What's new

Fifth Generation Fighter Jets

I'm not an expert --- and I hope some aviation experts on the forum can chime in --- but the J-31 seems to fit more of a 4.5th-gen role with avionics that may not be able to compete directly with current 5th-gen offerings like the F-22 Raptor.
You are indeed not an expert. Instead of picking of drawing board unrealistic pipedream plane like Japan and India one. You pick on an already flying prototype J-31?

And you even quote western source expert? Why do you trust western source so much? Isnt the same western source that claim ISI collaborate with Osama and Pakistan support Taliban and terrorism. If you put so much faith into western source then the mention must be truth?

Pakistanis need to realize China is an advance countries on par with western and if not surpassed some of them. Do you realized the latest Chinese destroyer is using AESA radar while USN AB destroyer are still using PESA. This is the thing the so called western expert will try to avoid telling you and even so they will try coming up with excuse of Chinese unproven AESA and try to make you believe PESA will be better than AESA.
 
You are indeed not an expert. Instead of picking of drawing board unrealistic pipedream plane like Japan and India one. You pick on an already flying prototype J-31?

And you even quote western source expert? Why do you trust western source so much? Isnt the same western source that claim ISI collaborate with Osama and Pakistan support Taliban and terrorism. If you put so much faith into western source then the mention must be truth?

Pakistanis need to realize China is an advance countries on par with western and if not surpassed some of them. Do you realized the latest Chinese destroyer is using AESA radar while USN AB destroyer are still using PESA. This is the thing the so called western expert will try to avoid telling you and even so they will try coming up with excuse of Chinese unproven AESA and try to make you believe PESA will be better than AESA.

The Beast has spoken!

I follow your posts closely and if you dig up any of mine, you'll see that I am always defending China and pointing out the West's hypocrisy. I also posted about China's quantum satellite and computing advances (cryptography, etc.) Trust me when I say that I don't trust any Western sources --- even Chinese ones seemed to be suggested that the J-20 is the real competitor to current 5th-gen jets.

I was hoping someone with your knowledge would read my post and correct me.

This is the century of China, and Pakistan will help enable it.
 
Country of Origin: Russia

Sukhoi-HAL FGFA
6f284f7a-fc7e-46fe-9c64-4fe72148807b.jpg

I have a question here, as I am no expert. It seems that the PAK FA is a capable fighter, but as you can see on the picture, it's metalic engine pods are exposed, wouldn't it make it a lot less stealthy, considering those engine pods would be emitting a lot of heat?
 
I have a question here, as I am no expert. It seems that the PAK FA is a capable fighter, but as you can see on the picture, it's metalic engine pods are exposed, wouldn't it make it a lot less stealthy, considering those engine pods would be emitting a lot of heat?

I believe you are right.
 
The F-22 has infrared reducing nozzles but the F-35 doesn't, but the F-35's missions are more standoff at greater distances than the F-22's interdiction so infrared signature is not a big requirement.
F-35 uses higher bypass engine so the plume radiance is lower than low bypass engine
engine-bypass-ratio.png


The spikes design of F-35's nozzle (LOAN nozzle) reduce exhaust length
nozzles.png


And finally, the nozzle has internal pipes to lead cooling air
us06398129-20020604-d00002.png

iwakuni-019.jpg
 
F-35 uses higher bypass engine so the plume radiance is lower than low bypass engine
engine-bypass-ratio.png


The spikes design of F-35's nozzle (LOAN nozzle) reduce exhaust length
nozzles.png


And finally, the nozzle has internal pipes to lead cooling air
us06398129-20020604-d00002.png

iwakuni-019.jpg

Thanks for that reply. You could very well be right and I could be wrong. I think it's almost impossible to know for sure unless you're one of the engineers who designs these things. That being said, I'll give you my reply and you can certainly counter.

The one aspect I would find most pertinent in consideration between the F135 engine vs the F119 and their respective aircraft's heat signature is during it's escape route, or at the time the aircraft's nozzle(s) is/are facing the enemy and exhibiting its full radiation. Given that scenario, the F119 in the Raptor has the ability to not only close its nozzles to reduce its heat emission (and its plume), but also perform supercruise where it wouldn't need full afterburner. F-35 cannot do that since it cannot perform supecruise. This is that most important time where the heat signature would need to be at its lowest and the F-22 seems to have the advantage, at least to me.

The other thing is besides the difference in higher bypass engines vs lower bypass ones, the F119 does have some cooling aspects to it as well. Besides, the advantage in closing its nozzles also helps reduces the heat radiating from the Raptor's behind and in essence, giving it similar results to a higher bypass engine since it would reduce its plume.

The surface area is certainly greater in the Raptor's dual engine nozzles whereas the single nozzle for the F-35's engine is smaller. But, the cross section of the nozzle area is greater in the F-35 which adds to its radar signature.

file.php


While both have embedded nozzles in relation to the air frame, which is relatively important to that specific radar cross section at the rear, and while the F-35 has a lower nozzle cross section, it has a greater embedded nozzle surface area. I think this makes a big difference during that critical escape time.

You can't see the nozzles in either (from most angles) which is a significant stealthy advantage for both.
Embedded nozzles.

141105-F-XC395-173.JPG


I still think where it counts more at super cruise in fleeing scenarios, the Raptor has an advantage over the F-35 in its infrared signature.
 
Jamming is something of old, while it can be classified under jamming, there are few new features under it.

5) AN/ASQ-239 “Barracuda”. While most aircraft carry crutch Electronic Warfare(EW) systems, the F-35’s was designed from the outset for integration, able to operate not just with other components within the aircraft such as the APG-81, it can operate with other F-35’s over MADL to perform EW operations together. The AN/ASQ-239 is an evolution of the F-22’s AN/ALR-94 which is described as the most complex and costly avionics piece on the F-22, the Barracuda has twice the reliability and is a quarter the cost of the ALR-94, as well as being able to reduce the 30 sensors on the F-22 to 10 sensors, it has demonstrated the ability to detect and jam the F-22’s radar. It’s able to precisely geo-locate emission locations hundreds of kilometers away, further then it’s radar can see and from there the APG-81 can be slaved to that data track and then detect and track the object with a very narrow beam, increasing power and detection on target while decreasing detection by other aircraft. At close range or against targets using Jammers it is capable of narrowband interleaved search and track(NBILST) against aircraft which provides precise range and velocity that can then be used by a missile without need of the APG-81, allowing 360 degree targeting of aircraft. The Barracuda can refer to it’s data-banks of known emissions and identify the source vehicle or store it for future classification. Other features are false target generation and range-gate stealing, offensive EW is possible, a towed RF decoy is also a part of the package as is MJU-68/B Flares, the counter measure dispenser’s can be seen from behind. The F-35 will also feature “cyber attack” capability.

It is impressive, that they caught up with Gripens capabilities from 20 years ago :welcome:.
Cooperative attack and defense using advanced tightly coupled datalinks
has been around in Sweden since the Viggen era.
 
Thanks for that reply. You could very well be right and I could be wrong. I think it's almost impossible to know for sure unless you're one of the engineers who designs these things.

Information about F-35 nozzle are available, including pattern
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions_article20.html
https://www.google.com/patents/US20090072044
https://www.google.com/patents/US6983602
http://www.google.com.gi/patents/US20020036241
https://www.google.ch/patents/US6398129
The one aspect I would find most pertinent in consideration between the F135 engine vs the F119 and their respective aircraft's heat signature is during it's escape route, or at the time the aircraft's nozzle(s) is/are facing the enemy and exhibiting its full radiation. Given that scenario, the F119 in the Raptor has the ability to not only close its nozzles to reduce its heat emission (and its plume), but also perform supercruise where it wouldn't need full afterburner. F-35 cannot do that since it cannot perform supecruise. This is that most important time where the heat signature would need to be at its lowest and the F-22 seems to have the advantage, at least to me.

The other thing is besides the difference in higher bypass engines vs lower bypass ones, the F119 does have some cooling aspects to it as well. Besides, the advantage in closing its nozzles also helps reduces the heat radiating from the Raptor's behind and in essence, giving it similar results to a higher bypass engine since it would reduce its plume.

The surface area is certainly greater in the Raptor's dual engine nozzles whereas the single nozzle for the F-35's engine is smaller. But, the cross section of the nozzle area is greater in the F-35 which adds to its radar signature.

file.php


While both have embedded nozzles in relation to the air frame, which is relatively important to that specific radar cross section at the rear, and while the F-35 has a lower nozzle cross section, it has a greater embedded nozzle surface area. I think this makes a big difference during that critical escape time.
.
I agree that F-22 on supercruise will have lesser tail signature than F-35 at 100% AB. But i don't think either will be particularly stealthy when they ran away. I think signature is the most important when you sneak on enemy.
Btw, reduce nozzle area will lengthen the exhaust trail because the flow velocity is higher

It is impressive, that they caught up with Gripens capabilities from 20 years ago :welcome:.
Cooperative attack and defense using advanced tightly coupled datalinks
has been around in Sweden since the Viggen era.
Datalink is around for a while, stealth datalink such as MADL is a recent invention.
 
F-22 Raptor and F-35 series aircraft represent 5th generation designs in true sense that happen to be operational and whose well-documented characteristics imply a major leap in capabilities from earlier designs in all spectrums (some confidentiality expected).

Rest are prototypes and experiments with some level of stealth in the mix. Some mere concepts.

The Beast has spoken!

I follow your posts closely and if you dig up any of mine, you'll see that I am always defending China and pointing out the West's hypocrisy. I also posted about China's quantum satellite and computing advances (cryptography, etc.) Trust me when I say that I don't trust any Western sources --- even Chinese ones seemed to be suggested that the J-20 is the real competitor to current 5th-gen jets.

I was hoping someone with your knowledge would read my post and correct me.

This is the century of China, and Pakistan will help enable it.
If you don't mind, can you mention your qualifications? Do you have scholarly experience?

We study lot of stuff in schools, colleges and universities that is of Western origin. Is this sufficient ground to declare it all untrustworthy?

Simple question: Why do Chinese AC ship with Japanese compressors in Pakistan? Why not 100% Chinese design? These are the details that you seem to miss practically and otherwise.

When you study something; do not differentiate it on the grounds of it being Chinese or American. If it advances your knowledge in positive manner, it is worth your time. Chinese are good in lot of stuff (manufacturing processes in particular) but they lack in crucial aspects of engineering still.

J-20 is vastly different design than F-22 Raptor by the way.

Journalism is one thing that I do not take at face value easily because it happens to be plagued with conspiracy theories, subjectivity, sensationalism and agenda. This isn't to say that excellent journalist pieces are not an occurrence but caution is advised nonetheless.
 
Last edited:
Information about F-35 nozzle are available, including pattern
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions_article20.html
https://www.google.com/patents/US20090072044
https://www.google.com/patents/US6983602
http://www.google.com.gi/patents/US20020036241
https://www.google.ch/patents/US6398129

I agree that F-22 on supercruise will have lesser tail signature than F-35 at 100% AB. But i don't think either will be particularly stealthy when they ran away. I think signature is the most important when you sneak on enemy.
Btw, reduce nozzle area will lengthen the exhaust trail because the flow velocity is higher


Datalink is around for a while, stealth datalink such as MADL is a recent invention.

Not really..., just in uninformed minds.
The Gripen TIDLS is described here:

https://m.blog.naver.com/jskimadd/10103300031

”One Gripen can provide radar sensing for four of its colleagues, allowing a single fighter to track a target, while the others use the data for a stealthy attack. TIDLS also permits multiple fighters to quickly and accurately lock onto a target's track through triangulation from several radars; or allows one fighter to jam a target while another tracks it; or allows multiple fighters to use different radar frequencies collaboratively to "burn through" jamming transmissions. TIDLS also gives the Gripen transparent access to the SAAB-Ericsson 340B Erieye "mini-AWACs" aircraft, as well as the overall ground command and control system. This system provides Sweden with an impressive defensive capability at a cost that, though still high, is less than that of comparable systems elsewhere.

TIDLS can connect up to four aircraft in a full-time two-way link. It has a range of 500 km and is highly resistant to jamming; almost the only way to jam the system is to position a jammer aircraft directly between the two communicating Gripens. Its basic modes include the ability to display the position, bearing, and speed of all four aircraft in a formation, including basic status information such as fuel and weapons state. The TIDLS is fundamentally different from broadcast-style links like Link 16. It serves fewer users but links them more closely together, exchanging much more data, and operating much closer to real time.

TIDLS information, along with radar, EW, and mapping data, appears on the central MFD. The display reflects complete sensor fusion: a target that is being tracked by multiple sources is one target on the screen. Detailed symbols distinguish between friendlies, hostiles, and unidentified targets and show who has targeted whom.

Today, Sweden is the only country that is flying with a link of this kind.

The Flygvapnet has already proven some of the tactical advantages of the link, including the ability to spread the formation over a much wider area. Visual contact between the fighters is no longer necessary, because the datalink shows the position of each aircraft. Leader and wingman roles are different: the pilot in the best position makes the attack, and the fact that he has targeted the enemy is immediately communicated to the three other aircraft.

A basic use of the datalink is "silent attack." An adversary may be aware that he is being tracked by a fighter radar that is outside missile range. He may not be aware that another, closer fighter is receiving that tracking data and is preparing for a missile launch without using its own radar. After launch, the shooter can break and escape, while the other fighter continues to pass tracking data to the missile. In tests, Gripen pilots have learned that this makes it possible to delay using the AMRAAM's active seeker until it is too late for the target to respond.

But the use of the link goes beyond this, towards what the Swedish Air Force calls "samverkan," or close-cooperation. One example is the use of the Ericsson PS-05/A radar with TIDLS. An Ericsson paper compares its application, with identical sensors and precise knowledge of the location of both platforms, to human twins: "Communication is possible without explaining everything."

"Radar-samverkan," the Ericsson paper suggests, equips the formation with a super-radar of extraordinary capabilities. 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. The target's signals will often identify it as well.

The datalink results in better tracking. Usually, three plots (echoes) are needed 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.

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 target's track instantly, reducing the need for radar transmission.

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.'”

Our Swedish Data-link updates every second (or faster:), as compared to Link16 (every twelfth second) This makes it possible for us to fly 'radar silent' and even shoot its missiles from it without any own radar. And the data-link is able to steer you in, in every detail (close control) through its data commands. Which means that Gripen will be very operational even with its radio totally jammed. The NATO variant Link16 can, if I'm correct, open up to four(?) 'timeslots/channels' and if you place them correctly in time, give you a update every third second. (But we can also do that kind of stuff and as our systems each update every second by themselves (or faster:) you might wonder how much info we would be able to transmit that 'NATO' way opening new 'timeslots'. Not that I know of course, just guessing here:)

Our system have the possibility to use AWACS, and satellites, and 'peer2peer'. It seems to me that Link16 first handedly is a 'centralized' system, now also trying to in cooperate some of the Swedish 'ideas'. As for what is best in a battle situation? I prefer the one with the most options myself, and that's not Link16. And it's not only Gripen using our system, it's used in all types of military vehicles, that's why it is so redundant. And that's why we still will have a 3-D sphere of information, even when all AWACS is down. We use all available radar, and their data links too. But remember, ours system is 'peer to peer', just like the Internet, built for durability.

“Link 16 (also known as TADIL J in the US) has been designed to optimize the use of the MIDS/JTIDS architecture. MIDS is a major U.S.-led international programme in which Link 16 compatible data communications terminals are being developed. Link 16 is defined as the designation for Joint Tactical Information Data System (JTIDS) waveform and protocol compatible radios that transmit and receive data messages in the TADIL-J message catalog. Gripen and Saab 340 with Erieye.

Link 16 has been developed to meet the information exchange requirements of all tactical units, supporting the exchange of surveillance data, EW data, mission tasking, weapons assignments and control data. Link 16 is the NATO-standard tactical datalink that is being adopted by more and more users, on more and more platforms, to support coalition operations. In addition to the Swedish data link, Link 16 is now an option in Gripens onboard datalink capabilities. This further enhances Gripen’s interoperability and gives users an even wider choice of networked systems to meet their national and international needs.”

Well, in a way, maybe, but for a prise. We lost some sweet capabilities to that adaption, but hey, look at the bright side, we gained some weight :)

“In BVR combat, where information and situational awareness are key to success, a datalink system gives the user unrivaled battlespace awareness. The advantages of datalink systems are well recognized elsewhere and include the JTIDS used by US armed forces and Britain's RAF, and NATO's Link 16. However, these other systems are fitted only to a few aircraft and are generally command-driven systems used to guide other aircraft. They do not allow a free flow of information between platforms and are limited in the type of data they can handle. Furthermore, compared to the CDL39 their basic data exchange rates are painfully slow. Types like the Super Hornet and Eurofighter Typhoon will be the first operational aircraft outside Sweden to have datalink capability that comes anywhere matching that of the Gripen.

The CDL39 is fully integrated with Sweden's new tactical Radio System(TARAS) - a secure radio network for JAS39 Gripen and JA37D Viggen fighters, S100B Argus AEW&C platforms, S102B Korpen SIGINT aircraft and ground-based Stridslednings Central, Command and Control Center (StriC) units. The FMV is currently working to make CDL39 capable of communicating with JTIDS for international Gripen operations. Up to four aircraft can be actively transmitting on the datalink at any one time and an infinite number can be receiving(passive).

As its most basic function the CDL39 can transmitt radar/sensor pictures and aircraft/weaponry status data anywhere on the TARAS network. To send data on the link all the pilot has to do is select the appropriate radio channel/which will be preset by the mission planning system) and transmit. extensive testing has shown the system to be unjammable.

The Gripen's datalink offers enormous flexibility. For example, in the air to surface role one aircraft "package" can attack a target, obtain a radar picture of the the target area and realy it to the cockpits of the next wave of attackers. Those aircraft would receive an accurate image of the target area, allowing them to know which targets have already been attacked. Furthermore this information can be relayed back to the StriC for decisions based on the actual situation.

In the air to air role it is possible for one Gripen to transmit its radar picture of an airborn target to the radar screen of another aircraft. The second aircraft can the leave its radar switched off, approach the target and engage it without ever betraying its precense. Weapons launch even can be guided from the first aircrafts radar. Using AEW&C radar, a much larger airpicture can be datalinked to a formation of Gripens, to increase their combat reach.

The Gripen/datalink combination offers formidable capabilities. The airforce has run air defence exercises deplying just six Gripens to defend half the country. Using the CDL39, three pairs of aircraft flying CAP are able to monitor Sweden's entire east coast, from the northern edge of the island of Gotland in the Baltic to Ronneby Air Base and beyond, to the souther tip of the country. Each Gripen pilot can be confident that everybody knows where everyone else is at all times, what they are seeing and what they are doing.
 
Not really..., just in uninformed minds.
The Gripen TIDLS is described here
Not really, like i said earlier, data link been around for a while but stealth data link is recent.
Gripen TIDLS is an encrypted datalink that link four aircraft, but it's stealth characteristics is not even close to that of MADL.
TIDS still uses UHF band (0.3-3 Ghz) to transmit information while MADL uses K band (20-40 Ghz)
sketch-1510235855869.png

http://flygteknik.mcistockholm.se/filer/tisdag/Session_N_-_rum_362/N2_Peter_Hellstrom.pdf
sketch-1510236090135.png

Beam width of any RF transmitters (radar, jammer, datalink.. etc) varied directly with wavelength (lower frequency has longer wavelength) and inversely with antenna size. In short, with similar aperture area, the higher your operating frequency, the smaller your beamwidth. Can't change physics.
sketch-1510237914907.png

Main difference between stealth data link such as MADL and legacy data link such as Link 16, TIDLS is their beam width. Link 16 and TIDS transmit omnidirectional while MADL transmit directionally with very narrow beam so unless enemy ELINT assets is between your two F-35, it is impossible for their ESM to detect MADL.
Finally, higher frequency lead to higher bandwidth => faster data transfer rate
 
Last edited:
Not really, like i said earlier, data link been around for a while but stealth data link is recent.
Gripen TIDLS is an encrypted datalink that link four aircraft, but it's stealth characteristics is not even close to that of MADL.
TIDS still uses UHF band (0.3-3 Ghz) to transmit information while MADL uses K band (20-40 Ghz)
sketch-1510235855869.png

http://flygteknik.mcistockholm.se/filer/tisdag/Session_N_-_rum_362/N2_Peter_Hellstrom.pdf
sketch-1510236090135.png

Beam width of any RF transmitters (radar, jammer, datalink.. etc) varied directly with wavelength (lower frequency has longer wavelength) and inversely with antenna size. In short, with similar aperture area, the higher your operating frequency, the smaller your beamwidth. Can't change physics.
sketch-1510237914907.png

Main difference between stealth data link such as MADL and legacy data link such as Link 16, TIDLS is their beam width. Link 16 and TIDS transmit omnidirectional while MADL transmit directionally with very narrow beam so unless enemy ELINT assets is between your two F-35, it is impossible for their ESM to detect MADL.
Finally, higher frequency lead to higher bandwidth => faster data transfer rate

Still, the main reason for the datalink is its functionality, not how easy it can be detected.
The MADL functionality is fairly similar to the Gripen A functionality, and most is not available with the LINK-16.
Stuff like beeing able to fire a missile based on radar data from another aircraft.
Cooperative radar search and jamming etc.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom