010570
oh yes, I am just thinking outside of OP's question.

File: f154.jpg (204KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

204KB, 1200x800px

>>33003653
f 15

>>33010605
Anon, dat rigid dick of freedom ain't lookin' so rigid.

We can't bring no sand people no freedom with no flacid freedom dick, now can we?

UNFUCK YOUSEFF, SON

File: SIXTA IS CONFUSE.jpg (11KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 480x360px

>>33010642
AND POLEEECE THAT MOOOOOSETACHE

File: flacid.png (2MB, 1328x1012px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1328x1012px

>>33010642

>>33010642
My rigid dick was beaten down by the dreaded CBT

>>33010703
Oh, shit. Now my dick ain't got no goddamn freedom neither. Carry on, son.

>>33010703
CBT?

File: IMG_0096.jpg (396KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

396KB, 1600x1200px

>>33010692
bombs are boring
Laser mav's are where its at

>>33010409
>Superbug
>slow
Mach 1.8 isn't slow, anon.

>>33010758
Computer Based Training
It feels like I do more CBT's than aircraft maintnance

>>33010758
You know that thing you're supposed to be doing at work but can't because you have to do all that bullshit that isn't actual work but somehow has to be done anyway? You know, work?

CBT is the organized, digitized, weaponized version of it. It has your name. It knows where you live. And you will have nightmares about it.

>>33010703

>>33010848
I was too drunk to not ratfuck that post.

You get the idea.

Go fuck yourselves.

>>33010570
>>33010605
Sweet, man. Is it true what they're saying about the F-35 being easier to maintain than the 4th gen birds? What's the scuttlebutt on it from the wrench turning side?

>>33004453

Cute.

>>33010914
I have not crewed the F35 but it would have the same issues on the mtx side as the F22

>>33003803

>although that may change once F-16 production finally ends
If India buys production rights, it'll probably outlast Gripen.

>>33010982
I had understood that they were addressing a lot of the maintainer issues with the F-35 they had with the F-22 - easy reapplication of panel edge RAM, better access, etc. What you hear is saying it's more same shit, different day?

>>33011020
With my actual pic being on this form I have no comment on 5th gen issues
but I will BS about F-16's all night long

>>33011079
Fair nuff.
Nobody saw nothing.

File: F-20_flying.jpg (467KB, 1800x1260px) Image search: [Google]

467KB, 1800x1260px

;-;

>>33010404
Neither is the Scorpion

>>33003653
Everything that is not a F-35?

>>33010620
fking saved

>>33003653
F-16

F-18

MiG-29

File: image.jpg (169KB, 1024x655px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 1024x655px

>>33003653
Define fighter.

>>33003653

MIG 21

>>33006704

Blue Thunder?

File: 2012_F35A_High_AOA_12J00765_42_1269967624_9200.jpg (75KB, 800x1200px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 800x1200px

>>33003653
F-35