F-35A versus Saab Grippen NG

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

viper12

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 210
  • Joined: 28 Jun 2017, 14:58

Unread post11 May 2018, 19:42

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:You are correct in your understanding.


Just to be sure, how does one prove that ?

I made a couple derivations, and all I got are :

Ps = (1/mg)*dE/dt = (1/mg)*(d/dt)(0.5m*v^2 + mgh) = (v/g)(dv/dt) + 0 for a constant altitude turn
a_c = omega*v, a_c being the centripetal acceleration and omega the turn rate

So I'm not sure what are the next steps that show Ps = constant implies omega = constant. I suppose from f-16adf's post that a_c is constant too, but not completely positive about it.

Or it's simply that the Ps isopleth is flat in the doghouse plot, so if you can adjust your pull on the stick to maintain constant Ps, you're simply at the same omega ?
Offline

fbw

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 56
  • Joined: 27 Dec 2012, 02:47

Unread post11 May 2018, 22:00

steve2267 wrote:While we are yakking about E-M diagrams and Pee-sub-ess curves... does anyone have E-M doghouse plots for any Hornet or Rhino variants? The turn diagrams I found in some F/A-18C/D and E/F performance addendums seemed to have turn information, but I couldn't find any Ps data or curves. Something that could be overlaid on top of the Hellenic F-16C manual that's floating around out there would be interesting, as an intellectual exercise.



You can convert the information from the NATOPS turn rate charts on the F-18 into a a “doghouse plot”. I used to have some F-18C E-M diagrams saved. I will see if I can dig them up again. Working from an iPhone, the one most easily accessible is a simple comparison of the F-18E/F compared to the “C”. Not going to give any data on the Ps though.
Attachments
B2CF17A9-9C1B-4F6D-A610-5F7E3F7C3A4D.jpeg
Offline
User avatar

steve2267

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1681
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2016, 17:36

Unread post11 May 2018, 22:21

fbw wrote:
steve2267 wrote:While we are yakking about E-M diagrams and Pee-sub-ess curves... does anyone have E-M doghouse plots for any Hornet or Rhino variants? The turn diagrams I found in some F/A-18C/D and E/F performance addendums seemed to have turn information, but I couldn't find any Ps data or curves. Something that could be overlaid on top of the Hellenic F-16C manual that's floating around out there would be interesting, as an intellectual exercise.



You can convert the information from the NATOPS turn rate charts on the F-18 into a a “doghouse plot”. I used to have some F-18C E-M diagrams saved. I will see if I can dig them up again. Working from an iPhone, the one most easily accessible is a simple comparison of the F-18E/F compared to the “C”. Not going to give any data on the Ps though.


Do those NATOPS turn rate charts include the information necessary to create the Ps isolines? I guess that was the biggest thing that left me scratching my head -- I couldn't find any Ps information. If it is not in the turn rate charts, do the NATOPS performance addendums (or the FM itself) have Ps data somewhere? (I'm drawing a blank.)
Take an F-16, stir in A-7, add dollop of F-117 & gob of F-22, sprinkle with AV-8B, stir well, then bake. Whaddya get? An F-35.
Offline

viper12

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 210
  • Joined: 28 Jun 2017, 14:58

Unread post12 May 2018, 00:04

The Ps curves are visible in the Greek F-16's FM, page 427 and further : https://info.publicintelligence.net/HAF ... lement.pdf

And I remember seeing those Ps curves, approximation or real data, back in the Falcon 4.0 manual nearly 20 years ago.

Note that the Ps curves aren't always available ; from what I remember of the F-15A and F/A-18E's NATOPS, you just get doghouse plots without any Ps curves, though obviously, you can draw the Ps=0 contour if you've got the curve for sustained turn rate vs speed.

BTW, has there ever been Ps curves at a constant g value in function of speed, like say when you're pulling 9G's in a horizontal turn from 0.9M to 0.7M ?
Offline

gta4

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 723
  • Joined: 17 Oct 2010, 19:10

Unread post12 May 2018, 03:56

During Indian MMRCA test, F/A-18E's STR was 93% as good as that of typhoon. That is a pretty impressive result for a jet with relative low T/W ratio. It proves F/A-18E's aerodynamic efficiency.
Offline

gta4

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 723
  • Joined: 17 Oct 2010, 19:10

Unread post12 May 2018, 04:00

This figure is more convincing.
With same load out, F/A-18E has better performance and range.
P.S.: This is a 402 powered F/A-18C
18E18C.jpg
Offline

loke

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 518
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2008, 19:07

Unread post17 May 2018, 12:58

Amazing, Saab seems to keep Gripen E in the competition in Canada.
Saab Group is confident that its single-engine Gripen E remains a viable contender for Canada’s next generation fighter aircraft fleet, even though there are currently no immediate plans for Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) pilots to actually fly the aircraft.


https://www.skiesmag.com/news/saab-posi ... n-fighter/

Canada is not just a NATO country it is also F-35 partner!

The probability of Canada buying non-US fighter is 0.0. The probability of Canada not buying F-35 is also 0.0.

Oh well I guess there might be some PR effect of staying in the race?? Or are they gambling that the Canadian politicians are so upset with Boeing, Trump, LM and whatnot and therefore go for a non-US platform in spite of being an F-35 partner?
Offline

hythelday

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 354
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2016, 12:43

Unread post17 May 2018, 13:19

Is there a race at all? I'm not following this too close (soap operas aren't my taste) but AFAIK there isn't an official competition, now is there?
Offline

gta4

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 723
  • Joined: 17 Oct 2010, 19:10

Unread post17 May 2018, 14:12

Why does SAAB advertise JAS39 as "SMART" plane?
Does it mean its avionic codes were written by python and tuned with TensorFlow :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
Offline

magitsu

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 284
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2015, 22:12

Unread post17 May 2018, 14:34

It's probably meant to indicate that its buyers would be SMART.
Nobody want's to make a dumb purchase, so it's there for reassurance. :wink:
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1393
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post17 May 2018, 19:32

Because anyone purchasing the Gripen E will be dumber than SAAB and the Gripen itself which means that in turn that SAAB and the Gripen E will look "SMART" (at least compared to their customers)... :wink:
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 5613
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post29 May 2018, 17:55

alphaxraylima wrote:I will stop as soon as someone actually provides a source of a F-16 turning like that with a similar load. That simple, I'm not going to stop just because someone starts throwing the word "gay" around, the complete opposite in fact. I have NEVER compared that Gripen video to a F-16 performing a level turn, going by the F-16C flight manual it would lose about 4000 ft trying to keep an average 21 degree turn rate for 13 seconds with a drag index of 100 and limited fuel (at sea level) and that is what I have been using as a comparison. If you think that is unfair that is fine, but as no one has been able to show any model F-16 turning like that, that is what we have to go on.



Allow me to clarify, and since you have no sense of humor whatsoever I'll try to keep it dry and to the point. Youtube videos are extremely subjective and in my experience raise far more questions than they ever answer. They tend to lead to bickering, forum warnings, they are basically unprofessional and they never tell the whole story. I would honestly trust a "my friends brothers uncle who works on BLANK say BLANK in combat will BLANK" than I do youtubes. I consider it very amateurish and frankly I don't bother with them. Even in me trying to say I don't bother with them, got me forum warnings so again I don't bother with them, nor do I consider them real evidence.

Flight manuals are nearly the exact opposite of youtube videos, being widely accepted and written accurately by professionals they are rarely subjective and spell out in boring black and white where the reality sits about aircraft performance in many conditions which is as others have said, highly variable depending on dozens of factors. typically the biggest error with flight manuals we see is "user/reader error"

I hope this has clarified why myself and many others here, don't play the youtube game, because no one wins, and its only makes things worse.


loke wrote:Amazing, Saab seems to keep Gripen E in the competition in Canada.
Saab Group is confident that its single-engine Gripen E remains a viable contender for Canada’s next generation fighter aircraft fleet, even though there are currently no immediate plans for Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) pilots to actually fly the aircraft.



https://www.skiesmag.com/news/saab-posi ... n-fighter/

Canada is not just a NATO country it is also F-35 partner!

The probability of Canada buying non-US fighter is 0.0. The probability of Canada not buying F-35 is also 0.0.

Oh well I guess there might be some PR effect of staying in the race?? Or are they gambling that the Canadian politicians are so upset with Boeing, Trump, LM and whatnot and therefore go for a non-US platform in spite of being an F-35 partner?


Please go here:

http://bestfighter4canada.blogspot.com/ ... fs-in.html


These guys are giving Gripen aficionados a very bad name, and they're using your jet to do it. The peak of fanboy ignorance lives there
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 21405
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post06 Jun 2018, 14:48

CANSEC 2018: Saab test pilot at CANSEC shows the benefits of the Gripen E's Wide Area Display 05 Jun 2018


RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

steve2267

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1681
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2016, 17:36

Unread post06 Jun 2018, 16:26

I kept waiting for him to demonstrate the video capabilities of that wide display by showing a YouTube video of a Gripen turning 270°...

Is it common for these cockpit demonstrators to NOT have a HUD? Or has the -E gone HUDless as well?
Take an F-16, stir in A-7, add dollop of F-117 & gob of F-22, sprinkle with AV-8B, stir well, then bake. Whaddya get? An F-35.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 21405
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post06 Jun 2018, 21:47

Moseying around the interrabble it may seem so for the Gripping E pit of many you know poppy wots:
"...The proposed "NG" models of the Gripen, the E and F, will likely adapt a similar single large touchscreen as utilized by the F-35. Again, it eschews a traditional HUD in favor of a helmet mounted display. Without a doubt, this is where fighter cockpit design is going...." http://bestfighter4canada.blogspot.com/ ... kpits.html

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-i-PQQ-RznBw/U ... ockpit.jpg

Image

OK I said above it was probably Poppycock but hey wot do I care because this ANGlish Brazzy Website probably is true:
"...Proposed system, called Cockpit NG, includes a WAD (Wide Area Display), one Helmet Mounted Display (Targo), that incorporate some symbols and images very similar to HUD (Head Up Display) and high capacity computers for processing and images. Time for SAAB presents the study results is unknown by DefesaNet. Currently only the american fighter Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II has a Wide Area Display. http://www.defesanet.com.br/gripenbrazi ... EXCLUSIVE-–-GRIPEN-NG-will-have--Wide-Display-/ OR https://tinyurl.com/ybvo6vok

http://www.defesanet.com.br/photo/gripe ... pen_ng.jpg

Image

GrippeningNingNing TwatterNues has similar view as above: https://i.pinimg.com/564x/bd/97/cb/bd97 ... b9cf4a.jpg

Image
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests