I almost hope that Denmark will choose this fighter for its F-16 replacements, although I think the EF Typhoon is a much more capable aircraft. Greetings from Denmark.
Thats a pretty descent payload the Gripen is carrying..would you say the Gripen NG would be able to fulfill the medium Strike fighter role as well as being an effective air to air fighter?
@f39eagle2 I'd definitely say so. With the maximum amount of external fuel, the NG is capable of carrying an even larger payload than the Rafale does when it's carrying the maximum amount of external fuel. The Gripen NG will also be able to carry a large variety of air-ground and ship-weapons. The Paveway II, Mk. 82, the RBS 15, the Mk 90 and the GBU-12 are just some weapons it carries. The pylons are NATO-standard so it can use any kind of western missile or bomb.
@wellerocks "With the maximum amount of external fuel, the NG is capable of carrying an even larger payload than the Rafale does when it's carrying the maximum amount of external fuel"
this is totally wrong
Rafale can carry 9800 kg of armement + 4800 kg external fuel , on 14 pylones ( 13 for the navy version )
C version : 9200 kg empty , 25 000 kg full
Gripen NG 3600 kg of armement + full fuel on 8 pylones + 2 rails for medium air air missile( i mean no meteor) at the end of the wings
but it changes nothing. Rafale can carry much more payload and still carry more external fuel
Rafale C 9060 kg empty + 4800 kg internal fuel + 10 640 kg of armement and external fuel on 14 payload pylones or 9500 kg of armement only
Gripen NG 7000 kg empty + 3400 kg internal fuel + 5200 kg of armement only or 5600 kg or armement and fuel ( 3800 max fuel ) on 8 payload pylones+ 1 missile rail at the top of teach wing
@XavierB0126 The Gripen NG will however have a smaller RCS than the Rafale C&M and according to the Indians, the Gripen AESA radar was definitely among the top of the contesters in the M-MRCA, beating atleast the MiG-35's, the F-16IN's and the Eurofighter's radar. I'm sure though that the Rafale's AESA is very competent non the less. Makes me wish that Sweden and France had a closer co-operation within aviation. Hopefully, the Neuron and the Meteor can be a step in the right direction!
@XavierB0126 Since I can't find the link on the forum that stated that, I'll have to assume you're right. However the Gripen NG will be able to have 4 pylons free for heavy air-ground weapons and 2 free for air-air weapons. If anything the Gripen NG will have similar weapon-cpapabilites to the EF and the Rafale.
to conclude, Rafale can carry, much more payload, better trust/weight ratio
( 15000/ 9060 empty or 15000/ 24500 full against 9800/ 7000 or 9800/ 16000 for gripen ) AND this is before the new M88-9 engine with 90 KN of max thrust with combustion ( each :) ) and better efficiency
yes, the New Gen gripen 2.0 is not even at the level of the first generation rafale
im happy than the gripen NG can supercruise at ...mach 1.1 when he s carrying something.
@XavierB0126 The Gripen NG will have a much increased T/W-ration which is well above 1.0. According to various sources it varies from 1.06 to 1.15. So the Rafale isn't that superior in that particular area. And the dual-engine vs. single-engine concepts can be argued for a long time. Dual engine fighters costs more and are larger but are able to carry more payload. The Rafale is a great aircraft, no doubt. It's not really similar to the Gripen so it's hard to compare them.
@XavierB0126 Could you explain what you mean by "the New Gen gripen 2.0 is not even at the level of the first generation rafale". I didn't quite get that.
@wellerocks sorry if i was a bit tough, i just "defend my meat" like you, btw with objective facts like you, but with the amount of single side vision people and people telling shit about rafale since years( especially english or anglo-saxon guys) i m often a bit tough, btw not from swesih guys for sure.
i just wanted to say, Rafale is still at the beginning of his developpment. the Rafale F3 is just the full done 1.0 version. when the Gripen NG is mid life major upgrade even 2.0 "super gripen"
@XavierB0126 Haha no worries friend. I can understand that problem of yours. Most poeple take a look at the Gripen and believe it can't perform especially well because it's cheap and produced by Sweden. The Rafale has a great life ahead of it. The Gripens will be able to fly until atleast 2040 when they're to be replaced with a completely new system. Hopefully, that might be a joint co-operation between france and Sweden.
@XavierB0126 The A/B Gripens were tailor-made for the Swedish conditions during the last days of the cold war. Since they were to only protect Sweden, range wasn't an issue and they needed to be able to land, re-arm and re-engage the enemy event hough lacking air or ground superiority. The C/D versions were more NATO-compatible versions of the A/B which made sales to Hungary, Thailand and the Czech Republic possible. The NG however is a completely new branch of the Gripen. A real beauty!
and about the radar u are right, his actual PESA radar ( need to wait until begin of 2012 for the new radar, :o wait 2012 its in 1 year lol ) is slightly inferior to the typhoon one. but i dont know if u can compare the AESA gripen radar with the today ones of rafale and eurofighter (gripen NG got meteor and AESA 1 year before rafale and 2 or 3 before typhoon )
@XavierB0126 I believe though that the French will be the first ones to have all Rafales integrated with AESA radars. The last of the A/B versions are now being converted to C/D standards, about 10-15 E/F's (Gripen NG) is to be bought in soon, and all C/D versions will within 5-10 years receive the MS 19 standard (AESA radar, Meteor integration, IRIS-T, HMD and a new pylon). That way, the E/F's could be used for international missions, Air Superiority and long distance missions with UCAV control
This is the plane Canada should select instead of the way overpriced F-35A. Canada wants 60-80 F-35, for the same price they could have 100 Gripen with 25 years of parts and maintence. Fills all of Canada's needs except for Parliments need to suck up to the USA.
@Papi1960R I could imagine the F-35A being a pretty bad choice for Canada which has a very large area to cover. it can't go faster than Mach #1.6 and it can't supercruise. Two very big drawbacks on range. The Gripen NG will allow Canada to use American engines (the same as the Hornets), have a range of 4000 km, use American aswell as European weaponry, use more of them and be more independent industrially and logically. I hope the last F-35 budget notification was a wake up call for Canada.
@wellerocks Reguardless of the flack you are getting from others on this thread, your observations are correct. For the activities that Canada needs to be involved in and the operations Canada chooses to be involved in the Gripen NG is much more than Canada could ever ask for. Mainly it would untether canada from being the USA's poor step-child when it comes to aviation. Buying the F-35 is currently beyound Canada's financial ability. The F-35 is too expensive for the USA, end of story.
@JrGuacamoles The Gripen NG uses a Volvo Aero modified version of the F414G engine, so yeah it basically uses the same engine as the Super Hornet but with Swedish modifications to gain some more thrust and to optimize it for the single engine Gripen.
@Lellefors Yeah, the Gripen is Swedish, I've never implied differently, but the Czech Air Force is the only operator that uses them in the NATO Tiger Meet. By doing so, they've also given their Gripens some awesome paintjobs.
I almost hope that Denmark will choose this fighter for its F-16 replacements, although I think the EF Typhoon is a much more capable aircraft. Greetings from Denmark.
Badger071 2 months ago
Awesome video, I love it.
namviet44 8 months ago
Perfect air jet fighter, Thailand like it and will purchase in the future.
MrGotzaza 9 months ago
Thats a pretty descent payload the Gripen is carrying..would you say the Gripen NG would be able to fulfill the medium Strike fighter role as well as being an effective air to air fighter?
f39eagle2 10 months ago
@f39eagle2 I'd definitely say so. With the maximum amount of external fuel, the NG is capable of carrying an even larger payload than the Rafale does when it's carrying the maximum amount of external fuel. The Gripen NG will also be able to carry a large variety of air-ground and ship-weapons. The Paveway II, Mk. 82, the RBS 15, the Mk 90 and the GBU-12 are just some weapons it carries. The pylons are NATO-standard so it can use any kind of western missile or bomb.
wellerocks 10 months ago
@wellerocks "With the maximum amount of external fuel, the NG is capable of carrying an even larger payload than the Rafale does when it's carrying the maximum amount of external fuel"
this is totally wrong
Rafale can carry 9800 kg of armement + 4800 kg external fuel , on 14 pylones ( 13 for the navy version )
C version : 9200 kg empty , 25 000 kg full
Gripen NG 3600 kg of armement + full fuel on 8 pylones + 2 rails for medium air air missile( i mean no meteor) at the end of the wings
XavierB0126 10 months ago
@XavierB0126 forgot 4800 kg of internal fuel.
but it changes nothing. Rafale can carry much more payload and still carry more external fuel
Rafale C 9060 kg empty + 4800 kg internal fuel + 10 640 kg of armement and external fuel on 14 payload pylones or 9500 kg of armement only
Gripen NG 7000 kg empty + 3400 kg internal fuel + 5200 kg of armement only or 5600 kg or armement and fuel ( 3800 max fuel ) on 8 payload pylones+ 1 missile rail at the top of teach wing
XavierB0126 10 months ago
@XavierB0126 The Gripen NG will however have a smaller RCS than the Rafale C&M and according to the Indians, the Gripen AESA radar was definitely among the top of the contesters in the M-MRCA, beating atleast the MiG-35's, the F-16IN's and the Eurofighter's radar. I'm sure though that the Rafale's AESA is very competent non the less. Makes me wish that Sweden and France had a closer co-operation within aviation. Hopefully, the Neuron and the Meteor can be a step in the right direction!
wellerocks 10 months ago
@XavierB0126 Since I can't find the link on the forum that stated that, I'll have to assume you're right. However the Gripen NG will be able to have 4 pylons free for heavy air-ground weapons and 2 free for air-air weapons. If anything the Gripen NG will have similar weapon-cpapabilites to the EF and the Rafale.
wellerocks 10 months ago
to conclude, Rafale can carry, much more payload, better trust/weight ratio
( 15000/ 9060 empty or 15000/ 24500 full against 9800/ 7000 or 9800/ 16000 for gripen ) AND this is before the new M88-9 engine with 90 KN of max thrust with combustion ( each :) ) and better efficiency
yes, the New Gen gripen 2.0 is not even at the level of the first generation rafale
im happy than the gripen NG can supercruise at ...mach 1.1 when he s carrying something.
and Rafale is omnirôle not multirôle fighter
XavierB0126 10 months ago
@XavierB0126 The Gripen NG will have a much increased T/W-ration which is well above 1.0. According to various sources it varies from 1.06 to 1.15. So the Rafale isn't that superior in that particular area. And the dual-engine vs. single-engine concepts can be argued for a long time. Dual engine fighters costs more and are larger but are able to carry more payload. The Rafale is a great aircraft, no doubt. It's not really similar to the Gripen so it's hard to compare them.
wellerocks 10 months ago
@XavierB0126 Could you explain what you mean by "the New Gen gripen 2.0 is not even at the level of the first generation rafale". I didn't quite get that.
wellerocks 10 months ago
@wellerocks sorry if i was a bit tough, i just "defend my meat" like you, btw with objective facts like you, but with the amount of single side vision people and people telling shit about rafale since years( especially english or anglo-saxon guys) i m often a bit tough, btw not from swesih guys for sure.
i just wanted to say, Rafale is still at the beginning of his developpment. the Rafale F3 is just the full done 1.0 version. when the Gripen NG is mid life major upgrade even 2.0 "super gripen"
XavierB0126 10 months ago
@XavierB0126 Haha no worries friend. I can understand that problem of yours. Most poeple take a look at the Gripen and believe it can't perform especially well because it's cheap and produced by Sweden. The Rafale has a great life ahead of it. The Gripens will be able to fly until atleast 2040 when they're to be replaced with a completely new system. Hopefully, that might be a joint co-operation between france and Sweden.
wellerocks 10 months ago
@wellerocks there was a bit a lame from me even if its some kind of true.
sorry for my bad english, your is very good
XavierB0126 10 months ago
@XavierB0126 The A/B Gripens were tailor-made for the Swedish conditions during the last days of the cold war. Since they were to only protect Sweden, range wasn't an issue and they needed to be able to land, re-arm and re-engage the enemy event hough lacking air or ground superiority. The C/D versions were more NATO-compatible versions of the A/B which made sales to Hungary, Thailand and the Czech Republic possible. The NG however is a completely new branch of the Gripen. A real beauty!
wellerocks 10 months ago
@wellerocks anyway, one thing is sure, The gripen NG is the best fighter of the world on cost / quality efficiency.
you forgot one thing about dual/single engine : dual engine is more safe for pilot if his engine had a problem
i dont know about RCS
typhoon , Rafale and gripen are constently improving their RCS
i heard Rafale had a better, then english guys told me the typhoon improved his RCS to be better than the other.
and today i heard Dassualt is working on a really improved RCS F4 version
XavierB0126 10 months ago
and about the radar u are right, his actual PESA radar ( need to wait until begin of 2012 for the new radar, :o wait 2012 its in 1 year lol ) is slightly inferior to the typhoon one. but i dont know if u can compare the AESA gripen radar with the today ones of rafale and eurofighter (gripen NG got meteor and AESA 1 year before rafale and 2 or 3 before typhoon )
XavierB0126 10 months ago
@XavierB0126 I believe though that the French will be the first ones to have all Rafales integrated with AESA radars. The last of the A/B versions are now being converted to C/D standards, about 10-15 E/F's (Gripen NG) is to be bought in soon, and all C/D versions will within 5-10 years receive the MS 19 standard (AESA radar, Meteor integration, IRIS-T, HMD and a new pylon). That way, the E/F's could be used for international missions, Air Superiority and long distance missions with UCAV control
wellerocks 10 months ago
@wellerocks i though Gripen NG was the first to intregrate meteor to his weapons, so i guess it means it will get his new radar at the same time ?
maybe im confused with the international demonstrator. which is already equipped with a beta AESA radar as the Rafale one for international selling
XavierB0126 10 months ago
This is the plane Canada should select instead of the way overpriced F-35A. Canada wants 60-80 F-35, for the same price they could have 100 Gripen with 25 years of parts and maintence. Fills all of Canada's needs except for Parliments need to suck up to the USA.
Papi1960R 11 months ago
@Papi1960R I could imagine the F-35A being a pretty bad choice for Canada which has a very large area to cover. it can't go faster than Mach #1.6 and it can't supercruise. Two very big drawbacks on range. The Gripen NG will allow Canada to use American engines (the same as the Hornets), have a range of 4000 km, use American aswell as European weaponry, use more of them and be more independent industrially and logically. I hope the last F-35 budget notification was a wake up call for Canada.
wellerocks 11 months ago
@wellerocks Reguardless of the flack you are getting from others on this thread, your observations are correct. For the activities that Canada needs to be involved in and the operations Canada chooses to be involved in the Gripen NG is much more than Canada could ever ask for. Mainly it would untether canada from being the USA's poor step-child when it comes to aviation. Buying the F-35 is currently beyound Canada's financial ability. The F-35 is too expensive for the USA, end of story.
Papi1960R 10 months ago
correct me if im wrong doesnt the gripen have the same engine as the f-18 super hornet?
JrGuacamoles 11 months ago
@JrGuacamoles The Gripen NG uses a Volvo Aero modified version of the F414G engine, so yeah it basically uses the same engine as the Super Hornet but with Swedish modifications to gain some more thrust and to optimize it for the single engine Gripen.
wellerocks 11 months ago
I hope to film the GRIPEN in the tiger meet in Cambrai le 15/05/2011
RAFALETIGRE1 11 months ago
@RAFALETIGRE1 very nice mate! I do love the Czech Gripens. They actually have the balls to give them a nice paintjob!
wellerocks 11 months ago
@wellerocks
The Gripen Fighter jets is SWEDISH!!!
Lellefors 10 months ago
@Lellefors Yeah, the Gripen is Swedish, I've never implied differently, but the Czech Air Force is the only operator that uses them in the NATO Tiger Meet. By doing so, they've also given their Gripens some awesome paintjobs.
wellerocks 10 months ago
EXTRA !!!!!!!!
RAFALETIGRE1 11 months ago
@RAFALETIGRE1 A real beauty, isn't she? ;)
wellerocks 11 months ago
Great fighter
BordoEnes 11 months ago