Jump to content

Talk:Atlas Cheetah

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Untitled

[edit]

I had to rewrite the article somewhat, due to the fact that Greg Goebel's Vectorsite is not always accurate and is very far off the mark in this case, most of his info being totally incorrect. I will create a separate article for the SA helmet-mounted sight later on. Impi 23:53, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

---I'm still not convinced they aren't kfir's--

If you're asking whether the Cheetahs are not merely rebadged Kfirs, the answer is quite simply no. All Cheetahs were converted and upgraded in South Africa, by South African technicians. All the Cheetah Es were converted from S.African Air Force Mirage IIIEZ airframes, and all but five of the Cheetah Ds were converted from existing SA Air Force Mirage IIIDZ/D2Z airframes. As for the Cheetah Cs and five extra Cheetah Ds, those were converted in South Africa using Mirage III/Nesher airframes purchased from Israel. Please note, the only airframes Israel provided were Mirage III/Nesher airframes, they provided no Kfir airframes.
Of course, it's an open secret that there was some technology transfer between South Africa and Israel. At the time the two nations co-operated on a number of military projects, with each nation contributing its own expertise. Thus it can be surmised that conversion data and technical expertise in terms of upgrading the Mirage III airframes was given to South Africa. However, there are a number of differences between the two upgrades. Unfortunately, due to the classified status of the Cheetah, I cannot give many details, but there are a few things that are readily obvious:
Firstly, the canards on the Cheetahs are different in both size and shape to those on the Kfir, which indicates that the aircraft have different weights and a different centre of gravity. Secondly, the Kfirs were all designed from the start to carry the J79, which necessitated a rather different rear fuselage from the standard Mirage III. The Cheetah Cs and Ds use the Atar 09K50, which is so similar to the original O9C and 09B that little modification was needed, and externally the rear fuselage looked pretty much identical. Incidentally, when looking at a picture of the Cheetah modification line in South Africa [1], it becomes obvious that the airframes being converted are Mirage III airframes.
It's hard to see from photos, but the engine intakes of the Kfir and Cheetah are also of different shapes. The landing gear is different too, but most importantly the nose profile of the Cheetah C is unlike any Kfir available at the time of the upgrade. Though the Kfir C.10 (Kfir 2000) has a similar nose profile, that particular aircraft came AFTER the Cheetah C project was completed.
Some segments of the avionics system also inevitably came from Israel, though at the time South Africa had already built up an impressive level of expertise in the design and manufacture of high-tech avionics (which can be seen in the Rooivalk's avionics systems). While it has never been confirmed, speculation is that the radar is of Israeli origin.
So, to summarise, the Cheetahs are not Kfirs. If you still don't believe me, ask any reputable defence aviation journalist, and they shall tell you the same thing. Impi 21:27, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Great reply, Impi! I sometimes get the feeling that questions/comments like the one at the top are (sometimes) motivated by the mindset that som == ething as sophisticated as a fighter aircraft cannot be manufactured in an African country ... they're dead wrong, of course. Elf-friend 10:29, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the encouragement, and I have to admit to getting the same feeling, yet the irony is that there is no need for it. South Africa's defence industry is so advanced that we're still churning out world-class products. An example is the recently tested G7 LEO, which is basically a 105mm howitzer (towed or turret-mounted) that outperforms all current NATO 155mm howitzers in range, accuracy and lethality. It's so impressive that the US Army is intensely interested in it at the moment as a self-propelled light howitzer for its Stryker Brigades. Not to mention that the helmets used in the Eurofighter, Rafale, Gripen and F-35 JSF all have varying degrees of technology developed in South Africa, and that the networking system that runs the defensive systems in the new US Navy carriers and destroyers is South African. There's tons more, but that's just an example of the niche markets South Africa has been able to penetrate. Plus, an even greater irony is that while people are doubting South Africa's ability to even upgrade a jet fighter, most have no idea that South Africa had its own fighter aircraft project ongoing during the 1980s, called Project Carver. It was a twin-engine fighter completely designed in SA. Unfortunately a lack of funding meant it never reached the flyable prototype stage, but that's neither here nor there. Funding shortages for new aircraft are heartbreaking (ask Israel with the Lavi), but it's no reflection on technical ability.
In fact, I think the ancient Greeks (copied by the Roman, Pliny the Elder), had it best: Ex Africa semper aliquid novi! (there is always something new out of Africa)....Impi 13:29, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)
The original question was posed by me long ago. i by no means doubt the Atlas engineers and their ingenuity and self reliance (one only has to look at the bomb project). The reason i asked is that a very good authority on military aviation intimated that they weren't *just* upgrades. New built airframes such as Neshers seams more plausible.160.5.247.213 07:36, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It has never been denied that some airframes were sourced from Israel, in fact in my reply above I asserted that this was indeed the case. This is true for five of the Cheetah Ds and all of the Cheetah Cs. These were not however "new-build" airframes, instead part of the Cheetah upgrade involved reworking the older airframes to "zero-hour" condition, after which the upgrade itself was initiated. — Impi 08:22, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
On YouTube there are interviews by channel Aircraft Interview with pilot Cobus Toerien who flew F-1s in the 80s and Cheetahs when the 90s came and he stated C models were from Kfirs, I think you should check it out for yourself for helpful info from someone who was there. Hope this helps. Befok bobbejaan (talk) 13:43, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge of other article

[edit]

I think the other Cheetah article should be merged into this one - this is a far superior article, and is better written. Artagra 23:45, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, and thanks for complimenting the article. To be honest though, there doesn't seem to be much usable information in the other article, so deleting it might be the best approach. — Impi 16:18, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I also agree. I will be bold and make that page a redirect to this one ... if anybody has a problem with that I will put that article up for deletion. Regards, Elf-friend 08:19, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Probable error on rate of climb

[edit]

The article indicates a rate of climb for the Cheetah of 1,484 m/min. The Mirage III from which it was derived climbs at a rate of nearly 5,000 m/min with essentially the same engine. I think something is wrong with the number shown. Plaasjaapie 04:05, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's definitely an error - looks like someone misread feet for metres. Piston engined light aircraft can climb at rates in that range. Roger (talk) 23:13, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's definitely an error, not sure how that crept in. There aren't many good sources on the Cheetah C readily available, mostly due to the SAAF's continuing secrecy regarding much of the aircraft, which makes obtaining accurate statistics a bit of a hit and miss affair. Do either of you have a reliable source on the Cheetah C's actual rate of climb? Otherwise we might have to leave it blank. — Impi (talk) 11:05, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The only source I have is a small book by Heitmann "Krygstuig van Suid Afrika" (1988) published by Struik ISBN 086977638X It contains this rather odd statistic "Tyd tot 10 975m - 3 minute" which seems to be reffering to the D model. Roger (talk) 18:56, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mirage 2000 F-16

[edit]

Why is that Mid-Life Updated Mirage III, comparable to fighters like the Mirage 2000 or the F-16? These are both a generation newer and are truely multi-role fighters. In contrast the Cheetah can be compared to the MiG-21, MiG-23/27 or the F-5 Tiger II, although the F-5 does not reach Mach 2. 92.227.122.25 (talk) 00:33, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fully agree - text should be deleted or updated to reflect Mig-21/23/27. Farawayman (talk) 17:01, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Project Carver and the Cheetah

[edit]

The introductory paragraph ignores Project Carver entirely in its discussion of the evolution of the Cheetah. It is my understanding that the Cheetah was a stopgap project to counter the MiG-23, while the Carver was being developed as a counter to Su-27 and MiG-29 aircraft that would eventually have made their way to southern Africa.

vs. F15

[edit]

I have removed the following text:

A measure of the capabilities of the Cheetah C is the result of an air-combat maneuvering (ACM) exercise between the Cheetah Cs of 2 Squadron and F-15E Strike Eagles of the 494th Fighter Squadron, United States Air Force at RAF Lakenheath, after which the score tallies for each side were almost exactly equal.

This text has probably been taken from [2] - and as this is a general discussion forum with the un-sourced contribution having been made by a "Junior Member" this statement cannot be used as a verifiable or respected source. Naturally, it deserves to be re-instated in the article if properly substantiated / sourced. Farawayman (talk) 16:58, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Atlas Cheetah. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:56, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Atlas Cheetah. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:58, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Atlas_Cheetah&oldid=1205465615"