• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

OT-F-35 v. F-16

?? Did I say otherwise? The only mention of the F-16 I made is that it is lacking in a deep strike scenario compared with the F-35 (this was of course nothing the F-16 was designed to do). I mentioned the deep strike just as a rather strange capability for Norway to highlight in the fighter selection process (this was of course to make the F-35 look good compared with the Gripen). The F-16 has been a tremendous success for the European countries as a multirole fighter with a service life which will cover more than 40 years as a frontline fighter.

I believe the European countries very much sees the F-35 as a modern F-16 class multirole fighter. I would imagine the critics very much said the same thing about the F-16 when it was replacing the F-5 as they say today about the F-35. "To advanced and to expensive..." Only time will tell if the F-35 will be the same success as the F-16.
 
JensOle said:
?? Did I say otherwise? The only mention of the F-16 I made is that it is lacking in a deep strike scenario compared with the F-35 (this was of course nothing the F-16 was designed to do). I mentioned the deep strike just as a rather strange capability for Norway to highlight in the fighter selection process (this was of course to make the F-35 look good compared with the Gripen). The F-16 has been a tremendous success for the European countries as a multirole fighter with a service life which will cover more than 40 years as a frontline fighter.

I believe the European countries very much sees the F-35 as a modern F-16 class multirole fighter. I would imagine the critics very much said the same thing about the F-16 when it was replacing the F-5 as they say today about the F-35. "To advanced and to expensive..." Only time will tell if the F-35 will be the same success as the F-16.
Click to expand...

i am pretty sure that i was agreeing with you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top