As long as my wing area data (24.8 m²) for the Gripen isn’t wrong the wing load data you give is incorrect. Simply sum up empty weight+internal fuel load and divide it through the wing area (6800 kg empty weight+2270 kg fuel/24.8 m² = 365.7 kg/m²). Simple math.

The canards are also added to the wing area as they provide positive lift. All in all the Gripen has a wing area of 30.2 m². AFAIK this is true only for close coupled canards. Not long canards. But I could be wrong.

Any source? (I’m just interested here)

The JAS 39 Gripen book by Gunnar Lindqvist and Bo Widefeldt(in Swedish only) says the Gripen top speed is Mach 2. I have read it elsewhere as well, can’t recall where though. I’ll look for it when I have my “library” avaliable!:)

Never seen that value, though it’s reasonable.

I read it in the excellent Draken 50 years anniversary book by SFF, the Swedish Aero Historical community.:)

As I wrote mach 1.08 with drop tanks and AAM;)

For a plane with a comparably low TWR, it’s rather impressive.:)

Official data say 10000 m in 2 minutes, but no problem here, the trick is not to rely on few official data only.

I got the numbers from the Draken 50th anniversary book.

Sorry maybe I have expressed me in a wrong way. Of course were the first Gripens advanced and they still are, but the differences in avionics of the A model to newer C models or fighters like Rafale, Eurofighter etc. is still large. But in fact in the time of their entry into service they were definitely advanced.
BTW you have any reports or articles that describe the MMI a bit more accurate and information about the sensor fusion of the Gripen? I’m interested in those info for both the older A/B and the newer C/D. Its ok if it is in swedish I think I will be able to find a sufficient translator.

No articles on the net I’m afraid. But there are several books who dives into the integral systems of the Gripen. Gerhard Keijsper’s Gripen book, World Air Power Journal Volume 42(IIRC), and the JAS 39 Gripen book by Gunnar Lindqvist and Bo Widefeldt are a few. The latter is only avaliable in Swedish unfortunatelly, but it’s probably the best book avaliable on the Gripen. It really goes to the bottom of things, and it’s quite critical at times.

Ok some figures for Gripen and Typhoon only to clear up differences:

JAS 39C/Typhoon
TWR with full internal fuel: 0.9:1/1.15:1
Wing load factor with full internal fuel: 365,72 kg/m² / 319 kg/m²
Top speed: Mach 1.8/>Mach 2
Supercruise: Mach 1.08 (not really supercruise) / Mach 1.2+ (both with AAMs and at least 1 drop tank)
Ceiling: 14000 m / >18000 m
Climb rate: to 10000 m in 2 min / to 12800 m in 1.5 min
Acceleration: Mach 0.5-1 in 30 sec (unspecified altitude)/ Mach 0.3-1 <30 sec (at sea level)

Here are some more correct numbers on the Gripens performance.

Wing load factor, JAS 39A with full internal fuel 8894kg is 294,43 kg/m². JAS 39C with full internal fuel = 300,397 kg/m².

The Gripen has been flown to at least Mach 2.

Service ceiling is >16500 m.

The Gripen can fly at Mach 1,2 without afterburner armed with two Sidewinders. The Gripen can still fly supersonically armed with 2 Sidewinders 4 AMRAAM’s and a centerline fuel tank.

Climb to 11,000m in 2 minutes. Climb to 14,000m in 3 minutes.

Acceleration from M 0,5 to M 1,1 in 30 seconds.

http://img162.imageshack.us/img162/1902/gripensupercruiseld0.jpg

1. JAS 39 Gripen. The first 4th gen fighter to enter service, it’s netcentric warfare capabilities has no peer, its ease of maintenance, quick turnaround time, MMI, MTBF, SI, and mission avaliablility is unmatched. It’s a fighter that proves that a plane doesn’t have to be large in order to be capable. It has changed the way we do air combat and brought it into the next generation.

2. JA37 Viggen. The worlds first delta/canard fighter. Unmatched combined capabilities. Being able to fly at Mach 2, and at the same time being able to take off and land within 500 meters. It could be refueled and rearmed in under 10 minutes. When take off order was given during a scramble it was airborn in under 1 minute. Its advanced PS-46 radar in combination with its very capable datalink system, as well as its ability to use simple road bases, probably gave it a higher survivability compared to other fighters avaliable at the time.

3. J35 Draken. The worlds first dubbel delta winged fighter. Originally developed to counter fast bombers at high altitude. As the threat scenario swiftly changed, the Draken adapted perfectly to other roles to which it was not originally intended for, and it did it probably better compared other fighters of the same era. Its radar was very advanced for a fighter, and its datalink was the first of its kind. It was also able to use normal stretches of road to take off and land from. When Austria retired its Draken in 2005, 50 years had passed since its first flight in 1955.

4. J29 Tunnan. Europes first swept winged fighter. With performance equal to and sometimes superior to the more famous MiG-15 and F-86 Sabre. The Tunnan set two world speed records, and saw successful combat in Kongo in the early 60’s. With 668 Tunnans produced Sweden had the 4th largest airforce in the world.

OT- In case some you are interested, here’s a link to simple but nice Gripen simulator. http://www.biologigrand.ac/lgh255/

Austria was the last country to operate the Draken, and they retired it in 2005. I think there are some civil registered ex Danish Drakens flying in the US though.

Not really what I was looking for.

Still opinions. I will reply in detail when you post something with meat on it.

Look, I’m no rocket scientist, but you need to realise official information isn’t enough to get accurate results. I’m sure you’re an intelligent man, and so I assume you can understand that what I wrote is not all “my personal opinions”. We’re obviously all patriots here, so it’s easy to be blinded.

But please, explain to me how wing twist, wing sweep, slats, canards, vortices and instability doesn’t effect turn rate. Also, explain to me how a delta is better compared to delta + canard.

Robban,

Ok!

1. How does wing sweep effect turn rate?
2. How does wing twist effect turn rate?
3. How does turn rate not effect maneuverability and agility?

Wing sweep, wing twist, dog tooths, in conjunction with leading edge slats + for example canards can increase lift and help prolong the stall. A Gripen always have positive lift an all wings and control surfaces. It turns by adding more lift, unlike the LCA which has to push the tail down killing overall lift in order to start a turn.

Of course turn rate is important and has an effect on maneuverability. But a a good turn rate is not the be all end all in close combat. How fast can you enter a maneuver, how fast can you stop the ongoing turn and change direction? As the Gripen makes full use of the instability by letting the canards pitch the nose by adding lift in front of the aerodynamic center, increasing overall lift, the pitch acceleration is very very good, and the canards helps to start and stop the manouver instantly. The LCA for example has to balance its instability and pitch with its tail, which is behind the aerodynamic center, making going in and out of manouvers more sluggish and unprecise. This is also why the LCA needs larger control surface than the Gripen, it needs more surface to put out into the airstream in order to stop a maneuver. When taking full advantage of an unstable design, a canard allows for smaller control surfaces, saving weight and drag. During hard maneuvering, the Gripens “elevons” are merely used for rolling and trimming the aircraft. The canards handle the rest.