PDA

View Full Version : South African JAS 39 Gripen maiden flight



signatory
11-14-2005, 10:26 PM
From http://www.gripen.com/

http://www.gripen.com/images/200.86359107460425368000625/_DSC1473.jpg
hires: http://www.gripen.com/images/200.86359107460425368000624/_DSC1473.jpg

http://www.gripen.com/images/200.86359107460425368000628/_DSC1431.jpg
hires: http://www.gripen.com/images/200.86359107460425368000627/_DSC1431.jpg

http://www.gripen.com/images/200.86359107460425368000612/_DSC1395.jpg
hires: http://www.gripen.com/images/200.86359107460425368000611/_DSC1395.jpg

http://www.gripen.com/images/200.86359107460425368000616/_DSC1270.jpg
hires: http://www.gripen.com/images/200.86359107460425368000615/_DSC1270.jpg

http://www.gripen.com/images/200.86359107460425368000594/85EW2775.jpg
hires: http://www.gripen.com/images/200.86359107460425368000593/85EW2775.jpg

http://www.gripen.com/images/200.86359107460425368000620/733D3625.jpg
hires: http://www.gripen.com/images/200.86359107460425368000619/733D3625.jpg

South African test pilot, Charl Coetzee (right) together with his Saab counterpart, Magnus Olsson (left) flew South Africa’s first Gripen fighter aircraft on its maiden flight in Sweden at the weekend.

VIDEO http://www.gripen.com/download/18.86359107460425368000546/SA_051111_ff.mpg

The first South African dual seat Gripen took to the skies on its maiden flight in Sweden on Friday 11 November 2005.

Painted in South African Air Force grey livery, the aircraft took off at 13.40 from Saab’s Flight Test Centre in Linköping, Sweden. The flight lasted 1 hr 10 min.
South African test pilot Charl Coetzee and Saab test pilot Magnus Olsson were at the controls for the first flight of South Africa’s future multi-/swing-role fighter.

During the flight, the test team were able to validate the basic flight control systems, engine, hydraulics and electrics.

“The flight went better than expected and we were able to demonstrate some additional functionalities,” explained Charl Coetzee.

“The maiden flight of South Africa’s first Gripen is an important milestone which has been achieved earlier than scheduled. This is indicative of the maturity of the Gripen design and the dedicated approach taken by joint Swedish-South African teams to keep the program on track for customer deliveries commencing in March 2008,” remarked Jerker Ahlqvist, Program Director, South Africa.

This aircraft will now undergo a thorough inspection and systems computer interrogation before being prepared for subsequent flight tests commencing later this month. It will be transferred to South Africa in August 2006, where it will participate in a flight development program focused on the integration of South Africa’s customized avionics and weapons systems.

D.Ranger
11-15-2005, 10:02 AM
It has begun... woot

eucalyptus
11-15-2005, 10:05 AM
I thought the deal was canceled couple a years ago due to wanting to spend money on poverty, or did this change?

catalyst
11-15-2005, 10:11 AM
In terms of Top 10 fighter aircraft, whee does the Gripen come?

JoaMei
11-15-2005, 11:00 AM
In terms of Top 10 fighter aircraft, whee does the Gripen come?

Depends, its a light fighter but with very modern electronics. I would say at place 4-6.

signatory
11-15-2005, 11:39 AM
In terms of Top 10 fighter aircraft, whee does the Gripen come?

For a air-defense role it's currently no 1 - the best - in combat service aircraft. The F/A-18 SH Block II is a nice match though. Gripen is a F-16 and Mig-29 killer that has been established. Especially on long and mid-range engagement. Unfortunately combat exercises against other jets don't happen too much. There are however plans to do Red Flag.

(Eurofighter and FA-22 have not taken on a air defense role yet, they are still assigned to evaluation/test)

Just the other day Czech Gripen's escorted an armenian cargoplane out of its airspace. It's actually up there doing some business.


If people want to compare jets not currently 'in business' they should also take into account the upgrades of the Gripen platform currently undergoing development and evaluation.

For the air defense role, around 2010 the list will likely look something like this:
No 1: F/A-22
Shared 2: Eurofighter, Gripen, (F-35)
Shared 3: Sukhoi's, F/A-18 Block II/III

F/A-22 and Gripen with the more capable radar and datalinks.

Sir James
11-15-2005, 11:52 AM
I thought that with the new regime South Africa has lost it's pilots most of them left the army becouse of the poor conditions.

signatory
11-15-2005, 12:30 PM
I thought that with the new regime South Africa has lost it's pilots most of them left the army becouse of the poor conditions.

It would be a problem if they were not aware of it.
They are rebuilding quite a lot from the old military structure and obviously there will be gaps to fill. But they are on top of that with additional support from BAe, Saab and the Swedish Airforce. it's not really a pay-issue.

Btw, Last Friday two new South African Flight Instructors graduated from the International flightschool in Sweden after a 11 week intense course. i.e two pilots became instructors.

Brzeczyszczykiewicz
11-15-2005, 12:46 PM
For a air-defense role it's currently no 1 - the best - in combat service aircraft. The F/A-18 SH Block II is a nice match though. Gripen is a F-16 and Mig-29 killer that has been established.
That's a very risky statement.
Gripen is a good light fighter but there are some planes superior to it- like Mirage 2000-5 Mk2, F-16 bl.60, newest Su-30 derivatives, etc...

signatory
11-15-2005, 01:11 PM
That's a very risky statement.
Gripen is a good light fighter but there are some planes superior to it- like Mirage 2000-5 Mk2, F-16 bl.60, newest Su-30 derivatives, etc...


lol. Believe what you want. And I will go on the pure proven and deployed technology. I believe the UK Empire Test Pilots’ School (ETPS) would agree.
UK pilots fly Gripen in Sweden to learn what new-generation is all about.

Parzival
11-15-2005, 02:24 PM
In terms of Top 10 fighter aircraft, whee does the Gripen come?
Ahead of F-16 at least. Comperable with Eurofighter.

Parzival
11-15-2005, 02:27 PM
That's a very risky statement.
Gripen is a good light fighter but there are some planes superior to it- like Mirage 2000-5 Mk2, F-16 bl.60, newest Su-30 derivatives, etc...
No, if u would equipt Gripen with the same weapons, it would be superior all of them. It has actually been proven it's better than F-16.

kosmos
11-15-2005, 02:58 PM
I am a South African. The situation here with these great aircraft is a joke. There are not even enough pilots to fly the existing stock of old Mirages converted to Cheetahs. There is a skills crises that go far beyond pilots, where bascially the problem is all the exisiting pilots are pale skins, and most Air Force pilots have left for the private sector because the conditions in the SAAF is so miserable. The skills shortage also extends to maintenance, and there is also big budget shortages for training. Yet we got spend billions of $$$ on these exotic aircraft. The whole arms deal that resulted in these types being ordered has been shown to have been riddled with fraud.

Anyway what to do need them for? who in the whole of Africa has this generation fighters? This is the rotten arms industry operating at its worst, encouraging and feeding corruption.

Maarten
11-15-2005, 03:14 PM
Great Jet. Example of European toptechnology!

Brzeczyszczykiewicz
11-15-2005, 04:00 PM
I think I'll post some data on which my (highly unpopular) beliefs are based :)

First, a comparison between Gripen, Mirage 2000-5 Mk2 and F-16 bl.52 Advanced (I'm too lazy to search for a similar data for Sukhois, Rafale, etc)

Spatial parameters:
Max. range
F-16 (with CFT): 4800 km
Gripen: 3300
Mirage: 3400

Tactical radius of operations (low altitude):
F-16: 400-480 km
Gripen: 300-400
Mirage: 330-430

Tactical radius of operations (high altitude):
F-16: 700-960 km
Gripen: 600-850
Mirage: 650-900

Service ceiling:
F-16: 15 400 m
Gripen: 16 000
Mirage: 17 700

Max speed:
F-16: 2,05 Ma
Gripen: 1,8
Mirage: 2,3

Climbing speed:
F-16: 300 m/s
Gripen: 250
Mirage: 280

Armament and radar systems

A-to-A armament:
F-16: 6x AMRAAM or Sidewinder
Gripen: 4x AMRAAM/Meteor or Siewinder/IRIS-T
Mirage: 4x Mica-EM, 2x Mica-IR, 2x Magic-2

Rearimg time without/with the change of armament variant
F-16: 16/28 min
Gripen: 12/25
Mirage: 20/40


Radar parameters:
Max detection range (target: jet fighter)
F-16: (AN/APG-68(v)9): 160 km
Gripen (PS-05/A): 120
Mirage: (RDY Mk.1) 130

Simultaneously tracked targets:
F-16: 10
Gripen: 6
Mirage: 8

Simultaneously engaged targets:
F-16/Gripen/Mirage: 4

------
In my eyes Gripen has only one advantage over these planes: the Link 39 terminal, but is it enough to call this plane a 'new generation' fighter?
All other parameters, equipment, armaments are similar to those used in other modern aircraft.

FallenAngel
11-15-2005, 04:29 PM
Also, keep in mind the F-16 series is 40+ years old and there's only so much you can do to keep an old plane competitive (although the numbers above show the F-16 is still a good competitor and I would suspect the F/A-18 E/F numbers to be similar to the F-16).

And the F/A-22 IS operational. Just because they havent shot anything down doesnt mean they're not "in business".

skinner the swede
11-15-2005, 04:37 PM
Brzeczyszczykiewicz:
You dant know a **** of what you are talking about. Oven the Swedish SAAB 37 Viggen could fly over 2 MA.

Many of the stats about Gripen that you have picked up are bull****!

F16 is a third generation flighter, Gripen is a fourth generation flighter. It's like comparing apels and pears.

Edit: Brzeczyszczykiewicz, I want a source for your stats.

Brzeczyszczykiewicz
11-15-2005, 05:00 PM
Brzeczyszczykiewicz:
You dant know a **** of what you are talking about. Oven the Swedish SAAB 37 Viggen could fly over 2 MA.

Many of the stats about Gripen that you have picked up are bull****!

F16 is a third generation flighter, Gripen is a fourth generation flighter. It's like comparing apels and pears.

Edit: Brzeczyszczykiewicz, I want a source for your stats.
No need for such agression, sir p-).

Source of my data:
"The multirole fighter for Poland- a comparison" by Andrzej Kinski, Michal Fiszer and Jerzy Gruszczynski (quite known military journalists, they also write for JDW and other proffesional periodicals) in a Polish military monthly "New Military Technology", September 2001 issue, ISSN 1230-1655 p-).

skinner the swede
11-15-2005, 05:07 PM
The topspeed of Gripen is wrong, it is capable to fly way over MA 2.

Gripen has a lot of things that the other airplains miss. Some numbers are not everything. Gripen has won every dogfight against both F-16 and F-18.

joka
11-15-2005, 05:14 PM
Gripen has won every dogfight against both F-16 and F-18.

Do you have a link for that? Sounds interesting.

skinner the swede
11-15-2005, 05:23 PM
Do you have a link for that? Sounds interesting.
Thor posted a link in a post.

Parzival
11-15-2005, 05:47 PM
Do you have a link for that? Sounds interesting.
When JAS 39 gripen has practised with norwegians F-16 and finnish f-18 it has won about every dogfight.

Parzival
11-15-2005, 05:49 PM
No need for such agression, sir p-).

Source of my data:
"The multirole fighter for Poland- a comparison" by Andrzej Kinski, Michal Fiszer and Jerzy Gruszczynski (quite known military journalists, they also write for JDW and other proffesional periodicals) in a Polish military monthly "New Military Technology", September 2001 issue, ISSN 1230-1655 p-).
it's just sad u don't have a clue of what u talking about? WHere is the stats about the superior manouver capability Gripen has which is probably the most significant abillity for the new generation fighters. Or where is the stats about Gripen superior acceleration speed? and so forth.

Adam Wilhelm
11-15-2005, 09:26 PM
Here´s an link: http://www.canit.se/~griffon/aviation/gripen/basic_data.html

And to all the swedes, just because it is a swedish plane it is not necessary to to extreme being an national.

Turn performance: 9 G sustained, G onset rate at least 6 G/s (1-9 G in 1.2 s), min -3 G,
20+ deg/s sustained, 30 deg/s instantaneous
Climb rate: <100 s from brake release to 10 km altitude
180 s approx to 14 km

This is numbers i´m impressed of.

Thor
11-15-2005, 10:36 PM
I think I'll post some data on which my (highly unpopular) beliefs are based :)

First, a comparison between Gripen, Mirage 2000-5 Mk2 and F-16 bl.52 Advanced (I'm too lazy to search for a similar data for Sukhois, Rafale, etc)

Why are poles continuing to post stuff like that and similar that's just not true?

You got the F-16 much due to political pressure. Trying to make it look otherwise is really not working.

Thor
11-15-2005, 10:38 PM
Thor posted a link in a post.
I did?

(ten characters)

adlep
11-15-2005, 11:10 PM
I am also Polish, but I have to agree that Brzeczyszykiewicz is mistaken arguing about superiority of F-16 based on some meaningless stats.
What really decides about the superiority in todays environment is:
a. Avionics
b. BWR capability.
c. Ergonomics of the cockpit and the workload of the pilot.
d. Situational awareness.
In all of these cases, Grippen has an edge...

Cifu
11-16-2005, 04:14 AM
First of all: i personally like the JAS-39, but i never call the "no.1." air superiority fighter...

The plane has a decent avionics and radar, but not better than the newer F-16 or Mirage 2000 planes. The main drawback of this plane is their small size and weapon load - and the relatively slow progress of upgrades (no CFT, for example), and weapon integration. Another major problem the wingtip AIM-9 rolleron, because its needed to remove, to avoid some unwanted slip-stream (just see ANY Gripen pics, the edge of the wingtip Sidewinder tailfin "missed" - thats missed parts the rolleron). Okay, can we say, to use the Iris-T missile, because its wont have similar problems, but thats the butchers way of solve a problem...

In dogfight the Gripen has no match the MiG-29, the MiG has better performance in every way. In dogfight training, the hungarian pilots prohibited to use their helmet mounted sights against the JAS-39 - even this restriction their performed better.
Again, okay, the Gripen pilots had helmet mounted sights in the near future, but we speak in present time...

So the Gripens are good planes, but nothing more. Dont build myts around them...

joka
11-16-2005, 04:21 AM
When JAS 39 gripen has practised with norwegians F-16 and finnish f-18 it has won about every dogfight.

Yeah, now you made it sound even more interesting. Link?

As the Gripen is a newer plane, it's not only possible that the Gripen can outperform the F-18 and F-16, but probable. But I find it somewhat peculiar that our airforces have been conducting secret dogfight trainings and the only people that have been kept in the loop is parzival and skinner. Therefore my persistency with the link :)

JoaMei
11-16-2005, 04:30 AM
Yeah, now you made it sound even more interesting. Link?

Remember the layout of the Gripen, it is similar to the
Typhoon and Rafale. This means pretty good in terms of agility.

But compared to the Typhoon and Rafale it lacks engine Power, speed and weapon load.

cazorp
11-16-2005, 05:49 AM
The thing is, Gripen is a modern fighter, for the modern defence budget, ie. - its cost efficient!

You can land it anywere just as long as its a paved straight and its 400 meters.. refuel and rearm and have it back up in the air in almost no time - with mainly conscripts making the service on the ground.. thats why we built it, and countries with similar needs buys it with these arguments..

Proven high availability, good maintainability and low support requirements allow a Gripen force to generate more sorties than any other aircraft in its class or, alternatively, to achieve the same level of operational tasking but with a smaller force.

The operational cost of Gripen is 50 per cent lower than any other aircraft in its class that is currently, or planned to be, in service. It is twice as reliable and easier to maintain than its competitors.

This is not WWII - dogfighting skills are not that important any longer..

Brzeczyszczykiewicz
11-16-2005, 10:33 AM
it's just sad u don't have a clue of what u talking about? WHere is the stats about the superior manouver capability Gripen has which is probably the most significant abillity for the new generation fighters. Or where is the stats about Gripen superior acceleration speed? and so forth.
Ok, I'll post some more numbers

Wing surface load (kg/m2):
F-16: 396
Gripen: 295
Mirage: 249

Thrust/mass ratio (kG/kg):
F-16: 1,16
Gripen: 0,93
Mirage: 0,96



An Norwegian pilot of F-16 declared: "During the winter exercise last year, we learned some interesting things when flying against the Swedish Gripens. With the F-16, we can out-maneuver the Gripen, thanks to our more powerful engine."
--------


Why are poles continuing to post stuff like that and similar that's just not true?
If my numbers aren't true, feel free to post yours.



You got the F-16 much due to political pressure. Trying to make it look otherwise is really not working.
If you didn't notice, my article had been written BEFORE Poland bought the F-16.

---------


I am also Polish, but I have to agree that Brzeczyszykiewicz is mistaken arguing about superiority of F-16 based on some meaningless stats.
What really decides about the superiority in todays environment is:
a. Avionics
What is so special and unusual about Gripen's avionics?


b. BWR capability.
Similar to other modern fighters.


c. Ergonomics of the cockpit and the workload of the pilot.
HOTAS, HMCS, etc. Again, every modern fighter has something like that.


d. Situational awareness.
Yup, one advantage.

--------------


The thing is, Gripen is a modern fighter, for the modern defence budget, ie. - its cost efficient!

You can land it anywere just as long as its a paved straight and its 400 meters.. refuel and rearm and have it back up in the air in almost no time - with mainly conscripts making the service on the ground.. thats why we built it, and countries with similar needs buys it with these arguments..

Proven high availability, good maintainability and low support requirements allow a Gripen force to generate more sorties than any other aircraft in its class or, alternatively, to achieve the same level of operational tasking but with a smaller force.

The operational cost of Gripen is 50 per cent lower than any other aircraft in its class that is currently, or planned to be, in service. It is twice as reliable and easier to maintain than its competitors.

This is not WWII - dogfighting skills are not that important any longer..
At least one person trying to bring up the advantages of Gripen instead of posting some flames directed at my humble person :)
And that's 100% true- Gripen has the lowest operational costs and probably the best reliability among modern fighters. But again- does it justify calling it the best aircraft of the world?


First of all: i personally like the JAS-39, but i never call the "no.1." air superiority fighter...

The plane has a decent avionics and radar, but not better than the newer F-16 or Mirage 2000 planes. The main drawback of this plane is their small size and weapon load - and the relatively slow progress of upgrades (no CFT, for example), and weapon integration. Another major problem the wingtip AIM-9 rolleron, because its needed to remove, to avoid some unwanted slip-stream (just see ANY Gripen pics, the edge of the wingtip Sidewinder tailfin "missed" - thats missed parts the rolleron). Okay, can we say, to use the Iris-T missile, because its wont have similar problems, but thats the butchers way of solve a problem...

In dogfight the Gripen has no match the MiG-29, the MiG has better performance in every way. In dogfight training, the hungarian pilots prohibited to use their helmet mounted sights against the JAS-39 - even this restriction their performed better.
Again, okay, the Gripen pilots had helmet mounted sights in the near future, but we speak in present time...

So the Gripens are good planes, but nothing more. Dont build myts around them...
Exactly what I've been thinking.


and btw. I might 'not have a clue' about the subject, but yet noone tried to challenge my data... Why is that?

signatory
11-16-2005, 11:29 AM
First of all: i personally like the JAS-39, but i never call the "no.1." air superiority fighter...

In dogfight the Gripen has no match the MiG-29, the MiG has better performance in every way. In dogfight training, the hungarian pilots prohibited to use their helmet mounted sights against the JAS-39 - even this restriction their performed better.
Again, okay, the Gripen pilots had helmet mounted sights in the near future, but we speak in present time...

So the Gripens are good planes, but nothing more. Dont build myts around them...

Gripen rarely do dogfights. And tbh in a short-range dog-fight it doesn't matter much what jet you have as long as it's a Generation 3+ design.

Again the argument is air-defense superiority. The Gripen's are excellent f-16 and mig-29 killers on long and medium range engagement.
It's just material physics together with top of the line technology. Don't argue against science :)

A practice the Swedish airforce have had for a few decades now with datalink capable jets and superior radar together with a small radar x-section. Heh, Sweden 'stole' MIG-29 radar (and alot of other russian tech) and they have as with any other russian radar equipment aquired by the swedes been examined and put to the test at the FOI and Ericsson microwave labs.

A Gripen with active radar can spot a mig-29 long before itself is visable, and not to mention a Gripen wingbuddy can engage the mig while using data-link and never revel his own position... that works in a dog-fight too btw.

Anyway, I am sure somewhere in Ethiopia there's even a guy *****ing about how his Mig-21 rules the world. Get over it. Argue against science all you want.

anv2
11-16-2005, 11:43 AM
Yeah, now you made it sound even more interesting. Link?

As the Gripen is a newer plane, it's not only possible that the Gripen can outperform the F-18 and F-16, but probable. But I find it somewhat peculiar that our airforces have been conducting secret dogfight trainings and the only people that have been kept in the loop is parzival and skinner. Therefore my persistency with the link :)

I remember hearing the same story about Gripen beating F-18, although it was in BVR combat. The details on the story are very thin and as such it's hard to say much on the matter. Still, Gripen's small frontal radar cross section probably helps it quite a bit in BVR combat.

Training operations between the Finnish and Swedish air forces aren't a secret, it's just that they're not advertised much.

signatory
11-16-2005, 12:12 PM
If you follow the websites of the larger exercises they often write how things go. They are quite open about it. They say when things go well, and not so well. Such as during Joint Winter '04 in Norway.

We learned that when German Tornado's and Swedish Gripen's (39A) flew in team. The Gripen oilpressure had a problem in the freezing cold without a heater, while on the ground. The reason was because the Gripen pilots had to wait much longer for the Tornado's to be re-armed and cleared for take-off.
The Gripen's also had 90%+ accomplished their checklist vs the 60% for european F-16's. Simply more airtime, less maintenance with the Gripen.
Can't see why people argue about it. It's a generation shift! It's Gripen, Eurofighter, F/A-22 coming out kicking 40 year old designs in the teeth.

http://www.f21.mil.se/images/local/bodo05_3grp.jpg

cazorp
11-16-2005, 12:18 PM
But Gripen, Eurofighter and especially F/A-22 has lots of different abilites.. Gripens focus is still high reliability/low cost, and F/A-22 is a air superiority fighter for the 21 st century, heavily dependant of AWACS fully equipped air-bases and so on..

joka
11-16-2005, 12:26 PM
Training operations between the Finnish and Swedish air forces aren't a secret, it's just that they're not advertised much.

That's just it, the Finnish airforce issues a press release for even the smallest and most insignificant training operations.
Now if at some point in time Finland, Sweden and Norway would have had a grandiose pissing contest with fighter jets, I'm pretty sure there would have been something written about the event. But then again, maybe I just missed it. So a link or source would be nice.

I'm not questioning the Gripen, just this mystical "dogfight get-together". :)

Parzival
11-16-2005, 12:55 PM
Exactly what I've been thinking.


and btw. I might 'not have a clue' about the subject, but yet noone tried to challenge my data... Why is that?
You gonna be kidding.
First of all, You stats are totally wrong.
Second, You are the first person that even think of comparing a third-generation fighter with a fourth-generation fighters, and also then claiming the third-generation fighter is better? How funny isn't that?
It's like claiming an old chevrolet malibu from the 90s would beat a Ferrari 360....

signatory
11-16-2005, 12:56 PM
That's just it, the Finnish airforce issues a press release for even the smallest and most insignificant training operations.
Now if at some point in time Finland, Sweden and Norway would have had a grandiose pissing contest with fighter jets, I'm pretty sure there would have been something written about the event. But then again, maybe I just missed it. So a link or source would be nice.

I'm not questioning the Gripen, just this mystical "dogfight get-together". :)

Joint winter 04 Norway
Battle Griffin 05, Norway
Nordic Air Meet 05 Sweden
ADEX 05 Finland

Those were the last big ones in the nordic region.
And they all had specially designed webpages for each exercise.
Such as http://www.battlegriffin.no/

Other info is naturally written on each country's own webpage.

Seriously, you never heard of ADEX?
http://www.ilmavoimat.fi/filebank/3103-adex_2005_ilm****a_100.jpg
6 Gripen's were in Finland may/june.
ADEX webpage: http://www.ilmavoimat.fi/index.php?id=444
See the gripen's with F-18 there ? :)

Oh and if you would like to know, during Nordic Air Meet the Finnish F-18's beat Swedish Viggen jets in aircombat :)

signatory
11-16-2005, 01:06 PM
from Nordic air meet october '04 in Sweden
http://www.f17.mil.se/images/local/gripenf16.jpg
Swedish Gripen + Danish F-16

http://www.f17.mil.se/images/local/jas39f18noam.jpg
Swedish Gripen + Swiss F-18

http://www.f21.mil.se/images/local/tiger_f16.jpg
Norwegian F-16 Tiger division
http://www.f21.mil.se/images/local/massorplan.jpg
Finnish F-18 line up. F-16 and Gripen on the runway.
http://www.f21.mil.se/images/local/noam_logo.gif

:)

Brzeczyszczykiewicz
11-16-2005, 01:26 PM
You gonna be kidding.
First of all, You stats are totally wrong.
You keep claiming that my stats, quoted from an article written by a professional military journalists, are wrong, but you still haven't posted the 'true' version of them. So I guess it's a question of faith p-).



Second, You are the first person that even think of comparing a third-generation fighter with a fourth-generation fighters, and also then claiming the third-generation fighter is better?
So what makes the Gripen a fourth generation fighter? What systems, equipment, armament, technological solutions make it different from all other fighters, significantly better than Mirage 2000-5 Mk2, F-16 block 52+ or 60, Su-30MKI etc.?

joka
11-16-2005, 01:27 PM
Yeah, I'm more or less aware of those exercises. But at no point have I heard any of the participant nations come out and make any comments about dogfights. If you have, I'd love to read it.

Here's some pictures from Adex 05 to make my blabbering posts a little more interesting :)
http://www.ilmavoimat.fi/imgarchive/gripen_adex/GRIPPEN-HN_7.jpg

http://www.ilmavoimat.fi/imgarchive/gripen_adex/GRIPPEN_1.jpg

http://www.ilmavoimat.fi/imgarchive/gripen_adex/GRIPPEN-HN_5.jpg

signatory
11-16-2005, 01:40 PM
Yeah, I'm more or less aware of those exercises. But at no point have I heard any of the participant nations come out and make any comments about dogfights. If you have, I'd love to read it.


I don't know who was talking about dog fights. the Original claim (which is first of all backed up by technological evidence. Facts we know about PS/05A MKIII and x-section signature et all) made by SWAFRAP crew on www.mil.se and and then with interviews for Gripen Magazine by . Of course that can be coloured. But in the end he is only verifying what the tech _should_ enable the jet to do.

When people say dogfights I think close-range combat ass to face style
and IMO most jets in NATO and PfP nations offers technically a similar chance.
In that aspect training is alot more important. p-)
------
Excerpt from Gripen news.

"During past international exercises, Gripen has been very competetive during close in combat against foreign aircraft such as the F-16 and F/A-18. I don't want ot make snap judgements because it was a limited number of contacts and I don't have all the exercise parameters. However, during BVR engagements we can definitely say that the radar, datalink, electronic, warfare suit and MMI of the Gripen gave its pilots a clear upper-hand. Their information advantage and SI meant they could employ Gripen's weapon systems in a more optimal way than their foregin counterparts.

Although some aircraft flown in these exercises may have had a slightly better thrust-to-weight ratio than our aircraft, Gripens still managed to get behind the F-16's to make use of the IR-missiles and guns. The small visual signature and excellent agility of the Gripen proved to be a considerable advantage in a dogfight."

Another excerpt.

"We flew several of the Norweigan pilots in our dual seat and they were very impressed with the cockpit displays - especially the tactical screen with the map - and the level of situational awareness that it gives you in combat. I think they understood that we could get so much more out of our jets. It's a different generation.

They thought that a Gripen was pretty similar to an F-16, said an SwAF officer, they thought they were about the same size, they both have one engine-but they were wrong. In combat we out-turned them in many engagements.
------
edit: SOURCE http://www.gripen.com/articles/5.dc41c5fb147cf10e7fff6349.html

joka
11-16-2005, 01:55 PM
Thanks! Wasn't that hard, was it :)

signatory
11-16-2005, 02:08 PM
Thanks! Wasn't that hard, was it :)

It wasn't even my job :P

Cifu
11-17-2005, 11:02 AM
Gripen rarely do dogfights. And tbh in a short-range dog-fight it doesn't matter much what jet you have as long as it's a Generation 3+ design.

Again the argument is air-defense superiority. The Gripen's are excellent f-16 and mig-29 killers on long and medium range engagement.
It's just material physics together with top of the line technology. Don't argue against science :)

A practice the Swedish airforce have had for a few decades now with datalink capable jets and superior radar together with a small radar x-section. Heh, Sweden 'stole' MIG-29 radar (and alot of other russian tech) and they have as with any other russian radar equipment aquired by the swedes been examined and put to the test at the FOI and Ericsson microwave labs.

A Gripen with active radar can spot a mig-29 long before itself is visable, and not to mention a Gripen wingbuddy can engage the mig while using data-link and never revel his own position... that works in a dog-fight too btw.

Anyway, I am sure somewhere in Ethiopia there's even a guy *****ing about how his Mig-21 rules the world. Get over it. Argue against science all you want.

Well, if you think this is the "plot", may you explain why they develop helmet mounted sight and new AAM's anywhere in globe, not only for the Gripen, but the F-15C, F-16C/D/E/F, F/A-22A, F-35A/B/C, or Eurofighter? Perhaps all of these developings are for nonsense? Or maybe they are think the chance for dogfight are reality even a Generation 4 or 5 fighter?

You miss the whole plot, i not make JAS-39 vs. MiG-29 "war", but argue a rather dissapointing training examine. The Gripen are not persuasive in dogfight. And an air superiority fighter are normaly has quite good dogfight ability. Period.

If you think the good long- and medium range A2A capacity are make useles the short range capacity, then looks like you know more than any fighterplane-developer... :P

signatory
11-17-2005, 11:29 AM
Well, if you think this is the "plot", may you explain why they develop helmet mounted sight and new AAM's anywhere in globe, not only for the Gripen, but the F-15C, F-16C/D/E/F, F/A-22A, F-35A/B/C, or Eurofighter? Perhaps all of these developings are for nonsense? Or maybe they are think the chance for dogfight are reality even a Generation 4 or 5 fighter?

You miss the whole plot, i not make JAS-39 vs. MiG-29 "war", but argue a rather dissapointing training examine. The Gripen are weak in dogfight. And an air superiority fighter are normaly has good dogfight ability. Period.

If you think the good long- and medium range A2A capacity are make useles the short range capacity, then looks like you know more than any fighterplane-developer... :P

You are missing the whole point. I don't even have to go into a debate on the abilities in a dog fight cause that is not the issue at hand.
The job is to deny enemy aircraft entry into your own airspace and stop their advance. As far away as possible.
This is not done by some miracle dog-fight that suddenly pops up out on the border.

If you're drawn into a dog-fight you have already failed your primary assignment. Therefor the IHMD system has one of the least priorities for the Gripen, Eurofighter and F/A-22 projects. In fact the Swedish airforce is just barely interested in it. South Africa is the prime customer probably because that order by Denel is part of the offset agreement.

BAE and SAAB could have delivered the system a decade ago.

Perhaps you need to find another movie besides "Top Gun" for your world view. The job is to protect the national airspace and you don't do that by slapping on a helmet mounted display on a outdated jet with a radar target the size of a blimp...

mountainbear
11-17-2005, 06:24 PM
South African air force changed its ensign?
http://homepage.eircom.net/~steven/images/eaglelrg.gif

Prins Proppmätt
11-19-2005, 12:46 PM
Here are som facts and figures from the official gripensite:

http://www.gripen.com/thegripenfighter/technicalsummary.4.3a1834fa3d6dee997fff747.html

Greek soldier
11-19-2005, 05:40 PM
For armament, SAAB says it can arm the Gripen with MICA too

http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/gripen/

They are also considering certifing the Brimstone AT missiles

http://www.canit.se/~griffon/aviation/gripen/armament.html

Plus, don't forget the EJ200. I post a reply I got from Eurojet GmbH:


Saab has years ago already investigated the technical and operational
feasibility for re-engineering JAS 39 Gripen with the EJ200 engine. Both Saab and EUROJET Turbo GmbH concluded that a re-engineering only shall be considered if there is a customer demand available. From a technical point of view, the EJ200 engine would fit into the engine bay of JAS39 Gripen with minor changes applied to the interface connections.The commercial feasibility of re-engineering JAS39 Gripen would be supported, if required, by individual business case calculations.
The Thrust vectoring nozzle is offered as an optional item for any ofthe EJ200 engine standards. I hope this answer can help.
Yours sincerely,
Katarina Elbogen

Katarina Elbogen
Executive PR and Political Affairs
EUROJET Turbo GmbHLilienthalstr. 2b85339 HallbergmoosE-Mail: k.elbogen@eurojet.de (k.elbogen@eurojet.de)

For a dogfight, please bring it to the Aegean Sea and then evaluate it against Greek Mirages and F-16s.

Something else: Please don't compare Gripen with Eurofighter. The one is single-engined and the other twin-engined.

But as a design is cool...