F-35A versus Saab Gripen NG

The F-35 compared with other modern jets.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6034
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post27 Feb 2018, 22:04

monkeypilot wrote:
SAAB already had an experience with canards.


Is that what the crashes were about? Experience showing?

And wone can suppose that the experience cumulated on C/D helped for E no?


No? Well how much do you think they are changing and rewriting with a limited budget on a program that's trying to keep things as simple as possible?

One can suppose anything, I suppose


I'm in for answers
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

rheonomic

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 668
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 03:44

Unread post28 Feb 2018, 02:43

monkeypilot wrote:No i meant there is a long way between a Lavi flight control laws and Saabs probably (much more experience etc.)


Eh, not necessarily. Not sure on the Isreali side, but I think that Gripen was Saab's first production aircraft with a DFLCS. (They seem to have modified a Viggen as a testbed.)

XanderCrews wrote:There's barely a 2 year difference in first flights between each, and Gripen had the crashes early on with flight software problems.


The two Gripen crashes were a result of a PIO (or Aircraft-Pilot Coupling if you want to be PC) that was exacerbated by the fact that Saab's test pilot was a very high gain pilot. Addressing PIO is a rather important implementation issue for a DFLCS.
If I recall correctly the particular problem had to deal with some rate limiting in the CLAW.

XanderCrews wrote:No? Well how much do you think they are changing and rewriting with a limited budget on a program that's trying to keep things as simple as possible?


My guess is that they'll upgrade the CLAWs for Gripen NG/E/F (or, I guess given some people's penchant for pedantry, the Sub Gripon NEFG). The F-16 Block 60 for example has updated CLAWs compared to earlier Vipers, which essentially have the original analog CLAWs implemented in software (risk reduction for the analog to digital transition).

I haven't found too much publicly available on the Gripen CLAWs. Based on what I've seen, the C/D models have a fairly standard gain-scheduled LQ controller. Depending on how much the NG differs from the C/D, at a minimum they'll probably want to update gain schedules. Saab's also done research into reconfigurable control that they might implement if they haven't already.

As a general rule though, you want to minimize the amount of changes you make to the CLAWs since they're safety critical.
"You could do that, but it would be wrong."
Offline

monkeypilot

Banned

  • Posts: 187
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2017, 09:35

Unread post28 Feb 2018, 23:29

I haven't found too much publicly available on the Gripen CLAWs. Based on what I've seen, the C/D models have a fairly standard gain-scheduled LQ controller. Depending on how much the NG differs from the C/D, at a minimum they'll probably want to update gain schedules. Saab's also done research into reconfigurable control that they might implement if they haven't already.


And you wont as another company enterered the game to fix LCAWS issues. But unofficially. (and therefore impossible to proof/quote)
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23552
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post15 Mar 2018, 16:30

Six Page PDF from AirForces Monthly Magazine April 2018 No.361 about 'Gripen Masterminds' attached.
Attachments
Gripen Masterminds AirForces Monthly April 2018 pp6.pdf
(1.54 MiB) Downloaded 236 times
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline

loke

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 771
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2008, 19:07

Unread post16 Mar 2018, 10:10

Since some people here are very interested in the radars of the Eurocanards:

MODES

AIR-TO-AIR MODES
Search while track
Single target track

AIR COMBAT MODES
HUD search
Vertical scan
Slewable scan
Boresight

AIR-TO-SURFACE MODES
Real beam ground map
Doppler beam sharpening
Sea surface search and track
Ground moving target indication and track
Spotlight and stripmap synthetic aperture radar
Inverse synthetic aperture radar imaging
Air to surface ranging

INTERLEAVED MODES
Customer configurable
Interleaved air and surface modes

SUPPORT FUNCTIONS
Passive search while track
Missile datalinks
Cued search
Non-cooperative target recognition
Comprehensive ECCM suite
Weather mode


In addition there is the "swash plate" that offer a much larger scan volume than a stationary antenna. I wonder how this will work in practise?

http://www.leonardocompany.com/document ... nload_file

For those who are very much focused on counting: Yes the Raven will have 1,000 modules. Confirmed by Selex a few years back.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23552
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post19 Mar 2018, 22:49

:devil: As per several posts on this GRIPPING thread here is some more lah-de-dah 'bout a GRIPPING MARITIME WERSION! :shock:
ANALYSIS: Saab continues refining Gripen Maritime
19 Mar 2018 Greg Waldron

"Saab is continuing to refine the design of its Gripen Maritime carrier-optimised fighter, as it eyes long-term possibilities for the proposed variant in Brazil and India.

Based on the in-development Gripen E, the model would be capable of operating from aircraft carriers configured either for short-take-off but arrested recovery (STOBAR) or catapult-assisted take-off but with arrested recovery (CATOBAR) operations.

"We have a fully certified design that has been signed off by Saab management for the maritime version of Gripen," says Tony Ogilvy, head of marketing for the Gripen M. "It's in our portfolio, but it is only a design. We have not taken it to the next critical step, which will require a customer."...

...He contends that Saab's model-based systems engineering approach offers a "very high level of fidelity" that should, if a Gripen M customer is obtained, result in a concept demonstrator that works well first time....

...In addition to locking down a launch customer, one challenge is weight. The present Gripen M design is 500kg (1,100lb) heavier than a baseline Gripen E, which Saab documents show as having a basic mass empty weight of 8t.

"We're looking at ways of reducing that weight," says Ogilvy. "We hope to get down to no more than 300kg extra."

The extra weight stems from strengthening around the fighter's centre of gravity, where the airframe would be subjected to high levels of energy during catapult launches and arrested landings. The jet's nose-gear oleo strut has also been strengthened, with steel replacing alloy.

Still, the Gripen M, powered by a single GE Aviation F414, would be lighter than other carrier-capable Western jets. The Dassault Rafale – with two Safran Aircraft Engines M88s – has an empty weight of just over 10t, while the figure for the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, using two F414s, is 14.5t. Lockheed Martin's short take-off and vertical landing F-35B starts at 14.7t, while the carrier-variant C-model has an empty weight of 15.7t.

"The Gripen's size is a bit like a Sea Harrier," says Ogilvy. "It's not too big, and it fits down every [aircraft carrier] lift in service today. This is a very important point – but one people tend not to think about." The Gripen M would be able to achieve this without folding wings, he adds.

On handling characteristics, Ogilvy notes that the original Gripen design was optimised for rough landings on Swedish roads. Landing on an aircraft carrier involves a comparable low flare approach with a relatively steep angle, he says. [SAD that there is no acknowledgement of the SIX Degrees of Freedom issue & NO FLARE - a carrier is NOT A ROAD]

"The undercarriage [of Gripen M] is slightly longer and slightly bigger," he says. "Apart from that and a shrouded hook for arrest and recovery, it is exactly the same aircraft. It will do exactly the same job [as the Gripen E] in every role. When the aircraft is not on the carrier, it is part of the Gripen fleet ashore."...

..."We're under no illusions as to the challenge we face, but we are very confident that our design will meet the rigours and requirements of STOBAR and CATOBAR operations," says Ogilvy."

Source: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... me-446635/
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2240
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post19 Mar 2018, 23:47

spazsinbad wrote:"Saab is continuing to refine the design of its Gripen Maritime carrier-optimised fighter, as it eyes long-term possibilities for the proposed variant in Brazil and India.


LOL, Brazil decommissioned their (sole) Aircraft Carrier last year without any replacement in mind (and none will happen due to the country's economical and social situation). I wonder what would the purpose of proposing a "Maritime Gripen" to Brazil... :roll:
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23552
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post19 Mar 2018, 23:55

YES but AFAIK there is a long term plan for a NEW build conventional aircraft carrier for Brazil - but now they have bought former HMS Ocean that plan may be even longer in the far future? OCEAN will only carry HELOs with no thought F-35Bs.
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

rheonomic

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 668
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 03:44

Unread post20 Mar 2018, 00:46

spazsinbad wrote:
ANALYSIS: Saab continues refining Gripen Maritime
On handling characteristics, Ogilvy notes that the original Gripen design was optimised for rough landings on Swedish roads. Landing on an aircraft carrier involves a comparable low flare approach with a relatively steep angle, he says. [SAD that there is no acknowledgement of the SIX Degrees of Freedom issue & NO FLARE - a carrier is NOT A ROAD]


I'm sure they'll get it working on schedule and on budget with expertise like that lol.

Realistically they'll need to get a company with CV experience to assist.
"You could do that, but it would be wrong."
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5868
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post20 Mar 2018, 02:47

spazsinbad wrote:YES but AFAIK there is a long term plan for a NEW build conventional aircraft carrier for Brazil - but now they have bought former HMS Ocean that plan may be even longer in the far future? OCEAN will only carry HELOs with no thought F-35Bs.



That is years or even decades off. As Brazil has no hope of acquiring a New Aircraft Carrier in the foreseeable future! So, hard to make a case to continue to develop a Naval Gripen. (Gripen M)


"IMHO"
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23552
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post20 Mar 2018, 02:51

Everything in BRAZIL is years away for sure including GRIPENS for their Air Force but whatever you think making a maritime version - which will take years anyway - does make some sense but for sure BRAZIL has to NOT be a basket case.
Brazil reveals Gripen production schedule, Embraer’s manufacturing role
08 Oct 2017 Victor Barreira

"... [Gripen E/F] deliveries will run from 2019 to 2024....

...Embraer Defense and Security will play a major role in the programme and fully produce eight single-seat Gripen E and seven Gripen F twin-seat aircraft starting in June 2020, with the first Embraer-built E-model to be delivered in August 2022 and first F-model in September 2023."

Source: http://www.janes.com/article/74696/braz ... uring-role
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

rheonomic

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 668
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 03:44

Unread post20 Mar 2018, 02:55

Corsair1963 wrote:That is years or even decades off. As Brazil has no hope of acquiring a New Aircraft Carrier in the foreseeable future! So, hard to make a case to continue to develop a Naval Gripen. (Gripen M)

"IMHO"


Even if Brazil had an aircraft carrier there's still not much case for developing a navalized Gripen for what would amount to a program of record of maybe 30 aircraft.

Who in their right mind would buy a navalized Gripen? If you want a naval Eurocanard buy a Rafale M.
"You could do that, but it would be wrong."
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23552
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post20 Mar 2018, 03:55

IF I was Brazil I would build a conventional carrier suitable for the F-35C. If that was too much deneiro I would build/buy a ski jumper suitable for the F-35B. BUT... I am not Brazil. Is anyone here BRAZILIAN? Buehler? Anyone? Buehler? I (emphasis) would not buy anything else. ButButBUTT why does Brazil build Gripen anyway? The more the merrier. No?
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5868
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post20 Mar 2018, 04:19

I doubt Brazil could afford a conventional Aircraft Carrier. Yet, a smaller cheaper SCS Type with some F-35B's (maybe second hand) could be possible. Even then it likely would be in the distant future.....
Offline

zero-one

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2193
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post20 Mar 2018, 13:02

Corsair1963 wrote:I doubt Brazil could afford a conventional Aircraft Carrier. Yet, a smaller cheaper SCS Type with some F-35B's (maybe second hand) could be possible. Even then it likely would be in the distant future.....



What ever happened to NAe Sao Paulo
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests