The integration of an AAM including the IR-ones into a radar-system is very demanding, because some related source-code is in need for that task.

Depends how the code is setup.

Can be easy. Can be tricky.

Again and I cannot reinforce this enough – MBDA (formerly Matra) – integrated Meteor onto Gripen first. That is not something that is done if it is the most complex of integrations… not when a significant degree of company & program prestige is resting on it.

With the Rafale also being a Meteor customer – that speaks volumes for the interoperability of the MBDA and Gripen systems… and MBDA’s knowledge of the Gripen system.

I can find nothing official that MICA EM can be used on the Gripen, just the MICA IR.

I can find historical info on it on the likes of flightglobal.

That, put with MBDA (building the Meteor) being formerly Matra, who built the Mica – using the Gripen as a launch frame, is enough to convince me that there is compatibility.

So you have no problem to give us the weaponary in frontline service with the Gripen already. If that is not enough you can give that not made by the USA. In short a Gripen becomes a flying toy without that.

The Gripen is one of the more flexible fighters in terms of weapons available today. Considering A2A only:

AIM-9
IRIS-T
AMRAAM
Meteor
MICA

Multiple sources of munitions.

Furthermore, since most customers will already have a store of munitions, the Gripen is almost certain to be compatible with those.

The life-cycle cost of a F-16 does not differ much from that of a Gripen.

Now. In your own words, to stay serious…!!

For instance

http://www.nacional.hr/en/clanak/34674/f-16-vs-gripen-croatian-air-force-to-spend-800-million-for-new-wings

Over a 30 year 150 hr/yr life, the cost breakdown is:

Gripen:
Purchase – $68m
Operating – $11.25m
Total – $79.25m
x9 Gripen = $713.25m

F-16:
Purchase – $74m
Operating – $16.65m
Total – $90.65m
x8 F-16 = $725.2m

Difference = 15%

So you get 9 Gripens for ~ the price of 8 x F-16s

Not forgetting the quote from Janes:

“At an estimated $4,700 per hour (2012 USD), the Gripen compares very favorably with the Block 40 / 50 F-16s which are its closest competitor at an estimated $7,000 per hour,”

So, using those with the above purchase costs over a 30 year 150 hr/yr life, the cost breakdown is:

Gripen:
Purchase – $68m
Operating – $21.15m
Total – $89.15m
[x12 Gripen = $1069.8m]

F-16:
Purchase – $74m
Operating – $31.5m
Total – $105.5m
[x10 F-16 = $1055]

Difference = 18%

So you get 12 Gripens for ~ the price of 10 x F-16s

Not approximately equal when you can afford to stand up an extra 4 fighters in 20!

“In 1979, the Swedish government began development studies for an aircraft capable of fighter, attack and reconnaissance missions to replace the Saab 35 Draken and 37 Viggen.” or in short with the technology at hand from that time-scale = early 80s. The late first flight was due to the risen software demands. Just in the 90s the Gripen A got the final software upgrade for all mission roles shown by the new designation C from a related avionic ugrade.

Now now Sens.

You do know when the ATF program kicked off right?

So the F-22 is now 3 decades overdue a replacement using your logic!

A single European aircraft isn’t necessarily the answer, and actually creates opposition to the project when there is no need to create such hostility. Subsystems and engines are where most of the cost comes from, but competition is also a good thing, so the focus should be on compatibility of these subsystems. Countries wishing to make a fighter can then have a fighter project that integrates the systems as they wish, or form a European project for it, it doesn’t much matter as savings are still likely to be realised all-round.

Indeed, focus should be on tailored airframes with common systems.

Unfortunately, there would undoubtedly be moaning by someone over loss of specialisation in-nation in building the particular system that they were interested in if it were designated to another nation.

The present Gripen is from the 80s and three decades overdue for a replacement.

The Saab Gripen first flew in 1987 and was introduced in 1997.

The F-22 first flew in 1997 and was introduced in 2005. Is it 2 decades overdue for a replacement? :confused:

The Saab Gripen C/D is being replaced with the E/F – which is more than sufficient for most needs over the next decade or two. Which will bridge the gap to multi-role UCAVs.