Sean, sweet title! 🙂

I wonder if your missile needs to power itself off the rail on a rear launch in order to not tumble. That could be dangerous as the buffering material that breaks free in the solid propellant would be striking you.

And weren’t the french the first in theory to be able to launch a missile that actually strikes a target behind the launch aircraft without the rear firing method? Seems like the Israelis, though, were the first to put it into practice.

The missile isn’t rear facing but uses TVC tp do the imediate turn after launch. Target data are received by MIDS for that.

Nice find Arthuro.

Edit:
anyone noticed the technical data at the end of the document? 590 m minimum takeoff run, 490 m minimum landing distance, empty weight 10220 kg :-p

@Nicolas,
AFAIK AS30L isn’t in service anymore, but it had been tested on the Rafale before.

So I dislike to do it in this thread, doesn’t matter as the discussion is the usual.

Austria sent a RfI to 4 manufacturers in 2000 (Dassault, Boeing, Saab and LM). The Eurofighter wasn’t considered as it was thought to be to expensive. In 2001 Eurofighter and RSK MiG asked to enter competion, Eurofighter was allowed, RSK MiG not, due political reasons. RfP was sent to the 5 manufacturers, but Boeing and Dassault didn’t respond. So three contenders were left F-16, Gripen and EF. F-16 was ruled out as LM wasn’t able or at least not willed to fullfil all criteria. Gripen and EF both fullfiled the requirements, with the Eurofighter being judged as the better technological choice. Due the fact that Saabs offer was just 3% cheaper than that from Eurofighter, the choice was obvious.
It was no decision by one man, but a comitee which decided 4:1 for the Eurofighter. the Austrian GAO was tasked three times to check the process again and the result was ever the same Eurofighter made the best offer (price/value)!
An investigation into possible bribary was started by the then new government (former opposition) as it was the only possibility to hold their election promise: “Cancel the Eurofighter procurement”. The investigation resulted in the CiC of the AF being suspended, but no bribary was eventually found and so the contract couldn’t be canceled without heavy penalties (~1 bln €)…

I have question regarding the defensive system: is there any laser warning sytem on any Gripen version?

As I understand it MAW and LWR are planned options for the Gripen NG.

How easy would it be to intercept a AESA radar emission of just one “ping” to just range a target that has been detected otherwise, pretty much like the sonar ping a submarine can use to range a contact? Wouldn’t it be even more discrete than a laser rangefinder in the case of an AC equipped with LWS? Besides the distance would be much better.

Nic

A very short pulse might indeed be discrete especially if you use an AESA and can direct the energy and manage the power directly towards the threat. It is indeed a technique used by the F-22 in combination with its RWR.
Flankers and AFAIK Fulcrums use a similar technique to provide range information when using IRST at distances where the LRF didn’t work.

Triangulation is a possiblity, but it also depends on the own flight path relative to the target even if a 2 ship shares information. But it can be very accurate.

Basically every passive system such as RWR or IRST could use triangulation in theory.

Having just read the article in AFM on the Typhoon in the Austrain air force, it strikes me as a very poor choice of procurement on their part.

Apparently they only ever fly it with a single AAM and the gun, and they do not have the software to use the AMRAAM. If this was all they wanted, why not get the M-346 or the A-50? These would be able to do the same job for a fraction of the price.

Is it just because of a slower scrable time or something? Any Austrains here who can shed some light on the decision?

There were a lot of cuts since the Eurofighter has been ordered. It was originally planned to procure some AIM-120B, but this plan has been abondoned and the software was subsequently removed before delivery. With the recent change from 2007 Austria just receives 15 instead of 18 aircraft and only T1/block 5 rather than T2/block 8. Operational equipment being canceled includes PIRATE and DASS.

Well I’m no architech-nerd and don’t know what 5th Gen core Arch is supposed to be…

What Lordassap means with “5th generation” architecture is a modulare computer hosting the software for most systems instead of multiple distributed computers for dedicated tasks. Gripen features the MACS (Modulare Airborne Computer System) consisting of the 3 D96 processors with 266 MHz each. Don’t know what the MACS controls in total however.

Just looked it up for the new EWS. Saab is working on a new EWS designated MIDAS (Multifucntion Defensive Avionics System) whose RWR/ECM antennas are based on AESA technology and which is supposed to integrate a new AESA radar as well. First deliveries were planed for 2013 to Flygvapnet, as retrofit for existing aircraft. This info is from early 2005 or even earlier and I haven’t read/heared anything more updated about it since then.

but Saab is competing with F-35 and have accelerated development in that area but a operational time frame depends on export success. The 39C of today is not exactly “old tech” but in short the Gripen DEMO or Test Aircraft 39-7 as it’s actually named flight tests the new engine and airframe but will during winter be outfitted with new system architecure and new sensors such as a AESA. Customer demonstrations will then happen during the summer 2009. I think this is when we can start to get some feedback.

The other Test jets most significantly 39-6 is for a while now flying some of the new architecure as is the avionics rigs outfitted with new h/w and s/w as it’s developed. More info pasted below. M-AESA will definitely be used for ECM and supression as well as communication together with a broadband uhf video link and satcom though this is nothing new in regards to the Gripen development program which often mistakenly is viewed as “Gripen Demo” vs “old program”… no, Gripen Demo is continued evolvement of the gripen program and while Saab has outlined very long planning the work is addressed towards urgent requirement (months), near requirement (3 year plans) and 9 year plans (3x3yr) So it’s not clear when say a operational AESA will be on Gripen but doesn’t have to be decided until ~2 years before it needs to be fielded.

Operationally speaking, the Gripens will from 2009 adopt the system version 19 which adds new ground tracking and mapping modes in the radar, independant system with command and control functions to the back-seat, the Helmet Mounted Display w/Night Vision and EO tracker, the IRIS-T and Link-16. It’s essentially the system that took part in the Swiss trials. (Those jets were taken from the IO&T unit) What version 20 to be fielded 2012 will contain is under negotiation depending om how the evolving development succeeds. That quickly sums up where they are at…[/QUOTE]

Actually, the document is wrong. The thing they labelled “laser detection” is in fact a jammer (the same as between the engines at the root of the fin).

LWR are :
1-one on the rear face of the fairing on top of the fin.

2-one on each side of the nose (look for small black squares) (above the yellow arrow).
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/ff/Rafale_ag1.jpg

I know that the document is wrong on the LWR position in the front. But I thought that the sensors on the sides of the fin tip pod are the LWR, but they seem to be the MAW. Is the rearward facing ECM antenna located in the fin root, where the RWR antenna is?