Somebody asked in a PM about some of the capabilities of the Gripen E; since others may have the same question I decided to re-post some older articles:

The Raven ES-05 active, electronically scanned array radar (AESA), developed by the company’s Edinburgh unit, will be the first production AESA to be mounted on a “repositioner,” a rotating mount that gives the radar a ±100-deg. field of view around the nose. The Skyward-G infrared search and track (IRST) system (from Nebbiano, Italy) is based on experience with the Eurofighter Typhoon’s Pirate IRST and Selex-developed land- and sea-based IRSTs. The fighter also has a new identification friend-or-foe (IFF) system with three electronically steerable antenna arrays, which matches the radar’s range and field of view.

The three main sensors will cue one another automatically to display to pilots a fused picture of airspace around the fighter; it will also be fused with the JAS’s new electronic-warfare system. Finally, sensor data can be shared between Gripens in a flight via data link.

The IRST is capable of detecting low-RCS targets at distances compatible with a beyond-visual-range missile launch, Mason says. “We have seen them,” he responds when asked if Selex IRSTs have tracked low-RCS targets. “We are looking at very small delta-Ts [temperature differences between the target and the background]. Some infrared absorbent paints cause more friction than standard surfaces, and that causes kinetic heating that the IRST will pick up.” Skyward-G does not depend on a supersonic target—“skin heating at 300-400 knots is significant”—and detects heat radiating through the aircraft’s skin from the engine, as well as skin friction and the exhaust plume.

The IRST uses a long-wave focal plane array sensor (a dual-band system, adding mid-wave capability, is a potential upgrade) with three fields of view. In its long-range search mode, the system is an IR telescope with a fast-moving scanning mirror (located in a transparent dome in front of the windshield) and “step-scans” through its search sector. It also has a single-target track mode, and in wide-field mode it provides a night-vision image on the head-up display. As a passive system, IRST does not have inherent range data, but it can perform “kinetic ranging”—the aircraft performs a weaving maneuver and the range is determined by the change in azimuth angle to the target—or the IRSTs on two aircraft can triangulate the target over the TAU-Link.

IRST hardware—the optics, detector and processor—has been improved since the development of Pirate started, but (according to Mason and other industry sources) the most important change has been the development of algorithms, based on operational experience and the analysis of real-world imagery, that look at IR signatures in detail, including variations of color and brightness within the target, in order to filter out false alarms caused by everything from birds to barbecue grills.

The IRST can give the radar a very accurate azimuth and elevation to the target, which allows it to focus its energy and increase the probability of achieving detection and track on a low-RCS target, Mason says. The AESA provides virtually instantaneous beam-steering within its ±70-deg. scan, but the repositioner is slower. One concept to be demonstrated will be the use of two Gripen radars and the TAU-Link to provide a wide-angle picture to both targets.

The new IFF is designed to provide low-latency coverage over the radar’s entire field of view and to its maximum range, and is independent of the radar. That approach has been selected to furnish the best possible information on cooperating targets (such as friendlies and commercial traffic), allowing the IRST and radar to concentrate on potentially hostile aircraft.

http://aviationweek.com/awin/gripen-sensors-claim-counter-stealth-performance

As a passive sensor, it emits no signals and is therefore undetectable as it scans for targets. Once a target is acquired, the IRST can continue to track it whilst undetected, waiting until the last possible moment to switch to an active (but detectable) sensor such as the AESA radar. With ‘lock on after launch’ (LOAL) technology, the IRST can even be used to guide a missile toward the target without using any active sensors at all, letting the missile seeker conduct terminal guidance to the target.

In addition to the on board EW and self-defence suite, the Gripen will also be the first aircraft to offer the new ‘BriteCloud’ off-board active decoy from Selex. BriteCloud is a self-contained Digital RF Memory (DRFM) jammer for * fighters, and was launched by Selex on 6 November 2013. Saab will offer BriteCloud as an electronic warfare option on all versions of Gripen.

BriteCloud is specifically aimed at defeating modern tracking systems, both ground-based and air-based. Its DRFM technology is able to defeat even contemporary chaff discrimination techniques, effectively creating a convincing false target that allows a wide range of threat systems to be countered.

http://saab.com/region/india/about-saab/stories/saab-india-stories/2014/gripen-es-electronic-wizardry-is-the-future/

Saab introduces “Wide Spectrum Combat” (WISCOM) to handle future (VLO) threats:

* Silent swarm ingress
* IRST and passive AESA
* Random AESA emissions
* Beamed datalinks
* Long range Meteor missiles

http://documents.mx/documents/the-gripen-philosophy-international-fighter-conference.html

AFAIK Gripen is the first 4.5 gen fighter with “beamed” (directonal) datalinks(?)

I have jst made some observations that strongly makes the case that we are indeed living in a simulation!!!

This happened when I was studying some new a

National Interest:
Why India Wants France’s Dassault Rafale Fighter Jet: They Can Carry Nuclear Weapons

I suggested this several times in the past, but the idea was always shot down by the experts…

Looking at the last eval, the Typhoon lost mainly on EW, Detection, Acquistion and SA and often not by a huge margin. Well every one of those things is being greatly improved, so I don’t think it can be rationally ruled as being worse at this stage. Nobody has such knowledge of the future.

Well, looking at the overall scores in each category, we see that for the “2015” version the Rafale consistently outperformed the Hornet, which was used as a benchmark (or it performed significantly above the threshold which was set at 6.) Here are the numbers, and the percent improvement from the 6-point threshold:

Aircraft Rafale Typhoon R, %diff T, %diff
Air Pol. 6,98 6,48 16 8
D.C.A. 7,28 6,49 21 8
Escort 7,41 6,54 24 9
Recce 7,63 5,43 27 -10
Strike 7,63 5,76 27 -4

A pity Rafale did not participate in the Danish competition — it would have been interesting to see if it would have been assessed as being consistently better than the Danish F-16.

I suspect it could — in general I have a feeling that many tend to underestimate the “old” Hornets, and how capable the Hornets are compared to e.g. the F-16 block 50/52.

Of course it could be that the Danes have assessed things in a completely different manner — OTOH the way the Rafale has consistently outperformed the Hornet in Switzerland makes one wonder…

Well the bad news is that Radar 2 won’t be for export, certainly not with the RF attack and cyberwarfare functions, so it’s likely irrelevant to the Swiss. Also not really sure how they can judge an aircraft standard that they can’t possibly have analysed yet. Maybe they just don’t want the cost of repeating the full eval. I’m not really to bothered about the Swiss though, I’m more interested in domestic capability and it’s only a very small order.

Me? And not all the Rafale guys trying to deny that it has any weaknesses.:D

Heh, I’m not massively sure the Rafale will ever fly in Indian or Swiss colours either.

Do you have any recent sources for “radar 2”? Are you sure it will ever be implemented?

I understand how you could not be bothered by the Swiss — in particular when they start doing things that don’t support your view of the superior Typhoon… — or is it only with Radar 2 that it will be superior?

Both Rafale and Typhoon have their weaknesses, and I already said it is beneficial to have a larger radar, so I am not sure what you are referring to.

Rafale most likely will fly in Indian colors — I agree it is an open question whether it will fly in Swiss colors, that was not the point, the point was that the Typhoon will not even enter into the race. If the upgraded Typhoon is so superior to the Rafale, isn’t it a bit strange that they keep the Rafale in but drops the Typhoon? In particular if all it takes to understand the superiority of Typhoon is to read a few articles about the future upgrades…. Seems strange if the Eurofighter marketing department did not bother to update the Swiss on the fantastic new capabilities of the Typhoon….

Fact of the matter is that there are so many variables that influence engagement capabilites, and radar range is far from being the only important one.

This is more in line with my own thinking…

Not by 2021. Right now the prediction for that in 2030-plus, by which Rafale will be irrelevant and it will likely left for Rafale NG.

If you by “Rafale NG” means the “Rafale MLU”, then you may be right; the F-16A became also irrelevant however an MLU fixed that…

We could see the same with the Rafale, there is plenty of room for growth in that airframe. It really depends on the funding levels, however with India and a few ME countries aboard it should be sufficient to do a proper MLU in the 2025-2030 time frame, and keep the Rafale relevant post 2030.