CannibalZ3 From United States of America, joined May 2001, 392 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (11 years 7 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 789 times:
The Air & Space article pretty much says (if I remember correctly) that the F-20 failed because it was built for foreign customers that used the F-5 but couldn't buy F-16 replacements for them, because there was a restriction on them. About the time the F-20 came out, which by all accounts I know of was an excellent airplane, the ban on F-16s was lifted, so everyone bought them instead. Hope this helps.
-Zach
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 12707 posts, RR: 80 Reply 3, posted (11 years 7 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 746 times:
The US not buying any did not help, not that they required it.
Never underestimate the 'penis envy' factor in some purchases of fighter aircraft in some parts of the world.
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 12707 posts, RR: 80 Reply 5, posted (11 years 7 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 731 times:
How best to explain? You are some second or third level air force, with a limited budget, you want a new fighter. (If any of your potential enemies have supersonic fighters, you could maybe use one, if not, a good armed trainer like the Hawk 100/200).
But no....you want a big manly top of the range F-16, like the big boys have.
Or maybe you do need a cheapish fighter, the F-20 is made for you, at this time in the 1980's it's weapon options are as good as most F-16's.
But no....the USAF and NATO has F-16's, so you've gotta have 'em. Never mind the F-20 will be easier and cheaper to maintain, important factors in combat.
Imagine these guys like South Park's Eric Cartman, 'I wanna F-16 dammit!'
Clear now?
Jwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 21 Reply 6, posted (11 years 7 months 22 hours ago) and read 719 times:
Wrong aircraft at the wrong time.
It was designed to replace the F-5 as the aircraft for the US to provide in their program to arm poor allies, but by the time it was ready for production those countries the program was dead and the countries chose the more sexy F-16 (which has better specs) to replace it.
Boeing nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (11 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 693 times:
This is one of the "greatest aircraft that never flew".
To bad politics got on the way of this aircraft being a reality. I remember one of it's strong points was that it could go from cold start to 10,000 ft. in less than a minute. Not many, if any, aircraft could do that.
Gregoire From France, joined Sep 2007, 0 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (11 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 680 times:
About penis envy we could also add that it is easy to maintain an aircraft in a big service that one that have not been bought the customer having the choice betwen the F16 and the F20 will have wonder why did the us have not bought the F20 and do we have to pay for the development cost then the F16 was a better plane than the F20 you may like it or not the F16 was a direct competitor of the F20 (as was the Mirage 2000) and the F16 was Better and used in the US so bye bye F20. a similar story happens with the super mirage 4000 that was a heavy fighter for export a great plane never find a customer because not in use in its own country
Sponsor Message: 
From Hong Kong, joined Jul 2001, 33 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 363 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 12707 posts, 
From Portugal, joined Feb 2006, 0 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, 
From France, joined Sep 2007, 0 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
