LMAO this is just flat BS.
You realize not only do US use these Aircraft in Alaska, but at altitude it’s dramatically colder than anywhere at sea level.
Such pathetic Eurocope.
Edit: LMAO flag all you want, still accurate
3 Likes
Wrong
1 Like
Not budget, Stomach.
Because winning is more important than feelings.
1 Like
shame they got rid of napalm before they made GPS kits and then wing kits for those GPS kits, would make it way easier to get rid of bombing bases with less weight
oh yeah american time i forget its normally on thursdays for you guys lol
Pathetic? Not really I’m pointing out a fact that they had problems in our weather, and as Quartas stated it may have only been early models.
You didn’t really provide a counter outside of just saying Alaska but that still doesn’t explain. Perhaps the US cut costs on export models to be more cheap, who knows, at least I provided actual evidence for my statement.
Also aren’t you the guy who stated the SLAMRAAM had no help from KONGSBERG, so why should I take you seriously when you’ve proven to not give credible sources? Well outside of Wiki links lmao
1 Like
4:17AM for me, so not US
The US only got rid of napalm because it became less effective of a way to clear jungle/forest/brush than other methods, which was it’s actual purpose.
ah then it is tonight lol i got confused cause normally its around 10pm-11pm friday night here in australia
what was even better than napalm for clearing vegetation?
1 Like
I wonder if they gonna pull a aim-120c-5 and give everyone 120D or its exclusive to the US but really really nerf and is basically a fakour 90 with aim-7f manuverability and range of a aim54C
Idk sounds like you can’t back your claim which is all I’m asking for then if you want to disprove my post.
I’m fine with being wrong but I’m not gonna just accept some guy getting overly hostile and going nuh uh unless he’s gonna have a rational discussion and provide sources for his claim, if you don’t have a source then we can try to discuss rational explanations, not like every question about every niche problem has been well recorded let’s be honest.
1 Like
I don’t understand. Gripen’s engine has better resistance to the cold than American planes despite using American engines?
Well its already going to the RAAF F-18F, so not US exclusive.
Nations that should 100% get it in addition to the US is Israel and probably Sweden (if they can)
If its not being slapped onto an F-15EX, then the Typhoon and Co will be fine with them just fixing C5s
2 Likes
Did any Gripens, domestic or foreign even use aim-120D?
I did?
Those aircraft have flown from decades from US bases in Alaska (same as F-35s btw, cope Griper), which has worse weather than the Nordics.
And I personally have launched US aircraft in Sub-Zero temps, no problem.
What have you done?
You’d have to ask Saab for the Gripen E I don’t think any modifications for environmental stuff is public info unlike the Gripen C. Which has documentation of it receiving tuning during the Gripen A development for handling low temp weather.
Then would you be interested in explaining why we had to modify the engine for cold weather starts?
Again you’re so hostile it’s really showing that fragile ego.
All I’m asking for is an explanation or a source that explains my post.
1 Like
SAAB has a tendency to allow for the Gripen to be fitted with as much as possible to increase sellability, that way a nation doesnt need to buy new missiles. They can use existing stock
Sweden obviously operates the Meteor and as far as I am aware, im not sure any Gripen E operates the Aim-120C5 (dont quote me on that)
So at this point, they could just pull the old “AMRAAM = AMRAAM” (I dont know if Aim-120D even requires any different mounting to Aim-120C5/8, I doubt it) and slap it on as a placeholder for Meteor to give the Gripen E a boost
1 Like
how wrong ?