F-35A versus Saab Gripen NG

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

aprichelieu

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 70
  • Joined: 20 Apr 2011, 19:25
  • Location: Stockholm

Unread post03 Mar 2021, 18:56

hornetfinn wrote:
kimjongnumbaun wrote:
aprichelieu wrote:So we are going into deflection, when we run out of arguments, are we?

Gripen’s software suite has been qualified according to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DO-178C.


What's your point? The Gripen E is still doing flight testing and it's been 15 years since the Gripen NG was announced. US fighters have been qualified to FAA standards since 2011 because it was made into law. Big deal.

https://afuzion.com/do-178-do-254-for-m ... ompliance/


Exactly. Besides F-35 is getting Technology Refresh 3 (TR3) with Block 4 and that will be DO-178C compliant AFAIK. Besides DO-178 is just guideline document for the whole software process. Being DO-178B compliant instead of DO-178C doesn't necessarily make the process or software any worse, although DO-178C provides more precise and complete guidance and guidelines to achieve robust software and process to deliver that.


The current F-35 S/W is not DO-178 compliant. That is what your link says.
Being DO-178 compliant means all software is compliant.
Having part being compliant simply means that you are not compliant.
If things in the C++ world does not change, it is likely to remain non-compliant.
Offline

aprichelieu

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 70
  • Joined: 20 Apr 2011, 19:25
  • Location: Stockholm

Unread post03 Mar 2021, 19:03

XanderCrews wrote:
aprichelieu wrote:
So we are going into deflection, when we run out of arguments, are we?


Deflection? LOL lets get into that shall we?

you're using rumors that have already been explained regarding the F-35. Meanwhile the Gripen E is still not in even initial service, the company stock is dropping and they're admitting supply problems on 39E. Now a person who attempts to cherry pick like yourself and then invent the reasons could come to the conclusion that the Gripen E is too expensive and too diificult to fix or upgrade as it is falling short of sales projections. Lets review:

Flight International:

Posted on 7/14/2008,

FARNBOROUGH 2008: Saab pitches Gripen NG as JSF alternative

The export market for the Saab Gripen fighter is starting to take off. “It’s all happening at a tremendous pace” says Bob Kemp, senior vice president for international sales & marketing at Gripen International, the company that handles sales of the Swedish aircraft.

In the days leading up to the show, Gripen International submitted a proposal to Switzerland, claiming the Gripen offered the most cost-effective and proportionate replacement for the Swiss Air Force’s ageing Northrop Grumman F-5E/F fighters. Rival aircraft such as the Dassault Rafale and the Eurofighter Typhoon would both be “too expensive to allow the procurement of the required 33 aircraft while staying within budget”, Kemp says.

Switzerland is one of a number of nations who need to replace their current US-supplied fighters, alongside Greece, Malaysia and Thailand (which recently ordered the Gripen) as well as some of the potential JSF customer nations. This is a new and difficult category for Gripen International, whose early sales successes were to nations in two other categories identified by Kemp.

Launch customer South Africa helped to position Gripen as what Kemp described as the “fighter-of-choice” for non-aligned nations, replacing French and Russian fighters. Argentina, Brazil and Ecuador are viewed as further prospects in this sector. The Gripen’s next customers – the Czech Republic and Hungary - represented a different class of operator: new NATO member states that wanted to replace Soviet-era fighters with Western aircraft that would be fully compatible with their new NATO responsibilities and commitments.

Gripen International still hopes to supply some 400 examples of the existing production JAS 39C and two-seat JAS 39D models, but the company is looking ahead, and in the slightly longer term Kemp hopes to establish a new variant, the so-called Gripen NG, as the “world’s export market-leading single-engined muti-role fighter.” Even before the Gripen entered service, Saab began looking ahead at how the aircraft could be further developed and improved, especially by increasing the aircraft’s range, and by adding new avionics and systems.


400 huh? How'd that work out? Lets move on:


Aero Society. 24 May 2016

This model, says Saab, could also work for India, where the dogfight to supply the IAF with fighters is now back on after the collapse of the MRCA programme and defence companies watching the negotiations with Dassault with interest. India's fighter shortfall beyond the 35 Rafales it is now in talks for and its large, aging MiG-21 fleet means that even though the initial number is small – this could rise substantially. Saab thus sees its Brazil model fitting New Dehli's 'Make In India' policy perfectly.

More widely, there still remain large numbers of aging light combat aircraft (such as F-5s) worldwide – giving Saab the scope to build on Gripen export success it has already achieved with Czech Republic, Hungary, South Africa and Thailand. Overall, says Saab chief Buskhe, his target is 400-450 Gripen sales worldwide.


450?! Wow! Where are we on that... 96? only 36 outside of Sweden which can't buy more than 60 and is keeping the older Gripen around... hmmm what can we make of this? hasn't made a sale since 2014? F model not anticipated until 2023? Adjusted sales expectations higher? Wow. These guys are hilarious. Are we counting the 13 "free" Gripens the Swedes bought to keep their line from closing?

F-35 is more mature, more popular, more useful and far more desired aircraft. Once again, the onus is on the Gripen. Its competing against airplanes in service, some of them for decades. Its not just the runt of the litter, its constantly late to boot. Sweden isn't getting their first models for 2 more years yet.

Ah yes deflection... like blabbering about Software while still being years behind what was supposed to be a simple and straightforward evolution of a proven platform?

Quick! better bring up the F-35 and deflect before people realize this 21st century MiG-21 still isn't ready. :mrgreen:

wait for it...

October 27 2020: Extended! The Swedish Air Force (SwAF) will retain a number of its Saab JAS 39 Gripen C/D fighters beyond their current planned 2026 retirement date, solidifying an earlier announced plan to make up an anticipated shortfall in Gripen E numbers.


So what conclusions can we draw from this about Gripen E?


Not very much.
The Swedish Government has decided to have a larger Air Force, and while Gripen C is not as good as the Gripen E it is still relevant to the defense of Sweden.
This means that instead of 60 fighters, there will be more than 100 up to a maximum of 150-160.
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6963
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post03 Mar 2021, 19:14

aprichelieu wrote:Not very much.
The Swedish Government has decided to have a larger Air Force, and while Gripen C is not as good as the Gripen E it is still relevant to the defense of Sweden.
This means that instead of 60 fighters, there will be more than 100 up to a maximum of 150-160.


really?

I read that they curtailed the Gripen E.

I read that their plans to "recycle" C's into E's was a failure

I read that the Gripen E is too expensive to buy and operate.

This is fun, no wonder you do it.

Lets broaden our conclusions:

As of this moment the Gripen E/F is a complete export failure. It even managed to pull defeat from the jaws of victory in Switzerland. Gripen overall has managed to either lose, or even failed to be considered for the list of countries saab thought it had a shot at. its years late, its expensive. it has years to go yet. its never displaced a single F-35 nation, its routinely passed over not just for the JSF, but for Super Hornet, and Other European options (including that Rafale that saab assured me was a total non starter.) its funny when the USAF rumor mills say "well we may not buy as many, or supplant with something else" thats double plus ungood. But when Sweden can't muster money for more than 60 of what I'm assured is such an easy to buy and fly and pay for fighter, instead supplanting with something else that's double plus great!

It can't be like an iphone Sven, iphones sell

If this thing is so great, why didn't Sweden back it in 2006 in the first place? Why did they ask Saab to delay in the 2010s after the Swiss bailed? Why did they chose to buy only 60 finally in 2013? The Gripen NG program was a disaster by SAABS OWN MEASURES.

It wasn't F-35 fans that assured us the Gripen NG would be ready long before the problem plagued JSF
It wasn't F-35 fans that said it would weigh 7000 kilos empty, then watched it fatten to 8000 kilos
It wasn't F-35 fans that said they would sell 450 of them, just to see it stuck at 36 exported
It wasn't F-35 fans that downgraded the additional fuel drop from 40 percent, to 38 percent, to finally 30 percent
It wasn't F-35 fans that set the timeline and watched it slip again and again, while insisting nothing slipped
It wasn't F-35 fans that had even sweden saying someone else needed to buy it first, which lead to irrecoverable loss of time.

What a joke. Did you notice all those Gripen CGI images? did you notice the F-35s that were purchased instead? isn't it funny?

so at what point do we decide its ok for the F-35 fans to start doing victory laps despite the USAF buying "only" 1000 plus of them? I think this one is settled right? This thread started in 2007, like most post earlier demonstrate, I think the F-35 won in the Netherlands, Norway, and Denmark. I think the Gripen lost in Switzerland, and india, don't you?

This is starting to look like the last super bowl. I don't think theyre coming back. Once Finland and Canada are out of the running I think thats pretty much curtains unless India comes in and saves the day. After that we are looking at the same thing as the original gripen. A couple dozen sold here or there. lots of blabbering but the sales speak for themselves. F-16V alone has already knocked out more "potential gripen customers" than the F-35, sopping up the eastern block hopes.

The saab salesman assured me that the Rafale would not win any exports, while telling me that the Gripen would sell in the hundreds. Rafale has 4 exports. Gripen E has ONE as of right now.

What conclusions should I draw about this? after this decade-plus long hype machine is looking like its fallen short of even its own expectations? Cheer? Call it a rousing success? patiently wait for the guy who is gonna walk through the door 5 minutes before closing and order 350 of them? Or de we maybe acknowledge this thing is a failure by its own expectations. Again not expectations heaped on it from outsiders, but its own "trash talk" that it utterly failed to live up to?

This means that instead of 60 fighters, there will be more than 100 up to a maximum of 150-160.


sure, but why not buy 100 Gripen E, and then have 60 of the older version? I mean since Gripen E is so easy to buy, fly, maintain, upgrade etc? Isn't that a little strange? why aren't they going with a majority of the more capable airplane? strange don't you think? Everything about Gripen E is amazing, but not even Sweden is going for more of it? hmmm

Back to the F-35, lets say the USAF does drop it to 1050 (I think this is highly unlikely, but lets play) that is basically 1 for 1 with F-16. Why didn't Gripen E go 1 for 1 in Sweden?

Image
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3090
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post03 Mar 2021, 21:35

XanderCrews wrote:Back to the F-35, lets say the USAF does drop it to 1050 (I think this is highly unlikely, but lets play) that is basically 1 for 1 with F-16. Why didn't Gripen E go 1 for 1 in Sweden?


And lets not forget that Brazil planned to buy 120 (one hundred and twenty) of these Gripen E/F aircraft but cut this plan to only 36 aircraft! This is a cut of 70% compared to the initial plan!
And this is not something that is being considered but instead it's something that already happened but the Gripen fans keep ignoring this while at the same time when someone who doesn't have the power to have a final world regarding the F-35 program comes up with tentative idea of reducing USAF's F-35 - something that is neither confirmed and likely won't happen (this same person admitted that this may not happen!) - the Gripen fans claim this as being a "set in stone fact" to the seven winds. :roll:

It's amazing how double standards of these Gripen fans like Mr. aprichelieu are :doh:


Moreover if the Gripen E/F is so good and 4.5th gen aircraft are more than enough for future needs, why did Saab sign up to co-develop and produce the stealth Tempest fighter aircraft with the Brits??
Another FACT that all Gripen fans seem to run away from like the devil runs from the cross :roll:
Last edited by ricnunes on 03 Mar 2021, 21:45, edited 1 time in total.
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3090
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post03 Mar 2021, 21:44

aprichelieu wrote:The current F-35 S/W is not DO-178 compliant. That is what your link says.
Being DO-178 compliant means all software is compliant.
Having part being compliant simply means that you are not compliant.
If things in the C++ world does not change, it is likely to remain non-compliant.


I'll re-post hornetfinn's post (which you seemed to have missed on purpose):

hornetfinn wrote:Exactly. Besides F-35 is getting Technology Refresh 3 (TR3) with Block 4 and that will be DO-178C compliant AFAIK. Besides DO-178 is just guideline document for the whole software process. Being DO-178B compliant instead of DO-178C doesn't necessarily make the process or software any worse, although DO-178C provides more precise and complete guidance and guidelines to achieve robust software and process to deliver that.


So the F-35 is currently DO-178B compliant and will be DO-178C compliant with Block 4.

Moreover, the F-35 is now in service and its software is FAA approved which means that yes, the F-35's C++ written software is compliant which is something that you still CANNOT say about your beloved Gripen E.
“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: 25655
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post04 Mar 2021, 05:51

BAE SYSTEMS The History of an Aerospace Giant Saab - BAe Gripen [one page PDF attached]
27 Apr 2020 BAe PR

"Following on from more than a decade of co-operation between the two companies, in 1995 British Aerospace signed an agreement with Saab to form Saab-BAe Gripen AB; a joint marketing, support and manufacturing agreement for an export variant of the Saab JAS39 Gripen.

The impetus for this agreement was BAe's research which had begun in 1980 into a lightweight, single-engined fighter. This failed to attract any UK official support so the agreement with Saab provided BAe Military Aircraft with a product which sat comfortably between the Hawk trainer and the Eurofighter Typhoon. In return Saab gained access to the global sales organization of British Aerospace which also adapted the capabilities of the Gripen to fit NATO standards and for flight refuelling.

BAe had been involved in the Gripen programme before 1995 and had designed and made the wings for the first three prototypes. In 1998 BAe purchased a 35% holding in Saab under which it would produce 45% of the export Gripen airframes. The Brough, Yorkshire factory which was already building the Gripen main landing gear unit became the centre for Gripen manufacturing in the United Kingdom and was selected to assemble the wing attachment unit. The site was also responsible for the marrying-up these units and the subsequent connection of other assemblies. This resulted in the delivery from Brough of 77 complete Gripen centre fuselages for both single and two-seater variants.

A significant milestone for Saab-BAE SYSTEMS was achieved in December 1999 when the South African government ordered 28 Gripen fighters, including nine fully combat-capable two seaters. The order significantly also included 24 BAE Hawk 100 trainers. As part of an offset deal, Brough's Gripen work was gradually passed over to Denel in South Africa, initially by the manufacture at Brough of 22 kits and then wholesale manufacture by Denel.

In 2005 BAE reduced its stake in Saab to 20.5% in 2005 and in 2010 ended it, as it was concentrating its attention on the F-35."

Photo: "Saab Gripen demonstrator. For more than 15 years from 1995 BAE and Saab worked closely together to refine and market the Saab Gripen, which sat comfortably in the BAE portfolio between the Hawk trainer and the Typhoon. (Saab)"


Source: The Aircraft of British Aerospace and BAE SYSTEMS 1977 - 2017
Attachments
GRIPEN Bae Systems - The History Of An Aerospace Giant PRN.pdf
(1.22 MiB) Downloaded 50 times
GripenDEMONSTRATOR.jpg
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3461
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post04 Mar 2021, 08:21

aprichelieu wrote:The current F-35 S/W is not DO-178 compliant. That is what your link says.
Being DO-178 compliant means all software is compliant.
Having part being compliant simply means that you are not compliant.
If things in the C++ world does not change, it is likely to remain non-compliant.


Not my link actually, but DO-178 compliance is only required for safety-critical software and other software aboard does not need to be done according to it (Level E in DO-178B/C).

https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a558107.pdf

What is “safety critical” software?
• Failure can cause loss of human life or have other catastrophic consequences

How does safety criticality affect software development?
• Regulatory agencies require compliance with certification requirements
• Safety-related standards may apply to finished product, development process, or both

Prescriptive
• Specify requirements on the Specify requirements on the process process by which software is developed and fielded by which software is developed and fielded
ƒ Sound process adds confidence in soundness of result
• Example: DO-178B

Goal-based
• Developer provides safety cases
ƒ Claims concerning system’s safety-relevant attributes
ƒ Arguments justifying those claims
ƒ Evidence backing up the arguments
• Example: UK Defense Standard 00-56
ƒ “A Safety Case is a structured argument, supported by a body of evidence, that provides a compelling, comprehensible and valid case that a system is safe for a given application in a given environment


Software where anomalous behavior has no effect on aircraft operational capability or pilot workload is Level E and is not addressed in any DO-178 version. I'm pretty sure there are that kind of software aboard all modern military aircraft, although most software will definitely be safety-critical at some level (A-D) and be addressed with DO-178. For example I'd imagine there is some maintenance related software aboard that is used only on the ground by maintenance crews or systems.

C++ is not really a problem and there are quite a lot of development and testing tools available to make sure C++ code is compliant with DO-178B/C. Some C++ features can not be used or they must be restricted (like multiple inheritance or memory allocation/deallocation). C++ is fine language but it's totally generic which means it has some features which are not good for safety-critical software.

This is from 2005, so it's not even a new thing at all:
https://www.militaryaerospace.com/compu ... ing-system

Green Hills Software Inc. in Santa Barbara, Calif., is offering DO-178B Level A certifiable Embedded C++ (EC++) programming language for the company’s safety-critical Integrity 178B real-time operating system (RTOS).


Testing tools:
https://www.parasoft.com/solutions/compliance/do-178/

Parasoft C/C++test’s testing functions, configurable contexts, and reporting mechanisms provide software development teams with proven tools that help them achieve DO-178B/C compliance.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 25655
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post04 Mar 2021, 09:01

Royal Thai Air Force to upgrade Gripen C/D combat aircraft to MS20 standard
03 Mar 2021 Alessandra Giovanzanti

"The Royal Thai Air Force’s (RTAF’s) Directorate of Aeronautical Engineering (DAE) has awarded a contract for the upgrade of the service’s 11 Saab JAS 39 Gripen C/D multirole combat aircraft to the latest MS20 standard, Janes learned on 3 March.

The THB631.725 million (USD20.84 million) contract, which dates back to around mid-January, was signed with the Swedish Defence Materiel Administration, according to documents published by the RTAF.

The requirement for the MS20 upgrade was first stated in November 2018 by Group Captain Prachya Tippayarat, from the RTAF’s Wing 7 at Surat Thani Air Force Base, in an interview with Janes . However, no details were provided at the time as to when the upgrade would take place.

The requirement was reiterated in the RTAF’s 2020 White Paper, with an envisaged start date in 2021, although no information has been provided about when the upgrade work is set to be completed.

According to Saab, the MS20 upgrade, which involves hardware and software upgrades, is designed to enhance the Gripens’ ability to engage ground targets by incorporating unguided and laser-guided bombs into the aircraft’s payload inventory. The platform’s air-to-air capability is also set to be enhanced by the introduction of new radar modes. The MS20 standard, which offers an optional ground collision avoidance system (GCAS), will additionally enable the aircraft to fire MBDA’s Meteor beyond-visual-range air-to-air missile (BVRAAM)."

Source: https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news ... 0-standard
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline

loke

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1184
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2008, 19:07

Unread post04 Mar 2021, 11:25

spazsinbad wrote:
Royal Thai Air Force to upgrade Gripen C/D combat aircraft to MS20 standard
03 Mar 2021 Alessandra Giovanzanti

"The Royal Thai Air Force’s (RTAF’s) Directorate of Aeronautical Engineering (DAE) has awarded a contract for the upgrade of the service’s 11 Saab JAS 39 Gripen C/D multirole combat aircraft to the latest MS20 standard, Janes learned on 3 March.

The THB631.725 million (USD20.84 million) contract, which dates back to around mid-January, was signed with the Swedish Defence Materiel Administration, according to documents published by the RTAF.

That's 1.89 million USD per jet.

In other news:
The new Brazilian Air Force fighter, F-39 E Gripen, has begun the supersonic flight testing phase in Brazil. The aircraft, which is in the Gripen Flight Testing Center (GFTC) at Embraer's facilities in Gavião Peixoto (SP), has carried out these activities in the designated test areas northwest of the base. All flights follow procedures defined by the authorities and are carried out at high altitudes, above 5,000 meters.

These flights, carried out by Saab, are essential to test the performance and functions of the new aircraft, to continue the certification and acceptance procedures of the aircraft, which arrived in Brazil in September 2020.

Activities in Brazil include testing of flight control systems and weather systems. It also aims to test the aircraft in the tropical climate. Unique characteristics of Brazilian aircraft, such as integration of armaments and Link BR2 communication system – which provides encrypted data and voice communication between aircraft – will also be tested in Brazil.

The Gripen Program
The partnership with Brazil began in 2014, with a contract for the development and production of 36 Gripen E/F aircraft for the Brazilian Air Force, including systems, support and equipment. A broad technology transfer program, which is running over a ten-year period, is driving the development of the local aeronautical industry through partner companies participating in the Gripen Brasileiro program.

During this period, more than 350 Brazilian technicians and engineers are participating in theoretical and practical training in Sweden to acquire the knowledge necessary to perform the same tasks in Brazil. To date, more than 230 professionals have completed the courses and most of them are back in the country working at gripen's Project and Development Center (GDDN).

GFTC and GDDN are part of the Gripen Program's technology transfer, and are essential in saab and Embraer's joint activities aimed at building procedures and the ability to develop and test new features during gripen's life cycle at FAB.

Auto-translated from: https://www.aereo.jor.br/2021/03/03/cac ... no-brasil/
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6963
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post04 Mar 2021, 15:54

Thailand Upgrades F5 TH Jets to Bring them on Par With Gripen 39 Aircraft
Our Bureau 05:30 AM, November 15, 2019 5342

Thailand Upgrades F5 TH Jets to Bring them on Par With Gripen 39 Aircraft

The Royal Thai Air Force has upgraded two of its 30-40 year-old F5 TH aircraft which will being them on par with the Gripen 39 C/D fighters.

The upgrades to two aircraft include German IRIS-T and Israeli Python 4 missiles, Italian radar and smart bombs and they can work just as well as Gripen 39 C/D fighter jets, air force chief Maanat Wongwat told the media in Bangkok today.

"Following the successful upgrade of two jets, we plan to upgrade 14 more of them in stages," he said.

The modernization program is expected to be completed in 2022 at a cost of 5.2 billion baht ($172 million), local media reported Friday.

According to the official, the country decided to modernize decades-old planes owing to lack of funds to procure new Gripen jets. "We indeed want to add a fleet of Swedish-made Gripen to our existing 12 fighter jets, but we just don't have a large enough budget," the air force chief admitted.


yeah they are upgrading their F-5s into Gripens recently too.

In 2005 BAE reduced its stake in Saab to 20.5% in 2005 and in 2010 ended it, as it was concentrating its attention on the F-35."


F-35 wins again

Looking like indonesia is going for Rafale too. Another door closes.
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6963
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post04 Mar 2021, 15:56

loke wrote:
In other news:
The new Brazilian Air Force fighter, F-39 E Gripen, has begun the supersonic flight testing phase in Brazil. The aircraft, which is in the Gripen Flight Testing Center (GFTC) at Embraer's facilities in Gavião Peixoto (SP), has carried out these activities in the designated test areas northwest of the base. All flights follow procedures defined by the authorities and are carried out at high altitudes, above 5,000 meters.

These flights, carried out by Saab, are essential to test the performance and functions of the new aircraft, to continue the certification and acceptance procedures of the aircraft, which arrived in Brazil in September 2020.

Activities in Brazil include testing of flight control systems and weather systems. It also aims to test the aircraft in the tropical climate. Unique characteristics of Brazilian aircraft, such as integration of armaments and Link BR2 communication system – which provides encrypted data and voice communication between aircraft – will also be tested in Brazil.

The Gripen Program
The partnership with Brazil began in 2014, with a contract for the development and production of 36 Gripen E/F aircraft for the Brazilian Air Force, including systems, support and equipment. A broad technology transfer program, which is running over a ten-year period, is driving the development of the local aeronautical industry through partner companies participating in the Gripen Brasileiro program.

During this period, more than 350 Brazilian technicians and engineers are participating in theoretical and practical training in Sweden to acquire the knowledge necessary to perform the same tasks in Brazil. To date, more than 230 professionals have completed the courses and most of them are back in the country working at gripen's Project and Development Center (GDDN).

GFTC and GDDN are part of the Gripen Program's technology transfer, and are essential in saab and Embraer's joint activities aimed at building procedures and the ability to develop and test new features during gripen's life cycle at FAB.

Auto-translated from: https://www.aereo.jor.br/2021/03/03/cac ... no-brasil/


probably the most exciting news since high speed taxi testing. Really really interesting stuff.
Choose Crews
Offline

aprichelieu

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 70
  • Joined: 20 Apr 2011, 19:25
  • Location: Stockholm

Unread post05 Mar 2021, 18:59

ricnunes wrote:
aprichelieu wrote:The current F-35 S/W is not DO-178 compliant. That is what your link says.
Being DO-178 compliant means all software is compliant.
Having part being compliant simply means that you are not compliant.
If things in the C++ world does not change, it is likely to remain non-compliant.


I'll re-post hornetfinn's post (which you seemed to have missed on purpose):

hornetfinn wrote:Exactly. Besides F-35 is getting Technology Refresh 3 (TR3) with Block 4 and that will be DO-178C compliant AFAIK. Besides DO-178 is just guideline document for the whole software process. Being DO-178B compliant instead of DO-178C doesn't necessarily make the process or software any worse, although DO-178C provides more precise and complete guidance and guidelines to achieve robust software and process to deliver that.


So the F-35 is currently DO-178B compliant and will be DO-178C compliant with Block 4.

Moreover, the F-35 is now in service and its software is FAA approved which means that yes, the F-35's C++ written software is compliant which is something that you still CANNOT say about your beloved Gripen E.


No, the F-35 is not DO-178B compliant, and the choice of C++ is one reason.
”AFAIK”, if you cannot make DO-178B compliant things, making DO-178C is not going to be easier,
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5072
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Nashua NH USA

Unread post05 Mar 2021, 19:29

aprichelieu wrote:No, the F-35 is not DO-178B compliant, and the choice of C++ is one reason.
”AFAIK”, if you cannot make DO-178B compliant things, making DO-178C is not going to be easier,

I have worked on many C++ DO-178B AND DO-178C compliant programs. You may want to recheck your assertion that C++ cannot be DO-178B/C compliant.
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
-PFD Systems Engineer
-PATRIOT Systems Engineer
Offline

pron

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 153
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2014, 19:28

Unread post05 Mar 2021, 20:10

aprichelieu wrote:
ricnunes wrote:
aprichelieu wrote:The current F-35 S/W is not DO-178 compliant. That is what your link says.
Being DO-178 compliant means all software is compliant.
Having part being compliant simply means that you are not compliant.
If things in the C++ world does not change, it is likely to remain non-compliant.


I'll re-post hornetfinn's post (which you seemed to have missed on purpose):

hornetfinn wrote:Exactly. Besides F-35 is getting Technology Refresh 3 (TR3) with Block 4 and that will be DO-178C compliant AFAIK. Besides DO-178 is just guideline document for the whole software process. Being DO-178B compliant instead of DO-178C doesn't necessarily make the process or software any worse, although DO-178C provides more precise and complete guidance and guidelines to achieve robust software and process to deliver that.


So the F-35 is currently DO-178B compliant and will be DO-178C compliant with Block 4.

Moreover, the F-35 is now in service and its software is FAA approved which means that yes, the F-35's C++ written software is compliant which is something that you still CANNOT say about your beloved Gripen E.


No, the F-35 is not DO-178B compliant, and the choice of C++ is one reason.
”AFAIK”, if you cannot make DO-178B compliant things, making DO-178C is not going to be easier,

The DO-331 supplement provides guidance on the use of Model-Based Technologies in the context of a DO-178C certification. Certain activities and objectives of DO-178C are modified or added depending on how model technologies are used. DO-331 describes how the core document and the supplement work together. Object-Oriented Technologies are being adopted through the use of features added to traditional programming languages to support a more powerful programming paradigms. For example, C++ and Ada provide an ability to define data types with operations that act on them and to define this as a class. The DO-332 supplement addresses such programming features and provides guidance on use of these technologies in conjunction with DO-178C.
Offline

aprichelieu

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 70
  • Joined: 20 Apr 2011, 19:25
  • Location: Stockholm

Unread post05 Mar 2021, 22:30

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:
aprichelieu wrote:No, the F-35 is not DO-178B compliant, and the choice of C++ is one reason.
”AFAIK”, if you cannot make DO-178B compliant things, making DO-178C is not going to be easier,

I have worked on many C++ DO-178B AND DO-178C compliant programs. You may want to recheck your assertion that C++ cannot be DO-178B/C compliant.


I don’t assert that C++ code cannot be made compliant.
I am saying that life becomes more difficult when you use C++.
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 6 guests