EX will have better performance than the C due to the engine power and better thrust curve than even the PW-229.
CX to EX would be negligible the “extra” weight from the dual cockpit is offset almost entirely by the loss of a fuel tank.
The difference in weight between the C and E is almost entirely from the strengthened airframe, if you look from C to D it is negligible.
The “biggest” reason in favor of the CX I would argue is certain MX actions are much easier in the single seater, but EX makes way more sense from a “future proofing” and cost standpoint
I genuinely find it interesting that the US made the switch from the PW-229 to the GE-129 for the F-15.
The PW-229 was used for the F-16C Block 52, being the alternative to the GE-129 that’s in the Block 50.
The main differences are:
PW-229 has worse AB thrust, but better non-AB thrust
GE-129 has better AB thrust, but worse non-AB thrust
It basically comes down to whether you’re planning on using your AB more or less than not using your AB. I would argue in the context of combat, especially BVR, I would rather have the extra thrust with the AB than with non-AB.
Eh, I think the thought process is more that -129 is going to become the “4th gen engine of choice”, so to speak going forward. Plus it might be easier to convert them to the -132 later on. The only reason they didn’t for the initial purchase was due to the acquisition method used, it would have taken too long from where they were with certifying the flight envelope.
Though I still think the F-2 should come first. We do not need the F-5TH yet. The F-2 would give Japan a competent and accurate Multirole aircraft (looking at you, F-16A OCU).
Thai Gripen E (photoshop made by SAAB themselve) 🤪, It is rumored that the Thai government will sign an order to purchase the Gripen E next month. If a deal is signed, it would be like a ‘yet to be delivered’ logic, like the Badger IFV.
