>>514707347
>No. But they have something else. Also, they will cope about the stealthy frontal radio signature.
Russia and China should come out and say that they can't match US frontal aspect stealth and that from certain angles the F-22 is virtually undetectable.
Hopefulle the mutts will go all in on the folly even more..

>>514706659
>Dimensions just dropped.
So I looked it up, it's the WS-13.
The engine is 4 meters and has ~56KN dry thrust and 96KN with AB.
This should give a potential MTOW of about 16 tonnes, official number is 15 tonnes.

>>514707707
>But the future NATO quantum battlespace network centric warfare.
Again, nothing new.
I know that SAABs C4i already has virtually all of the features mentioned and has had it for decades (since it has been Swedish military doctrine since before the 90s).

Our military is geared towards fighting Russia before they set foot in Sweden (at which point any war will be lost).
We also assume they will have air superiority, naval superiority and so on.

So all sensors (ground radars, launchers etc have to be fused with anything airborne).
Coastal artillery (RBS15) should be able to take targeting data from Gripens, AWACS, ships or other radar systems).
Updates to the missiles have to be deliverable by any platform that can deliver it, typically flying relays like Gripen.
Same goes for anti air systems.

It is all built around squeezing the most out of everything we have available.
Focusing on data fusion since the 70s has thus been the focus, and many of the novelties that the F-35 introduced as novelties have been around since Draken.

It's all so gay.

I remember from my army days over 20 years ago, we could send messages over radio (encrypted and frequency hopping ofc) and update the Archer from our forward observation posts using the standard military radio with data terminal.
So any infantry soldier could act as artillery observer and remotely update the fire control data for artillery.
Digitally and instantly.