Is Sweden's Gripen fighter jet the answer to Europe's F-35 fears?
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.
You're viewing a single thread.
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.
The F35 is so much more advanced as an operations platform that the two are barely comparable and I say this as a staunch European.
Could you explain why, please?
This was already covered in great detail all over the internet, but the main two factors are:
Sensor fusion is something that any 4.5 gen fighter is capable of. Cool HUDs and XR is just marketing bling. It doesn't really matter. Scale, sensors, ew, range, load and cost benefit matter.
F-35 is good if you need first strike tactical nuke capabilities today. Or small carrier capabilities. However, modern sensors can probably catch your F-35s quite early on anyway. The extra stealth might be good if you're fighting goat herders with Soviet AA and radars from the 50s. But hey, then you can just go for an upgraded F-16 with some fancy EW.
Any rational state actor should skip 5th gen, push their 4.5s to the limit and go for unmanned gen 6+.
I don't necessarily disagree with your take here, but this is all conjecture until we see a 5th-gen in real combat. There was that story about an Israeli F-35 sneaking right up to a... I forget what, Syrian AF probably, but even if that anecdote really happened we haven't really seen them used in anger. As I said elsewhere here, China is really the only one who'd offer a near-peer opponent (unless god forbid the US go so far off the rails that they turn on NATO).
Thanks. This leaves me with follow up questions:
I dont know the second thing but even defensively, stealth fighters are much more difficult to accurately aim at with sensors and guidance systems and such, and it also helps a ton if the enemy doesn't know how many planes you have and where they are from a strategic point of view. Stealth is simply a modern requirement to not be at a severe disadvantage.
If the plane is used for defence, is visibility that important?
Sure, it reduces losses and gives much more tactical advantage.
Sensor fusion is a software feature. Why can’t it be replicated in other aircrafts easily?
It isn't just software. Even the pilot's helmet in the F-35 is highly specialized and has integrated HUD:
Why can't the helmet be used in the Gripen?
The Gripen doesn't have the systems (hardware or software) to run it. The F-35 was designed from the ground up to use this.
SAAB have a basic version but there's less info about it and it's certainly less advanced. https://www.saab.com/newsroom/press-releases/2016/saab-receives-order-from-fmv-for-a-new-helmet-mounted-display-system
The planes are designed to carry several tons of bombs. For sure there must be some space to store some CPUs and memory.
If the helmet is such a key feature then it's worth developing a European version. The good thing about a helmet is that it's easy to replace, unlike other parts of the plane. So the Gripen can be bought right now, and then suppliers can deliver helmets. Have an open market for them with a public specification of the interfaces and thus a thriving European helmet industry.
I must not be explaining this very well if that's your takeaway.
I'm not an expert so you should look into this yourself but the way I understand it is that the F35 has leading EFW capabilities, the ability to be fully integrated into a digital battle management system (which is crucial in the NATO combined arms doctrine), can coordinate with autonomous drones and also has the best stealth factor.