Henry240:


That the Gripen is cheap to maintain is an illusion. Having studied South-African Gripen maintenance of her Gripen, i can say they aren't cheap to maintain.


The Gripen is a light weight fighter, in the same class as the JF-17, FA-50 and LCA. The F-16, J-10 and Super-Hornet are medium weight. The SU-30 is a heavy weight fighter, same class as the F-15, Rafale and Eurofighter.


It's only decent we compare with fighters with comparable class.

The only comparison is number of engines and role. F-16 and J-10 fall into the same category as the Gripen

And no, your "studies" are ludicrous. The problem was the lack of a maintenance contract with SAAB.

Henry240:


Thailand is a pro-western user. A US ally in Asia, they only use Western fighters and planes.


Brazil is getting the Gripen NG. That's a 5th GEN fighter.

Thai Air force chief Chalit Phukphasuk Chavalit reportedly met with Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont on Sept 29/07 and convinced him to support the purchase, citing the need for new combat aircraft to match neighboring Malaysia’s new SU-30MKMs. Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra reportedly ordered then air force chief ACM Kongsak Wantana to switch to the SU-30s for Thailand’s own purchase, but ACM Chalit rejected the Russian plane as unsuited to Thailand’s needs when he became the new air force chief.

Yeah, no.

africaken254:
when you read that it cost a particular jet per hour,several thousands dollars .a big chunk of that cost is fuel and also how much it cost to pay a pilot or technician in america isn't exact the same to a kenyan is paid.which is also factored in the cost of flying a jet per hour.

Also, you pay in USD for aviation fuel.

Henry240:


If the SAAF is starved off funds, how do you suppose Botswana is going to maintain her incoming Gripen.


Not true. The Gripen is a decent Aircrafts, but Fighters such as the F-16 Block 52 are significantly better than the Gripen. Capabilities of the Gripen put is just ahead of F-16 Block 40 aircrafts.


LCA, JF-17 and FA-50 are all new, however on paper, there capabilities and that of the Gripen are the same. LCA MK 2 comes with an AESA radar is ahead of the Gripen C/D, i only won't rate it because it isn't in production yet.

Really?

You say its the same as an F16 Block 40.... from the 1980's? Weird that you would say that since I remember pointing out to you that analysts compare the JF-17 Blk2 to the F16 Block 40.

Its allmost as though you have some sort of bias against the Gripen... I wonder where it is coming from.

And no, on paper the JF-17 and LCA and most certainly not the fvcking Golden Eagle are not comparable to the Gripen.

And, the Gripen C/D has access to AESA radar.

Jesus dude, get it together.

Henry240:


Why would the cost of paying a pilot be included in the cost flying an aircraft?

When i read the per-hour flight cost, i usually only factor in cost of fuel, maintenance cyscle before each flight and cost of bombs.

Dry v Wet costs.

Wet costs included Gripen is still the cheapest, hands down, multiple reports confirm.

Henry240:


What is available is what is available. Until you can prove what is unavailable to be available, then what you think is available does not exist. Your analogy can be applied to other aircrafts, not just the Gripen.


I don't claim to be an expert. I'm saying the Gripen is an average fighter, and based on available public documents, the Gripen is only an Average fighter leveraging on the lack of western alternatives in it's class. You don't have to be an expert to know this.


I find your last comment most unfortunate and won't be dragged into an internet brawl. However for the record, acquisition taken by countries are primarily based on threat assessments, politics and price.


Nigeria has been flying Strike missions since 1993 all across the West-African sub-region. Based on threat assessment, we have a requirement for a state-of-the-art, modern light weight 4th GEN aircraft which is geared towards a primary Strike mission role and a secondary Air Defence role. This is what we are getting with the JF-17.


It is not bitching, it's just common sense.


The F-16 Block 52 is a better aircraft, and is a much better proposition for $65m.

Your ignorance of this topic, sincerely no offence, is showing.

F16 Blk52 is an early 90's variant its major addition being a new engine and digitized navigation as well as a new generation of missiles.

Blk 40, which you keep comparing the Gripen to, is an F16 that can fight at night... thats it, FYI, our Cheetah were rated to be better than the Blk40 (performance aside)

The fact that you compare a fully digitized Gripen, designed for netcentric-warfare with allmost complete systems fusion to a Jet that was still largely analogue is beyond me. A jet that was flying 30 years ago.

You are telling us that the Gripen is comparable to a platform that took to the skies a full decade before the Gripen was operationalised, and further, that the SAAF decided to take a step backwards in capability.

I, literally, cannot even right now.

FYI- F16's are up to blk61 now.

MikeCZA:
Go read the RAND report. The Swedish experience chapter.

SAAF Gripen are also equipped with the Thales Digital koint reconnaissance pod.


Air surveillance isn't about taking pictures.


There's a reason some new fighters carry EW pods.


The Griffon has sharp EW teeth.

Like i stated previously. I have read the RAND report, the tributes to the Swedish Air Force was down to the fact they carried out 1/3 of all Recon (TAR) missions in Libya. The obvious capability goes to the Recon pods the Swedes had only just received. Infact the Pods went straight from the factory to the front-line.


The Swedes did exactly that in Libya....... Take pictures, nothing else.


The Gripen has EW just like every other modern fighter, until Gripen EW is used against an opponent with any semblance of an EW capability we cannot rate how they'll perform.


The RAND report clearly states "Precision and purpose: 46 Airpower in the libyan civil war, a nonexistent IADS. A fully chapter dedicated to nonexistent Libyan Air Defences.


As regards Data-Link, all modern fighter aircrafts use Data-Links. The RAND report talked about difficulties integrating Swedish Gripens into NATO C2 systems.

The JF-17 uses the Link 17, NATO Link 16.

MikeCZA:
The don't have an air force yet.

The fact SAAF is starved of funds doesn't mean others will face the same problem. As we calculate and have different SOPs.

Only comparable to advanced versions of the F16.

Yes, on paper.

Lower speeds and rated at 8g. The LCA can't be compared to advanced versions of the F16 or the Gripen.

Botswana doesn't have an Air Force


No, the Gripen C/D model is only above the F-16 Block 40 model. F-16 Block 52 is a better aircraft than the Gripen C/D. UAE Block 60s are in a totally different class.


Speed the F/A-18 flies at Mach 1.6 (Super Hornet Mach 1., the F-35 flies at Mach 1.6, the JF-17 flies at Mach 1.6. All the aircrafts are in the fighter jet top speed envelope. Fighters aircrafts mostly do Mach 1.2 - 1.6.

The G load is also within the armbits of fighter aircrafts.


The LCA would come with an AESA radar, in the first-see-first -shoot air combat of today, I'll rate the LCA better than the Gripen.


The Gripen is in no way comparable to advanced F-16s.

patches689:


They are.

And they are certainly cheaper than anything else.

The difficulties which have come with maintaining SAAF Gripens did not come out of thin air, including difficulties your Air Force had with aviation fuel.


According to the SAAF experience, the Gripens aren't easy to maintain.

patches689:


Thailand, Brazil, Argentina, Botswana....

What Argentina? The same Argentina which is checking out FA-50s from South-Korea or a different one?

Thailand - Western equipment

Botswana - Western equipment

Brazil - Gripen NG, a totally different generation.

patches689:


If the East was offering a significantly better fighter for a lower price they would buy it.

Or are you saying the Botswanans are incompetent?

Why would an F-16 clone be better?

No they won't. The East is offering significantly better or comparable fighters, J-10, MIG-29M, MIG-35, JF-17, FA-50, LCA.

They aren't going for them because they have a history of buying Western equipment.

Namibia is buying the J-10 because the have a history of buying Eastern equipment. Nigeria is going for the JF-17 because it suits our operational requirement.


According to you, the J-10 is a clone of an F-16, i find this comment to be extremely hilarious.

patches689:


Maybe its more to do with the fact that they dont need an twin engined air superiority fighter that can be taken out by a Gripen...

Based on what threat analysis did you come by this conclusion?

patches689:


The only comparison is number of engines and role. F-16 and J-10 fall into the same category as the Gripen

And no, your "studies" are ludicrous. The problem was the lack of a maintenance contract with SAAB.

The Gripen does not fall into the same category as the F-16 or J-10. It is a weight category, just like the boxers, with far higher payloads than the Gripen, both F-16, J-10, MIG-29 and Tornado fall within the same weight class.


The Gripen falls into a light weight class. Same class as the JF-17, LCA and FA-50. They are all similarly capable fighters with similar capabilities with only minute differences between them.

patches689:


Thai Air force chief Chalit Phukphasuk Chavalit reportedly met with Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont on Sept 29/07 and convinced him to support the purchase, citing the need for new combat aircraft to match neighboring Malaysia’s new SU-30MKMs. Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra reportedly ordered then air force chief ACM Kongsak Wantana to switch to the SU-30s for Thailand’s own purchase, but ACM Chalit rejected the Russian plane as unsuited to Thailand’s needs when he became the new air force chief.

Yeah, no.

It doesn't disapprove my comments. The Thai air force is primarily and strictly Western. This is a fact.

Patchesagain:


Really?

You say its the same as an F16 Block 40.... from the 1980's? Weird that you would say that since I remember pointing out to you that analysts compare the JF-17 Blk2 to the F16 Block 40.

Its allmost as though you have some sort of bias against the Gripen... I wonder where it is coming from.

And no, on paper the JF-17 and LCA and most certainly not the fvcking Golden Eagle are not comparable to the Gripen.

And, the Gripen C/D has access to AESA radar.

Jesus dude, get it together.

To be honest, i am getting bored of your rants.


I did not say it is the same as an F-16 Block 40. I'm saying although modern it is not as good as the F-16 Block 52 and can in way be compared to UAE Block 60s.


The PAF fly both the F-16 Block 52 and JF-17. The PAF confirms the JF-17 is close in capabilities to the F-16 Block 52 they have in service.


I think the Gripen is a fantastic aircraft for it's class, yes average in capabilities but still a decent aircraft. However the Gripen is in no way, shape or form worth $65 million a unit. It cannot be better than an F-16 Block 52 which comes with a better engine, better radar, Data-Link, better load carrying capability, which also includes the use of CFT. It's not possible.


You ranting, doest change the fact the JF-17, LCA and Gripen are the same class of fighters, with similar capabilities. The stats of all three aircrafts are available for all to see. Although the FA-50 is still an unknown quantity, it is rated as a light multi-role fighter, same as all 3 listed above.

Odunayaw:
su 30 cheaper and deadlier but expensive to maintain
gripen expensive but cheaper to maintain.

Do not delude urslf thinking they chose the gripen bcux its a better fighter or sumfn
the numbers they bought says alot

The Thai chose the Gripen over the Su 30 after inspecting both planes.. In fact, I know no incident where the Su 30 won a bid over the Gripen when money wasn't an issue.

Henry240:


.


The LCA would come with an AESA radar, in the first-see-first -shoot air combat of today, I'll rate the LCA better than the Gripen.

LCA MKII is still on paper,even the current version MKI is not mass produced .

Even if LCA has a better rader,what missles used is also contributed on the"killing rate" .

Henry240:


It doesn't disapprove my comments. The Thai air force is primarily and strictly Western. This is a fact.

It's makes no sense to request a contract bid from suppliers you're not interested in. If Thai was pro Western, they could have opted for American fighters. In case you don't do Geo politics, the Swiss don't fit in the Western politics tagline.

J10 is based on Israeli LAVI , Israelis helped the Chinese a lot with developing a digital FBW and RSS design among others. help was not large but kind of hand holding when the Chinese hit a technological bottleneck.

J10 has suffered from its share of problems and as a result we see lot of iterations/ blocks of the same. one can argue we saw different blocks due to inclusions of new technology but it also cannot be denied that it had to do with performance deviations from design parameters.

only last year more the 5 J10 crashed.

Henry240:



No, the Gripen C/D model is only above the F-16 Block 40 model. F-16 Block 52 is a better aircraft than the Gripen C/D. UAE Block 60s are in a totally different class.
.

How.

How do you rationalize this?

Because analysts compared the JF-17 Blk1 to the F-16 Blk40?

Dude, this is madness now.

Henry240:


The difficulties which have come with maintaining SAAF Gripens did not come out of thin air, including difficulties your Air Force had with aviation fuel.


According to the SAAF experience, the Gripens aren't easy to maintain.

The difficulty of maintenance and the difficulties with aviation fuel are linked to FUNDS.

If the SAAF had the budget it had when we bought the Gripen, there would be no problem.

The cost per flight hour of the Gripen is well documented, from many sources.

Fact of the matter is that it is the cheapest to operate. Fact, no discussion, just fact.

Henry240:


The difficulties which have come with maintaining SAAF Gripens did not come out of thin air, including difficulties your Air Force had with aviation fuel.


According to the SAAF experience, the Gripens aren't easy to maintain.

Cheaper to fly in fuel. You forget that South Africa allocates only less than 1.5% of GDP to the military compared to 4.5% in other countries so let's do a proper analysis the day we would allocate the same amount of cash to the military as everyone else.

Patchesagain:


Your ignorance of this topic, sincerely no offence, is showing.

F16 Blk52 is an early 90's variant its major addition being a new engine and digitized navigation as well as a new generation of missiles.

Blk 40, which you keep comparing the Gripen to, is an F16 that can fight at night... thats it, FYI, our Cheetah were rated to be better than the Blk40 (performance aside)

The fact that you compare a fully digitized Gripen, designed for netcentric-warfare with allmost complete systems fusion to a Jet that was still largely analogue is beyond me. A jet that was flying 30 years ago.

You are telling us that the Gripen is comparable to a platform that took to the skies a full decade before the Gripen was operationalised, and further, that the SAAF decided to take a step backwards in capability.

I, literally, cannot even right now.

FYI- F16's are up to blk61 now.

I did not compare the Gripen to the F-16 Block 40, i said, the Gripen is not as good as the F-16 Block 52. I never mention UAE Block 60s because of all in-service F-16s, the Block 60 is in a totally different generation. You compare the Block 60 to aircrafts such as the Rafale and Eurofighter.


You keep going on an on about Net-Centric. All modern aircrafts are Net-Centric. All of them can share data. That's not an advantage in 2016.

I am telling you that the Gripen C/D, is just like every other modern aircraft in the market. However when capabilities are brought to bear, the Gripen can in no shape or form hope to match aircrafts such as the F-16 Block 52 and above or the MIG-29M, certainly not the SU-30SM and above.


For it's class it is a decent fighter, however it's capablities are within what is obtainable for other aircrafts in it's class. It is not a wonder to worth 65 million per aircraft, it's huge price is only a tactic by SAAB to leverage upon the lack of aircrafts in the West in it's class. The Gripen shouldn't cost above 30- 35 million a pop.


F-16 Viper.


It is not a bias.

Henry240:


What Argentina? The same Argentina which is checking out FA-50s from South-Korea or a different one?

Thailand - Western equipment

Botswana - Western equipment

Brazil - Gripen NG, a totally different generation.

Argentina wanted the Gripen, Brits vetoed it.

So Thailand, Bots and Brazil are all so silly that they bought the more expensive and less effective platform because of "brand loyalty"

Come on

Henry240:

Botswana doesn't have an Air Force
.

They're don't, they have an air wing and I'm sure you know the difference.

Henry240:


No they won't. The East is offering significantly better or comparable fighters, J-10, MIG-29M, MIG-35, JF-17, FA-50, LCA.

They aren't going for them because they have a history of buying Western equipment.

Namibia is buying the J-10 because the have a history of buying Eastern equipment. Nigeria is going for the JF-17 because it suits our operational requirement.


According to you, the J-10 is a clone of an F-16, i find this comment to be extremely hilarious.

So thats your argument?

"Its totally better, but they only buy the other option because they are loyal customers"

J-10 is literally a clone.

You are buying the JF-17 because it is cheap.

Henry240:


Based on what threat analysis did you come by this conclusion?

Thai Air force chief Chalit Phukphasuk Chavalit reportedly met with Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont on Sept 29/07 and convinced him to support the purchase, citing the need for new combat aircraft to match neighboring Malaysia’s new SU-30MKMs. Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra reportedly ordered then air force chief ACM Kongsak Wantana to switch to the SU-30s for Thailand’s own purchase, but ACM Chalit rejected the Russian plane as unsuited to Thailand’s needs when he became the new air force chief.

Henry240:


It doesn't disapprove my comments. The Thai air force is primarily and strictly Western. This is a fact.

It disproves what you say because:

Politician: BUY THE RUSSIAN PLATFORM

Air-Marshall: No, the Gripen is better, we buy that.

They bought it to combat the Su30MKI.

Your "brand loyalty" argument is insanity. This proves it.

giles14:
over the air update? wot a good tool for Russian hackers.

You have no knowledge on the issue so it's wise you don't expose your low IQ.

ActivateKruger:


You have no knowledge on the issue so it's wise you don't expose your low IQ.

Being Intelligent is not the same thing as having knowledge

Just pointing that out,not interested in the argument

Henry240:


To be honest, i am getting bored of your rants.

Not rants , facts

Henry240:

I did not say it is the same as an F-16 Block 40. I'm saying although modern it is not as good as the F-16 Block 52 and can in way be compared to UAE Block 60s.

So, its not as good as a Blk 52 (a version that predates the Gripen)
But its similar to the Blk60
Which is an upgrade to the Blk52

Henry240:

The PAF fly both the F-16 Block 52 and JF-17. The PAF confirms the JF-17 is close in capabilities to the F-16 Block 52 they have in service.

Thats not what analysts say.

Henry240:

I think the Gripen is a fantastic aircraft for it's class, yes average in capabilities but still a decent aircraft. However the Gripen is in no way, shape or form worth $65 million a unit. It cannot be better than an F-16 Block 52 which comes with a better engine, better radar, Data-Link, better load carrying capability, which also includes the use of CFT. It's not possible.

Yeah, you are going to have to go ahead and back that up with some stats.

Henry240:

You ranting, doest change the fact the JF-17, LCA and Gripen are the same class of fighters, with similar capabilities. The stats of all three aircrafts are available for all to see. Although the FA-50 is still an unknown quantity, it is rated as a light multi-role fighter, same as all 3 listed above.

You saying it over and over again does not change the fact that it is your opinion and your opinion only