What a ridiculous NAFO troll you are. I am swedish ex. military with very good insight in our defence. Except for Hungary there is no decision made to make more JAS E. However there is several upgrades coming. You can look at SAAB:s homepage everything is there. We currently have 96 Gripen. But many need upgrades and maintenance. There is NO decision to send Gripen to Ukrain and this will never happen. Because the people of Sweden start to get tired of this war which not are our war. We already sent 60 billion (almost our whole defencebudget) to Ukrain and we are running out of money. The goverment run the people over about the issue of NATO membership. Also there are reports everywhere of Ukrainan soldiers deserting. Myself and many other active militarys is sick and tired of this warmongering instead of peacetalks. I recommend you to read Sun Tzu. It´s better to get to know your enemy and be honest about. The western propaganda like yours is ridiculous. I am waiting for we did´nt see it coming from our goverment. Truth is many of us who love our country and are patriots saw this coming a long time ago. And now we are standing there with our military storage empty. www.friatider.se/over-100000-pa-flykt-fran-zelenskyjs-arme
@@_c_y_p_3 Nice! I see those birds almost every day. And I never gets tired of it. I am lucky to live just a couple of kilometers from the factory in one direction and in the other direction I have the air force base where they are tested by the military authorities before every unit is delivered to the Swedish Air Force. So I both see them as well as hear the Gripen E very often. And sometimes I can watch SAAB's testpilots perform/practice for the air shows. That is awsome to watch. 😁
Yep I did 15 years in the Australian Air Force and always wanted the Gripen, even over the F35, as the Gripen is more versatile and easier/cheaper to operate and maintain. Also we could have bought more, many more giving us a larger and more versatile platform
@@ScottTaggart65 Maybe the same reason not to, was why the incredible Avro Canada CF-105 Arrow was not only scrapped, but everything about it was destroyed?
You forgot an important thing. Turnaround time on the road bases. Gripen only needs 10-15 minutes and also that an engine replacement only takes 1 hour! No other fighter even comes close, to such short turnaround times...
@@CaptainDangeax Rafale - also one hour in the field? Regarding the two engine Rafale (a lot more difficult to access the engines - hmm...). Can Rafale also be reloaded and refuled by two technicians and three conscript mechanics in the field perhaps?
The best fighters for Ukraine are the ones they have operational, and that they have pilots who can fly them and mechanics who can maintain them and spare parts to fix them. An airplane in the air is worth infinitely more than any number of ideas, plans, and promises.
Yeah, it's a bit like with cameras - the best camera is the one you can bring with you and have at hand when you need it. While I like the Gripen a great deal, there are many more spare F-16s out there one could send to Ukraine, compared to the Gripen. All planes need maintenance and a supply chain. The question is how well the Gripens could be maintained in Ukraine… Anyway, I hope Ukraine gets as many western planes as possible, including Gripens.
@@miskaknapek How many could in theory be sent to Ukraine doesn't matter when the number actually sent is much lower. Gripen is much easier to maintain then F-16, making that part a major advantage.
@@znail4675 grippen wil not be used by ukraine. ukraine is not interested in buying and training pilots on new type of fighter jets by two years. They can have dozens of F-16s and few pilots trained on them. Gripen is small aircraft with short range and Ukraine is second biggest country in Europa after Russia.
@@znail4675 That is true, but wrong in practice . Sending F-16, training pilots and maintenance personnel for the plane required a multinational effort from many countries. A new training facility needed to be build. Sweden would have to do that on their own as other operators of Grippen are insignificant or downright oppose helping Ukraine.
Sweden has already trained Ukrainians on Gripen more than year ago, before we was a nato member. However, the lessons of Ukraine also teaches us to not be too bold with Russia before having some sort of defense, our has naively been slashed since Cold War ended. When we finally were a member, the US blocked out Gripen support; they knew it would be better and that would have dropped their F16 sales to other countries.
I think the Jas 39 Gripen C and D will get available for Ukraine as soon as the 60 New Gripen E is delivered to the Swedish Airforce.Sweden has 98 operational Gripen C and D, with an undisclosed number of earlier versions in Storage. The Story here in Sweden is that Ukraine's first choice was the Gripen but too few were available and other European nations had plenty of F-16's ready for retirement.Ukraine also couldn't implement 2 Platforms at the same time,so the transfer is on hold,but sending Gripen Spare-parts to Ukraine is very telling for the near Future🇺🇦🤝🇸🇪
@@Magnus-v9x A lots of the parts to Gripen can be used for other fighters too. Ukraine will never get any donated Gripens unless someone pays SAAB to complete the 14 airframes for the C that they have in stock at the factory in Linkoping. Or if someone buys the 20-something Gripen that South Africa wants us to buy back, since they can't afford to keep them in the air with the countries financial situation. But if someone buys them from SA and then pays SAAB to fix them up, then there might be a slight chance to see Gripen in Ukraine before the war is over. But it would most likely take at least a year from now.
@peterfdsvenskaflygvapnet2643 Ok,thanks,I can see you're Ex Swedish Airforce so you know this better than me,maybe we will see our mighty Gripen in the Ukrainian skies within a year then.I don't really see Trump's Peace effort going anywhere,it's more like Extortion actually.
7:52 - "some experts think that Sweden could offer Gripen training for Ukrainian pilots NOW setting up the possibility...". Sweden already has been training Ukranian pilots for years now, for this. That's old news. Literally already happening.
@@reallivebluescat Like everything.. build on demand! Sweden had one of the largest airfleet in the world during the cold war.. And today 2024-11-09 the Nordic is at top 3 in the hole of Europe. The Nordic today is a game changer when it´s comes to war as it has been troughout history.. now we are united like no other countries in the world. Despite our 30M population we are among the best in the world when it matters.. just like hockey.
They might be a good fit, certainly easier to maintain and more cost effective. There is value in "good enough." I do like the CAS capabilities the Sabb might bring depending on the variant.
@@msromike123 You should research Red Flag from 2006 and forward and find out how the Swedish Gripen did against the Americans...You might learn something. I will be a good person and post a few links you can read. Quote: "Gripen first participated in Red Flag 2006 with the Gripen A,’ says Stefan Englund , former Swedish Air Force Flight Engineer on Quora. ‘It was assigned to the red team. Reduced AWACS, reduced ground support. The Gripens connected their link systems and acted themselves as AWACs, got the battlefield awareness necessary and avoided all ground defence, scored 10 kills the first day including a Typhoon. No losses they remained undetected. 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 encounter or failed their mission objectives. It was the only fighter that performed all planed starts, while others were sitting on the ground waiting for the weather to clear up. The evaluation was that Gripen capacity needed to be reevaluated." End Quote. Source: theaviationgeekclub.com/the-saab-gripen-is-able-to-dogfight-and-win-against-almost-any-dissimilar-aircraft-former-swedish-air-force-flight-engineer-explains-how/ Quote: 3 Swedish Gripen went up against 5 F-16, the score was 5-0 5-0 and 5-1 Source: www.globaldefensecorp.com/2021/01/07/gripen/ And there are so much more if you spend 10 minutes searching, so should we talk about what is "good enough"?
@@davedevonlad7402 None. I was comparing the Saab to the Mirage in that respect. I still say the F-16 is better if you can afford it. But for Ukraine this should be cheaper to operate and capable enough. But remember a single Saab took out a five of F-16s, I read it right here. LOL
Low operation costs, but all the Gripens mostly would have to be built still or replaced, while F16s are freely available to donate lol, so the cost isn't.. F16 might not be ideal but the Ukranians make it work otherwise they wouldn't ask for it so.. The f16s tho are older & aesa radar would be great upgrade, also the meteor longrange missiles Gripen uses would be fantastic, alltho there exist aim9x lonrange too i believe but not widely available. I wish we just trained Ukr pilots for F35 right away lol. It will have the best combat testing there.
Fast turnaround time re-arming too, 10min for air-to-air missions and 15min for ground-attack missions, using just a few conscripts and just one technician, coupled with the low cost of operations means it could do a lot of missions making up for the somewhat more limited take off weight. I think a mix of both F-16 and JAS-39 would be an excellent combo, F-16's to do the heavy ground-attack missions, covered by some Gripens in a more air-to-air and electronic warefare role, or where you need to sneak up on an enemy. But what do I know - I'm just a keyboard warrior...
With every Gripen video comes a long list of trash talk comments. Gripen is obviously not trash, there are just a lot of Americans and Russians who, for obvious reasons don’t want to see it shine.
@@banhof2223 Nope, you're thinking about Auto GCAS... And - selling F-16s and F-35s generates "somewhat" more money. Thailand choosing Gripen over F-16 made Lockheed Martin really pissed off...
Great Info !! Subscribed !! I like this guys style and info !! Short Video, Concise, a bit of humor and most importantly good topics and up to date Info !!
I’ve been saying this since talk of jets going to Ukraine was a thing. Gripen is way more suited to this type of conflict. The thing is Sweden doesn’t have the numbers to give them what Ukraine truly would need to make a big difference.
@ Sweden can’t give them 40-60 jets though and does it make sense to take all of the time and resources to train pilots on a weapons system for what they will get ? Idk.
@@556m4 We can give them 24, ie 4 divisions of 6. Not a major problem. Operational within a couple of weeks. Now the f-16s have been talked about for 18 months and they have like 4 in the air? American and Nato bullshit doesnt save Ukrainian lives. Action does. And Sweden have prmised and delivered Archers, CB90, CVS90, AWACS, BPS, munition, AT84, RBS 17, RBS70. Germany, US and France ( the chicken shit country of Europe, designing the only tank with just one fw gear, but 6 reverse gears, the Leclerc, so they can outpace the Germans when in retreat)
To be fair, most Swedish systems are made to be able to be used without a lot of training. Just look at the Carl Gustav recoil less rifle. The AT4. The Archer Artillery system. The Gripen (Gripen meens The Gryphon in Swedish btw). Small population that can quickly be trained how to operate weapon system (at least those that didnt do mandatory service, which was, unfortunatly, stoped 2010).
Gripen is the only fighter jet in the world designed for invasion defence....the main reason to REALLY need a suitable fighter jet. All others are designed by strong and safe countries to project power elsewhere, not to protect their own country. Countries that might really end up fighting for their life should go for Gripen or expect their fighters to be useless from day 2 after the enemy has bombarded their airfields with ballistic missiles.
Gripen was stopped by US fearing its performance would hinder further sales of F-16. As already said pilots are already trained and goverment set money aside to donate them.
At least officially there is no training in Sweden on Gripen and Zelensky said on his last visit to Sweden that he wished for pilots to start training no matter what/ when/ if a decision to send the Gripen. But politicians in Sweden are open and willing to send Gripen. But with all other partners it was decided to send the F16 instead because there are a lot more of them. It was also decided that Sweden would donate surveillance planes to complement the F16 system and potentially the Gripen in the future. That training should have started. The pilots to fly are already available in big numbers from Ukraine since it's a civilian plane and only minor training is needed for tactical purposes. But how long time it will take to teach the crew I do not know, it's not easy tactical decisions they will need to make. It's possible that the Ukrainian crew has been part of the Neptune Strike exercise. But that's just speculation from my side.
@@Nubbe999 Officially and what actually has happened might differ in war time. The decision by Sweden to send them together with their "AWACS" planes was already taken. Easist to see if you compare the Swedish commitment to Ukraine with booked value on the rest of the army. There is no possibility to fulfill that without sending Gripens.
what sales? F16s were gifted to Ukraine by many European countries at a significant quantity that couldn't be equaled by the Gripen. How does that make the Gripen the best choice? It might be a better choice on paper but there weren't/aren't enough of them so why create problems with a system that can't be supported???
@@rangerrick2246 Future sales of course to other countries would be harmed. Today it was also learned that US stopped the AWACS planes already promised. Gripen can be maintained and rearmed / refueled by a handful of conscripts so what support problems?
@@foppafredmost if not all donors are replacing old f16 with newer f35. I do not see the logic. Some people always see US meddling, no matter what. Canada and Finland are better examples of this where us f35 was chosen instead of gripen. But i trust what Finnish leadership says; f35 has higher survivability. Also much of the cheap operability is exaggerated; initial numbers still being touted today where based on only fuel costs. Love gripen though, its a nice plane for Ukraine but not some kind of star destroyer that never got its chance due to conspiracies. Its just a really good plane for sweden and someone like Ukraine. Personally id like to see f16 and Gripen (with meteor)work together; it would open up many new tactics.
The simple reality is that the Falcon was available in decent numbers and there has been a two year process of training pilots and ground staff as well as plenty of spare parts laying around. The Griffin was held up due to Swedish NATO membership issues from Turkey. It’s a better long term solution for Ukraine to fill out their Air Force but if the Griffin were named the primary fighter of Ukraine tomorrow it would take Over a year or two from now to get 80 jets delivered while the F-16s should be in place this coming summer.
But the pronunciation of Gripen was bad!!! Interresting how you would have said it with two p. Probably the same...then you should know that you say it wrong with 1 p.
Swedes had an advantageous position against the USSR in the Cold War as by necessity Soviet equipment and doctrine were designed to counter NATO ones. So the Swedes went for niche capabilities that targeted Soviet gaps or vulnerabilities arising from their focus on NATO. It was uneconomic and a distraction for the Soviets to put effort into designing systems to counter Swedish ones.
Swede here. I think the Gripen could one day be sent to Ukraine in there defense of the skies. As it currently is, we are unable to send them. Not because we don't want to, but because it's to much of a security risk for ourselves at the moment as we need them to defend our skies and coastal lines, especially in the baltic were incursion from russian jets and ships happens. That doens't mean our goverment aren't willing to prepare Ukraine for the Gripen. We essentially made it so Ukraine could get to know how this air frame works, so when the day come when Ukraine get's the green light for the Gripen, it will not be as time consuming to recieve them and get them in the air, since the ukrainian staff will already be familiar with Gripen and it's logistic. Kinda like pre-planning something ahead until the day come. The Gripen is a really great multiroll figher. It was designed along with the swedish doctrine during the cold war that military installations would be key targets in combat, including air-fields. We didn't have the numbers and the logistic to face the Sovjet's large numbers so we adapted our military, including the air force to hit and run tactics, known as "Disperse-operation". You strike, you hide before the enemy can retaliate and then strike again when the enemy isn't ready for it. This is also the reason why our highways are differently designed than in the rest of Europe so that certain roadstripes can be used as temporary runways for our jets during war-time. It's this air doctrine that gave birth to the Jas 35 Draken and the Saab 37 Viggen to then become a roll- model for the Jas-39 Gripen in the 1990s. Personally, even though Gripen in many areas outshine and is not such a logistical nightmare in comparision to the F-16 (and the modern F-35). I think Ukraine can benefit both the F-16 and the Gripen, as the 2 jets can reinforce what the other lack. The F-16 can be used as a dog fighter to keep the skies clear from russian fighters, while the Gripen to be used as a reconnaissance & support fighter to help pass information to the troops and blast openings in enemy defenses for them. I am proud of our own- made Gripen jet and that many countries are taking lessons how you can use highways as temporary runways, since air fields becomes high- value targets in wartime. One day, we hope Gripen can help Ukraine and get the recognition it deserved.
JAS Gripen J - Jakt - Hunting A - Attack S - Spaning - Surviellance Gripen - The Gryffin (mythological animal with the front of an eagle and the back of a lion)
Everyone focusing on the airframe rather than the logistics. There are THOUSANDS of F16s and only a few hundred Gripen and most are not gonna given OR sold any time soon. Which means. Why spend 6 months learning an airframe you will barely able to utilize? What if one get's destroyed? Are you gonna put that pilot back on a mig that may or may not even be avalible?
So.. of those THOUSANDS of F-16s how many has the US pledged to Ukraine eh? It doesnt matter if there are millions of them elsewhere, its the number in Ukraine that is important.
As countries that give armaments to Ukraine. Do it with limitations on the way that Ukraine will use it. And considering that US support is erratic, and limited by US internal politic; Ukraine should become more autonomous from USA by equiping herself with European equipment.
You are forgetting the critical factor there are only 300 Gripens made vs 4000 plus F-16s when you factor in combat losses, accidents and maintenance you would run out of Gripens very quickly If Ukraine had the time, yes but they dont have that luxury
It doesn't matter how many F-16 there are around the world that wont be sent to Ukraine. What matters is the number of planes that people are willing to send and Sweden are willing to send more Gripen then all those countries with F-16 together.
The Swedish Gripen is build with a main purpose to defend against an attack from Russia so it is more of a natural fit for Ukraine. It is also easy to modify and cheap to maintain.
Gripen can't enough good land to highways ( there is a video where the F-35 is landing with high speed in Finland ) but Jas Gripen can , and it can fly in wet ( rainy) conditions .
The Gripen is the best for Ukraine but….. I understand the most Ukraine could receive would be 20. In contrast (so far) 79 F16 promised and the US are retiring hundreds over the next decade or so. To better explain the Mirage 2000-5F promised to Ukraine are also likely to be less than 20. The Ukranians have said they need at least 130 fast jets. In other words, as with the Gripen, just not enough. My guess is that when the full set of pilots are trained Ukraine will have F16, Mirages, Gripes and Eurofighter Typhoons.
They won't get the Gripens or the typhoon as they are still a full functioning combat aircraft in their respective countries. There is absolutely no way the UK would authorize the typhoon in Ukraine In case it gets shot down and relatively modern equipment gets into Russian hands. If these aircraft ever were in Ukraine it would be after the war to rebuild the Ukrainian air force.
@@davedevonlad7402 12-24 Gripen are fully possible within two months notice, and two divisions armed with Meteors would force Russia to plan every singe sortie with the possibility of meeting them in mind.
@@johanmetreus1268I agree with your comment. But why create more complex issues with training and logistics, The pilots are already trained on the F-16s and know them well with plenty of spares available around the world. Maintenance crews would have to be specially trained and all new equipment just for the Gripen would need to be brought in, it would also take valuable pilots away from the front line for training in other countries. Personally it's a lot of effort for virtually no gain. I question why a missile cannot be adapted for long range combat for the F-16 It has been done before in other countries so why not now, the USA has some very clever people, would it not be cheaper to develop this. More pilots only need training on one platform, one type of logistics, one type of maintenance. It's just so much easier, it's almost like everyone wants to make it difficult for Ukraine.
@@davedevonlad7402 No, there are around 30 Ukrainian pilots trained on the F-16. The rest are trained on the various Soviet derivates, with an unknown number in the pipeline. Main problem seems to have been finding pilots proficient enough in English to absorb the training program. I have not seen any numbers for ground crews, but supposedly in the same ballpark. From what is being said, it is easier to train fresh pilots on the F-16 than retraining the already experienced ones as (for some reason) they also have to learn the US style of air operations. Either way, the only ones who can train the staff are the countries already operating the F-16. This means there is unused potential in the countries than do not, and as we seen during the three years of war, the Ukrainians don't seem to have an issue of using whatever they can get their hands on regardless of the logistical complications they might face. As we are talking complete divisions here, they get their own set of equipment regardless of what aircraft they fly, and just like the Challengers, Abrams and so forth wasn't sprinkled out over various units but kept together in specific brigades. It would be a very small issue having two extra divisions specifically equipped with Gripen and two specifically with Mirage 2000.... and since the training takes place outside the F-16 pipelines, the only "complication" is the need to find more suitable candidates to fill the spots. It is fully possible to integrate the Meteor on the F-16, but as that process has not even began yet (because 'Murican planes can't be soiled by Eurotrash even if it is better) the only plane possible to send to Ukraine with short notice is Gripen as Ukraina already had pilots and ground crews trained on JAS 39, but not on the Eurofighter which is the other aircraft the Meteor is already integrated on.
@@johanmetreus1268 You raise some good points, and many I agree with, but I still believe integrating the meteor would be better on the F-16 if possible. You mentioned ground crew numbers, 200 went to the USA to get trained so I assume there is probably 300+ if you take into account the other countries with F-16s. I still believe having one platform is better for integration but I am fully aware what the Gripen can bring to the table. The Gripen will obviously be in Ukraine at some point and I hope it will make a difference but the problem is it's still not there, Russia is inflicting serious casualties on Ukraine at the moment but again no Gripen and it's long range missiles, Ukraine have operational F-16s so get the meteor or something else integrated on to them asap as nobody can wait for a jet that might or might not turn up soon. Troops on the ground can't wait much longer. Current Ukrainian F-16 pilots can train their own pilots if the platform stays the same as well. But I get why Ukraine needs a longer ranged missile to counter the bomber threat, The Amraam-Ex is a potential option for area air defense and there was a potential air to air version in the pipeline called the Amraam-AXE, why are these not being integrated as they are already around. The USA has already sent 120+ of the Amraam-ER to Taiwan so why not send them to Ukraine.
Agree, the Gripen E model would be a better fit for the Ukraine theatre. But There are alot of F-16's in storage waiting to be repurposed and modernized.
In that case, they should get the latest version, E. It would be a good idea for several countries to join. Sweden alone cannot possibly finance this when the entire industry is in crisis.
Despite all the efforts, Ukraine would need the latest model, or some upgrades included. The European F16s have been upgraded with those pods that of course might fit the Gripen as well. The rugged factor is definitely for Gripens . Remember that Switzerland lately landed even their FA18 on the highway (but which is especially flat and straight built for that option). They also landed Mirages in the 70s on highway with a bridge in the middle .. 20cm was the clearance . So Europeans can land planes in rougher environment.
PS: just watched a video about the Japanese F16 ... called F2 ... I think the USA only allow Japan and Israel to enhance US fighter platforms .. what Israel also used for their F35s
Now I certainly don't want to deny Ukraine a highly capable and useful tool in their shed, but wouldn't this add just another burdening supply chain? I heard they're already having trouble fielding their Leopard 2 due to shortages in HE shells. And I fear more variety in their arsenal only adds to their already strained logistics.
Sweden doesn't talk about donations in public more than necessary. Announcements have several times been made after the fact, and also not disclosing numbers, if it can be kept secret. I think transfer of Gripen (Gryphon) is much closer to realisation, than is publicly known. This includes how far training of pilots has already gone, and how many. Also, I wouldn't be surprised, if domestic Ukranian production is beeing discussed.
I agree the JAS 39 would be a better main fighter aircraft for Ukraine right now and possibly into the future and use the F16 as a secondary aircraft more of a specialty aircraft for the more advanced pilots and the JAS 39 used as the main line fighter, just my 2 cents on that subject
Quantity is a quality in itself and the Gripen simply lacks quantity vs the F-16. According to Ukraine it needs at least 100 fighters from their allies to fulfill the need of its Airforce. The F-16 has the potential to fulfil that, the Gripen not. And with these numbers it probably pays off the standardize on the excellent F-16, even if the Gripen offers better capabilities.
The current bottle neck isn't the number of aircraft, but crews to fly and maintain them. If Ukraine made the decision to go with Gripen and signed a paid contract, SAAB could increase the production currently set to deliberately keep the production line running longest possible with the aircraft in the orderbook.
@@johanmetreus1268 And guess wbich aircraft has the bigger and wider training capacity? Hint: it's not the Gripen. Training 100 plus Gripen pilots plus logistics AND acquiring 100 plus Gripen fighters simply takes longer and costs more than with the F-16.
@@Drrolfski Training pipeline for crews is definitely a bottle neck even if both Czechia and Hungary would commit to full participation. Then again JAS 39 is a much easier system to handle and the required ground crews smaller so can't really say what the actual offset would be. Bottom line is that its all about (political) will.
@@johanmetreus1268 Even with full Swedish commitment it will be more expensive and will take longer to get a full Gripen fleet ready. Its lower maintenance won't compensate for that.
Simple math like lit there are 300 Gripens made and over 4000 F-16s The F-16 can use the AGM-88 which critical to Ukraine The Gripen has never used it there are a lot reason why its a no go
Ukraine has shown a keen interest in buying a bunch of Gripen aircraft (as well as CV90 IFVs), so for me the question is what will happen with the F-16s they get now in a ten year perspective?
I think Jas will be sent, but what everyone needs to understand is that there is a very limited number of Jas Gripen and production cannot be scaled up very much in a short time. In short, we are talking about a maximum of 12-16 Gripens.
yes, Gripen seems to be more in harmony with the Ukraine/ Former Soviet doctrine of rugged unattended runways and roads. Soviet ramps were also extremely littered with a lot of screws, small junks increasing the possibly of FODing F16 engine with the air intake so close to the ground. They were not as meticulous and tidy as Americans in keeping the ramps clean and spotless. MIG 29 was designed to taxi with air intakes closed bypassing air from upper inlets
It is all about availability. A lot of F16, just a few Gripens. But it is certainly a good air plane and in bigger numbers the better choose. But, availability is still the crux.
Yes Sweden will do that but it would be the Gripen that are on lend-lease right now and not the new versions. (Hungary have 14+ older variants that could be switched for new variant in an extended lend-lease to Hungary).
What happened to all the mothballed Saab 37 Viggen and Saab 35 Draken airframes? Couldn’t these older airframes, and outdated compatible ordinance, be re-commissioned and given to Ukraine along with retired pilots to act as instructors?
Swedish airforce pretty much flew all of them until they ran out of spare parts to keep enough of them flying anymore.
2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2
South Africa is unable to maintain and operate the Gripen jets and should be more than happy to sell them back to Sweden. After upgrades and service by SAAB, they should be perfect for Ukraine.
Now that the Nordic nations are placing their airforces under a central command, it only makes sense for Sweden to send aircraft to Ukraine. Sweden is surrounded by the other Nordic States. The Swedish airspace can still be protected.
Gripen factory in Ukraine will be a key for future expansion those awesome fighters. Before of war there were talks about replacement Migs by Gripens. But shortage of money was crucial. Ukraine met a war with outdated fleet and as result a lot of expirienced pilots were lost.
They went for the F - 16 because they could. But with a bit of thought out side the box it's the Gripen. I wouldn't be surprised if the Gripen takes over. At the moment it's all talk with a hint of what could come - Just a lot of hot (sometimes just cold) air with a lot of nothing.
An Updated version of the Viggen would be EVEN Better! Why? Just upon it's ease of Servicing, Reload time in Sorties, and STOL. But it's Electronics would need a fairly big UpGrade to be survivable. Great Plane, as the Gripen is, and the Draken was.
@@johanmetreus1268 I KNOW. But, it's SIMPLE to Use, Very, very Quick to Re=Arm/Re-Fuel, and Return to Combat Sorties. It also has Great Anti-shipping abilities, Photo Recon, and Interception Response (well. within Swedish Radar umbrella?! oops). The AIRFRAMES should be good for another 5-7 years, but could (obviously!) use newer cockpit gadgets, etc. But, as a 'Simpler' Fighter, it's still better-than a Mig-29!!
It is also (whatever of them that are left?!) Expendable, IE, Cheap if-not re-fitted.... But, so are ALL the A-6's, A-7's , Legacy F-18's, in the Desert Graveyard... Or, Tornados, by example.....
@@ericbrammer2245 Two problems here. The first is that there aren't any Viggens around. The second is that everything you list Viggen as capable of, Gripen does better. Now if there was a couple of hundred Viggen in fully working order just standing around I'd be more inclined to agree.
I was saying this ever since we said Ukraine could have F-16. The key thing is that most fighters, however good, require extensive infrastructure, whereas the Grippin allows much greater dispersal and logistics support without huge tank farms and ammo dumps. They are dispersed as well.
@@iamlonelyaf1434 None that I know of. The thing is that the Swedes have been neutral, but not expected the Soviets/Russians to respect that neutrality if it does not fit their plans. They had plans to operate in a dispersed mode out of isolated forest openings, making them hard to find until they came up to fight. The West in general (other than the UK/USMC Harriers, have favored high performance planes tied ot large runways.
Vailability is an issue. Sweden may have 30 or 40 Gripens ready to go, but between them, EuroNATO powers managed to mobilise some 80 F-16s. At least one of which has alerady been lost, and others WILL be lost. It's a war, losses happen. And that's the key issue. F-16 are MORE REPLACEABLE than Gripens. The USAF alone has 900 of the things, and the total number of F-16s is somewhere north of 2500 . . . while there are a mere 300 Gripens worldwide, all in use. Same reason, frankly, while Leo 2s are only a stopgap. Europe doen't have a few thousand MBTs in storage. The US does.
"A possible promise" of Mirages? Wes, I expect you of all people to be better informed than this. The Mirages are on the way, no doubt at all. Ukrainian pilots have been training on them for some time already. When the pilots are ready, the Mirages will come with them.
@@AndyWoohoo666 nah, the orgin of the engine of the RM12 is the GE-404, but the RM12 is so heavily modified (50%) that GE consider it a totally different engine, & they are all built in Sweden.. Similar with the radar, heavily reengineered in Sweden, where it's also produced.. Technically, I guess they could replace it with the newly developed GaN radar fully developed by SAAB, but I'm not sure anyone would accept that technology to be transferred at this time.. That one goes beyond what's in the Gripen E presently..🧐
Could sweden instead send the aged Saab SK 60 as light jet attackcraft , guess they do but there are much they dont want to do -guess 900+km double seated trainer jet wont suffice
I’m not sure you are considering things like service/repair, the availability of spare parts as well as the aircraft’s capability to use weapons more easily available to Ukraine (I.E. traditional NATO weapons) that may not be compatible with Grippen. Ukraine can get F-16 parts and weapons from all over the world. Only one place to get a Grippen’s So yes, on a purely tactical level, the Gripen is the better choice, but logistics and availability of munitions is a concern as well
Gripen can use all the weapons F-16 can use, but also French and other nations. Gripen is essentially the fighter with the most different weapons certified for it's use. Main reason is that it's sold with free weapon integration of whatever weapon the buyer wants.
One problem, there are 100x more older F16s than Grippens even though the Grippen is simpler to maintain but costs more than the newest F16s. In time i hope Pilots are trained for Grippens and Ukraine gets them. Probably long before the French Mirage is approved.
the biggest problem with the f16 is the location of the stick on the rigth hand side. must be weird to transition yourself from central stick if that is what you are used to. esp if you fly hotas.
With all the modern NATO fighters (F-35 isn't really a fighter) it isn't so much the aircraft or engine as the weapons and sensors suite they carry. They all have advantages and disadvantages. The F-16 has availability and spares availability but earlier versions have limitations. The Typhoon has immense air to air and with Brimstone and Storm Shadow very powerful ground attack capability but cost and complexity. Rafael very much on par with the Typhoon some advantages some disadvantage. Mirage 2000 already on way to Ukraine. Australian F18 were offered to Ukraine but it accepted. All in all the Gripen is a pretty good fit for Ukraine simpler to maintain than Typhoon or Rafael.
I disagree with you on this one Wes, and those other comments that extol the Grippen - it is only just a good trainer, certainly not a front line fighter - why do you like it?
The argument from the start was that F16 was a better choice cause it could be delivered in large amount to Ukraine. That was sadly only true on paper. Ukraine was let down again and of the hundred planes promised only 10 have been delivered. Perhaps Europe now realise that it is time to step up and ignore Usas stupid drip feed strategy and just give Ukraine what it needs. If there have been some clever planning there are a number of Ukrainian pilots that have been educated and can take off in Gripens now.
yes, but no pilots - UA would be a perfect place to show what Grippen can pull off - but UA does not have the crews for this plane - UA hardly has what is needed to air 10 F-16.
The Gripens can join the Clickbait Air Regiment, who are also due to receive F22's, F35'S and Eurofighters. It is all part of the channel monetization project.
I from Sweden and I love our fighter, however ukraine has got the f16 they need training for that plane. Even tho i think our plane is better then F16 , most important is training in rapairing and use the machines they already got.
Well, yeah, that would enhance Ukraine as the JAS-39 is far superior to the F-16, but the training lag will impact when as you're not going to simply jump out of an F-16 and into a JAS-39 and not be useless in the seat. Six months at minimum for conversion training in two seaters and probably longer.
@@TerryCheever "Jonson: Ukrainska piloter har testat Gripen" published 14 september 2023. Undisclosed as the exact number of personell is being kept secret.
Sweden will NOT send Gripen to Ukraine in any near future. The simple reason is.... we need all the 97 Gripen we have at the moment and for any foreseeable future. Not even 97 Gripen C + D plus 60 Gripen E on order will be more than just minimum needed for the situation right now. The problem for Sweden will be training pilots to operate the 60 new aircraft together with the 97 current Gripen.
Lots of amazing comments here. And some Russian bots also. Hey bots: уезжай из Украины
What a ridiculous NAFO troll you are. I am swedish ex. military with very good insight in our defence. Except for Hungary there is no decision made to make more JAS E. However there is several upgrades coming. You can look at SAAB:s homepage everything is there. We currently have 96 Gripen. But many need upgrades and maintenance. There is NO decision to send Gripen to Ukrain and this will never happen. Because the people of Sweden start to get tired of this war which not are our war. We already sent 60 billion (almost our whole defencebudget) to Ukrain and we are running out of money. The goverment run the people over about the issue of NATO membership. Also there are reports everywhere of Ukrainan soldiers deserting. Myself and many other active militarys is sick and tired of this warmongering instead of peacetalks. I recommend you to read Sun Tzu. It´s better to get to know your enemy and be honest about. The western propaganda like yours is ridiculous. I am waiting for we did´nt see it coming from our goverment. Truth is many of us who love our country and are patriots saw this coming a long time ago. And now we are standing there with our military storage empty. www.friatider.se/over-100000-pa-flykt-fran-zelenskyjs-arme
The article above is a right wing extremist magazine. The vast majority of Swedes are in favour of Nato and are supporting Ukraine.
@@_c_y_p_3 Nice! I see those birds almost every day. And I never gets tired of it. I am lucky to live just a couple of kilometers from the factory in one direction and in the other direction I have the air force base where they are tested by the military authorities before every unit is delivered to the Swedish Air Force. So I both see them as well as hear the Gripen E very often. And sometimes I can watch SAAB's testpilots perform/practice for the air shows. That is awsome to watch. 😁
Yep I did 15 years in the Australian Air Force and always wanted the Gripen, even over the F35, as the Gripen is more versatile and easier/cheaper to operate and maintain. Also we could have bought more, many more giving us a larger and more versatile platform
Was that your driving force ? The cost ? When you were flying f35 on arma3
I thought 🇨🇦 should have went with Gripen instead of the f35. For all the reasons in this video.
@@ScottTaggart65 Maybe the same reason not to, was why the incredible Avro Canada CF-105 Arrow was not only scrapped, but everything about it was destroyed?
@bfelten1 The US was afraid of the Arrow and got Deifenbaker to kill it. I see what you're getting at.👍
The Swedes are front line. They know what is required.
You forgot an important thing. Turnaround time on the road bases. Gripen only needs 10-15 minutes and also that an engine replacement only takes 1 hour! No other fighter even comes close, to such short turnaround times...
Yes, to replace ONE combatready Gripen, you need TWO or THREE other fighters! That I call value for the money!
The Rafale's engine can also be replaced in less than an hour, and the Rafale can change its objectives WHILE in mission
perhaps..
@@CaptainDangeax Rafale - also one hour in the field? Regarding the two engine Rafale (a lot more difficult to access the engines - hmm...). Can Rafale also be reloaded and refuled by two technicians and three conscript mechanics in the field perhaps?
JAS = FAR in english: Fighter Attack Reconnaissance. Gripen has been multirole/swingrole since day one...
The best fighters for Ukraine are the ones they have operational, and that they have pilots who can fly them and mechanics who can maintain them and spare parts to fix them. An airplane in the air is worth infinitely more than any number of ideas, plans, and promises.
Yeah, it's a bit like with cameras - the best camera is the one you can bring with you and have at hand when you need it.
While I like the Gripen a great deal, there are many more spare F-16s out there one could send to Ukraine, compared to the Gripen.
All planes need maintenance and a supply chain. The question is how well the Gripens could be maintained in Ukraine…
Anyway, I hope Ukraine gets as many western planes as possible, including Gripens.
@@miskaknapek How many could in theory be sent to Ukraine doesn't matter when the number actually sent is much lower.
Gripen is much easier to maintain then F-16, making that part a major advantage.
@@znail4675 grippen wil not be used by ukraine. ukraine is not interested in buying and training pilots on new type of fighter jets by two years. They can have dozens of F-16s and few pilots trained on them. Gripen is small aircraft with short range and Ukraine is second biggest country in Europa after Russia.
@@znail4675 That is true, but wrong in practice . Sending F-16, training pilots and maintenance personnel for the plane required a multinational effort from many countries. A new training facility needed to be build. Sweden would have to do that on their own as other operators of Grippen are insignificant or downright oppose helping Ukraine.
@@zepter00 GriPen....gees
kanelbulle he says, showing kladdkaka... I'm distracted now... xD
My thought, exactly. 😆
Sweden has already trained Ukrainians on Gripen more than year ago, before we was a nato member. However, the lessons of Ukraine also teaches us to not be too bold with Russia before having some sort of defense, our has naively been slashed since Cold War ended. When we finally were a member, the US blocked out Gripen support; they knew it would be better and that would have dropped their F16 sales to other countries.
I think the Jas 39 Gripen C and D will get available for Ukraine as soon as the 60 New Gripen E is delivered to the Swedish Airforce.Sweden has 98 operational Gripen C and D, with an undisclosed number of earlier versions in Storage.
The Story here in Sweden is that Ukraine's first choice was the Gripen but too few were available and other European nations had plenty of F-16's ready for retirement.Ukraine also couldn't implement 2 Platforms at the same time,so the transfer is on hold,but sending Gripen Spare-parts to Ukraine is very telling for the near Future🇺🇦🤝🇸🇪
A och B har uppgraderats till C och D. Inte lagts i malpåse.
@@peterfdsvenskaflygvapnet2643 Ok,Tack👍
@@Magnus-v9x A lots of the parts to Gripen can be used for other fighters too. Ukraine will never get any donated Gripens unless someone pays SAAB to complete the 14 airframes for the C that they have in stock at the factory in Linkoping. Or if someone buys the 20-something Gripen that South Africa wants us to buy back, since they can't afford to keep them in the air with the countries financial situation. But if someone buys them from SA and then pays SAAB to fix them up, then there might be a slight chance to see Gripen in Ukraine before the war is over. But it would most likely take at least a year from now.
@peterfdsvenskaflygvapnet2643 Ok,thanks,I can see you're Ex Swedish Airforce so you know this better than me,maybe we will see our mighty Gripen in the Ukrainian skies within a year then.I don't really see Trump's Peace effort going anywhere,it's more like Extortion actually.
@@peterfdsvenskaflygvapnet2643 Sorry,I tried to give you an answer but the long one disappeared.
7:52 - "some experts think that Sweden could offer Gripen training for Ukrainian pilots NOW setting up the possibility...".
Sweden already has been training Ukranian pilots for years now, for this. That's old news. Literally already happening.
Good to hear.
Sweden doesnt have alot of Gripens thou
@@reallivebluescat Like everything.. build on demand! Sweden had one of the largest airfleet in the world during the cold war..
And today 2024-11-09 the Nordic is at top 3 in the hole of Europe.
The Nordic today is a game changer when it´s comes to war as it has been troughout history.. now we are united like no other countries in the world.
Despite our 30M population we are among the best in the world when it matters.. just like hockey.
My opinion since the discussions about the F-16. Low maintenance costs and time, low operation costs, short starting and landing from trails and ways.
They might be a good fit, certainly easier to maintain and more cost effective. There is value in "good enough." I do like the CAS capabilities the Sabb might bring depending on the variant.
@@msromike123
You should research Red Flag from 2006 and forward and find out how the Swedish Gripen did against the Americans...You might learn something.
I will be a good person and post a few links you can read.
Quote:
"Gripen first participated in Red Flag 2006 with the Gripen A,’ says Stefan Englund , former Swedish Air Force Flight Engineer on Quora. ‘It was assigned to the red team. Reduced AWACS, reduced ground support. The Gripens connected their link systems and acted themselves as AWACs, got the battlefield awareness necessary and avoided all ground defence, scored 10 kills the first day including a Typhoon. No losses they remained undetected. 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 encounter or failed their mission objectives. It was the only fighter that performed all planed starts, while others were sitting on the ground waiting for the weather to clear up. The evaluation was that Gripen capacity needed to be reevaluated."
End Quote.
Source: theaviationgeekclub.com/the-saab-gripen-is-able-to-dogfight-and-win-against-almost-any-dissimilar-aircraft-former-swedish-air-force-flight-engineer-explains-how/
Quote:
3 Swedish Gripen went up against 5 F-16, the score was 5-0 5-0 and 5-1
Source: www.globaldefensecorp.com/2021/01/07/gripen/
And there are so much more if you spend 10 minutes searching, so should we talk about what is "good enough"?
@@msromike123question, what CAS can the Gripen do that an F-16 cannot ?
@@davedevonlad7402 None. I was comparing the Saab to the Mirage in that respect. I still say the F-16 is better if you can afford it. But for Ukraine this should be cheaper to operate and capable enough. But remember a single Saab took out a five of F-16s, I read it right here. LOL
Low operation costs, but all the Gripens mostly would have to be built still or replaced, while F16s are freely available to donate lol, so the cost isn't.. F16 might not be ideal but the Ukranians make it work otherwise they wouldn't ask for it so.. The f16s tho are older & aesa radar would be great upgrade, also the meteor longrange missiles Gripen uses would be fantastic, alltho there exist aim9x lonrange too i believe but not widely available. I wish we just trained Ukr pilots for F35 right away lol. It will have the best combat testing there.
Fast turnaround time re-arming too, 10min for air-to-air missions and 15min for ground-attack missions, using just a few conscripts and just one technician, coupled with the low cost of operations means it could do a lot of missions making up for the somewhat more limited take off weight. I think a mix of both F-16 and JAS-39 would be an excellent combo, F-16's to do the heavy ground-attack missions, covered by some Gripens in a more air-to-air and electronic warefare role, or where you need to sneak up on an enemy. But what do I know - I'm just a keyboard warrior...
Appreciate your hard work and insight. Thanks from washington state.
With every Gripen video comes a long list of trash talk comments. Gripen is obviously not trash, there are just a lot of Americans and Russians who, for obvious reasons don’t want to see it shine.
Lockheed Martin is definitely not very fond of Gripen - that's for sure...
@@-NiEr Lockheed Marin is the supplier of the flight control system in Gripen. So they are very happy $$$
@@banhof2223 Nope, you're thinking about Auto GCAS... And - selling F-16s and F-35s generates "somewhat" more money. Thailand choosing Gripen over F-16 made Lockheed Martin really pissed off...
Or maybe people who don´t want war. So tired of you warmongers.
@@Neo-xn7vc At least a guy called Vladimir is working really hard, to achieve peace on this entire planet. (If that can be of any comfort to you...)
Great Info !! Subscribed !! I like this guys style and info !! Short Video, Concise, a bit of humor and most importantly good topics and up to date Info !!
Bro, you’re an absolute legend!
I’ve been saying this since talk of jets going to Ukraine was a thing. Gripen is way more suited to this type of conflict. The thing is Sweden doesn’t have the numbers to give them what Ukraine truly would need to make a big difference.
That's what I've been asking, too: the Gripen is way, way, way closer to the design and use philosophy of the MiGs and Sukhois Ukraine is using.
@ Sweden can’t give them 40-60 jets though and does it make sense to take all of the time and resources to train pilots on a weapons system for what they will get ? Idk.
@@556m4 Pilots from Ukraine have been trained at F21
@@556m4 We can give them 24, ie 4 divisions of 6. Not a major problem. Operational within a couple of weeks. Now the f-16s have been talked about for 18 months and they have like 4 in the air? American and Nato bullshit doesnt save Ukrainian lives. Action does. And Sweden have prmised and delivered Archers, CB90, CVS90, AWACS, BPS, munition, AT84, RBS 17, RBS70. Germany, US and France ( the chicken shit country of Europe, designing the only tank with just one fw gear, but 6 reverse gears, the Leclerc, so they can outpace the Germans when in retreat)
Hey much love from Seattle Washington great channel great content. ❤❤
To be fair, most Swedish systems are made to be able to be used without a lot of training. Just look at the Carl Gustav recoil less rifle. The AT4. The Archer Artillery system. The Gripen (Gripen meens The Gryphon in Swedish btw). Small population that can quickly be trained how to operate weapon system (at least those that didnt do mandatory service, which was, unfortunatly, stoped 2010).
Gripen is the only fighter jet in the world designed for invasion defence....the main reason to REALLY need a suitable fighter jet. All others are designed by strong and safe countries to project power elsewhere, not to protect their own country. Countries that might really end up fighting for their life should go for Gripen or expect their fighters to be useless from day 2 after the enemy has bombarded their airfields with ballistic missiles.
Gripen was stopped by US fearing its performance would hinder further sales of F-16. As already said pilots are already trained and goverment set money aside to donate them.
At least officially there is no training in Sweden on Gripen and Zelensky said on his last visit to Sweden that he wished for pilots to start training no matter what/ when/ if a decision to send the Gripen.
But politicians in Sweden are open and willing to send Gripen. But with all other partners it was decided to send the F16 instead because there are a lot more of them.
It was also decided that Sweden would donate surveillance planes to complement the F16 system and potentially the Gripen in the future. That training should have started.
The pilots to fly are already available in big numbers from Ukraine since it's a civilian plane and only minor training is needed for tactical purposes. But how long time it will take to teach the crew I do not know, it's not easy tactical decisions they will need to make. It's possible that the Ukrainian crew has been part of the Neptune Strike exercise. But that's just speculation from my side.
@@Nubbe999 Officially and what actually has happened might differ in war time. The decision by Sweden to send them together with their "AWACS" planes was already taken. Easist to see if you compare the Swedish commitment to Ukraine with booked value on the rest of the army. There is no possibility to fulfill that without sending Gripens.
what sales? F16s were gifted to Ukraine by many European countries at a significant quantity that couldn't be equaled by the Gripen. How does that make the Gripen the best choice? It might be a better choice on paper but there weren't/aren't enough of them so why create problems with a system that can't be supported???
@@rangerrick2246 Future sales of course to other countries would be harmed. Today it was also learned that US stopped the AWACS planes already promised. Gripen can be maintained and rearmed / refueled by a handful of conscripts so what support problems?
@@foppafredmost if not all donors are replacing old f16 with newer f35. I do not see the logic. Some people always see US meddling, no matter what. Canada and Finland are better examples of this where us f35 was chosen instead of gripen. But i trust what Finnish leadership says; f35 has higher survivability.
Also much of the cheap operability is exaggerated; initial numbers still being touted today where based on only fuel costs.
Love gripen though, its a nice plane for Ukraine but not some kind of star destroyer that never got its chance due to conspiracies. Its just a really good plane for sweden and someone like Ukraine. Personally id like to see f16 and Gripen (with meteor)work together; it would open up many new tactics.
The Gripen actually did see combat in Libya. So it did have combat experience.
The Grippen is an incredible force multiplier if this happens
THERE IS NO GRIPPPPPPPPPEN....Just a GriPen
The simple reality is that the Falcon was available in decent numbers and there has been a two year process of training pilots and ground staff as well as plenty of spare parts laying around.
The Griffin was held up due to Swedish NATO membership issues from Turkey.
It’s a better long term solution for Ukraine to fill out their Air Force but if the Griffin were named the primary fighter of Ukraine tomorrow it would take
Over a year or two from now to get 80 jets delivered while the F-16s should be in place this coming summer.
It would be a better choice.... if it had a fraction of the availability of airframes and parts. That the F16 does
Just love the design. It comes in a box with instructions no it doesn’t Sweden I Love you 🤟😍😅
I just love the pronunciation of kanel bulle ;)
thank you for an interesting channel!
But the pronunciation of Gripen was bad!!! Interresting how you would have said it with two p. Probably the same...then you should know that you say it wrong with 1 p.
@Wes would be awsome if you can do a review on the Swedish BAE Systems Bofors tridon mk2
Swedish weapons are always based, advanced and built for the real world
More specifically, built to defend against the east.
Thanks again Wes 👍🍻
Swedes had an advantageous position against the USSR in the Cold War as by necessity Soviet equipment and doctrine were designed to counter NATO ones. So the Swedes went for niche capabilities that targeted Soviet gaps or vulnerabilities arising from their focus on NATO. It was uneconomic and a distraction for the Soviets to put effort into designing systems to counter Swedish ones.
Swede here. I think the Gripen could one day be sent to Ukraine in there defense of the skies. As it currently is, we are unable to send them. Not because we don't want to, but because it's to much of a security risk for ourselves at the moment as we need them to defend our skies and coastal lines, especially in the baltic were incursion from russian jets and ships happens.
That doens't mean our goverment aren't willing to prepare Ukraine for the Gripen. We essentially made it so Ukraine could get to know how this air frame works, so when the day come when Ukraine get's the green light for the Gripen, it will not be as time consuming to recieve them and get them in the air, since the ukrainian staff will already be familiar with Gripen and it's logistic. Kinda like pre-planning something ahead until the day come.
The Gripen is a really great multiroll figher. It was designed along with the swedish doctrine during the cold war that military installations would be key targets in combat, including air-fields. We didn't have the numbers and the logistic to face the Sovjet's large numbers so we adapted our military, including the air force to hit and run tactics, known as "Disperse-operation". You strike, you hide before the enemy can retaliate and then strike again when the enemy isn't ready for it. This is also the reason why our highways are differently designed than in the rest of Europe so that certain roadstripes can be used as temporary runways for our jets during war-time.
It's this air doctrine that gave birth to the Jas 35 Draken and the Saab 37 Viggen to then become a roll- model for the Jas-39 Gripen in the 1990s.
Personally, even though Gripen in many areas outshine and is not such a logistical nightmare in comparision to the F-16 (and the modern F-35). I think Ukraine can benefit both the F-16 and the Gripen, as the 2 jets can reinforce what the other lack.
The F-16 can be used as a dog fighter to keep the skies clear from russian fighters, while the Gripen to be used as a reconnaissance & support fighter to help pass information to the troops and blast openings in enemy defenses for them.
I am proud of our own- made Gripen jet and that many countries are taking lessons how you can use highways as temporary runways, since air fields becomes high- value targets in wartime. One day, we hope Gripen can help Ukraine and get the recognition it deserved.
JAS Gripen
J - Jakt - Hunting
A - Attack
S - Spaning - Surviellance
Gripen - The Gryffin (mythological animal with the front of an eagle and the back of a lion)
Everyone focusing on the airframe rather than the logistics. There are THOUSANDS of F16s and only a few hundred Gripen and most are not gonna given OR sold any time soon. Which means. Why spend 6 months learning an airframe you will barely able to utilize? What if one get's destroyed? Are you gonna put that pilot back on a mig that may or may not even be avalible?
So.. of those THOUSANDS of F-16s how many has the US pledged to Ukraine eh? It doesnt matter if there are millions of them elsewhere, its the number in Ukraine that is important.
As countries that give armaments to Ukraine. Do it with limitations on the way that Ukraine will use it. And considering that US support is erratic, and limited by US internal politic; Ukraine should become more autonomous from USA by equiping herself with European equipment.
Sweden does not impose any limitations at all on the things we give Ukraine.
You are forgetting the critical factor
there are only 300 Gripens made vs 4000 plus F-16s
when you factor in combat losses, accidents and maintenance
you would run out of Gripens very quickly
If Ukraine had the time, yes but they dont have that luxury
It doesn't matter how many F-16 there are around the world that wont be sent to Ukraine. What matters is the number of planes that people are willing to send and Sweden are willing to send more Gripen then all those countries with F-16 together.
If the Gripens come along with the Meteor BVR missile then it would definitely complicate the Russian Air Forces operations. Far superior to AMRAAM.
And RBS15 the most capable anti ship missile in the world. Latest version can also attack ground targets.
The Swedish Gripen is build with a main purpose to defend against an attack from Russia so it is more of a natural fit for Ukraine. It is also easy to modify and cheap to maintain.
Gripen can't enough good land to highways ( there is a video where the F-35 is landing with high speed in Finland ) but Jas Gripen can , and it can fly in wet ( rainy) conditions .
Thanks for the video, enjoy the fika Wes! ☕️
What you are saying is the truth 💯 Ukraine needs To have not just one kind of jet,
The Gripen is the best for Ukraine but….. I understand the most Ukraine could receive would be 20. In contrast (so far) 79 F16 promised and the US are retiring hundreds over the next decade or so. To better explain the Mirage 2000-5F promised to Ukraine are also likely to be less than 20. The Ukranians have said they need at least 130 fast jets.
In other words, as with the Gripen, just not enough. My guess is that when the full set of pilots are trained Ukraine will have F16, Mirages, Gripes and Eurofighter Typhoons.
They won't get the Gripens or the typhoon as they are still a full functioning combat aircraft in their respective countries.
There is absolutely no way the UK would authorize the typhoon in Ukraine In case it gets shot down and relatively modern equipment gets into Russian hands.
If these aircraft ever were in Ukraine it would be after the war to rebuild the Ukrainian air force.
@@davedevonlad7402 12-24 Gripen are fully possible within two months notice, and two divisions armed with Meteors would force Russia to plan every singe sortie with the possibility of meeting them in mind.
@@johanmetreus1268I agree with your comment.
But why create more complex issues with training and logistics,
The pilots are already trained on the F-16s and know them well with plenty of spares available around the world.
Maintenance crews would have to be specially trained and all new equipment just for the Gripen would need to be brought in, it would also take valuable pilots away from the front line for training in other countries.
Personally it's a lot of effort for virtually no gain.
I question why a missile cannot be adapted for long range combat for the F-16
It has been done before in other countries so why not now, the USA has some very clever people, would it not be cheaper to develop this.
More pilots only need training on one platform, one type of logistics, one type of maintenance.
It's just so much easier, it's almost like everyone wants to make it difficult for Ukraine.
@@davedevonlad7402 No, there are around 30 Ukrainian pilots trained on the F-16. The rest are trained on the various Soviet derivates, with an unknown number in the pipeline. Main problem seems to have been finding pilots proficient enough in English to absorb the training program.
I have not seen any numbers for ground crews, but supposedly in the same ballpark.
From what is being said, it is easier to train fresh pilots on the F-16 than retraining the already experienced ones as (for some reason) they also have to learn the US style of air operations.
Either way, the only ones who can train the staff are the countries already operating the F-16.
This means there is unused potential in the countries than do not, and as we seen during the three years of war, the Ukrainians don't seem to have an issue of using whatever they can get their hands on regardless of the logistical complications they might face.
As we are talking complete divisions here, they get their own set of equipment regardless of what aircraft they fly, and just like the Challengers, Abrams and so forth wasn't sprinkled out over various units but kept together in specific brigades.
It would be a very small issue having two extra divisions specifically equipped with Gripen and two specifically with Mirage 2000.... and since the training takes place outside the F-16 pipelines, the only "complication" is the need to find more suitable candidates to fill the spots.
It is fully possible to integrate the Meteor on the F-16, but as that process has not even began yet (because 'Murican planes can't be soiled by Eurotrash even if it is better) the only plane possible to send to Ukraine with short notice is Gripen as Ukraina already had pilots and ground crews trained on JAS 39, but not on the Eurofighter which is the other aircraft the Meteor is already integrated on.
@@johanmetreus1268 You raise some good points, and many I agree with, but I still believe integrating the meteor would be better on the F-16 if possible.
You mentioned ground crew numbers, 200 went to the USA to get trained so I assume there is probably 300+ if you take into account the other countries with F-16s.
I still believe having one platform is better for integration but I am fully aware what the Gripen can bring to the table.
The Gripen will obviously be in Ukraine at some point and I hope it will make a difference but the problem is it's still not there, Russia is inflicting serious casualties on Ukraine at the moment but again no Gripen and it's long range missiles, Ukraine have operational F-16s so get the meteor or something else integrated on to them asap as nobody can wait for a jet that might or might not turn up soon.
Troops on the ground can't wait much longer.
Current Ukrainian F-16 pilots can train their own pilots if the platform stays the same as well.
But I get why Ukraine needs a longer ranged missile to counter the bomber threat,
The Amraam-Ex is a potential option for area air defense and there was a potential air to air version in the pipeline called the Amraam-AXE, why are these not being integrated as they are already around.
The USA has already sent 120+ of the Amraam-ER to Taiwan so why not send them to Ukraine.
Agree, the Gripen E model would be a better fit for the Ukraine theatre. But There are alot of F-16's in storage waiting to be repurposed and modernized.
FOD walks, I remember walking the line.
Make it so, Number 1.
In that case, they should get the latest version, E. It would be a good idea for several countries to join. Sweden alone cannot possibly finance this when the entire industry is in crisis.
So many F16 and still the Crime Bridge untouched!😅
Despite all the efforts, Ukraine would need the latest model, or some upgrades included. The European F16s have been upgraded with those pods that of course might fit the Gripen as well. The rugged factor is definitely for Gripens . Remember that Switzerland lately landed even their FA18 on the highway (but which is especially flat and straight built for that option). They also landed Mirages in the 70s on highway with a bridge in the middle .. 20cm was the clearance . So Europeans can land planes in rougher environment.
PS: just watched a video about the Japanese F16 ... called F2 ... I think the USA only allow Japan and Israel to enhance US fighter platforms .. what Israel also used for their F35s
Now I certainly don't want to deny Ukraine a highly capable and useful tool in their shed, but wouldn't this add just another burdening supply chain? I heard they're already having trouble fielding their Leopard 2 due to shortages in HE shells. And I fear more variety in their arsenal only adds to their already strained logistics.
Thing is that Gripen can use most of NATOs ordnance so its not as bad of a supplychain burden as you would think.
Sweden doesn't talk about donations in public more than necessary. Announcements have several times been made after the fact, and also not disclosing numbers, if it can be kept secret. I think transfer of Gripen (Gryphon) is much closer to realisation, than is publicly known. This includes how far training of pilots has already gone, and how many.
Also, I wouldn't be surprised, if domestic Ukranian production is beeing discussed.
It wouldn't shock me if it was announced after Gripen planes are already in Ukraine.
I agree the JAS 39 would be a better main fighter aircraft for Ukraine right now and possibly into the future and use the F16 as a secondary aircraft more of a specialty aircraft for the more advanced pilots and the JAS 39 used as the main line fighter, just my 2 cents on that subject
Wow what a oneup!
The hottest looking fighter in history...
Fika sounds like Sweden's secret weapon.
Yes, you are right, keeps our minds sharp!
Snus would be more accurate...
I think all Swedes get that on wedding night. But I also think the Earth is full of magic talking earthworms 🪱 eeeewww….
It stands for Fara, Inkommande Kak Anfall (Danger, Incoming Cookie Attack)
Not a "kanelbulle" (cinnamon bun) but rather a typical "kladdkaka" (sticky chocolate cake) at 0:54
Quantity is a quality in itself and the Gripen simply lacks quantity vs the F-16. According to Ukraine it needs at least 100 fighters from their allies to fulfill the need of its Airforce. The F-16 has the potential to fulfil that, the Gripen not. And with these numbers it probably pays off the standardize on the excellent F-16, even if the Gripen offers better capabilities.
The current bottle neck isn't the number of aircraft, but crews to fly and maintain them. If Ukraine made the decision to go with Gripen and signed a paid contract, SAAB could increase the production currently set to deliberately keep the production line running longest possible with the aircraft in the orderbook.
@@johanmetreus1268 And guess wbich aircraft has the bigger and wider training capacity? Hint: it's not the Gripen. Training 100 plus Gripen pilots plus logistics AND acquiring 100 plus Gripen fighters simply takes longer and costs more than with the F-16.
@@Drrolfski Training pipeline for crews is definitely a bottle neck even if both Czechia and Hungary would commit to full participation.
Then again JAS 39 is a much easier system to handle and the required ground crews smaller so can't really say what the actual offset would be.
Bottom line is that its all about (political) will.
@@johanmetreus1268 Even with full Swedish commitment it will be more expensive and will take longer to get a full Gripen fleet ready. Its lower maintenance won't compensate for that.
Simple math like lit
there are 300 Gripens made and over 4000 F-16s
The F-16 can use the AGM-88 which critical to Ukraine
The Gripen has never used it
there are a lot reason why its a no go
Ukraine has shown a keen interest in buying a bunch of Gripen aircraft (as well as CV90 IFVs), so for me the question is what will happen with the F-16s they get now in a ten year perspective?
comments being deleted?
I think Jas will be sent, but what everyone needs to understand is that there is a very limited number of Jas Gripen and production cannot be scaled up very much in a short time. In short, we are talking about a maximum of 12-16 Gripens.
24
yes, Gripen seems to be more in harmony with the Ukraine/ Former Soviet doctrine of rugged unattended runways and roads. Soviet ramps were also extremely littered with a lot of screws, small junks increasing the possibly of FODing F16 engine with the air intake so close to the ground. They were not as meticulous and tidy as Americans in keeping the ramps clean and spotless. MIG 29 was designed to taxi with air intakes closed bypassing air from upper inlets
It is all about availability. A lot of F16, just a few Gripens. But it is certainly a good air plane and in bigger numbers the better choose. But, availability is still the crux.
It doesnt matter how many F16 exists if they are not pledged to Ukraine..
Yes Sweden will do that but it would be the Gripen that are on lend-lease right now and not the new versions. (Hungary have 14+ older variants that could be switched for new variant in an extended lend-lease to Hungary).
What happened to all the mothballed Saab 37 Viggen and Saab 35 Draken airframes? Couldn’t these older airframes, and outdated compatible ordinance, be re-commissioned and given to Ukraine along with retired pilots to act as instructors?
just a handfull left for museums and airshows
Swedish airforce pretty much flew all of them until they ran out of spare parts to keep enough of them flying anymore.
South Africa is unable to maintain and operate the Gripen jets and should be more than happy to sell them back to Sweden. After upgrades and service by SAAB, they should be perfect for Ukraine.
The F-35 Lightning, Mig-21 Fishbed, Thunderchief 105, Delta Dart F-106, are single engine jet fighters, and they did well for their purposes..
The best fika is a semla though. Or a cardamon bun. Cardamon is great for sweet breads.
Now that the Nordic nations are placing their airforces under a central command, it only makes sense for Sweden to send aircraft to Ukraine. Sweden is surrounded by the other Nordic States. The Swedish airspace can still be protected.
Gripen factory in Ukraine will be a key for future expansion those awesome fighters. Before of war there were talks about replacement Migs by Gripens. But shortage of money was crucial. Ukraine met a war with outdated fleet and as result a lot of expirienced pilots were lost.
They went for the F - 16 because they could. But with a bit of thought out side the box it's the Gripen. I wouldn't be surprised if the Gripen takes over.
At the moment it's all talk with a hint of what could come - Just a lot of hot (sometimes just cold) air with a lot of nothing.
An Updated version of the Viggen would be EVEN Better! Why? Just upon it's ease of Servicing, Reload time in Sorties, and STOL. But it's Electronics would need a fairly big UpGrade to be survivable. Great Plane, as the Gripen is, and the Draken was.
Viggen was a great aircraft in the 1990's, but fairly outdated by Gripen.
@@johanmetreus1268 I KNOW. But, it's SIMPLE to Use, Very, very Quick to Re=Arm/Re-Fuel, and Return to Combat Sorties. It also has Great Anti-shipping abilities, Photo Recon, and Interception Response (well. within Swedish Radar umbrella?! oops). The AIRFRAMES should be good for another 5-7 years, but could (obviously!) use newer cockpit gadgets, etc. But, as a 'Simpler' Fighter, it's still better-than a Mig-29!!
It is also (whatever of them that are left?!) Expendable, IE, Cheap if-not re-fitted.... But, so are ALL the A-6's, A-7's , Legacy F-18's, in the Desert Graveyard... Or, Tornados, by example.....
@@ericbrammer2245 Two problems here.
The first is that there aren't any Viggens around.
The second is that everything you list Viggen as capable of, Gripen does better.
Now if there was a couple of hundred Viggen in fully working order just standing around I'd be more inclined to agree.
I was saying this ever since we said Ukraine could have F-16. The key thing is that most fighters, however good, require extensive infrastructure, whereas the Grippin allows much greater dispersal and logistics support without huge tank farms and ammo dumps. They are dispersed as well.
Grippin???????
How many have they recieved?
@@iamlonelyaf1434 None that I know of. The thing is that the Swedes have been neutral, but not expected the Soviets/Russians to respect that neutrality if it does not fit their plans. They had plans to operate in a dispersed mode out of isolated forest openings, making them hard to find until they came up to fight. The West in general (other than the UK/USMC Harriers, have favored high performance planes tied ot large runways.
@@jameshorn270 I asked about the number of F-16s operationally. Not Gripen.
Vailability is an issue. Sweden may have 30 or 40 Gripens ready to go, but between them, EuroNATO powers managed to mobilise some 80 F-16s. At least one of which has alerady been lost, and others WILL be lost. It's a war, losses happen.
And that's the key issue. F-16 are MORE REPLACEABLE than Gripens. The USAF alone has 900 of the things, and the total number of F-16s is somewhere north of 2500 . . . while there are a mere 300 Gripens worldwide, all in use.
Same reason, frankly, while Leo 2s are only a stopgap. Europe doen't have a few thousand MBTs in storage. The US does.
"A possible promise" of Mirages? Wes, I expect you of all people to be better informed than this. The Mirages are on the way, no doubt at all. Ukrainian pilots have been training on them for some time already. When the pilots are ready, the Mirages will come with them.
Meanwhile Finland sends peanuts. They're the disappointment of the year.
Finland is one of the more likely targets for Russia to attack. Your information is also incorrect. Finland is very secretive about what they send.
... but how many?
Never been to Shephards AFB but I bets it 100x better than Ft Sill or Ft Johnson (I think that’s the new name)
US don't allow Sweden to send Gripen so it will likely never happen.
US has no control over the Gripen, as it is not inthe US production requirements, it is SWEDISH, manufactured by SAAB
@@andymartinez767
Sadly he got a point, the engine is American, radar British but his logic fails in the fact that F-16 is American.
That could change with a stroke of a pen.
@@Giveme1goodreasonSure but with Trump probably soon in power in the White house the likely if that will happen is less then zero..
@@AndyWoohoo666 nah, the orgin of the engine of the RM12 is the GE-404, but the RM12 is so heavily modified (50%) that GE consider it a totally different engine, & they are all built in Sweden.. Similar with the radar, heavily reengineered in Sweden, where it's also produced.. Technically, I guess they could replace it with the newly developed GaN radar fully developed by SAAB, but I'm not sure anyone would accept that technology to be transferred at this time.. That one goes beyond what's in the Gripen E presently..🧐
How does Ukraine handle so many different types of equipment which make additional demands on specialists and parts ? Isn't KISS the key ?.
Could sweden instead send the aged Saab SK 60 as light jet attackcraft , guess they do but there are much they dont want to do -guess 900+km double seated trainer jet wont suffice
I’m not sure you are considering things like service/repair, the availability of spare parts as well as the aircraft’s capability to use weapons more easily available to Ukraine (I.E. traditional NATO weapons) that may not be compatible with Grippen. Ukraine can get F-16 parts and weapons from all over the world. Only one place to get a Grippen’s
So yes, on a purely tactical level, the Gripen is the better choice, but logistics and availability of munitions is a concern as well
Gripen can use all the weapons F-16 can use, but also French and other nations. Gripen is essentially the fighter with the most different weapons certified for it's use. Main reason is that it's sold with free weapon integration of whatever weapon the buyer wants.
so true..but #'s they can get..today..said f16-f18 were in parking lots all over..gippens required to go on offensive into russia battle pits
Ukraine said they didn't want Australian F18 Hornets because they didn't want to train crews on two different planes.
One problem, there are 100x more older F16s than Grippens even though the Grippen is simpler to maintain but costs more than the newest F16s. In time i hope Pilots are trained for Grippens and Ukraine gets them. Probably long before the French Mirage is approved.
the biggest problem with the f16 is the location of the stick on the rigth hand side. must be weird to transition yourself from central stick if that is what you are used to. esp if you fly hotas.
With all the modern NATO fighters (F-35 isn't really a fighter) it isn't so much the aircraft or engine as the weapons and sensors suite they carry.
They all have advantages and disadvantages.
The F-16 has availability and spares availability but earlier versions have limitations.
The Typhoon has immense air to air and with Brimstone and Storm Shadow very powerful ground attack capability but cost and complexity.
Rafael very much on par with the Typhoon some advantages some disadvantage.
Mirage 2000 already on way to Ukraine.
Australian F18 were offered to Ukraine but it accepted.
All in all the Gripen is a pretty good fit for Ukraine simpler to maintain than Typhoon or Rafael.
Fika ❤
Enough with the Top Gun quotes already 😂. It was old by 1985.
The Grippen is a terrific choice for Ukraine.
Slava.
GriPPen????? GriPen!!!!!!!!!
I disagree with you on this one Wes, and those other comments that extol the Grippen - it is only just a good trainer, certainly not a front line fighter - why do you like it?
Gripen is not a fighter jet , IT IS A SYSTEM ! They attack in groups supported
by longer range radar / AWACs
The argument from the start was that F16 was a better choice cause it could be delivered in large amount to Ukraine. That was sadly only true on paper. Ukraine was let down again and of the hundred planes promised only 10 have been delivered. Perhaps Europe now realise that it is time to step up and ignore Usas stupid drip feed strategy and just give Ukraine what it needs. If there have been some clever planning there are a number of Ukrainian pilots that have been educated and can take off in Gripens now.
Probably, but f16 is available now, not in 6 years.
Some say that sweden might be able to buy back some of South Africas GRIPEN and give them to Ukrain
Gripen is a better fighter jet, but F-16 are readily available in mass. That is what Ukraine needs.
Almost all the Gripens that exist are in Swedish service. There is an abundance of older NATO F-16s that could be spared
Provision of Gripens to Ukraine has been in discussion for nearly two years.
The Swedish jets are specifically designed to combat russian technology.
Kanel bulle is pretty good😂 yeah!
yes, but no pilots - UA would be a perfect place to show what Grippen can pull off - but UA does not have the crews for this plane - UA hardly has what is needed to air 10 F-16.
There is NO GriPPen.........Just a GriPen
The Gripens can join the Clickbait Air Regiment, who are also due to receive F22's, F35'S and Eurofighters. It is all part of the channel monetization project.
Hello,im Russian bot and u all have greetings from Ghost of Kiev from sunny Crimea ❤
I from Sweden and I love our fighter, however ukraine has got the f16 they need training for that plane. Even tho i think our plane is better then F16 , most important is training in rapairing and use the machines they already got.
Well, yeah, that would enhance Ukraine as the JAS-39 is far superior to the F-16, but the training lag will impact when as you're not going to simply jump out of an F-16 and into a JAS-39 and not be useless in the seat. Six months at minimum for conversion training in two seaters and probably longer.
Sweden has already trained an undisclosed number of Ukrainian pilots and ground crews.
@@johanmetreus1268 'undiisclosed' as in you made it up. Propaganda much?
@@TerryCheever "Jonson: Ukrainska piloter har testat Gripen" published 14 september 2023.
Undisclosed as the exact number of personell is being kept secret.
Sweden will NOT send Gripen to Ukraine in any near future.
The simple reason is.... we need all the 97 Gripen we have at the moment and for any foreseeable future.
Not even 97 Gripen C + D plus 60 Gripen E on order will be more than just minimum needed for the situation right now.
The problem for Sweden will be training pilots to operate the 60 new aircraft together with the 97 current Gripen.
Gripen and Hornet are the best frontline fighters for Ukraine.
I doubt that…
This was such an easy choice no wonder they got it wrong.