The MRFs are just platforms to carry the weapons that we will buy for our defense. Therefore, we have to make sure the technology on which our fighter platforms are designed, will be relevant for the next 20-30 years. F-16 platform is designed and built on 1970's technology. JAS-39 platform is new 2000's technology. Because of newer technology, JAS-39 is cheaper to acquire, operate, and maintain. It is also more readily adaptable to new generation of 21st century weapons such as BVR missiles, Hypersonic Missiles, Network/Datalink-intensive warfare tactics, etc...
Sorry for being that guy but the JAS-39 Gripen is a 1980s design and entered service in 1996 with the Swedish Air Force. Both platforms are just one and the same, just different specs due to differing country building them.
@@itzyaboimemez2074 That's what the ukay-ukay F-16 enthusiasts wants you to believe so that they can sell you the obsolescent F-16. You never mentioned that General Dynamics designed F-16 in 1970s using 1960s technology to start with. They even used the WW2 era B-47 design for the landing gear.
The Gripen isn't the best answer to the Philippine Air Force's MRF program but it could be one of them. As to why, it comes to alot of reasons, mainly with costs, operational range, and the variety of weapons and systems that both planes use. As such, it would depend on the Air Force, the DND, and the DOF to purchase what place the Air Force would go for. But IMO, when it comes to range and weapons, the F-16 wins those two categories. It has a range of 4,217km compared to the 3,200 on the Gripen, which would prove useful for the elongated archipelago of the Philippines as well as for long-range strike missions against any hostile country. And depending on the weapon configuration, the F-16 can come to maybe around the same range as the Gripen C. Speed is also on the F-16 as it can go up to Mach 2.05 compared to Mach 2 that the Gripen C (which you got that wrong). But against the Gripen E? They would be on equal footing in terms of range. In terms of weapons, the F-16 can use a wide variety of munitions whether be it for anti-ship, air-to-air, air-to-ground, SEAD, air interdiction, and CAS. It can also use munitions from other countries as well such as the US, Israel, UK, France, Germany, and a lot of others. Unless its the Gripen E, the F-16 wins that category as the C variant of the Gripen lacks the interoperability of the modern E variant. Not to mention, the F-16 can carry 17,000lbs of ordnance when compared to the Gripen C's 11,700lbs. And when it comes to systems, the F-16 also wins that category as the Gripen C variant uses a Pulse-Doppler (PS-05/A) radar while the F-16 uses an AESA radar (AN/APG-83 or AN/APG-68, depends on the variant). And the F-16 can also use a wide variety of pods for jamming and targeting. But if it were the Gripen E, the latter would win. Costs would be the question for the DND, PAF, and the DOF to answer. Since the PAF is going through between the F-16C Block 70/72 and the JAS-39 Gripen C, the former would be a great choice until the budget increases.
@@_joapaYeah, our airforce MAY go for both these aircrafts. Curious though if we acquire the F-16's too, would there be "preconditions" in this deal like the "preconditions" set by the US government on the Pakistani Air Force with their F-16's, the use of which is limited to Pakistani air space only, (purely defensive role) and to violate this rule may result in cutting the supply of spares and related equipment, or other penalties that the Americans can think of. There's quite a number of articles about this matter.
Para sa akin dapat sa MRF na maging Interceptors ng ating PAF ay iyang F15Eagle At Boramae F21 ng Sokor sa Long range Fighting Second Gripen and Viper ng Medium range Fighting ng ating PAF then the Third ay FA50 ng Sokor and F2 ng Japan Para sa Dogfighting Kasi jan tayo mananalo kapag ang Communist Chinese Airforce PLAA makikipag Gera sa atin ng de natin Inaasahan At sa Air to Air tayo muna mag Strong holds ng ating PADIZ kasama na jan yong Anti Missile system natin PatriotII, IRON Dome at iba pang Anti Missile system Guys. Na mag Security sa atin lalo na sa ating mga inaasahang na Nag bubuhay sa atin na mga Producto. Ang Oil Products
@@HaggiyoPilipinas Mirage fighters were good interceptors, MRF's at their peak during the 1970's & 1980's global conflicts, but right now there's not that many operating them, so spare parts availability would be one of their downsides, plus their aged airframes doesn't make them viable "second hand" fighter jets, as their airframes MAY not exceed , say 15 years and beyond.
Yn ang maganda after f-16,halos pareho nlng sila at mas choice q sya dahil sa mura at marami syang command ekectronic use at madami din dalang missiles,powerful engine.❤❤❤
Kung d best pra AFP- PAF ng pinas yan saab jas-39 jet, bkt hanggang ngayon , bka abutin ng 2025.. puro plano na lng pinas nag - titiis fa-50ph light fighter jet..
becouse the philippines are dont have much budget to acquire the F35 fighter jet if the philippines have lots of budget they acquire the most latest and high advance fighter jet that can face all treat but the philippines is in low budget thats why the philippimes choice and acquire the fighter jet that can afford but have sttrong and advance system basis to budget that philippines have
The MRFs are just platforms to carry the weapons that we will buy for our defense. Therefore, we have to make sure the technology on which our fighter platforms are designed, will be relevant for the next 20-30 years. F-16 platform is designed and built on 1970's technology. JAS-39 platform is new 2000's technology.
Because of newer technology, JAS-39 is cheaper to acquire, operate, and maintain. It is also more readily adaptable to new generation of 21st century weapons such as BVR missiles, Hypersonic Missiles, Network/Datalink-intensive warfare tactics, etc...
Sorry for being that guy but the JAS-39 Gripen is a 1980s design and entered service in 1996 with the Swedish Air Force.
Both platforms are just one and the same, just different specs due to differing country building them.
@@itzyaboimemez2074 That's what the ukay-ukay F-16 enthusiasts wants you to believe so that they can sell you the obsolescent F-16. You never mentioned that General Dynamics designed F-16 in 1970s using 1960s technology to start with. They even used the WW2 era B-47 design for the landing gear.
The Gripen isn't the best answer to the Philippine Air Force's MRF program but it could be one of them. As to why, it comes to alot of reasons, mainly with costs, operational range, and the variety of weapons and systems that both planes use. As such, it would depend on the Air Force, the DND, and the DOF to purchase what place the Air Force would go for.
But IMO, when it comes to range and weapons, the F-16 wins those two categories.
It has a range of 4,217km compared to the 3,200 on the Gripen, which would prove useful for the elongated archipelago of the Philippines as well as for long-range strike missions against any hostile country. And depending on the weapon configuration, the F-16 can come to maybe around the same range as the Gripen C. Speed is also on the F-16 as it can go up to Mach 2.05 compared to Mach 2 that the Gripen C (which you got that wrong). But against the Gripen E? They would be on equal footing in terms of range.
In terms of weapons, the F-16 can use a wide variety of munitions whether be it for anti-ship, air-to-air, air-to-ground, SEAD, air interdiction, and CAS. It can also use munitions from other countries as well such as the US, Israel, UK, France, Germany, and a lot of others. Unless its the Gripen E, the F-16 wins that category as the C variant of the Gripen lacks the interoperability of the modern E variant. Not to mention, the F-16 can carry 17,000lbs of ordnance when compared to the Gripen C's 11,700lbs.
And when it comes to systems, the F-16 also wins that category as the Gripen C variant uses a Pulse-Doppler (PS-05/A) radar while the F-16 uses an AESA radar (AN/APG-83 or AN/APG-68, depends on the variant). And the F-16 can also use a wide variety of pods for jamming and targeting. But if it were the Gripen E, the latter would win.
Costs would be the question for the DND, PAF, and the DOF to answer.
Since the PAF is going through between the F-16C Block 70/72 and the JAS-39 Gripen C, the former would be a great choice until the budget increases.
I think the GRIPEN E is best for paf, more superior than f16, and also the fly cost more cheap and maintenance than f16
Thank you for your comment, please like and susbcribe
Gripen E with digital shield para sa stealth na kalaban. (best offer and SAAB due to transfer of technology)
Thank you for your comment, please like and subscribe for more updates
The Best MRF for the PAF is Gripen E
Too expensive. With that price we might as well go for F16 Block 70
@@_joapaYeah, our airforce MAY go for both these aircrafts.
Curious though if we acquire the F-16's too, would there be "preconditions" in this deal like the "preconditions" set by the US government on the Pakistani Air Force with their F-16's, the use of which is limited to Pakistani air space only, (purely defensive role) and to violate this rule may result in cutting the supply of spares and related equipment, or other penalties that the Americans can think of. There's quite a number of articles about this matter.
Para sa akin dapat sa MRF na maging Interceptors ng ating PAF ay iyang F15Eagle At Boramae F21 ng Sokor sa Long range Fighting Second Gripen and Viper ng Medium range Fighting ng ating PAF then the Third ay FA50 ng Sokor and F2 ng Japan Para sa Dogfighting
Kasi jan tayo mananalo kapag ang Communist Chinese Airforce PLAA makikipag Gera sa atin ng de natin Inaasahan At sa Air to Air tayo muna mag Strong holds ng ating PADIZ kasama na jan yong Anti Missile system natin PatriotII, IRON Dome at iba pang Anti Missile system Guys. Na mag Security sa atin lalo na sa ating mga inaasahang na Nag bubuhay sa atin na mga Producto. Ang Oil
Products
Or the Dassault 3000 of France
@@HaggiyoPilipinas Mirage fighters were good interceptors, MRF's at their peak during the 1970's & 1980's global conflicts, but right now there's not that many operating them, so spare parts availability would be one of their downsides, plus their aged airframes doesn't make them viable "second hand" fighter jets, as their airframes MAY not exceed , say 15 years and beyond.
Yn ang maganda after f-16,halos pareho nlng sila at mas choice q sya dahil sa mura at marami syang command ekectronic use at madami din dalang missiles,powerful engine.❤❤❤
Yes i agree with you, can i get a like and subscribe? thanks
Given the US grant, I think F16 will be first contract to signed.
Yes. The. Best. Yan. Ang. Grepen. Advance. Ang. MRF. Na. Grepen. E.
Yes i agree, Please like and subscribe for more updates
we need MRF that can detect long range ,,,,,,, avoid dog figth ,,,,,, low cost ,,,,,,,,,
F16 is known already by China for sure, 'cause it's an old platform. That is why it's better to choose the one that is new type of Enemy to Chinese.
Yes, exactly please like and subscribe for more updates
Ganda naman nyang payter na yan..
Thank you for your comment and appreciated, please like and subscribe for more updates
Kung d best pra AFP- PAF ng pinas yan saab jas-39 jet, bkt hanggang ngayon , bka abutin ng 2025.. puro plano na lng pinas nag - titiis fa-50ph light fighter jet..
becouse the philippines are dont have much budget to acquire the F35 fighter jet if the philippines have lots of budget they acquire the most latest and high advance fighter jet that can face all treat but the philippines is in low budget thats why the philippimes choice and acquire the fighter jet that can afford but have sttrong and advance system basis to budget that philippines have
Pwede mag Tagalog ka na lang magulo e😮
@@emmanueldavid8739 ✌️
Budget is the main problem for the AFP, please like and subscribe for more updates
Sna dlawang unit mabili f-16 and grepen
Hopefully this will come true in the future, please like and subscribe for more updates
We still hoping for the best MRF....