shouldnt we do polls instead? 🙂

Rafale and Super Hornet are both very adequate, aren’t they?

Gripen NG has also a combatrange of 1300km and 30min on station.. so its not out of it..

Hi there!

The problem with the Gripen is that it has to reheat to get in the air within the allowed length (700m IIRC). Due to its much better T/W ratio, the Typhoon doesn’t need AB and thus is much kinder to the ear.

Great T/W ratio and HMD are big assets despite costs significantly higher than the Gripen:

Given the size of India and the harsh Himalayan conditions in the North of the country, I’m rather confident that they’ll choose a twin-engined aircraft for security reasons. How fun it’d be to eject over the Everest in the dead of winter… :p

As I wouldn’t want to eject above the Indian Himalayas, I wouldn’t want to eject over the Brazilian Amazon forest either! 😀 Really the only critical technical criterion where the Gripen seems less convincing in front of the two other contenders.

nice read,Erakis!
Just some comments:

Gripen is taking of at 250m with A/B(80.5kN), wouldnt 700m be sufficient for non-A/B(54kN)?

All the Contenders do have HMD:s havent they?

The gripen with its 120000-130000 flighthours and even more on the ground have never experienced any engine failure…
So the twin engine safety thingie is a way of the past…

Seriosly Gripen has never been in a competion in NL. So why even talk about it as a competition?

looks like something i drafted, on a piece of handkerchief at my local coffeshop last week..sorry for the confusion 😀

Well now, the US engine manufacturers would not want to supply to power a non-US aircraft to compete with a US aircraft? And what if the F136 is not in fact used for the F-35? And what if RR said that they would like the business even if that did not suit LM?

It might be worth noting that the EJ200 consortium were required to make an engine with at least 20% growth potential – which would boost it from 60kN to over 70kN. Eurojet itself was reported to have plans to increase dry thrust to 78kN in time for a Typhoon midlife upgrade.

Source: http://typhoon.starstreak.net/Eurofighter/engines.html

I wonder if a 78kN engine would provide sufficient power for a mini SAAB F-35?

Why not use the RM12 in that case? it´s 80,5kN thustclass. Today its not to many american parts left.. Before F414G was selected as future engine for gripen, the RM12++ was on the drawingboard with expected 100kN thust.
too bad EJ200 consortium didnt incorporate Volvo Aero..
And that they worked on an engine together..

all this mumbo gumbo about Europe can’t making a large fighter engine begs the question..

do some European countries need to make a stealth fighter the size of the F-35?

what if say, Sweden decided to make a stealth fighter with an internal weapons bay about as small as the one on the X45? Could a single EJ2000 give it enough power? Basically a manned version of something like the X45/7.

it will be stealthy, small, maybe cheaper.. and not directly competing with the larger F-35?

If you ask me, i think f-35 will be the last manned fighter in the west…
it saves money, pilots, MMI tech, lifesupport etc. No more need for 9G limit, bigger fuelfractions etc.

Probably also going back to smaller and cheaper, thou VLO fighters.(X45/7/Neuron or more agile)
F-35 will probably be outdated earlier than later in its lifespan because of the development rate of mentioned crafts. No F-4/F-15/F-16 here..

Yet again people dopt a innovative company, that have allways delivered in the past. I dont think this will be a technical issue, but a financial.

The swedish AF has gone through degrading in many years and i dont think this will be financed by sweden.
The modell in drawings has been around for quite some time, and is not from scratch. Stealth is not as unknown as y think for swedes. They produced the “visby class” naval wessel and “filur UAV” etc. Neuron is on its way.

Engine will not be a problem?! thats probably already been calculated for.(probably 80-11kN will do, if volvo is in on it, its F414(G?))..

they’re both delta wing fighters, and should both use systems and avionics that will be validated by the Gripen and Tejas.

The deltas of the SAAB, is have a shape more like its canards. So, its not classic deltas. Also the shapes is more stealth oriented(wings, intakes, bodystores).
I think its more resembled to rafale, but with twin tail, specially MCA-1 or why not the F-15? But ofcourse they have “some” resemblance as a remarked.