
I hope a didn't give you a hart attack7 times!!!
I try to be clear and accurate and sometimes typos drive me crazy. (some people care about facts, accuracy)
Public sources, you're free to google and easy to calculate. I don't think so, these are major milestones that every aircraft manufacturer makes public.
post them here, you went to the trouble to calculate you provide the source, thats how things work around here.
By your calculation standards it took +14 years to get a single F35 in the air, development started in 1992 and flew in 2006. Impressive! 24 years to IOC (a very dubious one). Great!!. I see a trend here... maybe 34 years to FOC.
oops!





The preferred aircraft was a single-engine, lightweight single-seater, embracing fly-by-wire technology, canards, and an aerodynamically unstable design.[22] The powerplant selected was the Volvo-Flygmotor RM12, a licence-built derivative of the General Electric F404−400; engine development priorities were weight reduction and lowering component count.[22][23] On 30 June 1982, with approval from the Riksdag,[24] the FMV issued contracts worth SEK 25.7 billion to Saab, covering five prototypes and an initial batch of 30 production aircraft.[25][26] By January 1983, a Viggen was converted to a flying test aircraft for the JAS 39's intended avionics, such as the fly-by-wire controls.[27] The JAS 39 received the name Gripen (griffin) via a public competition,[28] which is the heraldry on Saab's logo.[Nb 4]
Saab rolled out the first Gripen on 26 April 1987, marking its 50th anniversary.[31] Originally planned to fly in 1987,[23] the first flight was delayed by 18 months due to issues with the flight control system. On 9 December 1988, the first prototype (serial number 39-1) took its 51-minute maiden flight with pilot Stig Holmström at the controls
soo.... being generous because this technically started in 1979 and FOC in 2026 for the E... ummm 47 years?
You sure showed me!!
it got into service in 1997, and before it even got to 2007 with 10 years in service, Saab was redesigning it massively with NG. I think the "improved Gripen" studies started as early as 2004.
by 2009 the Demo was in the air and according to Saab themselves they were running NG tests with it.
Its really up to you when you want to "Start counting" the Gripen program but for a simple light fighter thats so awesome the Gripen E sure has taken a long long time to get going.
Why is that??
Is that a problem for anyone? The development of Gripen F is done by Brazil for Brazil in Brazil with help from SAAB.
I have a huge problem with it. What are they waiting for? why isn't the GCAS done? why havn't we seen them take the F to the max? is it because theyre working on another variant first?
better use that as an arbitrary strike against it, because with ignorance one doesn't understand how test programs are run differently for different airplanes and why.
Testing takes a lot of time when there's a lot of problems with the product and this causes huge delays. I get thatand then you have lower your demands, accept less functionality and accept faults, get delayed deliveries as with the f35. If max speed is so easy why delay testing it? The first thing you want to test is the flight envelope, right?
Nope! STOVL lift system took priority. they tested the flight envelope, just not the ones you think. even a layman should understand why that was. It was just explained to you many times in fact.
When Will Gripen E STOVL and land on a ship?
now this is very simple, In order to ensure that further design changes weren't needed for the F-35A and F-35C, they had to ensure that the B didn't need any major changes first. The B is all about the STOVL system so that had to be tested extensively
But on the bright side, you get a hell of a lot of training aircraft and aggressors from all those aircrafts that can't or is too expensive to upgrade to fighting standards.
Saab would have "upgraded" by having you buy a whole "new" airplane. is it more or less expensive to go through the whole Gripen NG program?
Well this is defineitly where LM could use some Saab Magic. Has LM thought about renaming the current F-35 "Lightning NG" or "F-35E" and then maybe everyone will forget those first few hundred "mulligans"? worked for gripen. Who knew that saab built that thing with a tank that was 40 percent too small from the start? or with the wrong engine? I like how Saab Fixes its product. LOL redesign, rebrand.
Why is Sweden having to place an order for the Gripen E, to replace its legacy gripens so soon?? Buy cheap, buy twice.

But on the bright side, Saab hasn't built a single "production" Gripen E. So theres that
Having a lot of test flight hours doesn't make a test program great, it makes it expensive and late. I wouldn't brag with that picture.
Weren't you the one telling us Gripen was late to even start its test program? what does that make it
And this is after IOC and at the time when the SDD program is closed.
software updates and upgrades? why I never!
LM testing (you started it) A F22 PIO crash during testing if you don't recognize it.f22 pio .jpg
gotta reach all the way to the YF-22 eh?

If they are so security minded and cautious in the JSF program, why didn't they prioritize GCAS from the beginning that could have prevented the second crash?
When did Gripen get the GCAS? (feel free to use number days here)
because other things took priority and crashes are relatively rare? unlike Gripen this bad boy didn't open with crashing a lot.
Sorry to hear about Switzerland. Most have burned to see that "Hog" flying around over the alps. its almost like the Gripen E is falling so short of they hype, theres nothing to do but compare dates of things you don't understand.

I'm more than happy to admit the JSF program cost a lot and went over budget (old news right?), whats amazing to me though is just whats taking the Gripen NG/E/F program so long when its supposed to be a simple lightweight follow on evolution. I mean the JSF has an excuse at least. 5th generation STOVL/CVN capable with a dozen nations involved. pretty complicated. But I've been reading about Gripen NG since the mid 2000s. Whats its excuse?
F-35 is such a hog, and yet its winning. Its beating the Gripen E, and not by a little. that must burn, the F-35 is terrible and yet its winning, and the Gripen is marvelous and its losing.
I.will.Edit.this.twelve.times. screen.shot.me.
Last edited by XanderCrews on 21 Jun 2019, 17:56, edited 12 times in total.
Choose Crews