₦airaland Forum

jln115:
Was quoting an accredited Australian news site......as i said there were definitely Australian defence personal at the exercise and that's what they said.

But yes you make a good point!!

Politics mate

Aussies had a political issue around the F35 and 22 with different parties running on either as part of their platform for the replacement of their current fleet.

It lead to lots of weird stories circulating. I remember when that sh1t was going down, it was a weird time for everyone.

iblawi:
You are still trying to complicate thing when you've actually shot yourself on the foot.

South Africa have nothing like upgrades on their Gripens.

Please just accept that your initial claim was fault cause Mk4 is coming with Gripen E/F in 2017. For now there is nothing like 0.1m2 object detection for gripen.

What is code and why does south Africa keep buying it from Sweden?

(15 lines last year)

Henry240:
It is a Gripen vs the F-16. However you South-Africans managed to drag the JF-17 and Nigeria into it. It's obvious you Saffers are obsessed with Nigeria(Nigerians).

Uhhh

Do you want me to start bringing up quotes of yours from a few pages back?

Or post the article from beegugugs blog... The one where you guys immediately compared it to the Gripen as soon as you heard you were getting it?

Projection on your part

Henry240:
Take a look at the T-50. It seems to me like an SU-35 covered in stealth coating.

Henry talks big one second

Then runs when challenged

Yoh, JL my broe, I though Abraham Linkol made if illegal to own people like this

iblawi:
Are you drunk or something?

In what way is what I posted different from what you gave?

Post-2013

NOAR AESA (JAS-39 C/D PLUS, post-2013)

For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 10~11 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 18~20 km+
For RCS 0.1 m2 class target: 56~62 km+
For RCS 1.0 m2 class target: 100~110 km+
For RCS 5.0 m2 class target: 150~165 km+
For RCS 10.0 m2 class target: 178~195 km+

Look at the pic again it seems you have problems with interpretation of graphical representation.
If you are blind it was well stated in your source that 2014. Which gripen was dilevered to South Africa in 2014+?

This is your own spec MK3 pre-2013.

PS-05A (JAS-39 A/B/C/D)

For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 5~6 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 9~10 km+
For RCS 0.1 m2 class target: 27~32 km+
For RCS 1.0 m2 class target: 48~56 km+
For RCS 5.0 m2 class target: 72~84 km+
For RCS 10.0 m2 class target: 85~100 km+

Literally quoting blogs

Literally had to throw my laptop in the trash

Henry240:
Chinese J-20

Desperately he tries to change the topic....

Henry240:
We are done.

Knowing he cannot substantiate his answer

He runs

Henry240:
My response has always being that the JF-17 is better than the Gripen C/D. Nothing has changed.

He repeats himself over and over

Hoping his fairy god mother will grant his wish

Henry240:
The fact is, when all is considered, the JF-17 is much better than the Gripen.


You wasted $65million on a $25 million jet, now you are struggling to maintain it and butthurt at the same time.

How is it better?

Simple question

Henry240:
- All those to console yourself.


- the JF-17 is a light weight jet, there's no basis for comparison with a medium weight F-16. I agree.

However SAAB does compare, an they compared the Gripen C/D to an F-16 Block 40. A jet built in 1980.



Oh yes, the JF-17 is better than the Gripen for sure. You paid $65 million for a JF-17 made in Europe.

So you ignore how the Gripen is better

Then tell us that the JF17 is better (despite this)

And then continue your lie about the block 40?

Are you this delusional or just trolling?

Henry240:
2 Multi-functional-Displays as well as analog equipment.

It is a 3++ Gen fighter for sure.

Multi function displays make 3rd gen?

Stick an iPad into a Hawker Hurricane and now it's 3+ +

Holy sh1t: into the trash your post goes

iblawi:
@jln115 (copied)
Here's a list of radar ranges for some popular fighters. I found it compiled on F-16.net (let me see who the author is):

APG-77 AESA (F-22A)

For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 20 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 35 km+
For RCS 0.1 m2 class target: 112 km+
For RCS 1.0 m2 class target: 200 km+
For RCS 5.0 m2 class target: 300 km+
For RCS 10.0 m2 class target: 355 km+


CAESAR AESA (EF-2000 Tranch3, post-2015 with 1,500 T/Rs)

For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 18~21 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 32~38 km+
For RCS 0.1 m2 class target: 104~122 km+
For RCS 1.0 m2 class target: 185~216 km+
For RCS 5.0 m2 class target: 278~324 km+
For RCS 10.0 m2 class target: 330~385 km+


APG-63 V2/V3/V4 AESA (F-15C/E/SG)

For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 14~19 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 25~33 km+
For RCS 0.1 m2 class target: 81~104 km+
For RCS 1.0 m2 class target: 144~185 km+
For RCS 5.0 m2 class target: 215~278 km+
For RCS 10.0 m2 class target: 255~330 km+


APG-81 AESA (F-35A/B/C)

For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 16 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 28 km+
For RCS 0.1 m2 class target: 90 km+
For RCS 1.0 m2 class target: 160 km+
For RCS 5.0 m2 class target: 240 km+
For RCS 10.0 m2 class target: 285 km+


APG-79 AESA (F/A-18E/F and EA-18G, Block 2 and 3)

For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 13 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 22 km+
For RCS 0.1 m2 class target: 72 km+
For RCS 1.0 m2 class target: 128 km+
For RCS 5.0 m2 class target: 192 km+
For RCS 10.0 m2 class target: 228 km+


CAPTOR (EF-2000 Tranch 1 and 2)

For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 12 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 22 km+
For RCS 0.1 m2 class target: 70 km+
For RCS 1.0 m2 class target: 124 km+
For RCS 5.0 m2 class target: 185 km+
For RCS 10.0 m2 class target: 220 km+


RBE-2 AESA (Rafale F4, post-2012)

For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 11~13 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 20~23 km+
For RCS 0.1 m2 class target: 62~73 km+
For RCS 1.0 m2 class target: 110~130 km+
For RCS 5.0 m2 class target: 165~195 km+
For RCS 10.0 m2 class target: 195~230 km+


APG-80 AESA (F-16E)

For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 11 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 20 km+
For RCS 0.1 m2 class target: 62 km+
For RCS 1.0 m2 class target: 110 km+
For RCS 5.0 m2 class target: 165 km+
For RCS 10.0 m2 class target: 195 km+


NOAR AESA (JAS-39 C/D PLUS, post-2013)

For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 10~11 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 18~20 km+
For RCS 0.1 m2 class target: 56~62 km+
For RCS 1.0 m2 class target: 100~110 km+
For RCS 5.0 m2 class target: 150~165 km+
For RCS 10.0 m2 class target: 178~195 km+


APG-63 (F-15C)

For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 9 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 16 km+
For RCS 0.1 m2 class target: 51 km+
For RCS 1.0 m2 class target: 90 km+
For RCS 5.0 m2 class target: 135 km+
For RCS 10.0 m2 class target: 160 km+


RBE-2 PESA (Rafale F1/F2/F3)

For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 7~9 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 13~15 km+
For RCS 0.1 m2 class target: 41~49 km+
For RCS 1.0 m2 class target: 73~87 km+
For RCS 5.0 m2 class target: 110~130 km+
For RCS 10.0 m2 class target: 130~154 km+


APG-73 (F/A-18E/F, Block1)

For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 5~6 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 10~11 km+
For RCS 0.1 m2 class target: 32~36 km+
For RCS 1.0 m2 class target: 56~64 km+
For RCS 5.0 m2 class target: 84~96 km+
For RCS 10.0 m2 class target: 100~114 km+


PS-05A (JAS-39 A/B/C/D)

For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 5~6 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 9~10 km+
For RCS 0.1 m2 class target: 27~32 km+
For RCS 1.0 m2 class target: 48~56 km+
For RCS 5.0 m2 class target: 72~84 km+
For RCS 10.0 m2 class target: 85~100 km+


APG-68 V9 (F-16 C/D/I and RDY-2 iM2000-5MK2 and -9)

For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 4~5 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 8~9 km+
For RCS 0.1 m2 class target: 25~30 km+
For RCS 1.0 m2 class target: 46~54 km+
For RCS 5.0 m2 class target: 66~80 km+
For RCS 10.0 m2 class target: 78~95 km+


RDY (M2000-5)

For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 4~5 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 7~8 km+
For RCS 0.1 m2 class target: 22~27 km+
For RCS 1.0 m2 class target: 40~47 km+
For RCS 5.0 m2 class target: 60~70 km+
For RCS 10.0 m2 class target: 70~84 km+


APG-68 V5 (F-16 C/D)

For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 3~4 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 6~7 km+
For RCS 0.1 m2 class target: 18~22 km+
For RCS 1.0 m2 class target: 32~40 km+
For RCS 5.0 m2 class target: 50~60 km+
For RCS 10.0 m2 class target: 60~72 km+


APG-67 V4 (T-50)

For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 3~4 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 5~6 km+
For RCS 0.1 m2 class target: 17~20 km+
For RCS 1.0 m2 class target: 30~36 km+
For RCS 5.0 m2 class target: 45~53 km+
For RCS 10.0 m2 class target: 53~63 km+

(He quoted a blog)

Henry240:
All parameters considered, the JF-17 is a significantly better option.



So, the MIG-29 is now a 3rd Generation fighter jet. South-Africans would not kill me


A jet designed to compete against the F-16 is now a 3rd generation aircraft.


Is the SU-27 also 3rd Generation?

Which parameters?

How is it better?

Henry240:
I can tell you, the JF-17 is better than the Gripen C/D.

How?

(You know when henry120 is beat, he just starts repeating the same statement over and over)

Henry240:
Yet, the SAAF struggles to put them in the air.


"Ironic much?". So what can the SAAF afford?

Does the SAAF have the same budget as it did in 2005?

It's pathetic really, the size of the chip on your shoulder.

Henry240:
Which include F4, F5, Mirage, MIG-23, MIG-21.


I provided a comment of a PAC executive explicitly following the Chinese designation.

Western analysts describe it as "a day time interceptor"

Which generation is that?

Henry240:
No dufus, the Gripen does not out maneuver the JF-17. It's not even possible.


The fact is your Gripen according to SAAB is on the same level as the F-16 Block 40, when when all factors come into consideration, the Gripen is also lower than the JF-17.


So much for $65 million. What Mbeki did, was he got petrol and burnt $35 million per plane. To think it was all borrowed money makes it all the more sorrowful.

Better wing loading, more powerfull engine, better climb and higher G rating all say more manuverable. Fact.

SAAB did not say that, stop stooping to such pathetic lows as to lie. Sad!

80v2O, you get what you pay for

Henry240:
Keep acting stupiid.

A plane that is to replace an F4 Phantom, F-5, MIG-23, Mirage and MIG-29 is what?

A replacement for second gen aircraft

Thus third gen

Duh

tdayof:
The most lethal aircraft on earth for now.

Only truly lethal when part of a system

It's called the Joint Strike Fighter for a reason

[quote author=africaken254 post=49858236][/quote]Judging by the weapons seized that is an ancient cache

nemesis2u:
UNIT COST of an aircraft is for public consumption only

TOTAL LIFE CYCLE COST of an aircraft is what professionals r interested in.

And the Gripens is the lowest

Henry240:
This is where you provide evidence to support your comment, that performance has been taken into account.

Says the guy who refuses to provide any evidence for anything he says ever.

Henry240:
This is why the JF-17 is better than the Gripen C/D.


Jln115, listen to the classification of 2nd Generation jets by the PAC JF-17 program director.





https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HhuSmSE1vI

Lol - confirms it's 3rd gen

"Made to replace 2nd gen aircraft"

Henry240:
It improves performance you dummy dummingo!


Performance, RCS and Weight. Must i always spoon feed you South-Africans?

And yet the Gripen out performs (faster, climbs better, better payload) it and most likely has a smaller RCS

They do not improve maneuverablity as that is a question of flight surfaces

The killer to your argument is the Gripens higher G rating... Which they had to do because it can turn and climb harder and faster

Dude, give it up. You get what you pay for.

Perfectdanny:
Check google and clear your doubts please.

11B don't get side arms as standard

Only technical staff, specialists and officers (ie people who have their hands full in combat and require a defensive weapon) get pistols

Fidha254:
KDF too has its own internal insuarance scheme, but from 2015, they outsourced to a Kenyan based insuarer. Outsourcing to a Ptivately managed company has its advantages, in that the govt pays a fixed negotiated and calculated amout on behalf of all the troops, while each individual officer still contributes the same fixture..... so the amount of cover that the government pays cannever increase since the burden of covering the actual cost is passed down to the insuarer, so if only 2k soldier seek medical then the insuarer profits from the fixed amount paid by govt, but if 200k seek treatement then the insurer will foot aditional bill.......
Compared to an internal insuarance scheme, If there is a huge number that seek treatment that costs more than the cumulative total that they have contributed, the same institution still has to foot the bill.... and these kinds of inauarance are prone to inefficiencies and bearocracy, (atleast in our country), private insuarances have a standard, they are efficient and faster in dealing with a patient...


This would have taken years to pay if it was KDF/govt itself compensating/covering the life insuarence scheme., it would have taken years b4 the families of fallen heros recieved compensation...

Posted Sunday, May 29 2016 at 14:53
Reports that the families of Kenya Defence Forces (KDF) troops killed by Al Shabaab terrorists in El-Adde. Somalia, in January will receive Sh341 million as compensation is a welcome development.
The financial compensation will go a long way in helping heal the families of our fallen soldiers who died gallantly while defending their countrymen.
Kenya has about 4,000 troops in the 22,000-strong African Union force that is battling Al-Shabaab in Somalia.
Jubilee Insurance, which is the main cover provider for KDF personnel, should also be commended for the timely pay-out.
By promptly releasing the compensation, the firm has also helped build the industry’s name in a country where the number of insured is still very low in comparison to the total population.
It is our view that such compensation should be sustained so as to enable the relatives of our troops move on comfortably without financial hurdles, given that most of these soldiers are normally the main providers of material sustenance to their kin.
The insurance company’s personal accident policy covers KDF soldiers for accidental death or disablement.http://www.businessdailyafrica.com/Opinion-and-Analysis/Timely-compensation-for-KDF-heroes-welcome/539548-3223920-10g111g/index.html

I like it.

That's some common sense fin man right there

Fidha254:
Now any police from lowest to most senior rank rank can walk to any hospital he choses to with his entire family,

http://www.nation.co.ke/news/Police-officers-finally-get-enhanced-medical-cover/1056-3401852-12e0qjo/index.html

Police and prison officers, their spouses and children will receive free health care after the government procured a medical insurance for them.
The comprehensive cover will be provided by AAR as the lead insurer and four other companies. AON is the administrator of the new scheme.
The cover became effective Saturday and officers are required to register with AAR to enjoy the benefits.
The lowest ranked officer, a constable, is insured at Sh150,000 for outpatient and Sh1.5 million for inpatient every year.
On the other hand the highest ranked officer is insured at Sh500,000 for outpatient and Sh5 million for inpatient.
The new scheme will cover a 107,000-strong workforce from the National Police Service and the Kenya Prisons Service.......

...


An official conversant with the new cover described it as “superior”, compared to the old one administered by National Hospital Insurance Fund.
Unlike the old one, officers will be free to seek treatment from any hospital within the country including top private hospital.
Officers from the rank of Constable to Senior Assistant Inspector-General, in the old cover, were limited to visiting selected health facilities, with a bias to government-owned ones.
BETTER DEAL
Only high ranking officers were allowed to access top hospitals but were, however, restricted to Sh800,000 cover for inpatient treatment.
The scheme is in addition to the Sh1.7 billion life insurance cover that was unveiled two years ago.
The deal is a big relief to police because a majority of them could not afford decent medical care.
It comes seven years late because it was envisioned in the Ransley report, the police reforms blueprint that was adopted by the government in 2009.

-----
1$ = 100 ksh

..

Carefull

We do this in RSA with our military hospitals.

The money comes out of Militart Health Services budget - their budgets can get hit quite hard by this.

Good work @jln115

Your going to have to hold the fort for a while

But I see you completely BTFO Henry120 (will he ever recover?) So your watch may be chilled

Odunayaw:
this idiot doesn't even know what a DSI means

Jeez dude...u put south African education to shame
U can insult the US for adding dsi to the f35 and the Chinese for the j10

First y'all compared to su-30mki..next f16 block 52

Mandela refused to cure y'all of inferiority complex

...your pants r down..now go wipe ur poo of ignorance

He thinks DSI improves maneuverablity

Henry240:
The JF-17 comes with revolutionary DSI intakes, the Gripen is not more maneuverable.


RCS is purely a speculative figure. Come with proof of Gripen RCS calculation, and from which angle?

The JF-17 has a range that doubles that of a Gripen. Shorter takeoff distance is laughable.


The G-Load for the Gripen is +9, only slightly different from the JF-17 at +8. How many times have pilots maneuvers up to 9 Gs? The JF-17 G load is within the envelope of all modern fighters.


1 more hard point is not an advantage, especially when the JF-17 carriers a multiple bomb rack which can carry 3 bombs on each rack. Dude, i thought you are intelligent, you can do better?



HMD, again the JF-17 is lined up to start integrating an HMD.


Radar, have you heard of the KLjV2 which the JF-17 already carries....... Come now dude, stop embarrassing yourself.


The JF-17 also has a much higher service ceiling.

The JF-17 is a better fighter than the Gripen C/D. This isn't even up for a debate.


Guy, use your brains, it is there for a reason, Chinese classification of jets differ from that of the west. J-10, J-11 are also classified as 3rd Gen. I don't expect you to dumb down to Patches689's level. Your Gripens are trash, especially at $65 million a unit.

DSI intakes have nothing to do with maneuverability

RCS has been given many times

Gripen is faster and can carry and extra 1500kgs of weapons...

Gripens G rating is higher. Which allows it to do things they Junk Fighter cannot. It is better end of story.

So one extra hard point does not count? What about an extra 1500kgs of payload? Yeah I thought so....


Gripens are trash?

86 v 20. The air forces of the world have spoken.

Henry240:
Ok, anything else?

I'm not the one trying to say the JF17 is as good as a Gripen

Henry240:
Nigeria has purchased none.

Just like you only purchased a hand full of F7s the same will apply to the J17

You are a poor nation and buy cheap things