Is Sweden's Gripen fighter jet the answer to Europe's F-35 fears?
-
The problem with the Gripen is it is a 4th generation fighter. Nice, but it lacks the stealth of the F35 which means you either lose pilots a lot or you keep them well away from the fights. They are still useful in their role, but you want a better plane for a lot of roles that it cannot do. And of course 6th generation fighters are already on the drawing board.
The way to run it would be dispersed across the wilderness and not in the air for too long at any one time. That was Sweden's plan (and why it's built to resist ingestion of loose rocks among other things), and it would be Canada's as well just on a much larger scale. That may or may not be enough to overcome the lack of stealth, though. It's hard to say with public information.
The rest of the EU has a bit of a wilderness shortage, so probably it's not a good fit. South Korea has an F-35 clone they're selling, or the EU could break their agreement with the US and just code their own jailbroken software for the F-35.
-
The advantage with the Gripen is that the Americans can't turn it off on a whim
-
They're the same thing. War has casualties; in the long run the important thing is who runs out of stuff first.
That said, I'm not sure the cost difference is actually 10x. But, the survivability difference could be quite large.
I'm no specialist but the f35 seems to cost somewhere around 25-44.000 dollars per flight hour depending on type, the JAS somewhere around four to six thousand.
-
I'm no specialist but the f35 seems to cost somewhere around 25-44.000 dollars per flight hour depending on type, the JAS somewhere around four to six thousand.
Yep, that actually checks out. Which is interesting, because just the purchase cost is much closer (40-50 vs. 90-110 million).
It's still doing a lot better than older stealth planes, though, from everything I've heard.
-
The answer? Yes. The solution, though? No.
The F35 is the overall more advanced platform. That's simply a fact. But given the current state of the world, it is definitively the correct answer to the US' new attitude.
The solution for the future however is pushing the two big fighter programs currently in development in the EU.
If EU does not start investing into its own fighter they will never have one as capable as the american ones.
We need to stop thinking in short-term solutions
-
Micael Johansson, the CEO of Swedish company Saab, confirmed to Swedish media that Portugal and Canada are studying whether to buy the JAS 39 Gripen E/F fighter jet.
FCAS is the answer, not Gripen or for that matter Eurofighter or Rafale.
-
Drones work now because they are $1000 (random number in the right range), while a patriot missile is $4 billion dollars each. Sure you could shoot a drone down with one, but if you do the enemy will just send more and bankrupt you.
Ukraine has already seen some success using WWII air defense rifles, or hunting shotguns to take out drones, there the cost is around $1 each. It will need more effort, but there is no reason we cannot automate building such things, and from there mass production means drones are no longer cost effective because they get shot down. (note that shotguns have a range of about 50 meters, and the rifles maybe 10km - we need a lot of this on the lines to make a difference, but that means large amounts of mass production and so the cost should be maybe $5-10k each)
Drones work now because they are $1000 (random number in the right range), while a patriot missile is $4 billion dollars each. Sure you could shoot a drone down with one, but if you do the enemy will just send more and bankrupt you.
I agree with the point but these numbers are some orders of magnitude off. A patriot missile is typically 4 million dollars (so not billion). Drones vary widely depending on the type. Man-portable scouting drones can go as low as a few hundred dollars. I don't think a patriot missile would ever target something that small flying that low though. The Iranian Shahed is estimated to cost around $30-50k. Russia produces its own upgraded version (better navigation systems, bigger warheads, etc.) that costs around $80k.
Even then, you can make 50 drones for the cost of a single patriot. The economics are not favourable.
-
You're right, but these aircraft will have a service life of at least 20 years, and who knows what the world will look like then? Russia could be a Chinese vassal by that point. Mind you, I'm not suggesting that anybody buys more F-35s, I'm just saying they are not comparable. What needs to happen is Gripen/Rafale short term and a serious fast-tracking of the FCAS.
The last sentence is the one important one.
Any Plattform bought at the moment has it's downsides. Grippen/Raffaele/Typhoon all have massive downsides in terms of capabilities, survivability, integration. They can be overcome by now, but the difference to the F35,F22, Su57, and similar aircraft will only become bigger - and that doesn't even consider the sixth generation fighters that will enter the market during their lifetime.So any European jet can only be a bridge for Europe finally get their fucking act together and get the whole FCAS Plattform up and make that shit competitive.
Which is absolutely possible, necessary and mit be achieved at all costs. -
FCAS is the answer, not Gripen or for that matter Eurofighter or Rafale.
Not for 15 years or more...
-
Depends. You want 20 Gripen E/F flying or 2 F-35 ? Because that's the difference in running costs.
My instincts say 20 Gripens (Sherman v Tiger comes to mind)
-
If EU does not start investing into its own fighter they will never have one as capable as the american ones.
We need to stop thinking in short-term solutions
Yeah but wasnt f35 a joint project between EU and america
-
Ok, and that's difficult to replicate on the Gripen?
With all the 3D gaming technology I cannot imagine that creating a 3D scene inside a helmet is so difficult that it's worth buying this superexpensive plane instead of paying mabe the price of one plane for 3 companies to develop helmets for a Gripen with some additional cameras.
The plane only has to be better than European opponents, which hopefully doesn't require being better than the F35.
The entire plane has to be redesigned from the ground up, that's what he's explaining. The F-35s are caked in sensors like a valve index. They have special paints and materials that absorb radar, making the radar profile look more like a bird than aircraft-sized hunk of metal, which is useful against Russian and Iranian anti air SAMs, the same ones taking down Ukrainian jets. But that also includes the body shape, the engine intakes (even engine blade materials), everything.
Can the Europeans create an F-35 class platform? Absolutely. But you can't just retrofit your way out of a brand new generation of plane. It's like trying to retrofit a Ford F-350 super duty to conform to Japanese Kei truck regulations and weight classes. You end up redesigning the whole thing.
-
Not for 15 years or more...
Any order of new fighter jets takes about a decade as well. If you do not have them on order already, then why order new ones, when you could buy FCAS, which is a much better system instead.
-
The entire plane has to be redesigned from the ground up, that's what he's explaining. The F-35s are caked in sensors like a valve index. They have special paints and materials that absorb radar, making the radar profile look more like a bird than aircraft-sized hunk of metal, which is useful against Russian and Iranian anti air SAMs, the same ones taking down Ukrainian jets. But that also includes the body shape, the engine intakes (even engine blade materials), everything.
Can the Europeans create an F-35 class platform? Absolutely. But you can't just retrofit your way out of a brand new generation of plane. It's like trying to retrofit a Ford F-350 super duty to conform to Japanese Kei truck regulations and weight classes. You end up redesigning the whole thing.
Your comment is mostly about the stealth properties. If the plane is for defence and stealth is not that important, is the F-35 still needed for the 3D helmet or could a Gripen be enough?
-
Micael Johansson, the CEO of Swedish company Saab, confirmed to Swedish media that Portugal and Canada are studying whether to buy the JAS 39 Gripen E/F fighter jet.
I wish my country, Germany, would cancel its F35 orders
-
Untill we see Gripens EW suite in action, we don't know how relevant stealth is.
I read a random article several years back talking about Gripen and the Eurofighter finding eachother out in the skies and the Gripen pilot turned on the EW suite, which wrecked havok on the sensors of the Eurofighter.
-
Gripen is actually very capable fighter jet with very modular design. It's not as cool looking as F-35, but makes up for it with capabilities, reliability and ease of maintenance.
The F35 looks like a fat boat, Gripen looks like a fighter plane.
-
I wish my country, Germany, would cancel its F35 orders
That would be very expensive
-
That would be very expensive
Why? What's the expensive part?
-
Why? What's the expensive part?
They have contracts. I don't know the specifics. But that can sometimes amount to 1/3 of the price if they cut the deal after agreeing to the contract.
