@HashKey64 I hope they together can upgrade and improve this incredible little fighter who have proven to be far better than F-16, F-15, F-18 and even the Eurofighter!/From a Gripen fan in the UK
Since this aircraft is Swedish, check this song by a swedish metal band watch?v=YCYOlT9rDic.
It fits 1000% with that super aircraft!
And since this NG is the heaviest edition of Gripen, the title of this almighty swedish band fits with this NG model watch?v=3AhcVhpjXX4&feature=related
Politics... Why buy a cheap and impressive aircraft from a shitty little country nobody can pinpoint on a map when you can spend a little more for something slightly worse, but in return get a fat contract and get in bed with the americans? The benefits of being on good terms with the US of A may show up in other areas of not only military equipment. If you look at the bigger picture, it's not strange that many countries choose the not so obvious choice. Shame on such a fantastic aircraft though
US pilots are the most operational experienced pilots, any Norwgegian, Dutch or Danish pilot would agree about that. Gripens never lost any aerial encounter!? In the US? In Europe, Frisian Flag, changes were 50%, F16 versus Gripen.
@Melchersson And what was the role of these Typhoons? Did they act as a MG type? Or flying with specific limitations of any other type? Did the Typhoons flying in a aggressor role?
@Melchersson Remarkable concerning Gripens how many times one read about how many jets have been shot down by Gripens, or did not loose against other types. While most reports of other types involved, pilots talk about how difficult it is to survive and having been shot down for instance three times by enemy jets or specifically by Sam’s. Against Sam types as SA-10 or higher a F16 has not a change, as well as a Gripen has no change.
@MelcherssonAs said before, what were the conditions? What roles? Were the Typhoons acting as MIG29’s or other jets? Did they act as American aggressors, specifically in that role they are supposed to lose. Just simply claiming having shot down two EF’s, no one will take such claims really serious. Bye the way what’s that special having shot down two EF’s in these kind of trainings?
@Melchersson During Frysian Flag Swedish Gripens had to operate in a strike package against Patriots, Nasams, AA frigates, in combination with defending jets like Finnish F18’s, F15’s or Norwegian, Dutch and Polish F16’s. Patriots can be compared with Sa-12 or higher. 40 to 50% has no change to survive first day of war, you really think a Gripen will have more chances to survive than any other jet? If that really was the case any country would like to order a Gripen.
@Ilona7maverick7 Melchersson is right! The Eurofighter, F-16-18 is incomparable to the Gripen! The Swedish inventors got something like when Alfred Nobel invented the dynamite! SWedish Dynamite in the air!/From UK
5 F16's knocked down at Red Flag Alaska? Ever thought about this! The Agressor pilots are supposed to loose. Giving opposing pilots changes, learning to survive and win a dog fight.
Some facts about Red Flag Alaska last year. Hardly 40% of the jets of a strike package managed to get on target, first day of war. A lot of these jets were shot down. Bye the way, what are these Gripens doing in the air, not in a package, and others on the ground?
The Gripen is a very attractive proposition for countries that want ultra high performance, but don't want to break the bank buying U.S., French or German(Eurofighter) aircraft.....or deal with Russia's bureaucratic bullshit. The Gripen is relatively inexpensive, but is well designed and built, and has many common components from American and European sources. You can't go wrong buying several full strength squadrons of these things.
@Puzzoozoo ......well they're not getting the Swedish package. The Swedes aren't turning loose with the uprated engines, avionics, or weapon system. Most of the export aircraft get a very capable "shelf" package that costs less, but is still much better that what the Russians will sell them. An exception to this is the aircraft that were sold to the Czech Republic through a NATO refit program. Their version is close to being like Sweden's......with the added expense of course.
@Puzzoozoo Its not the upfront cost that is low but the life cycle cost. Maintenance is easy and the aircraft is reliable. Flight hours are cheap so you can have a high availability with a comparatively small amount of planes.
@avro206 ....that's a distinct possibility about the F-35. I'm not too happy about the U.S. Navy's adoption of those things on aircraft carriers......one engine over the ocean? Not such a great idea. Ever since the 1950s, the Navy has always had twin engine fighters and bombers on the flight deck...F-4s,F-14s, F-18s, A-6s, Vigilantes, etc. It's so much safer. I'd like to see a navalized F-22, extremely expensive but well worth it.
This would be ideal for a small country like, New Zealand. A one stop shop for multiple uses and cheap to maintain and support. Even an integrated system of C2, maritime and sig int with the other Saab Erieye, would give a small nation multiple cost effective options...
@huiarama I think at some point the RNZAF was considering the Grippen but decided to take the old F16 from the US instead.... unfortunatley the NZ Government has a history of buying military equipment to meet the reqiurements of our allies missions and needs. e.g. the Styer was purchased to support Australian Industry.
@ginjaninja1988 Hey Man thanks for your comments, in regards to what you have mentioned, I'm quite surprised as alternatives discussed were the F5, coupled with the fact Labour were leaning towards an armed helicopter force., like the Super Cobra for example. However, there are non-military spheres that come into it. I recommend looking up: David McCraw 'NZ Defence Policy: A triumph for Ideology' and Lance Beath: 'Why NZ needs another Defence White Paper'. They are published in the NZIIA.
@huiarama Thanks for the referal. It was an interesting read. It seems to be that depending on the party in power we have to choose either A: Fullfilling everyone else's strategic goals or B: No military at all. Its a shame really. I thought taking a leaf out of the Swiss or Swedish approach to Defense would be a good idea... carry a big stick and mind your own business. It seems to have worked well for them in continually far more complicated defense environments. I cant see the logic in
@ginjaninja1988 Your right it does, the Scandinavian model, could in theory work. We have a similar population base, education, civic society and global outlook, despite some notable variation such as minerals. There are large deposits of iron, steel. The other is the innovation of industry. NZ had that to a certain extent up til' the 70s and 80s. The point of no-return was in the mid 80s during the reforms of neo-liberalism. It comes down to sovereignty, something that neo-libs do not identify
@huiarama with. They pretty much focus on the individual and laissez-faire economics. Defence equates with the protection of sovereignty and the national interest and to a certain extent identity, even in complex times where states have collapsed to the point of civil war and peacekeeping and nation building is used...
@huiarama Fighting wars for America on the other side of the world..... but I can see the logic in maintaining an effective air and naval combat force. You never know what the future holds; especially considering the current worsening climate issues. Our little food basket may become a valuable little prize to a government with hungry mouths.
@ginjaninja1988 With respect, its not like that. Ultimately NZ operates in her self interest too. It would be naive to think otherwise. So, its not quite "America's wars" as such. Other commentators have referred to it as: 'an Anglo-Saxon Sphere of influence'. This has been a long and contested argument. I revert back to my last comments on Defence is a sovereign orientated output, coupled with the fact that the reforms from the 80s onwards focus on individualism and laissez-faire economics as
@huiarama archaic and with less relevance in the modern times, as such the language separates the citizen from the institution. Defence in NZ, is often an easy target by those who adopt this line of rhetoric or language. At the end of the day, the people who serve over seas in one capacity or another, reflect the beliefs and values of the society it serves, and of course its 'interests'.
i heard something about US delaying the delivery of the radar to gripen so norway or denmark would by F-35 dont know if it´s true but if it is true. it sure pisses me of as a swede
Brazil made a mistake not accepting the development of Mirage 2000Br at the same level of the Saudis Mirage, with some gadgets from Rafale electrinics. Much cheaper than Rafales an almost the same capabilities, with total transfer of tecnologie, as a previous step of total independencie.
Pois eh acho que deve ser a força aerea que tem de decidir, afinal quem vai usar eh eles, essa maldita republica brasileira eh uma merda nao cuida direito do povo e aki no rio ta uma desgraça é a força aérea brasileira que tem de decidir o aviao aff...-_-
Demoram mais de 1 ano pra fornecer uma peça pro Mirage, quando é solicitado pela FAB. Não confio nos franceses. A saab disse que por ser o NG, o Brasil pode optar por um motor de outro país caso seja melhor. Esse é o lado bom de o caça ainda estar em desenvolvimento! Mas pra falar a verdade, bom mesmo seria se tivesse comprado alguns SU-37 pra ontem e ter entrado no desenvolvimento do PAK-FA T-50 . concorda? =)
Gripen NG could be developed into a new, robust air-craft distinguishing future Brazilian and Swedish air fighters. Swede are more inclined to share their know-hows and secrets than the French.
Na compra de um Grippen de plástico, ganhe uma videoteca suéca com todos os episódios estrelados pela "lindíssima" Veronica Siwik. Hummm...os "fabianos" da Embraer vão adorar.
To Gripen NG have performance capable to be compared with the better fighter planes of today,it would need to have a much more powerfull engine, AESA radar and a bigger wing with more underwing hardpoints. If you disagree, please compare with the competitors the number of aams that NG is capable to transport,radar range against fighter size target and combat radius WITHOUT underwing fuel tanks. NG doesn't even have the possibility of install CFTs... If yes,show me a picture of NG with it.
I think you are right, the new engine gives a power ratio that Gripen can´t really take advantage of. But they seem too look into solving it by hanging "hard points" on the hard points. There is a CG image of Gripen NG carrying 2x2 ASM, 2 AMRAAM and 2 Sidewinder. On the other hand, Gripen is a plane built to be easy to maintain and the "turn around time" is much shorter then most aircrafts. IE after expending your ordnance you land, run diagnostics, fix any problems, re-arm and take off again.
And I think the Gripen carries more ordnance then Viggen, thanks to new engine technology, much better and smaller computers and the use of composite materials.
The ABS system on Gripen (yes, it has anti locking brakes) has more computer power tnen the entier Viggen.
Underwing double hardpoints doesn't make bigger the RCS !? Why couldn't Gripen NG have a wing with bigger area,may be with same size of that seen in Viggen if the plane that's flying now is only a technologies demonstrator,with more underwing
hardpoints to aams and/or military cargo ?
Why it hasn't CFTs? But,more than this,mine major concern is about the maximum range of its AESA radar : with so small size and single engined,will its radar have enough power against lowest RCS targets ?
Of course external ordnance increase RCS. Gripen carries more then Viggen.
It has CFT, they will be placed like on the F-16, over the smooth area between wing and body. They have also increased internal fuel stores.
Gripen isn´t that small, it is the same size or even bigger then many other fighters today. As far as I understand, the AESA radar will be roughly the same as the one Typhoon carries, they are made by the same company (what ever happened with the Ericsson radar, I have no clue).
Since Brazil already have the Eireye, buying Gripen NG makes sense. They are fully integrated and the information edge against your potential enemies would be huge. For example, the Gripen doesn´t have to use it´s own radar in a BWR attack, the information from the AEW can be sent to the Gripen and downloaded into it´s AAMs and fired without Gripen using any active systems.
Since you are from brazil, are you still looking to buy 36 plus, mayby, 120 planes...?
Here,in Brazil,what weights more against the Gripen NG as air defense fighter is its potentially much smaller combat radius without underwing fuel tanks, when compared against Super Hornet and Rafale, and its dependence of made in USA components. There's in Youtube a video,presented by a brigadier/engineer of Brazilian Air Force,that show how the USA really treat my country when
the topic is military buys and technology transfers - and what is shown is very bad and against SH and Gripen NG.
How is possible the Gripen have almost the same combat radius as SH if its cell is so slim when compared with american fighter ? If SAAB doesn't make all the Gripen components and if there's the dependence of american components,how to have confidence - not in SAAB but in USA makers - when there's the possibility of boycots !?...
As I said, according to Wikipedia. Smaller plane, less drag, one engine... Perhaps?
I don´t know how the agreement with US companies looks, perhaps they signed over the right to certain parts? But I do know there is a lot of options to the Gripen NG, both in ordnance and plane parts. Meteor is a part SAAB project and so is IRIS-T.
About parts, I emailed SAAB and asked, we´ll see if the answer. :)
So fast this engine can be installed in the Gripen the fighter will be much more atractive for many nations,and this will make fall barriers from many people that doesn't like of a fighter that depend of american important components...
Combat radius for Gripen C is 800km, on internal fuel. 1550km with external fuel. The Super Hornet has two engines, which increases its fuel consumption in comparison to the small and aerodynamically slippery Gripen. The Super Hornet suffers from VERY high drag. It can't go supersonic at low altitude even in clean configuration. Not even without pylons. The Super Hornet is an aerodynamic failure.
How would be the Gripen NG combat radius with CFTs that there's at least in design form ? Isn't there,under the NG and closer of wing tips,space for two more underwing hardpoints ? With these aditional hardpoints,if possible to install them,I think that much people would like more of the NG if could see it with more hard points to weapons.
What would be the Gripen NG combat radius to an air interception mission with CFTs,whose design can be found in some sites,6 Meteor and 4 A-Darter or IRIS-T ?
The Gripen is an excellent interceptor actually, the information superiority is extremely well developed, for instance one Gripen knocked down five F-16 falcons, and won every encounter during two weeks in the exercise Red Flag Alaska.
@HatTrick656 Gripen is a very stealthy fighter too, so "if" a F-22 Raptor and a JAS-39 Gripen NG should meet each other one-on-one i can't say what would happen. Maybe they would end up very close before any of them detect each other.
@OlderG0ds The Gripen compensates it with radar absorbing materials, smaller size and integrated jammer, at least according to the sources i've read which includes the Gripen home page. The hungarian report on its performance during Spring Flag Italy also suggests that it is quite stealthy.
It's a great plane, I have nothing bad to say about it, but I just wouldn't call it "very stealthy", I wouldn't call Eurofighter or Rafale that either. They all have reduced radar cross sections and make use of radar absorbent material but they're not exactly hard to find. But as I was saying under wing munitions are not made for stealth, they significantly increase a radar return.
Keep in mind wave reflections are just one aspect of the stealth spectrum.
@onlypeaceindeath It is not a stealth aircraft but compares very well in terms of RCS with other non stealth aircraft. It's new radar is also very good allowing it to fight at greater ranges. It's datalink and modern weapons make it a serious threat. It's a good value for the price. If your country has tons of money they can use the money saved to buy a few stealth aircraft as well.
@stupidburp Actually the USAF acknowledges it as a fifth generation fighter due to super cruise capability and semi-stealth features. It has a very low radar signature, and an extremely low IR/heat signal.
@OlderG0ds Actually, in terms of IR/Heat, the Gripen and the Rafalé performs very well, and even having smaller signatures than that of the F-22 and F-35. Although, while having external weapon bays and canards, they can't really match the stealthiness of the F-35 or the F-22. But according to some USAF sources, the F22 radar signature is that of a small bird, the F-35 that of a smaller chicken, and the Gripen NG with air-air missiles as that of a medium-large bird of pray, such as an Eagle
@wellerocks US is bound to promote and spread the word of the best and the most invincible factor to create a psychological barrier. I don't underestimate the Raptor but the same words were said about F-117 that got smashed by vintage weapons, shutting many mouths.
Besides, how many hours of training can a pilot obtain comfortably on it per year compared to Gripen or other 4++ generation fighters? Not even half. Its so expensive just flying it for 1 hour that half the time it'll be on ground.
@Saffronwing1 the 117 was shot downs because the mission flight path is at a preplanned pre-agreed upon as per some treaty....that allowed the sam operators to plan and even study in advance what weakness can be exploited. that caused its demise, if it was flown where no one would expect it then it would remain today as one very reknowned craft.
@nakazatoGTR Dude, that logic applies to almost every modern jet. LOL! the enemy won't be sitting playing cards when fighters scan their airspace or attempt to bomb. It is a big achievement for a country like Serbia that has a small offensive capability. Remember that Israeli air force used F-16s below the radar coverage (200 feet AGL) and destroyed the Osirak nuke plant in Iraq.
@wellerocks I doubt that. F-22 has addressed all aspects of stealth including infrared/heat , from the engine shape and cooling the exhaust internally before it comes out the afterburners and the missile bays hide additional heat sources etc. Gripen and Rafale have nothing on that. Pratt & Whitney F119 is the most advanced engines to be produced .
@OlderG0ds The F-22 has mainly focused on radar cross section signature reducing technology. Hence it's never supposed to get "close" to any fighters. It's main task is to deliver the first strike in air-air combat over extremely large distances. Most close range missiles use IR/Heat which means that since no target is to come that close anyway, it was not focused on as much. There's several videos on youtube showing the difference in IR between the Rafale and the F-22.
@OlderG0ds You are right about the Pratt & Whitney F119 being one of the most advanced engines as of today, but that is mostly due to other factors as being able to super cruising stealthy, Thrust vectoring, massive acceleration and great speed.
@RocknRoll707 Belive it or not but one Gripen pilot knocked down five F-16 block 50+ during close air combat in Red Flag Alaska. And the Gripens NEVER lost any aerial encouter or failed their mission objectives. It was the fighter that perfomed all their planed starts, while others where sitting on the ground waiting for the weather to clear up, So I guess its a pretty darn good airplane :)
@Helge129 You are absolutely right. Red Flag, as said in this Utube video: Nellis Air Force Base Russian Attack Training Exersice; "Red Flag is not a contest or a competition. There are no winners or losers, it's about training and saving lives"
Still the same as in the past, learning to survive a first ten missions.
@RocknRoll707 And no disrespect to the Norwegian pilots because I know they're just as well trained as us, but during a combat exercise with the Royal Norwegain Air Force, 3 Swedish Gripens went up against 5 RNAF F-16's. The Result was 5-0, 5-0, 5-1 after having flown 3 rounds. During Loyal Arrow in Sweden, 3 F-15C's from the USAF were intercepted by a Gripen acting as an aggressor. The result was 2 F-15's having been shot down and one managed to escape due to better thrust/weight.
@wellerocks Im Norwegian, and i love Gripen NG. Its superior to f-16. I think the F-35 is a better atack plain than the Gripen, but for interceptors the Gripen is better. I wish Norway had bought Gripen, but then again...we need to bomb third world countries, and thats where the f-35 shines lol
@Tordenguden Yeah that's probably true. If you ask me, the F-35 has great potential as a strategic bomber/strike fighter. However it seems to lack some serious air superiority aswell as range and economy. But I'm afraid that the Gripen E/F is soon to be doomed. India just ditched it, Brazil favors the Rafale, no Scandinavian country is going to buy it apart from Sweden, and even here in Sweden, the left-wing parties is trying to delay its entrance to the Swedish Air Force.
@Tordenguden The good thin about F-35 is the radar system, witch have a great range, so i theory a pilot would be able to kill the war target before the war target sees u on the radar. However, for intercepting russian fighters, and show air superiority, the Gripen would be a better option, or the EF. I would prefer Gripen though, since im a nordist, scandinavist...what ever hehe. I want a unified Scandinavia.
@Tordenguden I´ve heard that your Gripens been "shooting" down 2 of our EF during red-flag operations!
Congratulations! The EF is much better looking at blueprints but Id guess its the quality of the pilots that matter to! One is "good luck" 2 is a damn good fighter
@RocknRoll707 F-16 is an old airframe man. Its not God-made that it will be invincible forever. It is a fact that during Red Flag, Gripens screwed USAF F-16s and even F-15s prompting US to consider Raptors even more seriously.
Gripen has proved enough to be given a chance in a real battlefield. Besides, F-16 owes its true credentials to Israeli air force that pushed it to its limits in the right manner. USAF has only used them in coalition attacks against single countries so no biggie there.
Air interception over a big country like Brazil is tricky for any plane. But the Gripen NG has decent range. And it can land and refuel on hidden STOL road bases which are quite inexpensive to build anywhere in Brazil. And also one of the big strengths of this plane's unique philosophy. True, there are many U.S. components in the Gripen. But that can also be used as an excuse against those U.S. politicians who insist on treating South America as their back yard.
The Bad things of the Gripen NG are: combat radius not good enough in air interception,less cargo under wings than the other fighters in the FX-2 competition and the unwillinged presence
The music sounds somewhat like that of Ghost Recon (the original not GR:AW)
The Gripen NG is such a beautiful aircraft. I wish that the UK would consider purchasing them over the "JCA". (DO NOT) Retardedly flame me saying 0h n0es but the JCA is l33t stealth either. JMO.
Well SAAB needs a partner for Gripen NG. My guess is NG will be a Swiss/Swedish cojoint product.
HashKey64 2 weeks ago
@HashKey64 i belive Brazil is also in it well last time i checked anyways lol
twyztted 1 week ago
@twyztted Maybe it will be a truly international fighter then: Brazilian/Swiss/Swedish! ;D
HashKey64 1 week ago
@HashKey64 I hope they together can upgrade and improve this incredible little fighter who have proven to be far better than F-16, F-15, F-18 and even the Eurofighter!/From a Gripen fan in the UK
TheBeatnik1000 1 week ago
@HashKey64 that would be awesome
twyztted 6 days ago
@HashKey64 check out this video Gripen NG Brasil looks like a done deal so i say may God bless our countrys =)
twyztted 6 days ago
Since this aircraft is Swedish, check this song by a swedish metal band watch?v=YCYOlT9rDic.
It fits 1000% with that super aircraft!
And since this NG is the heaviest edition of Gripen, the title of this almighty swedish band fits with this NG model watch?v=3AhcVhpjXX4&feature=related
Perfection!
MSGDK 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Meet Zaab Gayripen.....Underpowered low tech Swedish piece of shit with a cheap short range radar LOL
Cengiz78x 1 month ago
whats the name of the music?
Stridus7 1 month ago
If they made version with internal weapons for better cruise speed and less RCS there will be probably no need for F-35 in Europe.
IonorRea 1 month ago
Maby the best choice for the Dutcth AireForce but, the orders for Dutch Industry the maybe never get...and the will off "The US" is already taken!!!
crocket1971 2 months ago
first you should stop wasting money of EU
TheRott44 2 months ago
Politics... Why buy a cheap and impressive aircraft from a shitty little country nobody can pinpoint on a map when you can spend a little more for something slightly worse, but in return get a fat contract and get in bed with the americans? The benefits of being on good terms with the US of A may show up in other areas of not only military equipment. If you look at the bigger picture, it's not strange that many countries choose the not so obvious choice. Shame on such a fantastic aircraft though
Monstretundersengen 2 months ago
Did i see buddy to buddy refuling at 2:12?
anden191 2 months ago
US pilots are the most operational experienced pilots, any Norwgegian, Dutch or Danish pilot would agree about that. Gripens never lost any aerial encounter!? In the US? In Europe, Frisian Flag, changes were 50%, F16 versus Gripen.
Ilona7maverick7 2 months ago
@Ilona7maverick7 2 EF was shoot down at one redflag in Hungury, no Gripens
Melchersson 2 months ago
@Melchersson And what was the role of these Typhoons? Did they act as a MG type? Or flying with specific limitations of any other type? Did the Typhoons flying in a aggressor role?
Ilona7maverick7 2 months ago
@Melchersson Remarkable concerning Gripens how many times one read about how many jets have been shot down by Gripens, or did not loose against other types. While most reports of other types involved, pilots talk about how difficult it is to survive and having been shot down for instance three times by enemy jets or specifically by Sam’s. Against Sam types as SA-10 or higher a F16 has not a change, as well as a Gripen has no change.
Ilona7maverick7 2 months ago
@Ilona7maverick7 The EFs who where shoot down by two Gripens on a red flag is available and well documented just google for it!
Melchersson 2 months ago
@MelcherssonAs said before, what were the conditions? What roles? Were the Typhoons acting as MIG29’s or other jets? Did they act as American aggressors, specifically in that role they are supposed to lose. Just simply claiming having shot down two EF’s, no one will take such claims really serious. Bye the way what’s that special having shot down two EF’s in these kind of trainings?
Ilona7maverick7 2 months ago
@Ilona7maverick7 Do your homework and google about the Gripen dogfights!
TheBeatnik1000 2 months ago
@Ilona7maverick7 Im from the UK and would prefer the little underrated Swedish fighter before the EF!
TheBeatnik1000 2 months ago
@Ilona7maverick7 The EF and F-16´s where the aggressors.You can search for it on google and the SAABs own site.
Melchersson 2 months ago
@Melchersson During Frysian Flag Swedish Gripens had to operate in a strike package against Patriots, Nasams, AA frigates, in combination with defending jets like Finnish F18’s, F15’s or Norwegian, Dutch and Polish F16’s. Patriots can be compared with Sa-12 or higher. 40 to 50% has no change to survive first day of war, you really think a Gripen will have more chances to survive than any other jet? If that really was the case any country would like to order a Gripen.
Ilona7maverick7 2 months ago
@Ilona7maverick7 Aren´t they?
Melchersson 2 months ago
@Ilona7maverick7 Melchersson is right! The Eurofighter, F-16-18 is incomparable to the Gripen! The Swedish inventors got something like when Alfred Nobel invented the dynamite! SWedish Dynamite in the air!/From UK
TheBeatnik1000 2 months ago
5 F16's knocked down at Red Flag Alaska? Ever thought about this! The Agressor pilots are supposed to loose. Giving opposing pilots changes, learning to survive and win a dog fight.
Some facts about Red Flag Alaska last year. Hardly 40% of the jets of a strike package managed to get on target, first day of war. A lot of these jets were shot down. Bye the way, what are these Gripens doing in the air, not in a package, and others on the ground?
Ilona7maverick7 2 months ago
I Know that the JAS-39 Gripen is Swedish, but what symbol is that on the tail? A Lion?
fordelningkid 3 months ago
@fordelningkid It's a griffin. Gripen = griffin in swedish.
baoap 3 months ago
oh ,I want it to Czech air force !
OSI821 5 months ago
Excelent.
Excelent CGI (computer graphics)
ricardoleitesantos 5 months ago
The Gripen is a very attractive proposition for countries that want ultra high performance, but don't want to break the bank buying U.S., French or German(Eurofighter) aircraft.....or deal with Russia's bureaucratic bullshit. The Gripen is relatively inexpensive, but is well designed and built, and has many common components from American and European sources. You can't go wrong buying several full strength squadrons of these things.
Lex5576 6 months ago
@Lex5576 I wouldn't call $50 million a pop as 'inexpensive'.
Puzzoozoo 6 months ago
@Puzzoozoo ......well they're not getting the Swedish package. The Swedes aren't turning loose with the uprated engines, avionics, or weapon system. Most of the export aircraft get a very capable "shelf" package that costs less, but is still much better that what the Russians will sell them. An exception to this is the aircraft that were sold to the Czech Republic through a NATO refit program. Their version is close to being like Sweden's......with the added expense of course.
Lex5576 5 months ago
@Puzzoozoo Its not the upfront cost that is low but the life cycle cost. Maintenance is easy and the aircraft is reliable. Flight hours are cheap so you can have a high availability with a comparatively small amount of planes.
meanmanturbo 4 months ago
@Lex5576 I think this should have been a contender for Canada. These F-35s are going to cost a fortune and alot of downtime for maintance.
avro206 3 months ago
@avro206 ....that's a distinct possibility about the F-35. I'm not too happy about the U.S. Navy's adoption of those things on aircraft carriers......one engine over the ocean? Not such a great idea. Ever since the 1950s, the Navy has always had twin engine fighters and bombers on the flight deck...F-4s,F-14s, F-18s, A-6s, Vigilantes, etc. It's so much safer. I'd like to see a navalized F-22, extremely expensive but well worth it.
Lex5576 3 months ago
It's a pride of Thai people to got this High performance-Low coast
fighter to protect our country. At first we never heard about "JAS-39"
we guess that new fighter to replace F-5 should be a F-16 F-15
or Eurofighter but when Thai airforce announce that they have chosen
JAS 39 all of us feel stress out about the perfomance. but after
when we known that Sweden give us a source code and some aircraft
technology. all of us feel need more 2-4 squadron of this.
PS.MBDA Meteor does it.
bigboom2006 7 months ago
@bigboom2006. Make us proud, show the planes from their best side ;)
SoPlEoReD 4 months ago
Hello Everybody!!! JSF is a bad plane. Gripen rules!!! Regards Svein.........
bergvoll14 7 months ago
uuuu, sexy!
alexander1t 8 months ago
This would be ideal for a small country like, New Zealand. A one stop shop for multiple uses and cheap to maintain and support. Even an integrated system of C2, maritime and sig int with the other Saab Erieye, would give a small nation multiple cost effective options...
huiarama 9 months ago
@huiarama I think at some point the RNZAF was considering the Grippen but decided to take the old F16 from the US instead.... unfortunatley the NZ Government has a history of buying military equipment to meet the reqiurements of our allies missions and needs. e.g. the Styer was purchased to support Australian Industry.
ginjaninja1988 8 months ago
@ginjaninja1988 Hey Man thanks for your comments, in regards to what you have mentioned, I'm quite surprised as alternatives discussed were the F5, coupled with the fact Labour were leaning towards an armed helicopter force., like the Super Cobra for example. However, there are non-military spheres that come into it. I recommend looking up: David McCraw 'NZ Defence Policy: A triumph for Ideology' and Lance Beath: 'Why NZ needs another Defence White Paper'. They are published in the NZIIA.
huiarama 8 months ago
@huiarama NZIIA is NZ International Institute of Affairs. They do a review magazine via Victoria university. Let me know what you think...
huiarama 8 months ago
@huiarama Thanks for the referal. It was an interesting read. It seems to be that depending on the party in power we have to choose either A: Fullfilling everyone else's strategic goals or B: No military at all. Its a shame really. I thought taking a leaf out of the Swiss or Swedish approach to Defense would be a good idea... carry a big stick and mind your own business. It seems to have worked well for them in continually far more complicated defense environments. I cant see the logic in
ginjaninja1988 8 months ago
@ginjaninja1988 Your right it does, the Scandinavian model, could in theory work. We have a similar population base, education, civic society and global outlook, despite some notable variation such as minerals. There are large deposits of iron, steel. The other is the innovation of industry. NZ had that to a certain extent up til' the 70s and 80s. The point of no-return was in the mid 80s during the reforms of neo-liberalism. It comes down to sovereignty, something that neo-libs do not identify
huiarama 8 months ago
@huiarama with. They pretty much focus on the individual and laissez-faire economics. Defence equates with the protection of sovereignty and the national interest and to a certain extent identity, even in complex times where states have collapsed to the point of civil war and peacekeeping and nation building is used...
huiarama 8 months ago
@huiarama Fighting wars for America on the other side of the world..... but I can see the logic in maintaining an effective air and naval combat force. You never know what the future holds; especially considering the current worsening climate issues. Our little food basket may become a valuable little prize to a government with hungry mouths.
ginjaninja1988 8 months ago
@ginjaninja1988 With respect, its not like that. Ultimately NZ operates in her self interest too. It would be naive to think otherwise. So, its not quite "America's wars" as such. Other commentators have referred to it as: 'an Anglo-Saxon Sphere of influence'. This has been a long and contested argument. I revert back to my last comments on Defence is a sovereign orientated output, coupled with the fact that the reforms from the 80s onwards focus on individualism and laissez-faire economics as
huiarama 8 months ago
@huiarama archaic and with less relevance in the modern times, as such the language separates the citizen from the institution. Defence in NZ, is often an easy target by those who adopt this line of rhetoric or language. At the end of the day, the people who serve over seas in one capacity or another, reflect the beliefs and values of the society it serves, and of course its 'interests'.
huiarama 8 months ago
i heard something about US delaying the delivery of the radar to gripen so norway or denmark would by F-35 dont know if it´s true but if it is true. it sure pisses me of as a swede
SuperAnime4life 10 months ago
Targeting pod?
discofishing 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Somebody know what the name of music has been added in this video?
Tickermaster 11 months ago
Somebody know wthat the name of music has been added in this video?
Tickermaster 11 months ago
JAS is going to bomb the living daylights out of Muammar Gaddafi!
siemenstraffic 11 months ago
@siemenstraffic Except that they won't be allowed to attack any ground targets.
jimmyn89SWE 11 months ago
We are small, but big, feel me? Sweden rules.
morrarN 11 months ago
Hi all,
Does anybody have some news regarding the latest info from the development of the NG.
my gut-feeling is that the JAS39, might not be the best technically, but more a kind of best-buy from a financial/technical point of view.
JAS for DK plz...?
laurentiuslafoca 1 year ago
damn i wanna be a pilot!
TheSwekebab 1 year ago 4
The Gripen is probably the most beautiful fighter in the world in my oppinion!!
arpan88 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I want to see those wonderful aircrafts ruling the skys here in Greece !
Every Greek does
ERIKEPAIOS 1 year ago
Its kinda un-realistic to compare this and the f22....
The f22 is stealth and costs 130 million USD.
RocknRoll707 1 year ago
I want to see those wonderful aircrafts ruling the skys here in Greece !
Every Greek does
ERIKEPAIOS 1 year ago 14
@ERIKEPAIOS amin,
MSGDK 1 year ago
@ERIKEPAIOS the irony of this comment is out of my imagination
irou95 3 months ago
I don´t to see anything virtual imagem. Fuck you man.
idpaipsc 1 year ago
A-W-E-S-O-M-E-!
flatron306 1 year ago
muy bien :)
mrmatt1861 1 year ago
Brazil made a mistake not accepting the development of Mirage 2000Br at the same level of the Saudis Mirage, with some gadgets from Rafale electrinics. Much cheaper than Rafales an almost the same capabilities, with total transfer of tecnologie, as a previous step of total independencie.
MarioSeoane 1 year ago
Pois eh acho que deve ser a força aerea que tem de decidir, afinal quem vai usar eh eles, essa maldita republica brasileira eh uma merda nao cuida direito do povo e aki no rio ta uma desgraça é a força aérea brasileira que tem de decidir o aviao aff...-_-
Lokoghost 1 year ago
Gripen é O Caça!
Markcy1989 1 year ago
Se o Lula optar pelo Gripen eu voto na Dilma!
Caso o contrario, o PT nunca terá meu voto!
E Lula... o Brasil precisa investir no programa nuclear! Continue assim, não deixe que os americanos continuem atrasando nosso desenvolvimento!
NinguemRegulaAmerica 1 year ago 2
@NinguemRegulaAmerica
Esse caça só existe num computador , nunca voou e te outro probleminha que niguem fala, suas turbinas, são americanas.
E já vimos que eles embargam nossas vendas quando existe equipamento deles a bordo, lembre-se do AMX p/ Venezuela.
martinsmmf2010 1 year ago
@martinsmmf2010
Então vamos no F... com os franceses novamente ?
Demoram mais de 1 ano pra fornecer uma peça pro Mirage, quando é solicitado pela FAB. Não confio nos franceses. A saab disse que por ser o NG, o Brasil pode optar por um motor de outro país caso seja melhor. Esse é o lado bom de o caça ainda estar em desenvolvimento! Mas pra falar a verdade, bom mesmo seria se tivesse comprado alguns SU-37 pra ontem e ter entrado no desenvolvimento do PAK-FA T-50 . concorda? =)
NinguemRegulaAmerica 1 year ago
A melhor opção para a nossa FAB, espero que os IMBECIS lá em Brasilia escolham direito.
paulegasrkm 1 year ago
Gripen NG could be developed into a new, robust air-craft distinguishing future Brazilian and Swedish air fighters. Swede are more inclined to share their know-hows and secrets than the French.
But the final desicion is up to Lula.
Brigadirok 2 years ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
Na compra de um Grippen de plástico, ganhe uma videoteca suéca com todos os episódios estrelados pela "lindíssima" Veronica Siwik. Hummm...os "fabianos" da Embraer vão adorar.
martinsmmf2010 2 years ago
GRIPEN NG BRAZIL!
88058083 2 years ago
yes but it would be better if Brazil take a part of PAK-FA programm.
goodspeedy666 2 years ago
AAAAAAAAAAA
BRAZIL NEED TO BUY GRIPEN!!!
We cant pay X value to rafale, we can buy and mantain TWO gripen with the same value!!!!
Im coment this because im trying enter to FAB (Forca Aérea Brasileira) or BAF (Brazilian air force)
ramonrochamoreira 2 years ago 5
Ramon rocha biba, By IIIRBR CaptainGasper euahea !
Concordo com vc, seria ótimo o gripen, mas lula escolheu rafale, e eu vou pra FAB, e se Deus quiser, vou pilotar o rafale !
GasperBoy157 2 years ago
Gripen NG Brazil
watch?v=33V-RsJBVXI
watch?v=33V-RsJBVXI
watch?v=33V-RsJBVXI
BRAZIL !!!
484861899 2 years ago
Comment removed
484861899 2 years ago
( Panzer Moniom ) Yea thats why they (Brazil) asked SAAB to adjust their aircraft to suit their needs a couple of weeks ago !!
HionShrooms 2 years ago
2:30-2:33 external tanks has wings ? why ?
goodspeedy666 2 years ago
Thats look more like bombs or some anti ship missils or something.
onlypeaceindeath 2 years ago
Brazil had not yet annonced who will win the buy.
alexrj2 2 years ago
Comment removed
PanzerMonium 2 years ago
Comment removed
HionShrooms 2 years ago
Comment removed
PanzerMonium 2 years ago
may i know the name / title of the background music please ?
ambercrown 2 years ago
I'd choose this than F-35 ...
ambercrown 2 years ago 4
It's official
Brazilian Air Force chose the Gripen!
F-18 Took the 2nd place and Rafale the last.
But thats not over yet since the final choise is made by the Brazilian government.
PanzerMonium 2 years ago
viva la gripen!
huiarama 2 years ago 7
I want to see those wonderful aircrafts ruling the skys here in Brazil!
I hope you win the FX-2 Sweden
PanzerMonium 2 years ago 46
To Gripen NG have performance capable to be compared with the better fighter planes of today,it would need to have a much more powerfull engine, AESA radar and a bigger wing with more underwing hardpoints. If you disagree, please compare with the competitors the number of aams that NG is capable to transport,radar range against fighter size target and combat radius WITHOUT underwing fuel tanks. NG doesn't even have the possibility of install CFTs... If yes,show me a picture of NG with it.
LeoAndRas 2 years ago
Gripen will have all those things. IR tracker, HMS, AESA radar, CFT, bigger engine (TV was scraped since the instability offers the same advantage).
Picture? Gripen NG doesn´t exist except as a technology demonstarter, but the concepts have been proven in tunnel and computer tests.
swertinge07 2 years ago
Even then Gripen would need a bigger wing,with
more wing area and with some underwing hardpoints more to aams and/or more military cargo... wouldn't be better a plane with Viggen size !?
LeoAndRas 2 years ago
I think you are right, the new engine gives a power ratio that Gripen can´t really take advantage of. But they seem too look into solving it by hanging "hard points" on the hard points. There is a CG image of Gripen NG carrying 2x2 ASM, 2 AMRAAM and 2 Sidewinder. On the other hand, Gripen is a plane built to be easy to maintain and the "turn around time" is much shorter then most aircrafts. IE after expending your ordnance you land, run diagnostics, fix any problems, re-arm and take off again.
swertinge07 2 years ago
And I think the Gripen carries more ordnance then Viggen, thanks to new engine technology, much better and smaller computers and the use of composite materials.
The ABS system on Gripen (yes, it has anti locking brakes) has more computer power tnen the entier Viggen.
swertinge07 2 years ago
Underwing double hardpoints doesn't make bigger the RCS !? Why couldn't Gripen NG have a wing with bigger area,may be with same size of that seen in Viggen if the plane that's flying now is only a technologies demonstrator,with more underwing
hardpoints to aams and/or military cargo ?
Why it hasn't CFTs? But,more than this,mine major concern is about the maximum range of its AESA radar : with so small size and single engined,will its radar have enough power against lowest RCS targets ?
LeoAndRas 2 years ago
Of course external ordnance increase RCS. Gripen carries more then Viggen.
It has CFT, they will be placed like on the F-16, over the smooth area between wing and body. They have also increased internal fuel stores.
Gripen isn´t that small, it is the same size or even bigger then many other fighters today. As far as I understand, the AESA radar will be roughly the same as the one Typhoon carries, they are made by the same company (what ever happened with the Ericsson radar, I have no clue).
swertinge07 2 years ago
Since Brazil already have the Eireye, buying Gripen NG makes sense. They are fully integrated and the information edge against your potential enemies would be huge. For example, the Gripen doesn´t have to use it´s own radar in a BWR attack, the information from the AEW can be sent to the Gripen and downloaded into it´s AAMs and fired without Gripen using any active systems.
Since you are from brazil, are you still looking to buy 36 plus, mayby, 120 planes...?
swertinge07 2 years ago
Here,in Brazil,what weights more against the Gripen NG as air defense fighter is its potentially much smaller combat radius without underwing fuel tanks, when compared against Super Hornet and Rafale, and its dependence of made in USA components. There's in Youtube a video,presented by a brigadier/engineer of Brazilian Air Force,that show how the USA really treat my country when
the topic is military buys and technology transfers - and what is shown is very bad and against SH and Gripen NG.
LeoAndRas 2 years ago
According to Wikipedia, Gripen C and SH has roughly the same combat radius... But Wikipedia is so, so...
SAAB got burned when they treid to sell Viggen to India in the 70s, it was stopped by the US, I hoped they learned something...
What realaly speaks for Gripen is the price, it costs half of a Rafale and one flight hour cost a fourth.
I hope Brazil makes the best choice for Sweden. :o)
swertinge07 2 years ago
How is possible the Gripen have almost the same combat radius as SH if its cell is so slim when compared with american fighter ? If SAAB doesn't make all the Gripen components and if there's the dependence of american components,how to have confidence - not in SAAB but in USA makers - when there's the possibility of boycots !?...
LeoAndRas 2 years ago
As I said, according to Wikipedia. Smaller plane, less drag, one engine... Perhaps?
I don´t know how the agreement with US companies looks, perhaps they signed over the right to certain parts? But I do know there is a lot of options to the Gripen NG, both in ordnance and plane parts. Meteor is a part SAAB project and so is IRIS-T.
About parts, I emailed SAAB and asked, we´ll see if the answer. :)
swertinge07 2 years ago
Couldn' t the engine be changed to that in the Typhoon fighter ? It surely would be the solution of all the problems...
LeoAndRas 2 years ago
As far as I read, the next generation Typhoon engine is an option.
swertinge07 2 years ago
So fast this engine can be installed in the Gripen the fighter will be much more atractive for many nations,and this will make fall barriers from many people that doesn't like of a fighter that depend of american important components...
LeoAndRas 2 years ago
I am not sure, exactly what SAAB is offering Brazil, but if your politicans want the EJ2000 engine, they will get it.
swertinge07 2 years ago
Combat radius for Gripen C is 800km, on internal fuel. 1550km with external fuel. The Super Hornet has two engines, which increases its fuel consumption in comparison to the small and aerodynamically slippery Gripen. The Super Hornet suffers from VERY high drag. It can't go supersonic at low altitude even in clean configuration. Not even without pylons. The Super Hornet is an aerodynamic failure.
tidls 2 years ago
How would be the Gripen NG combat radius with CFTs that there's at least in design form ? Isn't there,under the NG and closer of wing tips,space for two more underwing hardpoints ? With these aditional hardpoints,if possible to install them,I think that much people would like more of the NG if could see it with more hard points to weapons.
LeoAndRas 2 years ago
What would be the Gripen NG combat radius to an air interception mission with CFTs,whose design can be found in some sites,6 Meteor and 4 A-Darter or IRIS-T ?
LeoAndRas 2 years ago
@PanzerMonium
I hope that too :)
Our strong industrial relationship won't break. Trust me !
bloppo11 1 year ago
Go Gripen!!!!! Go TERMA!!!!!!!!
victorh1414 2 years ago 2
REaly want to know where to music is taken from in teh vid.. oh ..i realy love Gripen NG btw ;)
Nazguldashadow 2 years ago 2
The Gripen is an excellent interceptor actually, the information superiority is extremely well developed, for instance one Gripen knocked down five F-16 falcons, and won every encounter during two weeks in the exercise Red Flag Alaska.
mittshiett 2 years ago 42
@mittshiett And One F22 knocking down 6 Griffins.
HatTrick656 1 year ago
@HatTrick656 Gripen is a very stealthy fighter too, so "if" a F-22 Raptor and a JAS-39 Gripen NG should meet each other one-on-one i can't say what would happen. Maybe they would end up very close before any of them detect each other.
onlypeaceindeath 1 year ago
@onlypeaceindeath
under wing munitions = not very stealthy
OlderG0ds 1 year ago
@OlderG0ds The Gripen compensates it with radar absorbing materials, smaller size and integrated jammer, at least according to the sources i've read which includes the Gripen home page. The hungarian report on its performance during Spring Flag Italy also suggests that it is quite stealthy.
onlypeaceindeath 1 year ago
@onlypeaceindeath
It's a great plane, I have nothing bad to say about it, but I just wouldn't call it "very stealthy", I wouldn't call Eurofighter or Rafale that either. They all have reduced radar cross sections and make use of radar absorbent material but they're not exactly hard to find. But as I was saying under wing munitions are not made for stealth, they significantly increase a radar return.
Keep in mind wave reflections are just one aspect of the stealth spectrum.
OlderG0ds 1 year ago
@OlderG0ds True. But it's stealthy enough to be a nuisance for enemy radars at least. I think it was classed as semi-stealth, but i'm not sure.
onlypeaceindeath 1 year ago
@onlypeaceindeath It is not a stealth aircraft but compares very well in terms of RCS with other non stealth aircraft. It's new radar is also very good allowing it to fight at greater ranges. It's datalink and modern weapons make it a serious threat. It's a good value for the price. If your country has tons of money they can use the money saved to buy a few stealth aircraft as well.
stupidburp 1 year ago
@stupidburp Actually the USAF acknowledges it as a fifth generation fighter due to super cruise capability and semi-stealth features. It has a very low radar signature, and an extremely low IR/heat signal.
wellerocks 1 year ago
@OlderG0ds Actually, in terms of IR/Heat, the Gripen and the Rafalé performs very well, and even having smaller signatures than that of the F-22 and F-35. Although, while having external weapon bays and canards, they can't really match the stealthiness of the F-35 or the F-22. But according to some USAF sources, the F22 radar signature is that of a small bird, the F-35 that of a smaller chicken, and the Gripen NG with air-air missiles as that of a medium-large bird of pray, such as an Eagle
wellerocks 1 year ago
@wellerocks US is bound to promote and spread the word of the best and the most invincible factor to create a psychological barrier. I don't underestimate the Raptor but the same words were said about F-117 that got smashed by vintage weapons, shutting many mouths.
Besides, how many hours of training can a pilot obtain comfortably on it per year compared to Gripen or other 4++ generation fighters? Not even half. Its so expensive just flying it for 1 hour that half the time it'll be on ground.
Saffronwing1 1 year ago
@Saffronwing1 the 117 was shot downs because the mission flight path is at a preplanned pre-agreed upon as per some treaty....that allowed the sam operators to plan and even study in advance what weakness can be exploited. that caused its demise, if it was flown where no one would expect it then it would remain today as one very reknowned craft.
nakazatoGTR 1 year ago
@nakazatoGTR Dude, that logic applies to almost every modern jet. LOL! the enemy won't be sitting playing cards when fighters scan their airspace or attempt to bomb. It is a big achievement for a country like Serbia that has a small offensive capability. Remember that Israeli air force used F-16s below the radar coverage (200 feet AGL) and destroyed the Osirak nuke plant in Iraq.
The bottomline is F-117 got shot.
Saffronwing1 1 year ago
@Saffronwing1 again, the F-117 flew the exact same flight path on each patrol 'dude'.
allowing some commander time to experiment which way to shoot the thing down.
so NATO politics shot the 117 down.
nakazatoGTR 1 year ago
@wellerocks I doubt that. F-22 has addressed all aspects of stealth including infrared/heat , from the engine shape and cooling the exhaust internally before it comes out the afterburners and the missile bays hide additional heat sources etc. Gripen and Rafale have nothing on that. Pratt & Whitney F119 is the most advanced engines to be produced .
OlderG0ds 1 year ago
@OlderG0ds The F-22 has mainly focused on radar cross section signature reducing technology. Hence it's never supposed to get "close" to any fighters. It's main task is to deliver the first strike in air-air combat over extremely large distances. Most close range missiles use IR/Heat which means that since no target is to come that close anyway, it was not focused on as much. There's several videos on youtube showing the difference in IR between the Rafale and the F-22.
wellerocks 1 year ago
@OlderG0ds You are right about the Pratt & Whitney F119 being one of the most advanced engines as of today, but that is mostly due to other factors as being able to super cruising stealthy, Thrust vectoring, massive acceleration and great speed.
wellerocks 1 year ago
@OlderG0ds
Consider the US military budget to the budget of SAAB, and I think we have a winner in terms of bang for the buck.
Andreazor 11 months ago
@Andreazor What the hell does the U.S military budget have to do with a jet built by private companies?
OlderG0ds 11 months ago
@onlypeaceindeath > And the gripen is lot much faster, smaller and dynamic to do harder, faster and shorter swich & turn manuvers..
911205KW 1 year ago 2
@mittshiett When did it knock 5 F16s out? I mean maybe 1 or 2 for sure but 5?
RocknRoll707 1 year ago
@RocknRoll707 Belive it or not but one Gripen pilot knocked down five F-16 block 50+ during close air combat in Red Flag Alaska. And the Gripens NEVER lost any aerial encouter or failed their mission objectives. It was the fighter that perfomed all their planed starts, while others where sitting on the ground waiting for the weather to clear up, So I guess its a pretty darn good airplane :)
mittshiett 1 year ago 30
@mittshiett planes dont matter, its the pilot. give kudos to the pilots.
nakazatoGTR 5 months ago
@mittshiett Red Flag is not a competition however.
Helge129 2 months ago
@Helge129 You are absolutely right. Red Flag, as said in this Utube video: Nellis Air Force Base Russian Attack Training Exersice; "Red Flag is not a contest or a competition. There are no winners or losers, it's about training and saving lives"
Still the same as in the past, learning to survive a first ten missions.
Ilona7maverick7 2 months ago
@RocknRoll707 And no disrespect to the Norwegian pilots because I know they're just as well trained as us, but during a combat exercise with the Royal Norwegain Air Force, 3 Swedish Gripens went up against 5 RNAF F-16's. The Result was 5-0, 5-0, 5-1 after having flown 3 rounds. During Loyal Arrow in Sweden, 3 F-15C's from the USAF were intercepted by a Gripen acting as an aggressor. The result was 2 F-15's having been shot down and one managed to escape due to better thrust/weight.
wellerocks 1 year ago 5
@wellerocks Im Norwegian, and i love Gripen NG. Its superior to f-16. I think the F-35 is a better atack plain than the Gripen, but for interceptors the Gripen is better. I wish Norway had bought Gripen, but then again...we need to bomb third world countries, and thats where the f-35 shines lol
Tordenguden 10 months ago
@Tordenguden Yeah that's probably true. If you ask me, the F-35 has great potential as a strategic bomber/strike fighter. However it seems to lack some serious air superiority aswell as range and economy. But I'm afraid that the Gripen E/F is soon to be doomed. India just ditched it, Brazil favors the Rafale, no Scandinavian country is going to buy it apart from Sweden, and even here in Sweden, the left-wing parties is trying to delay its entrance to the Swedish Air Force.
wellerocks 10 months ago
@Tordenguden The good thin about F-35 is the radar system, witch have a great range, so i theory a pilot would be able to kill the war target before the war target sees u on the radar. However, for intercepting russian fighters, and show air superiority, the Gripen would be a better option, or the EF. I would prefer Gripen though, since im a nordist, scandinavist...what ever hehe. I want a unified Scandinavia.
Tordenguden 10 months ago
@Tordenguden I´ve heard that your Gripens been "shooting" down 2 of our EF during red-flag operations!
Congratulations! The EF is much better looking at blueprints but Id guess its the quality of the pilots that matter to! One is "good luck" 2 is a damn good fighter
TheBeatnik1000 9 months ago
@wellerocks Gripens Rocks!
my little poor country ordered 12 of gripens from Sweden
and already received 6 of them. Your info surprise me so much
and it's made me think about my country (little one in SE asia)
in cope tiger exercise F-15C of USAF (i'm not sure about number of them)
lose to F-5e and f-16 from my country (result7-2(f-5e) and 6-1(f-16))
and your info of epicness from gripens made me imagine about
what will happen in the next exercise in the future ^^. Go Go Gripen
kaskyable 1 month ago
@wellerocks
Then you woke up, right? LOL
Cengiz78x 1 month ago
@RocknRoll707 F-16 is an old airframe man. Its not God-made that it will be invincible forever. It is a fact that during Red Flag, Gripens screwed USAF F-16s and even F-15s prompting US to consider Raptors even more seriously.
Gripen has proved enough to be given a chance in a real battlefield. Besides, F-16 owes its true credentials to Israeli air force that pushed it to its limits in the right manner. USAF has only used them in coalition attacks against single countries so no biggie there.
Saffronwing1 1 year ago
Whats the music of the video?
nuclearman77 2 years ago
Air interception over a big country like Brazil is tricky for any plane. But the Gripen NG has decent range. And it can land and refuel on hidden STOL road bases which are quite inexpensive to build anywhere in Brazil. And also one of the big strengths of this plane's unique philosophy. True, there are many U.S. components in the Gripen. But that can also be used as an excuse against those U.S. politicians who insist on treating South America as their back yard.
Laccodel 2 years ago
The Bad things of the Gripen NG are: combat radius not good enough in air interception,less cargo under wings than the other fighters in the FX-2 competition and the unwillinged presence
of many USA made components in the plane.
LeoAndRas 2 years ago
Brasil is buying some of those jets....thanks god because those jet that we have in Brasil is horrible
corinthianobsb 2 years ago 3
The music sounds somewhat like that of Ghost Recon (the original not GR:AW)
The Gripen NG is such a beautiful aircraft. I wish that the UK would consider purchasing them over the "JCA". (DO NOT) Retardedly flame me saying 0h n0es but the JCA is l33t stealth either. JMO.
HH440r 2 years ago
Guess your talking about JFS? and if you do, it got its ass kicked by F18, the plane that its supposed to replace.
MRnissetomte 2 years ago
awesome where did you find the video
DreamAboutSpace 2 years ago
woow grete machine
shlo1 2 years ago