Finnish DefMin Interest in F-35s NOT Gripens

Program progress, politics, orders, and speculation
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2873
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post26 Nov 2019, 11:46

Not sure if F414 would've been bette than EJ200 in EF Typhoon.

https://www.mtu.de/engines/military-air ... raft/f414/
https://www.mtu.de/engines/military-air ... aft/ej200/

It seems like F414 has quite a bit larger diameter and is somewhat heavier. So there might've been problems installing it in the first place. It would've provided 10% more thrust while increasing weight somewhat (but less than 10%) meaning slightly better T/W ratio but possibly also drag due to larger diameter. So end result might've been not that much different.

Of course there was need to have European engine in Eurofighter.
Offline
User avatar

linkomart

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 411
  • Joined: 31 May 2010, 07:30
  • Location: Sweden

Unread post26 Nov 2019, 13:55

Without going in to details..... Its not only sea level static thrust that is important, thrust lapse with speed and altitude is also important and different between engines.
The EJ 200 is good at high speed and high altitude, not nessecary giving less thrust than the F414. (Its not only the engine, the installation is also important for the actual thrust.)

I think that in the Eurofighter the EJ200 is the best choice, the engine is well integrated in to that airframe.

But for Gripen, one of the main reason for picking the 414 instead of the EJ200 in my opinion were the fact that the interfaces are more common to the RM12 than the EJ 200, there were a few things that needed a major redsign if the EJ200 were to be fitted instead of the 414.
Also the air intake and duct could take the 414 with little modifications, for the EJ200 there would, probably, been more modifications neccesary.
The 414 were shoehorned in the the demo with little fuss, so to speak, add a slightly larger air intake and that was it.
There were other details as to why that engine was choosen of course, but thats one of them.

my 3 cent
Offline

madrat

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2353
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12

Unread post26 Nov 2019, 17:05

We know 'why' they chose EJ200. But twin F414 certainly offered more uptick than down. Typhoon has the ability to make mad dash speeds up high, but the airframe is enough composites that prolonged flight like that would be suicide for those materials. EJ200-powered Typhoon certainly is a hotrod when clean and high. But a dual-role Typhoon could use that down low power. And F414 isn't exactly a high bypass engine, it still offers more than mediocre performance high & fast. This is just a theoretical exercise to support Gripen with F414 and not EJ200.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

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

Unread post27 Nov 2019, 01:10

One big advantage of buying "US". Is future "upgrades".....
Offline
User avatar

linkomart

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 411
  • Joined: 31 May 2010, 07:30
  • Location: Sweden

Unread post27 Nov 2019, 09:41

madrat wrote:Typhoon has the ability to make mad dash speeds up high, but the airframe is enough composites that prolonged flight like that would be suicide for those materials. EJ200-powered Typhoon certainly is a hotrod when clean and high. But a dual-role Typhoon could use that down low power. And F414 isn't exactly a high bypass engine, it still offers more than mediocre performance high & fast. This is just a theoretical exercise to support Gripen with F414 and not EJ200.


I disagree, In my book, which is the saab standard for materials, CFRP materials generally are as tough as aluminium or even better when it comes to temperature. Homebuilts where the matrix is room temperature cured cannot withstand any temperature much above room temperature, but composites that have been in an autoclave can take atleast the same temperature as in the autoclave, as a rule of thumb. Aluminium usally starts to degrades at temperatures just north of 100 deg C, and CFRP are in the same league, depending on matrix.
I dont think ht the BAE materials are any different.

Just a clarification, I didn't say that the EJ200 were bad at low altitude, just that it was better at hig altitudes and speed. That was not theory, but the raw figures that I saw. I was not trying to make the case for the F414 in the Gripen, just saying some of the reasons why. It could have ended up the other way, and that would have been fine too, I guess.


Best regards
*Edited for spelling ( tvanty jears ago aj vasent an enjuneer no i can olmost smell toe it)
Last edited by linkomart on 27 Nov 2019, 21:28, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

madrat

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2353
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12

Unread post27 Nov 2019, 15:23

I can't disagree on anything you said. You have way more experience in this topic.

I just was pointing out that F414 would have been a great engine for Typhoon that is dual-role for the same reason Gripen went F414. I don't think Gripen with EJ200 would be quite as good as with F4x4-family engines. Gripen focuses on field maintenance and performing more than one role. It does seem, like Corsair1963 suggested, that EJ200 has changed much, whereas F4x4-family keeps improving.
Offline

magitsu

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 436
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2015, 22:12

Unread post28 Nov 2019, 04:20

Typhoon's AESA saga is amazing. Only Kuwait has bought them, with deliveries starting in late 2020.
That's not a lot of time to get experience from it until Finland would need to decide. Qatar's radar pick is unknown.

The partners seem to be looking at different revisions of Captor-E. Kuwait apparently got Mk0. Spain and Germany are adopting Mk1, Belgium was offered Mk2.

https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... evelopment
Last edited by magitsu on 28 Nov 2019, 10:18, edited 2 times in total.
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2873
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post28 Nov 2019, 10:06

madrat wrote:I can't disagree on anything you said. You have way more experience in this topic.

I just was pointing out that F414 would have been a great engine for Typhoon that is dual-role for the same reason Gripen went F414. I don't think Gripen with EJ200 would be quite as good as with F4x4-family engines. Gripen focuses on field maintenance and performing more than one role. It does seem, like Corsair1963 suggested, that EJ200 has changed much, whereas F4x4-family keeps improving.


I agree that for Gripen the F414 makes much more sense for multiple reasons. EJ200 would've been a bit too small for it. For EF Typhoon, I think EJ200 made sense although F414 would likely have worked just as well. Just bit different optimization so performance at different altitudes and speeds would likely have changed a little.

EJ200 is being developed like F414 with improved thrust, durability and service life. It remains to be seen if those upgrades are going to enter service but some work is being done.
https://www.defenseworld.net/news/24997 ... r_Aircraft

Does anybody know what's the status of F414 Enhanced Engine?
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3534
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post28 Nov 2019, 16:08

Interesting...

I was under the impression Typhoon's engines were crazy powerful, while the F-414 was more of an up-rated F-404. If memory serves, the EAP prototype flew at Paris airshow in 1987 with F-404's as an interim engine?

In any case, Typhoon's engines are a strong point. You never hear about it lacking power, maintenance issues etc.. As for Gripen, it's so small I wouldn't think there would be many engine options (that would fit).
Offline

pron

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 113
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2014, 19:28

Unread post28 Nov 2019, 17:09

hornetfinn wrote:Does anybody know what's the status of F414 Enhanced Engine?


I have looked for information on this for some time, and did find this.

It actually looks like they are coming to F/A-18 Super Hornet and EA-18G.

The fixed-price contract provides procurement funding for 28 Lot 20 and 21full-rate production F414-GE-400 engines.

Noteworthy the new engine could be the so called General Electric’s enhanced performance engine (EPE), that would increase the F414-GE-400’s power output from 22,000 lbs to 26,400 lbs. EPE development commenced in 2009 and features several improvements over the standard F414-GE-400, including greater resistance to foreign object damage, reduced fuel burn rate, and potentially increased thrust of up to 20%.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/ ... owlers-are

If the F414-EPE find it way to the Gripen E - it would be something to talk about. Maybe it's here the extra money goes.
Offline

magitsu

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 436
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2015, 22:12

Unread post29 Nov 2019, 06:30

pron wrote:If the F414-EPE find it way to the Gripen E - it would be something to talk about. Maybe it's here the extra money goes.

I doubt they want the extra hassle and cost when they've got less than 100 ordered and pressure to pass the tests as it is.
Changing a major component after only 100 has been ordered, with a few years to even the initial IOC?

Still that 10 million bucks must be going towards something tangible. Maybe it's somehow just improving the current ones with not a big amount of alteration. It's a bit hard for me to guess at which point of mods it turns into a new variant. Things like turbine blade changes probably would mean it's a new one, but there could be smaller ones that wouldn't need much extra testing time.

Unless it's somehow part of deal to a country that pays for things like these. Like Kuwait paid for the Mk0 CAPTOR-E into Typhoon. For example the Gripen to India offer seems to be mostly about Saab's AESA tech transfer.
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6036
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post30 Nov 2019, 21:17

playloud wrote:The Swedish Defence Materiel Administration is listing the dry thrust at >14,388 lbf (>64,000 kN).

How they would achieve greater thrust than a standard F414 at MIL, but the same at MAX, I have no idea.

Gripen E Spec.jpg



just lie. no big deal. I'll put 4700 CPFH on it :roll:
Choose Crews
Previous

Return to Program and politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests