SignI never said it is useless. but it does not meet the standards of Russian and Israeli airforces. Israel is going to buy JSF. (Plenty of money and willling partners to ressurect 21st century version of Lavi)
Russia after helping china with J-10 in 1990s has no intention of building some thing along those lines.
J-10 have nothing to do with Gripen. Gripen have never tried to be fitted into israelis or russian requirement (why?!). More likely be a good oppontent to them.
These are mostly useless surveys and have nothing to with unqiue and independent R&D needed for military industrial complex free from colloboration.
Sorry, you cant create a special “innovative culture” in some special companies. Its in the culture of the society as a hole, due to be created from kindergarden to universites.
Those were swedish when they were small companies from garage. now they are colloborative efforts from across the world. and most of them have nothing to do with aircraft manufacturing. There is no unique titanium and composite manufacturer in Sweden. so it is highly unlikely some strong light weight and longer life materials and still can counteract high performance stresses on 5G fighters can be manufactured in sweden.
Saab Aerostructures and Volvo Aero are two big companies in A/C material industry.
Material science have students in every university in Sweden.This is one of those areas why Sweden is ranked in second in the world in the innovation field. Please readup before making any statments. it only makes you look like a troll. Trolls are likely getting banned…
Than there is domestically developed missiles technology and rapidly implementing changes incase it is compromised. I doubt sweden can create AAM without exteranl help and still wont be top of the line. as external help is always limited without domestic experiance base.
Sweden doesnt understand why you need to develop things on your own.
Instead develop truly groundbraking AAMs with your friends. Like IRST and Meteor. Both which Sweden develop and manufacture key parts. For the rest search för “Saab bofors dynamics” and learn more of the Robot 17, NLAW, AT4 CS ,TAURUS, RBS15 etc..
http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab_Bofors_Dynamics
Than there is lack of money for yearly procurement. how many prototypes of Gripen NG has been built in past couple of years. and its serial production is highly dependent on some export order and even if that export order materializes. the yearly procurement is not more than 5 or 6 and that couple of years into future. i think with this slow procurment most of experiance people will get retired or start some thing else. not easy to find and train new labor. This is not competivie and efficient way of building airplane. and you still have to import majority of components externally.
Saab have no problem filling the orderbooks. Please readup before making any statments, first prototype will fly this year.
nope. . every supercomputer is uniquely tailored to use with unique software capabilities and it takse years of testing
No need to be tailored. Depending on software layers and calculation tools. A smart solution is to use civil standards as your backbone. Sukhoi seems to go another, more expensive and less efficient roote. One wonder why. Maybe there not aloud to use western code standards. In my mind this would make them very much cripled in a digital world, based on standards.
SignI wonder what the idea of those big front faceing areas under the small intakes are for (or airbrakes).
Look at the visibility throu the canopy…
Maybe a futuristic sensor.. i wonder if the israelis feels much more safe today, after looking at this glass fiber model..
Signsee below,
This is priceless, what planet do you live on? I strongle recomment last issue of The economist, google any country innovation or creativity rating, country competative index, budget balance…..
.
http://www.globalinnovationindex.org/gii/main/fullreport/index.html
http://www3.weforum.org/docs/CSI/2012-13/GCR_Rankings_2012-13.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_credit_rating
It really stands out.. 😀
Signan AEW asset for Canada would indeed be a good idea, concidering the size of the country, but thats another topic.
looking at the number platforms competing, i think the F/A-18E/F, Typhoon and Rafale have the best chances.
but concidering the size of Canada and the range requirement (something the CF-18A always fell short), why not just go for the F-15SE, sure its a bit bigger and based on an older design, but it still has potential.as for the Gripen, i really dont see it being a succes with the canucks, its a bit small, it doesnt have the range or payload. and i think the RCAF prefers a twin-engine.
but pernonally, i think this going the same way as the Dutch gripen plan, and they are going to end up with the F-35 anyway.
THe only answer to “your problem” is the rafale, which fells short on the pricetag. probably depends on the indian deal thou. Do you know Canadians requirements on range? please share with us.
SignIdeally I think it should go like this.
Canada does the maths again – Orders Super Hornet like for like +1 total 78 aircraft. At the same time with savings made over the F-35 they order the following. Also offers the ability to use tankers already in service.
5 x C-295AEW&C ordered first
19x C-295MPA to replace the CP-140 & CP-140a ordered in the next 5 yearsI really can’t understand why they don’t have thier own AWACS but this mix while not matching the E-3 offers value for money and ease of support with same base aircraft.
I would go for a Last gen Erieye instead. 😉 Probably even cheaper if the go for turboprop.
SignI am little afraid you are too focused on Swedish approach which does not quite fit Russia. You have to consider that Russian industry has developed under centralized planning system which almost entirely focused on concentrating all skilled workforce on defense and space related assets. The result is a society which can build world-class nuclear submarines and space stations but is unable to design a half-decent car or vacuum cleaner. Weird, I know…. 😎
Well, for a lean and innovative development a civil market is a must, you can always compencate for that with resources. I have a big respect of russian universities, which probably have one of the best math competence in the world. And therefore a good base.
But they still lack the above.
SignErr .. no. Ericsson engineers devised what was probably the first true cellular mobile phone systems to be commercially operational (NMTS – Nokia was also involved), & had a big input into the GSM digital system, but they certainly didn’t invent cellular telephony*.
Mobile telephony was invented by a lot of people, over many years. The operating principles of cellular telephony were worked out in the 1940s, & the technology needed to make it work was gradually developed over the next few decades by many people & firms in many countries.
*I’m ignoring the many pre-cellular mobile phone systems, because they were dead ends, limited by the technology to tiny numbers of users.
sorry to be a little black and white…:o
SignUsing commercial brands is a quite unlucky idea. Russians have never penetrated commercial markets very effectively, most of their big brands are either defense or commodity related. Sukhoi is by no means a “worse” or “better” brand than Ericsson, they just do not have any commercial product portfolio. People not related to military or civil aviation will hardly get to seeing their name. If it wasn’t for Sony-Ericsson cellphone lineage, who would drecognize Ericsson as a reasonable brand, except for those few antenna and radar geeks?
why not?
Ok, i have biggest respect of sukhoi, but..
For a healthy development of tech you need a healhy community of engineers, the size of the total community Universities/civil industry/defence industry support eachother and crosspolinate and breed ideás.
A healthy synergy is most wanted for lean and innovative development.
Signactually LM Ericsson invented the mobil phone system..
Signanyone got a data sheet were it states the weight and power of th PAK-FA engine?
SignYou have any basis for that statement, or pulling it out of your rear end?
TR1, they do not have any prof for their accusations. But i think over all in electronics and software the west got the upperhand. Take a look on the civil side. Name one big russian brand.
i can name the top of the iceberg of type western:
Software/electronics:
Google
Apple
IBM
Microsoft
And in high frequency/antenna devices
Nokia
Motorola
Ericsson
These firms drives the community and economy as well as the know-how of western workers in those areas. Easily transfered to radar benefited tech.
SignWhich is what the Flanker, F-15s are, for the fighter world. Just ask any Viper jock about the Eagle. 😉
A F-16 have a big RCS for its size, and a small radar for it size. its not a competition.
Countries like India cannot field many AEW&C/AWACS platforms, so they do appreciate long ranged sensors on their primary fighters as well..with low RCS platforms/ high ERP jammers, you need long ranged sensors to compensate for the shortfall
India could field more AEW if the had cheaper fighters 🙂 and therfore be more “passive”. Note that IR sensors isnt active and is still viable for a small jet to detect a big “hottie”.
I didn’t get this..
Anyways, just look at the radar aperture on a Flanker sized platform versus what is on a MiG-29/Tejas/Gripen etc. 1 sqr mtr versus 650mm. That translates to larger gain, and much better performance for the same ERP.[/
Sensors doesnt get bigger with generations. The size translates into bigger RCS and the race is on.
A bigger jet doesnt detect a smaller jet faster than the smaller jet detects the bigger.
Thing is mixed missions are increasingly likely…the big advantage of Multirole heavies is you can send them into a deep strike mission loaded for both the A2A and A2G mission.
What I like about the Su-35 is that it has wet wings (which means longer endurance, and time on target). Its ideal for complete enemy air suppression. You send a Su-35 package out, they can take out your GBAD with long range ARMs (Kh-31), do DEAD with Kh-38s, take out AWACs or even unwary fighters at range with RVV-BDs, can carry RVV-SD/MD for BVR/WVR and after all that, still hang around to keep your remaining fighters off the runway…this sort of flexibility is possible with these zerstorers.. thats flexibility which offensive AF’s prize.
And it can do this without sacrificing range at the same rate a light fighter would, when it starts getting loaded towards it max limits..
This is a special mission and a special strategy, made for a SU AF. A gripen AF would have done it with more and cheaper fighters, more teamwork(info share and utilation) and with less vulnerability (dispersed) and less logistical footprint. Thats it.
SignA larger fighter carries more space to carry larger, more effective sensors which translate directly into more capability to operate autonomously, has more growth potential on account of that very fact and can hence add more value to an AF which has limited number of force multipliers.
Then buy a A380 as a fighter. It will have enormous growth potential
Seriuosly
1. Operate autonomosly, isnt a problem for a Gripen, but its strongpoint is the opposite .
Dispersered assets that teams together is always much stronger. Information sharing and utiliesing is the force multiplier not size. Big size means higher costs and lesser pilot training, and therefore a force divider.
2. Sensors is better if bigger, that is right if its at the same tech level, but a bigger fighter is more visible for enemy sensors. So this counteracts each other. bigger isnt better in that sense.
3. Big Payload possiblity are only good in very rare occations and thats not in
A2A missions. Better fuelfraction is maybe possible for a bigger jet, but not always the case. That is better for endurance.
4. Small jets will have equial potential. Normally a sensor is replaced these days, not added as on the 3 gen. and therefore equial potential.
Sign2 Saab J32B Lansen build 1958-1960 vere upgraded to J32J in SweAF and still fly (air measurements)
Sign
got to love the Jaguar
not really..
Sign In
