[Jonty30]

Her her her.

[doorgunner69]

Great read. Thanks for sniffing these articles out.

The Russian high/low concept seems valid, and like something the US was trying to do with the F-16 as the "low" in quantity. Dunno what happened to the "high".

Not enough F-22s around to matter that much on that end, and the F-15s are falling apart from what I hear.

The Navy used to have the F-18 and F-14, but no longer.

[doorgunner69]

Oh yeah, at least from what I read from this, there was no "lemon" about the MT, just maybe not the shiny new airplane you thought you were getting, but still a perfectly good plane.

A lemon is a POS that is constant trouble. The MT does not sound remotely like that. And the Russians already know how to maintain the 29. Sounds like they got a bunch of perfectly fine new airplanes.

[octex]

Thanks for the threads you post. I really enjoy reading them.

[skinkinthegrass]

thanks, for the post. :-)

[cpdiii]

It does not have stealth technology. If you can see it, you can kill it.

[DemforBush]

Were I a buyer, the older airframe would concern me. From what I’ve read, the early Fulcrum’s airframe was designed with the Soviet philosophy of “disposable” hardware. As such, the airframe life on those early birds were pretty low - less than 3,000 flight hours, IIRC.

That’s just my amateur opinion, of course.