(Luft) Saab Gripen

[Quintus Fabius]

Einfach weil ich die Gripen E immer noch mag, aus völlig sinnfreien und irrationalen Gründen, und weil der folgende tschechische Artikel einfach nett ist:

https://www.czdefence.com/article/the-gr...-many-ways

Gripen E als Ergänzung der F-35

The main, much-discussed advantage of such a solution is the relatively lower operating and maintenance costs of Gripen aircraft compared to the F-35, which can certainly be relativised by pointing to the capabilities of the 5th generation aircraft. In absolute terms, however, the difference may mean that the modernisation of supersonic aviation will not burden the defence budget as significantly in the long term, and more can be invested in other areas.

Compared to the Gripen C, the Gripen E is about 3% larger (it is longer - 15.2 m - and has a larger wingspan - 8.6 m), heavier (maximum take-off weight is 16 500 kg), the main landing gear has been relocated, allowing 40% more fuel, giving a maximum range of around 4 000 km, and an operational range of more than 1 300 km. The new F414 engine produces 25% more thrust (reaching Mach 2 at high altitude and around 1,400 km/h at low levels), while inside the aircraft is practically brand new. It is built on a similar electronic warfare principle to the F-35, but with the difference that everything is easily replaceable, upgradable and replaceable.

The new Gripen E differs from the Gripen C/D not only by having a longer range, but it can also carry a larger payload due to its ten hangers, has a new AESA radar, has the ability to conduct advanced electronic warfare with spherical coverage (self-defence systems such as radar intercept warning, incoming missile warning, jammer, active countermeasures; but also offensive capabilities in this area, useful not only for countering adversary air defenses), has intuitive HMC (Human-Machine Collaboration) with artificial intelligence and numerous passive sensors that significantly enhance the pilot's situational awareness. It is an aircraft packed with state-of-the-art technology, and in basic respects it can be said to be not far behind the F-35A, and in some ways surpasses it.

It then shares with its predecessor the durability and reliable operability in difficult climatic conditions and the ability to operate from makeshift runways such as roads. Significantly, not only within the Swedish doctrine of supersonic deployment, it has strengthened independence from GPS and resistance to GPS jamming through an enhanced navigation capability that uses terrain height profile monitoring and comparison with a database, odometry (tracking of motion data to estimate changes in position over time), and comparison of optical sensor images with a stored database.

A unique feature of the Gripen E that takes it a step further than all other current fighters is the avionics system. In particular, it features modular avionics with a decoupled architecture. This means that any hardware or software operates separately. Hardware can be replaced independently of software and vice versa, without affecting critical flight systems. Beta versions of evaluation software can be run within the system without any risk. As with the Gripen C, the manufacturer thus adheres to the concept of short upgrade cycles - the revolutionary avionics architecture supports a smooth growth in capability to maintain technological superiority and seamlessly adapt to new operational needs. This is how the main differences of the new version versus older machines were presented by Saab representatives in May during the Future Air Force - New Generation Aircraft conference.

As for the stealth capability of the F-35 and the comparison with the Gripen E, the latter is not based on stealth technology. Nevertheless, it has a smaller RCS (Radar Cross-Section) than any other operational fighter aircraft except the F-35 and F-22. Thanks to the aforementioned electronic warfare (EW-suite) technologies using GaN (gallium nitride), it can be argued that the Gripen E will definitely not be an easy target for an adversary to detect.

The maintenance requirements of the F-35 are still very high for a single-engine fighter aircraft and the uptime rate is relatively low, while the Gripen is highly regarded among Western fighter aircraft for its unparalleled ease of maintenance.

Both the Gripen E/F and the F-35A have much in common. They are designed with low production and operational costs in mind compared to other aircraft of their generation. At the same time, both machines have, at first glance, not very significant flight performances in their category (e.g. as regards the top speed, it is Mach 1.6 for the F-35, while the Gripen E reaches Mach 2. Both speeds are lower than those of the twin-engine F-15, Su-27, but also of the single-engine Mirage 2000). However, this fact is more than compensated for by the advanced avionics and the ability to operate against the enemy beyond visual range (in the case of the F-35, the fact that the armament is enclosed in shafts and the aircraft reaches its maximum speed fully armed). If two thousand F-35s can be expected to be in service around the world within a decade, Gripen E/Fs will certainly fly in hundreds at most. Apart from its home country Sweden, it has so far only made its way to Brazil.

Angesichts der F-35-isierung der NATO und insbesondere auch Europas, stellt sich die Frage, ob die Gripen E nicht doch noch einen zweiten Blick verdient hätte, denn der Gedanke damit ein einfacheres System zu haben welches ergänzend an die Seite der F-35 tritt, welche umgekehrt wiederum die Gripen durch seine Unterstützung deutlich leistungsfähiger macht könnte eventuell (rein theoretisch) einen sinnvollen High-Low Mix ergeben.