Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning and F-22 'Raptor' : News & Discussion

[Picdelamirand-oil]

In 2019, in metropolitan France, the median standard of living of the population is 22,040 euros per year. This corresponds to a disposable income of €1,837 per month for a single person and €3,857 per month for a couple with two children under 14.
For a single person the expenditure on food is €272 i.e. 272/1837 = 14.8% and for a couple with children it is €472 i.e. 472/3857 = 12.24%.
So even if food exceeds salary increases by 10%, this only impacts the standard of living of the French by 1.2 to 1.5%.

 

[Rajput Lion]

No, the only 6th generation aircraft are the Gripen E/F and the Rafale. Because they are aircraft where survivability is achieved without giving considerable importance to stealth, but rather by a combination of factors that include, in addition to stealth, agility, terrain following, electronic warfare, good tactical situational awareness and weapons effectiveness. Electronics is evolving faster than metalworking and coating chemistry, and after 20 years it makes a difference.

Even IAF is most impressed by these two fighters. And I can clearly see that in our MKI upgrade and Tejas MK2, how they are following the Gripen-E example. F-35, just a no go!

 

[Optimist]

Google is my friend...

5TH Generation Fighters | Lockheed Martin

did you read it? why doesn't your link agree with you
Welcome to a new era in military aviation: the F-22 Raptor and F-35 Lightning II - the world's only 5TH Generation Fighters. These aircraft signal the arrival of battle-changing systems and are the only fighters that will defeat the threats of tomorrow.

5TH Generation Fighters represent a quantum leap in air-to-air and air-to-ground capabilities that provide an order of magnitude increase in operational effectiveness over legacy fighters. These capabilities ensure air dominance for the U.S. military and allied joint forces from Day One and for decades to come

 

[Panzerjager]

No, the only 6th generation aircraft are the Gripen E/F and the Rafale. Because they are aircraft where survivability is achieved without giving considerable importance to stealth, but rather by a combination of factors that include, in addition to stealth, agility, terrain following, electronic warfare, good tactical situational awareness and weapons effectiveness. Electronics is evolving faster than metalworking and coating chemistry, and after 20 years it makes a difference.

That describes just about everything. Typhoons, latest versions of F-15, F-18s, F-16s, certainly latest Flankers. I would put Gripen E ahead of Rafale. Gripen is more new and cost effective. I don't see the point in paying so much for Rafale when Gripen does the same things better and Gripen is more modern by about 20 years which as you point out makes a big difference. I can see why Brazil picked Gripen E/F over Rafale. Rafale is good but even among the 6th gen, its not getting any younger. Dassault is already looking to the future with something new.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

That describes just about everything. Typhoons, latest versions of F-15, F-18s, F-16s, certainly latest Flankers. I would put Gripen E ahead of Rafale. Gripen is more new and cost effective. I don't see the point in paying so much for Rafale when Gripen does the same things better and Gripen is more modern by about 20 years which as you point out makes a big difference. I can see why Brazil picked Gripen E/F over Rafale. Rafale is good but even among the 6th gen, its not getting any younger. Dassault is already looking to the future with something new.

Yes, the Swedes managed to make a good Mirage 2000, but Dassault passed that stage long ago.

 

[Optimist]

Dassault passed that stage long ago.

They are up to a FA-18c/d, with a substandard aesa.
Have you seen the old hornet GaN Aesa radar? It looks quite good.

 

[BMD]

 

[Panzerjager]

Yes, the Swedes managed to make a good Mirage 2000, but Dassault passed that stage long ago.

Yes. "long ago". You said yourself they are both 6th generation. And the Gripen E is more modern than Rafale. better and newer engine (same as Tejas), Gripen E has GaN AESA, a cockpit that has an excellent wide angle display and doesn't look like a time capsule from the 1980s like Rafale, while also managing to cost less. 6th generation. 20 years makes a difference, you really said it. Rafale went into service in 2001, Gripen E 2022.

Operational Signal environment for EW systems is becoming more and more complex. Systems developed 20 years ago are not able to handle all these signals, making it difficult to differentiate the threats signals from other signals. MFS-EW is made to handle the signal environment of today and in the future by using ultra wide band digital receivers, advanced signal processing and extensive processing capacity that can distinguish the real threat signals from others. The MFS EW is fully integrated with other tactical mission systems on board the aircraft, and there are also sensor fusion on several layers in the aircraft, combining all tactical sensors in Gripen E such as the AESA Radar, Electro optical sensors, IRST and also the datalink. These sources and sensors are integrated into one high level sensor fusion and situational awareness system for the pilot to enhance the effectiveness of the mission.

The new improved Electronic Warfare system of Gripen E | Stories | Saab

One of the biggest changes lies inside the plane.

www.saab.com

 

[Rajput Lion]

Yes. "long ago". You said yourself they are both 6th generation. And the Gripen E is more modern than Rafale. better and newer engine (same as Tejas), Gripen E has GaN AESA, a cockpit that has an excellent wide angle display and doesn't look like a time capsule from the 1980s like Rafale, while also managing to cost less. 6th generation. 20 years makes a difference, you really said it. Rafale went into service in 2001, Gripen E 2022.

Operational Signal environment for EW systems is becoming more and more complex. Systems developed 20 years ago are not able to handle all these signals, making it difficult to differentiate the threats signals from other signals. MFS-EW is made to handle the signal environment of today and in the future by using ultra wide band digital receivers, advanced signal processing and extensive processing capacity that can distinguish the real threat signals from others. The MFS EW is fully integrated with other tactical mission systems on board the aircraft, and there are also sensor fusion on several layers in the aircraft, combining all tactical sensors in Gripen E such as the AESA Radar, Electro optical sensors, IRST and also the datalink. These sources and sensors are integrated into one high level sensor fusion and situational awareness system for the pilot to enhance the effectiveness of the mission.

The new improved Electronic Warfare system of Gripen E | Stories | Saab

One of the biggest changes lies inside the plane.

www.saab.com

Gripen-E is ahead of Rafale currently because of GaN radar and Gan EW suite. It has 6 ECM transmitters(4 on wingtips and 2 on tail) vs 3 of Rafale(2 on canard roots, one at the back of the tail).

Also Gripen-E uses ultra-wideband digital receivers which can intercept frequencies from 0.5GHZ to 40GHz. Rafale for example can between 2 GHz to 40GHz.

However, Indian Rafale has supposedly low band interception modes. So for our Rafale SPECTRA may have been updated to intercept even UHF signals?? Not sure though.


But being twin-engined plane, Rafale will always have better kinematic performance and survivability than Gripen-E.

 

[randomradio]

The problem is that the notion of "generation" is an L.M. marketing invention that was born when the F-22 was the manufacturer's flagship aircraft. The definition of the 5th generation was therefore based on the characteristics of the F-22 and obviously included the supercruise.
But then L.M. wanted the F-35 to be 5th generation too and to do so he changed the necessary characteristics and of course he removed all the links to the old definition. This means that to find a definition that indicates supercruise as a necessary feature you have to look for very old documents elsewhere than at L.M.

I found one quite convincing, from 2009, in Air Force Magazine and it states that the definition he gives is generally accepted by all specialists

https://www.airandspaceforces.com/PDF/MagazineArchive/Documents/2009/October%202009/1009fighter.pdf

It is on the third page of the document which is marked p 40

Actually, the Russians first gave the F-22 the 5th gen designation. LM simply took it to the next level in their marketing.

 

[randomradio]

Decisions in Congress and the Defense Department regarding these aircraft programs may have important long-term implications. The F/A-18E/F is in full-rate production. The V-22, and the F-22 are now in transition from research-development (R&D) to procurement and could remain in production for decades. The next-generation combat aircraft that are expected to result from joint-service efforts now getting underway through the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program might be in production through the 2020s

https://sgp.fas.org/crs/weapons/IB92115.pdf

(Originally published in the year 2000. updated 2006)

******

The Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program is expected to develop and build a family of new-generation tactical aircraft for the Air Force, the Marine Corps, the Navy, and Britain’s Royal Navy. As now projected, the JSF is the Defense Department’s largest acquisition program in terms of cost and number of aircraft to be produced



The JSF program emerged in late 1995 from the Joint Advanced Strike Technology (JAST) program, which began in late 1993 as a result of the Administration’s Bottom-Up Review (BUR) of U.S. defense policy and programs. Having affirmed plans to abandon development of both the A-12/AFX aircraft that was to replace the Navy’s A-6 attack planes and the multi-role fighter (MRF) that the Air Force had considered to replace its F-16s, the BUR envisaged the JAST program as a replacement for both these programs. In 1994, the JAST program was criticized bysome observersfor being a technology-development program rather than a focused effort to develop and procure new aircraft. In 1995, in response to congressional direction, a program led by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) to develop an advanced short takeoff and vertical landing (ASTOVL) aircraft was incorporated into the JAST program, which opened the way for Marine Corps and British Navy participation.6 The name of the program was then changed to JSF to focus on joint development and production of a next-generation fighter/attack plane.

https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/20020111_RL30563_f4cf70861cb78ab27e9029846fa9c51ccfbf6995.pdf

The CRS reports above show that the JSF program (X-32 or X-35) were going to be "next-generation" already as had been written into the nomenclature from the start.

Yeah, LM never liked the 5th gen moniker until the Russians came in. Then LM flew to ridiculous lengths to market it when Gates was busy trying to shut it down in lieu of the F-35. So LM pushed the narrative that a 5th gen jet needs supercruise to keep the F-22 line open. Then they had to tone it down 'cause it was impacting the F-35 program, after their great screw up, and switched over to the narrative that only sensor fusion and stealth are enough, supercruise is secondary.

Now the narrative is changing back to high speed being a requirement for 6th gen. So high end performance is soon gonna make a comeback in marketing brochures.

People are sheep, mate. The fact is you need everything, 'cause weapons are all kinetic. You need speed to get around the battlespace, stealth to stay hidden and sensors and fusion to make sense of the battlespace. Without even one of these, you are dead. How you say? If you lack speed, you are too slow, a kinetic weapon will kill you. If you lack stealth, you are easily seen and a kinetic weapon will kill you. If you lack sensors, then you can't see the enemy and a kinetic weapon will kill you. That's about it.

Another thing to note is, sensor fusion is secondary, sensors are more important, because even today the best sensor fusion capability around is the human brain. The F-35's sensor fusion is blown out of proportion because inexperienced pilots are expected to deliver results very quickly, so a machine makes up for the difference, and that's the main selling point of fusion. Everything is done for the pilot and the pilot simply has to take action. But high end capabilities are expected to be handled by experienced pilots who are capable of doing better than a fusion engine. Human brain versus a fusion engine, the human brain will always win (although that will change with General AI, but people will compensate for that with neural links).

 

[RISING SUN]

A

Kidhar kya post kar raha haun bhai ?

Had opened Ukraine thread however I think this thread got clicked & opened for posting. As I was travelling in local to office, missed the header and posted erroneously. Have requested moderators to delete the post.

Thanks for the heads-up as I was wondering myself where did my post go before posting again in correct thread.

 

[randomradio]

That describes just about everything. Typhoons, latest versions of F-15, F-18s, F-16s, certainly latest Flankers. I would put Gripen E ahead of Rafale. Gripen is more new and cost effective. I don't see the point in paying so much for Rafale when Gripen does the same things better and Gripen is more modern by about 20 years which as you point out makes a big difference. I can see why Brazil picked Gripen E/F over Rafale. Rafale is good but even among the 6th gen, its not getting any younger. Dassault is already looking to the future with something new.

Rafale is a high end jet, Gripen is not. Goes back to high end performance. Twin engine, supercruise, 11G performance etc. Gripen is more along the lines of an improved Mirage, pretty much a generation behind when it comes to performance.

And Rafale has a better development roadmap, Gripen's at the end of its lifecycle.

 

[randomradio]

Yes. "long ago". You said yourself they are both 6th generation. And the Gripen E is more modern than Rafale. better and newer engine (same as Tejas), Gripen E has GaN AESA, a cockpit that has an excellent wide angle display and doesn't look like a time capsule from the 1980s like Rafale, while also managing to cost less. 6th generation. 20 years makes a difference, you really said it. Rafale went into service in 2001, Gripen E 2022.

Operational Signal environment for EW systems is becoming more and more complex. Systems developed 20 years ago are not able to handle all these signals, making it difficult to differentiate the threats signals from other signals. MFS-EW is made to handle the signal environment of today and in the future by using ultra wide band digital receivers, advanced signal processing and extensive processing capacity that can distinguish the real threat signals from others. The MFS EW is fully integrated with other tactical mission systems on board the aircraft, and there are also sensor fusion on several layers in the aircraft, combining all tactical sensors in Gripen E such as the AESA Radar, Electro optical sensors, IRST and also the datalink. These sources and sensors are integrated into one high level sensor fusion and situational awareness system for the pilot to enhance the effectiveness of the mission.

The new improved Electronic Warfare system of Gripen E | Stories | Saab

One of the biggest changes lies inside the plane.

www.saab.com

Yeah, Rafale's fallen behind by a few years. An aircraft that was supposed to be the first to introduce GaN in a big way could now become the last to do so.

 

[randomradio]

Also Gripen-E uses ultra-wideband digital receivers which can intercept frequencies from 0.5GHZ to 40GHz. Rafale for example can between 2 GHz to 40GHz.

That's not what ultra-wideband means. It's something else entirely.

Bandwidth (signal processing) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Rajput Lion]

That's not what ultra-wideband means. It's something else entirely.

Bandwidth (signal processing) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Ok thanks. But I was talking about frequency band coverage. This pics depicts what I's trying to convey:

Gripen-E's RWR covers UHF band to Ka band while Rafale F3's SPECTRA covers between S band to Ka band. That's what I meant by 'ultra wideband'.

 

[Bon Plan]

I do not see what you claimed. LM even go out of their way to specify the F-22's supercruise. they don't mention the F-16 at all like you said. in keeping with something published in 2009 it seems to be fairly straightforward and written very broadly. LM won the JSF contest in 2001. Since super cruise is not a JSF requirement, and LM never says its a 5th generation requirement, you made that up.

Lockheed actually specify here that F-22 super cruises and not F-35, they actually make it very clear.

Extreme Fighter Performance

Subsonic, supersonic, high g's, quick acceleration even loaded with air-to-air and air-to-ground weapons, the F-22 and F-35 are true fighters while still incorporating their unmatched VLO stealth signatures. The F-22, with its unique features of high-altitude supercruise and thrust-vectoring, surpasses any existing or planned fighter.

"Any existing or planned fighter" would actually include the F-35 and they don't even try to hide that the F-35 does not do what F-22 can.

I have read back the last 15 pages or so in this thread and what it looks like to me is about the same around 3 vs 3 posters antagonizing one another. I read that theyre going to be making 150 F-35s per year and they just signed a contract for something like 400 more F-35s? "pwning" the F-35 over engine heat seems pretty insignificant in the grand scheme of things. F-35 has won Europe. Putin has accelerated it further.

Its all over but the crying as they say, but the good news is, the engine is underspecced! Who cares? well the people arguing on the internet care very deeply. Winning on the internet while losing in Europe really matters.

anyway. I read this link about 3 times and I never saw them say what you claimed, if I missed it by all means please show me. LM are smart enough to say "fighter agility" Which is very broad, and they specify the F-22 supercruises, not all "5th generation"

we are stuck with bitter posters arguing semantics over things they think LM said 14 years ago?

Supercruise is a must since F22. They tried to with F35, but as it is shape as a sugar piece, despite 12T of thrust it can't.

LM remove "supercruise" from the later communication because F35 fails. And the older publication are no more reachable.

older one (scratch from 2010) :

https://www.lockheedmartin.com/capabilities/air_power/5th-gen/

one recent but not directly from LM :

5TH Generation Fighters | Lockheed Martin

This is a wikipedia extract where Supercruise is :

 

[Rajput Lion]

Doesn't F-35 hold 1.2 mach without burners for some time? If yes, then it does have limited 'supercruise'.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

Doesn't F-35 hold 1.2 mach without burners for some time? If yes, then it does have limited 'supercruise'.

No F-35 hold 1.2 mach with burners for some time. It needs afterburn to get through the transonic phase and then it can turn off the afterburn and with dry thrust it stays supersonic for a minute or two, but all supersonic aircraft can do that!

 

[Panzerjager]

Gripen-E is ahead of Rafale currently because of GaN radar and Gan EW suite. It has 6 ECM transmitters(4 on wingtips and 2 on tail) vs 3 of Rafale(2 on canard roots, one at the back of the tail).

Also Gripen-E uses ultra-wideband digital receivers which can intercept frequencies from 0.5GHZ to 40GHz. Rafale for example can between 2 GHz to 40GHz.

However, Indian Rafale has supposedly low band interception modes. So for our Rafale SPECTRA may have been updated to intercept even UHF signals?? Not sure though.


But being twin-engined plane, Rafale will always have better kinematic performance and survivability than Gripen-E.

Thank you! and very well said!

Half the engines means half the engine matinatince! And Gripen has pretty impressive kinematics, goes over Mach 2 and can supercruise like a 5th generation fighter F-22! It also has that movable radar that increases its field of view. not to mention Gripens ease of maintance overall and rough field and roadside capability.

I do understand why Rafale was picked in India though easily. There is the Naval option Rafale of course, and Rafale was more mature at the time of India's selection. it really made sense. Gripen NG was still in its infancy. I think Gripen E/F has really matured and it showed being a finalist in Canada and Finland while beating Rafale in Brasil. while Rafale either dropped out or placed further down. for as much as people talk about adaptability of Rafale going into the future I don't see it. Same old engines, same old cockpit. its one thing to talk about evolution its another to actually engage in it. Gripen is 20 years improved just like the Picdelamirand-oil said its a shame that when we pointed out the superior 6th generation fighter he suddenly changed his mind. Taking 2nd place is hard and some people struggle or 3rd in brasil