PDA

View Full Version : is grypen any use to uk


mr fish
29th Jan 2008, 15:19
it seems we have a lot of investment in this aircraft, with the current tranch3 problems and what looks to be a price hike, as any thought gone into some sort of ' high-low' mix ,e.g. f15-f16?

ORAC
29th Jan 2008, 15:23
No point for at least 2 reasons.

1. We're tied into buying Typhoon anyway, so no savings, in fact major expense.

2. We end up with one one of a unique type with all the additional support and training costs.

Bottom line, the costs go through the roof and we end up with a less capable mix than a pure Typhoon force.

Jackonicko
29th Jan 2008, 16:00
However, if you ****-canned the carriers and JSF, and bought tankers, Nimrod R replacement, and a horde of Gripens instead (on top of Typhoon, Sentinel et al), then you'd have a really useful, deployable, supportable, and cost effective air force.....

soddim
29th Jan 2008, 16:30
Now you're talking, Jacko.

How on Earth are the Navy going to defend their carriers anyway?

minigundiplomat
29th Jan 2008, 20:55
How on Earth are the Navy going to defend their carriers anyway?


Defend them from who? By the time they arrive, the MOD won't be able to afford the fuel for them, and all the sailors will have left the RN.

althenick
29th Jan 2008, 21:45
However, if you ****-canned the carriers and JSF, and bought tankers, Nimrod R replacement, and a horde of Gripens instead (on top of Typhoon, Sentinel et al), then you'd have a really useful, deployable, supportable, and cost effective air force.....

But phuque all of a credible Navy but **** why should anyone care about that eh Jacko? :mad:

...Sh1t! i've just bitten :O

AlJH
30th Jan 2008, 11:56
However, if you ****-canned the carriers and JSF, and bought tankers, Nimrod R replacement, and a horde of Gripens instead (on top of Typhoon, Sentinel et al), then you'd have a really useful, deployable, supportable, and cost effective air force.....

You'd have a really deployable force, capable of air defence/GR anywhere in the World. If you shifted Australia 200 miles West on the map. Remember that little gem?

danieloakworth
30th Jan 2008, 12:52
Grippen is too much of an old fashioned 'point defence fighter'. Bugger all fuel or loitering capability. One of the first requirements of a modern fighter should be the ability to stay airborne for 6 hours+ without having to live on the tanker.

Double Zero
30th Jan 2008, 16:50
I presume / hope that's a dig about the very sorry story of the tanker procurement - or rather not procurement.

Otherwise we're going to need Burt Rutan & lighter weapons or airships...

As far as the original idea of using Gripen goes, was that a joke too ?! Another type to support with all that goes with it , and we meanwhile desperately need just about everything except fighters.

There, a bite for your hook. :)

danieloakworth
30th Jan 2008, 18:52
Not a joke at all. Grippen, tanked up, carries less fuel than a clean F3. Over the battlefield the requirement is for your AD force to gain and maintain air superiority. Therefore he needs to be able to hang around for a while without having to constantly run back to the tanker for gas.

So you're going to bin fighters because they're not currently deployed abroad. You must be Air rank.

Double Zero
31st Jan 2008, 08:56
Unless ' Air Rank' is rhyming slang, doesn't apply here...

I was thinking we more or less 'have' Typhoon, meanwhile the tanker, transport, helo & even maybe at this late stage Nimrod projects are in big trouble -and don't get me started on the state of the Navy !

AlJH
31st Jan 2008, 10:55
Double Zero,

Do you mean the Flotilla?

BossEyed
31st Jan 2008, 11:10
Can we get something straight first?

Is it spelt "Grypen" or "Grippen"?

It must be one of those two... Right? :rolleyes:

M609
31st Jan 2008, 11:19
No...... :D

Nimrod Liney
31st Jan 2008, 12:11
Its JAS 39 Gripen

maxburner
31st Jan 2008, 19:18
JAS 39 is a very nice, capable fighter. But it's not in the same league as Typhoon.

OCCWMF
1st Feb 2008, 15:43
I told 'em we already got one....

Jackonicko
1st Feb 2008, 16:08
:D :D :D :D

but does it count if you have to go to Linkopping to fly it?

(Hmmm? A weekend in lovely LK, with all those lovely Swedish girls, and fly a Gripen.....)

backseatjock
1st Feb 2008, 18:14
Jacko, you must be thinking of a different Linkoping to the one I know! Little in the way of a good night out or lovely Swedish girls there mate - now Stockholm is another matter entirely......:)

Feck
1st Feb 2008, 19:40
You clearly haven't tried Plata on a Thursday night :E