https://youtube/watch?v=yRtPtcAaULk My question is why they baby this thing so much? I mean, if its combat ready and capable of out maneuvering so many aircraft, why does it roll over sideways at a pace similar to the F4 Phantom as opposed to say, the F-18 or F-16 or F-15? Why do they have to pamper it through sharp banks? To me that speaks to the integrity of the airframe and the engines, and if Im Stephen Harper Im starting to wonder why Im even willing to consider risking billions (around $40 at last check) for a plane that clearly cant even be pushed for fear it may drop out of the sky. How about, if you want to waste money on a maneuverable, single engine aircraft, you look at the Saab Gripen? I mean, Saab offered to give manufacturing rights to us to build on Canadian soil as well as partially covering the maintenance and conversion costs initially. That single engine is a port of the engine used in the Hornet, so maintenance would be easy. Better yet, buy the Super Hornet (say 45 or 50) and buy 10 or 15 Gripens and mix the fleet? When Boeing releases the stealth updates to the Super Hornet in a few years you can upgrade some of the fleet accordingly. Not to mention the ease of transition for all involved. Stop buying US failures that are being desperately pushed to cover rising development costs that even the Pentagon is opposed to. Back away now before you do something every person in this Country will regret. $40 billion, vs less than $10 over the lifespan. Shouldnt be a hard choice. The Hornet is a proven airframe as is the Gripen. We arent a War fueled nation. Make the smart choice for a change. Better yet, buy the Rafale!
Posted on: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 22:33:48 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015