The future engine may depend on which plane wins the MRCA. If SH wins GE 414 would make more sense, and likewise for the Rafale and Typhoon and their respective engines.

If gripen wins maybe F414G with its 22000lb+?

Mach 2 Capability in either case matters littles. As in the real world of Air Combat rarely get’s much past Mach 1.2………..(except the F-22)

Let’s not forget both aircraft are relatively small with small fuel factions. So, Mach 2 speeds would be extremely brief…………Just not practical.

the fuel fractions are ok in gripen…NG 0.31, to compare with f-16 C of 0.28 and F-15J with 0.29.
But than again F-35 is allways best suited for any mission and budget, wouldnt you say so scooter? 😮

Unfortunately, not. Engine and avionics are of American origin, no chance to export it without restrictions.

Not that easy, engine is of course, nearly all american(some volvo) dont know of the fadec.
The avionics is in small part american, more like international. Lots of non restricted components.
Not really know what you are getting at. The restrictions of restricted components are restricted in the same way as in a the F-16 or a SH.
Its a no go on blacklisted countries. So, LM/GE cant sell F-16 to Iran, like SAAB/GE cant sell gripens to Iran.

I would be very surprised if VLO isn’t working – as so much money is continously being poured into the technology.

The F-22 is wanted by the Israeli’s, the Australians and the Japanese. The USAF want more. The F-22 has had such a lopsided kill to loss ratio in recent excersises – it makes you wonder what other technology would be responsible for the ratio. When the USAF claimed the F-22 had an RCS smaller than that of a marble – while the JSF was claimed to have an RCS about the size of gold ball – and you analyse those numbers by comparison to an F-15s/16s RCS you can definitely see a huge benefit. The USAF claim the F-22 can get well within SDBs leathal range vs a S-300.

One can put it down to marketing BS – but I personally doubt it.

Today its working, probably all over the world. especially together with tactics and intelligens. Soon radars has broaden the bands and maybe working together more, via radiolink etc. to see black holes and angular refections. Some systems claim doing so. It should not be to hard. Requirement for that should be:

same radars or normalisation between the raw data.
More and specialiest signalprocesscapabability
Really good radiolink

The eastern vodka drinking boys, claim they have a VHF radar to pinpoint stealthcrafts. Seen pictures of it. A big array antenna that looks like stackt TV antennas on a truck.
They also claim the have a flying system, but that would be little over the edge, i would say, a big VHF antenna wont fly, to big and less compact.

Note also that the US wants stealth to “look invincible”. It´s a sell argument and big big political power, and for stengthing of the pilots who is flying the planes.
Rest of the world wants to “show” that they can tackle the problem, to stengthing their military and political power..;)

Still stealth of today is doomed to be obolete some day. Its a ever ongoing cat and mouse race. Some day a new sensortech comes around.
And ofcourse is the US also looking at this, to counter PAK-FA and others, and in the same way make its older stealth tech obsolete.

NO. they wanted to use it as is on the LCA..it was afterwards that work started on the MMR.

Flight International link

you can see it on this link as well.

I will get back to you on that.
Since it did not happen, i think the deal was not good for ericsson.

Sorry, my last statement was correct……………..While, I would be happy to concide that the Gripen NG is likely cheaper. It clearly in not anywhere close in the level of performance or capabilities.

While budget always have limits. We are talking about weapons of war here. Not Cars, Airliners, or Trains. Fighter Jet like the F-35 is the cornerstone of any countries defense.

Really, the old saying “that you get with you pay for” surely applies here…..

Here’s a question in 1938 if you were Norway. Would you want an Air Force full of Supermarine Spitfires or Brewster Buffalos……………….I have no doubt the latter was much cheaper.

As matter of fact in War cheaper “usually” get you killed!

Hmmph… are you talking about the vietnam war? 😉

most posters here are pretty much unaware of the realities..there was no reason for Saab to want India to join in on the Gripen program from the start. first of all, India didn’t have a very big defence budget then and the money available for spending on defence R&D was paltry to say the least..and even if India had joined the program, what would they have done to help ? there was little expertise and little know-how- it was all wasted after the HF-24..Saab on the other hand, had a captive SwAF customer base, which at that time at least, had a large requirement of over 200 Gripens. now, since the demand is low, they’re happy to share the technology in order to get more customers.

and then again, in those days, European partners would never part with top-notch technology..even France’s Dassault, from whom India had bought the Ouragan, Mystere and Mirage-2000, had offered an analog FBW for the LCA, which prompted ADA to go to Lockheed Martin instead..that one fact alone is responsible for at least 3-4 years delay, due to the post-Pokhran sanctions and seizing of data by LM..had Dassault given the ADA help in developing the all-digital FBW instead of offering an analog one for the LCA, that wouldn’t have happened. maybe it might have flown earlier with an analog FBW, but that one factor alone would’ve made it due for upgrades within half a decade of being inducted.

as for Sweden, they’ve never been a partner for India in defence, and apart from the Bofors guns, there is very little of Swedish origin in the IAF (some EW pods)..

and yet, when ADA did approach Ericcson for the PS-05A radar to be used on the LCA, the Swedes only wanted to install it as-is without parting with any technology related to the PS-05A, and as a result, the deal fell through..for a piddly slotted array radar, they were unwilling to share the technology, so why on earth would they share technology relating to how to build a fighter with India ?

unfortunately for India, Russia had no major expertise with digital FBW in the late 1980s and that led ADA to choose Dassault as initial design consultant and then use LM as its partner for FBW..as it is, the Mirage-2000 was the best jet in the IAF then and ADA wanted a fighter as nimble and multi-role as the M2k was..

and the argument that India should end this LCA program to make its defence stronger is ridiculous and short-sighted..China never made good airplanes when it began, but today they’re attempting a 5th gen fighter on their own..thats only possible due to the confidence and knowhow built up over decades of building and flying their own fighter derivatives and finally with the J-10..even with the JF-17, they’ve been cautious, and haven’t inserted as much technology as they could..but, iteratively, they’ll improve upon it till it finally becomes a good enough 3.5 generation fighter. the same is happening in India..

and for those complaining about the LCA’s avionics, thats just utter trash..anything that was of Indian origin on the Su-30MKI is from the LCA program only. the indigenous Jaguar DARIN-II and MiG-27 upgrades are based on technology developed for the LCA. those alone have saved millions of $ that would’ve been spent keeping factories in UK or Russia alive.

as for those complaining about its cockpit layout and comparing it to the Rafale or Gripen, do a cost analysis as well..the LCA will end up costing around $25-30 million per unit, whereas the Gripen is probably around $50-55 million per unit and even more for the Rafale..there was someone complaining that the FoV on the indigenous CSIO developed HUD is only 25 deg and less than that on the Typhoon..what they ignore is that its more than the Thales supplied HUD and costs probably half or a quarter of what the HUD on the Typhoon costs.

and while its layout is probably a generation behind Rafale or Gripen, its of the same generation as the Mirage-2000-5 Mk.2 which is what IAF’s Mirages will be upgraded to..no one in the IAF is asking Dassault to upgrade the Mirage’s cockpits to Rafale standards, are they?

I for one, know what the LCA will provide the IAF- a cheap, capable, multi-role fighter that can be very useful to bulk up the IAF and still be as capable or more as the bulk of our immediate neighbourhood’s fighters..I mean for God’s sake, the PAF intends to use the JF-17 as its mainstay for the next 30 years ! and we’ve never heard any reports of just how great it is..but to the PAF’s credit, they’re willing to take the JF-17 and work on it to make it a decent fighter. I guess thats what happens when you face a cash crunch.

The indians only wanted to buy lose parts of the Ps-05A like one per artical, like in spare parts(what i know of). i think that call it called technologie stealing. If i had a company i would not sell for that.
The same goes with erieye tech. That´s not serios business to me.

The comparing is just for making some people here aware of the diffrencies in the jets at hand.