Well that is something you have to set into relation. The Gripen A/B for example was not that advanced and used many off the shelf products such as the F404 (though upgraded in many ways). The much more advanced and complex C/D modells were delivered around the same time as Typhoons or Rafales.

That’s just simply untrue and show how little you know about the Gripen A/B and the RM12 engine. The Gripen 39A was incredibly advanced as the world first 4th gen fighter aircraft and delivered with swingrole capability and its highly developed datalink from start. 10 years before the RAF took delayed overbudget single-role Typhoons into service. And anyone with a clue would never refer to the Gripen development programme in A/B vs C/D but in the Batches and Blocks delivered through-out the production.

The first of Batch 2 Gripen 39A (after the first 30 jets) for instance received a significant avionics upgrade with 10 times as fast computers as the early jets and the last Batch 2 Gripens 39A were essentially the export base standard 39C including new APU and further developed avionics and the new cockpit. EBS39C added World wide climate, IFR (not ordered by the SwAF), further RCS reduction, heavier MTOW, increased service life and parts reduction. The US content is not 35% it’s 35% of the VALUE, with the engine parts (60% GM, 40% Volvo) being the most expensive part. Otoh the Typhoons got 80%+ Italian avionics…

GMTI/GMTT only tells you something is moving at a speed above a threshold value. GMTI/GMTT does not provide positive identification of what is moving. Is it a Scud TEL or a bus full of nuns on an outing? With GMTI/GMTT you cannot tell which it is.

The radar detects the moving target by GMTI mode. That’s the key. The computer can then display a high resolution SAR image that is also checked against a database for classification and/or the optical sensor zooms in on the target and again if applicable and not too far up the system can suggest classification. If the target is emitting the EWS classifies it from libraries. It’s just part of continued radar and SAW development. Much of this is on jets today and more will happen until the F-35 is operational. That’s life….. and the JSF is not getting Electronic Attack functions until 2020 according to LM.

Or how do you figure the JSF would do it?

🙂

Don’t confuse max range with max effective range. The S-400 doesn’t have a 400km range against LO targets, so the Storm Shadow wouldn’t have to be fired 400km away. Secondly, the Storm Shadow is stealthy, again further complicating things for the S-400.

For the record, I knew that or else I wouldn’t have used the 250km Storm Shadow as an example.

Thanks for explaining it to the less informed.

The SS also fly very low, S-400 got good range at high altitude targets not low-flying VLO cruise missiles.

Nice find Deino, thanks for the photo.

Bit surprised here, the Gripen evaluation team didn´t use any recon pod.

The Gripens flew with the tactical recon pod RECCELite.

Has it been established on what stations METEOR will be available on Rafale?

(since it’s longer, thicker and heavier than MICA)

First AESA antenna trials for what much later became NORA I, NORA II and NORA III was done with a Ericsson Microwave Systems home grown TILE antenna in 1994 on Viggen aircraft. They used S-band technology at the time as this is what they had mastered on the ERIEYE and other in-house projects. Ground tests with the larger Raytheon arrays went on from after 2002.

Not much is out on the early development but here’s a short summary.

An AESA development model for next generation fighter aircraftradar
Josefsson, L. Erhage, L. Emanuelson, T.
Ericsson Microwave Systems AB, Molndal;
This paper appears in: Phased Array Systems and Technology, 1996., IEEE

Abstract
An overview is presented of an ongoing study and development program which aims at the realisation of next generation radar systems for fighter aircraft. An important part of the study is the design, test, and evaluation of a breadboard array with about 100 active radiators. The array configuration, the test system, and some preliminary results are presented

More history:

1997 Flight Global ran this article.

Ericsson plans flying AESA demonstrator
DATE:08/10/97
SOURCE:Flight International

Andrzej Jeziorski/ MOLNDAL

Ericsson Microwave Systems is planning to have a flying demonstrator of its active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar operational in 1999.

The company says that it is keen to find partners to continue the project, but will start to build the demonstrator on its own if necessary. Ericsson says that it is talking to European and US radar manufacturers about a potential partnership – companies understood to be in talks on the programme include the European joint venture GEC Thomson Dasa Airborne Radar and Hughes and Northrop Grumman of the USA.

According to Ericsson airborne-radar programmes marketing manager Bo Wikström, a decision on the radar partnership will be made “within a year”.

The AESA project is now in its second phase, with completion of the development of a prototype transmitter/receiver (T/R) module, which is now about 250mm long. The concept for the entire radar is to have an array of 1,200-1,300 such modules, with a combination of electronic scanning across an arc of plus or minus 50-60 degrees, and mechanical scanning in azimuth, also to plus or minus 50-60 degrees off-centre.

This will give the pilot the ability to look “over his shoulder”, by being able to point the radar to his four o’clock position. While Wikström concedes that the mechanical scanning will sacrifice some of the weight saving expected from a pure electronically scanned radar, he says that the final unit should weigh about 160kg.

The AESA programme has been funded since 1994 by the Swedish Defence Materiel Administration. Ericsson says that it expects a radar of this type to be ready for operational use around 2010, and the system could be included in a future mid-life upgrade of the Saab JAS39 Gripen.
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/1997/10/08/24839/ericsson-plans-flying-aesa-demonstrator.html

Finally it’s not just about flying an array but what you do with it. The Herc trials demonstrated brand new methods that according to themselves were unique.

The Flying demonstrator with Thales array will demonstrate operational capability which is what the possible customers want to see but the final product will offer even greater trix and that’s thanks to lessons learned over some 20 years.

By all counts they should have had Austria sewn up as well 😉 I do agree though, the Swiss competition is Saab’s to lose.

Then you simply don’t understand what was going on in that tender and why Saab afterwards ended its partnership with Bae. There’s also a political side to the story. Such as saab and lockheed not allowed to submit updated offers on a reduced set of jets (lockheed threatened with legal action) but also a wish by the Austrian gov to industrially come closer to the EU core. The air force commander recommended the gov to buy Gripen it has since been revealed during the parliamentarian hearings on the legallity of the process.

The saab offer (and LMs) was for 30 aircraft.

In the end they ended up with 9 second hand single-role Typhoons + 6 new ones at a ridiculous price.

what 40% heavier ? are you suggesting that its approx 2500 kgs heavier than planned ? :rolleyes:

Would that be so surprising ? The Indian media has said a number of times its 2t overweight although they didn’t mention a new empty weight but this has since been reported as 6500kg.

Link

the Tejas being overweight by nearly two tonnes

The IAF expressed its reservations about the thrust of the existing GE-F404 engines, after the weight of the plane went up from 8,000 kg to 10,000 kg.

link

But yea I did mistake the payload weight number with empty weight. Either way its a massive increase for a jet of that type. The fact they need to change the engine is quite telling. Apparently even with planned weight reductions.

And that’s the last I will write on that subject in this thread.