They also mentioned the lack of HMCS as a weak point….. both the Swiss and French pilots at A2A exercises. Swings and roundabouts. It’s all about avionics and I don’t see the Typhoon being behind the Rafale in 5 years time, quite the opposite.

Rafale will get HMS and a number of other goodies due to the Indian contract.

Perhaps Rafale and Typhoon will be roughly on par 5 years from now, mainly depending on how much is invested in Typhoon. What will remain though is that 5 years from now both will be far above and beyond the F-16, F-18, and F-15 in terms of capabilities.

As I see it, AESA and an up-to-date EW system could make the F-15E more 4.5th gen than many.

It could be argued that the programming has already been done on 5th gen aircraft and could be re-used.

RCS? Given that they fly with external stores and usually DTs (the Indians were especially keen on the DT carrying strike radius), I don’t think the clean RCS is that important. Sure clean RCS is maybe different by a factor of 10, but add on all the junk and it falls to maybe 2x. It could also be argued that the same crap applied to an F-18SH gets you even better. EPAWSS is an AESA based EW system, it’s also being put together by the same guys who did the F-22 and F-35 EW systems and have been contract for the B-21.

There is a reason why modern a/c like SH, Rafale, Typhoon and Gripen have reduced RCS — it’s not just for fun!

Does the F-15 have reduced RCS? Does it have sensor fusion? Etc, etc.

I would hardly call the gain of sensor fusion”marginal”…

I agree.

Thanks for a nice summary!

It could if the target was within IRST range, but really the added accuracy going from the best non-interferometric to interferometric RWR isn’t big enough to make a significant difference in IRST detection range (because that depends on the IRST itself) and once the IRST has it, you’ve immediately got bearing accuracy in the microradians regardless of the RWR system. And if you are within IRST range, and you already got radar lock before firing the missile, why not cue the IRST then and forget the RWR? It still doesn’t give you very good range accuracy though, hence why you still need the radar. And it isn’t just about target lock either, there’s the RF attack and RF cyberwarfare function to consider. The swash-plate gives you more scope to maintain the desired course whilst still jamming.

This is not how it works in a 4.5/5 gen a/c like Rafale or F-35. Sensor fusion is handling this automatically, no need to “forget” about the RWR or anything.

Implementation of the “multi-sensor data fusion” into the RAFALE translates into accurate, reliable and strong tracks, uncluttered displays, reduced pilot workload, quicker pilot response, and eventually into increased situational awareness.

It is a full automated process carried out in three steps:
1.Establishing consolidated track files and refining primary information provided by the sensors,
2.Overcoming individual sensor limitations related to wavelength / frequency, field of regard, angular and distance resolution, etc, by sharing track information received from all the sensors,
3.Assessing the confidence level of consolidated tracks, suppressing redundant track symbols and decluttering the displays.

http://www.dassault-aviation.com/en/defense/rafale/the-sheer-power-of-multisensor-data-fusion/

I am afraid, that to hold people accountable for anything more than a tragic mistake two things need to happen.

1. Prove that they wanted to shoot down the airliner OR
2. Prove that they knew how to fully use the BUK and failed to do so via negligence or by intention (see point 1).

Rebels cannot be expected to fully know how to use a complicated (no matter how old) AA system. They don’t even need to know how a military plane looks like. They are rebels (or freedom fighters or whatever else you want to call them)

If the investigators can indeed prove the two points above, they can prosecute the hell out of anyone they want.

So just by calling themselves rebels and starting to operate weapons they cannot be “expected” to know how to operate they should not be held responsible?

If I steal a 737 and crash it into the ground because I am not able to operate such a sophisticated piece of equipment, I should not be held responsible? Good to know!

Problem is there are still people who are talking about the F35 not as it is today… but at it supposed to be in 10 years from now… r

I agree that the F-35 still needs to develop further, but 10 years — that is pulling it a bit too far IMHO. I believe that already 2-3 years from now the F-35 will be quite well developed.

Slovakia might buy, rather than lease, a fleet of Gripen fighter jets from Sweden’s Saab or might choose a different supplier, Defense Minister Peter Gajdos said on Wednesday.

The four-party government led by Prime Minister Robert Fico, re-elected for a second consecutive term in March, had been in talks with Saab on the lease of Gripens to replace Slovakia’s outdated Russian Mig-29 fighter jets.

“The government extended my mandate to negotiate on the lease or purchase … and also untied my hands to negotiate with other states in order to best use our resources in terms of price and securing Slovakia’s defense,” Gajdos said.

Saab was still Slovakia’s first choice, he said.

Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-slovakia-defence-idUSKCN11Y1K0

And I don’t blame the people who fired the missile anyway.

I disagree — the people firing the missile definitely should be held responsible for this.