Gripen A is a 0,1 m2 design. C/D is probably lower, E/F is? In this region is more important to count this things hanging under the wings. i really dont think JF-17 is much lower than that.
i do think a close coupled canard is better for tight turns and for high speed.

Engine blades contribute to at least 30% of frontal RCS. Thunder’s bumps hide the blades completely. No way Gripen’s frontal RCS can match Thunder’s IMO.

the NP-1 prototype is a twin seat trainer. the single seat NP-2 will most likely do away with the large canopy as seen in this image

ahhh I see 😎

Thunder is a much newer design with much better aerodynamics and much lower RCS. Thunder wins IMO.

http://www.topgunchen.cn/doc_img/album/20070715-859-1-3.jpg

pics http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4WjYESLFbc

promo vid http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFg22Cms7MI

airshow vid 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TcI4VzyaCRE&feature=fvwrel

airshow vid 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XL0e7H8BSY

Question is, would the US allow Japan to pursue a 5th gen fighter program? Don’t forget what happened to the Avro Arrow 😡

The Gripen NG Demo craft has the new internal tanks, so I think they have a better idea on the final NG range beyond being a “paper claim”.

correct. and also the NG demo reached mach 1.2 supercruise even without weight reduction from DSI 😎 which I think Thunder Block 2 would also be able to achieve with the new WS-13 engine

Griffin has 2,270 kg of internal fuel capacity. Thunder has 2,330 kg. Doesn’t seem like a lot of difference to me. Unless Thunder has much better aerodynamics, I don’t see how it can have a much longer combat radius than Griffin. :confused:

I don’t know how reliable these numbers are, but wiki gives unit cost of F-35A at 197 million USD 😮 this is getting dangerously close to F-22 unit cost

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II

Erm….? First true 21st century jet? Bit of a stretch there!

It has an entirely conventional Aluminium airframe, modern but not radical avionics and an engine based on 1970’s technology that can best be described as an augmented turbojet. The project can trace its roots back to the 80’s and the aircraft has an evolutionary connection with the even earlier Mig-21.

Its certainly an excellent light fighter, with a modern open architecture Western style avionics package at a very attractive price but certainly not the vanguard of new fighter development into the 21st century!

Let’s not forget about styling too. Thunder is the first, I repeat, the first, jet that employs DSI technology. In addition to a number of benefits, DSI looks way cooler than the traditional diverter and shock cone intakes. These days, styling sells. 😀

In terms of aerodynamics, the DSI is what makes Thunder the first of the new breed. As for avionics, AESA is scheduled for this year.

DSI DSI DSI jk jk 😀