Saab Gripen vs F-35A - Opinion From Pilot Who Flew Both - Interview 6/12
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 15 พ.ย. 2021
- How about Saab Gripen and the F-35, Lt. Col Martin "Tintin" Tesli, senior Norwegian Air Force representative and F-35 instructor pilot in the F-35A training programme?
In 2008, the government of Norway selected the F-35 Lightning II as the replacement for their F-16 fleet. Norwegian Air Force operates F-35A variant of the F-35 fighter. Their variant has a special drag chute to assist with landing in icy and slick conditions and to reduce landing distance on short airfields.
Filmed at the Luke AFB - the home base of the 56th Fighter Wing and number of F-35 squadrons. Also number of foreign pilots and ground personnel train at Luke learning to operate and handle the F-35 stealth fighter, including Italian, Danish, Norwegian, Dutch and other countries.
Siivet magazine had the opportunity to visit the base and follow the operations.
More F-35 related videos here:
• F-35 A/B/C Lightning II
And more HX-hanke / Hornet replacement program here:
• HX-Hanke / Finnish Hor...
(C) Jukka O. Kauppinen 2018-2021
www.siivet.fi
Subscribe our channel easily by clicking here:
th-cam.com/users/Siivet19...
Luke AFB:
Located west of Phoenix, Luke Air Force Base is home to the 56th Fighter Wing, the largest fighter wing in the world and the Air Force’s primary active-duty fighter pilot training wing. As part of Air Education and Training Command, and home to 24 squadrons with both F-35A Lightning II and F-16 Fighting Falcon aircraft, the 56th graduates more than 400 pilots and 300 air control professionals annually. The wing is also responsible for six additional squadrons under the 54th Fighter Group located at Holloman AFB, New Mexico, where F-16 training will move in the interim as Luke AFB transitions to become the primary pilot training center for the F-35A, the Air Force’s newest multi-role aircraft. Additionally, the 56th Fighter Wing oversees the Gila Bend Air Force Auxiliary Field and is steward of the Barry M. Goldwater Range, a military training range spanning more than 1.7 million acres of Sonoran desert.
Manufacturer's data:
The 5th generaton F-35 Lightning II integrates advanced stealth technology into a highly agile, supersonic aircraf that provides the pilot with unprecedented situatonal awareness and unmatched lethality and survivability.
F-35A
Length 51.4 f / 15.7 m
Speed Mach 1.6
Wingspan 35 f / 10.7 m
Wing area 460 f2 / 42.7 m2
Combat radius (internal fuel) +590 n.mi / 1,093 km
Range (internal fuel) +1,200 n.mi / 2,200 km
Internal fuel capacity 18,250 lb / 8,278 kg
Max g-ratng 9.0
Weapons payload 18,000 lb / 8,160 kg
Propulsion F135-PW-100
Thrust* 40,000 lb Max / 25,000 lb Mil
*Maximum Power (Max) = with aferburner
Military Power (Mil) = without aferburner
The three F-35 variants have similar performance characteristics, and are mainly distinguished by their different basing requirements. As a result, the F-35B and F-35C variants have unique ways to take off and land.
The F-35A conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL) variant is designed to operate from conventional runways, and is the only version to carry an internal cannon. The F-35A will be the most prevalent variant of the F-35. The U.S. Air Force as well as the majority of our allied air forces and Foreign Military Sales (FMS) nations will operate the F-35A, replacing their 3rd and 4th generation aircraft.
The F-35B model short takeoff/vertical landing (STOVL) variant is designed to operate from austere, short-field bases and a range of air-capable ships operating near front-line combat zones. The F-35B can also take off and land conventionally from longer runways at major bases.
F-35C - For the first time in U.S. Naval aviation history, radar-evading stealth capability comes to the carrier deck.
#siivetwings #f-35 #tankspotting
--
Siivet-Wings magazine:
siivet.fi/
For more great aviation videos please see:
/ siivet1986 - ยานยนต์และพาหนะ
![[Live] : ONE FIGHT NIGHT 24 วันนี้!! “จาร์เร็ด vs กุสตาโว”](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ENNA-fsT67c/mqdefault.jpg)
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 73 วันนี้!! คู่เอก "วรพล vs พันฤทธิ์"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/rrOljlqse3A/mqdefault.jpg)
The opinion of a pilot who flew both the F-35 and the Gripen is that the biggest difference is that the F-35 is a 5th gen and that the reason they chose the F-35 is because US is their biggest ally. I guess without flying both you wouldn't know that haha
Cope
Even Switzerland doesn't want that Ikea-plane...
It's made for 2nd/3rd world countries like South Africa
@@Kauppi2 I’m just messing with the stupid title choice. Not talking about the differences between the two.
@@Kauppi2 ..."said the experienced fighter pilot!"(?)
@@Kauppi2 But the Ikea plane is not a Hangar's Queen Diva, they are always ready to work without cost a fortune. Not everyone has the US DoD budget money to burn, and even the USA are looking for a cheap way to keep their planes flying. Your Hangar's Queen is a money pit, and will bite the taxpayers money in the ass.
Hahahahah facts
As I’ve said to others, both aircraft are very classified in terms of their technology. I think that’s why he was so vague.
wAW. What an analyst.
To be fair Norwei was offerd the Saab Gripen C, not the E.
Wow… that doesn’t sound at all like something he was ordered to say… 😆
The Saab Gripen should not be underestimated in its lasted update it is a formidable fighter jet ,recent report suggest that Saab have a stealth fighter jet in development we await to see the advanced Saab Stealth fighter jet as it will be a match for any jet fighter out there .
There is nothing confirmed about a 5th or 6th generation aircraft program developed solely by SAAB. The only news in that sense, was that they were cooperating on the Tempest project/program, which is now the Global Combat Air Program (GCAP).
both jets are EXCELLENT fighters. love them both. gripen is what ukraine needs.
ok but what if lockheed and saab worked together to make a combination of the f35 and the gripen? I honestly believe that would be awesome
No need - the USA already has the F-22 and there's nothing that can compare to it.
They already are the ngad.
there is nothing the griffin brings to the table
@@brassvulcher8207, the ONLY thing the F-35 brings to the table is better stealth. And huge costs, if that's what you're into.
@@themotie lol how about full out situational awareness with the ability to jam and ever destroy systems with its radar, control 10 drones, fire missiles even behind it, you say that because you’re uneducated in its capabilities, look up the Red flag kill ratios
lol we have chosen to go with biggest ally says it all. this guy hasn't flown the Gripen E and therefore can't seriously be counted on for an informed opinion.
what do you mean the Gripen wouldn’t even know it’s in a fight where do you people get these weird ideas from? even if the Gripen was at the F35 6 it would lose
fifth gen aircraft with 3:e gen missiles, against a 4:th gen aircraft with a 5:th gen missile.. I wonder how will win!
F-35 and it wouldn't even be close.
Well, it's a huge generational difference, but for the fanboys...
Norway suffers from severe little brother syndrome and would probably not by Gripen if it was a gen 10th fighter….
“It was a tough race,” Finnish defense minister Antti Kaikkonen said during a press conference announcing the decision today.
The company beat a crowded field of competitors, including the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, Eurofighter Typhoon, Dassault Rafale and Saab Gripen E. And it appears the F-35 defeated all comers handily.
Maj. Gen. Pasi Jokinen, commander of the Finnish air force, said the F-35 came first or shared the top score in all mission areas. Overall, the jet scored 4.47 on the capability assessment, exceeding the 4.0 requirement. The next highest scorer achieved only a 3.81.
Super Hornet Block 3 scored 3.81, coming in a very distant 2nd place. Gripen E came in dead last, according to the Swedish press, who said Saab refuses to confirm or deny their placing.
@@LRRPFco52 No surprise there. Always a pleasure to read your comments.
its the new upgraded block 4 fighters that Finland will recieve.. that score would get higher
but he has not been flying in Gripen E. its a completely new aircraft
Based off an older air frame, so not "completely new", by that logic the F-16V is completely new
@@gups4963 air frame is new aswell
@@AXXeYY In the same way an SU 35 is
@@gups4963 it was Changed for new landinggear and langer fuel tank. Mayby more
@@gups4963 the plane its 100% build digital now in production.
A rather short comment. That was probably all he was allowed to say. However, the classifications of generations are done by the US and included supercruise for the 5th generation but were taken away as the F-35 cannot do that. There is an interview with a test pilot from SAAB commenting on the sensors and pilot UI, and one particular comment on stealth was the geometric design (F-35) offers some benefits but also more drag, some weapons don't fit in the compartment, and he, in another context, indicated that they detect almost anything with some of the enhanced sensors including stealth operated objects, and what they can detect they can shoot at. In summary, they have similar capabilities but are very different.
Notice that this bit part 6 out of 12 part interview.
The F35 is moderately stealthy when viewed head on but folk that refer to the F35 as a ,''stealth fighter,' are misguided because it is not a stealth fighter but a joint strike fighter. It cannot supercruise either so that kicks it out of 5th gen. The F35 has limited capacity to carry munitions internally as well and with those stumpy little wings, it should never get into a dogfight with a genuine dogfighting aircraft.
To those Gripen Shills saying “But muh IRST.”
The F-35s nozzles are specially designed to reduce IR signature and even if it isn’t very good at it, it would still be better at it than the gripen which has bare exhausts that aren’t serrated and don’t have any IR reduction at all, not to mention that unlike the F-35s tail surfaces, the gripens tail surfaces don’t even attempt to hide its nozzles. The F-35 would easily pick up the IR signature from a gripen at a much longer range than the gripen is able to detect the F-35s IR.
F-35 has specific IR reduction measures and Gripens IRST is only good for cued searches. That means the Gripen must already know where the F-35 is in order to target it with its IRST.
As you say, the F-35 would detect the Gripen at much longer range than the Gripen ever would, be it in the IR spectrum, passive emissions or active radar.
Wow. You are talking about something you dont know anything about. Just guessing.
You are obviously not aware, the hot engine used in the F-35 produces an exhaust 150 degrees C hotter than any other jet fighter, this makes it an easy target for an air to air missile.
How do you Know
"closest ally = US",
that actually hurts abit :'(
fear not, he said 'biggest' ally, not closest.
MOST POWERFUL COUNTRY ON EARTH RAHHHHHHH
what do you mean, with out us you ll be speaking Russian
@@brassvulcher8207 Sweden has fought off Russia several times in history. Pick up a history book for once.
F35 can be fitted with B61 ..and another highlight Centric Network Warfare
Well nice... Let the Finns and Norweigians engage in future nuclear warfare while we in sweden let the Gripen do the defensive role in our skies.
Well, Norway can at least afford them.
Norways extraordinary wealth means they could have a fleet of everything!
Canada will choose for same reasons
He has not flown the Gripen E
Smoke and mirrors answer. The answer was hidden in plain sight... 'the US...'.
as he looks over at the US agent telling him to stick to the script or else! 🤣
What do you mean the F35 dusts it and anything else besides the Raptor 🤡
Pilots have to be very careful about what they say, a “bad review” could cost billions and hurt an entire nation’s economy.
He was being very careful. He kept looking at his right for assurance when a touchy subject came up.
Gripen c/d not nearly the aircraft the E is and has not been flown by Norway yet...........interesting
😂 Why are people so mad about American success? F-35 is the best so countries that it’s available to choose to buy it over the inferior competition like Gripen, Typhoon, Rafale, F-16 etc. when a superior product from Europe is available, the USA buys it over domestic products as well.
You all buy and use American products anyways. Pretty much every computer chip powering your electronics is American designed.
America is the backbone of the western world. Westerners shouldn’t feel jealous or upset about American success. We’re all on the same side. All westerners should be happy to see a fellow western country having success.
Wrong it's not, Saab jets & missiles far more even & better I know, iam mechanic for air force they worry about country that can produce
You almost get 2 Jas Gripen C for 1 F35 though..
@@dusermiginte4647 Also JAS is $4.700 per hour to fly vs F35A $40.000 per hour to fly
@@MrZloodie thats some difference. 😮
Gripen needs less maintenance too if I remember correctly but I think for like richer countries f-35 may be better but for like Sweden gripen is better
One advantage the Gripen will always have is its short field capability (STOL). The F35 with it's beast engine can take off very short but the high wing loads mean it will need longer runways to land. Drag chutes might help but the Gripen with its short landing and small logistical footprint can already use the under 6000 foot strips we have in places like Alert or Inuvik. The Gripen can be supplied maintained and operated anywhere a C130 can land to supply. That is why to use F35's all of our bases need upgrades for maintenance and operation in addition to lengthening...Norway has Orland AFB that is over 9000 feet long so easy to base there Finland is the same with long runways and infrastructure in the far north. Canada is dealing with many times larger airspace and has no runways long enough in the arctic to base F35s.
F-35C’s can do STOL but it doesn’t really matter, the F-35A is so superior to the Gripen that longer runways and more maintenance are well worth it to get the capabilities of the F-35.
And the F-35 is about the same fly away cost as the Gripen, but it’s 5th generation so has a much higher operating cost requiring more maintenance.
But the F-35’s superiority is why every country that has the option to do so buys the F-35 over all the competition. Europe jets got chased out of Europe because the F-35 took over the market. Literally every country is buying it even Czechia and Switzerland. Greece wants it as well. Canada chose the F-35 over the Gripen as well after the F-35 won in every category against the gripen during trials
@@tylerclayton6081 And we should sell it to Greece as an F you to Turkey
Any 4th gen aircraft have stol, it's not unique to a Gripen, Typhoon gets of the ground quicker.
@@anglonig1 obviously not clear on the concept...It's the landing part that make it STO AND LANDING...READ THE POST BEFORE YOU MAKE STUPID COMMENTS
@@tylerclayton6081 WE WILL SEE HOW IT PERFORMS IN 2028 LOL... by then it will be the upgraded F35...still not STOL but maybe Canada will buck up and build more infrastructure in the FAR north.
The F-35 is not 5th gen, it cannot supercruise. The F35 is not a stealth fighter either, it was designed and built as a ,"joint strike fighter'', it has good electronics but the SAAB electronics are just as good.
Glad he likes the F35 its just too bad that it requires so much maintenance that he wont get to fly it much. Im hoping Canada selects the Gripen E/F myself we need a robust interceptor with good speed and range not a hanger queen that costs $35,000 dollars an hour to keep in the air.
Why does Canada even need an Air Force? The only enemy they would possibly face is Russia, and if Russia attacked Canada they would be overrun in a week or less if not for the US. So better to coordinate with the US which could supply spare parts, ammo, etc.
@@Greg29 the mission rates is seems fine and reaching >90%
Norway recently reported that it costs them 11,000 euros per hour to operate, maintain, replace spares, fuel, and pay personnel for the F-35A. It comes out to about $12,349 depending on the conversion rate of the day. Saab’s H-X manager, Magnus Skogberg just revealed that the Gripen C/D costs......about 11,000 euros per hour to do the same and “thinks” Gripen E/F will also be 11,000 e/hr.
In 2020, USAF F-35As demonstrated the highest FMC/MC rates even compared to F-16C and A-10s. Are you saying F-16Cs and A-10s are hangar queens even more? Those have been the most ready platforms in USAF history over the past 40 years.
Please present your source for the norwegian operational costs. The ones ive heard is 360k NOK/h, but with the sim time is included it drops to 110k NOK/h. Guess most wouldnt include simulator time as to reduce operational cost/h. Just another way to fool taxpayers.
@@bjoolo655 you can found it right here on the site of this channel. Siivet-wings have gone to Norway to interview the peeps about this craft. It basically said that when adding only the things directly consumed per hour, it is possible to go down that low.
Well, Norway was never interested to by Gripen in the first place. They were always aiming at the F35.
Operational cost per flight hour:
- Gripen E, 9.000$/h
- Rafale, 17.000$/h
- F16 block 50, 18.000$/h
- Eurofighter Typhoon, 20.000$/h
- F/A-18 Super Hornet, 24.000$/h
- F35A, 31.000$/h
And the us of the F-35 from Norway, would be support the US in all the wars they are starting all over the world.
How much have flown have he flown them? How? What variant? Three different airplanes is called F-35. Two different airplanes is called Gripen. What do he mean with gen 5? Advanced avionics, supercruise and supremanouverability was the definition from LM. They have changed it to fit their needs, so no one know what they say with it today, more that a marketing label. Personally I prefere the original statement. So none of the three airplanes called F-35 is gen 5. I don't take this guy seriously.
Yup, he was just the chief pilot of the Norwegian Air Force F-35A (A, Norway bought As, so that's what he flies, you know), he has no clue clearly.
F-35A according to video description (makes sense for Norway). Gripen probably A/B or C/D, certainly not the new E/F.
@@vandecasa3795 No Gripen Fs exist, so we know he didn’t fly that. He was being polite because he doesn’t want to be ungrateful for hospitality shown by a sister nation in Scandinavia. It’s a privilege most pilots never get to go fly with another Air Force.
Biggest ally the same way the dog is allied to the master.
Australia is Thinking about not to order any more F-35 and stick with the F-18 Wonder why???
Gripen Brazil vs F-15, F-16, F-18, F-35... Go?
This shows how far norway have fallen, choosing the americans i front of their relaterade neighbors
I wonder if the US wasn’t so beholden to the military industrial complex’s if the F35 would have won most of its contracts.
yes it would, did you know it can fire missiles behind it? it doesn’t even have to get in firing position , anything 360 degrees is toast
The US military industrial complex exists in the swamp that Trump is planning to drain, they routinely pay massive bribes to get contracts, Lockheed managed to sell their widowmaker starfighter into Europe, they bribed Prince Bernhard to help secure the Dutch contract and a German Parliamentarian to secure the German contract. The Starfighter was so bad that over 150 German pilots were killed in crashes. Looking at folk calling the F-35 a, "stealth fighter", makes you realize just how much telling the same lie over and over can fool people !
I read up a bit online because my country (Canada) was stuck between the two fighter jets. Basically, from stats I went over online, the Gripen is faster, more manueverable, more fuel efficient, cheaper per unit by a large margin (a quarter of the price per unit) , and costs a quarter of the price to keep flying over the years compared to F35. The F35 has greater stealth capabilities, better at longer range attacks, can fly at higher ceiling (10,000m higher), better armament, newer frame (made in mid 2000 vs Gripen in the late 80's), Better technology, the Stealth coating is very hard to maintain over longer period. Both are great fighter jets. In the end the F35 overall is a better fighter jet but it costs 75% more per jet. A lot of ppl might think it's not worth the extra cost to get F35 because the cheaper flight time means more practice. Canada has recently decided to most likely go with F35, for the same reasons as Norway, because we are better allies with USA and because it is a very good fighter jet that can be used for a variety of missions. That being said, both are great fighter jets according to public info on them.
The Gripen E is a new design based on the A and C model. I do agree they are both great aircraft, but the F35 is not suited to Canada's needs, ie to patrol the north, which would be any new fighters primary mission. Canadian F35's will need external fuel tanks for added range, as will the Gripen, which will negate it's stealth advantage, which is why we would buy them in the first place. For that very reason the Gripen makes more sense.
I see a lot of comments about the Gripen E being super cheap, but the latest and cheapest figure I have seen is at 85 million USD when Thailand sent out and RFI. India got an offer for 101 million USD for aircraft only. The Swedes them self projected spending 160 million USD per aircraft for 60 Gripen E's, though I don't know what is included in that price and it was a while ago. Where do you get 20 million USD from?
@@Wickwire86 SAAB sells training, simulators and weapons package with in the aircraft, it's never a plane only sale. Brazil got the transfer technology deal too.
@@strikebr Yes, of course. That doesn't change the fact that the Gripen E isn't as super cheap as many people believe. The figures from Thailand and India I posted are for aircraft only. The Swedish one is probably not.
1. Gripen is not faster when combat loaded. In fact it is slower due to shit acceleration and parasitic drag.
2. Gripen is not more maneuverable in any configuration, let alone when combat loaded.
3. Gripen is not more fuel efficient.
4. Gripen is not cheaper.
5. F-35 has stealth, Gripen does not. Saying "greater stealth capabilities" is misrepresenting facts.
6. F-35 has far superior avionics.
7. F-35 has far superior networking.
So you only went with it or “your biggest ally” be upset and vindictive?
because its a far superior plane
I think buying F-35 is somehow related to the Covid strategy
Finnish Air Force Chief and Defense Minister already said in late 2014 they want the F-35, not some warmed over porridge from last week’s supper. H-X has been underway for 7 years. It has nothing to do with COVID.
This guy does know that "5th generation" is just a BS marketing term, yes?
Yeah. I was like "is that an official term?" "What does it mean?" Now you compare generations and not actual fighter jets?
As a ACTIVE Norwegian fighter pilot he desperately (AFTER his superiors choose the F-35) NOT ANSWERS about that question that could get him in VERY HIGH TROUBLE if he say ANYTHING serious in favor of the Saab Gripen.
It could be consider a real "sincerecide" do something like that...
And game over FOR HIM with his bosses...
Rapid exit by tangent... Maneuvered the pilot... :)
P.S. WE DECIDED??? HE did not decided anything AT ALL!!! TOTALLY LINED UP...
c/d Gripens no way near the E model get an education beyond political horsepucks
He was aware that anything that can be misunderstood could have huge consequences. He didn't want to insult anyone by saying some very personal opinion. Gripen is good but if you got the money and are willing to take on the political baggage , F-35 seems to be in its own class compared.
Being a NATO member (Norway and most other countries in it, going forward), buying American is "expected", it's very possible the Gripen never did or do stand a chance politically speaking between them two jets.
Politically (as in the deciding part after the tests are done) the Gripen would have to have to out class the American alternative significantly to make it embarrassingly evident that you are not just buying a fighter jet system, you also buy yourself into the circle of friends.
We chose to not piss off the Americans.
They chose the better fighter
@@brassvulcher8207 No
@@b_rabbit435Yes. The better jet won.
As a Swede, I don't give a shit which plane is better as long as either country ALONE can beat drunk Russian pilots handily. The combo across the Nordic countries is just lethal, though. I am voting for an invasion of USSR next. We need to expand NATO further ;-).
Well, Im with you, Im sugen on some beluga caviar anyway so lets go and do some invading duderino.. 😂❤
Sooo..... Basically he wanted the gripen but got the 35 because of politics 😂😂
Good, *clicks gun* now look at the camera and say "The U.S. is our biggest ally and that is why we choose F-35". CUT! Good production ok off to the camp now.
I keep reading things like the F-35 having better tech (it doesn't) and the Gripen is best suited for countries with a limited budget (which is EVERY country except the USA). You want to know if the Gripen is better than the F-35, here's the answer that NOBODY can argue with:
If you take cost-per-flight hour into account, the F-35 is between 5 and 6 times the total cost of the Gripen. You've seen that the general consensus is that the two planes are close in combat capability but they're not. The Gripen is faster, more maneuverable and can use a much larger array of weapons than the F-35. It can also fly close to electrical storms without fear of explosion. Ignore all that though, it is clear that the F-35 is NOT significantly more potent as a fighter than the Gripen.
What is the purpose of a fighter jet? The purpose of a fighter jet is to make your air force as powerful as it can be. Do you think for one minute that 10 F-35s would have a snowball's chance in hell against 55 Gripens when it's been pretty much established that the F-35 is NOT significantly more potent as a fighter than the Gripen? The answer is no.
Therefore, the Gripen makes your air force more powerful than the F-35.
Therefore the Gripen is better at delivering to an air force what a fighter is supposed to deliver.
Therefore, the Gripen is better than the F-35, end of line.
The rest is illogical semantics by people who WANT the F-35 to be worth it.
As more countries adopt the F35, the cheaper everything is for it.
@@Tattle-by-Tale the same goes for the Gripen
@@Tattle-by-Tale WGAF about F-turdyfive
Sound like a salty Swede to me... the F-35 is better than the tiny little boy Gripen sorry.
@@Taczy2023these guys hop online and don’t bother to look at testing kill ratios
Well, that was less informative than I expected (no offense to this YT-channel). At this point the only difference between upgraded "4.5 gen" and "5 gen" Is really just that the former doesn't sacrifice kinematic performance for some radar-low-observability features, while the latter does the opposite.
Now explain how Gripen demonstrators with even better T/W than the Gripen E/F take 2x the runway length/time to get airborne compared to F-35A in the H-X trials. You can watch video of it here on YT. F-35As take off within 9-12 seconds like a Typhoon, then climb faster than any of the aircraft it’s superseding. Gripens take off like an overladen F-5. They’re very anemic and underpowered. By the way, the F-35A take off performance is more like a slick or single EFT Typhoon or Rafale, but the F-35A is carrying more internal fuel than any of those 4.5 Gen can with internal + EFTs. The performance sacrifice argument falls apart really quick in the real world. It’s almost as if higher performance was a requirement for JSF’s KPPs....because it was.
Doing LO shaping doesn’t mean degrading kinematically. F-22 will absolutely destroy any 4.5th Gen. Also, F-35 is aerodynamically and kinematically fine. It’s not obvious but you can see the various things added to it to help it.
@@LRRPFco52 Please read carefully, I never said that F-35 is worse than 4.5 gen aircraft, I merely mentioned the differences in design philosophy. Performance is more than just engine thrust. F-35 loaded up with two 2000lbs bombs and two air-to-air missiles internally is not carrying an equivalent payload to what F-15EX, F/A-18E/F, Rafale or EF Typhoon can bring to the table. Furthermore: In a real situation, the mentioned aircraft can drop their bags and be more sleek (and stealthy), F-35 carries more fuel internally so it can't do that, it remains "Fat Amy". Gripen is a bit of a different design philosophy, it is a much smaller and lighter airplane (half the weight), but also easier and cheaper to operate, which means you can have more of them or use the budget to buy other stuff to achieve air superiority.
@@tristanpau1p If you watch a Large Force Exercise launch out of Nellis AFB, including F-16CM Block 50s/52s, F-16C Block 32 Aggressors, Typhoons, F-15Es, EA-18Gs, and F-35As, guess which ones are at twice the altitude and going faster than any others at the end of the runway and especially 1 mile out from runway end...
F-35s. All the others are laden with some draggy combo of External Fuel, pylons, CATMs, FLIR, LANTIRN, ATFLIR, ECM, and HARM TGT pods. Their performance is nothing like what you see at an airshow.
The F-35s have an ominous, thunderously-loud presence that clearly lets you know they're in a different league of performance, and the rest are from an older, weaker era.
@@vandecasa3795 nah, you really don’t want to drop your tanks just because you want to have your kinematics back for no reason at all. You do it when you are in deep shit especially on doing egress. Having a good reason is needed since those things are expensive and they can’t be retrieve since the kinetic energy imparted on the tank will destroy it into tiny little pieces.
Base from the loadout chart, SH and Rafale have the same loadout for a stealthy F-35. Two external tanks, 2 bombs/missiles and 2 BVRAAMs.
Gripen E have an increased weight of additional 1,000 kg to the original 7,000 kg of the NG while keeping the same engine. It will be anemic especially when the loadout gets heavier. Also, the price will be higher than F-35 as Saab have revealed. Their operating cost will be in question since stating operating cost since it will have a lot of fuel and upgraded avionics compared to C/D. It will be on the ballpark of current F-16.
You've chosen wisely
So they chose the F35 because it's controlled by their largest ally, but they would have chosen the Gripen if it was based on the performance/cost of the aircraft. Gotcha.
GRipen is the most bang for the buck outthere
what do you mean the Griffin would even know its in a fight, you people are fking welcome
The F35 cost as much as Gripen is counting in the trade deals they recieved to sway.
Pretend an imaginary high tech army invades the US and have partially air superiority, would the F35 be the best option then?
It won't happen but it could happen Norway and Finland, and then their nice cleaned bases won't be there anymore... where would they take off from? Be maintained from?
Gripen can be maintained by a couple of trucks on a small country road with a crew of 12 men.
By Finnish Air Force's calculations and tests the F-35 is the best performing, most capable fighter in these conditions. F-35 is capable of operating from same road bases as any other fighter, again as per FinAF's requirements.
Finland use 2000m road bases, it wouldn't work with Swedish road bases.
@@phillipbanes5484 well I can't say with 100% certainty of course but Swedish roadbase length is 800m, so less than half. F-35A is stated to require 2400m, which is obviously an inflated number if it can take off and land on Finnish roadbase of 2000m, but the questing is how far it can be pushed and still be able to take off with a reasonable weapons load and fuel load.
Had nothing to do with performance 😐
what do you mean the F35 kills everything around it over and over again in testing
Is that a logical reason to buy f35 that usa is our biggest ally and f35 is a 5th generation. Is he a pilot or a politician.? I can now very well understand that the whole NATO chose f35 for this logical reason and then they are crying and grounding f35. 2 crashes in 1 year. Lockheed there is no shame to ask for help from Russia. Japan Israel and other countries have shown their dissatisfaction. Pressurized compulsion selling to other countries doesn't make it a good aircraft. Please make it a good aircraft so that countries should acknowledge it should feel happy should feel proud should feel special should feel above class. Please do something and fix its problems.
It's not like he can go listing the top notch capabilities that the F-35 has and the Grippen doesn't. He'd be violating op-sec for both platforms.
Ehh admit it. Gripen flew better.
Gripen fits to nations with a budget. Norway and Denmark has no issues about money. They can waste it on anything they prefer. 👍
Fifth Gen. is not the issue really. It has less stealth than F-117, less maneuver and cruise capability than F-22. "But informaation gathering bla bla bla..." THAT IS A FRONTLINE COMBAT AIR CRAFT, NOT A C4I aircraft!
WHAT A COLLOSAL WASTE.
What's the use of an aircraft that is too expensive to fly? Simulators can't replace the real thing.
It is much more important to have a (debatably slightly less capable) modern aircraft that pilots can get actual flight hours on than a few top of the tech gizmos that are too expensive to be flown.
@@harri9885I think that is the main concern of the decision makers.
Front line combat aircrafts nothing but fighting to enemy. You can not operate them in the peace time as they do during conflict. They are not like transport or reconisense planes.
After all, if those machines has something beneficial to nations at making and operating (repairs etc.) then they are worth the penny.
Hence my candidate for Finland is the Eurofighter. That plane can help high-profile employment at the making at a Finnish assembly line, future programs of BAE systems (Tempest) can be beneficial for Finland and so on.
F-35 is a collosal waste in every aspect. Something a non-NATO nation like Finland, should not bother about it.
Gripen is terrible.
Su-75 has stealth and Gripen doesnt't, Su-75 has a longer ranges than Gripen. Su-75 has a bigger payload than Gripen. Su-75 has thrust vectoring.
And the funny part is Gripen is still more expensive than the Su-75
@@Anderson_Hwang gripen exists, su-75 isn't by the year 2021.
@@benokanruzgar8863 Well that means Gripen will become obsolete in a few years. Beaten by Su-75 with stealth , range, payload and a even cheaper price
Bullshitting jas39 NG is 5th Gen. Also E model , listen up folks Saab jets & missiles are cheaper better technologies than American overpriced F35/22 etc.
You at least know that "NG" is the name of the Gripen E/F program?