polish AF discussion..

Bimbac, you said that there is plenty of information about the Gripen's avioncs suite on the web. Does that even include tactical manuals ?

 

You know that Olgerd is always looking for references for possible future ED sims. Perhaps you could help him to optain declassified Gripen manuals ( if available ) ? A Gripen sim would be sweet for sure :)

Try to use Google for a start. I will pass some reference later.

By the way, I'm already in touch with Olgerd, but tactical manuals are classified stuff, and all the Gripen manuals are classified as well. I have the necessary security clearance, but of course I cannot disclose any information. Let's wait some 20-30 years and the info will surely be available ;)

Uh just because and airframe is a generation old doesn't mean what is inside is. Sorry, I just can't stand when blanket comments are made.

So, the mig-21-93 is as good as the Gripen?...

Looks like an exercise to me - two tanks on that F-16.

Corect :)

 

Polish MiG-21 Bis Guncam :D

 

^^ Ofcourse it is :D

I've found similar thread on f16.net forum:

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-1029-postdays-0-postorder-asc-start-90.html

Polish MiG-21 have in colection also F-15 and...

...B-52 - Exercise Clean Hunter 2000

PS;

Some Polish MiG-21Bis ( forum Babie Doły)

http://www.galeria.mojeosiedle.pl/viewtopic.php?t=9193&start=0

http://gdynia-babie-doly.mojeosiedle.pl/viewtopic.php?t=457&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=345

Poland chose the F-16, but under the table IMHO it was a payment for all its activities POland has been making in the international scene following its join to NATO. In addition to that the US offered multi billion dollar ofset deals in the form of comunications infra structures in the country that nobody else could match. So you got a new plane but you actualy got alot more than just the falcons. Including a relationship with the US.

Exactly. From the start (and even before Poland was a full Nato member) it longed for a closer relationship with the USA.

In return likewise Poland is considered as THE new US partner in Europe, playing a similar role as Germany played in the 50ties. This became pretty obvious when Germany refused to participate in the 'Alliance of the willing", and when semi-officially Rumsfeld in return announced plans to withdraw US forces from Germany (and deploy them to Poland, by that bringing welcomed money into the country)....

As promised: http://www.canit.se/~griffon/aviation/gripen/

By the way, why the particular aircraft is obtained by the country is mostly a political question. Swedish program for the Czech Republic included offsets as well and there are even some Czech companies participating on Gripen manufacturing and development. Getting a new hot airplane is not just about the airplane itself, it's about technology and infrastructure.

To some people here: I didn't mean to suggest that MiG-21-93 or later versions of F-16 are bad airplanes, but Gripen is the only 4th generation aircraft currently in active service in NATO inventory, and that's the FACT. F-22 and F-35 are surely much more advanced, but they are not in active duty yet, at least F-35. They are 5+ generation aircraft as well as Russian Su-35 and latest versions of Su-30 and MiG-29/35. But I repeat: None of these is in active duty yet.

Major difference between generations of warplanes is the adaptability and system design. For example, if you want Gripen to employ new type of Air-to-Air missile, you just upload a new software. This is not the case with older aircraft, however, some of them are capable of the same, although limited upgradeability, thus called 3+ generation.

Bimbac, what about Eurofighter?

Bimbac, what about Eurofighter?

It was already said: too expensive for a country like Poland (even for Belgium :D )…

I meant in comparison to the Gripen :)

Bimbac, what about Eurofighter?

Quite right, sorry ;) Just returned from 12h straight shift at work.

But it's not in active duty yet as well, there are a few squadrons in Europe that already have it, but they are not rated for combat yet. We are :)

The EF-2000 was designed for Air Superiority duties, while Gripen is primarily a homeland defence fighter. Gripen could be compared with Mirage 2000, F-16 and other tactical single-engine fighters, considering its performance, but in terms of performance vs. money and operational value, it is superior to all of these.

I would dare to compare Eurofighter with French Rafale and American F-22. Gripen is completely different league.

Understood! :D

As promised: http://www.canit.se/~griffon/aviation/gripen/

Nice site, thanks. A lovely airplane the Gripen is :)

That's the very thing I was trying to tell you all day ;)

F-22 and F-35 are surely much more advanced, but they are not in active duty yet, at least F-35. They are 5+ generation aircraft as well as Russian Su-35 and latest versions of Su-30 and MiG-29/35. But I repeat: None of these is in active duty yet.

This is innacurate. Su-35 is still on the drawing board, despite plans to bring it back with a new reshaped concept, both this and the Mig-35 are at least one generation behind F-22/35, for the simple fact they are simply modernized versions of the Su-27 and Mig-29, same way F-16 block 52+ is to the older F-16's. They still lack new features of newer aircraft like the Gripen, Typhoon and rafale. And they are NOT to be put as counters to the Lightning or the Raptor. That design is still yet to come.

The Gripen seems to have a powerfull anti-ship capabilty. Actualy the anti-ship role is where the design of the Gripen started as I just read. How do the newer F-16 compare to that capability ? I have never seen a Falcon armed with ASMs. Also is the anti-ship role is of any importance for Poland ?

But it's not in active duty yet as well, there are a few squadrons in Europe that already have it, but they are not rated for combat yet. We are :)

 

The EF-2000 was designed for Air Superiority duties, while Gripen is primarily a homeland defence fighter. Gripen could be compared with Mirage 2000, F-16 and other tactical single-engine fighters, considering its performance, but in terms of performance vs. money and operational value, it is superior to all of these.

 

I would dare to compare Eurofighter with French Rafale and American F-22. Gripen is completely different league.

Does it help when you are combat ready and your ass is kicked by a non combat ready fighter!

Anyway, F-16 is no match for the Vigen and the F-16 from the Italian Air Force inventory was tested extensively in air-to-air combat training but proved to be no match for Eurofighter Typhoon.

:pilotfly:

I think the Norway F-16 are capable of launching Penguin ASM, at least I've seen those missiles carried by their F-16s.

BTW, in a couple of years(or may be eariler) the question of new multirole fighter will be upon the governement of Bulgaria. It is very likely the winner of the competition to be decided the very same manner- under the table. The most agressive campaign is from US side- Boeing offers the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, Lockheed Martin the F-16C block 52. My opinion is that my country can't afford either of those aircrafts, no matter the offset packages.

Dont see much use of keep marketing the F-16, its getting long in the tooth. It only makes sense in the point of view of countering older russian aircraft under Mig-35 and Su-30MKI that are still abundant, but this could change pretty quick.

My country Flies F-16MLU's and now suddenly our north african neighbors are replacing their Mirage and Mig camel riders for Rafales and Su-30's. It will be a challenge to train with those in mind. :)

I sure hope for replacements in 15 years or something.

The Gripen seems to have a powerfull anti-ship capabilty. Actualy the anti-ship role is where the design of the Gripen started as I just read. How do the newer F-16 compare to that capability ? I have never seen a Falcon armed with ASMs. Also is the anti-ship role is of any importance for Poland ?

That's exactly why we all have joined the NATO ;). Polish Air Force could call us to deal with some naval intruders in the same way we would ask them to eliminate some Air Defence radars :)

To Pilotasso: Well, no one knows everything :( But generation differences are not made just by airframes, but also the systems. AESA, all-digital avionics and 2-axis thrust vectoring are the main features of 5th generation aircraft, and the newest MiG and Sue have all of them. Personally I would call them 4+ generation. As a fact, their aerodynamic features are unmatched so far.

To TucksonSonny: I think there is nothing wrong about being proud. I don't believe that the mere fact having Gripen would make us invincible. I just dared to say that Gripen is an excellent aircraft and weapon system, that's all.

And what about thrust to weight ratio?

I think it is one of the most important parameters for estimating dogfight performance.

Grippen T/W=8500*9,81/(80,5*10^3)=9,7

F-16b52+ T/W=28,984/26,463=1,1

It's significant difference. I hope the data are correct...

Both aircraft in "figter configuration". Note that typical F-16's fighter configuration MAY include more external fuel tanks. It was not specified in detail.

Anyway, F-16 is no match for the Vigen and[..]

Your a bit mixed up in there arent you? :)

That's exactly why we all have joined the NATO ;). Polish Air Force could call us to deal with some naval intruders in the same way we would ask them to eliminate some Air Defence radars :)

That sounds nice in theory, but does the czech airforce even has ASMs as a landlocked country ? :D How do you get away with that from your voters :)