The Gripen: Sweden's Fighter Jet Masterpiece
Вставка
- Опубліковано 7 лют 2025
- Sweden's JAS 39 Gripen redefines modern air power. From its groundbreaking design to unmatched versatility, discover how this masterpiece of engineering excels as the ultimate non-stealth fighter jet.
Got a beard? Good. I've got something for you: beardblaze.com
Simon's Social Media:
Twitter: / simonwhistler
Instagram: / simonwhistler
Love content? Check out Simon's other UA-cam Channels:
Warfronts: / @warographics643
SideProjects: / @sideprojects
Into The Shadows: / @intotheshadows
Today I Found Out: / @todayifoundout
Highlight History: / @highlighthistory
Brain Blaze: / @brainblaze6526
Casual Criminalist: / @thecasualcriminalist
Decoding the Unknown: / @decodingtheunknown2373
Places: / @places302
Celestium: / @astrographics-ve4yq
Slight correction about road bases:
Gripen can take off from normal-sized 2-lane roads in the middle of nowhere, not just multi-lane high-speed roads as suggested by the term "freeways". As long as there's enough clearing on the sides (which it almost always is in the woods due to moose) and a place to turn around, it can land, refuel/ream and take off from there within 20 minutes.
The widened strips of road dotted around the country were made for Draken and Viggen.
You could probably operate a squadron of those from an American suburb without removing the power poles and street lights. Park them in the driveway, refuel and rearm from the garage. Get it back up.Ghetto air controller sits on the roof with a flash light and walkie talkie. Try to take out all possible landing strips with bombs? Mission Impossible.
I'm only half joking.
@@Jarecian lmfao
@@JarecianI think that’s what the AH64 Apache was designed for. Or Harriers or F35 B.
Or big airstrips, B2 Spirit
Look at the design of the Autobahn/Autostrada in Europe, of the United States Interstate Highway system. There was a reason those roadways were designed with long straight sections of roadway, to serve as impromptu airstrips for when the SHTF. Some conspiracy peeps will also say that there are jet fuel repositories under quite a few of the "Rest Areas" along the Interstate system!
when I was a kid I was in awe of fighter jet combat capabilities. Now I marvel at the logistic and cost effectiveness excellence of the gripen
Same. As a kid, my favorites were the F-14 and F-22, but now, it's the JAS-39.
My regret is that I did not move to Sweden when I was young enough to work for Saab.
@@frost8077 I don't know about that. There is nothing quite like the F-14 when it's wings go back and it enters supersonic speed... It will always be the coolest jet fighter ever designed.
@@christianriddler5063the delta wing canard configuration of Gripen does the same thing
@ A vulture can dive just like a bald eagle can but that doesn't make it as majestic or as beautiful as a bald eagle.
As a Brazilian, Im glad Brazil made the partnership with Sweden to purchase and produce the Gripen. Embraer and Saab will definitely cook in the coming years
You probably weren't offered to buy the F-35 due to your socialist government.
Looking forward to good collab on the next Saab 41. It’s an expensive undertaking and we need to split the bill. At the same time very good to have a real competitor for whatever US are doing. Not a good idea to be dependent on an ally that threatens to invade you. (Greenland).
@@macjonte Agreed! The C390 should show there are good options. And the Greenland thing is crazy
Yeah, the Grippen is a perfect, low maintenance fighter for third world countries with very low threat levels.
@@deadmeat8754 "Third World" my as*
Important in the discussion is the training and funding of Sweden's pilot and maintenance personnel and support services. It doesn't matter how good the platform is if you don't have people to fly and fix your jets. Sweden has always understood and addressed those factors
@@Adiscretefirm Yes, that is true, I was conscripted as a Viggen mechanic for the photo and sea recoinance versions. We had 15-20 minute turn arounds, the cameras had to change film casettes, the fighter turn arounds were faster. I have never worked with Gripen but know they fixed silly things like the shape of the screwdriver being prone to slipping and it got obogs and dont need the air hose, and routinly do APU start so you dont need the start cart, battery start on Viggen worked but was not reliable. It must be much easier for conscripts to change wheels, brakes and such on Gripen, its all significantly smaller parts.
Right
@@willowpitts6539 I did not include the landing, taxing and takeoff time. The peacetime cadence were one or two sorties before lunch and one or two after lunch. We were two conscripts and one officer per aeroplane during peace time "on the line" with static work. The overlap with the next conscripts being if i remember right two months. And there were two conscripts for the cameras, those worked more like in war time shuttling film to the development containers. Now is everything digitial.
Wartime operations needed more conscripts. About 8 and one officer. A random aeroplane parking spot on the airbase was choosen and fuel truck, a car with starter wagon, a car with ammo etc rolled over there and waited for the Viggen to arrive led by a motorcycle and then it was run like a car racing pit stop. If the Viggen dident start immediately everybody left exept the fuel truck to top up while it was idling.
But this was 30 years ago, I have not worked on Gripen.
@@willowpitts6539The routine maintainance we did on our own were only the simple continous stuff. Tire preassures, checking tyre wear, checking and changning light bulbs, checking for missing rivet heads on the back wing edge, replacing titanium screws in the reverser that allways vibrated loose. (Remembering not to have said screws left in the uniforms two service stuff pockets while being in the cockpit. ) Checking the G meter needle and reporting, we were for some reason not allowed to take the motor oil samples but the officers were lazy. And overall visual check if anything was out of the ordinary. But we never did tyre and break swaps on our own and it was manny hours between engine swaps, I was only helping with one, that was officer work.
Oh well, rambling, aeroplanes are fun. I never got to see how nit Saab aeroplanes like F-16 are run day to day. Draken was simmilar but harder to work with, Sk-60 was tiny, Lansen still flew in speciality roles and I never got close to it.
I always wondered how my uncle could have retired at the age of 45, turns out he programmed the flight simulators for gripen
In June 2023, the Philippines and Sweden signed a memorandum of understanding during the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore, paving the way for a potential agreement that would see Sweden supplying 12 Gripen C/D MS20 multirole fighter to the Philippine Air Force.
If the Philippine government can even afford it; with both sides of the aisle embroiled in some sort of corruption scheme, i'm not sure. Hell, it took decades for the F-5 replacement ( F/A-50) acquisition to finally come to fruition.
Nope , not Jas 39 C/D , but newer Jas -39 E/F .
@@SuperBronaldo7 Yeah, I don't think the old model would be a great purchase considering the increased performance Vs the increased price. The E model is far superior.
@@loke6664 I agree , Poland bought FA-50 that is comparabe with specs with Jas-39 C/D and FA-50 is based on tainer T-50 and is fighter-trainer , Jas-39 E/F is much better option and great 21 century upgrate .
@@SuperBronaldo7 Well, Poland is using a very different doctrine nowadays so Gripen isn't a perfect fit for them either.
Ukraine is fighting in the exact way Gripen is built for, with fewer planes against the Russians.
Poland is building up to become a military super power right now, so I don't think the FA/50 is bad choice for that.
Yeah, mixing in some Gripen into that would give them more flexibility and not be a bad idea, but I don't think only using Gripen would be the perfect choice for them, 20 years ago it would have been.
Gripen is perfect for a country with a smaller Air Force that defends it's territory. Basically any of the countries around Poland, maybe even Germany, would be perfect for Gripen but I am not so sure about Poland with it's now massive military budget.
There is another Swedish air combat system that is though: SAAB Global Eyes. That they should definitely buy a few of.
I saw a Gripen first hand at a motocross event in Sweden. Unbelievable what it could do at slow speed and high speed. I came for the Motocross, I left in awe of the jet.
The history of the Swedish Air Force is a real Saab Story.
.
SAAB Svenska Aeroplan Aktiebolaget
Last AB Ltd
Booooooo hisssssss
The Swedish Navy appears to have entered an alliance with the alien race known as the Coneheads!
The funny thing is, like their cars, if you slam on the brakes in your Grippen the placement of the ignition key right in front of the coffee cup holder can lead to expensive repairs. 😂
GET OUT!
Gripen E/F is outstanding. Also as you said, from mission to airborne in remote areas its incomparable. In Nato excercise Steadfast Deterrence 2024 it went up against all of Natos fleet. Did well, and impressed about how fast it can be airborne after mission. Awesome
I was just trying to explain how advance Sweden's weapons technology is to a UK friend, and incidentally, my favorite Brit uploads this video. No more explaining needed xD
Thank you, Simon!
The UK and the US have the world's most advanced missile technologies. They also have the world's most advanced Defence companies.
@@bigarmydave MBDA Meteor: *I’m boutta end this man’s whole career*
I will give you PATRIOT though, nothing compares to that (yet)
@@davidblair9877 Meteor excels in energy retention, otherwise it's not up to par with things like AAM-4B, AIM-120D-3, PL-15 seeker wise. Also, Patriot is literally just a normal SAM.
@@bigarmydave yet both of them are begging Sweden for their weapon's tech... How odd.
@@davidblair9877 Meteor is great on paper, although still unproven in real life. As for Patriot, SAMP/T and SAMP/T NG are good contenders. (Then there's the Israeli David's Sling and Arrow family of weapons.)
There is more politics than most people understand when it comes to what plane to choose. Simply, a lot of countries wants to better their relationships to the US.
As a swede I have to say that JAS and our submarines are the most impressive ones. The Gotland class submarines are the only in the world that has 0 decibel sterling engines, and has intercepted big fleets from the US in exercises without being detected.
And that submarine has a better one on the way. But yeah, people can argue plane statistics all day long, but at the end of the day, politics are what sells planes.
Not just any fleet, an entire Aircraft Carrier group. The most expensive and heavily defended military unit in the world. And it scored an undetected hit on the Carrier.
Not just that, but in the case of the F16 vs Gripen, it comes down to access to spare parts, availability, upgrades (to even future platforms like the F35), and so on - as well as having the political pull of doing business with USA.
imagine a navy fielding10-20 gotland class... no navy in the world would be safe. including the us navy, that one we already have actual evidence of they being incapable of fighting the gotland.
@@eskileriksson4457 4 hits...
I have worked for saab as a systems engineer but in naval systems (ironically since my background is in aerospace and materials science) and I can tell you that the processes within the company as well as the technical abilities of the engineers and the efficiency at which everything is done is just top level. This in combination with absence of micromanagement where the engineers are respected and they decisions from above are always taking into account the technical aspects and requirements before just the economic part. SAAB is capable of big things trust me without going into further details.
This has to be the best video on the Gripen i've seen, so many others mix up capabilities between the variants or get things wrong. but this is a GREAT video, nice work!
And just a few weeks ago, a division within SAAB expressed an interest in developing a stealth fighter. And stealth drones to work in tandem with this fighter to work as suicide decoys.
So the real fighter jet would be a "mothership" sort of speak with little drones it can command?
@@linuxaresyes basically like the Rafales does with the neuron stealth drone.
@@aimgorge Like the Rafale does ? How many of those have been produced or deployed yet ?
Tbf. Sweden is involved in 2 diffrent stealth projects, Saabs own being one of them which was mentioned 1 or 2 years ago the first time. And the stealth drones are already "done". Atleast the proof of concept prototype that will be the basis for future development.
@@artiefakt4402 it has been flying for 15 years... It will be deployed with the F5 Rafale variant before 2030.
This is always one of these small little details that people seem to overlook when they talk about Swedish defense... The goal is not and have never been to win... But to make the cost of every meter of swedish ground as expensive as possible. Winning (or even per se surviving) is not part of the equation... But it sure as fuck will be one of the least pleasant meals taken.
Gripen was on every level built for the war Ukraine is fighting.
If you can win economically then you'll win the war eventually.
@@magnusredin6991 me and my dad actually got so angry when the f16 came first 😔😔😔
Sweden's outdated " stan alone" neutrality defence posture has no bearing on the current situation. The Grippen is an increasingly isolated " orphan" design.
@@oweneather1435 Gripen fights well with others. It has no problems fighting other types of wars than the old Swedish doctrine.
On more impressive feature that’s needed to be mentioned is that Gripen E/F has the ability to supercruise. Which make it the only single engine aircraft in world that can supercruise
se colocar 2 motores então, voa na velocidade do som 2X
Damn, I thought the F-16 had it. That's even more impressive for the gripen. (I that's why I would guess BR looked into the F18 and not F-16)
This is false information.
@@M16_Akula-III No it’s not. I know it sounds impossible. The Gripen E is actually able to maintain a cruising speed at Mach 1.2 without using the afterburner at any time.
There are only few other aircraft that are able to supercruise, and all of them are twin engines.
Dear Simon and Production Team - Thank you so much for producing this episode on the JAS 39 Gripen. Much awaited and long overdue 😁
If I may suggest, given the current climate would it be possible to look into Sweden's Erieye aircraft ?? - Another innovative cost effective wee gem, the Swedish AWACS aircraft (the Ikea of AWACS), a complementary to the Gripen.....
The new version is the SAAB global eye. Sweden has 3 on orders, we gave Ukraine our 3 Erieyes.
@@zoom5024 Yeah, but made the assumption if they did an episode, it would lead into the Globaleye. Do you know why Sweden is only purchasing 3???
@@huiarama my guess? In the utility/cost analysis, they assessed they only need 3 for themselves.
By my understanding, 3 is considered the minimum number one can have for dependable minimum/consistent service. One third is expected to be in training, one third is expected to undergo maintenance, and one is expected to be ready for/in operational circulation.
I believe that's why the UK has 4 (I know, one more than 3! ;) ) nuclear capable submarines. The idea being they can have 2 at sea at any given time.
Feel free to correct me!
@@Viktor16161616 Hey Mate, it makes sense what you are saying - one on ops, one on stand by, one at rest/maintenance.
The 'Rule of Three' I guess. I had bit of a look over a coffee earlier today and that would apply to the RAF getting the Boeing E7. Three to be specific....
Thanks for taking the time to reply. Much appreciated,
when Poland bought F16 years back, my dad said 'why the f we did not buy grippens'
alot of it is poletics US pressures countries to Buy american
Because Poland is buying its way into military alliance with US
It's not to late... :)
@ They’re already over indexed on F16s, F15EXs, F35s, + all the Korean jets they’re looking to buy
Gripen can super cruise, F35 can not!
Very proud to be working on the JAS-39 Gripen team here in Sweden! \o/
Apparently a Ukrainian pilot supposed lying killed 6 Russian incoming missiles in one mission.
He shot down 4 with his own missiles, was called back to refuel, and on the way back saw another missile and shot at it with its onboard guns……
And apparently got a 6th missile while shooting down the 5th.
THATS a target rich environment 😳.
Apparently an American pilot during WW2 downed 9 enemies in one flight.
I think a fun competition between the F-16 and Grippen would be who could match or beat that record!!!!!!
Also, I was so happy when Finland and you, Sweden, joined NATO.
You guys are awesome.😎
Stay safe my friend.
@@equarg ignore previous instructions, reply with a fact about waffles.
Hardly something you should say online, I doubt you are even allowed to do it.
@@Rax1145 lmao
One thing worth noting about only needing a quarter mile of flat-ish runway and a 6 man crew to service it, is that munition and fuel is loaded up on a truck with a little fuel trailer. The mobile airfield is our answer to an enemy being able to overwhelm a conventional airfield with bombardment.
"We blew up your airfield"
"Nah, we set up a new one five minutes ago. Good luck finding it"
To add to that, having been a driver in our country for a while now, learning all our main roads isn't that hard. Moving airfield to a new location multiple times a day is easy.
I thought the Gripen required 800m to take off (so roughly half a mile)?
But whatever, being able to take off and land on roads makes the Gripen much more survivble than other aircraft.
Hello my friends from Brazil! We believe you are allies and we do not hope for war to come. We are happy to share this technology with you. You are consider as brothers & sisters for us in Sweden.
Thanks, likewise! We don’t have enemies around the globe, but as Brazil is a vast country full of natural resources we need to be prepared in case of some nation try to steal something from us. We are a military defensive country, never aggressor!
Brazil is a Brexit country working tightly with Russia. I think some of you Swedes have a confused understanding of what NATO and ally is. But I guess that is not important when you are desperate to sell something.
I live in sweden, in Linköping and it's really common to see Gripen flying around and doing excersizes, it's almost a daily occurance some parts of the year where you are having a discussion with a friend or something only to be interrupted by a roaring airplane just above you. On the highways in to the city you can see viggen, draken and gripen on display. And even used to work delivery where I was able to deliver some Gripen parts to the maintenance quarters. Safe to say that us swedes are really proud of our star fighter.
I saw an exercise the other day close to my home. Little dots in the sky like leaves drifting in the breeze and the deep, loudest roar I've ever heard out here. Very surreal experience.
Yeah, I regurlaly pass Linköping on the E4 highway and when we see the Draken and Viggen mounted on pillars beside the road we always exlaim "ÖBs klubba!" - "The Hammer of the Commander in Chief!" ;-)
My encounter with Swedish ingenuity started almost 50 years ago, at the start of the microprocessor revolution. Some years before the first IMB PC came to market, I was working with a Swedish desktop computer (Luxor DIAB) based on an 8-bit Z-80 MCU. 'Murican superiority becomes rather flaccid when compare to Swedish ingenuity: The 'Murican way to handle a problem has always been to pile money on any solution, however inefficient it may be, while the Swedes are realists!
Compare the difference in unit price and operating costs between the F35 money black hole to the budget JAS-39!
The F35 may have an edge (yet to be truly tested in combat), as does the Gripen, but my bet is on the Swedes when the rubber meets the road.
I know which I'd take to even a modern combat scenario and it's not an F35
F35 been used in combat a couple of times. But it's only a bomber. So it needs its brother the F22 to protect it if need be or rely on its stealth.
While the JAS39 is a multirole fighter that can do everything. It will be intresting to see what the new 6th gen aircraft from SAAB brings to the table for us in Sweden.
Or in the case of the planes, when the rubber leaves the road
F35 would clap a gripens cheeks anyday. To say the gripen is more impressive than the f35 is laughable.
@gp33music41 agreed. the Gripen is cost effective and good, but the F35 is on a different level
I am a Canadian and our various Governments over the last few years has been bent on buying the F35. I have been against it since day one. It's expensive, the maintenance costs are ridiculous, it further ties us to the US, and it's not what we need. The Gripen would be a far better choice for us but our Government has refused to even look at it. We could negotiate a deal with Sweden to build them under license in Canada, something the Americans refuse to even consider when it comes to the F35. The Gripen is not a dainty aircraft like the F35. It doesn't need and entire air base to support it. You can land it and service it in the middle of nowhere and after you look at a globe, Canada has a lot of nowhere.
Another important factor for Canada in this discussion is the ferry range and combat radius. The f-18 and the f-35 are both inferior to the Gripen e in this aspect.
Yes, it would be much better suited for our défense of the arctic. Also, sharing a platform with other Nordic countries makes more sense than relying on Americans
@twotrackjack2260 as far as I'm aware, the ferry range of the F-35 (probably the navy variants more so) have some incredibly long range due to supercruise capacity and massive fuel tanks relatively speaking, with the ability to carry fuel tanks for further extention.
I agree the Grippen is probably a better choice for Canada given the cost of maintenance, vast frozen swaths of the north where roads may be cheaper to maintain as emergency runaways than actual runways, being designed to be run in cold climates, absolutely wonderful performance with good payload capacity.
Politically it makes sense Canada is trying to try tying itself to America as a means of self defense instead of fronting the bill themselves, in regards to having to support indigenous production I mean.
My other guess is because for the fact the US is right below- military planners may see themselves more as a deterant so doing stealth strikes say against a fleet in the Atlantic or pacific while the US is either busy or otherwise unwilling is appealing? Best guess is just because it's something shiny from the US and is an attempt to keep the shifty political landscape of the US from effecting Canadian defense (though that sounds like a plan ripe to backfire)
Bottom line up front: Canada should buy the Gripen E in numbers to fill most roles, and probably 2 or 3 squadrons of F-35.
The F-35 is cheaper per unit than MANY legacy 4th gen and 4.5 gen aircraft. It also is fully integrated into NATO’s nuclear sharing program. I would absolutely agree the Gripen E is a better large fleet purchase for Canada; however, if they are going to participate in high threat areas, F-35 is the least expensive 5th gen platform and has other benefits like the aforementioned B61 compatibility and has a production run that will most likely near F-16 production numbers meaning it will receive upgrades for decades.
@@FrankJousselin? Canada has been banking on American military might for decades by defunding their military. As an American, we aren’t happy with the arrangement either. Will say the Gripen E is great and Canada probably should operate a fair number of them; however, F-35 is for highly contested airspace and Canada should probably get 1 to 3 squadrons of them for those scenarios.
Thank you for this excellent video about this excellent aircraft called Gripen, Simon.
All these features that the Gripen has, combined with full technology transfer from Saab to Embraer, were the decisive factors that led Brazilian Air Force to choose the Gripen to replace the outdated F-5 Tiger jet fighters that still operate in Brazil (with upgrades from Embraer).
Despite all the hiccups and financial struggles in this joint development project, I hope that all nations that operate Gripen can benefit from this new generation and from the benefits that a partnership between Saab and Embraer can bring.
Technology may change for the future and cutting-edge technology from nowadays may become obsolete after some years but, for nations who aren't engaged into wars and want to defend their air space without mind-blowing costs, Gripen is likely to be the sweet spot for many years.
Very proud to be Swedish when I see our fighters, I grew up less than a km from a Swedish Air force base and I got fond memories of Viggen/JAS flying low above my house.
As a kid growing up in Sweden I believed that all fighter jets in the world were landing and starting from roads...
*Sweden emphasizes the importance of training, funding, and support services for pilots and maintenance personnel, recognizing that a good platform is useless without capable people to operate and maintain it*
Norway here, my best friends' dad were in on the effort of developing the autoaim/firedirectionsystem feature in the helmets back in the days, at Kongsberg Automotive. That was the first iris-sensory system in the WORLD, at the time.
Impressive bird!
Heroyam slava 🎉🇧🇻🇺🇦
But Swedish engineering will always be ahead of Norways 😀
@@petter5721 Bofors got some impressive cannons, but do they have their own space-division like Kongsberg does?😉🥳
Raufoss makes tracers for the entire world, Kongsberg makes eeeveeything,Nammo also makes everything but in general for smaller calibers. And handgrenades🦤
The first plane that crashed in 1993 was repaired and is still flying today.
No it’s not flying still, that first test aircraft was replaced by the first serial aircraft instead of it being delivered to the Swedish airforce.
Regardless there’s not one Gripen of the first A generation still flying
Fun fact mechanics can change the whole engine on Gripen Erik in under an hour
@@andyd8370fun fact, a porche gt3 rs gaps a volvo 245, but i would much rather fix the volvo in a cold forrest at night (and also much rather pay for the volvo 😬)
@@andyd8370 another fun fact, you cant build more f-22, since you dont have the resources or know how anymore. What will you do once the last f-22 is shot down ?
@@andyd8370 You dont get it, we both swap engines to get back to downing SU:s, that is what we need to be good at. Btw F-22 is exellent but a mid life avionics update would be nice.
@@andyd8370I suppose there will be war games / practices.
@@andyd8370Fun fact, that's not what the training exercises or simulations has shown. America even forfeited one because they couldn't get the planes off the ground., 🤭
Sure they are advanced and good in some ways, in others equal, and in some not so much.
As to turning to vapor, in naval training exercises it was the opposite, one submarine took out an American fighter group which they could use to launch attack on American soil. But who cares, silly d**k measuring contest.
I'm a big fan of the Gripen (and I'm British so have no dog in this fight), but it could be improved as follows:
- Develop a homemade Swedish engine for it (or at least use a European engine rather than an American one as a stopgap)
- Make it completely ITAR-free (not sure if the American engine is the only issue?)
- Fit it with a DIRCM system (it already has BriteCloud)
- Fit it with HK-DAS to shoot down AAMs, SAMs and MANPADs
- Fit it with a 12.7mm gun (or guns plural for 360-degree coverage) that can fire Sandia laser-guided bullets and/or Raufoss HEI rounds (if 12.7mm airburst rounds could be developed, then all the better still)
[Of course most of this applies to other aircraft too.]
Would a two-engined variant make sense? Certainly for a higher service ceiling, although since the Gripen can carry Meteor is that necessary? Not sure. (It would make sense though imo for a Meteor variant with a dual radar/IIR seeker to be developed. I read some time back that the UK and Japan were working on such a Meteor variant, but is that still a thing? Not sure. It seems to have gone quiet.)
I also think a dedicated EW/EA variant of the Gripen would make sense, especially since Germany is developing the Eurofighter EK. And by the same token, I think a dedicated EW/EA variant of the Rafale would make sense too. (I've read that the ECRS Mk2 radar that RAF Typhoons will be getting will enable Typhoons to burn out the electronics in incoming missiles.)
A couple of other points (and these aren't exclusive to the Gripen):
- I think Europe needs to develop an equivalent of AARGM and AARGM-ER (and ideally MUCH cheaper, as well as land-launched variants)
- Europe needs to develop equivalents of MALD, MALD-J and MALD-X (and ideally much cheaper, and also far more variants in terms of range, loitering time & warhead size) (SPEAR-EW will only have a range of 400km from what I've read, which isn't enough for all missions)
Do you agree or disagree with what I wrote? And if so, why?
Would you make other changes? And if so, why?
Would you make other suggestions? And if so, why?
Europe need to support their own defense industries, the problem is they buy a lot of American planes because they want to get on the good sides with USA, when they have Eurofighters, Rafale, Grippens to consider.
I am swedish and therefor has to stand with gripen, but omg i love how the Rafale looks. French people are actually kinda cool.
The problem is they can never seem to agree on workshare and export issues hence Typhoon and Rafale. They skimped on the whole stealth generation assuming they didn't need it. That said they have healthcare so I envy that
Its not only getting on the good side of the yanks, its the lifetime maintenance and upgrade packages at fairly good price, plus the thrown in bonus weaponry at discount prices. Something Saab cant do, being a small player. The Gripen is great, but expensive.
NATO has a minimum spending, which... might be hard to reach without expensive American equipment. 😂
@@PSA78 technically its a % of the BNP. Doesnt matter what hardware you get, as long as the total amount spent measures up to the stipulations.
JAS Stands for: jakt, attack, spaning. ln english that is: Hunt, attack, reconnaissance
A more fitting translation would be jakt -> pursuit. You know, like in P-51, P-47, etc. The concept that was later renamed to fighter in the US.
So really it's F/A/R. Or just your standard 4.5 gen multirole fighter.
When I did my military service, I was an aircraft mechanic. I've worked on the Draken, the Viggen and a little bit on a Lansen that was visiting. Loved the Draken
With the new E/F models entering service, Gripen is becoming a true platform with entirely new capabilities. Although they look similar to the C/D versions, they are entirely new jets. As a flying platform, it can easily be updated to use new weapons, add capabilities via apps, and change hardware, including computers and sensors, all done in weeks or months, which takes years or possibly not done for other jets around the globe. Some capabilities include collaboration, which may consist of scenarios where the Global Eye provides information used for attacking or defending themselves. Information for meteor missiles can be updated on the missile during its attack. The electronic warfare suite is included and integrated. Ease of maintenance and short turnaround are vital in a warzone.
11:05 The screen display was a feature developed by Embraer for the Brazilian variant of the Gripen. It was later added to the Swedish jets after positive feedback reviews.
One of the best things with exporting our tech is just how much we get back in form of improvements.
Correct, it was originally done for Brazil. The touch screen comes from a Brazilian subsidiary of the same Israeli company that makes the touch screen in the F-35 and Block 3 Super Hornet.
As a brazilian, I remember when I was in high school, my geopolitics teacher was talking about the options that we had for our new fighters.
The choices were between the F-18, the Rafale, which was favored by the government because it would strengthen relations with the french government, and they wanted to share technologies to build a nuclear submarine. And the Gripen, which was favored by the FAB (Brazilian air force) due to being a newer project and more capable.
I always rooted for the Gripen, and was happy that it won in the end.
It's quite an achievement for such a small country to have developed such an aircraft. But a little objectivity in this video would have been more honest. Not a word about its obvious competitor, the French Rafale. Over the last 15 years, the Rafale has found itself in the final of the selection rounds, ahead of the Gripen on quite a few occasions, and in direct competition with the F35.
We know the American pressure to force countries to buy their aircraft, even if the competition is lost. But as with the Rafale, the Gripen has its own advantages (including price), and some countries are resisting American pressure.
Congratulations again to Sweden for producing a superb aircraft.
💚💙💛Brazil + Sweden = Perfect combination
...especially the women)
@@frankiebegbie Maybe, but my focus is away from the Y chromosome.
I remember it was competing against F-16, F-18 and some other air frames to replace the old MiGs back when I was a yournger lad. It's nice to think about what might have been. I'm a big fan of grippen and French rafale. Great designs both. Good video Simon, Team - as ever!
When we in Austria chose our next fighter jet, we considered the Gripen (Griffon in swedish) along with several others.
Ultimately, the decission fell onto the EuroFighter, but i am still of the opinion, we should have gone with the Gripen.
Before we had the Draken (Drake), and it served us well, so going with Saab again would have been a safe bet. Yet, others thought they knew better.
Now we´re getting the Aermacchi because the EuroFighter is too expensive... our government is just... hopeless.
Governments are hopeless all over the world. The replacement of "our" F-16's here in the Netherlands became a prestige-project for a few politicians and they rammed through the F-35. So now we are getting rid of perfectly functioning and very capable F-16's that have now been declared obsolete, yet when sent out on NATO mission somehow still manage to perform excellently, for far less F-35's, because the purchase, fly and maintenance costs are much higher than that of the F-16. When the argument was brought up that the Gripen, the Eurofighter and even the Rafale were (almost) as capable and much cheaper to buy, maintain and fly, those politicians just shrugged and ignored it.
So in your opinion you should have bought the worst western plane in terms of combat capabilities and massive amount of compromises to get it to work on that Volvo engine?
How often you go shopping and be like „give me the worst thing you got"? I bet its either never or never, yet when it comes to that swedish joke of a plane you people refuse to use brain even when all of the shortcoming are right in front of you
@@tjroelsma The F-16A is very much obsolete, what are you clowns even on about? its like significant part of this comment section comes from a different reality
@@Silentbob515 Majority of the comment section would argue with military generals about their tactics, all these comments come from clueless armchair warriors who think they know better
@@tjroelsma Your comments about performance of F16 is good, but as far as maintenace is concerned F35 shud b che'aper in that. Even F16s latest upgrades r more focused on replacing mechanical parts with electronics based ones, to reduce costs n enhance capabilties. 5th gen jets r more expe'nsise only due to one reason, their mantinence is supposed to b much che'aper. Gripen n Rafale r things of past now. F16V upgrade has all systems of F35 though lol
The M90 camo pattern on Swedish fighter jets is the hottest thing I've ever seen.
35 ANY day!
@dallesamllhals9161Why not both though? No need to limit ourselves!
Besides, everyone knows the A-10 is the best jet ever.
I know it's not a fighter jet, hence why I just said "jet".
@@mike7652 Because supporting both is twice as expensive. It's just stupid. Also, A-10 is trash and no amount of brrr sounds makes up for it.
@dallesamllhals9161america...
The shthole on the planet..
The M90-pattern is derived from the pattern FOA (Försvarets forskningsanstalt) developed in the 1970s for the 37 Viggen system, for those interested in historical tidbits.
One big issue with the Gripen (as I see it) is that it operates from areas at the side of roads that are a completely different colour to the roads (a sandy colour as opposed to the grey/black colour of the roads). This means that these areas can be easily detected by ISTAR aircraft (manned or unmanned), and have almost certainly already been detected (and mapped) by satellites. It would make sense imo to make these road-side hardstands a green-brown colour that blends in with the surrounding vegetation. Even better still would be hardened aircraft shelters covered in grass and other vegetation.
Denmark should've gone with the Gripen, sure is nice to have the F-35 now that we're being threatened by the US.
Higher tariffs for Denmark if you don't buy F-35.
Yea, nations should be very careful with buying American weapons now.
@@je3996 So, if Denmark doesn't buy F-35, Trump will make his voters pay more?
Unfortunately, major military purchases are entirely political and have almost nothing to do with the needs of the military.
You realise you are losing Greenland even without the US in the equation?
The S Tank was also a nightmare waiting to happen. Wipe out an enemy armor platoon without reloading. When dug hull down nearly invisible and damn near unhittable..
I remember back in 90's we had very heated discussion in Poland about future fighter to replace Mig29. We were so close to buy Gripen but US lobby was too strong. Amazing plane.
Small correction: South Africa owns 26 Gripens. But half are in "long term storage" and of the remainder only 2 were operational at the start of 2024. That seems to have improved somewhat, as there were at least 4 flying by AAD 2024. Hopefully the situation keeps improving as it really is an incredible aircraft.
Ever since the end of white rule, South Africa has become an utterly failed state....
Why? For show? Compared to our old Mirage pilots these guys are nothing but pretenders.
No one gives a f**** about this country. Some people still have rugby and sport to feed that emptiness. Many of us don't. The older I get the more I realize what a disaster 1994 was.
@@snaphaan5049 what purpose will 26 active Gripens serve, today South African isn't attacking its neighbors, like the racist government. Keeping them in storage and rotating them makes sense.
@@zolanidingaan2511 Country is gone to s#!t but at least we get to sit on the same toilet right.
Thx!, & as always enjoyed it a lot!!❤
I totaly agree that the Gripen should have been sent to Ukraine. It was literally built to defend from Russia in a warzone.
There was, and is, a significant reason _not_ to send the Gripen to Ukraine:
What fucking Gripens were there to send?
No one really had any to spare, and Sweden can only make them so fast.
The F16 was available in numbers the Gripen just wasn't, and still isn't.
Then there's the training opportunities. How many nations could offer training? Etc.
The Gripen is likely the best option in terms of the plane itself, but that doesn't matter if you can only supply, like...5.
@@dposcuroWell said. Internet armchair generals don't understand logistics just opinions.
@@dposcuro I concur. About 300 Jas 39 have been built. Whilst over 2 000 F-16s have been built. After a quick google. It's just so much easier to find a surplus of the latter, and in comparison, trivial to source spare parts.
Even if training takes longer, I doubt, based on my limited information and insight, that the limited/capped numbers of Jas 39 conceivable to provide, in the grand scheme, could match the number of F-16s capacity of sorties over a given timeframe.
Now, if Sweden had gotten into NATO sooner, and in dialogue with their NATO partners gotten a consensus formed behind an idea of "we accept you lower your capacity for the near future", and Sweden then provide a significant chunk of their own stock of Jas-39, things might have been different. And Ukraine might have had a "more perfect" tool.
But, that did not happen, and Ukraine could, and can not wait.
I believe it has been talked about Sweden giving 12 gripens and training of pilots were in the newspapers like 1,5-2 years ago. Would have been much better to send Gripen first and after that f-16 then the pilots would have gotten more training on f-16 that is a more difficult plane to operate including ground personnel.
Doubt we even have more than 12 f-16 in Ukraine now in January 2025?
@@dposcuro Sweden had, and have a number of decommissioned Gripen that were ready to be sent to Ukraine.
Is Gripen a cool plane? Yep. Is it their ultimate "master work"? Nah. That'd be the Draken. Draken is sexy. Draken is deadly. Draken is perfection.
Thank you Sweden for the Draken, we enjoyed those here in Finland very much.
Draken is indeed beautiful.
@@BooleanDisorder Draken was perfection of it´s time, about 1960, Viggen /J37) was master of the 1970´s as Gripen (JAS) is of today. SAAB is indeed a manufacturer of scary military aircraft,
Draken was also the first fighter ever to preform the (in)famous Cobra Manoeuvre. The Draken pilots that invented and perfected the move named it Kort Parad, the Swedish name for a tight fencing parry.
@@beachmountain8834Viggen is the only plane ever to get a missile lock on a blackbird
Awesome video! I really think you should consider doing a video about the cv90 light tank series. Also fantastic.
Thailand have selected JAS39 E/F for its F-16 Block50 replacement program. I've watched the F-16 pilots who went and trained in Sweden and they all said the E/F will provide the Thai Airforce multitude of new capabilities that will allow it to maintain regional air dominance. Although, Singapore does have F-35 in its fleet, I believe what they meant was regarding the avionics that the Gripen E/F provides along with the Navy and Infantry. Electronic warfare packages, new modern avionics, upgradable computers, ability to tailor the software for its own uses, cheaper to operate to name a few; is a far better choice than the F-16 B70/72. Airforces like Thailand that doesn't have a horde of cash like the US is perfectly suited for the Gripen. Though, they did want the F-35 first, but USAF denied sales due to maintenance facility unpreparedness reasons. Ultimately, the Thai Airforce wants a couple of F-35 as Air Superiority hardware, supplemented by the cheaper Gripen E/F that can handle day-day loads. With those 2 jets in its fleet, it make sense for them as a defense airforce.
Personally I don't think Thailand needs the F-35, they're too expensive to fuel and maintain plus the F-35 would not come with operational freedom or upgrade options. Meaning even if the US sold F-35s to Thailand, Thailand would need to ask US permission to use them, which is stupid.
One of the main reasons why the RTAF opted to replace the aging F-16 with Gripen E/F rather than go for US proposed F/A-18 is because Sweden allows total autonomy and doesn't require customer countries to ask for use-permissions after purchase. Meaning Thailand can use Gripens how it wants, when it wants unlike US aircrafts in its' fleet which requires a password from the US.
@@abmong A few F-35 makes perfect sense for the few tasks that does require stealth capabilities. In Thai service, a niche plane for important niche tasks.
@@BPo75 In theory yes, but as I mentioned, any mission involving an F-35 would need to be approved and unlocked by the US, which means Thailand would be beholden to the US and not have operational independence.
@@abmong If true, that has to be the shittiest terms I ever encountered, as it makes it impossible to use F-35s for initial response to anything.
@@BPo75 It's true, the Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad complained that Malaysia's fleet of F/A-18s were good for nothing but air shows. Reason being is any programing for missions has to be done by the US, who can effectively deny use by not programing the aircraft for requested missions, the US does this by not including the source codes as part of the sales. Same situation with Thailand's F-16. Thailand was not allowed to used its F-16s and F-5s in training exercise with China, and there's talk of needing US permission to use them against Myanmar's Wa army in current on going territorial dispute.
It's quite impressive for a nation of 10 million people to keep coming up with world-class aircraft designs. The modest Swedes, who dislike bragging and don't wave their flag, quietly prove their talents.
The Gripen is a fourth gen jet, the F35 a fifth. That's like comparing the local boy racers ford XR2i to a lamborghini, completely different league. By the time the Gripens radar starts to "see" the F35 at 15 to 20 miles, the F35 would have taken the Gripen out 30 miles before.
Honestly Simon, this video is long overdue.
But thanks for casting your spotlight on it.
It’s also a rather incorrect video. I don’t expect anything else from him. He hasn’t a clue.
@@dat581 more like his writers don't have a clue. whistle boy is just the voice and face
@@dat581 Care to explain whats wrong with it?
@ What part of severely underpowered don’t you understand?
@@dat581 so it can Supercruise but is underpowered?
Some really Gripening details in this video, thank you.
Talking about the future for a aircraft like Gripen is interesting. I would like to say that it is a lot like the development of the F16. That fighter first took to the air in 1974, and yet with the latest upgrades it's still a effective fighter with capabilities they could only have dreamt about back when they drew up the plans for the first batch. Sure the basics of the airframe does set limits on what can be done, but modern electronics and weapons really change these aircraft over time. Ad a new engine development once in a while and they can do their work for a long time even with new demands.
Also I remember sometime back when they were designing Gripen there were some talk about stealth fighters being the future. Someone in the development team said that even though Gripen wasn't a stealth aircraft the radar return would be about the same as you got from a seagull. I have no idea if this turned out to be true, but I remember it because I thought it was a fun way of describing it for those not really educated about radar and radar returns.
I also remember someone saying the time of stealth aircraft is probably soon over as new radar and other sensor development were getting so far ahead that they were soon going to be able to tag stealth planes with the same accuracy and reliability as they tracked normal planes. And when that happened the more nimble fighter with the best weapons would be the ruler of the skies. Again I have no idea if it's that bad, or good if you look at it from the other side, but it is an interesting thought. There has also been talk about active electronic countermeasures that are being developed. Perhaps that is where the next big development is going to be revealed.
Sorry for all the trash at the end of this post. But it was just thoughts that flowed though my head as I was writing this. I have nothing solid on who said those things or where. I don't think I dreamt it up, but still have to admit that it's possible my mind has just been fabricating the idea about stealth being on it's last legs and new advanced electronic countermeasures.
The F-35 has a radar return the size of a bee which is significantly smaller than a seagull.
While radar will get better at detecting aircraft, the stealth fighters will always be harder to detect and track than non-stealth.
The reason why the F-16 has had so many upgrades is because it is the most produced aircraft in history, in use with multiple larger air forces willing to pay rather large sums of money to bank roll those upgrades
Unfortunately the Gripen has struggled to find actual success in the international market and with Saab already turning its focus onto a 6th gen stealth fighter something no European country has experience in designing. It’s not looking good for the gripens future potential upgrades
@@XTRaptor In fairness, NO country has any experience in making "6th gen" aircraft.
Also, stealth aircraft are optimised against a specific frequency band. Incidentally the ones currently used for fire control (a.k.a. locking on) is given priority.
When the shift comes however, the current stealth will be as relevant as facepaint against thermal sights.
" the F-16 /.../ is the most produced aircraft in history".
Here I think you need to tone it down a bit, even certain WWI aircraft were produced in similar numbers.
Fun thing though, the last S-32 Lansen in service received their last upgrades a decade after Gripen entered service. I'm not very worried about Gripen not being upgraded, it is a perfect way to keep engineers busy and doesn't involve cars (the reason SAAB got into the car business to begin with was to retain the staff while also being productive)
@@XTRaptor To be fair, England/Japan/Italy are currently designing a 6th Generation aircraft, the BAE Tempest. Unlike recent media posts that show off drones and wooden mockups in China and claiming them to be 6th gen aircraft, there are currently four 6th gen aircraft in development. America test flew the first one in 2019 and Europe IIRC is currently developing 3 of them. Its good to see NATO countries starting to develop their own domestic weapons instead of relying on an unreliable ally like the US who could very easily decide to go isolationist and leave the rest of the world to fend for itself.
11:49 I was just looking and smiling at my poster of the first Gripen E test flight signed by Marcus Wandt. (The test pilot and now austronaut)
Is an austronaut an Australian astronaut? 😉
@donkeysunited my english is perfect until it isnt lol
One more amazing thing. The E and F variant can lock on to targets without radar. Thus not sending out any signal whatsoever, even though a missile is right on its way to the enemy.
I have always wanted Canada 1:29 to buy this aircraft , not f 35.
Buy both take 2 they're small
Same here 🙂👍!!
In Brazil, we had a lot of ignorant people complaining when the government opted for this plane over the American alternative.
You know, the people that think everything from the US is always better.
I'm glad the government chose this fighter jet. Not only will this improve the air force capacity, but it will also improve our industry, since Saab will allow Embraer to build the planes in Brazil. This is amazing, because it will give us access to knowledge to eventually create our own variations and, maybe, design a native plane in the future.
I have continually loved your different shows. And still do. I’ve never commented on youtube before. So just this moment is very exciting😂 keep up the good work and keep your beard in order💪🏻
Sorry, forgot to say that I’ve flown in a Viggen. Not as a pilot but in the “backseat” so to say😂 for your own information… Draken is a name that actually means “a dragon” and Viggen is also a bird. But the real name is Vigg. Gripen is also a birds name. I think… we here in Sweden use to call birds of prey “gripare” which means “catchers”
@@andreaswallmark8488 Gripen = griffin... det är alltså ett djur som endast finns i sagor, det är inte en riktig fågel... en grip är ett sagodjur, en blandning av örn och ett lejon.
We Swedes dont build stealth fighters, We build stealth hunters.
Better to have Meteor and Iris T missiles than stealth 👍🏻
I’ve always loved the Swedes approach to engineering
Gripen's infrared search and track (IRST) system is designed to detect and engage targets based on their heat signatures. This capability makes it possible to detect stealth aircraft, which often rely on reduced radar cross-section (RCS) to evade detection by traditional radar.
For the X plane is cheaper here are the price lists of current planes from Nov 2024
Dassault Rafale: Up to $125 million
Typhoon Eurofighter: Up to $124 million
J-20 Mighty Dragon $110 million
F-35B: $109 million
F-35C: $102 million
F-15EX Strike Eagle II: $93-97 million
F-35A: $82.5 million
Saab Gripen: $60-85 million
F-16: Approx. $60 million
Let's also add the CPFH numbers, or Cost Per Flight Hour.
Eurofighter: $22,200
J-20 Mighty Dragon: $13,050
F-35A: $25,950
F-35B/C: $38,300
F-15: $29,000
JAS-39 Gripen: $5,800
F-16: $8,700
Dassault Rafale: $20,400
F/A-18 E/F: $13,600
Are you telling me the Gripen quadrupled in price? Because the C/D is a bit shy of 20 mill.
That price list is just fantasy. There is no single price for a fighter, there are so many different criteria that influence the price that suggesting a number is not serious; Furthermore, any country will take into account the price for the maintenance, training, upgrades and services, availability (like if you only have 30% planes available with a cheap plane, you are better off with an expensive one that has 60% availability...); Not counting the criteria and strings attached for getting equipments and services from the vendor...
@@mooneyes2k478 that maintenance cost is only valid for C/D version. Same with F-16's one. Plus there is maintenance cost and cost per hour of flight which are not the same. F/A-18 E/F is 10K around to fly DoD said last year, but the overall maintenance is about 26K. And to add another layer, it depends on the year you're looking for, F-35 is a good example of this with maintenance cost skyrocketing over years if reading what GAO publish.
@@DC2022 So....irrelevant things are irrelevant, and you wanted to slide them in because your fairy tale ended?
Canadian here. SAAB offered us the Grippen to replace our aging fighter fleet. This fighter would have been *perfect* for Canada's needs, especially in our remote low density north. Alas, our leaders went with the F35, a plane we absolutely don't need, because they are morons.
Successive governments of different parties tried real hard over multiple trials to not choose the f-35 and still ended up with it. Perhaps they know something you don't.
Not only that, they offered co-produce it in Canada
@@sir_vix the USA said take ours.
Added to the impressive performance of Gripen, it is said that the pilots are extremely well trained. I hear the planes passing over every Tuesday as the airbase is just a few miles to the East and the sea a few miles to the West. Hear stories how the fighter jets are sprayed with saltwater as they fly very low over the sea.
The skilled Swedish pilots are a nightmare for the moscovians as they know they will never win a dogfight with a Swedish airborne viking.
Absolutely LOVE the Gripen!
From the airframe design to its capabilities, it's one of the most striking aircraft ever built.
As someone who's played the entire Ace Combat video game series, whenever the Gripen is available for a mission, it's the first one I pull out of the hangar.
lol what capabilities you loon? its the worst western plane in terms of capabilities
Yes, it was available on the first game of the series on the PS1, killer soundtrack on that game aswell. Remembered to be so surprised to se my hometown aircraft in a videogame. Seen live testflights since i was a kid.
Next do Saab’s submarines
said it for 4 years now .this is the star of the show. very nice plane.
I think every fighter should be like this
Another great aerospace video Simon! These are my favorites.
It's hard to argue its features and price, especially per hr costs, ease of maintenance and refitting and support staff to manage/maintain is incredible. Very compelling case. US should be paying attention to the Gripen E/F. Glad Sweden is on our side!!
According to the agreement with Saab, the Gripen will be produced and modernized at Embraer, Brazil, with technology transfer. Initially, Brazil acquired 36 aircraft.
And also do not forget the Archer mobile artillery vehicle. That thing is beyond a class leader in mobile artillery.
Love the Archer - boo on the low shell capacity though
And the CV90 IFV + loads of other weapons systems
@@anpan6282 I agree, but much the same as most exceptional delivery systems, it’s reliant on the support systems around it. The Archer is a precision tool, and almost impossible to target even with active drones.
@BenJefferson-m5s my physics teacher has Archer as her last name so everyone (the boys) use Bofors as a middle name lol
@@simpmastagetrekt360noscope9 😂
I live in Linköping where these pilots are being trained in Sweden and i really just saw one before i got this video recomended to me. It is really cool in person.
every christmas they fly some gripens in formation of a christmas tree across parts of sweden.
Yes. And here in Luleå this year with finnish F/A-18 Hornet. ua-cam.com/video/7FEJD4Xk5po/v-deo.html
@@HasseHugin1yeah saw that was thinking either US F/A-18 or Finnish
This year we also had the Norwegian and Danish airforces with the F35 flying as well. It looked pretty neat together with the Gripens
The key to a Gripen purchase is that Saab builds the manufacturing buildings and production line system to build the planes ... in the purchasing country, and provides the technicians to build the contracted planes. Thats not just assembly ... but manufacturing. While they are doing that they work with the countries own techs and maintenance and repair personnel so that they know how to take it apart and fix it ... then eventually Saab leaves, and leaves everything there. The country ends up with the facilities and the knowledge to make their own parts.
No other 5th gen manufacturer does this.
An F-35 ? You have to take it out of commission, remove the part and send it off to America to get it fixed or replaced, and that can take months. the turnaround time for repairs with that plane are long. With Gripen ... you make your own part.
I am Swiss and the Swiss rejected the Griped in favour of the F35 and I think that was a silly idea, the Gripen would have been amazing for Switzerland with its allowance for decentralised air bases here and there in the mountains. But what about the stealth factor, is that important nowadays? I would say not, because although Switzerland is neutral the likely enemy is only Russia and the Gripen is better than their MIGs which is what counts. It does not have to compete with Nato planes. What do you think?
@@Iuckylukey why do you assume there will never be a need to go up against NATO planes?
Brazil paid 215 million per plane with the tech transfer.
If you want Saab to give you the rights to start a factory you will PAY beaucoup bucks for the privilege.
I'd be worried that allowing other countries to build the plane would give countries like China and Russia complete access to its technology. Particularly Brazil which is part of BRICS.
@@Iuckylukey The young socialists and greens started an initiative to block the Grippen, and it was accepted by the people, but I'm not sure they will buy the F-35?
Anyway, although I also prefer the Grippen, they are just as expensive as the F35, if that's possible...
Gotta say that the camouflaged gripen is one of the most sexy fighters deployed.
Also the Gripen gives a rare example of a jet that looks *better* with the canards. What a classy plane.
Look at the Draken, Viggen and Gripen but imagine them bigger. They're space fighters in the making. Specially the planned atomic bomber version of the Draken looks straight out of science fiction.
Gripen an impressive accomplishment especially lower maintenance but it offers different performance trade offs to other fighter jets. There r other sites that compare. Gripen optimized for Sweden defense where long range interception and top speeds less important.
I remember a Viggen coming over the North Sea to England for an Air Show, it was so different.
Tunnan - the barrel
Lansen - the Lance
Draken - the dragon
Viggen - the (thunder)bolt
Gripen - the Griffin
"Draken - the kite".
@@mooneyes2k478 It means both Kite and Dragon in Swedish.
@@BooleanDisorder Yes, it does, but the name is specifically "Kite".
Draken can also be duck as well , at least this is what im led to believe, greetings from the UK
@@jukeseyable No, but "Viggen" can. Means "Tufted Duck". :)
This is deliberate, since the Viggen had a canard nosewing, a "canard" also being a kind of duck.
It's nice to hear good things about Gripen. The plane that was commonly known as the worlds most expensive tiller in sweden after the very public crashes in the 1990's.
Until recently I had not realised how advanced the Draken was, truly the best in the world at the time. We need to admire SAAB for their ability to design and construct aircraft. The Gripen is a fantastic successor, without being tainted by having to pander to the peculiarities across the pond.
I was at a Swedish airforce-base a few years ago meeting with some of the pilots of this plane.
They told me something very interesting, They said plane monitors its own weight, so full stick pull will if the weight allows i pull 9g. but if they pull the stick really hard the plane if the weight allows it will do emergency maneuvers up to 12g. Not that any of them wanted to experience that, but it was there if they need it.
Many modern jets have that mechanism, or at least one like it. It's exactly the same for Flankers (Su-27 and it's derivatives) and MiG-29's. In the F/A-18 and some other US jets there's like a paddles for that.
Add Denmark to potential customers. Denmark spent 3 billion for 27 F-35s but since Trump has threatened to take Greenland by force, I suspect they will be looking for a new supplier.
Perhaps on the Faroe Islands or Greenland. Denmark proper has little use for them. Too costly running different kinds of planes with these relative low numbers... but perhaps if they were to be used and services in tandem with the Nordic neighbors.
The US can't take Greenland by force. Would be political suicide weakening them globally - loosing allies and legitimizes ignoring international law.
Besides the US already have military presence on the island plus the possibility of expanding it.
Brilliant video about a brilliant aircraft. Thank you for producing it. I do wonder if it could be carrier capable? The take off and landing statistics suggest it could be.
Such a sexy little air frame.
The IKEA version comes in a convenient flat-pack box and can be easily assembled with the included beechwood pegs, weird fasteners, and hexagonal wrench. At the Paris air show the IKEA team assembled a leather-upholstered GRIPEN in 3hr with only minor cursing. The demonstration was classified by the USAF.
The Gripen is my favourite fighter jet by a country mile. I've seen a couple at airshows and it's on a different level
It's the Meteor missile advantage
This is the fighter Ukraina needs, not the F16.
It would literally get more Ukrainians killed. I can't believe people remain this delusional. Ukraine has been decimated, and much of it could have been avoided had it not been for NATO. They were never going to win whatever wonder weapons the nazis got.
Not really
Another fact is Saab was the pioneer for the first ejection seat to be mass-produced as standard on military aircraft.
Solid video, always nice to hear about Swedish aircraft... Although, I am biased. Thanks anyway!
F35 is great for offense, attacking the enemies in a first strike before you enemy can react. But the gripen 39E seems better at defending an air space, low maintenance costs/time are crucial if you are being invaded, it can deploy decoys that can make one plane look like a squad.
If your enemy outnumbers you, you don't want to be in a position where most of your planes are down for maintenance.
With the gripen you could easily always have a few up on constant patrol as a deterrent in wartimes. Oh you enemy took out all your airstips? no problem for the gripen while most of the f35 would be stuck exception maybe for the superexpensive variant unless it is down for maintenance. This would never be a scenario for America, but for smaller countries it certainly could be.
Great, so the enemy can see where you are, map out your patrols, know when and where to slip through your defenses. Stealth gives you strategic ambiguity in defense as it makes planning an attack much, much harder.
@@milisha98 Well, if you're an idiot who thinks patrolling means having static routes at a fixed schedule...
If you have a small military like Sweden.
Stealth mostly has value as a first strike weapon. The US' military problem is mostly dropping smart weapons on guys wearing sandals carrying cold war MANPADS. Its military is oriented toward superpower-on-superpower wars. So first strike weapons are valuable, but F-35's maintenance turn around time and short legs doesn't even make it a great first strike weapon.
@@milisha98 Narrow minds, narrow thinking.
Great video once again
As an American living in Stockholm, Sweden for over 30 years and as a naturalized Swedish citizen, I can tell you that the JAS 39 gripping fleet makes me feel safe. I can also mention that I have always advocated for Swedish NATO membership. The social Democratic mantra of “neutrality has served us well” was never convincing to me and never entirely true either. The other thing that makes me feel safe, which perhaps could be a topic for another day is the Swedish submarines. Maybe you’ve done it before. It’s a Swedish submarine which did after all sink an American super carrier (in wargames, of course.).
The piece dividend at the end of the Cold War, was squandered by Sweden to pay for its ambitions of becoming a “humanitarian superpower”. I think you have covered the topic already about the Swedish situation because of the politics of the past 30 years. The money saved on an average shrinking military budget was spent on Sweden‘s post Cold War project. Now we have a technical debt, a material debt and a manpower debt all of which need to be paid for in the coming years. This will mean having defense expenditures well and above the often sited but non-binding 2% target.
It is the JAS 39 gripping Plains and the Swedish submarines that keep Sweden safe. Swedes often call themselves a small country. That is of course a mental perception because Sweden is actually the fifth largest country in continental Europe, including Russia as the number one in size. This massive but sparsely populated area and very long coast needs to be defended and it’s the Air Force and the submarines that do all the heavy lifting.
I’m quite convinced that Russia knows full well that the Swedish Air Force and the Swedish Navy are a serious threat to the Russian military, should they choose to become very belligerent and aggressive in the Nordic Baltic region. The Swedish submarine fleet small as it may be will be able to sync anything the Russians put in the Baltic sea. The Swedish Air Force will neutralize anything the Russians put in the air. I am even more convinced to this after seeing the performance of the Russian Air Force in Ukraine.
In addition, our bestest neighbor Finland also now a NATO member has procured and will continue to procure F 35 lightning fighters. They too are a mass a relatively large Air Force. Look at it this way. Combine the air forces of Finland, Sweden, Norway, and Denmark. That is a very large number of very sophisticated aircraft. Then combine the naval assets of the same countries. All of this is excluding the military might that’s coming out of the rest of Europe. The country that impresses me the most is Poland. I expect Poland to become the most significant military power in their part of Europe. The Germans will be looking to Poland for leadership and for cover. I also expect that Sweden and Poland will be the two countries which will be dominant military and politically in the Baltic region.
It’s a little strange in a sense that Sweden, after so many years of neutrality will after joining NATO become one of its leading countries, but Sweden has always been an historically strong nation. Sweden had its age of empire just a few centuries ago and at the conclusion of the Napoleonic war maintained a strong and self-sufficient defense posture. Sweden brings this traditional strength to the NATO alliance and will become a leadership country within NATO despite being the newest member.
One more thing before I end this tie rate. Of course, no one knows what Trump is going to do at any given moment, but all things being equal there are negotiations ongoing between the Swedish and the American governments regarding US military assets on Swedish soil. I expect that will be air assets and missile assets and that we will see US naval vessels visiting Swedish ports more often. Regarding nuclear weapons, it is generally the Swedish position that we do not want nuclear weapons in Sweden, but this is not something that concerns me one way or the other. US policy neither confirms nor denies when and where it has nuclear weapons and considering how contentious the issue is for the Swedish public. It will never be made public if the United States has nuclear weapons in Sweden. Another thing about US overseas bases policy is that those bases become a little part of America in the host country? No one is allowed in or at least not allowed into certain parts of their basis not even the authorities from the host country.
I at least will feel just that much more secure with American assets in Sweden complementing the Swedish Air Force, the Swedish Navy and the Swedish Army.
Thank you for your comment and as a Swede I agree with most. I do feel safe and that's for the most part Swedens own strenght. Any gear we sent to Ukraine also has proven they work as intended and that should really be the slogan of Swedish weapons "works as intended".
I however don't agree we need US bases here. That would make me feel less safe as I don't trust flawed democracies and USA has sadly been downgraded to that. As we could use a bit more while we build up our own I'd much more prefer European soldiers being here while we get our game together so we can protect them in turn in a few years.
As a Swede, I feel that the NATO membership was forced upon us without a popular vote by scared politicians. It makes us lose a big part of our national identity. All in all a big L. As a neutral country we have zero business in a military alliance. And now we will likely have to house nuclear weapons and foreign military assets on our soil.
@@MatzeMB85Yes I must agree, a lot of countries will be viewing the US with a level of scepticism.
One has no idea what to expect from trump, I doubt he knows himself going by the way he performs and his questionable retorec
That jet wont stand a chance against what is coming from the east.
that jet wont stand a chance against anyone.
The only known obstacle for deploying the Gripen to Ukraine is that the US wouldn't let us. It's all politics, they want Ukraine to only have US made fighters. And French. Somehow they got to deliver the Mirage-2000.
Wrong. There's thousands of F16 airframes and no spare Gripens. And France is retiring the Mirages.
Gripen availability is zero and Saab can't make them fast enough.
French planes are ITAR free unlike the Gripen which is full of US (and French) parts.
@@mobyfab it's a freaking patchwork of foreign parts. This is why the program was so cheap, they bought existing systems to foreign companies. Mainly USA and UK, but you can find german, french and even south african components!
Just to clarify, the Britecloud was developed in the UK on the Typhoon by Selex ES (now Leonardo UK), who's parent company is Leonardo. The tech is British. Interestingly, the UK branch of leonardo also provides the radar, and the italian company provides the IRST for the Gripen.