Saab Gripen, how does it rate?

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV 1 2 3

Interrested RE:Saab Gripen, how does it rate? 9/24/2003 2:01:08 PM

Oh yeah, for a beter range: Substitute the Rm engine for the M88-3 dry thrust between 12300-13500 and sfc of .780 a 13% increase in range!

Quote Reply

northenguy RE:Saab Gripen, how does it rate? - Northernguy...Massive 9/24/2003 3:02:09 PM

My comment about Sweden being remarkably unembarrased about their inability to project their forces to Iraq was a joke. I did have one serious observation in that post that I was hoping Gripen fans would respond to. The Swedes claim that their mobile remote air service depots which can be set up on highway are able to do their servicing, which includes hot swapping an engine, with only an experienced N.C.0. and 9 recruits. Very, very impressive if true. Since I have never been around anyone hotswapping a jet engine I was hoping someone experienced with such procedures would explain how you could this in the situation described.

Quote Reply

northenguy RE:Thoma- Interrested-northenguy..Jacques 9/24/2003 3:25:09 PM

Jacques.. Your point about a potential use for deploying Gripens into Iraq is well taken. My (ironic) point about Gripens in Iraq is that in the current context why would anyone want to put a primarily defensive aircraft into such a situation when other aircraft with greater offensive ability are available? Secondarily, if the Gripen isn't suited for situations like Iraq why would anyone but Sweden and similarly unengaged countries want to to have them? Granted, if you have some lying around and your real air force is busy they could probably put to good use in the manner that you describe. Sweden's procedures for dealing with week long sandstorms at their mobile remote service bases might be quite different from what is required in Iraq or any other real shooting situation. In Canada, there are no paved roads in 95% per cent of the country. That, by itself, is a sizeable part of the world. Ditto, for South America, Africa and large parts of South and Central Asia. The real question is "Is it real cheap to purchase, fly, service and man?" If so, that makes it attractive. Otherwise, there a plenty of other planes better suited for just about everybody but Sweden.

Quote Reply

jacques RE:Thoma- Interrested 9/24/2003 7:29:33 PM

The Gripen is superior to the F16 in some aspect and the F16 is superior to the Gripen in some aspect. Now the issue is money. Without money to service your airplane, both of them will soon worth nothing but a heap of scrap metal. Now one of you say the F16 is cheaper and the other say the Gripen is cheaper. Before we can move on to explore further into this subject we got to get our act together and reach an agreement on the price for the 2 airplanes. We can take about how the Gripen can be use in Canada after we reach an agreement on the Gripen, but naturally I don't think Canada need an air force (make the US do all the defense spending in the NORAD and NATO contract). Why apy for defense when someone else have to do it for you ?

Quote Reply

Thomas RE:jacques 9/25/2003 2:25:26 AM

The price for a second hand F-16 was a couple years ago 5 mio US $ according to Danish Governments Budget statement. The MLU programme came out approx the same amount, also according to the Budget statement. The price of the Gripen is from memory and Air International, that some years ago had a discussion. I know there is a world of difference between prices to different custoumers, but if only the ball park figure is right it is a no-contest. One thing the comparisons do not take into account: You have to keep a huge stock of spares for swedish aircraft or they'll refuse to deliver when you need the bits OR you will have to pay through the nose - all spares suppliers are vultures; but the Swedes take the price. The Danish experience with Draken should be a lesson to us all. The plane itself was OK-ish - a straight forward attack plane - nothing fancy. Robust like a tank - couldn't be pulled apart in the air (It sure has been attempted).

Quote Reply

Thomas RE:Jaques 9/25/2003 2:28:51 AM

Another aspect of maintainence: Any air force build up an infra structure where they can service different levels of overhauls. When the RDaAF had problems with the F-100 Super Sabre, they could switch contractor: You can't do that with a Swedish plane!

Quote Reply

PREV 1 2 3