It’s actually a pretty interesting design, though it was very much rejected before going anywhere to the point where I doubt it was even a complete concept.
It would use the general fuselage design of the F/B-22 concept to try and meet Japan’s requests for payload and range, but also was to integrate more modern systems from the F-35, and at least offered some limited integration of Japanese systems like engines.
When they moved it, they said that they want the 2K line for Prototyps and Demonstrator while the 2A4 line is the production line, thats why I since (1?) Year I try to get the PSO out of the 2A4 line
Boeing says it’s 60 nmi so like 111km, idk where you get 140 from you are just outright lying now, first about the SPEAR 3 being a GPS glide bomb like GBU-39, and now about the range of the GBU-39
I have no problem with them adding MMW SPEAR 3, but in no way is even a GPS one in the same class as a GBU-39
and?
why does the US always need an equivalent?
currently nobody has a effective equivalent to the gbu39 be it range or numbers
and that dosent seem to be a problem?
you can still only hit so many targets with it at once
meanwhile you can take 20 gbu39 into arb and get 20 ground kills with it
you cant do that with any other glide bomb because they lack in numbers
so now explain to me why is it not a problem when other nations dont have a direct equivalent to what the US has, but as soon as sombody that isnt the US has something it is a problem?
Because, in the absence of ANY FnF weapon to go alongside the Spear-3s (i.e, no AGM-65, AGM-130 or perhaps soon AGM-84) The Typhoon could get a better version of the GBU-39 to compensate.
Also there isnt a direct GBU-39 equal for the Typhoon.