F-35A versus Saab Gripen NG

[hornetfinn]

After Viggen, came of course the Gripen A/B followed by Gripen C/D, and now coming up Gripen E/F -- which will probably be the last fighter jets developed and produce by Sweden. The end of an era.

I agree that there is no way that Sweden is going to produce a new fighter jet after Gripe E/F, at least alone. I think Sweden is going to participate in some multinational program to develop a new fighter (like the new European program). It's just too costly to develop even a half decent fighter jet these days for country as small as Sweden to handle it. Even much larger countries are struggling to do so. I also really doubt anything will come from all these new 5th gen proposals coming from Turkey, Japan, South-Korea etc.

I do admire the Swedish ability to develop pretty good fighter jets for their time with very limited resources.

[mikc]

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?

F-35A IOC: August 2, 2016
F-35 GCAS testing begins: November 16, 2018

836 days


Gripen IOC: June 9, 1996
Gripen GCAS testing begins July 10 2013

6240 days

Now your mixing aircraft again, Gripen E is not Gripen C. It is a completely new aircraft with the same basic flight characteristics but that’s it, so why do you keep posting Gripen C stuff in this thread.

Anyway, just to get you up to speed on Auto GCAS “The Joint AFTI Sweden GCAS program was a cooperative effort between the Air Force Research Labs, NASA, and the Swedish government from 1997-1998. The Joint AFTI program had two phases. The first phase, January to October 1997, focused on nuisance criteria testing, and the second phase, July to November 1998, expanded to the full envelope Auto GCAS testing.”

i.e after Gripen C IOC so I think the comparison is flawed from the beginning.

Auto GCAS was ordered by FMV as part of MS20 in 2013 and was fielded 2016 on Gripen C as part of MS20.

It’s funny you picked IOC as comparison date, for Gripen E it would be a negative number (maybe -1200 more or less) because it’s part of MS21 that flew first on the 39-9, 26 November 2018 (no I don’t think they tested it during that first flight) but it will be part of Gripen E when delivered and is part of the testprogram for now.

First delivery of Gripen E from SAAB to FMV is 2019, first handover from FMV to SwAF is 2021 and planned IOC is 2023, IOC-date is up to the SwAF with MS21.

[citanon]

SAAB marketing loves to have it both ways. When talking about jazzy new features the Gripen E is a brand new from the ground up 6th gen fighter. When talking about system maturity the Gripen E is a careful evolution of a mature platform. Well, pick one or the other.

[Tiger05]

Gripen E is not Gripen C. It is a completely new aircraft with the same basic flight characteristics but that’s it, so why do you keep posting Gripen C stuff in this thread.

"Completely new aircraft"... right. For the last time, it is a new version of an existing design, not a major redesign let alone a clean sheet design.

Btw found on Saab's website:



Good luck convincing us that the Gripen E is a "completely new aircraft" when even Saab doesnt claim that (well, for now, given the "flexibility" of their marketing claims...).

[citanon]

They can have it both ways because the marketing for the Gripen is 6th gen too.

[wrightwing]

Completely new in the sense that an F-16 Block 70 is new compared to a Block 50.

[ricnunes]

Completely new in the sense that an F-16 Block 70 is new compared to a Block 50.

And less than in the sense that the Super Hornet is new compared to a legacy Hornet.

[XanderCrews]

Now your mixing aircraft again, Gripen E is not Gripen C. It is a completely new aircraft with the same basic flight characteristics but that’s it, so why do you keep posting Gripen C stuff in this thread.

I didn't even bother to read beyond that, because its absurd. You can ask saab for clarification, if you're confused

Its "completely new" but they didn't change the name and they started the letter designation on "E"??? And Saab themselves say its not new?

You seem to be the one thats mixed up.

The absolute state of one having to dig up YF-22 crashes to try and score points on the F-35, while claiming the Gripen C and E are completely different

SAAB marketing loves to have it both ways. When talking about jazzy new features the Gripen E is a brand new from the ground up 6th gen fighter. When talking about system maturity the Gripen E is a careful evolution of a mature platform. Well, pick one or the other.

Yep

Gripen E is not Gripen C. It is a completely new aircraft with the same basic flight characteristics but that’s it, so why do you keep posting Gripen C stuff in this thread.

"Completely new aircraft"... right. For the last time, it is a new version of an existing design, not a major redesign let alone a clean sheet design.

Btw found on Saab's website:



Good luck convincing us that the Gripen E is a "completely new aircraft" when even Saab doesnt claim that (well, for now, given the "flexibility" of their marketing claims...).

They listen to and promote the company, until they decide even the Company isn't pure enough.

Why is Saab trolling them like this? Don't they realize its a new aircraft?

[vilters]

The concept of the Grippen is so old that even new aircraft require a corrosion inspection when they leave the factory.

[spazsinbad]

How to be a gripping fiter pilote in seven pages. PDF attached: "The Swedish Fighter Pilot" by SØREN NIELSEN

FLYmag Scandinavian Aviation Magazine - The Magazine No.2 2019 [English]

[mikc]

Gripen E is not Gripen C. It is a completely new aircraft with the same basic flight characteristics but that’s it, so why do you keep posting Gripen C stuff in this thread.

"Completely new aircraft"... right. For the last time, it is a new version of an existing design, not a major redesign let alone a clean sheet design.

Good luck convincing us that the Gripen E is a "completely new aircraft" when even Saab doesnt claim that (well, for now, given the "flexibility" of their marketing claims...).

Clean sheet? Do you always have to start from scratch? No wonder you spend so much developing new aircrafts.

Btw F35 is following the basic aerodynamic profile of most modern American planes so whats new? And it ain't that different compared to F22, it's just the fat short sister

[sprstdlyscottsmn]

wow, that's rich. The F-22 does not share a single element other than being a VLO unstable tailed aircraft with the F-35. Every surface is 100% unique and so are the systems inside.

The Grippen E is closer to the F/A-18E. Take an existing platform, make it longer and wider but keep the planforms (actual wing shapes, sweep, aspect ratio, taper ratio) the same, just larger. Upgrade the engine and the systems. Keep the same forward fuselage.

You know what we call that? A new plane that looks like an old one, just bigger. You still have to go through full validation of the new flight characteristics and structural performance. It's a new plane.

[mikc]

I.will.Edit.this.twelve.times. screen.shot.me.

It's so nice I can get you ranting

You get it backwards and start about the Gripen C. But but... Gripen C..Gripen C. Why is that?

Gripen E has a completely new airframe with more carbon fiber with more room for fuel, it's longer, wider, heavier, different engine, new FCS, new Mission system, new EW, AESA-radar, new countermeasures and dispenser systems, new landing gear in new position, improved data link with video, sensor fusion, new decision support system, WAD, IRST, MAVS and additional hard points, new pylons and ejectors, stealthier and faster.

In this interview Marcus Wandt (SAAB test pilot) confirmed this. Reporter asks in Swedish "Gripen E that you stand infront of looks a lot like the present Gripen. What is the difference compared to earlier aircrafts?"

He responds "Yes, it's very similar to earlier Gripen, but I would like to reverse the question, and tell you what are the same? The aerodynamic profile is the same, it's a delta wing with canards, to deal with the negative stability. General flight control principle is the same but it's a new engine, new fuel system, additional pylons, different avionics, different cockpit, different displays, all new sensors, basically everything else is new.."

https://www.svd.se/beskedet-gripen-e-ka ... HazthKWwug

Btw how is the progress of C2D2 for F35? Keeping to schedule are we?

Block 4 comprises some 53 improvements to counter both air- and ground-based threats emerging from China and Russia. None of these upgrades will change the aircraft’s outer appearance, or “mold line.” Instead, they are primarily new or enhanced features executed in software, which will be rolled out in stages, with updates every April and October starting in 2019 and continuing through at least 2024.

http://www.airforcemag.com/MagazineArch ... -Guys.aspx

Haven't seen any updates about it and LM can't take a dump without bragging about it so we would have heard about it by now.

[gideonic]

IMO claiming that F-22 and F-35 are pretty much the same as they "have the same aerodynamic profile" crossed the line for me (not to mention YF-22, a prototype built on existing components that shares ridiculously little with the final product)

[ricnunes]

IMO claiming that F-22 and F-35 are pretty much the same as they "have the same aerodynamic profile" crossed the line for me (not to mention YF-22, a prototype built on existing components that shares ridiculously little with the final product)

DITTO!