Canada Future fighter capability project (ex-Next Generation Fighter Capability)

[GTX]

I'd be curious to see what a 'Silent Gripen' could achieve in terms of performance figures, range, and RCS.

Basically flying almost clean with 2 CFTs (as once studied by Saab), an Enclosed Weapons Pod (EWP) on the centerline (4x BVRAAMs, 10x SDBs or a mix), and 2x SRAAMs on the wingtip pylons (ideally in cocoons?). Perhaps also some additional treatment of RCS hotspots (via coatings etc).

So we are now making up platforms for this requirement?

 

[H_K]

So we are now making up platforms for this requirement?

No just saying it would be reasonable to expect Gripen to receive further upgrades to close the gap with 5th gen fighters and those are some of the RCS reduction ideas most commonly mentioned for other designs such as F-15, Super Hornet and Rafale... that might therefore be applied here if a customer like Canada shows up with fairly demanding requirements.

 

[Wotan]

Its generally easier when your machinery is more analogue like those 2nd and 3rd gen fighter jets. But with everything becoming more digitized, integrated with each other, etc.. it becomes more challenging.

Not if you have your own programmers...

https://simpleflying.com/gripen-e-f-35-stealth-supremacy-maintenance-freedom/

"Then there's the concern over the 'kill switch' aspect of the F-35. When a nation buys the F-35, it buys into an American ecosystem. The F-35 relies on the Operational Data Integrated Network, an automated logistics system that constantly sends data back to the US. If the Pentagon disagrees with a nation's foreign policy, they can theoretically cut off software access or parts, grounding the fleet. Saab gives operators total sovereign access to integrate its weapons, rewrite electronic warfare codes, and deploy without asking a foreign power for permission."

 

[TomcatViP]

Oh no. Not that. Not the kill switch again.

This conversation is border ridiculous (from Gripen RCS shadowing stealth aircraft performances to F-35 customer and program partners depicted as imbeciles). Can any admin here do actually their job and switch kill it for real?

 

[Not James Stockdale]

I'd be curious to see what a 'Silent Gripen' could achieve in terms of performance figures, range, and RCS.

Basically flying almost clean with 2 CFTs (as once studied by Saab), an Enclosed Weapons Pod (EWP) on the centerline (4x BVRAAMs, or 10x SDBs or a mix), and 2x SRAAMs on the wingtip pylons (ideally in disposable cocoons/nacelles?). Perhaps also some additional treatment of RCS hotspots (via coatings etc).

That sounds remarkably fat for a plane with a single F414.

 

[Apophenia]

... Not the kill switch again... Can any admin here do actually their job and switch kill it for real?

So don't read it! Is that really so difficult that you need a moderator to intervene?

Likewise parsing the content. You chose to zero in on the bit in inverted commas despite the key issue being emphasised in bold

"... Saab gives operators total sovereign access to integrate its weapons, rewrite electronic warfare codes, and deploy without asking a foreign power for permission."

 

[Wotan]

Oh no. Not that. Not the kill switch again.

The kill switch was confirmed by the american president himself.
https://militarywatchmagazine.com/article/how-america-turnoff-denmark-f35-greenland

 

[swerve]

But Trump! How credible is that?

 

[EmoBirb]

Oh no. Not that. Not the kill switch again.

This conversation is border ridiculous (from Gripen RCS shadowing stealth aircraft performances to F-35 customer and program partners depicted as imbeciles). Can any admin here do actually their job and switch kill it for real?

I'm not sure either why neither @GTX nor @helmutkohl nuked this thread by now.

Admittedly if they were to close it for clean up, I genuinely think that their issue would be to not know where to even start. This thread would probably be 3-4 pages if it would stick to factual matters and the chronology of Canada procuring the F-35 as the conclusion of this program.

But there would also be a handful of people who'd bitch about their noise getting deleted in the "Feedback" thread where staff would have to defend their justified actions against an angry mob.

 

[Ozair]

Oh no. Not that. Not the kill switch again.

This conversation is border ridiculous (from Gripen RCS shadowing stealth aircraft performances to F-35 customer and program partners depicted as imbeciles). Can any admin here do actually their job and switch kill it for real?

Agree 100%. Not just stupidity with kill switches but reposting links to nutjobs who don't understand basic fighter aircraft TTPs or technology. It isn't worth the time to refute because there isn't an interest in learning the truth, just pushing propaganda.

 

[Apophenia]

Maybe so. But the objectives behind tactical doctrine change over time and, with that, out goes the old TTPs and standard-manoeuvre manuals.

Some of us believe that such a time has now arrived. Others cling to the familiar.

 

[Ozair]

No just saying it would be reasonable to expect Gripen to receive further upgrades to close the gap with 5th gen fighters and those are some of the RCS reduction ideas most commonly mentioned for other designs such as F-15, Super Hornet and Rafale... that might therefore be applied here if a customer like Canada shows up with fairly demanding requirements.

The airframe doesn't have the growth margins for those types of upgrades, it is just too small and underpowered.

An external weapons pod similar to SH would sit way too low on the already low Gripen, hence designing the aircraft to be low to the ground and easy to load weapons backfires when you want to do something like that. Additionally the most SDBs the SH weapons pod could hold was 6 so a pod on the centreline of a Gripen E would be lucky to fit four SDB and maybe even no AAMs. You also have no targeting pod, no additional ECM pods etc. The aircraft remains highly vulnerable despite the best efforts to reduce RCS.

Maybe so. But the objectives behind tactical doctrine change over time and, with that, out goes the old TTPs and standard-manoeuvre manuals.

Some of us believe that such a time has now arrived. Others cling to the familiar.

No it comes down to a basic understanding of how systems work and actually what is being proposed is the old and not new. Said Gripen pilot above who thinks the Gripen is competitive to 5th gens by just using an IRST literally has no idea and frankly calls into question the quality of Swedish aircrew if that is what is being suggested.

How 5th gen fly and fight is different and different for a reason. The RCAF knows this and is evidenced by their evaluation of the Gripen E compared to the F-35. Instead of quacks posting articles on the internet to generate clicks from fanboys we can review the evaluation conducted by one of the more professional and well trained Air forces in the world. I know who I would rather believe...