Gripen turn around new edition

[@rawtruth1996]

Before watching this I was confused between buying a gripen or a typhoon. This settles it. I’m going for the gripen

You won't regret it. I can sleep until 8h45 knowing I can still make it at work by 9h00, plus I can take off from my street when I couldn't with the Eurofighter. Best part is I can use my five kids supervised by my wife to reload it.

[@petter5721]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/iaOwm4ZvrtF5qJo

[@marktec58]

As a former Mechanical Engineer, I must say that highway based turn around is really impressive, and also perfect for Canada. The F-35 probably needs a complete air base with a clean room to do the same thing, for 5 times the price! The Gripen is even cooler than IKEA furniture... :)

[@austintatious7209]

Classic Swedish quality and simplicity. Love it.

[@sidnewsound]

Brazil chose the best cost-efficiency ratio. The Gripen NG (New Generation) will be part of the FAB, the Brazilian Air Force in 2021.

[@dirtbikerswe1979]

Thanks for buying from us, Greeting from Sweden.

[@rolfhenriksson4156]

You made the right choice and much cheaper

[@farrelfzeta6908]

My country was once offered Gripens by Saab because we need replacement for our outdated F-5Es. Gripen seems to be cost-efficient, cheap, reliable, and capable for our developing country. They even came to our country for full demonstration of Gripen's capability. Turned out bcs of politics, our defense ministry went for Russian Su-35 which is too costly for our nation who uses fighter for patrol and defensive purposes. They could have bought more Gripens than Su-35 and expand our squadron wider to reach entire area of our country.

[@fatherlandchild2780]

Just because it was cheapest. Poor country, nothing to be proud of.

[@dirtbikerswe1979]

@@farrelfzeta6908 Many counties buying arms and planes from eaither from USA or Russia for political reasons. They seek friendship and protection of a superpower country.

[@digitalghosts4599]

When I was watching it, I felt like the pilot is a medieval knight assisted by his pages and staff before fighting a battle. We are so advanced, yet still so primitive

[@efxnews4776]

In some essence the pilot is a knight, is all in military ranking.

[@RaptorTroll360]

War, war never changes...

[@reynaldoraymundo4684]

and saving a damsel in distress? i love it!

[@normandong4479]

The Saab Gripen comes across as a very well designed and maintainable jet fighter. It does not give up any fighting or patrolling qualities for the sake of technology. Buyers of other aircraft may feel comfortable spending more public money to acquire & operate their jets, but faster turnaround time w its multiplier advantages is also key. Governments do not have to spend extravagantly to have air power & capabilities.

[@sbehxnsjjs1436]

Ryanair: 25 min turnaround Swedish airforce: Hold my beer

[@andreaskavak2364]

Hold my gripen

[@dirtbikerswe1979]

@@andreaskavak2364 Grip my hold

[@andreaskavak2364]

@@dirtbikerswe1979 hold my bombs

[@adam632]

hold my blondes

[@Sprinkles0139]

håll i min surströmming

[@fencer9469]

Incredible! Especially the fact that it won't need an airbase if things to awry

[@christofferwillenfort4035]

this is the swedidh concept Bas60 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bas_60 Makes it very hard to do basedenial aginst sweden. could easily be implemented in any country in 2-3 years.

[@scalpelboy1]

Basically an F1 pitstop for fighter plane

[@kakerake6018]

Box box, box box

[@edvaldojoaofarnese3978]

Sure that Ayrton Senna would love to fly this Gripen, great choice Brazil made, excellent work that Saab are doing with the embraer, gives us pride, respect from Brazil

[@garcimat]

Airton Senna ❤️❤️❤️ thanks for show our great hero, cheers from 🇧🇷

[@gillescordier8033]

Impressive!! Canada should re-arm itself with the Grippen. A great fighter!

[@SoapRS]

Gilles Cordier Gripen for fuck sake

[@tarunbasra8230]

Did they end up getting the griphin

[@martinrivera4175]

Air to air combat tested?

[@martinrivera4175]

@Harun Atic they're using old aircraft as R/C target drones? Live combat drills?

[@ddgaxelnilsson7855]

@@tarunbasra8230 no I don’t think they ended up with the griffen

[@antikoerper256]

Really glad that Bulgaria chose Gripen as it's new fighter! Best choice for sure!

[@baginatora]

*Lolz in Bulgarian*

[@michamcv.1846]

why bulgaria dont hang on his mic´s ? they dont fall from the sky like stones if the temperatur changes !

[@angelg3986]

Slow down. In Bulgaria this is going to be a "political decision". "Political decision" means sub-optimal (not good) decision, taken in the interest of a political influential group. So the people-in-shadow who influence the political decisions can change it, no matter what the experts think.

[@Drottninggatan2017]

These Gripens will fall out of the sky on first electronics strike. www.nyteknik.se/innovation/karlskogas-nya-vapen-slar-ut-elektroniken-6397323

[@filipspecht6052]

Bulgaria rules. How many Gripens?

[@normjohnson4629]

Canada needs to get new Gripens to replace our aging F18s. Forget the friggin over priced F35 crap. Swedes will provide full tech transfer and allow to be assembled in Canada. We need an interceptor version.

[@michaelcharron2818]

You are 100% right

[@johndix1820]

I’m sure you’re correct. Durable, dependable, innovative and survivable will keep anything capable and thus successful longer. F35 can’t be if much use when it must be maintained in an laboratory cleanliness environment. I hope the US solves its own self induced problem before it kills us!

[@yvoTV6232]

Nice fighter.its suitable for Philippines needs.less maintainance and maybe not so expensive unlike the F's fighter from U.S.

[@jari2018]

I smell ..someone doing something a russian would do and the added comments ,yes you are ....Cant take comments like this seriously being canadian.

[@kindanyume]

Check out my more detailed post regarding tht exactly but also no we dont need an interceptor ver the Gripen NG aka E/F can already do that and more.. and thats all important for NCAP

[@dealerovski82]

this is all very impressive, and they did it early in the 90s

[@Merecir]

Try the 70's. Viggen used a similar system. Or the 60's even. With Draken.

[@fredrik999z]

Viggen was the first aircraft from SAAB with true STOL capability. It could reverse thrust and even go backwards into small road pockets and turn around on narrow country roads. Viggen was developed in the 60's and in service from 1971-2005.

[@petter5721]

Well it started in the 1940s. During the 50s with Draken, concept evolved in the 70s with Viggen and now from the 90s with Gripen. All designed to be serviced and maintained by conscript soldiers.

[@simonbroberg969]

Had sat nav in '64, so guess you were not in the know. Viggen

[@SoapRS]

Petter ! No bro, the tunnan was first and then came Draken

[@marcusornestahl6378]

Swedes are masters of the Short Landing and take off principle, as for aircraft operation, all planes are designed so conscripts with only 10 months of total servicetime can do jobb to perfection. Simplicity at its best ;)

[@JiriUL]

Love it ! Greetings from the Czech Republic - our army uses Gripens and I think it was a good choice :)

[@jari2018]

How about fight or wardamage will it take years to maintain damage aircraft ? -a bullethole will take forever since we know swedes or are the rules different in war ? I guess they think it all or nothing - igoring the reality.

[@jari2018]

Lars , you blocked me I guess but you wrote nonsense , F-18 assemebled in Finland , they built own cars and Saab had its factory in Finland building the cab but later it assigned a another car to build by the current owner . Thats little but I dont have anything to do with living in Finland . I made a valid point - Do Saab or the Airforce have a plan to repair a partly destoyed Gripen- and my answear is still No.

[@2canines]

that's a dumb assumption jari. every air force in industrialized nations have such plans in place. how well they are implemented in peacetime is another question all together. Sweden actually have maintenance hangars inside mountains where the runway sticks straight out of it. so the aircraft can take off right out of the mountain. however they have not been used since the cold war.

[@N75911_]

I find it a bit strange that the F/A-18 Hornet is used by other Nation's Air Forces. It's carrier capabilities seem to just add unnecessary weight, which is a big reason the US Air Force doesn't use it. Though granted, the F/A-18 is an absolutely brilliant Carrier-born Strike Fighter.

[@Tamburello_1994]

The Senna action was a nice touch. Upvoted.

[@SNixD]

Some thoughts regarding the whole stealth and F-35 vs Gripen thing: Both planes operate cooperatively in a network with other radar systems. The F-35 is not stealthy to low frequency radars and thus cannot hide from those. Even if they do avoid detection they cannot target other planes without turning on their own radars and that means they will be instantly found by the passive systems in the Gripen. For BVR the Gripen at the moment has superior armaments, although that will change soon as the UK is working on integrating the same Meteor missile. This gives a slight advantage to the F-35 in performance but it might not be enough to cancel out the advantages that the Gripen's lower price and operational costs might offer (more planes and flight time for the same price). At closer distances stealth characteristics offer little advantage and the F-35's AIM-9X and Gripen's IRIS-T are comparable in performance. Both planes have IRST systems. The closer the planes get the more difficult it will be for the F-35 due to it's inferior maneuverability (sustained angle of attack, rate of climb, top speed). Another thing to keep in mind is that only the F-35A has the GAU-22/A 25 mm cannon, so in a situation where the missile load has been depleted the B and C variants will be even more disadvantaged. If we instead look at ground attack the picture changes to a much more clear advantage for the F-35. Even with low frequency radars being present, compared to the Gripen it has a much higher chance of entering enemy controlled airspace undetected, making it excellent for strikes against important ground targets. You could say it's almost perfect for sneaking in and launching anti-radiation missiles to disable enemy air defenses.

[@ivanlagrossemoule]

"The F-35 is not stealthy to low frequency radars and thus cannot hide from those" Not really. Low frequency radar aren't magical super radar. There's a reason most radar use much shorter wavelengths and stealth is optimized to the other wavelengths. "they cannot target other planes without turning on their own radars" Absolutely wrong. Passive sensors are a thing. EO-DAS can target enemy aircraft. The radar can work passively too. And that's ignoring the endless amount of tricks and jamming techniques you can use thanks to stealth. "they will be instantly found by the passive systems in the Gripen" Combat radar don't just pulse waves in a massive frontal cone, they scan the sky with a very thin beam. The F-35 has great maneuverability, it's just that every idiot who makes graphs uses data with 50% fuel and no missiles. The F-35 at 50% fuel carries more fuel than a F-16 with full internal tanks. Due to the internal payload, it suffers more at empty performance, but also loses less with added payload. So basically at equal fuel and weapon load the F-35 is going to give the Gripen a run for its money.

[@SNixD]

" There's a reason most radar use much shorter wavelengths and stealth is optimized to the other wavelengths." Yes, shorter wavelengths are used more because the systems can be made more compact and they have higher accuracy. A ground based system doesn't have to care that much about size and just knowing that there are planes in an area that are "invisible" to shorter wavelengths spoils the stealth surprise factor quite a bit. And the reason stealth isn't optimized for longer wavelengths is because it's physically impossible to build a plane with a radar absorbent coating that has a thickness measured in whole meters (at least until metamaterials change the game). "Absolutely wrong. Passive sensors are a thing. EO-DAS can target enemy aircraft. The radar can work passively too." EO-DAS is an IRST system that is a lot more range limited than radar. The Gripen has IRST as well but I have no idea how well it performs. I also mentioned that the Gripen uses passive radar detection and is linked not only with other planes but also with ground radar, ships and basically anything else that can provide information. If you manage to avoid detection from other sources, like LF radar or actively/passively from less stealthy angles, you'll still be discovered the moment you launch something. Sweden has been using this sort of networked system for a long time (in use and continually upgraded/re-developed since the 60's I think) and it is VERY hard to jam. First shot is valuable but it will probably end up with the other side shooting back before being taken out. Now if this takes place without supporting systems and/or with limited numbers the F-35 will definitely have an edge BVR. "...So basically at equal fuel and weapon load the F-35 is going to give the Gripen a run for its money." Let's say this assumption is correct and it makes up for the mach 0.4 difference in top speed and so on. If you put on a full weapons load, that means external stuff, you have sacrificed a lot of that precious stealth. You did say equal weapon load so it's either that or the Gripens have a lot of empty space under their wings. Like I previously wrote, the F-35 is a superior plane for sneaky ground attack missions and if that's the intended use the choice is obvious. You must have good use for something like that to justify the expense when you could have more planes, with cheaper flight hours and otherwise very similar performance, for the same price. Even if you do have use for a sneaky ground attack plane it might be smarter to have a mix of the two planes, unless the logistics become too bothersome with more than one system.

[@SNixD]

Exactly! The Gripen E will be a bit more expensive than the C and the F-35 will go down a bit in price but we're still talking 5:4 - 5:3 (Gripen:F-35) planes for the same price, with higher availability for each plane and the pilots getting more flight time as well due to the much lower operating costs. A 3 vs 1 scenario is not unrealistic considering the Gripen E is designed for quick turnarounds, with refueling, reloading and taking off again being done in mere minutes, and a complete engine change taking less than an hour.

[@ivanlagrossemoule]

"A ground based system doesn't have to care that much about size and just knowing that there are planes in an area that are "invisible" to shorter wavelengths spoils the stealth surprise factor quite a bit." Other than the many limitations of such systems, they still don't provide for targeting. So the limitations of such radars are quite obvious. "And the reason stealth isn't optimized for longer wavelengths is because it's physically impossible to build a plane with a radar absorbent coating that has a thickness measured in whole meters" I don't know who came up with this retarded idea but it keeps getting repeated despite being categorically wrong. The only coatings that follow such logic are those that rely on destructive interference to work, just like the anti-reflection coatings on lenses. Absorbent materials have no such limitations. The main limitations is unrelated to materials, it comes from shaping. It's difficult to build a combat aircraft and shape it properly for such wavelengths. The advantage for the aircraft though is that at wavelengths close to the size of the aircraft, the RCS diminishes extremely fast. "EO-DAS is an IRST system that is a lot more range limited than radar. The Gripen has IRST as well but I have no idea how well it performs." The Gripen uses less IR cameras than the F-35, so it has much lower resolution and performance. All of the integration of systems on the Gripen are taken a bit further to the F-35, that can for example guide missiles for other platforms. But you will find all of these capabilities on any western aircraft worth anything. I'm just saying that passive detection does exist for the F-35, both radar and IRST, and thanks to sensor fusion (Gripen has it too), it's even more efficient. Of course once detected (and supposing this detection isn't lost), the F-35 can be taken out. But it's very difficult to do so, can only be done at limited ranges, and is an advantage that the other aircraft don't have. At best the Gripen can sort of hold up against the F-35, but that's admitting it's already inferior in the first place. "Let's say this assumption is correct and it makes up for the mach 0.4 difference in top speed and so on. If you put on a full weapons load, that means external stuff, you have sacrificed a lot of that precious stealth. You did say equal weapon load so it's either that or the Gripens have a lot of empty space under their wings." The problem here is yet again, you're trying to find ways to ignore the advantage. The F-35 can fly in two configurations: -stealthy, which the Gripen can't even do in the first place -non-stealthy, which still makes it stealthier than the Gripen and therefore still gives it the upper hand You're just ignoring too many of the F-35 advantages to even understand why it holds the upper edge. Lets just put this in numbers. The F-35 can detect the Gripen at high ranges (it's hard to say how much due to classified numbers and bogus crap on the internet), but lets say 200 km. The F-35 can only be detected at loosely 20-30 km. At that point, the EO-DAS is still very useful, because the F-35 can passively detect a Gripen at more than 20-30 km. Maybe not 100 km, but still good ranges. Considering AIM-120D missiles will easily have 50+ km ranges, the Gripen isn't at an advantage. Sure, it can detect the F-35 if the F-35 locks on it with its radar, but then you're assuming there's one of each. The F-35 can easily turn its radar off, in what case all detection is lost, then another F-35 picks up the missile to guide it to the Gripen, but the Gripen lost its first target and has to acquire the second. This is just one idea based on actual IAD radar function, but now imagine what the smart lads working on the F-35 could come up with when using stealth at their advantage. Basically stealth keeps getting better with more aircraft, because you can used them in combined operations that wouldn't be possible otherwise. Bernhard Jordan The F-35A is below 90M. You're also completely ignoring the whole logistics train. You can't just magically get 3 times more pilots, maintenance crew, logistics and so on just like that, let alone get everything in the air at the same time as easily. Keeping combat aircraft in the air is a huge burden, and the cost of the aircraft is only a portion of that burden.

[@SNixD]

"Other than the many limitations of such systems, they still don't provide for targeting. So the limitations of such radars are quite obvious. " It does however tell where to point a high powered flashlight and gives time to prepare a response. Even if a perfect target lock isn't achievable and depending on the circumstances the enemy might just throw some missiles in that general direction and take care of that target lock when they get close enough. "The Gripen uses less IR cameras than the F-35, so it has much lower resolution and performance." I don envy the F-35's 360 degree detection but the resolution being superior in for a given direction I can't comment on since the data isn't available for either system. "The F-35 can only be detected at loosely 20-30 km." I think the detection range even for IRST is going to be longer than that. "You're just ignoring too many of the F-35 advantages to even understand why it holds the upper edge." No, I'm properly admitting that the F-35 is superior in stealth, because that is the biggest advantage that it holds, but I also believe that for many scenarios stealth will be of limited use. It wont be stealthy from all angles or in all frequencies and it limits the amount of ordnance it can carry. When facing a modern opponent with access to multiple methods of detection spread out over a wide area it will be detected. It will be detected at a later stage than the Gripen on a similar mission but unless it's close enough to take out the opponent before being found out the advantage isn't going to be worth the extra cost except in some special cases, unless your budget is unlimited. "The F-35A is below 90M. You're also completely ignoring the whole logistics train. You can't just magically get 3 times more pilots, maintenance crew, logistics and so on just like that, let alone get everything in the air at the same time as easily. Keeping combat aircraft in the air is a huge burden, and the cost of the aircraft is only a portion of that burden." Isn't it rather you that is completely ignoring it? So the F-35 is "only" around 25-50% more expensive to buy and you might not be able to get enough pilots even if you have more planes. So what about those difficult logistics? The Gripen is designed around fast turnarounds with minimal crew (you know, like in this video) and being easy to service. The cost of keeping an F-35 in the air for an hour is almost nine times higher. Availability, maintainability and low flight costs are areas where the Gripen thoroughly kicks the F-35's ass, on top of being cheaper to buy. You will need a higher number of F-35s to keep the same number of birds in the air, even if you have the same number of pilots.

[@flashjazz7800]

The Gripen is perfect for RCAF.

[@Stormwern]

They should have scored it with total eclipse of the heart! :) "Turn around, sometimes I get a little bit lonely..."

[@vedranstambuk2248]

This is the top! Smart people made the best airplane!

[@bcherbs]

There I was , at my campsite roasting a hot dog, when you will never guess what rolled in the parking lot !

[@Nilguiri]

It's a beautiful aircraft.

[@klsar1]

Faster than putting together any of ikea’s products

[@klasandersson7522]

God´s own truth! ( And I am swedish...)

[@Escrieg89]

Good show. Bring back the old days.

[@aurelienrb]

Looks like a western jet (technology) made with a Russian mind set (pragmatism)

[@TheStifler1992]

I supose you are blind.

[@toby7504]

👍🏻👍🏻 Simpel and great

[@mrThoreKarlsson]

Orejust swedish thinking

[@kindanyume]

Thats not "russian" alone per se.. look at the seriously kickass F-5.. and think of the Gripen as a modern version

[@zoom5024]

The simplicity has always been the mindset in the Swedish military since the cold war, that includes the planes.

[@FerrariKangaroo]

Great aeroplane for defence. Australia should have bought these instead of the F35.

[@PMcKay00]

Australia is over 17 times larger than Sweden in area. Range matters. Having said that, I'm not sure the F-35 has a lot more range unless it carries drop tanks, which aren't stealthy.

[@TheHawk1202]

but murica gotta be murica

[@TheHawk1202]

@@PMcKay00 Forget stealthiness for the F35. Except for deep penetration missions it will always have external weapon or fuel tank.

[@kjelllindberg6987]

@@PMcKay00 First strike capability/stealth is only needed for offensive fighting. Is it within Australia's doctrine to have/use the first-strike capability?

[@protonjinx]

Try this with an F-35 or F-22. I'll go read a good book while I wait.

[@jari2018]

they relay on airbases never interrupted -Gripen is made for interrupted warfare

[@kindanyume]

More like the f35 will fail to take off in the first place and nee 8 months trouble shooting for starters and the F22 for all its killer capabilities for a2a will try to use its stealth to hide the days needed for its very slow TAT

[@aviksaha2746]

F22,f35 rely on chartered mission, USA has Pacific on left and Atlantic on right. Gripen is advertised for partol, intercept and engagement.

[@tntfreddan3138]

Have a few beers as well. Might even be sober when they're halfway done.

[@tntfreddan3138]

@@aviksaha2746 JAS=Jakt, Attack, Spaning meaning "Intercept, Attack, Reconnaissance".

[@davidhall4408]

We Americans need to take note of this working together.

[@petter5721]

I spoke to Norwegian pilots in 2015 and they all wanted the Gripen since it is more cost effective and fits better to Norways needs than the JSF.

[@TheHawk1202]

Rafale or super hornet may actually be good

[@petter5721]

@@TheHawk1202 They are 2,5 timmes more expensive than Gripen and their maintenance cost is very high.

[@TheHawk1202]

@@petter5721 Still the Gripen is no match and it has only one engine. I mean yeah the Gripen is a very good plane but it's a light aircraft compared to a SH or a Rafale. Gripen can only carry half of what these two planes can carry. When it comes to long range missions, which most likely to happen in a big country like Finland, it's not not the best. From what I heard lately about the HX challenge the F35 and the Gripen didn't make a good impression. Specially the F35, this one its almost sure it wont be chosen.

[@einar8019]

@@TheHawk1202 did you just cal finland a big country? its 400km from east to west where its the longest

[@TheHawk1202]

@@einar8019 yeah now go see how much km it is from north to south

[@Doan84]

I look really forward for the successor of the Gripen. I wonder how it will look. BTW. The Draken is one of the sexiest Jets ever built.

[@blackcat3383]

Gripen, Draken...and also the Viggen! I think this the right fighter for the small/medium Air Force.

[@petter5721]

Gripen E is the successor, a completely new aircraft, it looks similar thou.

[@Doan84]

@@petter5721 I wouldn't call the Gripen E a successor, as it is the same Jet, but updated.

[@Thellbro]

I think stealth is a given…but then?

[@zaheerkader7426]

Using senna and seeing this on 1 may brings a tear to my eye

[@markcedydabest5692]

Very nice info. Hope Philippine Air Force will finalize on dealing this highly versatile fighter jet

[@shiddy.]

very good ... these should be mass produced

[@jayebkhan1462]

Beautiful Engineering ♥

[@hkkhgffh3613]

With this concept even a Guerrilla warfare seems possible. Imagine if Charlie had this plane!

[@martinrivera4175]

In Iraq they planted antipersonnel mines even on paved roads.

Well the Swedish defense plan is basically guerilla !

[@chasrmartel4777]

An aircraft like this should form the low part of a modern high-low strategy as put forth by Admiral Zumwalt in the 70s.

[@rc-fannl7364]

Some clever design features in this aircraft.

[@paracelsus9510]

The gripen has single handedly forced the CIS to stop producing large fighters , they will get swarmed by gripens being loaded out of Mack trucks and launched from subversive road bases, flying under radar and using aesa to fire and forget well beyond disclosed ranges . Terrain and understanding designed this jet , and it may as well be called the white death , simo would be proud / it will stop any sukhoi or mig aggression in the Baltic .

[@laserbrain7774]

They can fight off the russians OR the americans.

[@efxnews4776]

@@laserbrain7774 did you ever heard the term "numeric superiority"? No fighter jet can won over this no matter how powerful it is. For every expansive jet in the sky, there will be at least 10 Gripens in the air, all the time. That's is the true power of Gripen.

[@djmistto]

Welcome to Brazil, mate!

[@rasmus554]

Is swedish not brazil

[@theflyinggasmask]

+Rasmus Persson hahaha XD

[@Dunken88]

+Rasmus Persson dum?

[@Leijona321]

Brazil is getting gripens, thats why he welcomed them to brazil. lol

[@gusjackalcrow7576]

Nice, with full of transfer of tech

[@caspermaster-com]

3:21 I thought the guy took a sip of beer haha

[@adam632]

.lol.

[@suvalkija]

Šaunuoliai švedai,sukūrė nuostabų lėktuvą!

[@mluiga]

We all now the importance of a quick pit stop!

[@vishaltripathi6247]

India should go for Gripen for MMRCA under make in India and not F16 or F18.

[@henrikcarlsen1881]

F16 v2 is still a formidable plane. So is the Hornet ... but they're rather old.

[@iatsd]

India should opt for the Raphael. Updated Gripen would be a good second choice.

[@yournemesis2454]

F18 Super Hornets and rafales are more capable than gripen hence mmrca will be given to either of the two..if it is only single engine than gripen would have been the best choice

[@fatdog2467]

racist cows verses racist pigs,, wow the world knows no greater love

[@dvrapant]

Yeah they probably should since those aircraft are already on the chopping block in the US but let's face facts. It really depends on who is flying them doesn't it?

[@endysagita31]

Swedish war art! It takes less than 10 minutes with only five ground crews, and one Supervisor?!? Holy God!!!!!

[@fredre7887]

and rest is conscripts (doing military service)

[@ahargrov1]

I was half expecting the pilot to jump out take a piss in the forest and then jump back in

[@moeKalong]

He could do that while the ground team does the turn around

[@lukewalker3905]

I was literally thinking that too!

[@efxnews4776]

If this advertising was made in Brasil, you will surely see this.

[@richardweber1436]

This is the plane for Canada.

[@dataduck811]

Definitely! It's an exciting piece of machinery.

[@ColdWarriorGamer]

no. terrible plane for canada. terrible range and payload

[@MikeWood]

Canadian Defence Review considered this an ideal aircraft. Beats the used Aussie F18s. www.canadiandefencereview.com/Featured_content?blog/110

[@sitoudien9816]

Unfortunately, canada buys into the america industrial complex. Gripen is relatively low cost per performance. Easier to maintain and turn around than american jets.

[@dmtribaltyphoon5001]

Agreed I hope we get the gripen and not another American equipment so that they can drain us dry

[@bobl78]

Should I ever get a Gripen it´s good to know I can refuel and rearm it on a small track in the forest.. no need to wait in the queue of a truck stop

[@gendoikari6062]

Lovely aircraft!... other "primadonna" planes require tonnes of attention and pampering to get them back on the ring quickly..

[@loekvanhijningen3757]

sweden is fantastic not just pleanes but the S tank is also a very original concept! CHAPEAU!!!!!!!!

[@jajasmile5321]

Unlike the F=16 this wings are at head level to the ground crews which makes it faster to turn .

[@jackcooper8063]

Good hardware saab

[@radziomar9377]

Wow.. much comfort watching a f1 race rather than muscle flexing going to war

[@มึงมันอ่อนควาย]

วิศวะเก่งจิงๆออกแบบทรงเครื่องบินได้ลงตัวและสวยมาก เครื่องยน เดียวแต่ให้กำลังแรงได้โหดสุดๆ กองทัพอากาศไทยตาถึงจิงๆที่เลือก กริฟเพน อนาคตข้างหน้าสั่งมาอีกอย่างน้อย 2ฝูงนะคับ

[@anderskedegard6799]

Exactly.

[@petter5721]

I bet you can repair this fighter with just one tool, an IKEA hex-key 👍🏻

[@marciocosta6770]

Jag är brasiliansk och stolt över det vackra flygplanet, gratulerar Saab och Embraer. kram till det svenska folket.

[@tobiaslundqvist.71]

Thank you! I understand that Brasil buys Swedish patrol-ships aswell for the navy! And maybe SAAB's "Global-eye" survailance aircraft also? 💙💛💚💙💛💚💙💛

[@Aviation18]

On delivery, does it come as a flat pack that I have to build myself?

[@deepurajak7927]

Nice job work

[@94Whiskey]

I hope the Philippines really picks the Gripen !!!!

[@martinrivera4175]

PAF deadline is before 2022. Military favor the F-16v. We'll find out in few months

[@94Whiskey]

@@martinrivera4175 ... yeah but F16 per/hr flight maintenance is $20,000 compared to Gripens $7,000... We'll see....

[@martinrivera4175]

@@94Whiskey the political members always wants cheaper. Walang tawad. it's going be the Gripens.

[@94Whiskey]

@@martinrivera4175 ... sana nga Gripen. Simple at hindi maarte....

[@jakefalk1836]

Would be nice to se a comparison of turning times and how much crew and equipment other planes need! Also if they can use roads as in the case of Gripen or if they need a functioning airfield.

[@denvvv187]

Шведы видимо до сих пор вспоминают неудачу под Полтавой, поэтому яростно готовятся к партизанской войне, чтобы самолеты взлетали с лесных дорог а танки можно было привезти в легковом прицепе прямо на передовую. Передайте им что Полтава вообще то находилась в России и это ОНИ пришли к нам а не мы к ним. Причем не один раз. А мы к ним никогда не приходили и не собираемся. :) А вот шведские музыкальные коллективы и главный танкист Дольф Лундгрен у нас очень популярны!

[@mitchjames9350]

The Swedes have the right idea with the Gripens design of it being flexible and focus on survival.

[@philglobalnomad]

Australia should have purchased these, even now they can to replace the ageing f18 hornets a lot better an cheap option plus saab is good

[@rzero21]

Makes me wonder what is the turn around time for other aircraft and how reliable the rest of the top military fighters are (like how many times they can perform sorties before getting grounded)

[@victorcapel2755]

Actually, the flight econmy of the Gripen is far superior to almost any other fighter out there. You'd get 4 times as much Airtime with a Gripen then a F35 for the same Money.

[@einar8019]

@@victorcapel2755 8x*

[@petter5721]

I read that a standard turnaround for a F35 takes about 2 hours from an airbase.

[@reynaldoraymundo4684]

i hope that the philippines will finally get this birds/beasts.

[@bramcurtis6900]

I actually think a combination of the Gripen N/G E and the F 35 would be ideal for Canada. Say 60 Gripens and 18 F 35's split evenly between the 2 main bases. The stealth aspect used in concert with the Gripen's lethal abilities would present both a credible and formidable home defence and a serious contribution in virtually any armed conflict in which we might be called.

[@radarmusen]

Denmark has going for F35. Still renember when we had Draken F35, the danish version was very universal and was used for many kind of operations.

[@fredre7887]

oh didnt know u had that one! (as swede) insane engine on that one - pure interceptor

[@prosperidadeemabundância-777]

Brasil e Amazônia agradecem, onde essa parceria com SAAB e EMBRAER, vai dar o que falar no mundo aéreo mundial...Agora teremos os melhores caças do mundo... Brazil and the Amazon are grateful, where this partnership with SAAB and EMBRAER, will give something to talk about in the air world ... Now we will have the best fighters in the world ...

[@balajikulasekaran6910]

Perfect for indian air force. Hope we buy it.

[@rai6472]

No doubt Gripen is an amazing bird but it's like a multi nation platform that's why Indian government has some concerns.

[@alexanderwingeskog758]

It was primarily developed from JA-37 Viggen ofc and the needs of Sweden air force. But as with IKEA furniture it seems to suit more countries. I don't know exactly what you where offered but as with the Brazilian offer we could share most of our technology and maybe the next Indian air force plane would be better cheaper and so on then our own... and we might buy yours... Yes Gripen is somewhat NATO and EU conformed because of our location and alliances. But there seem to be only 4 pacts these days... the NATO/EU, Warsaw pact (former Soviet now more or less russian), and some islamic (unofficial pacts, some with Russia) and the more or less neutral countries who just want a good aircraft to defend the borders and will do it so in the best way possible... India for me (as a Swede) seem to conform more to the NATO nowadays though. Most of your Soviet/Russian stuff is a bit old?

[@TARGE170]

Warsaw pact today? Dissolved in 1991, mate.

[@Rikard_Nilsson]

He obviously meant the old warsaw pact countries, not that the USSR and Warsaw pact was still a thing.

[@TARGE170]

"But there seem to be only 4 pacts these days..." Difficult to interpret otherwise. How did you manage that? Also: I didn't make any comment on the USSR, that's straw man.

[@Rikard_Nilsson]

Deliberately obtuse much?

[@manjunathyatnur8562]

No doubt Grippen is the the best fighter but the Airframe made in Brazil,British Radar, Italian IRST,French Avionics and American Engine it looks a problem for any country to procure spares quickly during war time. As a Fighter Grippen is the best single engine multi role available in the world now.

[@Zingos]

Only shitty export version airframe is made in brazil and only non critical components...... and only for brazil ur welcome... // sweden

[@TARGE170]

Just like Tejas Mk1

[@MrBadlemon]

Volvo makes the engine. I could go on and on...How many fighter plane does India make?? OH yes ZIRO

[@JohnDoe-qo4xd]

We made our own jet to avoid lack of parts in case of war. It has been like this since the end of WW2. The airframe etc are made by Embraer as a part of a licence deal when they bought it. The Swedish ones are not made in Brazil. Licencing/mutual technical exchanges are are one of the most common parts of any weapon deals these days.

[@JohnDoe-qo4xd]

eddie money ; Not really - if U.S dumps us, we got the complete factories to make the severe, external parts - It's how the story goes. And most parts/tech are made/invented by Sweden. Otherwise we would have had to do like Norway, Denmark etc and bought a complete jet with SOME parts manufactured in-country. We are neutral, so worst case, worst situation - we can fend for ourselves as long as we manage.

[@guskalo1981]

These Swedes understand modern war.

[@martingustafsson6330]

What is the turn around for f-35? I read somewhere 36h for f-35, but it sound unrealistic.

[@gusjackalcrow7576]

Simplified and easy handling...just need more at range attack, perhaps

[@johanmetreus1268]

Hence the 39E and 39F.

[@liveisnotbeautiful]

It is now our plane for Thailand

[@maralonent6257]

Excellent choice. I'm hoping Canada will also purchase them.

[@borjeborjesson4772]

yes in surat thani

[@golfpark94]

I still dont understand why, as a european country, the Netherlands made the choice to go for the JSF.

[@joaovitorsilvagohl682]

not realy

[@beaggyboy]

I must say this Gripen truly has a robust canopy, when evn the Rafale is compared .While tho sufficient, it but looked somewhat flimsy in the French fighter's case. Don't mind my saying in all frankness.

[@hitsurapapel1978]

It's only a matter of time until walmart starts selling these

[@terabyter7976]

Now Brazil have this lil cute guy

[@exidy-yt]

The Gripen is a fantastic multirole combat aircraft, and it's a serious shame that more countries aren't employing it, especially the fellow Nordic countries. Reading below what some of the Norwegians have to say, now it makes sense. Their governments bowed to American interests the same way Canada did when PM Diefenbaker cancelled the Avro Arrow and killed Canada's aerospace industry in one sweep of his pen, for a deal to buy a bunch of 2nd-hand F-104 Starfighters, one of the shittiest mach 2 planes ever built and TERRIBLE for Canada's territorial needs with an awful combat range to cover the 2nd largest country in the world, and a bunch of by-then already obsolete Bowmarc missile defense batteries that even the American govt. wouldn't buy and use. Thankfully the new Tredeau government cancelled the order for F-35s for replacing our F/A-18s, and hopefully they decide to go with the JAS 39 E/F Super Gripen instead!

[@kurtsoderberg]

They are all NATO, Nato countries cant by Swedish AIR hardwere but the serntaly do bye electrincs and self heald rockets.

[@einar8019]

@@kurtsoderberg the gripen is fully compatible with all nato systems

[@lil__boi3027]

@@einar8019 if it truly was, it would be able to use American electronics and radars since they are most common But it can't iirc

[@einar8019]

@@lil__boi3027 why would it use a worse american radar that costs more and it is compatible with nato coms and weaponry

[@lil__boi3027]

@@einar8019 radars for the f-16 and other common American fighters are not only made by the US, there are multiple companies in Israel and other places who make upgrade packages for American fighters, since they are pretty common Also that means that air forces that use American planes (there are alot of them) can install hardwere that was made for American planes that they Already Have for the fighter, as well as munitions that were made for American planes (again, alot use those) So essentially air forces that use American planes can buy the fighter and operate and upgrade it ez, so you have a huge potential for a shitton of users

[@oldbaldfatman2766]

March 19, 2019----Shit, wish the U.S. Air Force and Marine aircraft did the same. Just too heavily dependent on fixed bases. Thanks for the video.

[@christerjohanzzon]

Our aircrafts have always been able to land on countryside roads for quick maintenance and turnaround. Fixed bases are good, but not necessary.

[@bobcobbob3641]

Can you imagine Konigsegg “Ghost” special editions.

[@Ornithoptera]

Bob cob Bob The predecessor of the Gripen, the Viggen, had the koenigsegg ghost painted on one of the last Viggens that ever flew.

[@daniel1982641]

New Zealand should buy these jets.

[@carloscarcamo3743]

Para la geografia del sur de chile seria ideal Gripen sur F16 norte Es la combinacion perfecta

[@LordGryllwotth]

I remember summer trips going to sweden and seeing these airstrips. Many square pads on the side of the road. How quick can you do this with a F35?

The F35 has not been designed for short turnover times (as the US have different operational needs than Sweden). Keeping it "stealthy" requires a lot of maintenance !

[@smokeypillow]

"advanced simplicity"

[@petter5721]

SmokeyPillow SAAB now how do build advanced simplicity 👍🏻

[@adamsaeed8710]

Swedish Drive in service!

[@martinrivera6910]

What kind do you have in Sweden. We have to put chains on our tires and drive10miles an hours in Lake Tahoe freeway every year?

[@SpaceAudio]

Canada should buy these instead of the overhyped overrated overly expensive F-35. You can place a Gripen under a tree and have its basic maintenace there. As for the F-35 because it's so delicate to maintain you'll need a beauty parlor. 😂

[@stockholm3976]

Saab + Embraer = best companies

[@dabaladelivery]

Os Gripen-E do Brasil ficaram ágeis e letais com tecnologia smart e boa autonomia de voo

[@paulwitham2220]

That's exactly what l told Justin.

[@josipcro]

Only thing i can say i lov it😊

[@DreamskyDance]

I really hope my country ( Croatia ) will buy gripens instead of some old f16...

[@muzijuniourhlela91muzivusi84]

Always combat ready the gripen

[@SgfGustafsson]

I’m sure people knew this, but all of that was done on the side of a Swedish highway.

[@zettle2345]

I hope they use some good IR screens. That jet is a huge hot spot, sitting next to that fuel truck. Great plane, but my concerns are for why you would need to land on a road. If your airports are not safe...

[@ZarkowsWorld]

It is infact thousands upon thousands of 1 km road-strips ear-marked for landing and take-off.

[@trevor5290]

why you would need to land on a road. If your airports are not safe... You answered your own question didn't you.

[@gustavostensson1048]

The idea originally comes from the 6-day war, where israel took out all of the Egyptian air-force in a couple of ours. The airplanes were still intact, but the runways weren't so they could not get them up in the air, that is the main reason why.

[@Homoprimatesapiens]

This aircraft is very well designed and built. Obviously the ground crew have to be as professional as the pilot itself. But pls ground crew give the pilot a change to empty its bladder and bowls. Give a chap a chance !

[@wangtuoda188]

真是一架漂亮的飞机

[@billhughes869]

Very smart!