How are airplanes certified for a certain generation?

Is there any global agency where manufacturers apply so they can get a certification that tells wich gen the airplane belongs.

i.e:
F-22 = 5th gen
F-35 = 5th gen
F-15 = 4tg gen

Attached: maxresdefault (13).jpg (1280x720, 106K)

It's just a marketing meme

What's that a concept of?

F-14: boomers
F-18: Gen X
F-35: Zoomers

Eurofighter = 4+ generation
Su-57 = 4(!) generation

it's propaganda. being the first one to spout shit like "sensor fusion" wich has been state of the art for centuries somehow gets people who've never heard it before hyped.

Yes I work there.
Ask me anything

Generally, plane generations are defined by what sort of design elements the newer planes adopt. For 5th generation, it was the integration of stealth technology. 6th generation will have to have its own generally accepted advancement that all other fighters will subsequently adopt.

It's mostly a semantic definition that hinges on certain shared design characteristics and capabilities of combat aircraft at various times. Definitions vary depending on who's asked, but the current split between 4th and 5th gen is most heavily defined by stealth capabilities.

well it's just a bunch of buzzwords, and mostly it comes from marketing terms brought out to sell "5th gen" planes, and the earlier gradiation are set out to count up to 5.

China for instance classifies "5th gen" planes as "4th gen", not because they gradiate 5th gens and 4th gen planes differently, but because they lump everything from the me-262 all the way up to the Mig-21 as a single generation, when there's more like 3 gens in that mess, and 2 more in the 3rd gen which includes F-4s and f-16s despite the F-4 being a huge lumbering all missile beast and the F-16 being an ultra-light weight zippy gun fighter. (the other reason they call "5th gen" "4th" is because 4 is associated with death in asian cultures, so it's like calling new planes "deadly gen", because you can't spell chuuni without china)

In reality there's basically about 7 generations of jets, from the "planes with jets strapped to them" of the late war period, to the "jets with wings strapped to them" and mouth breather period of the post war period, to the triangle era as delta/swept wings became mandatory and everyone was area ruling, to the oh lord he comin era of the F-105/F-4/Mig-25s where size and sometimes T/W grew kinda egregiously. Then you have the electro-swing era of swing wings and computers and smol radars really starting to get into the cockpit and change things, then the cheap and cheerful era of the late 80s/90s when swing wings suddenly disappear and everything looks almost like a throwback to the triangle era but with computerised controls really defining how even the aerodynamics work now.
And then we have the stealth "era" which sort of has begun but also hasn't.

Attached: Nigerian_Air_Force_Chengdu_F-7NI_Airguard_Iwelumo-1.jpg (1100x733, 142K)

Attached: cohmsu-47.gif (480x270, 1.84M)

No, 4th gen jets are just your modern fighters, while 5th gens are pretty much just stealthy which sets them apart. Not sure what 6th gen will bring. It can get confusing with 4.5 gen or 4++ gen or whatever people come up with. There is a podcast called The Fighter Pilot Podcast though and they have an episode where they talk about the differences in each generation in great detail. Worth the listen.

real talk, do you even speak english? this fucking phrase
> like "sensor fusion" wich has been state of the art for centuries
makes absolute 0 sense

but what about F-15/F-22?!

You work at global agency where manufacturers apply? kek

Attached: 1558713328257.jpg (640x654, 39K)

Pic related is the criteria in the JSDF, published in 2010 for development of Japanese 6th gen or F-3.

They think a next generation (6th gen) fighter is required to have key qualities like:
1) counter-stealth capabilities (powerful radar and other sensors to detect and track stealth aircraft)
2) informed and intelligent - a better situational awareness and combat assistance by AI
3) instantaneous destructive capabilities, essentially directed energy weapon like laser and high-power microwave (mainly for self-defense against AAMs)
4) cooperation with UAVs as well as friendlies for more network-oriented fighting
and put forward the concept of i3 fighter (informed, intelligent, and instantaneous), and F-3 is based on this concept.

I don't know if it really qualifies, but seemingly, on the media and wikipedia, the i3 fighter (F-3) is regarded as the world's first 6th gen concept of a kind published. Maybe it will be redefined by someone who comes up with a more super-duper concept, but so far other 6th gen programmes like Tempest and FCAS seem to have similar concepts.

Attached: i3fighter.jpg (1209x1673, 155K)

Whoa, LAZOR beams? Hard core, bro.

Attached: 14th Gen.jpg (1422x800, 124K)

>F-14: boomers
Fuck you nigger.

Lasers and options. It seems 6th gen aircraft are looking to adopt SHMUP-style sub aircraft orbiting them at all times, like a pair of hands.

he means networking is a thing on aircrafts since the days of 4th gen you idiot
bidirectional comms are older than that

bidirectional comms are not SENSOR fusion...
the two key words in sensor fusion are SENSOR and FUSION. a radio just because it receives sound and plays it to your ears is NOT sensor fusion you fucking knuckle dragger. have a basic grasp of the language or at the very fuckin least the meaning of the word in the generation its being used in.

Attached: 1506627509813.png (485x443, 22K)

Makes sense I think. I didn't realize the Eurofighter was basically a 4++/4,9

The Eurofighter and Rafale are commonly referred to as a 4+ or a 4.5 gen. Eurofighter has a LOT of problems with it, though.

lol its just an classification based on the capabilities of the aircraft

>Eurofighter has a LOT of problems with it, though.
Such as?

data transfer being bi directional is not data transfer in reality its data transfer

sensor fusion is just a meme word for networking you mongoloid

you really are fucktarded, don't respond to me again and live in the shitpile that is your low iq existence

Attached: 1512000768233.png (645x773, 108K)

dont fucking speak to me like that I am american you euroshit if you are so knowledge about fighter jets then why does your country have hardly any?

>he thinks that networking on aircrafts works differently than a simple fucking pc

Fighter generations started with military analysts trying to categorize different eras of aerial combat. Then military and aerospace magazines picked it up as they found it useful for historical and technical analysis. Finally, it has now been used as a marketing term by aircraft manufacturers to estimate large leaps in technology standards. 5th-gen aircraft are now fairly well-established as a proper category, but anyone claiming "sixth-gen" is just trying to grab your attention until they can actually put out a prototype with distinct advantages over 5th-gen.

That’s for us millenials I guess

You add up the stat points, duh.

Attached: ace-combat-7-f16c-falcom.jpg (800x450, 84K)

They insist that the Eurofighter is the world's most modern multirole fighter and a real 5th generation fighter unlike the F-35. The way they do PR is boomer tier obnoxious. pic related

Attached: odtexcwejae21.jpg (2560x1440, 237K)

It is a leading combat aircraft, but clearly isn't a 5th gen if stealth capabilities define 5th gen

>How are airplanes certified for a certain generation?

"5th generation" was a marketing phrase invented by Lockheed-Martin in the mid-90's when pushing the F22.

F4s were never called "third generation". No eurofighter or rafale was pitched as a "4.5gen". No F15, F104, F86, EE Lightning, Mig 21, or the likes was marketed as a "generation (n)" aircraft, before the mid-90's, and lockheed's PR department started their sales pitch.

A few aircraft have been described as "next generation", as steps in development cycle have resulted in new airframes with new concepts, but otherwise, its solely a marketing buzzword.

And you, and others, have swallowed it, hook, line and sinker.

That isn't a problem and can you please cite anything where they make a claim of Typhoon being 5 gen? Because I've never heard of that before.

Fighter generations were first developed in the 1960s and '70s, but were mainly for analytical use and used primarily in hindsight, looking back at previous aircraft rather than categorizing then-modern or future aircraft.

Severely lacking in weapons integration for years and severe problems with the program itself. Most Typhoons used by the Germans, for example, are hardly capable of being used in the ground attack role due to being older models which haven't had such capabilities retrofitted in yet.

As for the program, the aircraft are only allowed to be worked on with a Eurofighter company official present, and if he decides that you need to buy a spare part, you are contractually obligated to buy a spare part. Additionally, they're always out of spare parts because the company is fucking incompetent and doesn't build enough of them, so readiness rates are way the fuck down.

OH BABY GET A WHIFF OF THAT BRAAPHOG

Attached: 1532443903262.png (861x637, 127K)

>Severely lacking in weapons integration for years
Because that wasn't a requirement for the first tranche.
>severe problems with the program itself
Like all fighter programs?
>Most Typhoons used by the Germans, for example, are hardly capable of being used in the ground attack role due to being older models which haven't had such capabilities retrofitted in yet.
So again, down to customer requirements and not an inherent flaw of the platform.
>As for the program, the aircraft are only allowed to be worked on with a Eurofighter company official present, and if he decides that you need to buy a spare part, you are contractually obligated to buy a spare part.
So much like any fighter then
>Additionally, they're always out of spare parts because the company is fucking incompetent and doesn't build enough of them, so readiness rates are way the fuck down.
Can I please see a citation that this was due to "incompetent[ness]"? Because any spare part issues were contractual in nature, relating to the customer and supplier(s).

So the only "flaw" you've pointed out that's actually related to the fighter itself is not even a flaw.

t. doesnt know what sensor fusion is.

Let me explain, roughly:
>Be f16 pilot
>want to drop bomb
>need to range target
>feed range data into FCS
>need to mark target
>feed data into FCS
>[many more steps in process]
>you have 30 seconds to do this
>while using other hand to fly plane

Sensor fusion
>be f35 pilot
>want to bomb something
>look at it
>done

This. The reduction in workload is staggering.

F-22: Millennials

I'm okay with this. Yhe F-35 is better overall, but the F-22 is still really good and holds a touch more nostalgic class

I don't know how to explain this to you any more clearly. If your plane can't do something, that's a problem with the plane itself. I could custom order a shovel that has no head and it'd be a shit shovel regardless of my retardation in purchasing it.
>Like all fighter programs?
No and no. No other plane works like that.
>Can I please see a citation that this was due to "incompetent[ness]"? Because any spare part issues were contractual in nature, relating to the customer and supplier(s).
How about you look at the plethora of testimonies from nearly everyone involved saying that spare parts shortages were a significant issue. And not just in Germany, who doesn't buy enough. It's like the Eurocopter debacle all over again, with the same issues.

Not to mention SA time. Combining all the SA data (from radar, IRST, ELINT, and RWR) on a single display that you can see all of at a glance is a pretty big deal.

That's pretty much what it seems like a lot of shills and spreyfags don't seem to get about the F-35. I've tried playing DCS and it's fucking stupid the amount of shit you have to do to make anything work and that's just a fucking video game. I can't imagine literally flying a plane and doing 100 different little things while keeping your mind on the target. Reading reports from pilots who first stepped into the cockpit and it fires up and they've already got IFF shit beamed into their cockpit while they're powering up on the ground it's pretty cool.

>I don't know how to explain this to you any more clearly. If your plane can't do something, that's a problem with the plane itself.
Its only a problem if it was required to fulfill a requirement. There was no requirement for the 1 tranche of Eurofighters to be A2G capable.
>I could custom order a shovel that has no head and it'd be a shit shovel regardless of my retardation in purchasing it.
No, it's like complaining why a Ford F-150 can't beat Formula 1 car in a race. There was no requirement for the F-150 to be able to beat an F1 so it wasn't designed with that in mind.

The Europeans wanted a basic interceptor / A2A fighter and so Tranche 1 matched that specification. Now in further Tranches were there was the requirement for A2G, you see there is a very good level of capability Typhoon can provide.

>No and no. No other plane works like that.
Then clearly you don't know anything about F-35 and ALIS.

>How about you look at the plethora of testimonies from nearly everyone involved saying that spare parts shortages were a significant issue. And not just in Germany, who doesn't buy enough. It's like the Eurocopter debacle all over again, with the same issues.
I asked you for a citation, you can't give one and by your own admission there, it's down to the customer ordering the spare parts. Nothing inherently wrong with Typhoon as a platform.

>Its only a problem if it was required to fulfill a requirement. There was no requirement for the 1 tranche of Eurofighters to be A2G capable.
Because it was going to take an inordinate amount of time to make them air to ground capable and they wanted a new plane for at least air to air at that moment. Britain has upgraded almost all of theirs to do so. I'm sure all involved would have been thrilled to have them all be air to ground capable from the getgo, but that couldn't happen. We're in an era where a large degree of multirole capability is demanded of nearly all aircraft as nobody but the absolute richest can afford to have something so specialized.

>Then clearly you don't know anything about F-35 and ALIS.
Look. Buddy. While there are contractors on site and available, they have no power to REQUIRE a replacement be purchased by the military in question. If one of the contractors says that something needs to be bought, the nation is contractually obligated to buy that part. Not heavily suggested. Obligated. The Eurofighter Consortium That is wholly unique. I'm sorry that you don't know the difference.

>Nothing inherently wrong with Typhoon as a platform.
Everything to do with the program. The parts are slow in coming, my dude. Parts are ordered, but they arrive late.

>There are indications of problems with the collaborative contracts for the supply of spares and repair of equipment. There have been shortages of spares and long timescales for equipment repairs on some of these contracts ...
>The [2008] spares procurement contract does not include penalties for late delivery ...

>To compensate, the Department [the MoD] has had to take parts from some of its Typhoon aircraft to make other aircraft available to fly.

>Because it was going to take an inordinate amount of time to make them air to ground capable
Opinion.

>they wanted a new plane for at least air to air at that moment.
As I said.

>Britain has upgraded almost all of theirs to do so.
The UK has dedicated its Tranche 1 fleet to a pure air defense role.

>I'm sure all involved would have been thrilled to have them all be air to ground capable from the getgo, but that couldn't happen.
Opinion.

>We're in an era where a large degree of multirole capability is demanded of nearly all aircraft as nobody but the absolute richest can afford to have something so specialized.
Agreed, but again, opinion and irrelevant to the point.

>Look. Buddy. While there are contractors on site and available, they have no power to REQUIRE a replacement be purchased by the military in question. If one of the contractors says that something needs to be bought, the nation is contractually obligated to buy that part. Not heavily suggested. Obligated. The Eurofighter Consortium That is wholly unique. I'm sorry that you don't know the difference.
Please, by all means, point me towards cite that back ups your statement.

To refer back to the F-35. You do understand that every integration, every bit of software or hardware must go through the F-35 Joint Program Office as Lockheed Martin has singular control over their product's source code.

>Everything to do with the program. The parts are slow in coming, my dude. Parts are ordered, but they arrive late.
We are speaking about the platform. Not the program as this post was referring to the platform, not the program.

This is like suggesting the F-35 is a terrible aircraft because the program has had issues (like every other military program).

The article you cite is over 8 years old and refers to *contractual* and customer issues exactly as I said in , not incompetency as you've suggested.