finland went with f-35 and supposedly released a final comprehensive report on how all the entrants did
unfortunately i'm a retard and can't find the actual document and figures
any of you guys have it?
all i know if the gripen and the super hornet were second and three but i don't know who or why
nice try ivanjeet
i just want to wank over aircraft stats
last time we had a real competition between aircraft with numbers was the swiss contract between the eurocanards
It’s a felony to share classified documents with foreigners Chaim
Did you check the war thunder forums
i'm not looking for classified stuff, i just want a crack at the final report that they used to rank the top three
people have access to it because i'm seeing twitter quotes on how the f-35 got a 4.4 or something on their combat test and the second place was a 3.8 and i wanted to read it
They will never see the true limits public. See the sr 71. No one is really sure. At least mach 5 on accident was achieved in it. They claim like 3 or something, pilots regularly would go above 4.
well that's lame
i was very curious how they would compare the f-35 to the super bug/gripen, and also super bug vs gripen
i'm particularly interesting in how they could have compared three pretty varied bids, since it was f-35s vs super hornets AND growlers vs gripens AND awacs plane
because just comparing fighters vs fighters only is kind of a foregone conclusion
>since it was f-35s vs super hornets AND growlers vs gripens AND awacs plane
neat
F-35A scored 4.47/5.
F/A-18E & Growler scored 3.81, and got second place.
JAS-39E & Global Eye score not known, 3rd place.
Typhoon and Rafale were disqualified for not fitting into budget or not being able to fulfill industrial cooperation & supply security requirements and were not evaluated in wargames. In that sense, SAAB was better than expected.
The scoring wasn't based on fixed metrics but more like a test-grading on a gaussian curve. The purpose was to find the differences between the candidates, not meeting some arbitrary minimum requirements. 30% of the score came from performing the counter-air mission. They had 6 or so different scenarios in wargames they ran. Ground strike, Recon, DEAD and anti-ship missions too.
thank you for the info
is there a place i can read more in depth or is that basically it?
i'm really interested to see how they came to those scores comparing f-35 and the hornet/growler combo
https://corporalfrisk.com/2021/12/11/f-35a-is-hx-the-winner-takes-it-all/
Corporal Frisk's blog was pretty great for following the HX competition when it was going on. He's just a layman writing on public information. His angle might seem like shilling too much for the 4.5th gen especially in retrospect, but I found it enjoyable to read about all the possible strengths and capabilities they had.
yeah i've read a lot from him and he's a good summary of the information to explain to a retard like me, but i wanted to get a crack at the actual information he's working with if it's available
>His angle might seem like shilling too much for the 4.5th gen
nah
Frisk takes a balanced view and doesn't jump to conclusions
that's a little bit rarer in the defence blog zone than you might expect
here's a few
https://corporalfrisk.com/2020/01/11/hx-challenge-pt-1-complete-independence/
https://corporalfrisk.com/2020/01/22/hx-challenge-pt-2-born-joint/
https://corporalfrisk.com/2020/01/30/hx-challenge-pt-3-head-start-for-future-growth/
https://corporalfrisk.com/2020/02/16/hx-challenge-pt-4-more-of-everything/
https://corporalfrisk.com/2020/02/21/hx-challenge-pt-5-bigger-better-stronger/
There's all kinds of neat stuff like Rafale's electronic warfare & Growlers in every 4-ship, Typhoons with BriteCloud 55 and being able to point their radars in different directions while simply using their superior kinematics to dodge incoming missiles, Gripen's software advantage and vast arsenal etc. F-35A was obviously easily superior to them all, but it's a fun "what if?" if it hadn't been available.
where did they mention gripen was third?
By admitting that Eurofighter and Rafale did not meet requirements industrial cooperation and supply security. Makes one really wonder how badly NH-90 damaged relations between Finnish ministry of defense and Safran. Engine supplier for both NH-90 and Rafale. Also NH-90 related, Finland sent request for information for Eurofighter for BAE Systems, not the Eurofighter GmbH. Where Airbus is major shareholder and major supplier for NH-90.
all i've found is that the second competitor came in at 3.8 but it didn't specify if it was hornets or gripens though
It was all over the news when it came out, but it's seemingly been purged from the internet. The Air Force said the second best candidate scored 3.81 and then SAAB went publics and expressed frustration at being in 3rd place and not 2nd. The factor that pushed Super ahead of the Gripen was the 14 Growlers, one in every 4-ship formation.
Our relations with the French MIC is still good, no hard feelings. Getting in on the NH-90 was mainly a political goal to begin with. The Finnish Army recently praised the NH-90, when the fleet performed better than expected in moving about a battalion of troops from one side of the country to the other.
Now that I think of it, the complaints about the NH-90 do sound a lot like the usual complaints about jet fighters, don't they? "CaN't wALk oN thE rAmP wIThOuT BReaKinG iT!!!" when that was a proof-of-concept prototype where the ramp only needed to handle one person at a time. Kinda like at least half the illiterate journo screeching about the F-35's problems came from the X-35 prototype.
NH-90s biggest problem has already been shown in the war in Ukraine; you can't get spares for it from US' vast boneyards.
neat thanks
I mean just looking at how many people have dropped the NH90 and the maintenance hours per flight hours should be pretty telling. I recall reading that it was an absolute shitshow for the Finns in the beginning to get proper maintenance infrastructure in place.
Between this and the eurocopter, seems like the german tradition of being actually shitty engineers after all the propaganda keeps being true
I don't think engineers are the real issue with defense procurement in Krautland. Politicians and military bureaucracy. Military as whole is pretty much lowest appreciated part of state there, their own media has shat on it since WWII and when they got rid of conscription lot competent people will never be exposed to military and will never consider enlisting. WWII vets and people trained by them ran the show until 80's, after that common sense left the Bundeswehr.
It has more to do with BAE generally having good relationship with Finnish government and military. You know the original marketing video they put for Finnish politicians barely marketed Eurofighter, instead the emphasis was on BAE being RELIABLE partner for FDF for decades.
>Why Safran specifically? I remember the NH90 to have a fuckton of issue but the engine doesn't have much to do with this mess.
It has something do with crates, it is incredibly stupid and it cost tax payers about 20 million €. Engine itself isn't the issue.
Helicopter isn't the issue with NH-90, at least with TTH model, naval variant is whole other can of worms. The issue with NH-90 with it was entire production being a cluster fuck and supply chain has been a major issue long after helicopters were produced. Finnish army had issues keeping pilots qualified, because spare parts ordered years in advance weren't delivered on schedule and there weren't enough air worthy aircraft around. All that because French deployed bunch to NH-90's to Mali and Italians handful to Afghanistan. They were naturally the priority for any spares. Whole original planing for NH-90's supply chain seems to be based on the idea that all that is ever going to happen will be routine peace time training operations. Anything more going on means that other clients have issues keeping routine peace time operations going on.
>Finland sent request for information for Eurofighter for BAE Systems, not the Eurofighter GmbH
Because the bongs are in the driving seat for Eurofighter and it's GmbH's (and by extension the German Govt's) refusal to pay to upgrade the Eurofighter that slowed its development, because "ze war ended in 1991, we'll never fight ze Russians again, zey are our friends now, ja"
More because Continental politics strongly favoured German spending on butter rather than guns for the past 30 years
non-military german engineering has the same problems.
Overpriced and overcomplicated
Probably still a stronger industrial sector than your country
But it's true, many german companies producing for consumers (cars, electronics, stuff) are cashing in on their reputation and putting out stuff that is poor value for the price. It's like remington and freedom group all over the place (not usually to that degree though). That shit doesn't fly in the industrial sector, so there's a lot of companies there that are still top notch.
>Makes one really wonder how badly NH-90 damaged relations between Finnish ministry of defense and Safran
Why Safran specifically? I remember the NH90 to have a fuckton of issue but the engine doesn't have much to do with this mess.
> Finland sent request for information for Eurofighter for BAE Systems, not the Eurofighter GmbH
Why would they tho, Eurofighter GmbH only is responsible for construction, production and upgrades.
Eurofighter GmbH is joint venture with substantial stake controlled by Airbus. NH-90 disaster taught somethings about particular company to Finnish military, only role Finland would have accepted Airbus to be in Hornet replacement is as parts supplier with no saying at all in program management. Program management being handled by BAE that is only industry contact to Finnish military and Patria, Finland deals with BAE and BAE deals with Airbus. Unlike Airbus, BAE has reputation as reliable partner for Finnish military. If they fuck up something, they don't cover it up or outright lie about issues. From every perspective that isn't helicopter itself at this point, NH-90 has been by far worst mistake Finnish military has ever done in peace time, you know war time fuck ups cost lives. I'm almost certain that Rafale was only included in HX tender for legal and diplomatic reasons. Only situation where Finland should ever buy French hardware is when procurement numbers are low enough that it doesn't warrant industry cooperation. Buying bunch of helicopters for border guards is fine, because numbers are too low for tech transfers and industry cooperation.
Here is their marketing video for Eurofighter.... they aren't selling the plane, they are selling image of being reliable partner. That is the extent damage control necessary for all parties involved in NH-90, aside from Leonardo and Fokker, at least they are forth coming with issues if and when they fuck up something.
>At least mach 5 on accident was achieved in it. They claim like 3 or something, pilots regularly would go above 4.
sauce?
>Finland's HX program was so good Germany's Bundeswehr trusted it to make their own F-35 decision
Even the military autism of Prussia respects the Finn.
jassm is really more of a "dearly beloved:"