F-35A versus Saab Gripen NG

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

loke

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1222
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2008, 19:07

Unread post03 Dec 2021, 18:22

XanderCrews wrote:So we have skipped "IOC" and are in "delivery phase" now?

Not sure what you are talking about? Deliveries normally always comes first, and then IOC. IOC will come soon. ish. Soonish.
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7472
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post03 Dec 2021, 20:29

loke wrote:
XanderCrews wrote:So we have skipped "IOC" and are in "delivery phase" now?

Not sure what you are talking about? Deliveries normally always comes first, and then IOC. IOC will come soon. ish. Soonish.


not necessarily, many people seemed to claim the airplane would be in service before delivery took place, since there is not the same onerous American requirement for a fully deployable entire squadron, many seemed to imply it would be a software fix that made the Gripen IOC overnight. now we are celebrating "delivery phase."
Choose Crews
Offline

hythelday

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 775
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2016, 12:43
  • Location: Estonia

Unread post11 Dec 2021, 11:52

Just three days before Finland announced that "no one except F-35 passed minimum threshold in our wargame":

Swedish Armed Forces wrote:Gripen E differs from Gripen C/D in several ways. The E version has modernised sensors. The overall capability of the aircraft, including software, systems integration, weapons and electronic warfare systems will match and more or less outdo today’s fifth generation fighter jets.


https://www.forsvarsmakten.se/en/news/2 ... delivered/

A blast from the past, May 2016 when HX was just getting started:

Gripen News wrote:Q: Saab is talking about Gripen as being the "smart fighter" - which we can hear more about in one of your videos.  How is this 'smart' concept being received in a market so dominated by U.S rhetoric centered around '5th gen' and 'stealth'?

A: Gripen is a highly versatile multirole platform and one of its missions is interdiction in a highly contested airspace. However, Gripen is more focused on using a smart approach in packs, advanced EW systems and the deployment of standoff weapons instead of being reliant on stealth, as some as its competitors,  when it comes to  taking out advanced enemy air defences. 

It is also smart in being able to add on new technologies when arising quickly and very cost efficient, keeping the system continuously up to date meeting arising threat and capability demand.

Q: What kind of technology and tactics will actually enable Gripen fighters to handle new threats such as the latest Russian fighters with large nose radars and reduced radar signatures? 

A: What kind of tactics that can be used against a potential threat Saab will never discuss of obvious reasons, it’s our customers most precious secret. What Saab does, however, is to offer and deliver products and solutions that meet the needs and demands from these customers. When it comes to Gripen its an aircraft built to fly, fight and survive in the most hostile threat environments. It’s a genuine multi-role swing-role fighter equipped with sophisticated datalinks, radar and other sensors, plus an electronic warfare suite that are the best in the world.

Q: Recently Finland issued a RFI (Request For Information) and with that Saab released a new promotional video. Although still early in that process could you talk a little bit about how Saab will approach and support this tender? 

A: We believe we have a very attractive offer meeting the needs of a Nordic air force like the Finnish. Gripen is easily deployed with a small logistic footprint, optimized for short turn-around time and dispersed air bases concept. It is a mature and proven product, in operational service with several air forces. It is designed for continuous upgrades in order to keep the system up to date and equipped with latest technology throughout the life-cycle. 

http://gripennewsthread.blogspot.com/20 ... n.html?m=1

Interesting that @GripenNews twitter found inner strength to complement Radale on UAE sale but is completely silent on HX decision :twisted:

Corporal Frisk wrote:The acquisition cost has come down nicely, and the current contract gives a unit cost of 73.49 MEUR per aircraft for the Finnish aircraft. 


Meanwhile Gripen E is 85M$ :devil: But the real savings with Gripen are in operations! 4700$ CPFH!

Finnish Air Force wrote:The F-35 solution fitted to the allocated funding frame was the most cost-effective. The F-35 had the lowest procurement cost when considering all aspects of the offer. The operating and sustainment costs of the system will fall below the 254 million euro yearly budget.  F-35 operations and lifespan development will be feasible with the Defence Forces’ resources.
No offer was significantly less expensive than others in operating and sustainment costs.

https://ilmavoimat.fi/en/-/the-lockheed ... le-fighter

But muh dispersed OPs!

Corporal Frisk wrote:All bases, both main bases, other air force bases, alternative civilian fields, and road bases, remain in use. The F-35A has no major issues with operating from the current Finnish network. 


On the Swedish homefront:

SVT.se wrote:
According to previous information to SVT, Saab has had a hard time measuring itself in the fight against the world's largest weapon manufacturer Lockheed Martin, which manufactures the F-35. Among other things, they placed a flight simulator at the US Embassy in Helsinki, where the Finnish pilots could carry out simulated test flights.

https://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/klar ... jort-i-dag

So SAAB was seriously pitching 6th gen Flanker killer smart fighter to fight and win against Russian IADS and fighters up into the 2060, but they could not compete against such a massive and unfair advantage like "putting a simulator in the embassy" lmao. Yup, only US has embassy in Helsinki, and it was probably impossible to travel from Finland to Sweden.

So what is next for Saab?

SVT.se wrote:But what does the defeat mean for Saab's future in the aircraft industry? According to Jonas Olsson, taxpayers may ultimately have to compensate for the lost revenue.

https://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/svt- ... och-goliat

:devil:

I mean Swedidh government dis buy 14 Gripen C airframes just to keep the line going (none were ultimetely sold), so why not spend 10 billion on a Smart Fighter again.

I am going to have a riot with all of this, I'm livid.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4656
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post12 Dec 2021, 17:03

Still can't get over the wing going from Sweden to Brazil back to Sweden back to Brazil thing. Who the F comes up with a process like this? I wonder if that's what in store for Canada too, should they select the little fighter that couldn't. Incredible manufacturing breakthrough,

I'm calling it, "Wing Pong".
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7472
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post13 Dec 2021, 04:39

hythelday wrote:Just three days before Finland announced that "no one except F-35 passed minimum threshold in our wargame":

Swedish Armed Forces wrote:Gripen E differs from Gripen C/D in several ways. The E version has modernised sensors. The overall capability of the aircraft, including software, systems integration, weapons and electronic warfare systems will match and more or less outdo today’s fifth generation fighter jets.


https://www.forsvarsmakten.se/en/news/2 ... delivered/

A blast from the past, May 2016 when HX was just getting started:

Gripen News wrote:Q: Saab is talking about Gripen as being the "smart fighter" - which we can hear more about in one of your videos.  How is this 'smart' concept being received in a market so dominated by U.S rhetoric centered around '5th gen' and 'stealth'?

A: Gripen is a highly versatile multirole platform and one of its missions is interdiction in a highly contested airspace. However, Gripen is more focused on using a smart approach in packs, advanced EW systems and the deployment of standoff weapons instead of being reliant on stealth, as some as its competitors,  when it comes to  taking out advanced enemy air defences. 

It is also smart in being able to add on new technologies when arising quickly and very cost efficient, keeping the system continuously up to date meeting arising threat and capability demand.

Q: What kind of technology and tactics will actually enable Gripen fighters to handle new threats such as the latest Russian fighters with large nose radars and reduced radar signatures? 

A: What kind of tactics that can be used against a potential threat Saab will never discuss of obvious reasons, it’s our customers most precious secret. What Saab does, however, is to offer and deliver products and solutions that meet the needs and demands from these customers. When it comes to Gripen its an aircraft built to fly, fight and survive in the most hostile threat environments. It’s a genuine multi-role swing-role fighter equipped with sophisticated datalinks, radar and other sensors, plus an electronic warfare suite that are the best in the world.

Q: Recently Finland issued a RFI (Request For Information) and with that Saab released a new promotional video. Although still early in that process could you talk a little bit about how Saab will approach and support this tender? 

A: We believe we have a very attractive offer meeting the needs of a Nordic air force like the Finnish. Gripen is easily deployed with a small logistic footprint, optimized for short turn-around time and dispersed air bases concept. It is a mature and proven product, in operational service with several air forces. It is designed for continuous upgrades in order to keep the system up to date and equipped with latest technology throughout the life-cycle. 

http://gripennewsthread.blogspot.com/20 ... n.html?m=1

Interesting that @GripenNews twitter found inner strength to complement Radale on UAE sale but is completely silent on HX decision :twisted:

Corporal Frisk wrote:The acquisition cost has come down nicely, and the current contract gives a unit cost of 73.49 MEUR per aircraft for the Finnish aircraft. 


Meanwhile Gripen E is 85M$ :devil: But the real savings with Gripen are in operations! 4700$ CPFH!

Finnish Air Force wrote:The F-35 solution fitted to the allocated funding frame was the most cost-effective. The F-35 had the lowest procurement cost when considering all aspects of the offer. The operating and sustainment costs of the system will fall below the 254 million euro yearly budget.  F-35 operations and lifespan development will be feasible with the Defence Forces’ resources.
No offer was significantly less expensive than others in operating and sustainment costs.

https://ilmavoimat.fi/en/-/the-lockheed ... le-fighter

But muh dispersed OPs!

Corporal Frisk wrote:All bases, both main bases, other air force bases, alternative civilian fields, and road bases, remain in use. The F-35A has no major issues with operating from the current Finnish network. 


On the Swedish homefront:

SVT.se wrote:
According to previous information to SVT, Saab has had a hard time measuring itself in the fight against the world's largest weapon manufacturer Lockheed Martin, which manufactures the F-35. Among other things, they placed a flight simulator at the US Embassy in Helsinki, where the Finnish pilots could carry out simulated test flights.

https://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/klar ... jort-i-dag

So SAAB was seriously pitching 6th gen Flanker killer smart fighter to fight and win against Russian IADS and fighters up into the 2060, but they could not compete against such a massive and unfair advantage like "putting a simulator in the embassy" lmao. Yup, only US has embassy in Helsinki, and it was probably impossible to travel from Finland to Sweden.

So what is next for Saab?

SVT.se wrote:But what does the defeat mean for Saab's future in the aircraft industry? According to Jonas Olsson, taxpayers may ultimately have to compensate for the lost revenue.

https://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/svt- ... och-goliat

:devil:

I mean Swedidh government dis buy 14 Gripen C airframes just to keep the line going (none were ultimetely sold), so why not spend 10 billion on a Smart Fighter again.

I am going to have a riot with all of this, I'm livid.


:lmao:

its almost too much, from the most advanced aircraft in the world to:

that this would be the case was not entirely unexpected.

- It is the world's largest arms company against the relatively small Saab. The odds are very small from the beginning, says SVT's reporter Jonas Olsson who monitors defense and security issues.


I guess Jonas doesn't read Bill Sweetman? or Saab claims?

the smart fighter company outfoxed again by a simple simulator? and of course low production scales meaning the cost of the Gripen is not cheap.

very small from the beginning
very small from the beginning
very small from the beginning

Its almost like I have been saying this for over 10 years...

can some kind soul please keep an eye on "best fighter for canada" and let us know when the news about Gripen drops over there? I may need to screenshot.
Choose Crews
Offline

go4long

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 136
  • Joined: 04 Sep 2013, 07:20
  • Location: Calgary

Unread post13 Dec 2021, 15:24

mixelflick wrote:the little fighter that couldn't. Incredible manufacturing breakthrough,

I'm calling it, "Wing Pong".


Hey...little fighter that couldn't is my line. lol

XanderCrews wrote:can some kind soul please keep an eye on "best fighter for canada" and let us know when the news about Gripen drops over there? I may need to screenshot.


It's been a train wreck. But it's all the usual lines. Oh it's politics, and what not. Or the others are just completely ignoring the open statements from Finland and continuing with the propaganda machine for the Gripen. I think most have acknowledged by now that the F-35 is almost certain to win in Canada.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4656
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post13 Dec 2021, 17:24

go4long wrote:
mixelflick wrote:the little fighter that couldn't. Incredible manufacturing breakthrough,

I'm calling it, "Wing Pong".


Hey...little fighter that couldn't is my line. lol

NOTED :mrgreen: .
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3677
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post13 Dec 2021, 17:38

Look at the bright side: Gripen wings can "fly" (from Brazil to Sweden and back) without the need of a fuselage or engine :mrgreen: :doh:

Saab should name this the Gripen E "official" soundtrack:
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline

madrat

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3264
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12

Unread post13 Dec 2021, 20:07

ricnunes wrote:Look at the bright side: Gripen wings can "fly" (from Brazil to Sweden and back) without the need of a fuselage or engine :mrgreen: :doh:

Completely off the radar, too? That's a must buy!
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3677
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post14 Dec 2021, 01:50

madrat wrote:
ricnunes wrote:Look at the bright side: Gripen wings can "fly" (from Brazil to Sweden and back) without the need of a fuselage or engine :mrgreen: :doh:

Completely off the radar, too? That's a must buy!


LOL! It's Saab's 6th gen stealth :mrgreen:
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline

das__kardinal

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 27
  • Joined: 18 Jun 2021, 10:16

Unread post16 Dec 2021, 14:06

Gripen is stuck between a rock and a hard place. All their claims as to modularity, upgradeability, modern computer architecture, best EW suite etc... can be matched by the F-35 and the Rafale. The F-35 being the 800 pound, king-of-the-hill gorilla with stealth on top, and the Rafale having all those 5th Gen - / 4th gen ++ features (minus the stealth shaping) along with a demonstrable operational track record.
Plus, the Rafale is positioned to be the F-35 alternative for whoever doesn't want to be too dependent on the US (the UAE being the latest demonstration). It also has a clear, funded upgrade path and more customers, hence a secure future.
Gripen OTOH is late to the party, has only two customers and the primary hasn't been showing a strong commitment either, AND it's still heavily dependent on US hardware (starting with the engine), making it far less suitable to the "we want to fly our planes without US oversight" crowd.
And it's not even that cheaper.
Offline

madrat

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3264
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12

Unread post17 Dec 2021, 02:44

Rock and hard place indeed! They had their chance for a Viggen-ish NG product. They stepped into it by sticking to a dead end engine. F414EPE was never going to be what they thought, and they never had the basic weight they originally aimed at. May as well have gone with F110 at that point. The existing Gripen E of that time for a modest-yet-modern upgrade for smaller countries, and Viggen NG with an F110 using true stealth shaping for non-aligned countries that were palatable for exporting US technology. Maybe find a common partnership with Japan, or some other major economy. The upside is it was a good F-16 user path for non- F-35 users. The downside was that F-16 Block 70+ was their competition. The only hope was to get a major economy partnership. The option at that point was something like an internal bay and other features that F-16 could not match. And with Japan having an F110-level engine and independently-developed AESA technology available, you could have bypasses on perhaps US controls.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4656
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post17 Dec 2021, 17:08

What do you mean by the F-414 was never going to be what they thought?

I understand that the most powerful iteration of such can put out 26,000lbs of thrust, or close to it. Were they hoping for more? I mean, for such a little engine that's fantastic. We're talking early F-100 levels of thrust, and when I say tiny - I do mean it!

Ever been on the ramp with an F-15 or 16 next to an F/A-18? Engines on the former are ginormous!, while the F-404 my God... it looked like a toy. To think advanced versions of it can put out that much "oomph", very impressive IMO. It sounds like SAAB knew they were going to be hurting for power, and had even higher expectations?
Offline

kimjongnumbaun

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 523
  • Joined: 08 Dec 2016, 21:41

Unread post19 Dec 2021, 06:29

XanderCrews wrote:
can some kind soul please keep an eye on "best fighter for canada" and let us know when the news about Gripen drops over there? I may need to screenshot.


Most are losing their minds and claiming politics.
Offline

madrat

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3264
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12

Unread post19 Dec 2021, 13:40

mixelflick wrote:What do you mean by the F-414 was never going to be what they thought? <snip> ...To think advanced versions of it can put out that much "oomph", very impressive IMO. It sounds like SAAB knew they were going to be hurting for power, and had even higher expectations?

Let us know when an F414 mounted in a jet actually has anywhere near its bench performance. They needed power closer to the bench performance to make their jet competitive with the larger competitors.
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], viperzerof-2 and 10 guests