The Akasha Colony wrote:Iltica wrote:Oh really? That really stacks it in favor of the "heavy" design if we can afford it. That F414 thrust ratio though... Dayum.
Is there any way to compare two aircraft to get a sense of the cost difference? Maybe the F-20 and F-16? They're both American and from around the same era. The costs won't be representative but the ratio between the two might be?
Not easily. F-16 was more expensive than F-20, but lots of things went into play in each contract. You can try to compare the $15 million vs. $18 million initial price, but there are factors involved like Northrop trying to intentionally undercut General Dynamics and willing to take a big hit to make the sale, with the hope of getting more profitable follow-on orders in the future. GD had no incentive to do the same since the USAF was already willing to buy its fighters at the contracted price.I don't know how much a production F-20 would have cost but it's combat radius looks far too small to defend a country this size at just 300 nmi with droptanks, and the end of this article makes it seem like it wouldn't be saving much money anyway.
Though I really like the idea of a fighter so maneuverable that even an experienced fighter pilot could black out without any warning.
The F-20 ended up trying to do too much with the light F-5's airframe. The F-16 started out the same way and would have turned out that way if Pierre Sprey had his way. Luckily, he didn't, and smarter minds who favored expensive things like a radar, missile armament, and ground attack capability triumphed, turning the F-16 into a multi-role medium fighter rather than an ultralight fighter armed with just a gun and boundless optimism. The F-16 turned out better than the F-20 because it was designed for such roles and so could better accommodate the equipment that was added to make these roles a reality. Range is one of the major drawbacks that most light fighters face.
Alright then, looks like the 26,000 lb-ish design wins as long as it's competitively priced. I still subscribe to the "not a pound for air-to-ground" philosophy but the extra room seems worth it for the fuel alone.
Maybe affording it will seem more plausible if there were an established line of domestic fighters, like Sweden but lagging behind a little bit for most of the 20th century?
