Eriksson Microwave, now Saab Microwave, has developed the worlds first AESA AEW&C, the Erieye that became operational 1997 and has been bought by Sweden, Brazil, Mexico, Greece, Pakistan and Thailand. That Saab will be able to take that experience to develop an AESA for Gripen together with Selex is no big gamble.
Making an AEW&C sized radar system is not the same as making a fighter sized system. I'm sure it will help, but it will not allow the sweeds to produce a system of the calibur of the AN/APG 81. An AESA's real capability does not lay in the array hardware itself, its the signal proscessor and the software that give the system its teeth, therefore just because you have an active array does not mean you have a system as capable as the AN/APG 77/79/81 series. Eurofighter fans continually make this mistake, sighting CAPTOR as the answer to the APG 79 just because they are both AESA's, when in reality its 1st gen vs 3rd gen.
Gripen does not have the payload constraints of F-35 and any operator can buy the targeting pod of their choice. If any buyer still would want an integrated equipment it doesn't need to be developed by Saab itself
Payload constraints? What, a dragy, LO compromising targeting pod? EOTS will be as (if not more) capable as any targeting pod on the market at IOC and beyond, Lightning, ATFLIR, Sniper whatever. As for payload being "constrained", AFAIK at IOC F35 will have more systems ready to fire than a new Gippen does now, and due to the external carriage capability, the only constraints the F35 will have on ordinance will be wether they are compatible with US avionics and hardpoints, the same constraints as Grippen, but with more suff ready to drop.
I said similar avionics, not exatly the same, and what avionics do you think Gripen will be lacking compared to Gripen? And when is F-35 to get the same datalink capability that Gripen already has?
Similar avionics? I dont think so bud. In addition to the AN/APG 81 and EOTS (which are both either not intalled or more capable than grippen's comperable systems), the F35 will have a 360 degree IR detection and track envilope provided by the DAS (Distributed Apature System). But the real difference lays in the EW/EWSP suite, 5th gen combat management system and HUI (human user interface), which will all be the worlds most advanced at IOC. The EW/EWSP suite includes a fully digital RWR (quite rare and not even on Typhoon), towed decoys, IRCM dispenser and a formidable offenceive electronic attack capability provided by the APG 81. The only system's that will be comperable at IOC will be on the F/A-18F Bk II and Rafale's spectra EW suite. All of these EW sub-systems are intergrated through the F35's fiber optic data buss and combat management system, whcih is only rivaled by the Rhinos', granting much better rates of information disimination, distribution and prioritization, reducing the workload on the pilot and aiding tactical desision making. This is all presented to the pilot through the most advanced and user freindly HUI anyware, which includes a voice command system (also on Typhoon) and a helmet mounted HUD, allowing information to be presented to the pilot when he is looking at any direction and providing the pilot with 360 degree FLIR imagry from the DAS (i.e. he can see through the floor). All of these systems, the heart of the platforms avionics suite are well ahead of grippens avionics capability, even though they both have a datalink.
Anyone who believes there will not come any new radar technology that will make the F-35 stealth worthless is pretty illusional. Of course there will come better RAM coatings, and they can be used on all fighters, not only F-35. They will actually have better effect on "legacy" fighters and will reduce the difference in RCS.
Any new technology is based on a physical principal, which is known and understood well before a working system is produced. Its a bit rich to state that some magical radar will be produced that will be the end of LO, when its prinicle isnt even known yet. The only 2 anti stealth radars that are known both have real problems when being used in an operational environment, and i am not aware of annother way (from an EM/physics perspective) for a radar to defeat stealth aircraft. Microwave radars are needed because of the acuuracy these systems provide, and these systems are the most vulnerable to current LO techniques. So will there be a new radar system that can defeat F35's type of LO characteristics, sure in the next 100 years, difinatly. But the real question is will such a system be operational in the F35's projected service life, or 30+ years??? i doubt it.
Static uninstalled thrust witout considering engine optimisation and aerodynamics does not say much about speed.
Your right, but the F135 is a very capable, low bypass 40000lb+ trust engine that, although is designed for subsonic cruise, will be very capable when reheating. It's design speed is mach 1.6+ which given its massive thrust potential and operational clean configeration is pretty much a given, and as fast as most strike fighters arround at the moment. But kinematic performance isnt dictated by flat out top spirnt speed, acceleration is just as inportant, and with the same % of internal fuel, F35 will be a better performer than Rafale (by thrust to weight ratio). However when you account for the same acutal weight of fuel, F35 will be a better performer than most commers considering its thrust potential and interal fuel capacity. So i'm not sure "slow" is the most apt lable, maybe in comparison to a Raptor, Typhoon opr Flanker, its top sprint may be a bit slower (its been rumored that F22's sprint speed is less than mach 2 and it's rare that a flanker would actually hit mach 2 in operational configuration, therefore Mach 1.7/8 isnt very far behind), but in overall kinematic performence it's no slouch.
F-35 will be a slow bomb truck simply because that is what has been ordered. The USAF doesn't need a fast A2A fighter, it already has the Raptor, USN first priority is to get better range than the Hornets and USMC is only interested in CAS. It is difficult enough to try to fulfill the wishes of three different branches, getting more than they ask for is not possible.
The US didnt want a bomb truck, they have the B1b and '52 for that. What they wanted was a strike fighter, hence the name Joint Strike Fighter, which includes air superiority, anyway the F35C will be the USN's primary air superiority fighter and it is identical incapability to the USAF's F35A. But stating what the different arms of the US military have or want in simple terms reveals nothing on the F35's air superiority capability. Considering the fact that in the post veitnam era 95% of combat has been BVR perhaps we should have a look at the F35's BVR capability? IMO the 3 major factors in BVR are 1) your Radar/Missile combination and RCS, because it dictates your ability to see and engage (F35 is second only to the F22 in this reguard, and is head and sholders above the rest). 2) Your EW/EWSP suite because of its effect on number 1 (at IOC F35 will be arguiably the most fighter anyware in this respect, with only Rafale and Rhino being comparable). 3) kinematics, the ability to move and improve you tactical position. (F35 is behind Flanker, Typhoon and Raptor in this respect but comperable to most legacy strike fighters including MiG 35, F18C/D/E/F, Viper, Rafale). F35 is miles ahead of everyone apart from the F22A in 1 & 2 and comperable to most in 3. Put simply the F35's LO, networking and LPI radar system will allow the platform to detect, track and engage threats while effectively avioding counter detection and engagement by all legacy plarforms, while disupting threat platforms datalinks and degrading their radar performance, all in a package with comperable raw performance. The F35 will be a devistating BVR performer, easilly outclassing any contemporary platform apart from the raptor. In the WVR threat environment, the combination of the 360 degree detection and track envilope of the DASS and the 360 degree engagement envilope of focal plane array equiped heaters like AIM 132 will effectively allow the F35 to engage a threat at any bearing or at any angle, even directly behind him, without maneuvering. Considering that, even with its poor instentanious or sustained turn rate (compared to Flanker, Typhoon or Raptor), it will be a devistating WVR performer. In real terms the F35 will be a fearsome air superiority platform, and far more capable than any legacy platform, especially Grippen.
I didn't say anything in my last posting about maritime strike, but Gripen is originally designed with anti shipping in mind and is already operational in that role. Any customer only has to integrate the missile of choice.
Oh, they only have to "intergrate the missile of their choice" huh? Its that easy? Considering most contemporary, western multi-role platforms have the radar and avionics capability for effective maritime strike, including Hornet, Rhino, Viper, Strike Eagle and Rafale, all you have to do is intergrate the compatable weapons system of your choice on any of these platforms and you've got a ship buster. So how is Grippen any different?
There is no interest from the US for dedicated anti shipping and any customers would have to pay for that themselves with the money left after cost overruns.
That are being "investigated" you say? Very reassuring...
No interest in a dedicated anti shipping capabiliy? Have you ever heard of JASSM? AGM 158, if it is compleated, will be one of the most potent anti shiping systems operational enyware, considering it's level of LO, warhead and pasive seeker. under current plans this system will be cleared for external carriage ad droping for the F35 at IOC. If you cant buy JASSM well you can integrate the system of your choice, just like grippen.
