The Rafale and Typhoon look nice on a superficial glance, but I've heard that the integration and display is not as logical as the F-18s, which is still the benchmark. F-16 is also a good office, Gripen will look slightly different when NG and MKI-zed 😉
The Mig-35 is just typical Russian piece of shit tinmobile with LCD displays.
F-16's are getting replaced with the F-35's all over the world. F-16's and Gripen belong to the light weight category of fighters and this will be filled by our own LCA from next year onwards. Next is the Eurofighter Typhoon which is so costly that there is little chance for it. Then the F-18. These two aircrafts belong to the heavier category like that of the Su-30 MKI. So no need for these two. The remaining ones are the Mig-35 and the Rafale. So the choice must be any one of these fighters. If we choose Mig, in the near future IAF will be full of Russian made aircrafts like Su-30MKI and PAKFA. So the better option will be Rafale provided the French provide the best stuff and technology at reasonable price.
Hi … I have flown (rear seat) on 4 of the 6 jets competing (Gripen D, MiG-35, F-16 Block 60, F/A-18 E/F) and have sat in the cockpit of the Rafale for my documentary series, The Jet Set on NDTV 24×7.
While I DO NOT claim to be an expert on in-flight instrumentation, I can comment on basic ergonomics for what it is worth.
In my opinion … the inflight displays on the MiG-35 are as functional and as clear as any of the fighters competing. The colour HUD repeater on the MiG-35 is also very very decent.
The Gripen has a narrower cockpit but, in my opinion, the most intuitive display system .. jogging between data-link, engine parameters, moving map and other displays is remarkably easy to understand and operate.
The F/A-18 has an easy to operate touch screen display on (at least on one of the MFD)in the rear cockpit. I also remember the clarity of the display when painting the Farnborough airfield a few years back (this was a non AESA equipped jet).
The F-16 IN cockpit is a radical improvement on the other F-16 cockpits I have seen during sorties. A Block 30 + F-16 and quite frankly even a Block 52 cockpit are primitive compared to what I saw on my flight at the Bangalore Air Show this time. Incredible ease of use and progressive development of in-flight displays. Incidentally … the bubble cockpit on the F-16 is all very well … but visibility from the rear is not necessarily better than any of the other fighters … and certainly not a patch on the rear seat all round visibility from the cockpit of a Sea Harrier …
Hi … I saw the cockpit of the Rafalle on board their carrier the De Gaulle several years back… I flew on the other jets in the US, Russia and Sweden. Tx Vishnu
The sidestick takes a little getting used to. It does not actually move more than an inch. Its pressure actuated … the more the pressure, the harder it turns.
The Gripen stick has a nice soft stop feature which restricts the jet to about 7g … beyond which you have to pull a fair bit harder to get the jet all the way to the hard stop when its pulling its maximum gs .. this is accompanied by an aural warning.
vishnu you are wrong. the sidestick has "give" of no more than a quarter-inch. in fact, the first sidesticks used in the F-16C/Ds were completely stiff. this was latter changed after pilot feedback that a little "play" on the stick would help immensely. this was implemented, and the stick now moves a little less than a quarter-inch.
@ vishnu. Not sure why rear seat visibility from the F16D is such an issue. After all, the guys who are going to fight the aeroplane are going to sit in the single seater, and the F16 bubble has unparalleled visibility for the front / single seat. Don't think them guys are designing canopies exclusively for wannabe fighter jock journalists yet ;).
Hi anonymous … In having been given controls of the F-16 during these incentive flights … the movement of the sidestick felt about an inch in all directions to me … but since you suggest I am "wrong," let me correct both your information and mine. According to online sources … "the sidestick now moves up to 3/16 of an inch aft, 3/32 of an inch left and right, and less than a hundredth of an inch forward (since pilots under negative g tend to give more forward stick than needed)."
Also … I never suggested rear seat visibility from the F-16 D is an "issue." I merely indicated that rear seat visibility is not a patch on what it is in the rear seat of the Sea Harrier.
I merely indicated that rear seat visibility is not a patch on what it is in the rear seat of the Sea Harrier. ——————————— rear seat visibility in su30mki and mig35 is excellent cuz rear seats in these aircrafts are higher compared to front seat so this allows excellent front/rear visibility for rear seat pilot in these aircraft
while rear seat of f18,f16,typhoon,rafale is at same level so not that good frontal/rear visibility for rear seat pilot
mki and mig35 have larger cockpits also the rear pilot seated higher than front pilot in mki or mig35 allows rear pilot to see frontal/rear view better than compared to same person sitting in f16/18,rafale,typhoon
Cockpit ergonomics and avionics dont matter that much….its the flight performance and the pilot that makes the difference… cockpits and avionics can always be upgraded later on..
From top: Rafale, Gripen, F/A-18, F-16, Typhoon and MiG-35.
The Rafale and Typhoon look nice on a superficial glance, but I've heard that the integration and display is not as logical as the F-18s, which is still the benchmark. F-16 is also a good office, Gripen will look slightly different when NG and MKI-zed 😉
The Mig-35 is just typical Russian piece of shit tinmobile with LCD displays.
mig35 has larger MFD so its cockpit is better than rafale,f18
You are being unfair to the Mig
F-16's are getting replaced with the F-35's all over the world. F-16's and Gripen belong to the light weight category of fighters and this will be filled by our own LCA from next year onwards. Next is the Eurofighter Typhoon which is so costly that there is little chance for it. Then the F-18. These two aircrafts belong to the heavier category like that of the Su-30 MKI. So no need for these two. The remaining ones are the Mig-35 and the Rafale. So the choice must be any one of these fighters. If we choose Mig, in the near future IAF will be full of Russian made aircrafts like Su-30MKI and PAKFA. So the better option will be Rafale provided the French provide the best stuff and technology at reasonable price.
MIG is last for sure! even F16 has a better, more modern cockpit
mig 35 is so outdated comparatively to western jets lol
Gripen and Rafale look the most modern/ergonomic but luckily it's not up to internet people to decide what is the best… 🙂
The EF one look old actually.
The Rafale is WOW! But the F-16's bubble canopy is beyond compare and very neat cockpit layout, actually it was the one that set the trend.
Hi … I have flown (rear seat) on 4 of the 6 jets competing (Gripen D, MiG-35, F-16 Block 60, F/A-18 E/F) and have sat in the cockpit of the Rafale for my documentary series, The Jet Set on NDTV 24×7.
While I DO NOT claim to be an expert on in-flight instrumentation, I can comment on basic ergonomics for what it is worth.
In my opinion … the inflight displays on the MiG-35 are as functional and as clear as any of the fighters competing. The colour HUD repeater on the MiG-35 is also very very decent.
The Gripen has a narrower cockpit but, in my opinion, the most intuitive display system .. jogging between data-link, engine parameters, moving map and other displays is remarkably easy to understand and operate.
The F/A-18 has an easy to operate touch screen display on (at least on one of the MFD)in the rear cockpit. I also remember the clarity of the display when painting the Farnborough airfield a few years back (this was a non AESA equipped jet).
The F-16 IN cockpit is a radical improvement on the other F-16 cockpits I have seen during sorties. A Block 30 + F-16 and quite frankly even a Block 52 cockpit are primitive compared to what I saw on my flight at the Bangalore Air Show this time. Incredible ease of use and progressive development of in-flight displays. Incidentally … the bubble cockpit on the F-16 is all very well … but visibility from the rear is not necessarily better than any of the other fighters … and certainly not a patch on the rear seat all round visibility from the cockpit of a Sea Harrier …
Cheers
Vishnu Som
Associate Editor, NDTV
hey vishnu ,
did you went to france for this and yes most of people being too conservative about mig35 even thugh its a excellent machine
Hi … I saw the cockpit of the Rafalle on board their carrier the De Gaulle several years back… I flew on the other jets in the US, Russia and Sweden. Tx Vishnu
I like the F-16 Viper's cockpit best, with the three big LCDs, sidestick (the in-thing) and bubble canopy (excellent visibility).
The sidestick takes a little getting used to. It does not actually move more than an inch. Its pressure actuated … the more the pressure, the harder it turns.
The Gripen stick has a nice soft stop feature which restricts the jet to about 7g … beyond which you have to pull a fair bit harder to get the jet all the way to the hard stop when its pulling its maximum gs .. this is accompanied by an aural warning.
Cheers
Vishnu
vishnu you are wrong. the sidestick has "give" of no more than a quarter-inch. in fact, the first sidesticks used in the F-16C/Ds were completely stiff. this was latter changed after pilot feedback that a little "play" on the stick would help immensely. this was implemented, and the stick now moves a little less than a quarter-inch.
@ vishnu. Not sure why rear seat visibility from the F16D is such an issue. After all, the guys who are going to fight the aeroplane are going to sit in the single seater, and the F16 bubble has unparalleled visibility for the front / single seat. Don't think them guys are designing canopies exclusively for wannabe fighter jock journalists yet ;).
Hi anonymous … In having been given controls of the F-16 during these incentive flights … the movement of the sidestick felt about an inch in all directions to me … but since you suggest I am "wrong," let me correct both your information and mine. According to online sources … "the sidestick now moves up to 3/16 of an inch aft, 3/32 of an inch left and right, and less than a hundredth of an inch forward (since pilots under negative g tend to give more forward stick than needed)."
Also … I never suggested rear seat visibility from the F-16 D is an "issue." I merely indicated that rear seat visibility is not a patch on what it is in the rear seat of the Sea Harrier.
Cheers
Vishnu
to vishnu
I merely indicated that rear seat visibility is not a patch on what it is in the rear seat of the Sea Harrier.
———————————
rear seat visibility in su30mki and mig35 is excellent cuz rear seats in these aircrafts are higher compared to front seat so this allows excellent front/rear visibility for rear seat pilot in these aircraft
while rear seat of f18,f16,typhoon,rafale is at same level so not that good frontal/rear visibility for rear seat pilot
mki and mig35 have larger cockpits also the rear pilot seated higher than front pilot in mki or mig35 allows rear pilot to see frontal/rear view better than compared to same person sitting in f16/18,rafale,typhoon
Cockpit ergonomics and avionics dont matter that much….its the flight performance and the pilot that makes the difference… cockpits and avionics can always be upgraded later on..
all these side-stick fighters suck.
pensioned fighter-pilot.last fighter F 104-G.
Preferred my aircraft in training T-6 G and T28 that was flying.
Spins,loops ,cuban eights, immelmans,barrel rolls etc etc..