Make In India - Fighter Jet musings - News, Developments, Updates - F16,F18, Gripen, Any other

[Taygibay]

ELTA EL/W-2090 is left, buddy

Yeah, I meant fighters obviously but should have specified.

The R&D in GaN in India is advancing outside the purview of the DRDO.

Yes mate, at R&D you are correct but IIRC, LRDE is
in charge of integration for mil use and products.

Good days to you and yours, Tay.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

REALITY IS THAT GRIPEN IS NICE FOR COUNTRY IN PEACE OR WITHOUT CREDIBLE AIR OPPONENT... it is the case of Switzerland, Brazil. Before for south africa, and some european country mainly relying on NATO for other stuff than air policy.
All the others need a more serious plane.

A high rank swiss air force top brass said few feek ago that in case of a war, the guy with the best plane is the one returning alive to its base (at same level of training).

Gripen is a nice light plane, with the quality of a light plane : affordable (not so far...), and the default : less potent.

Switzerland has only one war to win : economic. For the rest Gripen is enough. Even a KAI Golden Eagle F150 is enough.... and more affordable.


Deep penetration by Tejas ? I don't think so. Too light.
Rafale is made from the beginning to ba able to made deep strike and to take car of it simultaneously, without help (it's why Dassault called the plane omni role )

Since the Rafale is much more expensive to fly, it is likely that a Gripen pilot gets more
training than a Rafale pilot, assuming the same budget.

Rafale has somewhat longer range than the Gripen, and a few more weapon stations.
That does not neccessary make Rafale the winner in a fight.
The Gripen radar positioner gives a significant advantage with proper tactics.
The AWACS feature also may allow for unexpected losses.

And here is British expert Justin Bronk's comment on the Gripen C vs the Typhoon. Again the electronic warfare capabilities are highlighted.
"Gripen is a bit of an unknown quantity against modern air superiority machines because it takes a fundamentally different approach to survivability. Whilst in traditional DACT exercises, Typhoon pilots have often referred to the Gripen as ‘cannon-fodder’ due to its inferior thrust-to-weight ratio, speed, agility and armament, in the few cases where the Gripen has ‘come to play’ with its full electronic warfare capabilities, it has given Typhoons very nasty shocks. Against the Su-35S, Gripen would rely on the cutting edge EW capabilities which Saab builds the Gripen (especially the new E/F) around to hide the aircraft from the sensors of the Russian jets in much the same way as the Raptor relies on x-band stealth. These EW capabilities are so highly classified that there is simply no way to assess their effectiveness in the public domain. Having said that, RAF pilots who I have talked to with experience of the Saab fighter’s EW teeth first hand say that the ability of the aircraft to get alarmingly close without detection thanks entirely to EW is very impressive."

https://hushkit.net/2016/03/17/su-35-versus-typhoon-analysis-from-rusis-justin-bronk/

When I visited SAAB last year, I asked about the Gripen E EW capabilities vs Spectra,
and they claimed that the Gripen E EW capabilities are superior to that of Rafale.

By the way: JAS-39 Gripen is Jakt, Attack, Spaning-39 or Fighter, Strike, Reconnaisance-39.
Gripen was omnirole 20 years ago.

 

[X_Killer]

Deep penetration by Tejas ? I don't think so. Too light.

Buddy, please let me know , where I claim Tejas for deep penetration ops.

Tejas is designed to replace oldies like mig-23, mig-21..
And Tejas is much more than what is expected from it and it is quite cheaper too.

For deep penetrations, FGFA And RAFALEs will be their to take care of it. Isn't it?

AFAIK, old migs are also not intended for deep penetration ops. Isn't it?

 

[BON PLAN]

Since the Rafale is much more expensive to fly, it is likely that a Gripen pilot gets more
training than a Rafale pilot, assuming the same budget.

Rafale has somewhat longer range than the Gripen, and a few more weapon stations.
That does not neccessary make Rafale the winner in a fight.
The Gripen radar positioner gives a significant advantage with proper tactics.
The AWACS feature also may allow for unexpected losses.

And here is British expert Justin Bronk's comment on the Gripen C vs the Typhoon. Again the electronic warfare capabilities are highlighted.
"Gripen is a bit of an unknown quantity against modern air superiority machines because it takes a fundamentally different approach to survivability. Whilst in traditional DACT exercises, Typhoon pilots have often referred to the Gripen as ‘cannon-fodder’ due to its inferior thrust-to-weight ratio, speed, agility and armament, in the few cases where the Gripen has ‘come to play’ with its full electronic warfare capabilities, it has given Typhoons very nasty shocks. Against the Su-35S, Gripen would rely on the cutting edge EW capabilities which Saab builds the Gripen (especially the new E/F) around to hide the aircraft from the sensors of the Russian jets in much the same way as the Raptor relies on x-band stealth. These EW capabilities are so highly classified that there is simply no way to assess their effectiveness in the public domain. Having said that, RAF pilots who I have talked to with experience of the Saab fighter’s EW teeth first hand say that the ability of the aircraft to get alarmingly close without detection thanks entirely to EW is very impressive."

https://hushkit.net/2016/03/17/su-35-versus-typhoon-analysis-from-rusis-justin-bronk/

When I visited SAAB last year, I asked about the Gripen E EW capabilities vs Spectra,
and they claimed that the Gripen E EW capabilities are superior to that of Rafale.

By the way: JAS-39 Gripen is Jakt, Attack, Spaning-39 or Fighter, Strike, Reconnaisance-39.
Gripen was omnirole 20 years ago.

Gripen is highly agile. It use the same close canard coupled delta config than Rafale. It is more clever than the EF formula.
EW capacity ? Never heard so many thing about that. It's clear that EF is not a reference in the domain.
But if Gripen is efficient to slow down the opponent ability to watch it, what about Spectra?
At the beginning of Spectra it was said of electronic stealth.... 25% of the Rafale developpment costs were (and is) spent in Spectra. And it's also so classified that there is today an iron wall about the real capacity of Spectra (the sole system able to fly above a S300 during a MACE exercise, when the dedicated F16CJ were detected...)

 

[X_Killer]

Dassault Rafale, the Stealth fighter you never knew it was.

Rafale is officially said to have a frontal RCS of about 0.1m2 and comes under the category of Low observable (LO) aircraft. But with the aid of SPECTRA which can perform “active cancellation”—receiving a radar signal and mimicking the aircraft’s echo exactly one-half wavelength out of phase so the radar sees almost nothing, the RCS is reduced to about 0.06m2.

But it doesn’t stop there. Dassault has admitted that a new upgrade package is almost ready for operations which would further decrease the RCS of Rafale to that of a Sparrow! Called DEDIRA (Demonstrateur de Discrétion Rafale / Descreet Rafale Demonstrator) it aims to improve the SPECTRA suite on the F3R version of Rafale. This program is linked with another one called INCAS (Intégration de Nouvelles Capacités à Spectra) which deals with the integration of GaN modules in RBE2 and SPECTRA suite along with GaN modules incorporated ‘smart-skins’ for all-passive day/night and all weather long-range detection and targeting capability involving all passive sensors available to sensor fusion.
The DEDIRA program will further improve the active stealth aspect of SPECTRA to bring down the frontal RCS of Rafale close to 0.0006m2. For reference, the unofficial frontal RCS of Raptor is 0.0001m2 without active cancellation, which is a Very Low observable (VLO) aircraft. DEDIRA is already integrated on a test Rafale numbered B301.

http://tejasmrca.weebly.com/military-aviation/dassault-rafale

Those who underestimating RAFALE and claiming GRIPEN-E which is istill need to be matured, should learn about other jets.

GRIPEN HISTORY
The basic design published in its initial phase of GRIPEN

As the Eurofighter program developed, BAe helped SAAB work on the p.106 design for Sweden to have its independent fighter based on separate needs and design requirements.

The Gripen's Ferranti-Ericsson PS-05/A X-band pulse Doppler radar has three times the processing power of the Viggen's PS-46/A radar, but only 60% of its volume and weight. The PS-05/A has all-altitude look-down capability, resistance to jamming, and provides a number of operating modes. Air-to-air modes include:
*Long range search and track.
*Multiple target (up to ten) track while scan.
*Short range, wide angle search and track.
*Automatic gun and missile fire control.

Air-to-ground modes include:
*Search and track.
*Ground and sea target track while scan.
*High resolution mapping.
*Air-to-surface ranging.

GRIPEN -E
With 39-8 being used mainly for airframe and general flight control tests, a second prototype (39-9) will be used as a tactical systems testbed, while the third and final single-seat prototype (39-10) will fly as a production-standard airframe. The twin-seat Gripen NG demonstrator (39-7) that provided much of the risk mitigation for the Gripen E will continue to serve as a general test platform throughout the flight trials effort.

As previously highlighted by Saab, the Gripen E's enhancements over the earlier C/D models can be categorised in terms of survivability, sensors, general systems, payload, communications, performance, range, avionics, and human-machine interface/sensor fusion.
Survivability improvements include a reduced radar cross-section (though the extent of this is classified); a multifunctional electronic warfare system; enhanced radar warning receivers; enhanced intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition, and reconnaissance functionality and threat geo-location; multi-threat handling; as well as directional jamming and electronic countermeasures.

The enhanced sensors are primarily focused around the Selex ES Raven active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar and the Selex ES Skyward-G infrared search-and-track system. General system improvements for Gripen Einclude increased power and cooling for the AESA radar and electronic warfare systems. The increased payload comes from the two added fuselage pylon stations, two wingtip stations, and the integration of additional stores such as the Rafael Litening G4 advanced targeting pod and the RecceLite reconnaissance pod. Also, enhanced weapon systems such as stand-off munitions might be integrated.

Communication improvements for Gripen E include encryption and resistance to jamming, as well as a dedicated radio for a tactical air unit datalink, or 'fighter link'. The aircraft's enhanced performance is the result of swapping the current General Electric GE F404 engine for the more powerful F414G (to be designated F414-GE-39E for Gripen E), and the additional 1,100 kg in internal fuel will increase its radius of operation (depending on mission profile and loadout) from an estimated 432 n miles to 700 n miles.
The Gripen E's new avionic system is based on the ARINC-653 standard software interface, and the open-architecture/commercial off-the-shelf components

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

Gripen is highly agile. It use the same close canard coupled delta config than Rafale. It is more clever than the EF formula.
EW capacity ? Never heard so many thing about that. It's clear that EF is not a reference in the domain.
But if Gripen is efficient to slow down the opponent ability to watch it, what about Spectra?
At the beginning of Spectra it was said of electronic stealth.... 25% of the Rafale developpment costs were (and is) spent in Spectra. And it's also so classified that there is today an iron wall about the real capacity of Spectra (the sole system able to fly above a S300 during a MACE exercise, when the dedicated F16CJ were detected...)

SAAB claims that their EW is better, but as no public information is available,
we are not able to accept or reject that statement.
We are also not able to decide which has an advantage in a fight.
For India, it is important to be superior to JF-17 and F-16, as well as J-xx.
It is less important to be superior to each other.

 

[X_Killer]

SAAB claims that their EW is better, but as no public information is available,
we are not able to accept or reject that statement.
We are also not able to decide which has an advantage in a fight.
For India, it is important to be superior to JF-17 and F-16, as well as J-xx.
It is less important to be superior to each other.

LCA Mk1A superior over jf-17 and FGFA & RAFALEs will take care of all j-xx and f-16s. Su-30MKI already has an advantage over f-16C/D.

 

[randomradio]

This is a wafer. This is what IISc is producing.
View attachment 418691

This is what they are planning to do, according to your sources.
View attachment 418692
Before You have packaged die, the stuff is very hard to use.

In order to build a radar transceiver for AESA, you need a power module.
A GaN power module is hard to design, to be reliable.
It can take several years to design a power module and get it in production
once you have packaged die.

View attachment 418693

When You have a real system, You may suddenly discover some corner case,
which will require a redesign of the wafer, starting a new cycle.

And I'm telling you we have already done it. That's why we are "expanding" an existing production line.

Are you saying we are building a production line without having the product first? You are a weird fellow.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

And I'm telling you we have already done it. That's why we are "expanding" an existing production line.

Are you saying we are building a production line without having the product first? You are a weird fellow.

Your sources indicate that You can produce GaN transistors on wafers.
Nothing more.
They also says that they want to develop methods to package the dies from the wafer.
Without packaged die, how can you have the power modules?

 

[randomradio]

Your sources indicate that You can produce GaN transistors on wafers.
Nothing more.
They also says that they want to develop methods to package the dies from the wafer.
Without packaged die, how can you have the power modules?

No, the wafers are what they have shown, nothing more. As I said, you don't build a production unit if you don't have a product.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

No, the wafers are what they have shown, nothing more. As I said, you don't build a production unit if you don't have a product.

GaN transistors are products.
There are plenty of companies that manufacture and sell power transistors without manufacturing and selling power modules.

 

[BON PLAN]

GRIPEN HISTORY
The basic design published in its initial phase of GRIPEN

hi hi hi .... a single engine Eurofighter ?

SAAB claims that their EW is better, but as no public information is available,
we are not able to accept or reject that statement.
We are also not able to decide which has an advantage in a fight.
For India, it is important to be superior to JF-17 and F-16, as well as J-xx.
It is less important to be superior to each other.

Thales has a very long history in EW, developped for the french deterrence planes.

I doubt Saab match Thales. Honnestly.

 

[randomradio]

GaN transistors are products.
There are plenty of companies that manufacture and sell power transistors without manufacturing and selling power modules.

View attachment 418833

Who on earth creates a full fledged facility just to create transistors only?

 

[X_Killer]

GaN transistors are products.
There are plenty of companies that manufacture and sell power transistors without manufacturing and selling power modules.

View attachment 418833

I was expecting for a Swedish Company but its Canadian.

hi hi hi .... a single engine Eurofighter ?

This shows that Saab didn't give birth to GRIPEN.
It is a BAe's p.106 concept.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

hi hi hi .... a single engine Eurofighter ?


Thales has a very long history in EW, developped for the french deterrence planes.

I doubt Saab match Thales. Honnestly.

Then again,
FMV published RCS figures for Gripen A (now removed) which was 0,1 square meters.
FMV = Försvarets Materialverk = Defence Equipment Agency.
The government organisation which purchases and tests military equipment in Sweden.
Both Gripen C and Gripen E has seen improvements in RCS.

Who on earth creates a full fledged facility just to create transistors only?

Semiconductor companies.
Volume Wafer production requirements are very different from power module production
requirements, so it does not make sense to do both in the same foundry.