Which aircraft??

[Artoo]

Currently my country is in the middle of choosing a new multirole aircraft. There are three candidates:

http://spin.ict.pwr.wroc.pl/hornet/serwisy/hangar/f16falcon/male/f-1650m.jpg
F-16C/D

http://venus.ci.uw.edu.pl/~animal/military.pl/samoloty/gripen/gripen_03s.jpg
JAS-39 Gripen

http://venus.ci.uw.edu.pl/~animal/military.pl/samoloty/mirage2000/mirage2000_06s.jpg
Mirage 2000

I know that some of you are interested in aircraft (hopefully most:D) So I was wondering what would you choose...
Please vote along with some opinions if you wish:)

My vote goes for the Gripen because for me it seems to be the best choice... Reasons?? It's the newest aircraft of the three mentioned and it's got a lot of room for development.

[trebmal_ca]

the Gripen has very advanced electronics, the mirage and the falcon are getting old, though the mirage is an insanely fast plane.
(above mach 2 if I remember correctly)

[GhostTX]

Poland's a member of N.A.T.O, right?

I figured it'd be in line to get the new Euro-Fighter (EF2000, I think) that's being/been developed.

http://www.fighter-planes.com/info/ef2000.htm

[d-eye]

the EF has been in development for years, go the Gripen :D

[Higaran]

F-16, tryed and true, just maybe should be upgraded a little.

[BunsenHoneydew]

F-16. I believe the chief test pilot for Saab crashed two Gripens,
once during a flight test, and once during an airshow. What does this
have do with anything? If the chief test pilot cannot retain control
of his/her aircraft, how can a regular pilot be expected to do the same?

Don't know much about Mirages, though.

Bunsen

[Paladrache]

Me likes the F-22, and the Saab Gripen.
As for old school aircraft, I really love the Harrier Jump Jet, and the SR71 Blackbird. My old flight instructor flew Blackbirds some time ago, and badass they were.

[Liberator]

I would say get some F-18s. The payload on the 22s is too small for a multirole fighter, and unless they've changed it, it's mostly internal. F-14 Super Tomcat also makes for a good multirole fighter, IMHO.

[Artoo]

Well guys, I prefere the F/A-18 too, but those three above are the ONLY candidates. F-18 got sacked for financial reasons...

@GhostTX: yeah Poland is a member of NATO, but EF is not an option due to costs... (same goes for F-22)

[The5thElephant]

AARGGHHHHH WHY NOT THE F/A-18!! I love that plane. Stupid money problems. Id probably go for one of the F-16's. Light, maneuvarble and fast. Also is good at both bombing and dogfighting. But unlike the F-18 isn't as good at doing both at once.

[Harmanoff]

Being a swede i'd wish for it to be Gripen obviously. Poor Saab, everytime they seem to sell a few planes the order get cancelled. The latest was a few planes for the Czech republic. The floods became so expensive they decided to cancel the contract.

This was the last time Sweden developed a fighter i promise. Our military aviation program is out.

[Artoo]

Are you sure of that Harmanoff?? That would be a big shame:(
I've seen Draken, Viggen and Gripen live in flight and they all are great machines.... I'd love to see what could Saab come up with next.

@Trebmal: I've looked up Mirage 2000s speed and it's MACH 2,2+ at high altitude of course...

[oneredpanther]

While the majority of the world's air forces are currently retooling their primary strike and defence groups with multirole combat aircraft, given the current state of affairs target-wise, it would be wiser to asses these aircraft on their ability to perform as low-altitude, stealthy bombers rather than high-speed fighters.

Actual aircraft-to-aircraft airborne combat has not been seen in earnest for 20 years now, lessening the role of dedicated fighter aircraft.

This is why the Royal Air Force's Panavia Tornado F3 variant and the USAF's F-16 are being replaced with the Eurofighter Typhoon and F-35 respectively.

I'd probably vote for the gripen, owing to it's large external stores capability (8000Kg on the "B" variant). While the engines produce around 15% less thrust than the F-16, the Gripen is lighter and can accomodate an extra 800kg of ordinance over the F-16.

It's a shame Poland doesn't have the option of the Eurofighter, because it's a superior aircraft to every fighter in the world, save for the F-35, which costs around twice as much and can't match the EF2000 for air-surface delivery....

[Mikk]

Rafaele carries 9000+ kg. Is it too expensive?

[Artoo]

Mikk: That's a yes...BIG yes in fact

Panth: Some good stuff you said there...
Going along your philosophy air superiority could be partially taken care of by arround 20+ (not sure) Mig-29s we already have only upgraded to some reasonable standarts and with western avionics and weapons.
I heard that in case of choosing F-16 Poland might eventually upgrade to the JSF (F-35)
The sad part is that the offset value is said to be the most important fact at the moment because of candidate aircrafts similarities in performance and price...

However I'm not as big a fan of the EF2000 as you are. Not sure about other aspects (I admit I don't know it that much) but it seems to lack in stealth judging by its shape (while saying that I'm looking at a 1:72 scale model of it standing on my shelf).

Some time ago there also was a rumour that Germany ofered Poland EF2000 engines for Mig-29. Most local experts had a good laugh out of it:) Very unlikely.

[d-eye]

Originally posted by The5thElephant
AARGGHHHHH WHY NOT THE F/A-18!! I love that plane.

pity it doesn't have legs for the long haul, and each new version is getting worse.

[d-eye]

Originally posted by BunsenHoneydew
F-16. I believe the chief test pilot for Saab crashed two Gripens,
once during a flight test, and once during an airshow. What does this
have do with anything? If the chief test pilot cannot retain control
of his/her aircraft, how can a regular pilot be expected to do the same?


All aircraft crash, 3 in 13 years is not a bad record at all. Particularly when the first one was in the test phase and it was the pilots first time flying the aircraft (crashed on landing due to Pilot induced oscilliations which came about due to conditions and flight control software problems - which was later modified)

The second was in the first series fighter (as opposed to test version) and the report for that can be found here (http://www.canit.se/~griffon/aviation/text/gripcras.htm)

The third was during a 1v1 combat simulation, the report of which is here (http://www.canit.se/~griffon/aviation/text/gripen_cr_990920.html)

on the other hand if you want the f-16 crash statistics go to http://www.jetsafety.com/f16crash.htm which for the last four years totals 48 - yes I know there is more of them flying .

The point is flying is dangerous,(especially military flying) and a continual learning game, as long as you learn from each crash, and try to avoid it next time then everything is fine.

just a side point, parts of the world seem to be coming very risk adverse, which is not necessarily a good thing.

[Mikk]

Too bad. But the F-16 is good looking too.

[Vengeance]

mmm...i would definetly choose the Gripen...

since it's cool-loking and swedish....just like me ;)

[Thaum]

Originally posted by OneRedPanther
While the majority of the world's air forces are currently retooling their primary strike and defence groups with multirole combat aircraft, given the current state of affairs target-wise, it would be wiser to asses these aircraft on their ability to perform as low-altitude, stealthy bombers rather than high-speed fighters.

Actual aircraft-to-aircraft airborne combat has not been seen in earnest for 20 years now, lessening the role of dedicated fighter aircraft.

This is why the Royal Air Force's Panavia Tornado F3 variant and the USAF's F-16 are being replaced with the Eurofighter Typhoon and F-35 respectively.

I'd probably vote for the gripen, owing to it's large external stores capability (8000Kg on the "B" variant). While the engines produce around 15% less thrust than the F-16, the Gripen is lighter and can accomodate an extra 800kg of ordinance over the F-16.

It's a shame Poland doesn't have the option of the Eurofighter, because it's a superior aircraft to every fighter in the world, save for the F-35, which costs around twice as much and can't match the EF2000 for air-surface delivery....

Hey Panth do you have any comparisons of the EF compared to other fighters/strike aircraft. I was always wondering how it would compare to the newer American aircraft.
Also when is it going to be active service. It seems to have been in development for years and years.

As for the original question I would have to say the F16 as it seems to have the most variants and have tried and true weapons systems. However having said that I am not too sure about the other two aircraft, so I am really talking out of my hat.

[Artoo]

lol no future for the Mirage on these boards so far...

I agree, F-16 does have a lot of variants, but it seems to be getting old...

[The5thElephant]

Well it is getting old, but that doesn't mean it isn't a very very good fighter plane. It is extremely maneuvarable, has a state-of-the-art cockpit system (only beaten by the F/A-18's cockpit) and only some Russian planes can beat it in a dogfight.

[Artoo]

I never said that it's bad... I respect this airplanes abbilities and how it did in combat... By saying it's old I mean that Gripen for example has a lot more of development ahead and ways to improve it, while the F-16's upgrades are taking more and more of what's left in the airframe...