Question about reliance of data?(turn rate)

[litzj]

I have read this report, and I found that Fig. 18 at page 50 showed Inst. and Sust. Turn rate of various 4~5th gen aircraft.

However, F-16's maximum turn rate is 24 deg at sea level from FM of F-16C Block 52.

Is this contents right? or Did I miss something????

 

[Dragon029]

I wouldn't put too much stock into a submission by a guy who's written a book named American Gripen: The Solution to the F-35 Nightmare but then put an F-22 on the front cover.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

He's a former geologist and financial analyst, climate-change denier, and would-be far-right politician. He wrote a book on "Australia's Defence" and submitted this 'report' as to why the F-35 is the wrong choice for Australia. He loves the Gripen E.

I wouldn't place too much weight on his graphs of turn rates, he probably got the numbers off wikipedia or something. He has no special access to useful data.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Exhibit A: this terrible, terrible article.

http://dailycaller.com/2016/01/22/american-gripen-the-solution-to-the-f-35-nightmare/

 

[litzj]

Thx for your comments. I should not give weight on this reports

 

[red admiral]

A quick look at Gripen E Thrust/Weight and Wing Loading compared to the other aircraft tells you that these graphs have been made up. You can't beat physics.

 

[Mike Pryce]

Even if right they would be meaningless in the absence of speed, height, fuel state, load information etc. No fighter has 'a' turn rate.

Is there a 'thing' in Australia where you can't just say succinctly why you dislike the F-35, or why you want F-22 or Gripen or whatever? This chap, and the APA crowd, seem to write huge amounts to say just one thing. Does quantity have a quality of its own down under?

 

[kcran567]

According to that graph the Gripen blows away every fighter aircraft in the world in instantaneous and sustained turn rate. Maybe all those aircraft at empty weight based on wing area and engine thrust. What are the parameters? Could have easily labeled that graph based on cost of operation or something like that.

 

[red admiral]

Because magic...

He's out on Gripen E cost by 2.5x, which is one of the most important bits of his argument. I'd just ignore it as its simply made up and unsourced.