Forum: F-22A Raptor

geogen wrote:

Perhaps only to reframe the discussion, Shep... Thumb

If we review the post in question... a few posts up, it was being inferred that "Gripen is NOT in the same league as Typhoon, Rafale and Flanker-C". When countered that we should hypothesize an AESA equipped NG Gripen and not base-mod Gripen, for comparative sake... it was then morphed into a debate about NG Gripen not being 'F-22 esque.' Hmmmm.

Just saying we should reconsider defining exactly what the heck we're wishing to debate here Wink

Cheers-

Point taken, thats what I get for typing a response while still under the influence i guess! I apolagise.

Well I think with an AESA Gripen would still be a lesser performer than a Rafale with AESA as i would think rafale is a much more stealthy jet, well maybe not much more but certainly more stealthy and Rafale I am pretty sure would still have the performance advantage.

Typhoon is probably NOT as stealthy as the Gripen though, I don't know why i just get that feeling and i admit I could be all wrong there and i do not buy into the CAPTOR hype one bit seeing as the Typhoon users are developing AESA sets which speaks volumes in itself. Gripen with AESA may give Typhoon a run for its money but than Typhoons superoir energy/speed could make that kinda a moot point anyway.

Gripen AESA'd up vs a Flanker is perhaps more interesting with the Flankers large RCS
and yes i know the later Flankers have LO treatment but the basic planform is still a disaster from an RCS viewpoint. If a Flanker mangages to see the Gripen though i'm pretty sure that the Gripen would be falling from the sky not long after...

I guess I could sum it up by saying (to me) the Gripen is more like a lesser (by a large margin) perfoming Typhoon and an AESA may not be enough to swing the fight in its favour.
I don't know the full facts and don't pretend otherwise, i'm only a casual enthusiast and like a little debate (or simply reading one) somewhere sensible like here every now and than as I've yet to find a forum as mature as this since Key Pub went so badly down hill and troll infested. Hope i havn't put peoples backs up as that wasn't my intention.

F-16.net Sponsor

Good reply. I don't know why I've always been a SAAB fanboy, go figure. Just have to respect a nation that size IMO, historically neutral... pumping out extreme electronics, military vehicles, subs, missiles, artillery and since WW-II, superb cost-effective aviation.

I'd just hypothesize that the increased thrust on the NG as well, could push the NG into a more competitive acceleration/cruise speed/rate of climb league? No doubt it would be interesting to see the performance enhancements, if any, come out of the development. I guess I'm giving them the benefit only, until the specs speak. The biggie however, IMO, is the Life Cycle Cost (LCC) factor given a single F414 and small frame. Even the UPC is a significant asymmetrical factor when comparing. How many more attrition jets could be afforded in your AF's inventory, given a 10 yr LCC budget, than say Rafale-AESA, EF tranche 3B or Flanker-C?? + 10% units? 20%??

Either way, put 2x meteor and 2x IRIS-T/SRAAM on a Low profile NG; I would just imagine it being deserved 'league-club' honors. Cheers-

Yeah those are some very valid points about cost and value and yes I would think you're right about an NG being a great jet if produced, certainly enough for many users needs.

Forum: F-22A Raptor

What's happening with the F-22