Singapore down selects three fighters...

In article , AL wrote:

It is all about putting all your eggs in one basket. Everybody knows
about the Congress idiosyncrasies. Not to mention there may be plans to
do some kind of upgrade from type 52 F16 to near type 60.

Not likely. They may upgrade the block 52s but not to near block 60.
The airframe and systems are too different to make it economical.


IMHO, it is going to be a tossup between Rafale and the Typhoon. F15 is
too complicated and the road map is too short to operate. But Rafale
programme needs more money and the Typhoon roll out rate isn't exactly
fast.

It's all about loiter time and weapons. In a way, this almost mirrors the
Korean decision.
The fact that they operate F-16s becomes a plus for the F-15 wrt
engine support.

--
Harry Andreas
Engineering raconteur

In article ,
wrote:

On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 13:29:56 +1000, David Bromage
wrote:
AL wrote:
It is all about putting all your eggs in one basket. Everybody knows
about the Congress idiosyncrasies. Not to mention there may be plans to
do some kind of upgrade from type 52 F16 to near type 60.

IMHO, it is going to be a tossup between Rafale and the Typhoon. F15 is
too complicated and the road map is too short to operate.

I think the F-15 has a very good chance. Bear in mind their next door
neighbours are getting Su-30s.

If the want a counter to the Su-30, wouldn't something more modern
than the F-15 be approprate?

It's all about loiter time and weapons.
An amraam is faster than an Su-30.
And I can assure you that the newest F-15s have extremely modern
avionics and weapons. Unsurpassed.

--
Harry Andreas
Engineering raconteur

On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 17:39:30 +1000, David Bromage wrote:
If the F-15 isn't a likely contender, then yes it comes down to the
Rafale v Typhoon. At the risk of starting another "my plane is bigger
than your plane" flamewar, which of these two would you rather have if
your neighbour is getting Su-30s in 2-3 years?

The Typhoon, it's more manouvrable, has a better power-to-weight
ratio, and has supercruise.

--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(My real email address would be if you added 275
to it and reversed the last two letters).

On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 12:07:05 -0700, Harry Andreas wrote:
In article , AL wrote:

It is all about putting all your eggs in one basket. Everybody knows
about the Congress idiosyncrasies. Not to mention there may be plans to
do some kind of upgrade from type 52 F16 to near type 60.

Not likely. They may upgrade the block 52s but not to near block 60.
The airframe and systems are too different to make it economical.


IMHO, it is going to be a tossup between Rafale and the Typhoon. F15 is
too complicated and the road map is too short to operate. But Rafale
programme needs more money and the Typhoon roll out rate isn't exactly
fast.

It's all about loiter time and weapons. In a way, this almost mirrors the
Korean decision.
The fact that they operate F-16s becomes a plus for the F-15 wrt
engine support.

If commonality of parts was a strong criterion, they'd go for more
F-16s.

--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(My real email address would be if you added 275
to it and reversed the last two letters).

phil hunt wrote:

On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 11:27:11 +0800, AL wrote:


It is all about putting all your eggs in one basket. Everybody knows
about the Congress idiosyncrasies.



"Everyone"? I don't.

The stopped sale of laser ring gyro for the A4, you can buy but you
can't have AMRAAM . Just to mention the few that is in public domain.






So when will the final decision be made?



End 2004?

--
AL
New anti-terrorism tool, "Fly naked"
http://www.alfredivy.per.sg

Yes, the newest F-15s is most impressive. But there isn't any planned
future development. All funds are directed towards F-35.

If you are considering F-15K/T against other aircraft, that is
definitely not good.
Interestingly models of aircraft operated by the Malaysia and Indonesia
did not make it to the shortlist. There are a million ways to interpret
this. One of them is to avoid any hesitation by the pilots when going
head to head?

Harry Andreas wrote:

It's all about loiter time and weapons.
An amraam is faster than an Su-30.
And I can assure you that the newest F-15s have extremely modern
avionics and weapons. Unsurpassed.




--
AL
New anti-terrorism tool, "Fly naked"
http://www.alfredivy.per.sg

On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 10:33:45 +0800, AL wrote:

phil hunt wrote:

On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 11:27:11 +0800, AL wrote:

It is all about putting all your eggs in one basket. Everybody knows
about the Congress idiosyncrasies.

"Everyone"? I don't.

The stopped sale of laser ring gyro for the A4, you can buy but you
can't have AMRAAM . Just to mention the few that is in public domain.

Why wouldn't the USA sell AMRAAM?

Still, your main argument is right: Europeans have few problems
selling the latest military kit to people.


--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(My real email address would be if you added 275
to it and reversed the last two letters).

This side of the pond, you can buy the AMRAAM, but you can't get it
delivered. Something to do about not introducing the latest weapon in
the region.

Israeli stuff is really good and they no qualms about releasing source
code. My theory is that they are not so hot on world domination.

phil hunt wrote:

On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 10:33:45 +0800, AL wrote:


phil hunt wrote:



On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 11:27:11 +0800, AL wrote:



It is all about putting all your eggs in one basket. Everybody knows
about the Congress idiosyncrasies.


"Everyone"? I don't.



The stopped sale of laser ring gyro for the A4, you can buy but you
can't have AMRAAM . Just to mention the few that is in public domain.



Why wouldn't the USA sell AMRAAM?

Still, your main argument is right: Europeans have few problems
selling the latest military kit to people.





--
AL
New anti-terrorism tool, "Fly naked"
http://www.alfredivy.per.sg

In article ,
wrote:

On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 12:07:05 -0700, Harry Andreas
wrote:
In article , AL wrote:

It is all about putting all your eggs in one basket. Everybody knows
about the Congress idiosyncrasies. Not to mention there may be plans to
do some kind of upgrade from type 52 F16 to near type 60.

Not likely. They may upgrade the block 52s but not to near block 60.
The airframe and systems are too different to make it economical.


IMHO, it is going to be a tossup between Rafale and the Typhoon. F15 is
too complicated and the road map is too short to operate. But Rafale
programme needs more money and the Typhoon roll out rate isn't exactly
fast.

It's all about loiter time and weapons. In a way, this almost mirrors the
Korean decision.
The fact that they operate F-16s becomes a plus for the F-15 wrt
engine support.

If commonality of parts was a strong criterion, they'd go for more
F-16s.

Like the Koreans, I think they want loiter time plus 2 engines.
While the Koreans worry about mountainous terrain and no airfields,
Singapore worries about lots of water and no airfields.
The Koreans of course, wanted a ground attack multi-role a/c
while Singapore looks to want air superiority, but their concerns are
similar.

--
Harry Andreas
Engineering raconteur

In article , AL wrote:

Yes, the newest F-15s is most impressive. But there isn't any planned
future development. All funds are directed towards F-35.

All US funds...maybe. There are upgrades programs underway for
AESA radar on F-15Cs. Probably other upgrades, too.
Plus Macair...oops, Boeing, will put in their own money if a sale looks in
the offing.


If you are considering F-15K/T against other aircraft, that is
definitely not good.

No, just a comparison of concerns, not missions.


Interestingly models of aircraft operated by the Malaysia and Indonesia
did not make it to the shortlist. There are a million ways to interpret
this. One of them is to avoid any hesitation by the pilots when going
head to head?

That's certainly a consideration. Plus the recognition factor when US forces
are in the area. USN a/c not likely to fire on an F-15.

--
Harry Andreas
Engineering raconteur