Pilotasso Posted September 7, 2005 Posted September 7, 2005 This is probably the worlds most neglected fighter by military aviation enthusiasts. I have failed to see why this is so. Looking at the sparse information avaiable either on the books I have and in the net (yes I visited http://www.F-16.net) I can already conclude that should this aircraft recieve minor adaptations it could be very well the most capable and advanced aircraft flying for any asian country. The japanese are developing the AAM-5 wich is suposed to be in the class of the AMRAAM, so far the fact that it doesnt carry it by now seems to be the mere lack of interest of doing it so from the beggining. Added with the worlds first multirole AESA radar equiped fighter, the plane has potential to even surpass the F-15J on many scenarios. Compared to the baseline F-16 the only disavantage I see is the T/W ratio, the plane is equiped with the same F110-GE-129 engine as the lates US block 52 but weighting 2 more tonnes. But In flight it looks more efficient in term of wing loading, in a turn I dont think the F-2 would be in disavantage at all. Look at http://www.goemondo.com/s&a/ for some video clips Here some pictures of it including a rare perspective of the pit inside. I would very much like to know more about this plane. Its squadrons, its up to date upgrades and additions, how it fares in training, weapons and avionics capabilities. If anyone is a "connaiseur" I would like to hear from you. .
Pilotasso Posted September 7, 2005 Author Posted September 7, 2005 It was also very expensive at the time its production started. By the 90's making AESA radars was extremely painfull. The F-2 costs almost as an F-15. But its a mean looking bird. Im telling you, if I ever could decide I would trade our MLU's for F-2 in a blink of an eye. Giving AMRAAM capability (if it doesnt already) is a matter of software and missile clearance. .
Force_Feedback Posted September 7, 2005 Posted September 7, 2005 What about the T-50 (Golden Eagle)? It's another f16 based fighter, how about it? Creedence Clearwater Revival:worthy:
Cobra360 Posted September 7, 2005 Posted September 7, 2005 Japan has cancelled further F-2 production. It will not meet the planned number it was ment to. This is due in part to Japan changing is defence tactics and the large number of F-2 is not needed. Instead Japan want a new heavy fighter. Possibly a version of the F-15T that is beeing offered to Singapore. Word has being going round that Japan is looking at the F/A-22 as a possible future purchase.
Pilotasso Posted September 7, 2005 Author Posted September 7, 2005 What about the T-50 (Golden Eagle)? It's another f16 based fighter, how about it? haha got to love sarcasm... ;) .
Pilotasso Posted September 7, 2005 Author Posted September 7, 2005 Possibly a version of the F-15T that is beeing offered to Singapore. Word has being going round that Japan is looking at the F/A-22 as a possible future purchase. replacing 1 plane for another of the same generation doesnt make much sence IMHO, and f-22's are so expensive I imagine flying 1 in an airforce that wont have many, would make the pilots a bit nervous. 250 million Its way too expensive. So is the F-15T, anyway as I said doest make much sense to me. They are not suposed to have long range striking capability either. .
S77th-konkussion Posted September 7, 2005 Posted September 7, 2005 True, but japan will get a stripper. version. How much reduction in cost/ performance is anyone's guess, though. [sIGPIC]http://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=43337&d=1287169113[/sIGPIC]
Guest EVIL-SCOTSMAN Posted September 7, 2005 Posted September 7, 2005 I thought f22 was solely for teh US of A and nobody else at this moment in time ?
Trident Posted September 7, 2005 Posted September 7, 2005 The F-2 looks great, better than the original F-16 infact (and that's saying something, think what you want about the Viper but it DOES looks cool). However, it's actually not particularly well suited to its intended role - maritime strike (no, actually it is not supposed to be a fighter!). Inspite of being enlarged it's just too small. You know, sometimes I think the US should have let them base their FS-X on the F/A-18, basically creating the F/A-18E as a joint project. This would have resulted in shared costs for the USA and a better aircraft for Japan.
Tranquil Posted September 8, 2005 Posted September 8, 2005 "However, Lockheed officials, citing Japan's history of producing more aircraft than originally estimated, felt that Japan might ultimately produce as many as 200 FS-X aircraft." http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/japan/f-2.htm It sounds like a capable fighter. I'm sure the boys at the pentagon will be watching the production levels of this plane very closely, lest history repeat itself. lol... let me guess. You wouldnt buy a jap car becuase of events that occured 60+ years ago? /me waves to the banjo totting yokel.
Force_Feedback Posted September 8, 2005 Posted September 8, 2005 I guess those F-2s are really reliable... Hey, why not discuss the "other" f-16 rip-off (the Korean one)? It looks better than the F-2, especially the intake area. Creedence Clearwater Revival:worthy:
Pilotasso Posted September 8, 2005 Author Posted September 8, 2005 I guess those F-2s are really reliable... Hey, why not discuss the "other" f-16 rip-off (the Korean one)? It looks better than the F-2, especially the intake area. "SLAP"!!!! "SLAP" !!!! Dude... your mistaking a fighter for a trainer. The T-50 is a trainer. Comparing the F-2 to the T-50 is like comparing the Mig-29M with the mig AT! .
Force_Feedback Posted September 8, 2005 Posted September 8, 2005 "SLAP"!!!! "SLAP" !!!! Dude... your mistaking a fighter for a trainer. The T-50 is a trainer. Comparing the F-2 to the T-50 is like comparing the Mig-29M with the mig AT! I don't care if it's even a crop duster, it's based on teh f-16, so it fits in here, thus it needs attention. Creedence Clearwater Revival:worthy:
Cobra360 Posted September 8, 2005 Posted September 8, 2005 You could also say it's the front of a F/A-18 with the back of a F-16. :D
Pilotasso Posted September 8, 2005 Author Posted September 8, 2005 ...but I opened this thread with the F-2 in mind, not every F-16 extravagant variants. .
Doug97 Posted September 8, 2005 Posted September 8, 2005 It sounds like a capable fighter. I'm sure the boys at the pentagon will be watching the production levels of this plane very closely, lest history repeat itself. Right, in the same way they watch the British armed forces lest an attempt is made to recolonise the US. They better also be keeping tabs on the Italian military, in case they decide to reclaim the territory of the Roman Empire. Don't forget about those Egyptians either! They might want to start rebuilding those pyramids any day now ...
Force_Feedback Posted September 8, 2005 Posted September 8, 2005 I see by your sig you are French-Canadian. So, I wouldn't expect you to understand. Wahahaha, omg, the sarcasm is killing me, stop it! :D :D Let's see, I'm Dutch, so I'm a slave trading racist... I like the looks of the T-50 more, it looks like a pregnant F-16 Creedence Clearwater Revival:worthy:
BIOLOG Posted September 8, 2005 Posted September 8, 2005 Watch it guys. You better stop flaming around, this discussion is becoming way too personal. Behave properly, and get back on topic, or this thread get axed. The bird of Hermes is my name eating my wings to make me tame.
Doug97 Posted September 8, 2005 Posted September 8, 2005 I see by your sig you are French-Canadian. So, I wouldn't expect you to understand. Oh man, that is just too rich. As a matter of fact, I am Scottish. I moved to Montreal 5 months ago. However, that is completely irrelevent. Really you should be judging people by the content of their posts, not by where they happen to live. Not only would your world-view bear a closer resemblance to reality, but you also wouldn't feel the need to throw insults around left right and centre based on hasty assumptions. This would mean you would put your foot in it less often, and look less like a fool. I offer this advice free of charge, there's no need to thank me.
Tranquil Posted September 8, 2005 Posted September 8, 2005 It took only 20 years for Japan to go from fighting WITH the Allied Forces to fighting AGAINST them. http://www.japan-101.com/history/history_ww1_ww2.htm Those who forget the past, are destined to repeat it. Ah, I see you're from France. That explains it. WTF French? lol mate, im kiwi. The little country with big balls.. I think you need to leave your fall out shelter and open your eyes bud. The only thing japans coveting are big juicy whales. Don’t worry, you and your 5 wives are safe and sound in Utah.
Force_Feedback Posted September 9, 2005 Posted September 9, 2005 Errm, guys, don't feed the troll(s). This was about the F-2 (and the Golden Eagle, I hope :p) Creedence Clearwater Revival:worthy:
Guest IguanaKing Posted September 10, 2005 Posted September 10, 2005 The F-2 looks like an F-16 that has been redesigned to carry a heavier load over a greater distance. Am I correct in assuming that Mitsubishi is building it? BTW...every country should keep a bit of an eye on other countries, its called common sense. I disagree however with pidgeonholing people based on their national origin vs. opinions and vice-versa. Half my family is Japanese, Hawg, I don't seem to see any animosity toward America from them...heh...but, I know that isn't what you were trying to say. ;) Oh...just to add another tidbit to the "Japan101" thing...Japanese civilians are not allowed to possess or carry firearms, to include civilian authorities (meaning even Japanese police ALSO are not allowed to carry guns).
hassata Posted September 10, 2005 Posted September 10, 2005 Hawg's right, guys. Now all black people better watch the US industries carefully lest nets start falling out of the sky :(. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Guest IguanaKing Posted September 10, 2005 Posted September 10, 2005 What do they carry - katanas?! :) No, nothing other than the occasional "whitey be good" stick, but, just try to f*** with a JP...I dare ya. :icon_axe:
Recommended Posts