What's new

Former Swedish Air Force Flight Engineer explains how the Saab Gripen can Dogfight and Win Against (

They ALREADY denied us to sell gripen in early 2000

Self praising article nothing more and my God they are comparing GRIPEN to f-22 and f35
f16 D has twice the range, thrust payload and better weapons than gripen C and costs almost the same(80m)....if you add CFTs the range is thrice...
why would Pakistan buy it if f16 is available..it will be damn straight stupid
 
.
Yes true, thank you for your input. Please return to your SAAB brochures, wake me up when the Gripen has any meaning full impact on a real conflict.

Plus your frustration is misplaced not my fault there are very few takers for the Gripen.

The whole point of the Swedish Air Force is to keep us out of war,
and the aircrafts provided by SAAB has been very successful.

Wake me up when you learn to write sentences compliant with the English language.
 
. .
Ok can’t fight the logic so you resort to complaining about my English. :lol:
You do not have any logic, nor language skills.
You simply make assumptions without knowledge or sources and when I point that out
you respond with arrogance and derogative statements.
 
. .
You do not have any logic, nor language skills.
You simply make assumptions without knowledge or sources and when I point that out
you respond with arrogance and derogative statements.


....and your impeccable source is a blog! The Gripen is mighty ..some blog said so....:lol:

f16 D has twice the range, thrust payload and better weapons than gripen C and costs almost the same(80m)....if you add CFTs the range is thrice...
why would Pakistan buy it if f16 is available..it will be damn straight stupid

Precisely, I don’t see enough capability to justify the Gripen C over the JF 17, replacing the F16 is as you say stupid.
 
.
....and your impeccable source is a blog! The Gripen is mighty ..some blog said so....:lol:

Precisely, I don’t see enough capability to justify the Gripen C over the JF 17, replacing the F16 is as you say stupid.

A blog run by the Swedish Air Force is as good as an official statement.
What You see and do not see is 100% irrelevant, since You do not have access to classified information about things like the Electronic Warfare capability.
 
.
A blog run by the Swedish Air Force is as good as an official statement.
What You see and do not see is 100% irrelevant, since You do not have access to classified information about things like the Electronic Warfare capability.

Ok an official Swedish air force blog states a Gripen killed two Typhoons in mock close in combat. Does this imply the Gripen will kill every Typhoons it encounters in combat? No, it is unreasonable to expect that outcome.

The results of DACT is often contentious, it is rare for all parties to agree on the outcome despite HUD footage and ACMI data. You have presented the Swedish view point via an official SAF blog. I don't speak the language so I trust that you are being honest when you claim it is official.

Here is a direct quote from Major Mikael Olsson callsign “Spotter”

When asked how the Gripen compared to Typhoon, “Spotter” was typically pragmatic. Whilst he stressed it was not a major test point, he was happy that the Gripen, with its small visual signature, was a formidable opponent and hard to see in air combat. He acknowledged that with less thrust than the Typhoon, energy management was a challenge in combat situations but that, if forced into a slow speed fight, the Gripen could hold its own. With similar turn performance often it would be the skill of the pilot which determined the outcome.



Major Mikael “Spotter” Olsson says pilot skill is the determining factor between Gripen and Typhoon.

While Major Henrik "MONSTER" Lahti implies the outcome was one sided favoring the Gripen.

So within the same unit you have two divergent views. The missing piece is still the RAF's take on events of that day. If you want to present a balanced view point then you must present the RAF recollection of events on that day.

Do you really think the RAF will concur with Major Henrik "MONSTER" Lahti? I seriously doubt it..
 
.
Ok an official Swedish air force blog states a Gripen killed two Typhoons in mock close in combat. Does this imply the Gripen will kill every Typhoons it encounters in combat? No, it is unreasonable to expect that outcome.

The results of DACT is often contentious, it is rare for all parties to agree on the outcome despite HUD footage and ACMI data. You have presented the Swedish view point via an official SAF blog. I don't speak the language so I trust that you are being honest when you claim it is official.

Here is a direct quote from Major Mikael Olsson callsign “Spotter”

Major Mikael “Spotter” Olsson says pilot skill is the determining factor between Gripen and Typhoon.

While Major Henrik "MONSTER" Lahti implies the outcome was one sided favoring the Gripen.

So within the same unit you have two divergent views. The missing piece is still the RAF's take on events of that day. If you want to present a balanced view point then you must present the RAF recollection of events on that day.

Do you really think the RAF will concur with Major Henrik "MONSTER" Lahti? I seriously doubt it..

You believe that I have made claims that needs to be proved - I have not.
I simply let people draw their own conclusions.
You, on the other hand, had made claims, which You have failed to prove.

The website is available in English: https://www.forsvarsmakten.se/en/

http://www.collectair.co.uk/pdf/interview-hr.pdf

Squadron exchanges were a regular occurrence at Coltishall, and while on 41 Mike participated in a particularly interesting one with F6 wing of the Swedish Air Force at Karlsborg, flying the AJ37 Viggen. Right from the start, he and his colleagues realised that much was exceptional about the way the Swedes trained and operated, not least considering that the majority of the pilots were effectively doing national service. ‘When you looked at the people who were flying the aeroplanes, I thought that we could learn from this, definitely. The guy who flew me was a Honda 500cc works motorcycle rider; they had rally drivers, go-kart racers, all kinds of things. These weren’t people with good degrees in underwater basket-weaving, these were people who were recruited to fly the Viggen.

The first to go up in the Viggen was our boss, Hilton Moses. I remember going out with him to the aeroplane and seeing him laugh- ing and smiling, and then seeing him getting out and coming back to the crewroom looking like he’d just been put through some kind of crazy combination between a fairground ride and a washing machine. Then I went flying in the afternoon, and it changed my life.

‘They would fly around at Mach 0.95, 650kt give or take a bit, and they trained at 10m. We flew through firebreaks in trees, we flew all over northern Sweden at 30ft, and we never went below 600kt. All of this, I should add, was done under about a 150 to 200ft overcast with no breaks. In the RAF, anybody who wanted to get old would not have flown in that weather. After about 40 minutes, we pulled up into cloud, and the pilot then flew a 4-degree hands-off approach with his hands on his head into a remote airstrip, landed, reversed into a parking bay, did an engine-running refuel without any communication with the people on the ground except hand signals, taxied out and took off in the direction that we’d landed in. Wind direction just wasn’t factored.
Then we did some approaches onto roadways, flying at 15 or 20ft to clear the cars and warn them that there were going to be some aeroplane movements before doing practice
approaches. And the aerobatics beggared belief.

The next day, it was time to take the Swedish pilots flying in the Jaguar. I was at a bit of a
loss as to how I was going to explain to this guy that we flew at 420kt when they flew at 620kt. So I decided that the way ahead was to leave the part-throttle reheat in, accelerate to 620kt and then give him the aeroplane. That’s what I did—I took off,and gave him control at 620kt and about 150ft. He pushed the nose down, took the Jaguar down to 30ft and proceeded to fly it at
about 30 to 40ft and 600kt-plus quite happily. It knocked all the myths about who’s got the best aeroplanes, who’s got the best-trained pilots and so on. The Swedish Air Force had aeroplanes that were light years ahead of anything the RAF had, or was going to get, or has got now, and their pilots were in a totally different league to us. This was not just an individual — I flew with three of them, and all three were like that. Each of them was able to fly the Jaguar faster and lower from the back seat than I could from the front seat.
 
.
f16 D has twice the range, thrust payload and better weapons than gripen C and costs almost the same(80m)....if you add CFTs the range is thrice...
why would Pakistan buy it if f16 is available..it will be damn straight stupid

There were only a few aspects in the two articles that could be of benefit to the development of the JF-17. While it would not be pragmatic to majorly change the JF-17 design at this point, Looking into way to as closely match Gripen's flight envelope could make a world of difference. Also the need for an IRST, HMD, and High off-boresight WVR missile to compensate for the lower TWR / lower maneuverability.


Quote:
"F-16 has a higher TWR [thrust to weight ratio], but one need to consider drag and wing loading too. The Gripen has much lower drag. And far lower wing loading. It can reach supersonic speeds on dry thrust while carrying a full armament of four AMRAAM’s two Sidewinders and an external fuel tank. Even though the Gripen lacks the TWR of the F-16 it can nearly match it in climb rate thanks to low drag."

Quote:
However, I have an advantage! I wear an HMD, Helmet Mounted Display and together with my 4 IRIS-T (Infra Red Imaging System – Thrust vectoring, heat seeking robot) under the wings, I can fire robots at almost everything within my field of view.

Quote:
When asked how the Gripen compared to Typhoon, “Spotter” was typically pragmatic. Whilst he stressed it was not a major test point, he was happy that the Gripen, with its small visual signature, was a formidable opponent and hard to see in air combat. He acknowledged that with less thrust than the Typhoon, energy management was a challenge in combat situations but that, if forced into a slow speed fight, the Gripen could hold its own. With similar turn performance often it would be the skill of the pilot which determined the outcome.
 
.

Latest posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom