Fourth-generation fighter: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Fourth-generation jet fighters compared: A total 22 Tejas produced as of december, 2018. Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
m Moving Category:Fourth-generation jet fighter to Category:Fourth-generation jet fighters per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy |
||
| (587 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Short description|Classification of fighter aircraft c. 1970–2000}} |
|||
[[File:A Su-27 escorted by an F-16.jpg|thumb|A Soviet [[Su-27]] escorted by a [[United States Air Force]] [[F-16]]]] |
|||
{{Infobox aircraft |
|||
[[File:U.S. F-16C Fighting Falcon and Polish Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-29A over Krzesiny air base, Poland - 20050615.jpg|thumb|right|A Polish Air Force [[MiG-29]] with a USAF [[General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon|F-16]]]] |
|||
| name = Fourth-generation fighter |
|||
'''Fourth-generation jet fighter''' is a general classification of [[jet fighter]]s in service from approximately 1980 to the present and represent design concepts of the 1970s. Fourth-[[Jet fighter generations|generation]] designs are heavily influenced by lessons learned from the previous generation of combat aircraft. Long-range [[air-to-air missile]]s, originally thought to make [[dogfight]]ing obsolete, proved less influential than expected, precipitating a renewed emphasis on maneuverability. Meanwhile, the growing costs of military aircraft in general and the demonstrated success of aircraft such as the [[F-4 Phantom II]] gave rise to the popularity of [[multirole combat aircraft]] in parallel with the advances marking the so-called fourth generation. |
|||
| image = File:A Su-27 escorted by an F-16.jpg |
|||
| caption = A [[Sukhoi Su-27]] (background) and [[General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon]] (foreground), fourth-generation fighters used by the [[Soviet Air Force]] and [[United States Air Force]] respectively |
|||
| alt = <!-- Alt text for main image --> |
|||
| type = [[Fighter aircraft]] |
|||
| national_origin = Multi-national |
|||
| manufacturer = <!-- Generally the prime contractor(s) who are responsible for both designing and building an aircraft --> |
|||
| design_group = <!--Only design group(s) different from the manufacturer or builder --> |
|||
| designer = <!-- Only appropriate for one-person designers, not project leaders or chief designers --> |
|||
| builder = <!--Only builder(s) different from the manufacturer or design group(s) --> |
|||
| first_flight = 1970s |
|||
| introduction = 1980s |
|||
| retired = <!--Date the aircraft left service. If vague or more than a few dates, skip this. --> |
|||
| status = In service |
|||
| primary_user = <!-- List only one user; for military aircraft, this is a nation or a service arm. Please DON'T add flag templates, as they limit horizontal space. --> |
|||
| more_users = <!-- Limited to THREE (3) "more users" here (4 total users). List users with {{plainlist}} or {{unbulleted list}}. --> |
|||
| produced = <!--Years in production (e.g. 1970–1999) if still in active use but no longer built --> |
|||
| number_built = <!-- Total number of flight-worthy aircraft completed. --> |
|||
| developed_from = [[Jet fighter generations#Third generation|Third-generation fighter]] |
|||
| variants = <!--Variants OF this aircraft--> |
|||
| developed_into = [[Fifth-generation fighter]] |
|||
}} |
|||
The '''fourth-generation fighter''' is a [[Jet fighter generations|class]] of [[jet fighter]]s in service from around 1980 to the present, and represents design concepts of the 1970s. Fourth-generation designs are heavily influenced by lessons learned from the previous generation of combat aircraft. [[Jet fighter generations#Third generation|Third-generation fighters]] were often designed primarily as [[Interceptor aircraft|interceptors]], being built around speed and [[Air-to-air missile|air-to-air missiles]]. While exceptionally fast in a straight line, many third-generation fighters severely lacked in maneuverability, as doctrine held that traditional [[Dogfight|dogfighting]] would be impossible at supersonic speeds. In practice, air-to-air missiles of the time, despite being responsible for the vast majority of air-to-air victories, were relatively unreliable, and combat would quickly become subsonic and close-range. This would leave third-generation fighters vulnerable and ill-equipped, renewing an interest in manoeuvrability for the fourth generation of fighters. Meanwhile, the growing costs of military aircraft in general and the demonstrated success of aircraft such as the [[McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II]] gave rise to the popularity of [[multirole combat aircraft]] in parallel with the advances marking the so-called fourth generation. |
|||
During the period in question, maneuverability was enhanced by [[relaxed static stability]], made possible by introduction of the [[fly-by-wire]] (FBW) [[Aircraft flight control systems|flight control system]] (FLCS), which in turn was possible due to advances in [[digital computer]]s and system-integration techniques. Replacement of analog avionics, required to enable FBW operations, became a fundamental requirement as legacy [[analog computer]] systems began to be replaced by digital flight control systems in the latter half of the 1980s.<ref name="HM1983"/> |
|||
The further advance of microcomputers in the 1980s and 1990s permitted rapid upgrades to the [[avionics]] over the lifetimes of these fighters, incorporating system upgrades such as [[active electronically scanned array]] (AESA), digital avionics buses and [[infra-red search and track]] |
During this period, maneuverability was enhanced by [[relaxed static stability]], made possible by introduction of the [[fly-by-wire]] (FBW) [[Aircraft flight control systems|flight-control system]], which in turn was possible due to advances in [[digital computer]]s and system-integration techniques. Replacement of analog avionics, required to enable FBW operations, became a fundamental requirement as legacy [[analog computer]] systems began to be replaced by digital flight-control systems in the latter half of the 1980s.<ref name="HM1983">Hoh, Roger H. and David G. Mitchell. "Flying Qualities of Relaxed Static Stability Aircraft - Volume I: Flying Qualities Airworthiness Assessment and Flight Testing of Augmented Aircraft". Federal Aviation Administration (DOT/FAA/CT-82/130-I), September 1983. pp. 11ff.</ref> The further advance of microcomputers in the 1980s and 1990s permitted rapid upgrades to the [[avionics]] over the lifetimes of these fighters, incorporating system upgrades such as [[active electronically scanned array]] (AESA), digital avionics buses, and [[infra-red search and track]]. |
||
Due to the dramatic enhancement of capabilities in these upgraded fighters and in new designs of the 1990s that reflected these new capabilities, |
Due to the dramatic enhancement of capabilities in these upgraded fighters and in new designs of the 1990s that reflected these new capabilities, they have come to be known as 4.5 generation. This is intended to reflect a class of fighters that are evolutionary upgrades of the fourth generation incorporating integrated avionics suites, advanced weapons efforts to make the (mostly) conventionally designed aircraft nonetheless less easily detectable and trackable as a response to advancing missile and [[radar]] technology (see [[stealth technology]]).<ref>Fulghum, David A. and Douglas Barrie [http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=awst&id=news/aw042307p2.xml "F-22 Tops Japan's Military Wish List"]. ''Aviation Week and Space Technology'', 22 April 2007. Retrieved 3 October 2010. {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110927185244/http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=awst&id=news%2Faw042307p2.xml |date=27 September 2011 }}.</ref><ref name="graythreat">[http://www.afa.org/magazine/Feb1996/0296grayt.asp "The Gray Threat"] ({{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070819190411/http://www.afa.org/magazine/Feb1996/0296grayt.asp |date=2007-08-19 }}). ''Air Force Magazine''.</ref> Inherent airframe design features exist and include masking of turbine blades and application of advanced sometimes [[radar-absorbent material]]s, but not the distinctive low-observable configurations of the latest aircraft, referred to as [[Fifth-generation jet fighter|fifth-generation fighter]]s or aircraft such as the [[Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor]]. |
||
The United States defines 4.5-generation fighter aircraft as fourth-generation jet fighters that have been upgraded with AESA radar, high-capacity data-link, enhanced avionics, and "the ability to deploy current and reasonably foreseeable advanced armaments".<ref>[http://opencrs.com/document/RL33543 "CRS RL33543: Tactical Aircraft Modernization"] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090830143750/http://opencrs.com/document/RL33543/ |date=2009-08-30 }}. ''Issues for Congress'' 9 July 2009. Retrieved |
The United States defines 4.5-generation fighter aircraft as fourth-generation jet fighters that have been upgraded with AESA radar, high-capacity data-link, enhanced avionics, and "the ability to deploy current and reasonably foreseeable advanced armaments".<ref>[http://opencrs.com/document/RL33543 "CRS RL33543: Tactical Aircraft Modernization"] ({{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090830143750/http://opencrs.com/document/RL33543/ |date=2009-08-30 }}). ''Issues for Congress'' 9 July 2009. Retrieved 3 October 2010.</ref><ref>[http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.2647: "National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Enrolled as Agreed to or Passed by Both House and Senate)"] ({{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101104133757/http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.2647: |date=2010-11-04 }}). thomas.loc.gov. Retrieved 3 October 2010.</ref> Contemporary examples of 4.5-generation fighters are the [[Sukhoi Su-30|Sukhoi Su-30SM]]/[[Sukhoi Su-34|Su-34]]/[[Sukhoi Su-35|Su-35]],<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://thediplomat.com/2018/02/russia-to-upgrade-su-30sm-fighter-jets-in-2018/ |title=Russia to Upgrade Su-30SM Fighter Jets in 2018 |first=Franz-Stefan |last=Gady |publisher=thediplomat.com}}</ref> [[Shenyang J-15#Variants|Shenyang J-15B]]/[[Shenyang J-16|J-16]],<ref>{{cite web|title=Russian and Chinese Combat Air Trends|url=https://rusi.org/sites/default/files/russian_and_chinese_combat_air_trends_whr_final_web_version.pdf|page=P6|access-date=2021-05-07|archive-date=2021-01-23|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210123085747/https://www.rusi.org/sites/default/files/russian_and_chinese_combat_air_trends_whr_final_web_version.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref> [[Chengdu J-10#Variants|Chengdu J-10C]], [[Mikoyan MiG-35]], [[Eurofighter Typhoon]], [[Dassault Rafale]], [[Saab JAS 39 Gripen|Saab JAS 39E/F Gripen]], [[Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet]], [[General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon variants#F-16E/F|Lockheed Martin F-16E/F/V Block 70/72]], [[McDonnell Douglas F-15E Strike Eagle|McDonnell Douglas F-15E/EX Strike Eagle/Eagle II]], [[HAL Tejas|HAL Tejas MK1A]],<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.indiatoday.in/magazine/up-front/story/20190121-a-liability-called-rafale-point-of-view-1428691-2019-01-11 |title=A Liability Called Rafale |department=Point of View |first1=Bharat |last1=Karnad |location=New Delhi|date=January 21, 2019 |website=India Today}}</ref> [[JF-17 Thunder|CAC/PAC JF-17 Block 3]], and [[Mitsubishi F-2]].<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://thediplomat.com/2015/06/is-japan-facing-a-shortage-of-fighter-aircraft/ |title=Is Japan Facing a Shortage of Fighter Aircraft? |first=Franz-Stefan |last=Gady |publisher=thediplomat.com}}</ref> |
||
==Design considerations== |
|||
==Characteristics== |
|||
[[File:U.S. F-16C Fighting Falcon and Polish Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-29A over Krzesiny air base, Poland - 20050615.jpg|thumb|right|A [[Polish Air Force]] [[Mikoyan MiG-29]] with a USAF F-16 Fighting Falcon]] |
|||
===Performance=== |
===Performance=== |
||
[[File:J-10a zhas.png|thumb|left|The [[Chengdu J-10#Variants|Chengdu J-10A]] features a [[Canard (aeronautics)|canard]] [[delta wing]] design and a quadruplex [[fly-by-wire]] system.]] |
|||
General performance has traditionally been the most important class of design characteristics, as it enables a fighter to gain a favorable position to use its weapons while rendering the enemy unable to use theirs. This can occur at long range (beyond visual range or BVR) or short range (within visual range or WVR). At short range, the ideal position is to the rear of the enemy aircraft, where it is unable to aim or fire weapons and the hot exhaust makes a good target for [[infrared homing]] missiles. At longer [[BVR]] range, the probability of a successful missile intercept is improved by launch at high energy, kinetic (the aircraft's speed towards its target) and potential (altitude advantage). Being able to maneuver violently, and without losing energy meanwhile increases the chance of evading enemy missiles, or escape out of range of the likely return-fire. |
|||
These two scenarios have competing demands—interception requires excellent linear speed, while Within Visual Range or WVR engagements require excellent turn rate, while maintaining speed, rapid acceleration, and availability of control at low speeds and high [[angle of attack]]. |
|||
Prior to the 1970s, a popular view in the defense community was that missiles would render WVR combat obsolete and hence maneuverability useless. Combat experience proved this untrue due to the poor quality of missiles and the recurring need to identify targets visually. Though improvements in missile technology may make that vision a reality, experience has indicated that sensors are not foolproof and that fighters will still need to be able to fight and maneuver at close ranges. So whereas the premier [[third-generation jet fighter]]s (e.g., the [[F-4 Phantom II|F-4]] and [[Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23|MiG-23]]) were designed as interceptors with only a secondary emphasis on maneuverability, interceptors have been relegated to a secondary role in the fourth generation, with a renewed emphasis on maneuverability. While the trade-offs involved in combat aircraft design are again shifting towards BVR engagement, the management of the advancing environment of numerous information flows in the modern battle-space, and low-observability, arguably at the expense of maneuvering ability in close-combat, the application of [[thrust vectoring]] provides a way to maintain it, especially at low speed. |
|||
Whereas the premier [[third-generation jet fighter]]s (e.g., the [[McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II|F-4]] and [[Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23|MiG-23]]) were designed as interceptors with only a secondary emphasis on maneuverability, 4th generation aircraft try to reach an equilibrium, with most designs, such as the [[Grumman F-14 Tomcat|F-14]] and the [[McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle|F-15]], being able to execute BVR interceptions while remaining highly maneuverable in case the platform and the pilot find themselves in a close range [[dogfight]]. While the trade-offs involved in combat aircraft design are again shifting towards [[beyond visual range]] (BVR) engagement, the management of the advancing environment of numerous information flows in the modern battlespace, and low-observability, arguably at the expense of maneuvering ability in close combat, the application of [[thrust vectoring]] provides a way to maintain it, especially at low speed. |
|||
There are two primary contributing factors to maneuverability—the amount of thrust delivered by the engines, and the ability of the aircraft's control surfaces to efficiently generate aerodynamic forces, and hence alterations in the plane's direction. [[Air combat manoeuvring]] (ACM) involves a great deal of energy management. The greater energy a fighter has, the more flexibility it has to move where it wants. An aircraft with little energy is immobile, and becomes a defenseless target. Note that available thrust does not necessarily equal speed; while it does give greater acceleration, the maximum speed of an aircraft is also determined by how much drag it produces. Herein lies one important trade-off. Low-drag configurations have small, often highly swept wings that disrupt the airflow as little as possible. However, that also means they have greatly reduced ability to alter the airflow to maneuver the aircraft. |
|||
Key advances contributing to enhanced maneuverability in the fourth generation include high engine thrust, powerful control surfaces, and [[relaxed static stability]] (RSS), this last enabled via "fly-by-wire" computer-controlled stability augmentation. [[Air combat manoeuvring]] also involves a great deal of energy management to maintain speed and altitude under rapidly changing flight conditions. |
|||
[[File:F-16 Fighting Falcon.jpg|thumb|A USAF [[General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon|F-16]] on a mission near Iraq in 2003]] |
[[File:F-16 Fighting Falcon.jpg|thumb|A USAF [[General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon|F-16]] on a mission near Iraq in 2003]] |
||
There are two rough indicators of these factors. A plane's turning ability can be roughly measured by its wing loading, defined as the mass of the aircraft divided by the area of its lifting surfaces. A highly loaded wing has little capacity to produce additional lift, and so has limited turning ability, whereas a lightly loaded wing has much greater potential lifting power. A rough measure of acceleration is a plane's [[thrust-to-weight ratio]]. |
|||
===Fly-by-wire=== |
===Fly-by-wire=== |
||
[[File:FA-18 inverted above an F-14.jpg|thumb|The [[F/A-18]] inverted above an [[F-14]] shown here is an example of fly-by-wire control.]] |
[[File:FA-18 inverted above an F-14.jpg|thumb|The [[McDonnell Douglas F/A-18 Hornet|F/A-18]] inverted above an [[Grumman F-14 Tomcat|F-14]] shown here is an example of fly-by-wire control.]] |
||
Fly-by-wire is a term used to describe the computerized automation of flight control surfaces. Early fourth-generation fighters like the F-15 Eagle and F-14 Tomcat retained electromechanical flight hydraulics. Later fourth-generation fighters would make extensive use of fly-by-wire technology. |
|||
One of the new innovations on fourth generation jet fighters is [[fly-by-wire]], while generation 4.5 introduced [[Active electronically scanned array]] radar. |
|||
The YF-16, eventually developed into the [[F-16 Fighting Falcon]], was the |
The General Dynamics YF-16, eventually developed into the [[General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon|F-16 Fighting Falcon]], was the world's first aircraft intentionally designed to be slightly aerodynamically unstable. This technique, called relaxed static stability (RSS), was incorporated to further enhance the aircraft's performance. Most aircraft are designed with ''positive'' static stability, which induces an aircraft to return to its original [[Aircraft attitude|attitude]] following a disturbance. However, positive static stability, the tendency to remain in its current attitude, opposes the pilot's efforts to maneuver. An aircraft with ''negative'' static stability, though, in the absence of control input, will readily deviate from level and controlled flight. An unstable aircraft can therefore be made more maneuverable. Such a 4th generation aircraft requires a computerized FBW [[Aircraft flight control systems|flight control system]] (FLCS) to maintain its desired flight path.<ref>Greenwood, Cynthia. [http://www.corrdefense.org/CorrDefense%20Magazine/Spring%202007/feature.htm "Air Force Looks at the Benefits of Using CPCs on F-16 Black Boxes."] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081011192605/http://www.corrdefense.org/CorrDefense%20Magazine/Spring%202007/feature.htm |date=2008-10-11 }} ''CorrDefense'', Spring 2007. Retrieved: 16 June 2008.</ref> |
||
Some late derivatives of the early types, such as the F-15SA Strike Eagle for Saudi Arabia, have included upgrading to FBW. |
|||
An aircraft with negative static stability can therefore be made more maneuverable. At supersonic airspeed, a negatively stable aircraft can exhibit positive static stability due to aerodynamic center migration.<ref name="HM1983">Hoh, Roger H. and David G. Mitchell. "Flying Qualities of Relaxed Static Stability Aircraft - Volume I: Flying Qualities Airworthiness Assessment and Flight Testing of Augmented Aircraft." Federal Aviation Administration (DOT/FAA/CT-82/130-I), September 1983. pp. 11ff.</ref><ref>Aronstein and Piccirillo 1996, p. 21.</ref> To counter this tendency to depart from controlled flight—and avoid the need for constant minute trimming inputs by the pilot—the 4th gen aircraft has a quadruplex (four-channel) [[Aircraft flight control systems#Fly-by-wire|fly-by-wire]] (FBW) [[Aircraft flight control systems|flight control system]] (FLCS). The flight control computer (FLCC), which is the key component of the FLCS, accepts the pilot’s input from the stick and rudder controls, and manipulates the control surfaces in such a way as to produce the desired result without inducing a loss of control. The FLCC also takes thousands of measurements per second of the aircraft’s attitude, and automatically makes corrections to counter deviations from the flight path that were not input by the pilot. [[coordinated flight|Coordinated turn]] is also achieved in the same way, processing thousands of instructions per second to synchronize [[aircraft principal axes|yawing and rolling]] to minimize [[slip (aerodynamic)|sideslip]] drag in turns.<ref>Greenwood, Cynthia. [http://www.corrdefense.org/CorrDefense%20Magazine/Spring%202007/feature.htm "Air Force Looks at the Benefits of Using CPCs on F-16 Black Boxes."] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081011192605/http://www.corrdefense.org/CorrDefense%20Magazine/Spring%202007/feature.htm |date=2008-10-11 }} ''CorrDefense'', Spring 2007. Retrieved: 16 June 2008.</ref> |
|||
Early fourth generation American fighters like the F-15 Eagle and F-14 Tomcat retained electro-mechanical flight hydraulics, while their newer and cheaper alternatives, the [[F-16 Fighting Falcon]] and [[F/A-18 Hornet]], incorporated [[fly-by-wire]]. The newest derivative of the F-15, the F-15SA Strike Eagle for Saudi Arabia, has fly-by-wire instead of the previous Eagles' hybrid electronic/mechanical system. |
|||
===Thrust vectoring=== |
===Thrust vectoring=== |
||
[[File:MiG29-OVT-ENGINE.JPG|thumb|MiG-29OVT all-aspect [[thrust vectoring]] engine view]] |
[[File:MiG29-OVT-ENGINE.JPG|thumb|MiG-29OVT all-aspect [[thrust vectoring]] engine view]] |
||
[[Thrust vectoring]] |
[[Thrust vectoring]] was originally introduced in the [[Hawker Siddeley Harrier]] for vertical takeoff and landing, and pilots soon developed the technique of "viffing", or vectoring in forward flight, to enhance manoeuvrability. The first fixed-wing type to display enhanced manoeuvrability in this way was the [[Sukhoi Su-27]], the first aircraft to publicly display thrust vectoring in pitch. Combined with a thrust-to-weight ratio above unity, this enabled it to maintain near-zero airspeed at high angles of attack without stalling, and perform novel aerobatics such as [[Pugachev's Cobra]]. The [[Thrust vectoring#Vectoring in three dimensions|three-dimensional TVC]] nozzles of the [[Sukhoi Su-30MKI]] are mounted 32° outward to the longitudinal engine axis (i.e. in the horizontal plane) and can be deflected ±15° in the vertical plane. This produces a [[corkscrew]] effect, further enhancing the turning capability of the aircraft.<ref>[http://www.air-attack.com/page/80/Su-30MK.html "Air-Attack.com – Su-30MK AL-31FP engines two-dimensional thrust vectoring"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100917182438/http://air-attack.com/page/80/Su-30MK.html |date=2010-09-17 }}. ''air-attack.com''. Retrieved: 3 October 2010.</ref> The MiG-35 with its RD-33OVT engines with the vectored thrust nozzles allows it to be the first twin-engined aircraft with vectoring nozzles that can move in two directions (that is, 3D TVC). Other existing thrust-vectoring aircraft, like the [[F-22 Raptor|F-22]], have nozzles that vector in one direction.<ref>[http://www.domain-b.com/aero/mil_avi/mil_aircraft/20090814_mig-35_oneView.html "MiG-35"]. ''domain-b.com''. Retrieved: 3 October 2010.</ref> The technology has been fitted to the [[Sukhoi]] [[Sukhoi Su-47|Su-47 Berkut]] and later derivatives. The U.S. explored fitting the technology to the [[F-16]] and the [[F-15S/MTD|F-15]], but did not introduce it until the fifth generation arrived. |
||
===Supercruise=== |
===Supercruise=== |
||
[[File:Dassault Rafale B 03.jpg|thumb|left|[[Rafale]] features [[supercruise]]<ref name="Fox Three.">[http://www.dassault-aviation.com/fileadmin/user_upload/redacteur/AUTRES_DOCS/Fox_three/Fox_Three_nr_8.pdf "Fox Three"]. {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/ |
[[File:Dassault Rafale B 03.jpg|thumb|left|The [[Dassault Rafale]], which features [[supercruise]]<ref name="Fox Three.">[http://www.dassault-aviation.com/fileadmin/user_upload/redacteur/AUTRES_DOCS/Fox_three/Fox_Three_nr_8.pdf "Fox Three"]. {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130525192408/http://www.dassault-aviation.com/fileadmin/user_upload/redacteur/AUTRES_DOCS/Fox_three/Fox_Three_nr_8.pdf |date=May 25, 2013 }} ''dassault-aviation.com''. Retrieved: 24 April 2010.</ref>]] |
||
[[Supercruise]] is the ability of aircraft to cruise at supersonic speeds without |
[[Supercruise]] is the ability of a jet aircraft to cruise at supersonic speeds without using an [[afterburner]]. |
||
Maintaining supersonic speed without afterburner use saves large quantities of fuel, greatly increasing range and endurance, but the engine power available is limited and drag rises sharply in the transonic region, so drag-creating equipment such as external stores and their attachment points must be minimised, preferably with the use of internal storage. |
|||
Because of parasitic drag effects, fighters carrying external weapons stores encounter a vastly increased drag divergence near the speed of sound. This can prevent safe acceleration through the [[transonic]] regime or make it too fuel-expensive to be effective on missions. Meanwhile, maintaining supersonic speed without (periodic) afterburner use saves large quantities of fuel too, increasing the range at which an aircraft can in reality still take advantage of its full performance. |
|||
The [[Eurofighter Typhoon]] can cruise around Mach 1.2 without afterburner, with the maximum level speed without reheat is Mach 1.5.<ref>[https://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.luftwaffe.de%2Fportal%2Fa%2Fluftwaffe%2Fwaff%2Fjets%2Feuro&langpair=de%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 "Supercuise at about Mach 1.2"] ''luftwaffe.de''. Retrieved: 3 October 2010.</ref><ref>[https://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.eurofighter.at%2Faustria%2Ftd_lu.asp&langpair=de%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF8 "Supercruise at about Mach 1.2"]. ''eurofighter.at''. Retrieved: 3 October 2010.</ref><ref>[http://www.mil.no/multimedia/archive/00089/2_Eurofighter_capabi_89302a.pdf "Eurofighter capability, p. 53. Supercruise 2 SRAAM 6 MRAAM"] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090327110114/http://www.mil.no/multimedia/archive/00089/2_Eurofighter_capabi_89302a.pdf |date=2009-03-27 }}. ''mil.no/multimedia/archive''. Retrieved: 24 April 2010.</ref> An [[Eurofighter Typhoon|EF T1 DA]] (Development Aircraft trainer version) demonstrated supercruise (1.21 M) with 2 SRAAM, 4 MRAAM and drop tank (plus 1-tonne flight-test equipment, plus 700 kg more weight for the trainer version) during the Singapore evaluation.<ref>''AFM'' September 2004 "Eastern smile" pp. 41–43.</ref> |
|||
{{clear}}<!-- This prevents the following heading from being pushed over by the Rafale photo on wide screens --> |
|||
===Avionics=== |
===Avionics=== |
||
[[File:F-15e cockpit.jpg|thumb|A USAF [[F-15E]] cockpit]] |
[[File:F-15e cockpit.jpg|thumb|A USAF [[F-15E]] cockpit]] |
||
[[Avionics]] can often be swapped out as new technologies become available; they are often upgraded over the lifetime of an aircraft. For example, the F-15C Eagle, first produced in 1978, has received upgrades in 2007 such as AESA radar and [[Helmet-mounted display#Joint Helmet-Mounted Cueing System (JHMCS)|joint helmet-mounted cueing system]], and is scheduled to receive a 2040C upgrade to keep it in service until 2040. |
|||
[[File:AESA JUK AE.jpg|left|thumb|[[Zhuk (radar)|Zhuk-AE]] [[active electronically scanned array]] radar]] |
|||
Details about these systems are highly classified. Thus, many export aircraft have downgraded avionics, and buyers often replace them with domestically developed avionics, sometimes considered superior to the original. Examples are the [[Sukhoi Su-30MKI]] sold to India, the [[F-15 Eagle|F-15I]] and [[F-16 Fighting Falcon|F-16I]] sold to Israel, and the [[F-15E Strike Eagle|F-15K]] sold to South Korea. |
|||
The primary sensor for all modern fighters is radar. The U.S. fielded its first modified F-15Cs equipped with [[AN/APG-63 radar family#AN/APG-63(V)2|AN/APG-63(V)2]] AESA radars,<ref>[http://defense-update.com/features/du-1-07/aesaradar_US.htm "U.S. Fighters Mature With AESA Radars."] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120509202550/http://defense-update.com/features/du-1-07/aesaradar_US.htm |date=2012-05-09 }} ''defense-update.com.'' Retrieved: 3 October 2010.</ref> which have no moving parts and are capable of projecting a much tighter beam and quicker scans. Later on, it was introduced to the [[F/A-18E/F Super Hornet]] and the block 60 (export) F-16 also, and will be used for future American fighters. France introduced its first indigenous AESA radar, the [[RBE2]]-AESA built by Thales in February 2012<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.latribune.fr/entreprises-finance/industrie/aeronautique-defense/20121002trib000722459/le-radar-rbe2-l-arme-fatale-du-rafale-a-l-export-.html|title=Le radar RBE2, l'arme fatale du Rafale à l'export|website=latribune.fr|date=2 October 2012 }}</ref> for use on the Rafale. The RBE2-AESA can also be retrofitted on the Mirage 2000. A European consortium GTDAR is developing an AESA [[Euroradar CAPTOR]] radar for future use on the Typhoon. For the next-generation F-22 and F-35, the U.S. will use [[low probability of intercept]] capacity. This will spread the energy of a radar pulse over several frequencies, so as not to trip the [[radar warning receivers]] that all aircraft carry. |
|||
[[File:OLS-for-Su-aircrafts.jpg|thumb|The OLS-30 is a combined [[IRST]]/[[laser rangefinder]] device.]] |
|||
In response to the increasing American emphasis on radar-evading stealth designs, Russia turned to alternate sensors, with emphasis on Infrared Search and Track (IRST) sensors, first introduced on the American [[F-101 Voodoo]] and [[F-102 Delta Dagger]] fighters in the 1960s, for detection and tracking of airborne targets. These measure IR radiation from targets. As a passive sensor, it has limited range, and contains no inherent data about position and direction of targets—these must be inferred from the images captured. To offset this, IRST systems can incorporate a [[laser rangefinder]] in order to provide full [[fire-control]] solutions for cannon fire or for launching missiles. Using this method, German [[MiG-29]] using helmet-displayed IRST systems were able to acquire a [[missile lock]] with greater efficiency than USAF [[F-16]] in wargame exercises. IRST sensors have now become standard on Russian aircraft. |
|||
[[File:AESA JUK AE.jpg|left|thumb|[[Zhuk (radar)|Zhuk-AE]] [[Active electronically scanned array]] radar]] |
|||
The primary sensor for all modern fighters is [[radar]]. The U.S. fielded its first modified F-15Cs equipped with [[AN/APG-63 radar family#AN/APG-63(V)2|AN/APG-63(V)2]] [[Active electronically scanned array]] radars,<ref>[http://defense-update.com/features/du-1-07/aesaradar_US.htm "U.S. Fighters Mature With AESA Radars."] ''defense-update.com.'' Retrieved: 3 October 2010.</ref> which have no moving parts and are capable of projecting a much tighter beam and quicker scans. Later on, it was introduced to the [[F/A-18E/F Super Hornet]] and the block 60 (export) F-16 also, and will be used for future American fighters. France introduced its first indigenous AESA radar, the [[RBE2]]-AESA built by Thales in February 2012<ref>http://www.latribune.fr/entreprises-finance/industrie/aeronautique-defense/20121002trib000722459/le-radar-rbe2-l-arme-fatale-du-rafale-a-l-export-.html</ref> for use on the Rafale. The RBE2-AESA can also be retrofitted on the Mirage 2000. A European consortium GTDAR is developing an AESA [[Euroradar CAPTOR]] radar for future use on the Typhoon. Russia has an AESA radar on its MIG-35 and their newest [[Sukhoi Su-27|Su-27]] versions. For the next-generation F-22 and F-35, the U.S. will use [[low probability of intercept]] (LPI) capacity. This will spread the energy of a radar pulse over several frequencies, so as not to trip the [[radar warning receivers]] that all aircraft carry. |
|||
[[File:OLS-for-Su-aircrafts.jpg|thumb|The OLS-30 is a combined [[IRST]]/[[laser rangefinder|LR]] device.]] |
|||
A computing feature of significant tactical importance is the datalink. All modern European and American aircraft are capable of sharing targeting data with allied fighters and AWACS planes (see [[JTIDS]]). The Russian [[MiG-31]] interceptor also has some datalink capability. The sharing of targeting and sensor data allows pilots to put radiating, highly visible sensors further from enemy forces, while using those data to vector silent fighters toward the enemy. |
|||
In response to the increasing American emphasis on radar-evading stealth designs, Russia turned to alternate sensors, with emphasis on [[infra-red search and track]] (IRST) sensors, first introduced on the American [[F-101 Voodoo]] and [[F-102 Delta Dagger]] fighters in the 1960s, for detection and tracking of airborne targets. These measure IR radiation from targets. As a passive sensor, it has limited range, and contains no inherent data about position and direction of targets - these must be inferred from the images captured. To offset this, IRST systems can incorporate a [[laser rangefinder]] in order to provide full [[fire-control]] solutions for cannon fire or for launching missiles. Using this method, German [[Mig-29|MiG-29]] using helmet-displayed IRST systems were able to acquire a [[missile lock]] with greater efficiency than USAF [[F-16]] in wargame exercises. IRST sensors have now become standard on Russian aircraft. With the exception of the [[F-14 Tomcat|F-14D]] (officially retired as of September 2006), no 4th-generation Western fighters carry built-in IRST sensors for air-to-air detection, though the similar [[FLIR]] is often used to acquire ground targets. |
|||
===Stealth=== |
|||
However '4.5 generation' fighters started introducing integrated IRST systems, such as the [[Dassault Rafale]] boasting the [[Optronique secteur frontal]] integrated IRST, a feature adopted very early in its design as an "omnirole" fighter jet. The [[Eurofighter|Eurofighter Typhoon]] introduced the PIRATE-IRST (beginning with Tranche 1 Block 5 aircraft,<ref>[http://www.publicservice.co.uk/pdf/dmj/issue31/DMJ31%200012%20A%20Brookes%20ATL.pdf "Eurofighter Typhoon."] ''publicservice.co.'' Retrieved: 3 October 2010.</ref> while previously build aircraft are being retrofited since spring 2007<ref>[http://www.eurofighter.com/news/article263.asp "Type Acceptance for Block 5 Standard Eurofighter Typhoon."] ''www.eurofighter.com'', Eurofighter GmbH, 15 February 2007. Retrieved: 20 June 2007.</ref>) and the [[F-35 Joint Strike Fighter|F-35]]s will have built-in, PIRATE-IRST sensors, a feature adopted early in the design, meanwhile beginning in 2012 the Super Hornet will also have an IRST.<ref>Warwick, Graham. [http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2007/03/13/212600/ultra-hornet.html "Ultra Hornet."] ''flightglobal.com,'' 13 March 2007. Retrieved: 3 October 2010.</ref> |
|||
[[File:Eurofighter 9803 2.jpg|alt=|thumb|The [[Eurofighter Typhoon]] uses jet [[intake]]s that conceal the front of the jet engine (a strong radar target) from radar. Many important radar targets, such as the wing, canard, and fin leading edges, are highly swept to reflect radar energy well away from the front sector.]] |
|||
While the basic principles of shaping aircraft to avoid radar detection were known since the 1960s, the advent of [[radar-absorbent material]]s allowed aircraft of drastically reduced [[radar cross-section]] to become practicable. During the 1970s, early stealth technology led to the faceted airframe of the [[Lockheed F-117 Nighthawk]] ground-attack aircraft. The faceting reflected radar beams highly directionally, leading to brief "twinkles", which detector systems of the day typically registered as noise, but even with digital FBW stability and control enhancement, the aerodynamic performance penalties were severe and the F-117 found use principally in the night ground-attack role. Stealth technologies also seek to decrease the [[infrared signature]], visual signature, and [[acoustic signature]] of the aircraft. |
|||
In the modern-day, the [[KF-21 Boramae]], though not considered a [[Fifth-generation fighter|5th-gen fighter]], has much more significant [[Stealth aircraft|stealth]] than other 4th gen fighters. |
|||
The tactical implications of the computing and data bus capabilities of aircraft are hard to determine. A more sophisticated computer bus would allow more flexible uses of the existing avionics. For example, it is speculated that the F-22 is able to jam or damage enemy electronics with a focused application of its radar. A computing feature of significant tactical importance is the datalink. All modern European and American aircraft are capable of sharing targeting data with allied fighters and AWACS planes (see [[JTIDS]]). The Russian [[MiG-31]] interceptor also has some datalink capability, so it is reasonable to assume that other Russian planes can also do so. The sharing of targeting and sensor data allows pilots to put radiating, highly visible sensors further from enemy forces, while using that data to vector silent fighters toward the enemy. |
|||
== |
==4.5 generation== |
||
[[Image:A flight testing of the KF-21 prototype 001 on 18 August 2022 (cropped).jpg|thumb|[[KAI KF-21 Boramae]] prototype]] |
|||
The term 4.5 generation is often used to refer to new or enhanced fighters, which appeared beginning in the 1990s, and incorporated some features regarded as [[fifth generation fighter|fifth generation]], but lacked others. The 4.5-generation fighters are therefore generally less expensive, less complex, and have a shorter development time than true fifth-generation aircraft, while maintaining capabilities significantly in advance of those of the original fourth generation. Such capabilities may include advanced sensor integration, AESA radar, supercruise capability, [[supermaneuverability]], broad multi-role capability, and reduced radar cross-section.<ref>[https://www.fighterworld.com.au/az-of-fighter-aircraft/five-generations-of-jets Five Generations of Jets] ''Fighterworld'' RAAF Williamtown Aviation Heritage Centre.</ref> |
|||
The 4.5-generation fighters have introduced integrated IRST systems, such as the Dassault Rafale featuring the ''[[optronique secteur frontal]]'' integrated IRST. The Eurofighter Typhoon introduced the PIRATE-IRST, which was also retrofitted to earlier production models.<ref>[http://www.publicservice.co.uk/pdf/dmj/issue31/DMJ31%200012%20A%20Brookes%20ATL.pdf "Eurofighter Typhoon."] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120722123008/http://www.publicservice.co.uk/pdf/dmj/issue31/dmj31%200012%20a%20brookes%20atl.pdf |date=2012-07-22 }} ''publicservice.co.'' Retrieved: 3 October 2010.</ref><ref>[http://www.eurofighter.com/news/article263.asp "Type Acceptance for Block 5 Standard Eurofighter Typhoon."] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070927192531/http://www.eurofighter.com/news/article263.asp |date=2007-09-27 }} ''www.eurofighter.com'', Eurofighter GmbH, 15 February 2007. Retrieved: 20 June 2007.</ref> The Super Hornet was also fitted with IRST <ref>Warwick, Graham. [http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2007/03/13/212600/ultra-hornet.html "Ultra Hornet."] ''flightglobal.com,'' 13 March 2007. Retrieved: 3 October 2010.</ref> although not integrated but rather as a pod that needs to attached on one of the hardpoints. |
|||
[[Stealth technology]] is an extension of the notion of [[aircraft camouflage]] to modern radar and [[thermography|infrared]] detection sensors. While not rendering an aircraft "invisible" as is popularly conceived, stealth makes an aircraft much more difficult to discern among the sky, clouds, or distant aircraft, conferring a significant tactical advantage. While the basic principles of shaping aircraft to avoid detection were known at least since the 1960s, it was not until the availability of supercomputers that shape computations could be performed from every angle, a complex task. The use of computer-aided design, combined with [[radar-absorbent material]]s, produced aircraft of drastically reduced radar cross-section ([[Radar cross-section|RCS]]) that were much more difficult to detect on radar. Meanwhile, advances in digital flight control make potentially destabilizing, or control-complicating effects of shape alterations easier to compensate for. |
|||
As advances in stealthy materials and design methods enabled smoother airframes, such technologies began to be retrospectively applied to existing fighter aircraft. Many 4.5 generation fighters incorporate some low-observable features. Low-observable radar technology emerged as an important development. The Pakistani / Chinese [[JF-17]] and China's [[Chengdu J-10#Variants|Chengdu J-10B/C]] use a [[diverterless supersonic inlet]], while India's [[HAL Tejas]] uses [[Carbon-fiber-reinforced polymers|carbon-fiber composite]] in manufacturing.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Features of HAL Tejas|url=https://hal-india.co.in/LCA-Tejas%20Division%20Bangalore/M__187}}</ref> The [[IAI Lavi]] used an [[S-duct]] air intake to prevent radar waves from reflecting off the engine compressor blades, an important aspect of fifth-generation fighter aircraft to reduce frontal RCS. These are a few of the preferred methods employed in some fifth-generation fighters to reduce RCS.<ref>{{cite news|title=Going stealthy with composites|url=https://www.materialstoday.com/composite-applications/features/going-stealthy-with-composites/}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Characterization of Radar Cross Section of Carbon Fiber Composite Materials |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/291698935}}</ref> |
|||
During the 1970s, the rudimentary level of stealth shaping (as seen in the faceted design of the [[Lockheed F-117 Nighthawk]]) resulted in too severe a performance penalty to be used on fighters. Faster computers enabled smoother designs such as the [[B-2 Spirit]], and thought was given to applying the basic ideas to decrease, if not drastically reduce, the RCS of fighter aircraft. These techniques are also combined with methods of decreasing the [[infrared signature]], visual signature, and [[acoustic signature]] of the aircraft. While fighters designated 4.5 generation under the US-devised system incorporate some low-observable features, so-called [[fifth-generation fighter]]s have more clearly been designed with this as a very high priority. The inclusion of this as a criterion for the designation of "fifth generation" serves to illustrate the degree to which US manufacturers and their clients appear to assign value to this capability. |
|||
[[KAI KF-21 Boramae]] is a joint South Korean-Indonesian fighter program, the functionality of the Block 1 model (the first flight test prototype) has been described as ‘4.5th generation’. |
|||
[[File:US Navy Boeing FA-18F Super Hornet AVV Creek.jpg |thumb|The [[Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet]] has a reduced radar cross section including diverter vanes to hide the engines' fan blades.]] |
|||
There are some reports that the [[Dassault Rafale]]'s avionics, the [[Thales Spectra]], includes "stealthy" [[radar jamming and deception]] technology, and systems for the active cancellation of RADAR analogous to the acoustic noise suppression systems on the [[Bombardier Dash 8]]. Conventional jammers make locating an aircraft more difficult, but their operation is itself detectable, with missiles being designed more recently to endeavor to follow the jamming itself. The French system is hypothesized to interfere with detection without revealing that jamming is in operation. |
|||
Such a system ought in principle to be able to make an aircraft entirely invisible, were it to be feasible to actively mimic an undisturbed RADAR signature (canceling all reflections, and compensating for any RADAR shadow) however such a system would be incalculably difficult and is not envisaged. Meanwhile, the real effectiveness of systems that allegedly exist is unknown. |
|||
Research continues into other ways of decreasing observability by radar. There are claims that Russian researchers are working on "[[plasma stealth]]".<ref>http://www.aeronautics.ru/archive/research_literature/aviation_articles/Aviation%20Week/topics/plasma_stealth/index.htm "Research Articles." ''Venik's Aviation Data Archive.'' Retrieved: 3 October 2010.</ref> |
|||
There are in any case ways to detect fighters other than radar. For instance, passive infra-red sensors can detect the heat of engines, and even the sound of a [[sonic boom]] (which any supersonic aircraft will make) can be tracked with a network of sensors and computers. However, using these to provide precise targeting information for a long-range missile is considerably less straightforward than radar. |
|||
==Combat performance== |
|||
The F-15 and F-16 have the first and second best known overall combat records of modern jet fighters, an amalgamation of the combat records of both jets in [[Israeli Air Force]] service in various conflicts, followed by both jets in [[USAF]] service during the Invasion of Iraq at 1991. F-15s have a claimed combat record of 101 victories and zero losses in actual air-to-air combat against considerably inferior planes.<ref>[http://boeing.com/defense-space/military/f15/f-15k/index.html "F-15K - Republic of Korea."] ''Boeing.com.'' Retrieved: 3 October 2010.</ref> |
|||
* [[1982 Lebanon War]], Israeli Air Force credited their F-15s and F-16s with 86 air-to-air kills, mostly of obsolete [[Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21|MiG-21s]] and [[Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23|MiG-23s]], while suffering no air-to-air losses of their own. |
|||
* [[Iran–Iraq War]], saw the first instance of employing 4th generation jet fighters in open war. Iran used [[F-14]]s and Iraq deployed [[MiG-29]]s, although there are no reports of the two aircraft types actually engaging each other. |
|||
* [[Gulf War]] of 1991 |
|||
** On 17 January 1991, the first night of the offence of invasion forces, an [[Iraq]]i [[MiG-25]]PD shot down a U.S. Navy F/A-18C (piloted by LCDR [[Scott Speicher]]), which was lost {{convert|29|nmi|km}} southeast of [[Baghdad]].<ref>[http://www.foia.cia.gov/browse_docs_full.asp?doc_no=0000588922&title=INTELLIGENCE+COMMUNITY+ASSESSMENT+OF+THE+LIEUTENANT+COMMANDER+SPEICHER+CASE&abstract=&no_pages=0006&pub_date=3%2F27%2F2001&release_date=5%2F22%2F2001&keywords=IRAQ%7COPERATION+DESERT+STORM%7CSPEICHER+MICHAEL+SCOTT%7CDOWNED+PILOT&case_no=F%2D2001%2D00709©right=0&release_dec=RIFPUB&classification=U&showPage=0001 "Intelligence Community Assessment of the Lieutenant Commander Speicher Case."] ''foia.cia.gov.'' Retrieved: 3 October 2010.</ref><ref>[http://cia.gov./Iraq "Operation Desert Storm Downed Pilot."] ''Central Intelligence Agency, USA.''</ref><ref>[http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_404.shtml "Iraqi Air-to-Air Victories since 1967."] ''ACIG.'' Retrieved: 3 October 2010.</ref> |
|||
** USAF [[F-15 Eagle|F-15]] pilots shot down five [[Iraq]]i MiG-29s.<ref name="sci">[http://www.sci.fi/~fta/score.htm Sci] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060925163741/http://www.sci.fi/~fta/score.htm |date=2006-09-25 }} Retrieved: 3 October 2010.</ref> |
|||
* During the [[Kargil Conflict]] between India and Pakistan in 1999, the Indian Air Force used Dassault Mirage 2000s to drop laser-guided bombs. MiG-29s were used extensively to provide fighter escort to the Mirage 2000s. Two bombing aircraft were shot down by ground fire while they targeted Pakistani camps and logistic bases in Kargil. Two Mirage squadrons flew a total of 515 sorties, and in 240 strike missions dropped 55,000 kg (120,000 lb) of ordnance. The [[Pakistan Air Force]] did not take part, allowing the IAF Mirages to fly at will. |
|||
* [[Kosovo War|1999 Kosovo War]] |
|||
** A [[Royal Netherlands Air Force|Dutch]] [[F-16]] pilot shot down a [[Yugoslavia]]n MiG-29A and a USAF F-16 pilot also shot down a MiG-29A.<ref name="F-16 1999">[http://www.f-16.net/f-16_timeline_year-1999.html "F-16 Timeline 1999."] ''f-16.net.'' Retrieved: 3 October 2010.</ref><ref>[http://www.zap16.com/mil%20fact/f-16.htm "Zap 16."] ''zap.16.com.'' Retrieved: 3 October 2010.</ref> |
|||
** USAF F-15 pilots shot down four MiG-29s.<ref name="F-16 1999"/> |
|||
* [[Eritrean-Ethiopian War]]. In February 1999, according to some reports, [[Ethiopia]]n [[Su-27]] pilots shot down four [[Eritrea]]n MiG-29s. Some of these sources claim that the Ethiopian planes were flown by Russian pilots, and the Eritrean planes by Ukrainians. (It is certainly true that local pilots were trained by instructors from those nations.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_189.shtml |title=Archived copy |accessdate=2010-02-01 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://www.webcitation.org/5nDhCzUZj?url=http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_189.shtml |archivedate=2010-02-01 |df= }}. ACIG</ref>) |
|||
* [[Soviet–Afghan War]]. Between May 1986 and November 1988, PAF F-16s shot down at least eight intruders from Afghanistan. The first three of these (one Su-22, one probable Su-22, and one An-26) were shot down by two pilots from No. 9 Squadron. Pilots of No. 14 Squadron destroyed the remaining five intruders (two Su-22s, two MiG-23s, and one Su-25). Most of these kills were by the AIM-9 Sidewinder, but at least one (a Su-22) was destroyed by cannon fire. Flight Lieutenant Khalid Mahmood is credited with three of these kills.<ref>[http://www.f-16.net/f-16_users_article14.html F-16 Air Forces - Pakistan]. F-16.net. Retrieved on 2010-09-08.</ref> |
|||
===Exercise reports=== |
|||
Different air forces regularly practice against each other in exercises, and when they fly different aircraft some indication of the relative capabilities of the aircraft can be gained.<ref>Cox, Jody D. and Hugh G. Severs. "The Relationship Between Realism in Air Force Exercises and Combat Readiness." ''Air Forces Issues Team, Washington DC, September 1994, pp. 1–114.</ref> |
|||
During the "[[Cope India '04]]" exercise (2004), [[United States Air Force|USAF]] F-15 Eagles were pitted against [[Indian Air Force]] Su-30MKs, Mirage 2000s, MiG-29s and aging [[MiG-21]]s. The results have been widely publicized with the IAF winning a majority of the mock combat, although the USAF fought at a numerical disadvantage, and both sides without AWACS support thereby restricting BVR combat.<ref>[http://newsfromrussia.com/world/2004/06/30/54664.html "Russian fighters superior, says Pentagon."] ''newsfromrussia.com.'' Retrieved: 3 October 2010.</ref><ref name="Aviation Week">[http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/news/channel_military.jsp?view=story&id=news/m15vsu0524.xml "Su-30MK Beats F-15C 'Every Time'."] ''Aviation Week and Space Technology'' [https://web.archive.org/web/20030110015808/http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/news/channel_military.jsp?view=story&id=news/m15vsu0524.xml copy on archive.org]</ref> |
|||
The "Cope India 2005" exercise was conducted with teams that used a combination of United States and Russian-designed aircraft. The ''[[Christian Science Monitor]]'' (CSM) reported that “both the Americans and the Indians won, and lost.”<ref>Baldauf, Scott. [http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1128/p01s04-wosc.html "Indian Air Force, in war games, gives US a run."] ''csmonitor.com.'' Retrieved: 3 October 2010.</ref> According to the same article the Indian air force designed Cope 2005 in that the rules of engagement be that the forces fight within visual range, and both forces could not take advantage of their long range sensors or weapons.{{citation needed|date=February 2012}} |
|||
In July 2007, the Indian Air Force fielded the [[Sukhoi Su-30MKI]] during the ''Indra-Dhanush'' exercise with the Royal Air Force's [[Eurofighter Typhoon]]. This was the first time that the two jets had taken part in such an exercise.<ref>[http://www.raf.mod.uk/news/archive.cfm?storyid=BE8B53D9-1143-EC82-2E1D1D967FFBDE9F Exercise Indra Dhanush wraps up at Waddington]</ref><ref>[http://www.targeta.co.uk/waddington_indradhanush.htm "Exercise Indra Dhanush 07, RAF Waddington."] ''targeta.cp.uk.'' Retrieved: 3 October 2010.</ref> The IAF did not allow their pilots to use the radar of the MKIs during the exercise so as to protect the highly classified N011M Bars.<ref>[http://cities.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=252960 India’s Sukhois turn it on in UK skies, turn off radars]</ref> |
|||
RAF Tornado pilots were candid in their admission of the Su-30 MKI's superior manoeuvring in the air, just as they had anticipated, but the IAF pilots were also impressed by the Typhoon's agility in the air.<ref>http://www.airsceneuk.org.uk/hangar/2007/441indians/indra.htm</ref> |
|||
==Fourth-generation jet fighters compared== |
|||
{| class="wikitable sortable" style="text-align: right" |
|||
|- |
|||
! Aircraft |
|||
! Primary<br/>Builder |
|||
! data-sort-type="number" | Number<br/>built |
|||
! data-sort-type="number" | First<br/>flight |
|||
! Service<br/>life |
|||
! data-sort-type="number" | Length |
|||
! data-sort-type="number" | Wingspan<br/>m |
|||
! data-sort-type="number" | Wing area<br/>sq. m |
|||
! data-sort-type="number" | Empty<br/>weight |
|||
! data-sort-type="number" | Max takeoff<br/>weight |
|||
! data-sort-type="number" | Max Speed<br />km/h |
|||
! data-sort-type="number" | Range<br />km |
|||
! data-sort-type="number" | Ceiling<br />m |
|||
! data-sort-type="number" | Engines<br />×<br />Thrust |
|||
|- |
|||
| [[Panavia Tornado ADV|Tornado ADV]] || {{flagicon|EU}} [[Panavia Aircraft GmbH]] || 218 || 1979 || 1985–2011 || 18.68 || 13.91/8.60 || 26.60 || 14,500 kg || 27,986 kg || 2,337 || 4,265 || 15,240 || 2 × 40.5 kN/73.5 kN |
|||
|- |
|||
| [[Eurofighter Typhoon|Typhoon]] || {{flagicon|EU}} [[Eurofighter GmbH]] || 571 || 1994 || 2003–Present || 15.96 || 10.95 || 51.20 || 11,000 kg || 23,500 kg || 2,495<ref>http://www.bundesheer.at/waffen/waf_eurofighter.shtml</ref> || 3,790 || 19,812 || 2 × 60 kN/90 kN |
|||
|- |
|||
| [[Dassault Mirage 2000|Mirage 2000]] || {{flag|France|FRA}} || 601 || 1978 || 1982–Present || 14.36 || 9.13 || 41.00 || 7,500 kg|| 17,000 kg || 2,337 || 3,335 || 17,060 || 1 × 64.3 kN/95.1 kN |
|||
|- |
|||
| [[Dassault Rafale|Rafale]] || {{flag|France|FRA}} || 157<ref>http://www.la-croix.com/Economie/France/Dans-usine-Rafale-avion-made-France-2016-03-31-1200750210</ref> <ref>http://www.dassault-aviation.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/2/files/2017/03/conf-de-presse-8-mars-v060317-EN.pdf</ref> || 1986 || 2001–Present || 15.27 || 10.80 || 45.70 || 10,196 kg|| 24,500 kg || 1,912 || 3,700 || 15,240 || 2 × 50.04 kN/75.62 kN |
|||
|- |
|||
| [[HAL Tejas|Tejas]] || {{flag|India|IN}} || 22<ref>https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAL_Tejas</ref><ref>http://www.tejas.gov.in/first_flights.html</ref><ref>http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/tejas/ </ref>|| 2001 || 2015-present || 13.20 || 8.20 || 38.40 || 6,560 kg || 13,500 kg || 2,205 || 3000 || 16,000 || 1 × 53.9 kN/89.8 kN |
|||
|- |
|||
| [[Mitsubishi F-2|F-2]] || {{flag|Japan|JAP}} || 98 || 1995 || 2000–Present || 15.52 || 11.13 || 34.84 || 9,527 kg|| 22,090 kg || 2,124 || 834 || 18,000 || 1 × 76 kN/125 kN |
|||
|- |
|||
| [[CAC/PAC JF-17 Thunder|JF-17]] || {{flag|People's Republic of China|PRC}}<br>{{flag|Pakistan|PAK}} || 86<ref>{{Cite web|title = Pakistan with chinese has manufactured 86 JF-17 Thunder aircraft: National Assembly body told {{!}} Business Recorder|url = http://www.brecorder.com/general-news/172/1260525/|website = Business Recorder|accessdate = 2016-01-08}}</ref> || 2003 || 2007–Present || 14.93 || 9.45 || 24.40 || 5,300 kg || 12,383 kg || 1,837 || 3,482 || 13,220 || 1 × 49.4 kN/84.5 kN |
|||
|- |
|||
| [[Xian JH-7|JH-7]] || {{flag|People's Republic of China|PRC}} || 240 || 1988 || 1992–Present || 22.32 || 12.80 || || 14,500 kg|| 28,475 kg || 1,808 || 3,700 || 16,000 || 2 × 54.29 kN/91.26 kN |
|||
|- |
|||
| [[Shenyang J-11|J-11]]/[[Shenyang J-15|J-15]]/[[Shenyang J-16|J-16]] || {{flag|People's Republic of China|PRC}} || 253+ || 1998 || 1998–Present || 21.90 || 14.70 || 62.04 || 16,380 kg|| 33,000 kg || 2,496 || 3,530 || 19,000 || 2 × 75.22 kN/132.0 kN |
|||
|- |
|||
| [[Chengdu J-10|J-10]] || {{flag|People's Republic of China|PRC}} || 400+ || 1998 || 2005–Present || 15.49 || 9.75 || 33.10 || 9,750 kg|| 19,277 kg || 2,336 || 1,850 || 18,000 || 1 × 89.17 kN/130.0 kN |
|||
|- |
|||
| [[AIDC F-CK-1 Ching-kuo|F-CK-1 Ching-kuo]] || {{flag|Taiwan|TWN}} || 130 || 1989 || 1994–Present || 14.21 || 9.46 || 24.20 || 6,500 kg || 12,000 kg || 1,911 || 1,100 || 16,800 || 2 × 27.0 kN/42.0 kN |
|||
|- |
|||
| [[Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-29|MiG-29]]/[[Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-35|35]] || {{flag|Soviet Union}}/{{flag|Russia}} || 1,600 || 1977 || 1983–Present|| 17.37 || 11.40 || 38.00 || 11,000 kg || 20,000 kg || 2,400 || 2,100 || 18,013 || 2 × 50.0 kN/81.3 kN |
|||
|- |
|||
| [[Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-31|MiG-31]] || {{flag|Soviet Union}}/{{flag|Russia}} || 500 || 1975 || 1981–Present|| 22.69 || 13.46 || 61.60 || 21,820 kg || 46,200 kg || 3,005 || 3,300 || 20,600 || 2 × 93.0 kN/152.0 kN |
|||
|- |
|||
| [[Sukhoi Su-27|Su-27]]/[[Sukhoi Su-30|30]]/[[Sukhoi Su-33|33]]/[[Sukhoi Su-35|35]] || {{flag|Soviet Union}}/{{flag|Russia}} || 1,391 || 1977 || 1985–Present || 21.90 || 14.70 || 62.00 || 16,380 kg || 30,450 kg || 2,496 || 3,530 || 19,000 || 2 × 75.22 kN/122.6 kN |
|||
|- |
|||
| [[Saab JAS 39 Gripen|JAS 39 Gripen]] || {{flag|Sweden|SWE}} || 247 || 1988 || 1997–Present || 14.10 || 8.40 || 30.00 || 6,800 kg || 14,000 kg || 2,204 || 3,200 || 15,240 || 1 × 54.0 kN/80.5 kN |
|||
|- |
|||
| [[British Aerospace Sea Harrier|Sea Harrier FA.2]] || {{flag|United Kingdom|UK}} || 29|| 1993 || 1993–2006 || 14.20 || 7.60 || 18.68 || 6,374 kg || 11,900 kg || 1,182 || 3,600 || 16,000 || 1 × 95.64 kN/80.5 kN |
|||
|- |
|||
| [[British Aerospace Hawk 200|Hawk 200]] || {{flag|United Kingdom|UK}} || 62|| 1986 || 1993–Present || 11.38 || 9.39 || 16.69 || 4,128 kg || 9,101 kg || 1,481 || 1,950 || 15,250 || 1 × 26 kN |
|||
|- |
|||
| [[Grumman F-14 Tomcat|F-14 Tomcat]] || {{flag|United States|USA}} || 712 || 1970 || 1974–9/2006|| 19.10 || 19.55/11.58 || 54.50 || 19,838 kg || 33,730 kg || 2,485 || 2,960 || 15,200 || 2 × 64.4 kN/123.7 kN |
|||
|- |
|||
| [[McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle|F-15 Eagle]] || {{flag|United States|USA}} || 1,198 || 1972 || 1976–Present || 19.43 || 13.05 || 56.50 || 12,700 kg || 30,845 kg || 2,665 || 5,550 || 20,000 || 2 × 64.9 kN/105.7 kN |
|||
|- |
|||
| [[General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon|F-16 Fighting Falcon]] || {{flag|United States|USA}} || 4,500 || 1974 || 1978–Present || 15.06 || 9.96 || 27.87 || 8,570 kg || 19,200 kg || 2,120 || 4,220 || 15,240 || 1 × 76.3 kN/127.0 kN |
|||
|- |
|||
| [[McDonnell Douglas F/A-18 Hornet|F/A-18 Hornet]] || {{flag|United States|USA}} || 1,480 || 1974 || 1983–Present || 17.10 || 12.30 || 38.00 || 10,400 kg || 23,500 kg || 1,915 || 3,330 || 15,240 || 2 × 48.9 kN/79.2 kN |
|||
|- |
|||
| [[Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet|F/A-18 Super Hornet]] || {{flag|United States|USA}} || 589 || 1995 || 1999–Present || 18.31 || 13.62 || 46.5 || 14,552 kg || 29,937 kg || 1,915 || 3,330 || 15,000 || 2 × 62.3 kN/97.9 kN |
|||
|- |
|||
|} |
|||
===In development=== |
|||
* {{PRC}} |
|||
** [[Shenyang J-11#Variants|Shenyang J-11D]] |
|||
* {{RUS}} |
|||
** [[Mikoyan MiG-35]] |
|||
===Canceled=== |
|||
* {{ARG}} |
|||
** [[FMA SAIA 90]] |
|||
* {{FRA}} |
|||
** [[Dassault Mirage 4000]] |
|||
* {{ISR}} |
|||
** [[IAI Lavi]] |
|||
** [[IAI Nammer]] |
|||
* {{PRC}} |
|||
** [[Shenyang J-8#J-8II .28Finback-B.29 Series|Shenyang J-8III]] |
|||
** [[Chengdu J-9]] |
|||
** [[Shenyang J-13]] |
|||
* {{flag|Romania|1965}} |
|||
** [[IAR 95]] |
|||
* {{flag|South Africa|1928}} |
|||
** [[Atlas Carver]] |
|||
* {{RUS}} - {{USSR}} |
|||
** [[Mikoyan Project 1.44]] |
|||
** [[Sukhoi Su-47]] |
|||
** [[Yakovlev Yak-141]] |
|||
**[[Yakovlev Yak-43|Yak-43]] |
|||
** [[Yakovlev Yak-45]] |
|||
* {{RUS}}-{{IRN}} |
|||
** [[M-ATF]] |
|||
* {{USA}} |
|||
** [[Boeing F-15SE Silent Eagle]] |
|||
** [[Northrop YF-17]] |
|||
* {{FRG}} |
|||
** [[VFW VAK 191B]] |
|||
* {{YUG}} |
|||
** [[Novi Avion]] |
|||
==See also== |
==See also== |
||
*[[ |
*[[Jet fighter generations]] |
||
*[[List of fighter aircraft]] |
*[[List of fighter aircraft]] |
||
==References== |
|||
{{Reflist}} |
|||
==References== |
|||
;Notes |
|||
{{Reflist|30em}} |
|||
===Bibliography=== |
|||
{{Refbegin}} |
{{Refbegin}} |
||
* Aronstein, David C. and Albert C. Piccirillo. ''The Lightweight Fighter Program: A Successful Approach to Fighter Technology Transition.'' Reston, VA: AIAA, 1996 |
* Aronstein, David C. and Albert C. Piccirillo. ''The Lightweight Fighter Program: A Successful Approach to Fighter Technology Transition.'' Reston, VA: AIAA, 1996 |
||
* Kelly, Orr. ''Hornet: The Inside story of the F/A-18''. Novato, California: |
* Kelly, Orr. ''Hornet: The Inside story of the F/A-18''. Novato, California: Presidio Press, 1990. {{ISBN|0-89141-344-8}}. |
||
* Kopp, Carlo. [http://www.ausairpower.net/jsf-analysis-2002.html "Lockheed-Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Analysis 2002."] ''Air Power Australia'', 2002. Retrieved: 10 April 2006. |
* Kopp, Carlo. [http://www.ausairpower.net/jsf-analysis-2002.html "Lockheed-Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Analysis 2002."] ''Air Power Australia'', 2002. Retrieved: 10 April 2006. |
||
* Richardson, Doug. ''Stealth Warplanes: Deception, Evasion and Concealment in the Air''. London: Salamander. 1989, First Edition. {{ISBN|0-7603-1051-3}}. |
* Richardson, Doug. ''Stealth Warplanes: Deception, Evasion and Concealment in the Air''. London: Salamander. 1989, First Edition. {{ISBN|0-7603-1051-3}}. |
||
| Line 233: | Line 113: | ||
{{Jet Fighter Generations}} |
{{Jet Fighter Generations}} |
||
[[Category:Fourth-generation jet fighters]] |
|||
[[Category:Jet fighter generations|4th generation]] |
[[Category:Jet fighter generations|4th generation]] |
||
[[Category: |
[[Category:1980s aircraft]] |
||
[[Category: |
[[Category:1990s aircraft]] |
||
[[Category: |
[[Category:2000s aircraft]] |
||
[[Category: |
[[Category:2010s aircraft]] |
||
[[Category:20th century in technology]] |
[[Category:20th century in technology]] |
||
Latest revision as of 08:26, 23 November 2024
| Fourth-generation fighter | |
|---|---|
 A Sukhoi Su-27 (background) and General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon (foreground), fourth-generation fighters used by the Soviet Air Force and United States Air Force respectively | |
| General information | |
| Type | Fighter aircraft |
| National origin | Multi-national |
| Status | In service |
| History | |
| Introduction date | 1980s |
| First flight | 1970s |
| Developed from | Third-generation fighter |
| Developed into | Fifth-generation fighter |
The fourth-generation fighter is a class of jet fighters in service from around 1980 to the present, and represents design concepts of the 1970s. Fourth-generation designs are heavily influenced by lessons learned from the previous generation of combat aircraft. Third-generation fighters were often designed primarily as interceptors, being built around speed and air-to-air missiles. While exceptionally fast in a straight line, many third-generation fighters severely lacked in maneuverability, as doctrine held that traditional dogfighting would be impossible at supersonic speeds. In practice, air-to-air missiles of the time, despite being responsible for the vast majority of air-to-air victories, were relatively unreliable, and combat would quickly become subsonic and close-range. This would leave third-generation fighters vulnerable and ill-equipped, renewing an interest in manoeuvrability for the fourth generation of fighters. Meanwhile, the growing costs of military aircraft in general and the demonstrated success of aircraft such as the McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II gave rise to the popularity of multirole combat aircraft in parallel with the advances marking the so-called fourth generation.
During this period, maneuverability was enhanced by relaxed static stability, made possible by introduction of the fly-by-wire (FBW) flight-control system, which in turn was possible due to advances in digital computers and system-integration techniques. Replacement of analog avionics, required to enable FBW operations, became a fundamental requirement as legacy analog computer systems began to be replaced by digital flight-control systems in the latter half of the 1980s.[1] The further advance of microcomputers in the 1980s and 1990s permitted rapid upgrades to the avionics over the lifetimes of these fighters, incorporating system upgrades such as active electronically scanned array (AESA), digital avionics buses, and infra-red search and track.
Due to the dramatic enhancement of capabilities in these upgraded fighters and in new designs of the 1990s that reflected these new capabilities, they have come to be known as 4.5 generation. This is intended to reflect a class of fighters that are evolutionary upgrades of the fourth generation incorporating integrated avionics suites, advanced weapons efforts to make the (mostly) conventionally designed aircraft nonetheless less easily detectable and trackable as a response to advancing missile and radar technology (see stealth technology).[2][3] Inherent airframe design features exist and include masking of turbine blades and application of advanced sometimes radar-absorbent materials, but not the distinctive low-observable configurations of the latest aircraft, referred to as fifth-generation fighters or aircraft such as the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor.
The United States defines 4.5-generation fighter aircraft as fourth-generation jet fighters that have been upgraded with AESA radar, high-capacity data-link, enhanced avionics, and "the ability to deploy current and reasonably foreseeable advanced armaments".[4][5] Contemporary examples of 4.5-generation fighters are the Sukhoi Su-30SM/Su-34/Su-35,[6] Shenyang J-15B/J-16,[7] Chengdu J-10C, Mikoyan MiG-35, Eurofighter Typhoon, Dassault Rafale, Saab JAS 39E/F Gripen, Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, Lockheed Martin F-16E/F/V Block 70/72, McDonnell Douglas F-15E/EX Strike Eagle/Eagle II, HAL Tejas MK1A,[8] CAC/PAC JF-17 Block 3, and Mitsubishi F-2.[9]
Characteristics
[edit]
Performance
[edit]Whereas the premier third-generation jet fighters (e.g., the F-4 and MiG-23) were designed as interceptors with only a secondary emphasis on maneuverability, 4th generation aircraft try to reach an equilibrium, with most designs, such as the F-14 and the F-15, being able to execute BVR interceptions while remaining highly maneuverable in case the platform and the pilot find themselves in a close range dogfight. While the trade-offs involved in combat aircraft design are again shifting towards beyond visual range (BVR) engagement, the management of the advancing environment of numerous information flows in the modern battlespace, and low-observability, arguably at the expense of maneuvering ability in close combat, the application of thrust vectoring provides a way to maintain it, especially at low speed.
Key advances contributing to enhanced maneuverability in the fourth generation include high engine thrust, powerful control surfaces, and relaxed static stability (RSS), this last enabled via "fly-by-wire" computer-controlled stability augmentation. Air combat manoeuvring also involves a great deal of energy management to maintain speed and altitude under rapidly changing flight conditions.
Fly-by-wire
[edit]
Fly-by-wire is a term used to describe the computerized automation of flight control surfaces. Early fourth-generation fighters like the F-15 Eagle and F-14 Tomcat retained electromechanical flight hydraulics. Later fourth-generation fighters would make extensive use of fly-by-wire technology.
The General Dynamics YF-16, eventually developed into the F-16 Fighting Falcon, was the world's first aircraft intentionally designed to be slightly aerodynamically unstable. This technique, called relaxed static stability (RSS), was incorporated to further enhance the aircraft's performance. Most aircraft are designed with positive static stability, which induces an aircraft to return to its original attitude following a disturbance. However, positive static stability, the tendency to remain in its current attitude, opposes the pilot's efforts to maneuver. An aircraft with negative static stability, though, in the absence of control input, will readily deviate from level and controlled flight. An unstable aircraft can therefore be made more maneuverable. Such a 4th generation aircraft requires a computerized FBW flight control system (FLCS) to maintain its desired flight path.[10]
Some late derivatives of the early types, such as the F-15SA Strike Eagle for Saudi Arabia, have included upgrading to FBW.
Thrust vectoring
[edit]
Thrust vectoring was originally introduced in the Hawker Siddeley Harrier for vertical takeoff and landing, and pilots soon developed the technique of "viffing", or vectoring in forward flight, to enhance manoeuvrability. The first fixed-wing type to display enhanced manoeuvrability in this way was the Sukhoi Su-27, the first aircraft to publicly display thrust vectoring in pitch. Combined with a thrust-to-weight ratio above unity, this enabled it to maintain near-zero airspeed at high angles of attack without stalling, and perform novel aerobatics such as Pugachev's Cobra. The three-dimensional TVC nozzles of the Sukhoi Su-30MKI are mounted 32° outward to the longitudinal engine axis (i.e. in the horizontal plane) and can be deflected ±15° in the vertical plane. This produces a corkscrew effect, further enhancing the turning capability of the aircraft.[11] The MiG-35 with its RD-33OVT engines with the vectored thrust nozzles allows it to be the first twin-engined aircraft with vectoring nozzles that can move in two directions (that is, 3D TVC). Other existing thrust-vectoring aircraft, like the F-22, have nozzles that vector in one direction.[12] The technology has been fitted to the Sukhoi Su-47 Berkut and later derivatives. The U.S. explored fitting the technology to the F-16 and the F-15, but did not introduce it until the fifth generation arrived.
Supercruise
[edit]
Supercruise is the ability of a jet aircraft to cruise at supersonic speeds without using an afterburner.
Maintaining supersonic speed without afterburner use saves large quantities of fuel, greatly increasing range and endurance, but the engine power available is limited and drag rises sharply in the transonic region, so drag-creating equipment such as external stores and their attachment points must be minimised, preferably with the use of internal storage.
The Eurofighter Typhoon can cruise around Mach 1.2 without afterburner, with the maximum level speed without reheat is Mach 1.5.[14][15][16] An EF T1 DA (Development Aircraft trainer version) demonstrated supercruise (1.21 M) with 2 SRAAM, 4 MRAAM and drop tank (plus 1-tonne flight-test equipment, plus 700 kg more weight for the trainer version) during the Singapore evaluation.[17]
Avionics
[edit]
Avionics can often be swapped out as new technologies become available; they are often upgraded over the lifetime of an aircraft. For example, the F-15C Eagle, first produced in 1978, has received upgrades in 2007 such as AESA radar and joint helmet-mounted cueing system, and is scheduled to receive a 2040C upgrade to keep it in service until 2040.
The primary sensor for all modern fighters is radar. The U.S. fielded its first modified F-15Cs equipped with AN/APG-63(V)2 AESA radars,[18] which have no moving parts and are capable of projecting a much tighter beam and quicker scans. Later on, it was introduced to the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and the block 60 (export) F-16 also, and will be used for future American fighters. France introduced its first indigenous AESA radar, the RBE2-AESA built by Thales in February 2012[19] for use on the Rafale. The RBE2-AESA can also be retrofitted on the Mirage 2000. A European consortium GTDAR is developing an AESA Euroradar CAPTOR radar for future use on the Typhoon. For the next-generation F-22 and F-35, the U.S. will use low probability of intercept capacity. This will spread the energy of a radar pulse over several frequencies, so as not to trip the radar warning receivers that all aircraft carry.
In response to the increasing American emphasis on radar-evading stealth designs, Russia turned to alternate sensors, with emphasis on Infrared Search and Track (IRST) sensors, first introduced on the American F-101 Voodoo and F-102 Delta Dagger fighters in the 1960s, for detection and tracking of airborne targets. These measure IR radiation from targets. As a passive sensor, it has limited range, and contains no inherent data about position and direction of targets—these must be inferred from the images captured. To offset this, IRST systems can incorporate a laser rangefinder in order to provide full fire-control solutions for cannon fire or for launching missiles. Using this method, German MiG-29 using helmet-displayed IRST systems were able to acquire a missile lock with greater efficiency than USAF F-16 in wargame exercises. IRST sensors have now become standard on Russian aircraft.
A computing feature of significant tactical importance is the datalink. All modern European and American aircraft are capable of sharing targeting data with allied fighters and AWACS planes (see JTIDS). The Russian MiG-31 interceptor also has some datalink capability. The sharing of targeting and sensor data allows pilots to put radiating, highly visible sensors further from enemy forces, while using those data to vector silent fighters toward the enemy.
Stealth
[edit]
While the basic principles of shaping aircraft to avoid radar detection were known since the 1960s, the advent of radar-absorbent materials allowed aircraft of drastically reduced radar cross-section to become practicable. During the 1970s, early stealth technology led to the faceted airframe of the Lockheed F-117 Nighthawk ground-attack aircraft. The faceting reflected radar beams highly directionally, leading to brief "twinkles", which detector systems of the day typically registered as noise, but even with digital FBW stability and control enhancement, the aerodynamic performance penalties were severe and the F-117 found use principally in the night ground-attack role. Stealth technologies also seek to decrease the infrared signature, visual signature, and acoustic signature of the aircraft.
In the modern-day, the KF-21 Boramae, though not considered a 5th-gen fighter, has much more significant stealth than other 4th gen fighters.
4.5 generation
[edit].jpg)
The term 4.5 generation is often used to refer to new or enhanced fighters, which appeared beginning in the 1990s, and incorporated some features regarded as fifth generation, but lacked others. The 4.5-generation fighters are therefore generally less expensive, less complex, and have a shorter development time than true fifth-generation aircraft, while maintaining capabilities significantly in advance of those of the original fourth generation. Such capabilities may include advanced sensor integration, AESA radar, supercruise capability, supermaneuverability, broad multi-role capability, and reduced radar cross-section.[20]
The 4.5-generation fighters have introduced integrated IRST systems, such as the Dassault Rafale featuring the optronique secteur frontal integrated IRST. The Eurofighter Typhoon introduced the PIRATE-IRST, which was also retrofitted to earlier production models.[21][22] The Super Hornet was also fitted with IRST [23] although not integrated but rather as a pod that needs to attached on one of the hardpoints.
As advances in stealthy materials and design methods enabled smoother airframes, such technologies began to be retrospectively applied to existing fighter aircraft. Many 4.5 generation fighters incorporate some low-observable features. Low-observable radar technology emerged as an important development. The Pakistani / Chinese JF-17 and China's Chengdu J-10B/C use a diverterless supersonic inlet, while India's HAL Tejas uses carbon-fiber composite in manufacturing.[24] The IAI Lavi used an S-duct air intake to prevent radar waves from reflecting off the engine compressor blades, an important aspect of fifth-generation fighter aircraft to reduce frontal RCS. These are a few of the preferred methods employed in some fifth-generation fighters to reduce RCS.[25][26]
KAI KF-21 Boramae is a joint South Korean-Indonesian fighter program, the functionality of the Block 1 model (the first flight test prototype) has been described as ‘4.5th generation’.
See also
[edit]References
[edit]- ^ Hoh, Roger H. and David G. Mitchell. "Flying Qualities of Relaxed Static Stability Aircraft - Volume I: Flying Qualities Airworthiness Assessment and Flight Testing of Augmented Aircraft". Federal Aviation Administration (DOT/FAA/CT-82/130-I), September 1983. pp. 11ff.
- ^ Fulghum, David A. and Douglas Barrie "F-22 Tops Japan's Military Wish List". Aviation Week and Space Technology, 22 April 2007. Retrieved 3 October 2010. Archived 27 September 2011 at the Wayback Machine.
- ^ "The Gray Threat" (Archived 2007-08-19 at the Wayback Machine). Air Force Magazine.
- ^ "CRS RL33543: Tactical Aircraft Modernization" (Archived 2009-08-30 at the Wayback Machine). Issues for Congress 9 July 2009. Retrieved 3 October 2010.
- ^ "National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Enrolled as Agreed to or Passed by Both House and Senate)" (Archived 2010-11-04 at the Wayback Machine). thomas.loc.gov. Retrieved 3 October 2010.
- ^ Gady, Franz-Stefan. "Russia to Upgrade Su-30SM Fighter Jets in 2018". thediplomat.com.
- ^ "Russian and Chinese Combat Air Trends" (PDF). p. P6. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2021-01-23. Retrieved 2021-05-07.
- ^ Karnad, Bharat (January 21, 2019). "A Liability Called Rafale". Point of View. India Today. New Delhi.
- ^ Gady, Franz-Stefan. "Is Japan Facing a Shortage of Fighter Aircraft?". thediplomat.com.
- ^ Greenwood, Cynthia. "Air Force Looks at the Benefits of Using CPCs on F-16 Black Boxes." Archived 2008-10-11 at the Wayback Machine CorrDefense, Spring 2007. Retrieved: 16 June 2008.
- ^ "Air-Attack.com – Su-30MK AL-31FP engines two-dimensional thrust vectoring" Archived 2010-09-17 at the Wayback Machine. air-attack.com. Retrieved: 3 October 2010.
- ^ "MiG-35". domain-b.com. Retrieved: 3 October 2010.
- ^ "Fox Three". Archived May 25, 2013, at the Wayback Machine dassault-aviation.com. Retrieved: 24 April 2010.
- ^ "Supercuise at about Mach 1.2" luftwaffe.de. Retrieved: 3 October 2010.
- ^ "Supercruise at about Mach 1.2". eurofighter.at. Retrieved: 3 October 2010.
- ^ "Eurofighter capability, p. 53. Supercruise 2 SRAAM 6 MRAAM" Archived 2009-03-27 at the Wayback Machine. mil.no/multimedia/archive. Retrieved: 24 April 2010.
- ^ AFM September 2004 "Eastern smile" pp. 41–43.
- ^ "U.S. Fighters Mature With AESA Radars." Archived 2012-05-09 at the Wayback Machine defense-update.com. Retrieved: 3 October 2010.
- ^ "Le radar RBE2, l'arme fatale du Rafale à l'export". latribune.fr. 2 October 2012.
- ^ Five Generations of Jets Fighterworld RAAF Williamtown Aviation Heritage Centre.
- ^ "Eurofighter Typhoon." Archived 2012-07-22 at the Wayback Machine publicservice.co. Retrieved: 3 October 2010.
- ^ "Type Acceptance for Block 5 Standard Eurofighter Typhoon." Archived 2007-09-27 at the Wayback Machine www.eurofighter.com, Eurofighter GmbH, 15 February 2007. Retrieved: 20 June 2007.
- ^ Warwick, Graham. "Ultra Hornet." flightglobal.com, 13 March 2007. Retrieved: 3 October 2010.
- ^ "Features of HAL Tejas".
- ^ "Going stealthy with composites".
- ^ "Characterization of Radar Cross Section of Carbon Fiber Composite Materials".
Bibliography
[edit]- Aronstein, David C. and Albert C. Piccirillo. The Lightweight Fighter Program: A Successful Approach to Fighter Technology Transition. Reston, VA: AIAA, 1996
- Kelly, Orr. Hornet: The Inside story of the F/A-18. Novato, California: Presidio Press, 1990. ISBN 0-89141-344-8.
- Kopp, Carlo. "Lockheed-Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Analysis 2002." Air Power Australia, 2002. Retrieved: 10 April 2006.
- Richardson, Doug. Stealth Warplanes: Deception, Evasion and Concealment in the Air. London: Salamander. 1989, First Edition. ISBN 0-7603-1051-3.
- Shaw, Robert. Fighter Combat: Tactics and Maneuvering. Annapolis, Maryland: Naval Institute Press, 1985. ISBN 0-87021-059-9.
- Sweetman, Bill. "Fighter Tactics." Jane's International Defense Review. Retrieved: 10 April 2006.