Loke – Misery loves company. Facing the prospect of being cut to a token force, RNLAF would like to see the Belgian force cut down to one F-35 squadron in a joint force, providing them with economies of scale and some depth. Probably up to the Belgian politicians at this point.

Well luckily there is no misery in Norway — the Norwegian AF is very happy about having a budget large enough to alllow them to buy the number of F-35 that they want (48, + 4 training a/c).

Perhaps the issue is not just with the cost of the F-35 but also the shrinking defence budgets in some countries?

Some links from the Gripen Blog:

The video shows the experience of Brazilian naval aviator, Romulo Sobral visiting Saab in Linköping, trying his hands at the simulator first and then flying the actual Gripen.

The purpose of Sobral’s visit was to verify that the design requirements of the Gripen confer flight characteristics that demonstrate their conversion potential into a naval version without major and fundamental design changes.​

http://www.gripenblogs.com/Lists/Posts/Post.aspx?ID=839

“With Gripen, I am no longer limited to my own range of vision, but I can see much farther away from me, getting an early awareness of what is happening, says FAB’s fighter aircraft pilot Carlos Afonso de Araujo who tested the new generation Gripen and gave approval for its purchase.

Carlos has made a detailed report verifying the capabilities of the new Gripen. In an interview with Mediacon News, he talks about the aircraft’s technical aspects that caught his eye.

Carlos says that Gripen is a very easy aircraft to fly and control, adding that it accelerates very fast and can reach high altitudes with high speed while maintaining its performance.

Gripen can receive information from sensors and radars that are very distant: on the ground, or even from other aircraft. This gives the pilot a situational awareness advantage. This technology has never been used before in Brazil. With the current fighter aircraft in the country, a pilot’s vision is limited to the radar’s detection capabilities.

“Gripen is a new dimension. It is not like exchanging an old car for a new one. It is a radical, complete change. It is a new generation aircraft with new concepts, new tactics, new possibilities “, Carlos says.

http://www.gripenblogs.com/Lists/Posts/Post.aspx?ID=838

And yes, i like the NG and agree it is an excellent bargain. What it is not: 100% of capabilities of the other eurocanards or f-35 at 60% of the price.

Apart from perhaps Tu22m I don’t think anybody here thinks that the Gripen NG is anywhere near the F-35 in terms of capabilities.

I LOLed when I first saw that table put together by Signatory, I was tempted to post it but thought it would mainly generate noise. Signatory seems to know a lot so I was in a way a bit surprised when he put out that table — had he compared it to e.g. other 4.5 gen jets like Rafale or Typhoon it would have made more sense, but the F-35!?

Although a lot of money has been wasted on the F-35 program no doubt some of those billions actually went to inventing new and more advanced technologies…

Almost certainly a damned-sight more than an armchair journalist or some “guy” sent to a European conference. Also, I highly doubt the LM engineering team is so obsessed with Gripen as you seem to be.

Gripen is not a threat to F-35 sales as such, but it may be a threat to future F-16 sales… actually it seems LM has given up on F-16? Or people are not interested?

I did not see the “Advanced F-16” compete in Brazil, Switzerland, Malaysia. Thailand already got F-16 but started buying the old Gripen C/D some years ago.

F-16 will probably keep selling but with the Gripen E it may get a tough competitor. And this can become a problem for LM if the cost of the F-35 does not come down. LM has put all their money on F-35 becoming the new F-16, perhaps that’s why they have not invested enough in further development in the F-16? It is still to early to say if the F-35 becomes cheap enough to become the “new F-16”, or if many of the countries currently operating F-16 will switch to something cheaper.

If they want a modern, cost-affordable Western jet, what else is there than the Gripen E? Rafale/SH/Typhoon will be too expensive for those countries, if the F-35 is too expensive for them.

You are confusing a single de-cluttered display with the sensors working together (what the F-35 program calls “Sensor Fusion”). Take a look at the two slides I provided and you will see that while their end product looks similar, how that data got there and how much the pilot was involved varies greatly.

I was watching a vid of the F-35 Simulator where the pilot commented that by default the F-35’s display does not tell him which sensor produced the track because it’s a group product, not the result of a single sensor (although it can be).

I believe in the leaks of the Swiss eval, the Swiss praised the sensor fusion of at least one (or two) of the competitors.

How can they praise something that is not there?

Although sensor fusion on the F-35 has reached a higher level than other a/c, and although the F-16 and F-18 does not have sensor fusion, does not mean that other (e.g. European) a/c don’t have sensor fusion… the same goes for beamed datalinks. Don’t know about Rafale and Typhoon, but Gripen E will have this (and there are some rumors Gripen C/D already has it?)

Edit:

Data Fusion

PCWRITE. This combination of “letters” appears in the lower left corner of the HLD – Head Level Display, giving a real-time and instant confirmation of which sensors are signaling at that moment. Each letter representing either the RBE2 AESA radar, the Infrared / Laser / TV Front-Sector Optronics (FSO), the internal system of electronic warfare SPECTRA EW, IFF (identification friend-or-foe), are merged into a unified and clear visual symbolism directly on the SA display (situational awareness), and that means keeping the pilot in the situational loop. Rarely (not witnessed at any time during our evaluations) would the pilot ever be unaware of the environment within the 360º “bubble” surrounding the aircraft.

The heart of this data fusion is the MDPU – Processing Unit Data Modules that com-prises 19 LRUs (flight-line replaceable units), each providing a processing capacity up to 50 times greater than the previous generation of fighters. Translation: The pilot has a reduced workload, which enables him to act like a real tactical decision maker, rather than a mere sensor operator.

The key point of this data fusion is to overcome the limitations of any one particular sensor. For example, if it relies on waveforms, frequency, or infrared imaging, and the angle, distance, altitude, weather conditions or even a malfunction pose a limita-tion; other components supplement the formation of the big picture, situationally. The MDPU collects consolidated data from different sources based on various technologies, complementing, organizing and providing information through symbolism refined, reliable and unified.

Full text: http://www.defesanet.com.br/rafale/noticia/10893/Shooting-Down-an-Aggressor-on-My-Six–Vive-la-difference-

seems to be translated from Portugese however seems “data fusion” referred to above is basically what is normally known as “sensor fusion”

Edit2:

“The strong points of the Rafale were the quality of its sensors, such as the PESA (passive electronically scanned array) radar; the frontal optronics; and the EW (electronic warfare) suite, Spectra,” the report on the 2008 fly-off noted. “The good data fusion of all its sensors allowed to provide the pilot a very good situational awareness,” it continued.

http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/dubai-air-show/2013-11-15/swiss-battle-could-be-euro-canard-turning-point
Although Rafale will never manage to match the F-35 in terms of sensor fusion, keep in mind that the Rafale flying in 2016 will be quite different from the Rafale tested in Switzerland in 2008.

I can assure you that English people are far worse at speacking french :dev2:

Sorry for the OT, but I believe there are “physiological” reasons why the French struggle with English and vice versa. When you learn a language as a small child structures are being made in your brain. Languages that rely on similar brain structures are quite easy to learn at a later stage whereas languages with a very different structure is much harder to learn (for many people — of course there are some that can very easily learn almost any language, and some that can learn but with much effort)

French is a Latin language whereas English is not.. and the brains of the French and English are therefore quite different from eachother… 😉

They were denied the F-15 due to it being the US’s Top-of-the-Line A2A fighter, just like they are denied the F-22 today.

It’s not about weight but technology level.

Are you sure about that?

Unlike the F-22, the F-15 has been sold to several countries; it seems strange to deny it to a close NATO ally like Norway, if Norway had asked for it. (which we never did)

Norwegian pilots are convinced that the F-35 is the best choice for Norway; however at the same time they have admitted that, just like all other a/c, also the F-35 is a result of compromises, and for the F-35 some of those compromises (or “weaknesses”) are in the areas of “kinematic performance”.

An a/c like the Typhoon don’t have many of those “weaknesses” that the F-35 got; however the Norwegian pilots are very clear on what they prefer; the F-35. The reason is that even if the Typhoon has some very strong points in the “kinematic” department, it also has many weak points (compared to the F-35), in particular when it comes to stealth (both RCS and IR); quality (and quantity) of sensors; sensor fusion; EW systems, etc, and those weaknesses with the Typhoon (and all other 4.5 gen jets) are considered a much much bigger issue than some kinematic issues with the F-35.

Perhaps the same pilots would have “preferred” the F-22 to the F-35, however the F-22 is not on the table as we all know. OTOH in the past the F-15 was never on the table for the Norwegian pilots either…