F-16 versus Saab Gripen

Agreed, it will never be a fair fight but how would the F-16 match up against the ... ?
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

lichy1987

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 6
  • Joined: 09 Apr 2010, 11:59

Unread post19 Apr 2010, 07:36

I'll try. I will translate it, when i get this magazine in my hands...I borrow it to my friend.
btw. Polish, is difficult a language;)
Please correct any mistakes i made in English, it will be fastest and most nice way to learn this language for me:)
Offline

shep1978

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1395
  • Joined: 04 Apr 2009, 16:00
  • Location: UK

Unread post19 Apr 2010, 18:21

lichy1987 wrote:I'll try. I will translate it, when i get this magazine in my hands...I borrow it to my friend.
btw. Polish, is difficult a language;)
Please correct any mistakes i made in English, it will be fastest and most nice way to learn this language for me:)


That would be very good if you could translate the article though i'd watch posting it all up incase you violate copyrights.

And for the record your English writing is better than many English nationals, well certainly the younger generations anyway. I have no qualifications in English (or anything for that matter) so i'm hardly a font of knowledge on the subject but 'borrow it to my friend' should have read "I leant it to my friend" but I understood what you meant clearly enough though.
Offline

lichy1987

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 6
  • Joined: 09 Apr 2010, 11:59

Unread post20 Apr 2010, 08:01

Thanks for correction:)

I think that i can translate only most important thinks obut fight between our F-16's and Gripen's. I was having trouble when i translate about 50% of article from one of our magazines. Fortunatelly it was only a warning:)

Interesting could be comparrison newest F-16's to Gripen NG (for now DEMO). But unfortunatelly theres no final version of this plane...yet:(
Offline

robban

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 40
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2004, 13:13

Unread post22 Apr 2010, 18:33

tomcat21 wrote:
Oh really?
Have you ever read what I wrote before? The Gripens had their... muzzles kicked 4:0 by Polish F-16 Block 52+ on Loyal Arrow - mainly due to be detected first.


Yes, I read it and I responded to it looooooong ago.
Offline

shep1978

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1395
  • Joined: 04 Apr 2009, 16:00
  • Location: UK

Unread post25 Apr 2010, 06:44

robban wrote:
tomcat21 wrote:
Oh really?
Have you ever read what I wrote before? The Gripens had their... muzzles kicked 4:0 by Polish F-16 Block 52+ on Loyal Arrow - mainly due to be detected first.


Yes, I read it and I responded to it looooooong ago.


Because there is no way a simple F-16 could ever best the mighty Gripen without the Gripen having 101 handicaps placed on it, I am right...... :roll: :lol:
Offline

robban

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 40
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2004, 13:13

Unread post26 Apr 2010, 10:07

shep1978 wrote:
robban wrote:
tomcat21 wrote:
Oh really?
Have you ever read what I wrote before? The Gripens had their... muzzles kicked 4:0 by Polish F-16 Block 52+ on Loyal Arrow - mainly due to be detected first.


Yes, I read it and I responded to it looooooong ago.


Because there is no way a simple F-16 could ever best the mighty Gripen without the Gripen having 101 handicaps placed on it, I am right...... :roll: :lol:


I guess nothing is impossible.

But, considering that the Gripen beats the F-16 in:

Maneuverability: Gripen better at all speeds, especially when supersonic.

ITR: F-16 26 deg/sec. Gripen >30 deg/sec.

STR: F-16(C) 18 deg/sec. Gripen 20 deg/sec.

Wing loading: Gripen has MUCH lower wingloading.

Drag: Gripen has much lower drag. Even though the Gripen has a lower TWR, it can still outclimb the F-16 at certain speeds. It is also faster, especially on dry thrust.

Radar range: F-16 90-105km. Gripen 120km.

RCS: F-16 1.2m2. Gripen <0.1m2.

Sensor fusion: The Gripen is a new generation and was designed from the start with sensor fusion in mind. The F-16 is not comparable here.

Fighter link: F-16, Link 16. No real time info. 12 sec delay on information. Amount of information that can be transfered -low/limited.
Gripen, TIDLS, real time information with extremely high information flow. In full fusion with the aircrafts radar and EWS systems.

MMI: There's really no comparison.

Turn around time, MTBF, etc, Gripen completely superior.

If we go by RCS and radar range then it should give us an idea which aircraft will be detected first. Although it's not so easy. But looking at all the info we have. The F-16 falls short on all the points that counts. If the "report" is true, than the ROE clearly favored the Polish F-16's in this particular case.

Perhaps it would be easier if I made the aircraft trade places?

Like this.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Maneuverability: F-16 better at all speeds, especially when supersonic.

Radar range: Gripen 90-105km. F-16 120km.

RCS: Gripen 1.2m2. F-16 <0.1m2.

Sensor fusion: The F-16 is a new generation and was built with sensor fusion in mind. The Gripen is not comparable here.

Fighter link: Gripen, TIDLS. No real time info. 12 sec delay on information. Amount of information that can be transfered -low/limited.
F-16, Link 16, real time information with extremely high information flow. In full fusion with the aircrafts radar and EWS systems.

MMI: There's really no comparison.

Turn around time, MTBF, etc, F-16 completely superior.


Do you see what I'm getting at?
Offline

loke

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 763
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2008, 19:07

Unread post26 Apr 2010, 13:54

AFAIK these exercises will often not say anything about which a/c is the "best", since they have very specific rules to adhere to and since the exercises are typically DACT, in which one team will play a specific role.

In some cases I am sure one can say something about the "performance" of each plane, however I think that even in those cases one would need to know all the rules and restrictions for that particular exercise to be able to interpret the results in a meaningful manner. Since such details are not available to us I think that we enthusiasts on the internet in general cannot draw any meaningful conclusions about any of these exercises -- only the pros actually involved in each particular exercise would be able to do that I suspect.

I am not an expert in these things however after spending some time on different fora, I have concluded with the above. Perhaps somebody with real experience can add to this...?
Online

madrat

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2271
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12

Unread post26 Apr 2010, 16:31

*sarcasm* This is proof that Saab should have kept the Viggen around and gave it all of the cool toys that they built for Gripen.

(Don't get me wrong, I really like the Viggen and not really a big fan of the Gripen. But the Viggen is obsolete today in no uncertain terms.)
Offline

shep1978

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1395
  • Joined: 04 Apr 2009, 16:00
  • Location: UK

Unread post26 Apr 2010, 20:04

robban wrote:
shep1978 wrote:
robban wrote:
tomcat21 wrote:
Oh really?
Have you ever read what I wrote before? The Gripens had their... muzzles kicked 4:0 by Polish F-16 Block 52+ on Loyal Arrow - mainly due to be detected first.


Yes, I read it and I responded to it looooooong ago.


Because there is no way a simple F-16 could ever best the mighty Gripen without the Gripen having 101 handicaps placed on it, I am right...... :roll: :lol:


I guess nothing is impossible.

But, considering that the Gripen beats the F-16 in:

Maneuverability: Gripen better at all speeds, especially when supersonic.

ITR: F-16 26 deg/sec. Gripen >30 deg/sec.

STR: F-16(C) 18 deg/sec. Gripen 20 deg/sec.

Wing loading: Gripen has MUCH lower wingloading.

Drag: Gripen has much lower drag. Even though the Gripen has a lower TWR, it can still outclimb the F-16 at certain speeds. It is also faster, especially on dry thrust.

Radar range: F-16 90-105km. Gripen 120km.

RCS: F-16 1.2m2. Gripen <0.1m2.

Sensor fusion: The Gripen is a new generation and was designed from the start with sensor fusion in mind. The F-16 is not comparable here.

Fighter link: F-16, Link 16. No real time info. 12 sec delay on information. Amount of information that can be transfered -low/limited.
Gripen, TIDLS, real time information with extremely high information flow. In full fusion with the aircrafts radar and EWS systems.

MMI: There's really no comparison.

Turn around time, MTBF, etc, Gripen completely superior.

If we go by RCS and radar range then it should give us an idea which aircraft will be detected first. Although it's not so easy. But looking at all the info we have. The F-16 falls short on all the points that counts. If the "report" is true, than the ROE clearly favored the Polish F-16's in this particular case.

Perhaps it would be easier if I made the aircraft trade places?

Like this.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Maneuverability: F-16 better at all speeds, especially when supersonic.

Radar range: Gripen 90-105km. F-16 120km.

RCS: Gripen 1.2m2. F-16 <0.1m2.

Sensor fusion: The F-16 is a new generation and was built with sensor fusion in mind. The Gripen is not comparable here.

Fighter link: Gripen, TIDLS. No real time info. 12 sec delay on information. Amount of information that can be transfered -low/limited.
F-16, Link 16, real time information with extremely high information flow. In full fusion with the aircrafts radar and EWS systems.

MMI: There's really no comparison.

Turn around time, MTBF, etc, F-16 completely superior.


Do you see what I'm getting at?


Not really, your just reeling off a load of numbers and a whole lot of conjecture such as the Gripen has lower drag , RCS and superior sensor fusion. F-16's are still more nimble as can be seen at any airshow and you yourself admit the Gripen can outclimb an F-16 but only at "certain speeds". TIDLS is horribly overhyped, notice how no ohter country has tried to buy it?

And for the sensor fusion part, well I would think a Block 50/52 would equal the Gripen and a block 60 would blow it out of the water in that regard. Same goes for radar sets and EW equipment. I still don't know how you know the gripen has lower drag either, I guess SAAB must have told you so and they wouldn't tell porkies to try and sell an aircraft would they..

At the end of the day Gripen isn't special, just overhyped and it's certainly able to be beat by a comparably aged F-16 and whats more it'd certainly have a real struggle against an early block F-16 in WVR combat.
Offline

robban

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 40
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2004, 13:13

Unread post26 Apr 2010, 21:14

shep1978 wrote:
Not really, your just reeling off a load of numbers and a whole lot of conjecture such as the Gripen has lower drag , RCS and superior sensor fusion. F-16's are still more nimble as can be seen at any airshow and you yourself admit the Gripen can outclimb an F-16 but only at "certain speeds". TIDLS is horribly overhyped, notice how no ohter country has tried to buy it?

And for the sensor fusion part, well I would think a Block 50/52 would equal the Gripen and a block 60 would blow it out of the water in that regard. Same goes for radar sets and EW equipment. I still don't know how you know the gripen has lower drag either, I guess SAAB must have told you so and they wouldn't tell porkies to try and sell an aircraft would they..

At the end of the day Gripen isn't special, just overhyped and it's certainly able to be beat by a comparably aged F-16 and whats more it'd certainly have a real struggle against an early block F-16 in WVR combat.


Should I respond to this? Nah, no use. My goodness. :lol:
Offline

shep1978

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1395
  • Joined: 04 Apr 2009, 16:00
  • Location: UK

Unread post26 Apr 2010, 22:33

robban wrote:
Should I respond to this? Nah, no use. My goodness. :lol:


Your argument has fallen apart and you're withdrawing, you've made that very clear.
Offline

Scorpion82

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1094
  • Joined: 07 Oct 2007, 18:52

Unread post26 Apr 2010, 23:55

shep1978 wrote:Not really, your just reeling off a load of numbers and a whole lot of conjecture


Well let's see what you come up with! No data and only conjecture!
Offline

geogen

Banned

  • Posts: 3123
  • Joined: 11 Mar 2008, 15:28
  • Location: 45 km offshore, New England

Unread post27 Apr 2010, 06:11

robban, count me as a SAAB fanboy in general and Gripen NG fan in particular. But in your example of listed technical specs, etc, I'm curious which exact block of F-16C is used and further, in which year produced? There are just so many differently equipped F-16Cs one must have more specifics in order to better evaluate?

Avionics, performance, fusion and comms wise, perhaps it's an equal comparison between block 60 type and Gripen NG. It will also come down to how each base aircraft is specially equipped with add-on systems in regards to actual sorties. Also, how one is armed also is a key factor. Does one jet have 2 AIM-120C-5 only and the other 4 METEOR, e.g.? Does one have 2 AIM-9M only and the other 4 MICA-IR or 4 IRIS-T, e.g.? Just saying it's probably more a factor of which systems and weapons involved in a match-up, rather than raw jet. (And that debate is obviously relative). Regards -
The Super-Viper has not yet begun to concede.
Offline

shep1978

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1395
  • Joined: 04 Apr 2009, 16:00
  • Location: UK

Unread post27 Apr 2010, 08:14

Scorpion82 wrote:
Well let's see what you come up with! No data and only conjecture!


Why bother, the Gripen got eaten alive by Polish F-16's, thats pretty telling in itself that the gripen is not the superior aircraft. Note how no serious airforce has never bought the Gripen either, another telling fact.
Robban would be best to go back to his "canards are the best thing since sliced bread" thread, it was most entertaining to watch.
Offline

loke

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 763
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2008, 19:07

Unread post27 Apr 2010, 08:27

shep1978 wrote:
Scorpion82 wrote:
Well let's see what you come up with! No data and only conjecture!


Why bother, the Gripen got eaten alive by Polish F-16's, thats pretty telling in itself that the gripen is not the superior aircraft. Note how no serious airforce has never bought the Gripen either, another telling fact.


The SH has found only one export customer so far; does that mean it's a completeley rubbish a/c?

Also, training exercises say nothing about the strenght of each a/c, I thought you had enough insight to realize that.


I am not saying "Gripen is better" or "F-16 is better"; I am simply pointing out that your arguments above are complete rubbish. If you want a make a point you should try to support them with real arguments; it's actually a bit funny, Scorpion82 challenges you, and the above is you answer?
PreviousNext

Return to F-16 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests