Finnish DefMin interested in F-35s, not Gripens

[hornetfinn]

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.

[linkomart]

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

[madrat]

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.

[Corsair1963]

One big advantage of buying "US". Is future "upgrades".....

[linkomart]

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)

[madrat]

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.

[magitsu]

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

[hornetfinn]

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?

[mixelflick]

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).

[pron]

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.

[magitsu]

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.

[XanderCrews]

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

[magitsu]

HX Challenge to bring the HX Fighter Programme candidates to Finland in January and February

https://ilmavoimat.fi/artikkeli/-/asset ... geId=en_US

The Finnish Air Force will organise the HX Challenge testing and evaluation event from 9 January to 26 February 2020. The hub of the event will be Pirkkala Air Base.

HX Fighter Programme candidates

The objective of the HX Challenge is to verify the data reported by the fighter manufacturers under Finnish conditions and through tests designed in Finland. Each of the five candidates will undergo a test period of seven weekdays.

Colonel Juha-Pekka Keränen is the Finnish Air Force HX Programme Director. Col Keränen, what is the role of the HX Challenge in the HX Fighter Programme capability assessment?

The HX Challenge is the first stage of the capability assessment. The aim of the testing and evaluation event is to verify that each candidate’s systems and performance values match the data reported by the manufacturers.

The second phase of the capability assessment will make use of the data and performance values established during the HX Challenge. Carried out with virtual simulators, this phase focuses on determining the success of a flight of four aircraft in the scenarios itemised in the call for tenders.

The third phase will demonstrate the operational efficiency of each candidate’s comprehensive HX solution by playing and simulating a long-term war game. The data obtained in the first two phases of the capability assessment will be utilised in the war game, which will feature the HX solutions as a part of Finland’s defence system.

All in all, the purpose of the HX Challenge is not to rank the candidates, but to make sure that the performance values reported in the responses to the call for tenders actually apply in the Finnish operating environment. We will utilise the verified data in the second and third phases of the capability assessment.

Will the performance values reported by the HX candidates be verified also through other means?

The HX Challenge plays an important role in establishing the candidates’ performance values and systems in realistic conditions. However, testing and evaluation will also be carried out through other means. Some metrics will be verified through test flights in the candidates’ home countries, and some through simulations and laboratory tests.

As we evaluate the different performance values of the aircraft and its systems, we choose the most secure and practical method to verify the particular data. For instance, certain parameters and tactics would be used only under emergency conditions. In order to safeguard operational security, these performance values will be assessed in a geographically limited area or entirely through simulations and laboratory tests.

Why will the HX Challenge take place in Finland?

The testing and evaluation event is organised in Finland so that each candidate’s performance values can be verified under Finnish conditions and through tests designed in Finland. This guarantees fair and balanced evaluation for all the five candidates. Finnish winter conditions have an effect especially on the performance of electro-optical sensors. In addition, other active and passive sensor systems may be affected. Modern multi-role fighters can manage low temperatures and freezing cold. However, when the temperature is around zero degrees centigrade, the conditions often get more challenging because of a combination of rain, freezing drizzle, sleet and snow.

Will the other services of the Finnish Defence Forces participate in the HX Challenge?

The hub of the HX Challenge will be Pirkkala Air Base, the main operating base of the Satakunta Air Command, but evaluation flights will take place all across Finland. In the air, the candidates will face Finnish Air Force F/A-18s and Hawk jet trainers. The Air Combat Centre of the Satakunta Air Command will play an important role in the execution of the testing and evaluation event. Within the Finnish Air Force, the Air Combat Centre is tasked with flight-testing as well as the research and development of air warfare tactics and doctrines.

The HX Fighter Programme is a part of the development of Finland’s defence system. Thus, the Army, the Navy as well as the Finnish Defence Forces’ joint commands and agencies (e.g. FDF Logistics Command, FDF C5 Agency, Finnish Defence Research Agency) will participate in the HX Challenge with their know-how and equipment. Naturally, the new fighters must be able to network with Army and Navy weapon systems as seamlessly as possible.

(!)The HX Challenge will evaluate the capabilities reported by the manufacturers in the five categories of operations itemised in the call for tenders: counter-air, counter-land, counter-sea, long-range strike as well as intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance and target acquisition. For example, we will test the candidates’ capabilities to support Army and Navy troops. Thus, it is only natural that experts from all the services participate in the HX Challenge. The emphasis of the event will be on the verification of technical systems, not on the assessment of tactical efficiency.

How can the HX Challenge be seen in the Tampere region?

The HX Challenge test periods will start on 9 January and end on 26 February. We have designated a test period of seven weekdays for each of the candidates. The first Eurofighter Typhoons will arrive at Pirkkala Air Base in the beginning of January, and the last Super Hornets will leave at the end of February. The number of aircraft and personnel arriving in Finland varies from one candidate to another. Each candidate will bring two to four aircraft to Pirkkala Air Base as some of the evaluation flights will require two aircraft. January and February will be extremely busy for the Satakunta Air Command, with more Defence Forces personnel than regularly on the air base.

The HX Challenge is a technical testing and evaluation event, not an air show or a live air exercise. In the Tampere region, the event can be seen mostly as individual take-offs and landings at the Pirkkala Air Base. In addition, there will be temporary restrictions of movement in the vicinity of the base. During the HX Challenge, the Satakunta Air Command will designate a location between terminals 1 and 2 on the civilian side of the airport where it will be possible to watch the take-offs and landings.

The performance values of the candidates will be measured and verified through carefully planned sorties. The evaluation flights will be flown mainly between 8 am and 4 pm. On a couple of days, there will be tests in low-light conditions in the evening after office hours. No evaluation flights will be flown during the weekends.

How will the HX Fighter Programme negotiations with the candidates continue after the HX Challenge?

The HX Fighter Programme negotiation process is separate from the HX Challenge. The objective of the negotiations is to enhance and optimise each candidate’s HX solution.

The HX negotiation process will progress step-by-step. The tenderer-specific revised Request for Quotation (RFQ), based on the initial tenders and the first phase of HX Programme negotiations with the candidates, was sent to the manufacturers in October 2019 and responses to the revised RFQ will be accepted until 31 January 2020. The revised RFQ launched the second phase of the HX Programme negotiations, in which the content of the HX solution will be finalised with each tenderer.

The request for the Best and Final Offer (BAFO) will be sent to the tenderers in 2020 at the end of the second phase of the HX Programme negotiations. The Government of Finland will decide on the procurement in 2021.
HX Challenge test periods:

Eurofighter Typhoon 9–17 January 2020
Dassault Rafale 20–28 January 2020
Saab Gripen 29 January–6 February 2020
Lockheed Martin F-35 7–17 February 2020
Boeing F/A-18 Super Hornet 18–26 February 2020

***

Everybody will be bringing at least 2 fighters, because certain tests require two birds in the air at the same time. Some have already told that they will bring 4. E.g. Saab will take their sole "production representative" Gripen E first time outside Sweden (with two-seater Gripen Demo and GlobalEye AEW&C).
No idea whether BAE will bring 2-seater Typhoons when they apparently offered only 1-seaters in the previous round. Dassault offered both, so they will probably bring 2-seater Rafales. Growler should be appearing for Boeing. It's likely the one that will be most heavily verified outside of Finland for the purposes of this HX challenge. LM will be bringing 4 F-35s as per current public knowledge. Two seaters aren't strictly necessary because the jets save all parameters during tasked scenarios. Sifting through that data is the priority instead of taking scenic rides on the backseat.

[magitsu]

There should be at least moderate international press coverage:
https://twitter.com/jamie_aviacom/statu ... 7565378560

[madrat]

Wouldn't it really mess with Dassault, Saab, and Eurofighter if LM brought at least one B variant to unofficially show off its ability to STOVL? Who needs to land on the re-purposed highway when you can drop into any specific parking place at the local pub. Getting down from 30,000 feet and safely exiting the aircraft to put your butt in a chair at the officer's club should be a useful event to those crazy Finns.