Ofrecimiento de Mirage F1 a la Argentina
- Tema iniciado stalder
- Fecha de inicio
- Estado
Guitro01 dijo:Las contra medidas del Mirage-2000-5 ya les rompio el tuje a los Jonis, en Red Flag, si el Spectre es mejor, debe ser de **** madre
Hmmm....digamos que el Spectre "podria pinchar" el radar contrario y volver "invisible" al Rafale
Saludos
SuperEtendard dijo:El tema es que mientras todos seguian con radares "convencionales", Rusia con el MIG-31 y Francia con el Rafale pusieron en servicio los primeros aviones con radares de exploracion electronica(y pregunto por operativos)
Saludos
El Rafale en el EdA francés, sólo hay un escuadrón equipado con ellos y la misma Dassault ha reconocido que llevan 3 o 4 años de retraso con respecto al Typhoon en el desarrollo por ejemplo de radares AESA, eso sin mencionar al Superhornet, osea que como mucho es una superioridad muy pero que muy puntual y teorica, ya que sobre el papel el EdA francés tampoco está equipado con ellos sino a un nivel ínfimo y habría que ver el grado de operatividad real.
M
mendogroso
CALIFFA dijo:
EL SU-30 MK es un caza.
S
SnAkE_OnE
SuperEtendard dijo:cuantos aviones USA tienen radares AESA
por ahora que yo sepa solamente los F-22A y los F/A-18E/F ya entregados a sus bases respectivas
S
SnAkE_OnE
Kilua dijo:
que experiencia? en este caso la mejor , ya que el MM-38 y el AM-39 por la participacion que tuvieron en 1982 , dispararon automaticamente su precio incluso casi cuadruplicandose por tener el sello de "probado en combate" y ademas...con el equipamiento original , con un R-530 diseñado para derribar bombarderos rusos con un RCS grande como un estadio de futbol y los Magic que eran inferiores a los AIM-9L y ante el perfil y las condiciones del combate mismo (con pocos minutos de sobrevuelo de las islas y con un mayor consumo de combustible a baja cota por parte de los deltas contra los Harrier que estaban "en su salsa")
S
SnAkE_OnE
KF86 dijo:
cuando tenes razon , tenes razon , los de Elmendorff en Alaska no?
S
SnAkE_OnE
ahi te di la justificacion del porque del mal desempeño en combate aereo en 1982...
SnAkE_OnE dijo:
A eso me parece que se le debería agregar:
- el mal entrenamiento de los pilotos argentinos en combate aire-aire
- el uso inapropiado de las armas aire-aire
- la escasa maniobrabilidad en combate cerrado del MIII
- El superior entrenamiento de los pilotos británicos
Un saludo
Queria hacerles una pregunta, hablando de radares AESA, el radar de este tipo israeli, esta operativo en algun avion???
Saludos
Saludos
M
mendogroso
no el 2052 se ofresio para los Mig-29 si ganaban el contrato para la indiaTabano1973 dijo:
Derruido dijo:Y por que pensas que se me caen las babas por el Rafale.
En el barrio ¿Quien tiene EF?
Saludis
Bue...no todo el mundo piensa que el Rafale es inferior al Tifon:
De un foro sueco...donde se habla de Grippen, Rafale y Tifon.
ppp56; your arguments are totally FALSE August 22 2006, 9:35 AM
AND Lies on NO ground at all.
Substanciate your claims for a LAUGH.
In reality, Typhoon is far behind BOTH (se refiere al Rafale y Grippen) in A2A and A2G capabilities and if you insist i'll have pleasure in proving this point to you.
For the time being swallow your superioricist pride and try to cope with the REAL world.
The only superiority for Typhoon is in the Eurofighter commercials.
"PPP this, PPP that, quit whining because you cant hack the fact the Gripens got limitations and flaws."
Because according to YOU Typhoon doesnt have any?
I can figure a few:
Range doesn't really make an impression with ANY useful playload does it?
Typhoon have ONLY three "Wet" hard points, its central hard point is limited to a 1,000 litre fuel tank, the other in a normal configuration are 1,500 litre.
This leaves you with NO way to carry more than a GBU 12s and AAMs for a long range strike mission with external tanks.
The futur Litening pod will take the central hardpoint position limiting the range further.
Station 4 and 10 are limited to 500KG/1000 lbs GBU 12s and cannot carry Storm Shadow, there is no space for it and the pylon itself can't cope with the weight.
"I said the Gripen was over gadgetised, being filled with things that make it more expensive which it wont be able to use to its full potential due to it's lacks in areas such as payload and range."
So according to you, the best country in Europe out of NATO for Electronic warfare doesn't know that they are doing? Arrogant troll.
"Gripen is a much less capable aircraft than Eurogfighter in terms of radar, electronics ect,"
PROVE it. Radar-wise they are getting their act together faster than the Eurofighter consortium, the SELEX radar is stricly a private venture as for Captor, its performances are not too hot compraed to RDY-2.
Typhoon AESA is still unfunded, and i am sure on one thing, Gripen ECMs are WAY superior to anything BAe and the rest can come up with, just in xcase you didn't notice just YET, Sweeden and France have been the European conutries which have developed the most advanced ECM protection suites and Electronic Offensive systems.
BOTH Gripen AND Rafale already have an Offensive SEAD capabiltiy.
"but sure Gripen can be upgraded to hell and made better and better but its smaller size compared to Eurofighter will severely restict what can be done with it"
Size is all you can understand about aircrafts, design, aerodynamics are as remote to your level of comprehension as the asteroid belt is from hearth apparently.
Fuel IS calculated by FRACTION. That of Typhoon is LOW.
Playload is calculated in terms of %age of airframe empty weight. That of Typhoon is LOW.
To summerise: Empty vs Max TOW / Fuel fraction.
Try this one you might well have a nasty surprise...
Basic Mass (Empty) 11,000kg (24,250lb)
Maximum (Take-off) 23,500kg (51,809lb)
Source: http://www.eurogighter.com
WHAT, ONLY 13.500 kg internal + external playload?
"above all it will drive up the cost of the Gripen up and up making it less attractive to Gripens target customer and in doing so killing all exports and therefore the program since Sweden cant afford/isnt going to buy them."
Just in case it didn't hit a nerve YET. Gripen IS the European export market CHAMPION and this for a very good reason despite BAe skills for selling wooden chariots for Rolls-Royces.
"Your only arguement seems to be the same as Thunders, the old "oh but there's delays in weapon integration therefore lets pretend it cant ever carry them",
No delays there my friend and this is NOT my argument, my argument IS that Typhoon design is of an older technologic generation and inferior as an airframe.
AS FAR as Eurofighter are concerned, the Typhoon laggs BEHIND in every single developement point by a FAIR margin mainly due to developement time and lack of proper invesment.
MANY of Typhoon features are actually of an oldeer technology, at least in the case of Rafale it's even visible only looking at the specs.
Typhoon doesnt and WILL NOT have totally passive AAM BVR engagementsd which are Rafale F-2 capabilities right NOW.
"fact is we'll compare what weapons are advertised as going with the Eurofighter and compare that to Gripen, and in this case the EF carries a larger mud moving load."
So far it only manage to better the playload of Mirage 2000 and AGAIN it's totally missleading to compare their tonage, %age is how it should be compared.
"Did I state Gripen was lagging behind operationally? NO, did I claim EF to be the better platform? Yes, is it? YES!!"
In your WET dreams. It is ONLY a larger platform, better remains to be proven operationally only your bunch keep bubling "BIG's BEAUTIFULL" which is for a large part due to a cultural complexion, not reality.
"As for your response, stop mincing your words, if you think the EF is worse then say it and if you think the EF is better than say it."
The Typhoon does NOT better in operational reality for playload and fuel fraction period as for A2A capabiltiews they still are lower for now.
" When you say, PPP I think Eurofighter is worse, Rob I think it not worse, you are just admitting to your post being a complete flame, with no relevance to the topic. Two words... "Grow Up"..."
>>>"Envy is as evil a thing as arrogance." -- Theodore Roosevelt<<<
I think you guys are mad with ENVY, taking credit for a mostly German design which have the MOST obvious flaws of all 4th generation aircraft.
y sigue asi:
I need to double check all the stats, but I'm pretty sure the F-16 Block 52 is a clear step above the Gripen. Also, the radar is definitely MUCH better on the latest F-16s."
Absolute nonsense.
The Gripen Radar is the strongest radar in europe with 120nm range, over 25 targets at the same time, advanced SAR, seemless multimode in air/ground.
Couple that with a very small RCS.
The parts not made in Sweden for Gripen is dumb components such as fuel pumps, landing gear and about 40% of the engine. Most of the avionics and overall design is Swedish. Eurofighter is lagging behind both Gripen and Rafale in capability by several years. By the time EF is up to Gripen performance the new Enhanced Gripen will already be available. To even talk about F-16 is ridiculous.
And again as pointed out about the maturity and superiority of the Gripen radar vs the EF, the BVR missile METEOR is integrated on Gripen just because the EF radar can not handle the long range envelope.
Muy interesante comentario
-----
"It had once been planned to use only the Eurofighter for Meteor's airborne trials, but now the Gripen will lead the flight test team as the only available 'mature' platform. "
-- 17 January 2006 Meteor BVRAAM Operational status
Saludos
Preguntaba eso por que me gustaria ver unos cuantos F-18 en las FAA y el COAN, y de esos algunos con radar AESA.
Soñar que le dicen, vio
Saludos
Soñar que le dicen, vio
Saludos
SnAkE_OnE dijo:
The AN/APG-79 AESA entered Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) in September 2003 and began Operational Evaluation (OPEVAL) in July 2006. It is planned to replace the AN/APG-73 from 2007.
Lo que significa que actualmente no hay ningun F/A-18E operativo con APG-79.
Saludos
Eso no esta demostrado, ni se puede sacar esa conclusion por la existencia de 2 combates aire-aire, es decir, caza de superioridad vs caza de superioridad.jet_jet dijo:
Que pruebas existen que se hizo un mal uso de las armas aire-aire existentes?jet_jet dijo:
Esto no es asi. Si es verdad que relativamente el MIII es menos maniobrable que el Sea Harrier. Pero los britanicos antes de venir entrenaron con los MIII del AdA y sorpresa: fueron diezmados los Sea Harriers.jet_jet dijo:
No me cabe duda que los pilotos de la RN son de lo mejor. Pero no demostraron en MLV ser particularmente superiores a los pilotos argentinos.jet_jet dijo:
Como bien dijo Snake, la "derrota" en el combate aereo se debio principalmente a la situacion tactica que tuvo que enfrentar el MIII (y los Dagger) mas que a ningun otro motivo.
Saludos
- Estado
Temas similares
- Zona Militar
- Zona Militar en Youtube
- Zona Militar
- Zona Militar en Youtube
- Zona Militar
- Zona Militar en Youtube