1 Gripen vs 2 Typhoons. Pilot tells his story.

[Kaktus29]

such trainings are specific for a purpose.. here they are just testing how pilots would react to enemy having short IR range "superiority" .. to me this looks like testing pilots to be ready for a specific enemy where NATO believes would only pose a danger in short range-surprise-heavy ECM environment where such short range furballs might happen..

 

so it got nothing to do with grippen or tiffy. they could very well use tiffy in the role of grippen and tornado in the role of tiffy.. its about exposing pilots to the shock.. to me this is more dangerous as it shows NATO is training for a specific war in mind..

[Scrim]

No they haven't. And even if they did, PIRATE wouldn't be of any use in such a scenario. HEA/HMSS however, we do have, and it obviously would have been used were this not a specific test/training sortie.

 

What I've read is that it's been around since '07, and that it is linked to the pilot's HMD.

[whiteladder]

What I've read is that it's been around since '07, that it is linked to the pilot's HMD.

 

That's correct all the Raf Typhoon tranche 1 were upgrade to Block 5 standard by August 2007, via the R1 and R2 upgrades fitted Pirate.. The first production Block 5 FGR4 was delivered on the 6th of August 2007

[Eddie]

What I've read is that it's been around since '07, and that it is linked to the pilot's HMD.

 

That's correct all the Raf Typhoon tranche 1 were upgrade to Block 5 standard by August 2007, via the R1 and R2 upgrades fitted Pirate.. The first production Block 5 FGR4 was delivered on the 6th of August 2007

 

No. The R2 upgrade fitted FLIR, that is the physical FLIR system. PIRATE is currently not operational capability, and is not in use.

 

As for HMD integration, well yes it can be, but that is for night vision/navigation purposes not targeting. PIRATE is (or will be) a double function system, both conventional FLIR and IRST. The hardware is there, the software etc. is not, and in many cases the hardware is ballast only and is neither used or necessarily serviceable.

[whiteladder]

No. The R2 upgrade fitted FLIR, that is the physical FLIR system. PIRATE is currently not operational capability, and is not in use.

 

As for HMD integration, well yes it can be, but that is for night vision/navigation purposes not targeting. PIRATE is (or will be) a double function system, both conventional FLIR and IRST. The hardware is there, the software etc. is not, and in many cases the hardware is ballast only and is neither used or necessarily serviceable.

 

This aviation week article would suggest otherwise

 

http://m.aviationweek.com/awin/us-navy-follows-uk-lead-infrared-systems

 

"The performance of the Typhoon's Pirate IRST has increased due to better processing and software since it entered service in 2007, says aEurofighter*engineer. The service-entry standard was “pretty raw.” Better processing exploits the fact that the IRST is extremely agile, capable of performing complex tailored scans, because its steering mirror is much lighter than a radar dish. It can scan faster than an AESA, in some cases, because it does not transmit. “The angular and thermal accuracy provides the processor with enough data to analyze the core and the edges” of objects in the field of view, the engineer says. “It's like a fingerprint.”

 

This is key to IRST performance, because as a passive system it provides no time-based range data, and has been historically susceptible to false alarms from stars, cloud reflections and ground targets. Better processing and fbriast scanning also make it possible to use geometrical techniques for range measurement.

 

The updated Pirate is believed to have shown its ability to detect the*F-22*at significant ranges in 2010, when four of the stealth fighters were deployed to Lakenheath AFB in the U.K., according to European industry sources. Selex leads the EuroFirst consortium that produces Pirate, and its Skyward-G for theSaab*JAS 39E*Gripen*uses similar technology.

[whiteladder]

Also I think Bill Sweetman did an article discribing how 2 Typhoon can use Pirate in conjuction with link 16 to determine a targets range passively without relying on target movement to do determine range. It was called double vision.

 

Pretty cool video on youtube

 

Edited June 7, 2014 by whiteladder

[docfu]

So, obviously there is a huge gain by being able to lock onto a target within the pilot's field of view vs the airrcraft, but what I'm wondering now is what is the actual ability to launch a missile .

 

I mean, you'd still have to be somewhat pointed in the direction of your enemy right? Or is it completely possible to launch with the target at 90 degrees off the nose?

[OutOnTheOP]

To the best of my knowledge, IRIS-T and AIM-9X both have over-the-shoulder capability, and can engage targets pretty much anywhere (AIM-9X has a 90* seeker field of view and lock-on-after-launch capability)... though the farther the target is from straight ahead, the more range is reduced. R-73 has something like 45-60 degree off-boresight capability, with a projected upgrade to expand that further.

[Brisse]

As long as the structure of the aircraft is not blocking the line of sight between target and seeker, they can launch at extreme angles, probably around 90 degrees max. The missile will however lose a lot of energy if forced to manouver like that.

[EtherealN]

I mean, you'd still have to be somewhat pointed in the direction of your enemy right? Or is it completely possible to launch with the target at 90 degrees off the nose?

 

Missiles with thrust-vectoring are kinda cool. ;)

[GripenNG]

Missiles with thrust-vectoring are kinda cool. ;)

 

Which explains why these exercises/tests like MEATBALL-14 ( :D ) are critical for proper use of equipment so you don´t end up in the wrong end of your own missile.

[docfu]

Yeah, the next thing I was going to mention was firing...if you have a bogey 3 o'clock flat to your right and you spot them, then you would roll...left? before firing...

 

(So that the underside of the plane is facing them.)

 

The next obvious question is what kind of paint job do you do on the underside of your plane to either mock the enemy or strike fear into them...

[Brisse]

The next obvious question is what kind of paint job do you do on the underside of your plane to either mock the enemy or strike fear into them...

 

The M90 camo from the AJS37 Viggen obviously. :pilotfly:

 

Edit: And before anyone mentions it, the AJS37 was actually just plain grey on the underside.

 

http://www.fht.nu/bilder/Flygvapnet/Flygvapennytt/fv_nytt_2_91_ajs_37_viggen.pdf

Edited June 7, 2014 by Brisse

[docfu]

Priceless how the 3 yellow crowns at a distance looks almost like a smiling face from a distance....

[Orava]

Greetings from Finland

[Brisse]

Those links does not really tell us much though :(

[GripenNG]

An interesting article about the squadron exchange! :)

 

http://www.globalaviationresource.com/v2/2014/06/13/military-exercise-testing-times-as-swedish-air-force-gripens-visit-raf-coningsby/