F-16 versus Saab Gripen

Yes, I have seen pics of this system (in IAI Lahav website, if I'm not mistaken), but it would just end up like the Gripen: 4 Flankers can carry a great deal of payload AND have high range, the Viper has to chosoe. If you use that cool tanks you loose hardpoints for bombs. Remember that Brazil, unfortunately, has no $$ for lots of PGMs, so it's more of a Brazilian problem than Viper's problem.

Someone mentioned that South Africa is large. For a Swedish maybe is, but for a Brazilian surely isn't. The state of Pará (1,253,164 sq km) is larger than South Africa (1,221,037 sq km). Brazil has a 8,544,415 sq km surface, way larger than the USA (excluding Alaska). That's why we need a fighter with very large range.

I know one feature of the Gripen radar that should really make it stand out...
It can render stealth technology useless, let me explain, stealth works as to absorb/scatter the radar signals in any and all directions except back to the radar emitting the signals.
The gripen can have I believe upp to five(?) aircraft radars linked (this array should also be able to look way beyond 160km btw) and have those additional radars (located at different points in space) listening after the reflected pulses witch otherwise would get lost.. Some math and datatransfers and everbody know where to aim... ;o)

So, you're saying that the Gripen's rader can detect aircraft like the F-117 and B-2?

The thing Mr.halman mentioned about is the importance of modern data-link for the NG fighters. According to the Ericsson's paper suggestion:

1. The PS-05/A can operate in passive mode, as a sensitive receiver with high directional accuracy (due to its large antenna). Two PS-05/As can exchange information by datalink and locate the target by triangulation.
   
2. The datalink results in better tracking. Usually, three plots need to track a target in track-while-scan mode. The datalink allows the radars to share plots, not just tracks, so even if none of the aircraft in a formation gets enough plots on its own to track the target, they may do so collectively.
   
3. Each radar plot includes Doppler velocity, which provides the individual aircraft with range-rate data. However, this data on its own does not yield the velocity of the target. Using the TIDLS, two fighters can take simultaneous range-rate readings and thereby determine the targets track instantly, reducing the need for radar transmission.
   
4. In ECM applications, one fighter can search, while the wingman simultaneously focuses jamming on the same target, using the radar. This makes it very difficult for the target to intercept or jam the radar that is tracking him. Another anti-jamming technique is for all four radars to illuminate the same target simultaneously at different frequencies.

The Swedish AF is the pioneer of fighter-to-fighter data-link, and the JAS-39 is the first fighter with the NG fighter-to-fighter data-link. However, almost every NG fighter in the world (F/A-22, F/A-18E/F, F-35, EF-2000, Rafale, Su-30MKK/MKI, Su-27SM, Su-35/37, MIG-31) has equipped or will equip soon the same class of NG fighter-to-fighter data-link since then. The Gripen was the first fighter with this kind of revolutional innovation, but it is not unique now.

Will the NG fighter-to-fighter data-link help the fighters like JAS-39 catch the stealthy target at longer distance??? I think the answer is "Yes", since even the stealthy fighter can't make its RCS in every direction as small as its frontal RCS. If you combine the data from the different fighters, AWACS, ground-based air-defense radar and so on in different location with the help of NG data-link, you may catch out the stealthy target earlier then just use the radar of your fighter's own, as an old saying goes: "The unite is the force".

However, when the main point you talk about is to use this kind of system to aqainst the F/A-22 of USAFs, don't forget:

• F/A-22s have this kind of NG data-link and capability, too. In addition, the AN/APG-77 AESA radar is ten times at least more powerful and much, much more capable then PS-05A, and F/A-22's frontal RCS is 200 to 1000 times smaller than the other NG fighters in the world such as F/A-18E/F, F-16E/F, EF-2000, Rafale, JAS-39 and so on now. If JAS-39s can detect F/A-22s a little longer with the help of PS-05As + NG data-link, there is no reason for F/A-22s can't detect JAS-39 much, much, much, much, much... more longer with the help of AN/APG-77s + NG data-link. Even Raptor just use its radar to detect JAS-39, according to the detective capability of AN/APG-77 and the frontal RCS of JAS-39, the Raptor could detect JAS-39 at the distance of 120 to 170 km away theoretically.
  
• The power of F/A-22's radar make it not only the most powerful detector in the world now, but also a formidble EW warfare/weapon. USAF has planned to make a minor upgrade for AN/APG-77s in 2010, and it will make AN/APG-77s to become a "Microwave weapon" that can "burn through and destroy" the enemy's radars of air-borne or ground-base which direct their antenae toward the Raptor.
  
• Which air-force on earth has the most AESA radars, data-links, AWACSs, EW systems, C4ISR capability, and CPU processing capability??? Ans: USAF...

.........toan, you mean to say Gripen's PS-05/A is an airborne bistatic radar functioning as Fire Control Radar?!

Last check, the Chinese and the Russian were not able to overcome the technical and operational difficulties, to have such a FCR on their fighter to effectively counter stealth.

I appreciate if you can provide link to the mentioned Ericsson's paper.

Will the NG fighter-to-fighter data-link help the fighters like JAS-39 catch the stealthy target at longer distance??? I think the answer is "Yes", since even the stealthy fighter can't make its RCS in every direction as small as its frontal RCS. If you combine the data from the different fighters, AWACS, ground-based air-defense radar and so on in different location with the help of NG data-link, you may catch out the stealthy target earlier then just use the radar of your fighter's own, as an old saying goes: "The unite is the force".

I stand to be corrected. But I think Data Fusion with Data Link alone are not sufficient to counter stealth as you have mentioned. Unless you were referring to bistatic/multistatic radar or PCL techniques.

cheers,

The data and the capability about the data-link of GRIPEN can be found in JEDONLINE 2002, April.

http://www.jedonline.com/default.asp?fu ... er%20story

However, it seems that this web-site has not been charge-free anymore since one years ago.

What is the approximate detection range of the F/A 22 ? Since we already are off topic The erieye wich also use AESA based hardware have a claimed detection range of >350Km granted not when it comes to stealthy targets but still.

btw. I believe viggen used fighter to fighter data links from the mid eighties.

The Erieye is an AWACS with the size of E-2C class, therefore, although its AWACS radar's technology is more advancing, its detection range, flight endurance, and the capacity of command and control are still inferior to the E-3C AWACS.

In USA, the USAF had played several times of such combat simulation: Two F/A-22s v.s four F-15Cs or F-16Cs + one E-3C. And F/A-22s was the winner and "killed" every F-15, F-16, and E-3C in each game.

The Swedish AF has installed data-link to their fighters since 1960s. But of course, the speed and capability of the data-links for Dragon and Viggen are not comparable to the data-link for Gripen.

The frontal RCS of F/A-22 is about 1/10,000 ~ 1/20,000 of the RCS of F-15C, which means that the maximal effective detection range of a radar for F/A-22 should be only 1/10 ~ 1/15 of the maximal effective detection range of the same radar for F-15C.

The best non-USA fighter's radar in the world today may detect F-15C 200 ~ 250 km away, and the best non-USA AWACS's radar in the world today may detect F-15C 350 ~ 400 km away.

# 200 ~ 250 / 10 ~ 15 = 13 ~ 25 km (The maximal theoretically effective detection range of the best non-USA fighter's radar in the world today for F/A-22 in head-to-head engagement).

# 350 ~ 400 / 10 ~ 15 = 23 ~ 40 km (The maximal theoretically effective detection range of the best non-USA AWACS's radar in the world today for F/A-22 in head-to-head engagement).

While F/A-22 with AN/APG-77 can detect any other fighter or AWACS in the world today at the range from 80 ~ 100 (target with RCS of 0.05 m2 class, the best estimation I've heard for the frontal RCS of EF-2000 and Rafale) to 230 km+ (target with huge RCS) away theoretically.

Just read a story in the magazine "Combat AIRCRAFT", March 2005, where a RNoAF Viper pilot say they were able to outmaneuver the Gripen thanks to its more powerful engine. He also states that the Swedish pilots do not call the JAS39 Gripen, but just “39”.

I can't believe it, today I was going to post a similar reply regarding that exact story I also saw in that issue! What are the chances of that!!!!!

This is a quote from the Viper pilot in the same article:"We also found out that you should not say Gripen, but just '39'. The Swedish AF guys all refer to the JAS39 as the '39'. Apparently only drunks and babies call it Gripen"

Great minds think alike...

I was based at Bodoe (Bodø) 82-85, so I read the article very carefully.

Excerpt from Gripen news.

"During past international exercises, Gripen has been very competetive during close in combat against foreign aircraft such as the F-16 and F/A-18. I don't want ot make snap judgements because it was a limited number of contacts and I don't have all the exercise parameters. However, during BVR engagements we can definitely say that the radar, datalink, electronic, warfare suit and MMI of the Gripen gave its pilots a clear upper-hand. Their information advantage and SI meant they could employ Gripen's weapon systems in a more optimal way than their foregin counterparts.

Although some aircraft flown in these exercises may have had a slightly better thrust-to-weight ratio than our aircraft, Gripens still managed to get behind the F-16's to make use of the IR-missiles and guns. The small visual signature and excellent agility of the Gripen proved to be a considerable advantage in a dogfight."

Another excerpt.

"We flew several of the Norweigan pilots in our dual seat and they were very impressed with the cockpit displays - especially the tactical screen with the map - and the level of situational awareness that it gives you in combat. I think they understood that we could get so much more out of our jets. It's a different generation.

They thought that a Gripen was pretty similar to an F-16, said an SwAF officer, they thought they were about the same size, they both have one engine-but they were wrong. In combat we out-turned them in many engagements.

Who wrote the Gripen News? The article quoted from above was written by an independent (it seamed) journalist, so may be more objective. The article included material from Norwegian, Swedish and Finish air forces operating in arctic conditions, so was not centered around the Viper, but actually talked the most about the Gripen.

I think you can forget about any information displays mounted below the Pilots neck, as far as advantages in the dogfight is concerned. I'm obviously not the expert here, so would like to know what our pilots in here think about the value of nice displays and their location, while in a dogfight.

They thought that a Gripen was pretty similar to an F-16, said an SwAF officer, they thought they were about the same size, they both have one engine-but they were wrong. In combat we out-turned them in many engagements.

I don't know, that article I read in " Combat Aircraft" has pretty much convinced me that the Viper is more agile than the Gripen.