F-35A versus Saab Gripen NG

The F-35 compared with other modern jets.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

magitsu

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 604
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2015, 22:12

Unread post22 Apr 2020, 19:40

They at least bet on the right kind of horse here as Germans also are going back to business jets after two expensive Global Hawk/Triton flight certification fails. Whether they end up buying Saab for that need is another matter.
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2334
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post23 Apr 2020, 00:35

optimist wrote:"What is pathetic about the "Saab AEW"? If you are referring to GlobalEye, it is anything but pathetic IMHO."

I think he was probably referring to the Gripen..but even so. Do you think the globaleye is the best AEW&C? There are 3 in the world, owned by UAE


What I was referring to is the strength of the Swedish "network" which includes the AEW. Sweden has how many AEWs? 2? Now isn't that pathetic...

Its not about the AEW being powerful or that the Gripen has the link 16. Some people are still thinking platforms based. Its about what's filtering in from that link 16 to provide situation awareness for the fighter.

Buying a Gripen provide the hardware to plug into the network, but may not get you the subscription. That's why many nations are buying even the F-16.
Offline

optimist

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1252
  • Joined: 20 Nov 2014, 03:34
  • Location: australia

Unread post23 Apr 2020, 00:42

loke wrote:
optimist wrote:"What is pathetic about the "Saab AEW"? If you are referring to GlobalEye, it is anything but pathetic IMHO."

I think he was probably referring to the Gripen..but even so. Do you think the globaleye is the best AEW&C? There are 3 in the world, owned by UAE

He said "gripen and saab AEW".

No I don't think GlobalEye is "the best" AEW&C. However it looks pretty solid to me.

Do you think that all systems that are not "the best" are pathetic?


I was thinking it was about the competition. Where Gripen has a new EW/EA pod. But still needed an AEW to fulfill the mission sets. I don't know how much EW/EA globaleye has, if any? I know it's only acknowledged our E-7a MESA has classified EW/EA. As to its abilities as an AEW, I'm sure the brochure is very good. The Erieye has customers.
Aussie fanboy
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3112
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post23 Apr 2020, 11:39

optimist wrote:I was thinking it was about the competition. Where Gripen has a new EW/EA pod. But still needed an AEW to fulfill the mission sets. I don't know how much EW/EA globaleye has, if any? I know it's only acknowledged our E-7a MESA has classified EW/EA. As to its abilities as an AEW, I'm sure the brochure is very good. The Erieye has customers.


Globaleye has self protection system and ESM/ELINT according to Saab brochures. Haven't seen anything about offensive EW/EA in it. But Globaleye is very small AEW aicraft compared to Boeing 737NG based Wedgetail. E-7 has higher empty weight than max takeoff weight of Globaleye. I think Globaleye is very interesting AEW platform for smaller countries as it's likely quite a bit less expensive than E-7 for example.

I think it's very interesting that so different offers are in the competition. It might also give some interesting tidbits when the competition is over and final selection made. Too bad we will likely not get any detailed info about how candidates compare to each other.
Offline

loke

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 965
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2008, 19:07

Unread post23 Apr 2020, 14:40

hornetfinn wrote:I think Globaleye is very interesting AEW platform for smaller countries as it's likely quite a bit less expensive than E-7 for example.

I agree-- Just like the previous EriEye, GlobalEye is most suited for small-to medium sized countries. 70% increase in radar range is nice; also the addition of the electro-optic sensor and the Seaspray 7500 packs a lot of functionality in a small airframe. 11 hours endurance should be enough for most countries (Saab 2000 Erieye has 9.5 hours endurance it seems).

Although it cannot operate from austere road bases like fighter jets, it can at least operate from much smaller airfields than the bigger AEW&C aircraft.
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6412
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post23 Apr 2020, 17:42

loke wrote:
XanderCrews wrote:Image

can it Air to air refuel?

11-hour endurance without re-fuelling.


that's not much at all

loke wrote:
hornetfinn wrote: 11 hours endurance should be enough for most countries (Saab 2000 Erieye has 9.5 hours endurance it seems).


definitely! as long as the bad guys adhere to the on coverage schedule, its tops. only 13 hours short of 24 hour coverage.

the fact that it has to RTB instead of AARing is not good either.

but your mind is made up. 11 hours must be sufficient since thats what it offers.
Choose Crews
Offline

loke

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 965
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2008, 19:07

Unread post23 Apr 2020, 21:06

XanderCrews wrote:11-hour endurance without re-fuelling.


that's not much at all

loke wrote:
hornetfinn wrote: 11 hours endurance should be enough for most countries (Saab 2000 Erieye has 9.5 hours endurance it seems).


definitely! as long as the bad guys adhere to the on coverage schedule, its tops. only 13 hours short of 24 hour coverage.

the fact that it has to RTB instead of AARing is not good either.

but your mind is made up. 11 hours must be sufficient since thats what it offers.[/quote]
The older Erieye was sold/leased to 8 countries. Those countries clearly disagreed with you since the Erieye has shorter endurance, in some cases much shorter (some of them were based on airframes even smaller than the Saab 2000).

It's all about requirements, clearly some countries have less stringent requirements, and several of them were happy with less than 9 hours endurance. I think they would be satifised with 11 hours if less than 9 could meet their requirements in the past.
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6412
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post24 Apr 2020, 03:26

optimist wrote:
loke wrote:
optimist wrote:"What is pathetic about the "Saab AEW"? If you are referring to GlobalEye, it is anything but pathetic IMHO."

I think he was probably referring to the Gripen..but even so. Do you think the globaleye is the best AEW&C? There are 3 in the world, owned by UAE

He said "gripen and saab AEW".

No I don't think GlobalEye is "the best" AEW&C. However it looks pretty solid to me.

Do you think that all systems that are not "the best" are pathetic?


I was thinking it was about the competition. Where Gripen has a new EW/EA pod. But still needed an AEW to fulfill the mission sets. I don't know how much EW/EA globaleye has, if any? I know it's only acknowledged our E-7a MESA has classified EW/EA. As to its abilities as an AEW, I'm sure the brochure is very good. The Erieye has customers.


Even P-8s have some serious electronic weaponry, though I'm not privy to the details. its not just a dumb subhunter though turns out.
Choose Crews
Offline

optimist

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1252
  • Joined: 20 Nov 2014, 03:34
  • Location: australia

Unread post24 Apr 2020, 04:17

The P-3 did some funny stuff too.
Aussie fanboy
Offline

kimjongnumbaun

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 383
  • Joined: 08 Dec 2016, 21:41

Unread post24 Apr 2020, 06:07

optimist wrote:The P-3 did some funny stuff too.


Heard a P-3 makes wide turns and has a confirmed J-8 kill. :devil:
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3112
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post24 Apr 2020, 07:35

XanderCrews wrote:
loke wrote:11-hour endurance without re-fuelling.


that's not much at all

loke wrote:
hornetfinn wrote: 11 hours endurance should be enough for most countries (Saab 2000 Erieye has 9.5 hours endurance it seems).


definitely! as long as the bad guys adhere to the on coverage schedule, its tops. only 13 hours short of 24 hour coverage.

the fact that it has to RTB instead of AARing is not good either.

but your mind is made up. 11 hours must be sufficient since thats what it offers.


To be fair, 11 hour endurance without refueling is very similar to what E-3 and E-7 can do without AARing. I think that's pretty good for a small AEW aircraft. Sweden and most other smaller countries don't have tanker aircraft or have only a couple small tankers (Sweden has 1 KC-130 IIRC). Of course Sweden would need at least 6 of those (like they previously had) to cover the whole country 24/7.

But naturally Globaleye isn't comparable to E-7 or E-3 as those are much bigger aircraft with advantages that come with their size. Mainly having much more power and cooling available along with a lot of space (relatively) for more equipment and operators. Globaleye is similar to Israeli IAI EL/W-2085 which also doesn't have AAR capability. Israeli Air Force use those to supplement their larger Boeing 707-based AEW&C aircraft.

I think Globaleye is very good for smaller countries with limited resources but not that good for larger countries like USA or Australia. There E-7 or similar are much better choice due to their higher performance and capabilties. That's given the country can afford enough of them and preferably also AAR aicraft. I really like the composition of Australian Air Force. They have very good all around capabilties for their needs.
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2334
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post24 Apr 2020, 08:00

The business jet based AEW does have some advantages compared to the single aisle jets in terms of fuel efficiencies and cost. However I think the gulfstreams have an advantage in both vs the bombadiers that the Swedes use, in thrust, range fuel efficiencies and basic TW. The Bizjets can operate at higher altitudes (51k ft service ceiling) and with the advantage that higher altitudes bring. The 737 based platforms are ~40k ft max?
Offline

kimjongnumbaun

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 383
  • Joined: 08 Dec 2016, 21:41

Unread post24 Apr 2020, 08:08

hornetfinn wrote:
To be fair, 11 hour endurance without refueling is very similar to what E-3 and E-7 can do without AARing. I think that's pretty good for a small AEW aircraft. Sweden and most other smaller countries don't have tanker aircraft or have only a couple small tankers (Sweden has 1 KC-130 IIRC). Of course Sweden would need at least 6 of those (like they previously had) to cover the whole country 24/7.

But naturally Globaleye isn't comparable to E-7 or E-3 as those are much bigger aircraft with advantages that come with their size. Mainly having much more power and cooling available along with a lot of space (relatively) for more equipment and operators. Globaleye is similar to Israeli IAI EL/W-2085 which also doesn't have AAR capability. Israeli Air Force use those to supplement their larger Boeing 707-based AEW&C aircraft.

I think Globaleye is very good for smaller countries with limited resources but not that good for larger countries like USA or Australia. There E-7 or similar are much better choice due to their higher performance and capabilties. That's given the country can afford enough of them and preferably also AAR aicraft. I really like the composition of Australian Air Force. They have very good all around capabilties for their needs.


I think the issue Xander was making was that despite having an 11 hour endurance, they don't have aerial refueling to extend that endurance. That should be a fairly simple upgrade that wasn't built in.
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3112
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post24 Apr 2020, 09:32

kimjongnumbaun wrote:I think the issue Xander was making was that despite having an 11 hour endurance, they don't have aerial refueling to extend that endurance. That should be a fairly simple upgrade that wasn't built in.


That's true. I doubt that would be difficult to do. Sweden doesn't have much AAR capabilties but that capability could be useful because other countries do have those and could offer help. Of course it could also boost sales to other countries as I agree that it's a useful capability. Only issue I can see is that those small business jet based AEW aircraft don't have much room for rest or spare operators. So I think they'd be much more fatigued by really long missions.
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2334
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post24 Apr 2020, 12:50

The Israelis looked at it for the gulfstream. Even offered AAR for their JSTARs offering. Issue is its expensive if only for a small number, not that it can't be done. Don't think anyone has looked at it for the bombardier.
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests