# JAS 39 Gripen vs Eurofighter?



## Lucky13 (Apr 21, 2007)

Which one?


----------



## Glider (Apr 21, 2007)

Eurofighter. Think of the F15 and F16 with the Eurofighter as the F15.


----------



## Gnomey (Apr 21, 2007)

Eurofighter. Overall the better aircraft with a better package for air to air and almost as manoeuvrable.


----------



## Lucky13 (Apr 21, 2007)

*Rock* me *Hard place* I put my money on Gripen....


----------



## Matt308 (Apr 21, 2007)

Eurofighter in a pure air-to-air engagement. AESA radar/Meteor BVRAAM trumps Gripen in long range engagements.


----------



## twoeagles (Apr 21, 2007)

Gripen in a classic dogfight; Euro in a longer range missile engagement.


----------



## 102first_hussars (Apr 21, 2007)

The Ef 2000 is faster, and more advanced avionics


----------



## Lucky13 (Apr 21, 2007)

Mach 2.0 vs 2.3 I think...


----------



## Matt308 (Apr 21, 2007)

And supercruise.


----------



## 102first_hussars (Apr 22, 2007)

Yeah well IMO opinion a RAF pilot in an EF2000 would ass rape a Swwed pilot in a Saab anytime, no matter how good the Swwed Armed Forces are


the RAF is just that Damn good


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 22, 2007)

Eurofighter. New generation of aircraft with better avionix and overall better performance and characteristics. JAS 39 is a great aircraft but the Eurofighter is the part of the next generation. All she is missing is the stealth capabitlities of the 22 and the 35.


----------



## Lucky13 (Apr 22, 2007)

UK´s Empire Test Pilots´ School uses the Gripen. The Swedes flew with USAF in RED FLAG exercise a while back and they (F-15 or 16 I think) couldn't touch them because of their EWS... They also kicked some serious F-16 ass in Norway a wee while back....8)  

The Gripen could also carry the same ordnance(?) like the USAF fighters....
Also, isn't the Eurofighter a "airbase only" aircraft?


----------



## Matt308 (Apr 22, 2007)

Lucky13 said:


> UK´s Empire Test Pilots´ School uses the Gripen. The Swedes flew with USAF in RED FLAG exercise a while back and they (F-15 or 16 I think) couldn't touch them because of their EWS... They also kicked some serious F-16 ass in Norway a wee while back....8)
> 
> The Gripen could also carry the same ordnance(?) like the USAF fighters....
> Also, isn't the Eurofighter a "airbase only" aircraft?




Couldn't touch them? I seriously doubt that. And against F-15C/E with AESA that's just a line of BS.

And yes I do believe the Gripen is qualified for all NATO missile loudouts (ie AIM-9/AIM-120). Don't get me wrong, Gripen is world class and I hope we never have to get on the wrong side of her. But she is not F-35 or Eurofighter caliber. She is also not as expensive.


----------



## Glider (Apr 22, 2007)

Matt308 said:


> Couldn't touch them? I seriously doubt that. And against F-15C/E with AESA that's just a line of BS.



Thats an assumption that I wouldn't wish to make before I knew the facts. At the end of the day the F15 is an old airframe and the Grippen a very new one with all the latest gadgets. I doubt that the F15 couldn't touch it, thats a bit much but wouldn't be suprised if the F15 found the Grippen more than equal.

:


> Don't get me wrong, Gripen is world class and I hope we never have to get on the wrong side of her. But she is not F-35 or Eurofighter caliber. She is also not as expensive.



Which gives her a good chance in the export market.


----------



## Lucky13 (Apr 22, 2007)

Glider said:


> Thats an assumption that I wouldn't wish to make before I knew the facts. At the end of the day the F15 is an old airframe and the Grippen a very new one with all the latest gadgets. I doubt that the F15 couldn't touch it, thats a bit much but wouldn't be suprised if the F15 found the Grippen more than equal.
> 
> :
> 
> Which gives her a good chance in the export market.



I was just quoting what was written fellas. I'll see if I can find the website again. It had something to do with their EWS system anyway. Early Warning System, right?


----------



## Lucky13 (Apr 22, 2007)

"The very small radar cross section of Gripen was another problem for the ‘red team’ that included both air-to-air and surface-to-air threats. “We also confirmed that our warning and electronic warfare systems (EWS) are really, really good - it was almost impossible for the Red air force to get through our EW systems. We always knew where the air defense was, could avoid them and still do our work, even in very dynamic situations, with the threat getting more complex each day” said Colonel Lindberg."

It's not the same article that I read. This from the South African Air Force...
First Red Flag exercise for Gripen
Still looking folks....


----------



## des (Apr 23, 2007)

well, you may think that the gripen is better, but the eurofighter has more weapons


----------



## Matt308 (Apr 23, 2007)

Exxxxplain, please....


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 24, 2007)

Wow that was a great post!


----------



## Soren (Apr 25, 2007)

Both are great fighters, no doubt, but; The Eurofighter can maintain 9 G for as long as there is fuel in the tanks, can the Gripen do that ?


----------



## Lucky13 (Apr 25, 2007)

Yes.... Question is though, can the pilot....?  

Does Eurofighter have IHMD (Integrated Helmet-Mounted Display)?


----------



## Soren (Apr 25, 2007)

The Gripen can only reach 9 G in a glimse while the Eurofighter can maintain this, so the eurofighter is superior in a dogfight. (Although it'll most likely not ever end in a dogfight) And yes, the EF does have IHMD.


----------



## Matt308 (Apr 25, 2007)

Soren said:


> The Gripen can only reach 9 G in a glimse



I find that hard to believe, Soren. But I have no direct evidence to dispute it. Typically modern fighters are much more capable than their passengers. And 9 g sustained is not a magnificent feat for today's technologies.


----------



## Matt308 (Apr 25, 2007)

Lucky13 said:


> Yes.... Question is though, can the pilot....?
> 
> Does Eurofighter have IHMD (Integrated Helmet-Mounted Display)?



Eurofighter IHMD is state of the art and not to be trifled with.


----------



## Lucky13 (Apr 26, 2007)

Gripen has the worlds most advanced datalink system.... Isn't the Eurofighter only to operate from large airbases which can be too vulnerable. Gripen can operate from normal roads that's 800m long and 17m (sometimes only nine metres) wide and hide in peoples garages?

"The EWS 39 consists of a radar warner, jammer and countermeasures dispensers. The system is designed to handle all sorts of off-board, integrated and pod-mounted jammers, chaff and flare dispensers. Together, these contribute to making the Gripen the world's most capable and cost-effective combat aircraft in operation today"

"BOL, internationally recognized as today's most effective countermeasures dispenser, is used by the US F-14, F-15, the Eurofighter, the Tornado and the Swedish Viggen and Gripen."


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 26, 2007)

Lucky13 said:


> Gripen can operate from normal roads that's 800m long and 17m (sometimes only nine metres) wide and hide in peoples garages?



That would have to be a big garage...


----------



## Lucky13 (Apr 26, 2007)

They used to be able to fold the fin on the Viggen, so I guess that they can do it on the Gripen as well. But, who know......  
Many people have a double garage too....to fit their private destillery in.

Said too much! Please delete this comment....


----------



## Soren (Apr 26, 2007)

Matt308 said:


> I find that hard to believe, Soren. But I have no direct evidence to dispute it. Typically modern fighters are much more capable than their passengers. And 9 g sustained is not a magnificent feat for today's technologies.



Even with a G-suit you can't stay conscious while pulling 9 G's for long Matt, so the pilot is the limiting factor. Only the advent of a new G-suit for the EF pilots allowed them to fly at a continous 9 G.


A cool video: 

Embedded media from this media site is no longer available


----------



## Matt308 (Apr 26, 2007)

Thankyou. But that does that have to do with the Gripen. You honestly think that the Gripen is airframe limited to "glimses" and cannot sustain high g maneuvers? C'mon. Sounds like French Airbus flight control limitations. No serious worldclass fighter manufacterer would impose such software limitations upon their equipment. That would be criminal.


----------



## Soren (Apr 29, 2007)

9 G is alot, and AFAIK the Gripen can only maintain this for a short while - the Eurofighter with its excellent power to weight ratio and aerodynamics can maintain 9 G for as long as there is fuel however, the EF pilot also has the advantage of his better G-suit.

As to a/c limitations, well I'm not sure what the structural limit is for these two a/c - its high no doubt... 12 G ??


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 29, 2007)

Some how I just find this hard to believe. The F-16 can handle 9 G and more as good as any aircraft, so I would think the Grippen could to.

Also can you please post some info on the EF Pilots "Better" G Suit...


----------



## Soren (Apr 29, 2007)

The F-16 can't do 9 G for very long.

Here's something on the Eurofighter G-suit:
Autoflug Libelle GmbH
EUROFIGHTER TYPHOON ROADSHOW VISITS RAF MARHAM

Its called the Libelle suit.


----------



## Soren (Apr 29, 2007)

I dream I can one day get a ride in one of these birds


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 29, 2007)

Soren said:


> The F-16 can't do 9 G for very long.



The F-16 was designed to withstand high G forces of 9G and more.



Soren said:


> Here's something on the Eurofighter G-suit:
> EUROFIGHTER TYPHOON ROADSHOW VISITS RAF MARHAM



Thanks!


----------



## Soren (Apr 29, 2007)

The F-16 airframe can withstand 9 G and more yes, but the point is the a/c itself can't maintain it for more than a short while. 

Btw I added another link specifically on the Libelle suit: Autoflug Libelle GmbH


----------



## Matt308 (Apr 29, 2007)

Soren said:


> The F-16 can't do 9 G for very long.
> 
> QUOTE]
> 
> ...


----------



## Lucky13 (Apr 29, 2007)

No airframe is that good so it can't be improved upon. Won't be long before they start to improve the Typhoon I think either....one way or another. That's what you do when you're in the top of the league and want to stay there.


----------



## Matt308 (Apr 29, 2007)

Ofcourse. But not one that is touted as a 5th gen fighter and is being marketed to the world as a leading contender for those airplanes that are.


----------



## Lucky13 (Apr 29, 2007)

Gripen is "only" a 4.5 generation fighter and so is Eurofighter.....  I think that the F-22 is the only operational fighter of the 5th generation, soon also to be the F-35....


----------



## Soren (Apr 29, 2007)

You wait and see lucky, modern stealth technology might just go obsolete.


----------



## Matt308 (Apr 29, 2007)

Why so Soren? I'm curious as to your thoughts.


----------



## Glider (Apr 29, 2007)

Matt308 said:


> Why so Soren? I'm curious as to your thoughts.



Just a blatent guess but here is my suggestion.

Stealth planes are not invisible to radar, they reduce the radar signature to a fraction of its 'normal' size, say to the size of a medium size bird a seagull for instance.

One day with the growth of computer power, the radars may be able to look for a seagull going 600kts in a straight line and bobs your uncle, its the enemy.


----------



## Matt308 (Apr 29, 2007)

Not sure where you equated stealth with invisibility, mate.

Okay, the detection/avoidance game is becoming true as we speak. However, to be surveilled is a manifestation of your vulnerability. For those in Seattle, that means that even though more powerful radar (AESA for example) is available, the ability to avoid detection is a matter of your stealth characteristic. You can downplay reduced radar signature all you want, but reality is your signature plays a key role in BVR engagements.


----------



## Lucky13 (Apr 30, 2007)

Maybe one day we'll get that far so we have gone a full circle and we're back where we started. The pilot that SEE you first and shoot you down with guns wins.....


----------



## Matt308 (Apr 30, 2007)




----------



## Soren (Apr 30, 2007)

Besides new and more powerful radars being developed other more sophisticated detection systems are as-well.

Stealth detection system disappears from screens | The Register


----------



## Soren (Apr 30, 2007)

Well shaped and coated or not, you're still a mass flying in the air which will be in the way of some signals.


----------



## Matt308 (May 1, 2007)

This "detection system" has been on the boards since the Bosnian fracus. In fact, this was the officially claimed reason for the F-117 loss (coupled with the claim that the F-117 operational route was used repeatedly  ). However, the B-2, F-22 and F-35 do not rely solely upon angled facets to reflect RF energy. They also make high use of technology to prevent or minimize RF reflections. Thus, this "detection system", of whatever dubious merit it may be, has been addressed in 5th gen fighters.

It will always be a tradeoff of detection, avoidance and jamming.


----------



## nic_tester (Dec 3, 2007)

wvr, not sure if this is at all interesting anymore, besides, i cant make the comparison. The huge twr advantage of the EF might dominate the Jas wvr.

bwr, wouldnt the smaller rcs of the gripen be a rather big advantage here? Especially with stores? Or maybe all ac with stores have such a huge rcs that it wont make much of a difference. Detected at 1000km or 800km, big deal?

Radar, well, how often are fighters left to their own radar these days? awacs on attack, groundradar on defence.

Dont the missiles do all the work these days?

So, a small, cheapish fighter makes alot of sense imho. But the ef got huge advantages in speed, climb and stayingpower. But counting the potatoes before they are out of the ground would probably not be healthy for the flyers of the EF-af if they went up against a gripen af.


----------



## nic_tester (Dec 3, 2007)

the disadvantage of the gripen is pisspoor range, imho.

the disadvantage of the ef is that its a huge thing with two engines so can only be employed by the affluent with state of the art maintenance facilities.


----------



## Lucky13 (Dec 3, 2007)

Completely forgot about this thread....


----------



## Matt308 (Dec 3, 2007)

Good post, Lucky.

It seems to me that comparisons between the Gripen and EF are comparing apples and oranges. This is like comparing the F-16 vs F-15. Both are excellent planes in their own right, but each holds its own niche. One is an air superiority fighter, while the other is a multi-role aircraft with completely different development requirements. Can't fault either. To make a choice in combat would require operational scenarios.

Perhaps Eurofighter vs Gripen, head-on, at 200nm? Now that I would give to EF.


----------



## Soren (Dec 9, 2007)

IMO the EuroFighter is the very best fighter in the air today.


----------



## seesul (Dec 9, 2007)

Czech Air forces betted on Jas-39.8)


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Dec 9, 2007)

Soren said:


> IMO the EuroFighter is the very best fighter in the air today.



I would agree with you but now that the F-22 has entered service my vote goes to the Raptor.


----------



## Soren (Dec 9, 2007)

The F-22 definitely has its advantages, however IMO the EuroFighter is a slightly better fighter. The EF features extreme agility because of its excellent aerodynamics, while the Raptor has its great agility by virtue of its thrust vectoring. The EF features the most advanced pilot's interface in the world, and EF pilots have available the best G-suit in the world as-well.

Its a hard choice, but since the EF is also cheaper to produce I'd go for it.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Dec 9, 2007)

Soren said:


> The EF features the most advanced pilot's interface in the world, and EF pilots have available the best G-suit in the world as-well.



Can you show proof for both of these please?




Soren said:


> Its a hard choice, but since the EF is also cheaper to produce I'd go for it.



Not by much.

The F-22 cost $137 million to produce.

The Eurofighter costs aprox. $128 million to produce.

At that cost it really does not matter. 

Besides if the Dollar keeps dropping the EF will soon over take it in cost.


----------



## Soren (Dec 9, 2007)

*Pilots interface*
Presagis Inc. | BAE Systems:  Eurofighter Typhoon

*The Libelle G-suit*
Autoflug Libelle GmbH


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Dec 9, 2007)

Thanks for the links Soren, but I dont see how it can be compared to the F-22s systems when the majority of it is still classified.

I just dont see a Typhoon besting a F-22.

Typhoon is a great aircraft though. Dont take me wrong.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Dec 9, 2007)

I think the Eurofighter might have a more capable strike ability from what I've read, but in it's original element (air-to-air) I believe the F-22 is the most advanced and capable combat aircraft in the world today.


----------



## Soren (Dec 9, 2007)

Don't get me wrong Adler the F-22 and EuroFighter are really close! Both state of the art!

However the F-22's interface isn't a secret, it doesn't feature the same advanced features as that of the EF, and while the F-22 EF are about as close as can get in terms of sustained instantanous turn rate, roll rate climb, the F-22 pilot lacks to absolutely crucial Libelle G-suit. Both aircraft can go further than the passenger (Pilot), so the one with the best G-suit wins, and the EF pilot clearly has the best available to him. One must note that the USAAF is considering adopting the Libelle suit as-well though.

In short I just don't think the F-22 is worth the extra 10 million bucks.. (PS the cost of the F-22 development is way beyond that of the EF project)

Btw, not that it matters much but interesting nonetheless, I read today that the EF is THE most precisely built fighter in the world.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Dec 9, 2007)

Soren said:


> so the one with the best G-suit wins, and the EF pilot clearly has the best available to him. One must note that the USAAF is considering adopting the Libelle suit as-well though.


The suit won't make much of a difference if you're killed BVR.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Dec 9, 2007)

And the F-22 has the advantage of surprise...

Every little advantage in combat counts.


----------



## Soren (Dec 9, 2007)

Copy that FBJ, not sure who has the advantage there...


----------



## Marcel (Dec 12, 2007)

Soren said:


> The EF features extreme agility because of its excellent aerodynamics, while the Raptor has its great agility by virtue of its thrust vectoring.



Hi Soren,

What's the disadvantage of trust vectoring against the agility caused by the aerodynamics?


----------



## Lucky13 (Dec 12, 2007)

You could almost say that the JAS is today's Mig-21 and the F-22 and Typhoon be the F-4 and F-8 then, eh?  I'd still say that JAS is in the top 5 today....

How is the servicability(?) in the field comparec between these three then, can F-22 and Typhoon take off from normal narrow country roads, frozen lakes etc....? J-35 Draken could and so also J-37 Viggen and JAS.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Dec 12, 2007)

Marcel said:


> Hi Soren,
> 
> What's the disadvantage of trust vectoring against the agility caused by the aerodynamics?



I was trying to figure that out as well.


----------



## Soren (Dec 12, 2007)

I never said anything about it being a disadvantage, there's no disadvantage, its just a different way of trying to achieve the same.


----------



## Marcel (Dec 13, 2007)

Soren said:


> I never said anything about it being a disadvantage, there's no disadvantage, its just a different way of trying to achieve the same.



Ah, I misunderstood your post then, sorry.
But do you think the Typhoon could even improve by having trust vectoring or wouldn't that make a difference?


----------



## Soren (Dec 13, 2007)

It would certainly improve by having thrust vectoring.


----------



## nic_tester (Mar 31, 2008)

Marcel said:


> Hi Soren,
> 
> What's the disadvantage of trust vectoring against the agility caused by the aerodynamics?



One obvious advantage of trust vectoring is that it allows for reasonable handling at high altitudes where the air is thin so controlsurfaces become ever less effective.

I also read somewhere that thrustvectoring is not that great outside the airshows. However I have no understanding whatsoever of the aeronautical calculations involved so some1 else has to contribute on that.


----------



## Zarathos (Mar 31, 2008)

Why EF2000 has better air to air package? Both planes currently carry AIM-120, and both will be carrying Meteors. Difference is in SRAAMs - ASRAAM for EF and IRIS-T for Gripen, but I don't think that ASRAAM gives EF2000 upper hand in terms of weaponry. EF2000 currently lack much in area of AS capabilities, but JAS-39 is not the best one in that area too, so that's even. 

CAPTOR radar from Eurofighter and Gripens PS/5 are both mechanicaly steered, both are inspired by Blue Vixen radar, both will have AESA versions in the future. Which one is better? Probably CAPTOR, but I've heard of lot of good about PS/5 too and Gripen as smaller plane has probably lower RCS, so it will be detected later. Makes probably both detection systems more or less even in one-on-one competition.

What else? EWS on Gripen are excelent (Red Flag, quoted here), don't know much about Eurofighter. Gripen has better situational awarenes thanks to best datalink system in the world.

For me, if I had too choose between Gripen and EF2000 for Poland, I choose Gripen each time. Actually I'm still pissed at our politicians for choosing F-16 instead Gripen. 

It's excelent 5th generation plane (yeah, I know, but I find 4,5th generation as US marketing trick to place F-22 above it's competitors), it's cheaper to buy, fly and maintain then it's competition (not only EF2000). It has some minuses, like not so great air to ground capabilities and has little short range, but for small and medium countries with not enough money to buy Rafale or EF2000 and sane enough not to buy (and wait) for F-35 it's excelent choice. 

If I will be big country with lot of money? EF2000, mostly because of range.


----------



## Chimp (Sep 11, 2009)

Read it and weep, Eurofighter fanboys.

Gripen - The wings of your nation - Hungary ? The Story so far

Gripen has kicked ass in Red Flag battles in Hungary. It has kicked ass in Alaska. It has kicked ass basically everywhere. So where does this supposed Eurofighter superiority come from? Not to mention, Gripen is cheaper.

Gripen is built to protect and defend the superiority of smaller nations and that's where it shines.


----------



## Maximowitz (Sep 11, 2009)

The Eurofighter took so long between initial concept to being brought into operational service I'm suprised it didn't come with a prop and a spatted undercarriage. A complete waste of time and money, the RAF might as well have bought American fighters for half the cash.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 12, 2009)

Chimp said:


> Read it and weep, Eurofighter fanboys.



What a great way to make friends on the forum with your first post...


----------



## Milos Sijacki (Sep 12, 2009)

Personally, I don't know enough about any of these two fighters, so there fore can not yet decide. However, tomorrow, there is an air show on Batajnica Military Air Base, where we shall see both of these fighters in action. 

Cheers


----------



## Matt308 (Sep 12, 2009)

Now that I would like to see!


----------



## Marcel (Sep 15, 2009)

Here in the NL it's still a debate if we'll buy the J35 or the Grippen. Politic demand we'll buy the F35 and this was quite sure until last year when the Swedes came with a good offer. I think the main advantage of the Grippen is that it's much cheaper while still being quite a competitive fighter. Being a small nation this is a major concern. But politics demand that we keep our bonds tight with the US, so I think in the end it'll probably be the "Joint strikefighter" (probably the first part of the name "joint" we persuade many dutchman  )


----------



## A4K (Sep 15, 2009)

Got onto this thread late jan, but after seeing both types perform last year at the Kecskeméti air show, my money's on the Gripen...seemed to have a little more agility and better turn of speed...

Actually it woke me up with a start to the shift in technology...all the jets I grew up with (F-16, F-18, MiG-29, Su-27, etc) were present and performed comparative displays, and to be blunt, looked like dinosaurs compared to the newer types!...I was amazed how much aircraft have improved in the 20 years between the designs!


----------



## Butters (Sep 15, 2009)

Here's an interesting article on the confusing subject of the actual cost of modern fighters.

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/dae/articles/communiques/FighterCostFinalJuly06.pdf

It's a couple of years out of date, but other than the unrealistically low price given for the F-35, it is a useful means of comparing the prices of the latest Western fighters.

JL


----------

