The right fighter for Ukraine isn't the F-16, it's the GRIPEN

[@xodiaq]

Really valid points, unfortunately the availability issue is a monolithic one. I do think F-16s would be of value, but in complement to Gripens they’d be super effective. Gripens we’re designed for THIS fight, but the F-16 first entered service in ‘79. That’s a Cold War era fighter, too. I’m not a huge fan of F-16 but it is an exceptionally capable aircraft that can do things the Gripen can’t, adding ability and flexibility. It shouldn’t be an either/or question, but maybe how much of both?

Want to tell of what the F-16, I guess more so not block 70, can do that Gripen C can't?

[@richardthomas598]

​@ Shoot Meteor. Take off from any decent highway. Not get wrecked by common debris on that runway. Do intermediate maintenance with a small team in a forest. Shall I go on?

@@richardthomas598 The other way around though. As per his claim.

[@Rimasta1]

One big problem with the F-16 in Ukraine is the big air intake. Ex-Soviet airfields are known to get very cold in the winter and then in the warmer weather they expand and break apart. It’s one reason why when we see Russian airfields they kinda look like shit and why many Russian designed fighters have rough field capability. A lot of work would need to be done to support the F-16 and that’s brings me to the next big issue. The F-16 needs an airbase, not a highway. So that means the Russians will be targeting them. Best way to kill a fighter is on the ground.

[@guyb7995]

@ Gripen can shoot Meteor (F16 can't), F16 can shoot HARM (Grippen can't). Typhoon can do both.

[@MH-ft9pq]

The Eurofighter sneeking in at the end

[@Funniblockman]

Eurofighter: Ay lemme sneak right on in rq. *Sneeki sneeki*

[@kikotv9333]

Yeah got that right 😂

[@WasabiSniffer]

Lol pretty good photo-GBU28 ;)

[@quasimotto8653]

The Eurofighter is a great fighter, but it runs into the same "availability" issue that you get with the Gripen. By comparison, there are almost 10 times as many F-16s in existence. Plus, in most versions, the Eurofighter is more than twice as expensive to procure and almost 3 times more expensive to maintain. For Ukraine.......the F-16 is far more available and much more practical.

[@johnassal5838]

​​@@quasimotto8653 Sweden already joining NATO opens a 3rd option: Transfer F16s to Sweden to cover them transferring Grippins to Ukraine. Numbers are still limited to perhaps a handful more than Sweden has at the moment but it's still 100 Gen 4.5 fighters they can easily deploy "now" from anywhere instead of waiting for multiple airfields to be upgraded all while telegraphing to the Russians which ones they want to hit while they still have relative superiority. Also there's no reason hundreds of F16s couldn't follow on as the Grippins secure the airspace providing the time needed to ugrade facilities, logistics and train support crews.

[@samuelanders7597]

The grippen is definitely a beast. Just watched a video about some new computer upgrades pushing it firmly into the gen 4.5 territory. A world class fighter

[@operator0]

There are, effectively, two completely different version of the Gripen. The "legacy" Gripen which is the aforementioned C/D version, and the new E/F version. These planes are so different from each other that you could us the F/A-18 Hornet and F/A-18 Super Hornet as a reference. The E/F version has a new engine, new landing gear, which includes new landing gear geometry and new avionics. That new geometry allows the new Gripen to have larger internal fuel tanks. The new engine allows the new Gripen to have super cruise ability. Most of all though is that the new avionics suite is second to none. In fact that avionics suite is at least as good as the Rafale and the F-35, and better than planes like the F-22 and F-15EX. The E/F Gripen is a gen 4.5 plane, and would be a challenge for most everything the Russians would want to throw at it, like the SU-27 and MIG-31.

[@tHEHEAd1138]

​@@operator0 Also, comes with that new fighter jet smell! 🤓

[@peterfdsvenskaflygvapnet2643]

​@@operator0 Don't forget that the Gripen E has more hardpoints then the C has too. And sounds a lot more then the C. I should know as I live less then 3 km's from where they are manufactured at SAAB here in Sweden. 😊

[@AbcdEfgh-sq2tf]

​@@peterfdsvenskaflygvapnet2643still no where near the capability of the Rafale or F-16. The countries Sweden are willing to sell to will spend more money to buy more capable jets, while the countries that would have bought the Gripen are on unfriendly terms with Western countries in general.

[@peterfdsvenskaflygvapnet2643]

@@AbcdEfgh-sq2tf And what countries are that?? Czech republic? Brazil?? And have you ever seen the results of the tests between those aircrafts?? You dont have a single right in your comment.

[@daleswindells9351]

As a British man who knows a lot about fighters and who isn't biased, happily I will admit this is the best jet in the world. Glad they're on our side ❤

[@AnhTrieu90]

Problem is, the Swedes can’t make them fast enough.

[@IkesThePyro]

Nor can they afford to give them away.

[@nonplayablecarecter1712]

@@IkesThePyroI mean NATO could split the bill, and maybe sell them components.

[@peterfdsvenskaflygvapnet2643]

@@nonplayablecarecter1712 That won't happen either. A modern fighter costs a small fortune, and a small country like say Sweden can't afford to give such money away. Besides the cost there is no chance that SAAB can produce a large number of the C-version. Since the C is no longer in production, it is the new E-version that is produced today. And that's a totally new aircraft. Both larger, better and costs way more then the C. So no Gripen C for Ukraine unless a country like South Africa are allowed to sell their Gripens to Ukraine.

[@marcofava]

I mean the publicity alone could shoot the Gripen into Rafale sales territory, also it is widely known the US and France very often hampered SAAB's and Sweden's efforts with other governments because obviously they are the bigger countries with more diplomatic clout. The thing that has filled the Gripen is what was about to sink the Rafale, economy of scale, which is also why SAAB is always keen to point out that for Gripen they are always open to a full technological transfer and also are willing to set up manufacturing in the country that buys it, because they do not have the infrastructure to build many of them, and due to the low sales, it does not make sense to expand the existing infrastructure.

[@peterfdsvenskaflygvapnet2643]

@Jez And what is your source for the info about the Viggens and Gripen A's? Because there is no chance that there is about 50 Viggen's that can be ready to fly in 24 hours. There are around 70 aircrafts, or rather parts of aircrafts around. And only 2 are flying. The rest are conservated in museums, used to train firefighting on, mounted on piedestals as showcasings. And the majority of the around 70 aircraft are only parts of the fuselages. And when it comes to Gripen A, as far as I know a whole bunch of the old A version was upgraded to the C versions eletronics suite. And bought or leased by a few other countries. Besides it would be fun to know where they are placed, since non of todays flotillas in Sweden has any mountain hangars to hide them in.

[@PlugInRides]

Legacy Hornets are also a good option, since their landing gear allows highway use, and they are available.

[@oveidasinclair982]

Salt air environment on those legacy jets, they're only good for limited parts now.

[@PlugInRides]

@@oveidasinclair982 Finland, Canada, Australia. Not all Legacy Hornets were flown off US carriers.

[@dvlrnr]

​​@@PlugInRides Finland still needs theirs until 2030.

[@bradevans7935]

@@PlugInRides Australia has about 45 A and B models that were retired in 2021. They were supposed to have been sold, but it appears that the sale has fallen through. At least one local journalist has already called for them to be transferred to Ukraine.

[@bendedstraw4294]

What about A-10 ?

[@ttrestle]

4,600 F-16s!! That’s such an amazing number.

[@Rockhunter329]

Quantity has a quality all it's own. Ironicaly, said by some Russian.

[@bradevans7935]

@@Rockhunter329 Stalin was Georgian.

[@OrIoN1989]

@@bradevans7935 Ironic like always.

[@pharaongaming8617]

​@@bradevans7935 Yes but Stalin didn't say that, actually it was said by a British General from WW1

[@themc.kennyshow6585]

YESSS! FINALLY! SOMEONE IS TALKING ABOUT THE GRIPEN!! Too underrated.

[@richardthomas598]

Perun lavished lots of love on it too.

[@themc.kennyshow6585]

@@richardthomas598 I really hope that more channels like: The infographics show, Covert Cabal, Not what you think and others pick it up

[@theamericancommie727]

I feel like it’s both, not enough countries gander at it but the people who like it overhype the damn thing. Avionics this avionics that, yeah well what good is that when just about every single other NATO jet and their dog has good avionics, and better performance, it’s thrust to weight is garbage and so is it’s climb rate. It’s good at what it’s meant to do but against NATO Jets it falls short.

[@shoktan]

There’s also the F/A-18 C hornets the RAAF retired and put into storage recently. Some were supposed to go to private contractors and the Canadian Air Force, but there are still ~50 left. The Warzone put out an article about this a week ago and I think the F/A-18 is at least worth considering.

[@johnmoser1162]

Sure and you are going to enlist in the Ukrainian army to to do maintenance ?! Hmm ... use the brain cells first.

[@shoktan]

@@johnmoser1162 The same argument applies to supplying literally any western fighter. Second, where did I say that this would be easy? It’s been clear since last year that sending western jets would be difficult. If you were paying attention, the discussion is about which western fighter would best suit the needs of the Ukrainian Air Force AND is also available in meaningful numbers, not about how well you understand the obvious. Use the brain cells first.

[@johnmoser1162]

@@shoktan Again - the issue is not the hardware. Ppl think you send a tank or a fighter and all is done. This high tech crap needs nonstop maintenance. So ask yourself - who should do that ? The AFU - forget it, you need professionals. So that means NATO / Australian boots on the ground - not going to happen. Jets flying outside UA for maintence ? You waste the mileage ... So a lot of brainless ppl talking a lot of crap ...

[@richkingb01]

​@@johnmoser1162 actually i think you'll find it's the ukrainian air force that would maintain them. Not the army. Hmm... use the brain cells first.

[@johnmoser1162]

@@richkingb01 hmm ... big difference ?

[@Two-Checks]

"Grippen deez-" "Get the f**k out of my house."

[@drewski5730]

The F18 would be a great airplane for Ukraine. Idk why no one is talking about that. Plenty are available used and could be refurbished. It’s built specifically for austere strips with little to no support, and operates just fine in the Arctic. The F18 has extensive upgrade availability as well.

[@JustinStLouis-xz7ut]

MiG-31s are on the prowl! That's why!

[@elektrotehnik94]

All F18s seem to be either badly needed to their non-USA countries, or have so much flying hours that it would be a maintenance-hungry stop-gap measure. At least that is what people in the know say, like Justin Bronks. All in all, I believe F16 is doable & in the works, details being arranged in secret - as they should be 🏆❤️

[@drewski5730]

@@elektrotehnik94 I’m not buying what the analysts are saying then. Nothing wrong with an F18 at the end of its service life, and I disagree with the point that the countries that do have them, need them. I don’t think Canada needs it’s F18’s for anything, neither does Australia. I’m sure the Navy has plenty in storage.

[@peterfdsvenskaflygvapnet2643]

Finland are discussing to send some of their F18's to Ukraine. But I don't think it will be done since they has to be replaced with the new F35's they have ordered. And I think the first F35's will be delivered in 2025.

[@kk-gr3ly]

​@@peterfdsvenskaflygvapnet2643 We're definitely not discussing anything, our "beloved" PM made it up by herself and blurred it out to Zelenskyi. The official stance is that we cannot afford to send them.

[@Aquascape_Dreaming]

Plus the Gripen is cheaper. You only need to worry about the Gripen in high humidity environments, but that's probably true of any aircraft, and it's also a long term concern, not short term.

[@exidy-yt]

Could not agree more. The Gripen-E is a 4.5gen MONSTER of an air superiority fighter with long range, low maintainance and ability to fly from small airbases, but the lack of manufacturing ruins it. Canada completely screwed up in rejecting the Gripen-E (with manufacturing rights!!!) in favour of the F-35 when it's a short-legged finicky beast that cannot even fly from Canada's northern bases, whereas the Gripen-E has double the range, and all the advantages of the most modern fighters excepting stealth, while still being low-observability. Lack of manufacturing facilites ruins the Gripen's ability to be made and it would have been of huge assistance to Ukraine.

[@einar8019]

ukraine would never get the new gripen E but would get older gripen C

[@exidy-yt]

@@einar8019 Even this would still be an enormous assed for Ukraine, a match for anything but the Su-35 and even then it can hold it's own.

[@MrRjizz]

@@exidy-yt they wont be getting any look at the production numbers. saab is already no full production for brazil and cant make any new ones for ukraine and no operator would donate theirs to them

[@exidy-yt]

@@MrRjizz That's what I mean about the lack of manufacturing rights. Saab simply can't make enough of them by itself to meet demand, which is why the deal with Canada would have been so good for both the nation AND Saab allowing Canada's once world-class aerospace industry to be reborn and taking the pressure off of Saab to supply the planes themselves. They could have then precedent to second-source production to someone else to make Gripens for Ukraine since Brazil is taking up all their current capacity.

[@remulsive9558]

Who the hell told you all this. The gripen E isn’t even in service, also the F-35 is 100x more capable. It’s not even a Comparison. Canada rejected it for that simply reason. F-35 gets you 870 miles in air to air with internal fuel, gripen will never come close without external fuel tanks

[@toddbrackett4277]

Great opportunity for Sweden to upgrade its fleet to the JAS-39-E/F. If the Sweds commit to training and equipping the Ukrainian Air Force then the rest of the Scandinavians/EU Members could fill their defense gap until the new E/Fs are ready. 90 JAS-39 could replace the aircraft lost to date with much greater capabilities.

[@saberline152]

sadly we didn't buy them because they can't carry the nukes stored here.

[@GrundleLongDong]

It’d definitely have to be later down the line, diversity is the enemy as of right now. Ukraine can’t spare many pilots for training at once so it’s better to have them all training on one aircraft, and the best one for that is the f16 thanks to numerical superiority and general experience

[@toddbrackett4277]

@@GrundleLongDong, I agree with you on having a single type and I love the Viper but the JAS-39 has the numbers that Ukraine needs to replace its lost aircraft and I think that it is best suited to the job. The Czech and Swedish C/Ds are being replaced with F-35A & JAS-39 E/Fs. The Hornet or Super Hornet would be my second choice. Australia has a fleet of mothballed F/A-18Cs and more will soon be available from Finland & Spain. Some of the USN Super Hornet Block II could be replaced with new build Block IIIs (Boeing has the capacity). Hornet/Super Hornets are better suited to rough & short take off/landings than the Vipers and they can perform the same missions.

[@GrundleLongDong]

@@toddbrackett4277 I’d have to disagree Sweden only has 96 gripen C/D vs the over 1000 American f16s (not including the many other countries with spare f16s), spending the valuable time training on a jet with only 1/10th the availability for a relatively small performance difference just isn’t worth it at this point in the war. It’s also important to mention whatever jet it may be will serve as an introduction to the Ukrainians of western aeronautical technology, which differs significantly from the soviet style of tech. This places the f16 ahead not just for the ease of use (the gripen is great but very specialised towards bvr combat meaning more experience is required to get the best out of that jet, one the other hand the f16 is more well rounded. It’s good at bvr but also can hold it’s own in a dogfight meaning it’s much more forgiving for a new user). Thanks to the f16s widespread use there is also much more available training thanks to the many more people already familiar with the jet. I do agree that eventually it’d be beneficial to see more verity however for now the f16 is definitely the best option

[@einar8019]

@@GrundleLongDong the gripen is just as good at wvr as the f16 also the gripen is alot easier to maintain and uses less fuel, the only problem is availabilty as you stated

[@Rose_Butterfly98]

The Swedish would be very happy to sell them some lol. Saabs really hoping someone will order one. The Gripen actually outperforms the f 16 in some categories. It's more fuel efficient and it can supercruise, making it even more fuel efficient than the f16, it can pull higher Gs and those meteors make it better for bvr.

[@StrikeNoir105E]

I mean the Gripen was designed a good couple of decades or so after the F-16, you would think that it would be superior in certain aspects.

[@Rose_Butterfly98]

@@StrikeNoir105E I don't think the time it was developed affects it that much when the original f16s and the ones today are so different. But there are definitely some ways the Gripen is better, instantaneous turn rate, is one, almost all 4th gen fighters beat the f16 in that. It can also use the meteor missiles which are currently either the most dangerous active radar homing missiles or at least second place and Ukraine needs those if it's gonna fight against r37 capable aircraft since that's the other most dangerous missile.

[@triadwarfare]

The gripen is great, but it has one major weakness: it doesn't have a lot of operators that are willing to retire the aircraft and send it over to Ukraine. The F16 meanwhile has plenty of operators, and the ones Ukraine will be getting are the ones being retired for service anyway.

[@noth606]

F-18 hornet would be a good plane for them I think, short takeoff/landing, sturdier than F-16 afaik, good targeting pod and weapons compatibilty.

[@hankhaney3785]

...get a "Grip" !!

[@amorosogombe9650]

Okay. But what is the proliferation of Gripen? Exactly. You just nailed it. Availability.

[@LBCB94025]

and those canards make it super maneuverable in a dogfight!! not to mention the aerodynamic advantages and increased amount of lift from a delta wing configuration**!! 🧐🤔😁👍🏻🖤👏🏻

[@chm985]

Yep the Gripen would be perfect but there are none to give unfortunately.

[@InterstellarTaco]

The Gripen is a cool plane but there's not many of them and it's unlikely SAAB has the capability to ramp up production unlike General Dynamics and their near endless production capacity.

[@emanueljohansson5236]

To say that the gripen has lower performance than the f16 is crazy

[@itsmederek1]

F-/A18: Am I a joke to you?

[@Rimasta1]

The Hornet would be a good option for many reasons but the problem is, no one is going to want to part with their newer airframes and the older ones have been used pretty hard and are nearing the end of their lives.

[@nemelendez]

Gonna use the F/A 18 for the Mig 31and others😁

[@nemelendez]

Equip them with laser search and then block all RF😁

[@burddog0792]

@@Rimasta1 There are a bunch around the world that have never seen carrier service. Australia apparently has a bunch which haven't seen a hard life.

[@guyb7995]

@@burddog0792 Yep, near on 50 of them I heard recently.

[@hakanliljeberg790]

Let´s call Gripen Iryna´s or Ingegerd´s hammer..

[@tsangarisjohn]

It definelty would be long term. Sweden needs to make more and get this going. I’m the mean time F-16s are available from many countries, including parts. But I’m sure the people in charge know what needs to be done. Logistics is everything. From training crews to the smallest nut and bolt.

[@niclink1030]

Im pretty sure sweden only makes e/f varient wich i doubt they whould seend

[@imyourdad2458]

I could listen to Alex Hollings for straight 4-5 hrs even if he's supposedly (doesn't mean he is)BSing all his way around.😂 Thank you Alex for keeping us informed and entertained every day.

[@MarcoSoprani]

Love the Gripen, such a smart little fighter! Being deployed in Ukraine would also benefit its reputation and visibility, let's see.

[@gigaflynn_]

Unfortunately there aren't that many Gripens in the world, but there's approximately all of the F-16s.

[@Rousseau4469]

Also Indian Rafales have been spotted to bear 4 Meteor missiles on their underbody structure. Which is an impressive number surpassed only by F-15's that carry more Abraaham which is an inferior air to air missile.

[@fabriglas]

Right but all pilots will need to be trained and the support too

[@guyb7995]

which is why it should have stated 6 months ago, but back then the excuse was "but all pilots will need to be trained and the support too"

[@heathert.4727]

Europe’s aircraft are really slept on and that needs to change.

[@JoseRodriguez-eu5ez]

Australia isn't using their F/A-18 fleet. Canada is just sitting on their stuff. They could likely strike a deal with the US to exchange for F-35. Not only will it give the US good combat data on the capabilities of the F/A-18 against modern equipment, but it helps us all improve our ties, industry, and arsenals. It's (mostly) a win-win.

Australia may need them vs China. But yeah. Much of the equipment was made to fight Russia and now whatever countries citizens don't have to do that.

[@aaroncasey3591]

Great choice if it was more sustainable. I'd argue the f18 is a better choice due to far more availability in parts and logistics. The sweeds rated it second after the f35 in there trail phase for purchase.

[@peterfdsvenskaflygvapnet2643]

Sweeds?? I hope you ment the finns? Since Sweden has never been thinking of buying either the F-18 or the F-35. Besides in Finland it stood between the F-35 and Gripen E to replace the aging fleet of F-18's that Finland operates today.

[@cccalifornia7206]

I agree with you about this aircraft for UKRAINE!!!👍😉🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🤝🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 SLAVA UKRAINE 👊

[@Mark_317]

The Saab requires 10 hours of maintenance for 1 hour of flight time, the viper requires 17 hours per 1 hour of flight time.

[@kk-gr3ly]

Is there a more in depth report on the Gripen from Saab about that?

[@SW-ii5gg]

​@@kk-gr3ly there is probably a Saab story somewhere online.

[@edselreynoso3438]

​@UCDTWZ_ptMsZ2TRFNDbh6xJA It's true. I worked the F-16 many years. While I can't compare it to the Gripen, the Viper is a little more maintenance heavy. There are more inspections to perform than the Gripen. It's not just what breaks that keeps you grounded. Plus, that giant intake isn't compatible to Russian airfields, much less in a hot war zone. I've been deployed to Kyrgyzstan, and seen it first hand - their airfields are absolutely horrible! And don't get me started about the hydrazine -70 tank. Thats pure cancer in a bottle! It's rocket fuel used for the EPU. Besides, the American government has stolen so much from the people already. Stripped its military essential weapons needed for readiness with no plans to replace these systems. At the rate we're giving away weapons, we'll have to deploy the Civil Air Patrol to intercept Russian TU-160's and their Flanker escorts!

[@GalironRunner]

@@edselreynoso3438 no just no while im not a fan of all teh cash we are sending ukraine i honestly thing the eu should be doing a hell of a lot more the fact is the us has a sizable fleet of 35s in operation the navy still has tons of 18s and the usaf still has its fleet of 22s with the next gen replacement in the works.

[@edselreynoso3438]

@@GalironRunner Once again, the US has done more than its fair share even in proportion to its population. So, I agree that the EU should do more. What difference does it make how many airframes we have in storage or on the flight line? I'm of the opinion the US should not give another bullet or dollar for another mercenary's salary without a formal invoice for Ukraine to sign. This has been thrust upon us through corrupt and evil government leaders that are profiting from the suffering of innocent people. If the US and UK had kept out of peace talks or if we or NATO had quickly promised not to induct Ukraine the world would only be talking about war from a state of peace and skepticism.

[@lunabranwen]

How about both ? Add a dozen L-159 for kicks

[@DJDarkrobe]

Totally agree with this one, maybe the politicians will finally help out Ukraine with fighters.

[@BlyGuy]

Ukraine made their bed, now they can sleep in it. They've already gotten 100's of billions of my people's tax dollars to do f*CK all with, they can fight this skirmish on their own. Also, Ukraine is about as corrupt a country as it gets, even more so than the US. Zelensky is also a tyrant to a far greater level than Putin. I pray for the Ukrainian people caught up in this geopolitical mess, but the west/NATO should stay the f out of it.

[@WALTERBROADDUS]

Ukraine has gotten over 100 billion dollars in aid from the United States alone. I would say that's more than enough help thank you.

[@BlyGuy]

@@WALTERBROADDUS wayyyyyyyy way way wayyyyy more than enough, considering they shouldn't have gotten a dime of our tax dollars at a time we are dealing with historically bad inflation

[@WALTERBROADDUS]

@@BlyGuy 🙋🏽‍♂️preach, preach....

[@BlyGuy]

@@WALTERBROADDUS still not a dollar in federal aide for the many victims of the Palestine Ohio "controlled burn".

[@bobgreene2892]

Good analysis. How would Ukraine acquire the Gryppren C?

[@Ario.of.Persia]

You talk about Gripen but I’m watching that mighty Tomcat behind you!😁

[@GrumpySoth]

Good call - Sweeden just committed to provide training and fighters today

[@BringTheRains]

Can we get like a 10 minute video of this please?

[@Gregorius421]

Watch "Which NATO Fighter is Best for Ukraine?" from 24:29 with Justin Bronk, these are exactly his arguments. 45:16 for the Meteor missile.

[@elektrotehnik94]

@@Gregorius421 Can confirm, it’s the best video out there, by far. Better than Perun, and that’s saying something ^^ 🏆❤️

[@surfinoperator]

In my opinion, the swedish Grippen or french Mirage would be two amazing multirole fighter jets for Ukraine....

[@taylorc2542]

It's not his opinion that Meteor is the best, it's a fact that it's the best.

[@darugdawg2453]

Wheres the data?

[@drksideofthewal]

Not anymore

[@CompleteAnimation]

This is almost word for word what Perun had to say in his video a few weeks ago. It sounds dangerously close to plagiarism.

[@ivanthemadvandal8435]

Many people have been saying the same thing for close to a year. It's just got more attention lately because Ukraine has been pushing hard to get fighters recently, Perun's conclusions on this are far from unique.

[@Llyrin]

If the Russians who made DCS modeled the SAAB Gripen accurately, then it will give any non-stealth fighter a bad day.

[@Sabre613]

Rafale better

[@niclink1030]

​@@Sabre613 maby and if it is not to big of a difrence

[@thegotlandisfarmer8774]

Last time I check the Gripen was the best non stealth aircraft of the modern era. Also the gripen looks better then the Rafael but that my opinion

[@jik294]

The Grippen E model is pretty much on par with current F-16's as far as technology systems goes, plus it also adds in an IRIS system much like the MIG-29 and SU-27's. Sweden has also said they are very much for providing Grippens to Ukraine, but the soonest they'd be able deliver any is several years down the road as they're just now in the process of building and delivering E models to Sweden and they have contractual obligations to fulfill there current contracts before they can look into anything else.

[@jdogdarkness]

Availability torpedoes that. Meanwhile F-16s are relatively old and we're getting rid of them(so fears of Russian capture are stupid) and there are no shortage of them worldwide.

[@thall7368]

Completely agree. It has the obvious choice just looking over the technical specs.

[@Wonderwhoopin]

This guy is killing me with his facts ! Damn his wisdom of genius

[@mowgli2071]

As much as I support it happening, if you think they're getting the top shelf fighters for free you've got another think coming. The nice thing about Ukraine getting the F-16 is that you've got a vast crowd of geezers from all over the world that will be able to advise both the pilots and ground crew. America, Belgium, Denmark, Greece, Israel, The Netherlands, Poland, Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan all have F-16s. _And they all talk to each other._ Which means they're continuously able to refine their own experience. These countries have former pilots and ground crew able to come back and add ideas and experience. And they can do the same for Ukraine.

[@Horseshoecrabwarrior]

Y'know what they say: Quantity is a quality of its own.

[@AndyWoohoo666]

Only if you know how to use quantity, in the end quality always prevail none quality. So far Russia has proven how inept they are with quantity.

[@Horseshoecrabwarrior]

@Andy Woohoo Well, Russia had a good quantity of military hardware, but their quantity of competent leaders and soldiers was rather lacking. Quantity has a quality of its own, but nobody will believe a pound of gold is worth less than a ton of trash.

[@AndyWoohoo666]

@@Horseshoecrabwarrior Yeah, no matter how much quantity you got if soldiers and officers are trash. Quality with quality soldiers/ officers always ( within reason of course ) beat trash. “Quality is more important than quantity. One home run is much better than two doubles.”

[@Horseshoecrabwarrior]

@Andy Woohoo Yup, there's a reason the saying is "quantity is a quality of its own" and not "quantity beats quality."

[@00chla50]

Stalin. Stalin was the one who said that.

[@oveidasinclair982]

Problem with the Gripen is that there are not that many of them on the open market and not many nations who fly them, or could part with them in any numbers that would be useful for Ukraine.

[@Tb64]

You fight with what you have, not what you want. Sherman tank wasn't the greatest tank but it really did help.

[@ivanthemadvandal8435]

Sherman's were far better than they typically get credit for

[@tarmaque]

The genius of the Sherman was volume. I recall reading a quote from one German tank commander (paraphrased) "Every time we destroy ten Shermans to the loss of one Tiger it's a net win for the Americas!" While the Americans didn't "win" the war in Europe in WWII, our resources and industrial might absolutely did. Even Russia sending a generation of its young men to die in opposition to the Germans couldn't have done so without US industry supporting them.

[@Wes147]

I also imagine the production rate suffers compared to the F-16 because of all of this

[@GrundleLongDong]

I’d argue the production rate benefits thanks to increased funding, can’t help the lack of facilities though that’s a deeper issue

[@ShortyTW867]

What's the saying, "beggars can't be choosers." not enough Gripen in the mix to send. But you are correct. Gripen would probably be best for Ukraine.

[@NZobservatory]

The Russians are worried that Ukraine will finally get modern fighters and then the world will discover just how crappy Russia's air force really is.

[@iblueberry.3057]

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 Ох, смешная шутка! ВВС России дерьмо... Ох, я так со времён фейерверка в Мариуполе не смеялся. 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 Чувак, иди работай комиком! У тебя это отлично выходит! Я не могу перестать смеяться! 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@NZobservatory]

@@iblueberry.3057 I don't speak Klingon, Olga. Or Orc. Hey, how's the *MOSKVA* doing? It was sunk by a country with no navy. Imagine what that country will do to Russia's joke of an air farce! 😆😅🤣😂

[@Oresei]

​@@iblueberry.3057 Над кем ты будешь смеяться, когда Москву возьмут? 🤣🤣🤣

[@nestor1208]

@@iblueberry.3057 чел даже не знает как их воздушные войска называются, но что-то тут рассказывает про фейерверки :) Не о том ли фейерверке вы говорите, последствия которого сейчас видно на гугл картах по координатам 47.0961694,37.5486731 ? За этот фейерверк вы до конца жизни платить будете, так и не расплатитесь. Кровью, в том числе.

[@benjaminfranklintheog6001]

@@iblueberry.3057 live while you can orc soon you will be in a coffin

[@lexsatre567]

Or f18a-c Australia Spain Finland Canada all have them including stockpiles and they're gear is suited for impact

[@drewski5730]

Finally someone has made the connection. This is the perfect airplane, and hundreds are available used. Parts and engines are plentiful, and the F18 was meant to operate in the harshest conditions on the planet.

[@matthewhuszarik4173]

The F-16 is the better choice than the Gripen simply because there are enough surplus F-16 to keep Ukraine supported indefinitely along with the breadth and amount of spare parts and munitions needed. The Gripen is limited in numbers available and the munitions, spare parts, and other supplies to maintain them.

[@richardthomas598]

That is why F-16 is usually named for the bombing role. We want Gripen to contest Russian air. 12 Gripen. 36 F-16. But the Gripen is crucial.

[@matthewhuszarik4173]

@@richardthomas598 The F-16 is a better air superiority fighter. But the US also has thousands of F-15 mothballed in the desert as well and it is one of the best air superiority fighters. The Gripen is a fine fighter it is just a jack of all trades and limited in numbers and resources to keep them flying.

[@richardthomas598]

​@@matthewhuszarik4173 🤣🤣🤣 You clearly haven't been listening, so I won't bother with you further.

[@matthewhuszarik4173]

@@richardthomas598 Not agreeing with you is not the same thing as not listening to you. The only advantage the Gripen has over the F-16 in air superiority is the Meteor missile, which will not be sent to Ukraine. For the same reasons no other first tier weapons are being sent. Without the Meteor the Gripen is inferior to the F-16 especially so when you consider availability of planes, spare parts, and munitions.

[@lucdelhaize4029]

F16 won't be a little more expensive to maintain but read a hell of a lot more plus for every one hour of flight they require 16 hours of maintenance so availability for air operations is another big factor against. It boils down to what can be procured and not what is best.

[@clementine_awesomeness]

best 4th gen fighter period

[@napobg6842]

A good for sure but definitely not the best

[@joeclaridy]

Stares in F-15 👀

[@Sacto1654]

Except the Gripen is limited by the production capacity of the Saab factory. the F-16 is widely available and of known quantity and will still work for the Ukrainian Air Force.

[@HunterGeophysicsAustralia]

Ah yes, I see you've been to the @Perun KZbin channel as well. :P

[@ivanthemadvandal8435]

People have been saying this since mid 22, its far from a unique conclusion by Perun.

[@peterfdsvenskaflygvapnet2643]

Even the Ukrainian air force has said this for nearly a year by now. 😂

[@Kieran0]

There are very few Gripens and many of the operators are in S.America, Africa & Asia, generally places who haven't been willing to provide support for Ukraine so far. Sweden who likely would happily donate some only have roughly 100 aircraft and presumably they'd want to keep some. Compare than with over 4000 F16s, generally used by NATO countries who are happy to donate equipment to Ukraine. Several of those countries are actively looking for a replacement for their aging F16s so from a logistical perspective it's is a no-brainer. Yes there's a bunch of hurdles to overcome but I'd rather have 100 F16s than 10 Gripens.

[@chrisjames3087]

The US has 1,000 F-16's. I think they can spare a few.

[@edselreynoso3438]

Please leave us out of this! This jackal in the WH has done enough damage to the American people (and the world). The support for Ukraine, while heart felt, is insincere. This war could have been avoided if the US and UK kept their mouths shut and let them talk it out. But they needed to feed the military industrial complex and have this war start. Not to mention, Biden needed his corruption with Ukraine to be covered up. Bio-Weapons labs and other illegal activities. Please don't be duped into thinking we're doing the right thing here. We're intentionally prolonging the death and destruction of a nation for financial gain. Biden's financial gain. How completely diabolical!

[@valeriisloboda6150]

No, it’s not. There is literally NO OTHER OPTION except of F-16/18. Beginners learn tactics while professionals learn logistics. F-16 is one of the most produced jets in the world. There is no problem with spare parts, ammunition. A lot of countries have it, so there won’t be shortage with anything.

[@markstrickland8736]

Ukraine needs to be able to fire air to air missiles to shoot down Russian fighters firing long range air to ground missiles.

[@Rimasta1]

And they need to do something while still flying at low altitude to avoid Russian SAM’s. AMRAAM would lose to much energy firing from low altitude but the meteor would give them a good probability of a kill. Plus, if the Intel leak is to be believed, fighters will be needed to offset dwindling supplies of long-range high altitude SAM’s.

[@guyb7995]

Problem is the air to ground missiles in use have much more range than any air to air missile (even the Meteor), so the fighters deploying them can use their stand off range in well protected skies over Russia/Bel. or just well outside of range over the Black Sea. These fighters are more for bringing the battle home for the RU fighters providing CAP style protection for the SU24/25s and helicopters hitting the front lines and preventing UA aerial attacks against ground targets themselves.

[@Brocuzgodlocdunfamdogson]

More importantly, they need more aircraft that can fire AGM-88 HARMs. Destroying russian SAMs is the first step in winning the air war. Plus, they can also use HARMs to target russian counter-battery radar. Apparently Ukraine has modified their MiG-29s to carry HARMs but they don’t have full functionality. I’m not sure about the Slovakian and Polish MiGs though…they might have full, or at least somewhat better functionality since they were donated by NATO nations.

[@jordibt1789]

That's why the grippen is better, it can carry the MBDA Meteor, the best air to air missile, not that they'll be getting them i'd wager the best they're getting are AMRAAM'S of the b/c variant

[@EK-gr9gd]

​@@Brocuzgodlocdunfamdogson No, Germany didn't implement AGM-88 into MiG-29, neither did any "new NATO member".

[@Nyxrucht]

I swear saab is very underrated

[@fredhercmaricaubang1883]

YES, Alex! You got it all RIGHT! And what you're actually talking about is the SAAB JAS-39E/F Gripen! GREAT BIRD, that!

[@peterfdsvenskaflygvapnet2643]

Just too bad that the E/F version is not operative yet. It is the C that would be actual for Ukraine.

[@fredhercmaricaubang1883]

@@peterfdsvenskaflygvapnet2643 I KNOW, right? I wish the Swedes would hurry up & speed up the E/F variant's development WITHOUT sacrificing the qualities that make the Gripen a World champion! All they gotta do now is just improve the assembly line process for emergency mass production & they're ALL SET! Then we'll see what the Gripen can REALLY do! Especially against the latest versions of the Flanker & the Felon as well as the latest chink stealth fighters!

[@peterfdsvenskaflygvapnet2643]

@@fredhercmaricaubang1883 Sadly there is no space for that in the plant at SAAB for a second assembly line for example. I used to work there, so I know pretty much how it looks there. And no, I did not build the Gripen. I was on the civilian side mainly.

[@fredhercmaricaubang1883]

@@peterfdsvenskaflygvapnet2643 Would it be possible to spread out production in different plants or locations? This has several benefits, chief of which is that should World War 3 break out (Hoping not but given how the world is today...), production of the Gripen would be slowed & not halted. What do you think?

[@peterfdsvenskaflygvapnet2643]

@@fredhercmaricaubang1883 As far as I know it already are spread out. Parts are made in several places, but all is assembled here. And im not sure if they can re-start the underground plant again, or if that would be to any use, since they only made parts there, not assembling an entire aircraft since they made I think it was the J29 Flying Barrel. And having several assembly plants spread out would cost a fortune. As well as it would be close to impossible to get the workers needed for it. It's not everyone that has the skills to put an aircraft together. It takes at least a year to learn. That was for how long I had to be in the schoolbench before I was sent into the production line of the SAAB 340. So I would say it is technically possible but practically impossible to do.

[@plamenski5244]

Even if Saab tried to speed up production, can GE deliver enough engines for the gripens needed?

[@MinistryOfMagic_DoM]

Plus it's badass.

[@BillyAsWell]

The Gripen is a monster!

[@jimmyw7530]

The Gripen outperforms the F-16 in most respects. Only an American would say otherwise. In exercises the Gripen frequently schools F-16s. If spec sheets were the final word Russian fighters would be unstoppable… Which they clearly are not!

[@John.S.Patton]

It's training, a lot of nations don't show what their aircraft can do.

[@jimmyw7530]

@@John.S.Patton yeah, on a rare chance to test themselves against a foreign adversary and unfamiliar aircraft, allies often hold back to what… Perform poorly on purpose? Waste a training opportunity? Try to hide secrets from allies who provide components for their aircraft? What nonsense reason do you prefer? Or have you invented another?

[@John.S.Patton]

@@jimmyw7530 why would any country show a foreign country what their aircraft really can do, even the US SF don't show everything when training foreign troops it just stupid to do so.

[@jimmyw7530]

@@John.S.Patton you do know the F-16 is in service with dozens of countries right! All the secrets are well and truly out of the bag, it’s been decades. But sure, what ever you want to believe.

[@thumpin250]

Just really surprised at the runway requirements. Would never had thought you could make that short work.

[@tristainlongshot7524]

Out of the Fighters of the mid and late 4th Gen air frames the F/A-18 Legacy Hornets would be a good option for them. They have more robust landing gear, up 4 multi hard points for dumb bombs, laser guided, GPS guided, and AMG-88 Harms. and has 4 dedicated AA hard points with two on the sides of the intakes and two on the wing tips. has greater then 1-1 TtW, and there are parts to fix up the air frames when they get hit and there is enough legacy hornets to make the remaining Russian air wings stay out of Ukraine and has enough AG effectiveness to help knock out those AA sites.

[@onebridge7231]

Yes!, but as you stated, Sweden doesn’t have any to pony up in significant numbers.

[@williamwroldsen]

As a Navy F-18 Pilot the F-18 is number 1

[@alexbowman4392]

The Gripen can out turn an F 16 and land on improvised runways, it's also easier to maintain. Sadly there are just to few of them at the moment. With 4.6k airframes and 26 countrys besides the US operating the F 16, the numbers are in it's favor. Plus a lot of countries are gearing up to replace the F 16 with brand new F 35s. More spare airframes and more spare parts.

[@mehmood3526]

It's absolutely the best but there are not enough of them to tip the balance.

[@joeyhamilton6854]

The Gruppen may be the ideal on a blank piece of paper but no country has the stock to give them up. f16s are being replaced by F35s and they have a huge spare parts supply chains built.

[@pharaongaming8617]

Right Fighter for Ukraine is MIG 29 and SU 27 of Local production

[@NAFOARMY]

Quantity is a quality all by itself.

[@ClericChris]

GRIPEN sounds like an Old English word for "wife who is quick with temper and when getting in the bathtub displaces more water than the husband"

[@zxuan1972]

I don't know but some US ex pilot and analyst said that gripen can't match with su 30 and su 35 only fighter that are capable to match them is f15 , Rafael and eurofighter,But these fighter need years training. Gripen is suitable against mig 29 and su27. But gripen do have some advantage as it can take off even from short runway and need little maintenance compared to others. So i think because of this and seeing Ukraine crisis it was seen as suitable for Ukraine.

[@tickticktickBOOOOM]

"Quantity has a quality all its own."

[@jeremyfox1511]

My father was a f16 crew chief for the USAF for 18 years. I agree with the grippen. I don't think they have the manpower for maintaining the 16.

[@wedgeantilles8575]

Your analysis is very similar to what Perun thought about this topic. The Gripen would be perfect, because it was designed to fight exactly the war that Ukraine is in. He mentioned the compatibility with Meteor too and stressed how important a good missle is to fight against Russians CAP. However - like you - he remarked about the lack of total number of Gripen. I like it when two channels I have high regards for come to the same conclusion. I am not an expert on the topics you cover and my knowledge has limits. So if you both come to the same conclusion this works for me like some kind of "fact checking" Thank you for all your great content!

[@Dave5843-d9m]

I can see Ukraine taking Gripen when the war has cooled down. It’s the ideal tool for forward bases if/when Russia tries again. Which they will.

[@sgsheff]

Does the Gripen still require a special fuel that is different than the rest of the NATO fighters? I know in the past that has limited the Gripen from taking part in certain things in the Middle East and limited it's sales to other countries.

[@johansoovik2088]

205 produced gripen 96 i service about 20 sold about 90 in longetimestorege

[@peceed]

Gripen has built-in jammer and FLIR, so you need to compare weight to thrust ratio with F-16 with pods. And Gripen is more aerodynamic, it wins dogfight against F-16.

[@FreedomGolfClub]

Damn... Grippen Deez sounds crazy

[@blacktemplar5970]

this guys a genius

[@winstonsmith7801]

Why are we talking about arming Ukraine ? , How about the US not causing the Ukrainian conflict in the first place.

[@imrekalman9044]

That's beyond the ability of these state department approved channels.

[@davidbeck3243]

Saab will be pushed by Sweden being a NATO-Member. And so the Gripen will be much more common. Still don't understand why it's so underrepresanted. Great Video, all said that can be said about the F-16 vs. Gripen thing

[@rey1953]

Agree 100%!

[@trailblazer632]

Sweden isnt guving away gripens like candy at Halloween though

[@longjonsilvers802]

The meteor is good, but what about the AIM-120D7 and AIM-260?

[@peterfdsvenskaflygvapnet2643]

The AIM 120 is going out of service? And the 260 is not in service yet? He said that is in service today... And the Meteor has just entered service. And after what I heard a lots of ppl that knows their missiles better then me says that the Meteor is way better then the AMRAAM is...

[@edselreynoso3438]

@@peterfdsvenskaflygvapnet2643 meteor is an awesome missile! Better than the scorpion in some ways.

[@EmpperorThor2211]

I’d love for Ukraine to get both. But realistically there just not enough Gripens for Ukraine to get any in large numbers

[@joesutherland225]

Grippen is the bestfor them but yes production takes time