what i’m curious about is the stamping. The stamp indicates it was cleared for released in August 2013. SAAF at a cursory search only received their Gripens in 2010… It doesn’t make a whole lot of sense for them to declassify fairly sensitive info on capabilities 3 years after you bought the damn things.
the RAF Typhoon for instance,
we’re still officially completely in the dark about time to climb, even conditions under which hot refuelling cant take place are restricted info, and they were introduced in 2006…
I just do not see why Armscor would declassify info they know to be true… and thereby give away info on their capabilities… it does not make sense given that Saab are uptight about it and have not revealed anything.
I was considering writing out some more comparisons but it’s clear that no one in the thread here arguing against the report is being honest with themselves. At the moment it seems to just be a place for people to let out their frustration that something is going to be changed in a negative way that they don’t like.
Exactly my point. The only feasible explanation for that being the figure, if that is the genuine figure from the doc (i’ve not seen it firsthand) is if Armscor is delibrately trying to mislead with that figure, and I can think of plenty of reasons to do that…
What matters is Saab, who built the damn things and probably know their airframe a bit better than a South African procurement company, have not come forward and said “yes, that’s correct, it can do X and Y” or “no, the Gripen cannot pull this AOA and that sustained turn rate”
On a sidenote, the AIAA paper from Saab on the Gripen development from which I pulled the first source… they didn’t modify the graphs. They just omitted the lines and numbers by covering them.
Also, the score for the Gripen on ARMSCOR isn’t very encouraging.
There are totally people here like that but the way you’ve been using the sources and drawing conclusions have been heavily critiqued for good reason. Calling everyone who is throwing this critique your way dishonest with themselves is just delusional.
I personally want whatever is the most accurate Gripen flight model, I never expected it to out-rate everything and I can enjoy it either way in Simulator battles which is where I play, META’s aren’t as important there.
I just play war thunder, any of my opinions should be taken with a grain of salt. My report is still valid whether they want it to be or not. What they got is opinions, not solid criticism.
