Gripen Multirole fighter

Both Gripens get shot down before even detecting the F-22.
Dumb thread, saged.

File: ce2.gif (174KB, 600x447px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 600x447px

>>32027898

>>32028148
>because Gripens are made of plywood

ok man

File: ikea.jpg (204KB, 1200x730px) Image search: [Google]

204KB, 1200x730px

>>32028183
You know how Swedes love their wood.

>>32028196
I gave your mum wood last night if you know what i mean.

>>32028232
Jokes on you I've got two dads ya homo

>>32027898
First, the Gripen has to detect the raptor. Extreme long range, the F-22 can shoot completely undetected, but the advantages of this are offset because the chances of an AMRAAM hitting from this range are reduced, and the Gripen can easily avoid it.
If the Gripen can dodge long enough to get to medium range BVR, it will detect the F-22 with its AESA radar but it will be at a disadvantage, as the Gripen has to defend, but the Raptor does not. This is where the Gripen is most likely to be killed, as it will not have the height advantage necessary to fire at as long a range as the F-22, and it will be harder to avoid the F-22's missile.
If it can get into dog-fighting range, it should have an advantage, as the Raptor still lacks a HMD but the Gripen does not.

>>32028292
>the F-22 can shoot completely undetected, but the advantages of this are offset because the chances of an AMRAAM hitting from this range are reduced, and the Gripen can easily avoid it.

Want to know why I know you know fuck all?

>>32028292
>Raptor still lacks a HMD
I actually didn't know this, wtf are they doing

>>32028312
Scorpion is integrated into the F-22, and they're looking into getting the JHMCS in.

Talking shit.

File: Gripen firing Meteor.jpg (231KB, 715x531px) Image search: [Google]

231KB, 715x531px

Reminder that Gripen has better missiles.

>>32028148
That's an RC jet
https://youtu.be/e7EZ62OfHxw

>>32028618
No shit

>>32028312
What's HMD?

>>32028330
He's also failing to recognize the F-22s short range capabilities, even with Lunenburg lenses and being put into the defending role the F-22 still trounces most 4+ gen aircraft. So much so that the French still fervently masturbate to their one kill.

>>32029096
Helmet Mounted Display

>>32028292
Another important advantage the 22 has is that even if the Gripen can see it, its radar guided missiles can't at range.

>>32027898
Gripen would be fucked.

But there would never be a scenario where a Gripen would fight a F-22 anyway.

And that said the Gripen costs about half as much to buy and a 5th as much to operate, so naturally its not as good att Air to air.

It's like asking about the Panther tank vs T34. In a 2vs2 situation the Panthers would definitely win but they're expensive and difficult to maintain so they're not equivalent in terms of production, cost and maintenance.

So yeah, the two expensive planes would win. For sure. But how many wars are fought between an equal number of vehicles in perfect condition?

>>32028431
AIM-120D >= Meteor > AIM-120C

Meteor sales pitches compare it to the AMRAAM-C, not D.

>>32027898
All swedecuck weapons are garbage.
Too much Somali semen.

>>32030136
>So yeah, the two expensive planes would win. For sure. But how many wars are fought between an equal number of vehicles in perfect condition?
And this is why the F-35 can fire other planes' missiles and the F-15 is being repurposed to be a sixteen-AMRAAM dakka truck.

>>32030783
>F-35 can fire other planes' missiles
Any link for that?
That's fucking amazing.

File: JA37vpl10.jpg (61KB, 960x684px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 960x684px

>>32030783
>>32031012

>Fire others missiles

You mean that one plane can be the one who lights up the target with its radar and then that info is transmitted via datalink to another plane who fires the missile?

Because we did that in the 80s with the JA-37 Viggen.

>>32031101
>Because we did that in the 80s with the JA-37 Viggen.

That is a false comparison.

>>32031862
Then what did he/you mean?

>>32027898
Gripens are good if you're a small and/or cheap air force and want an aircraft that's cheap to fly and nets you a lot of technology transfers & local industry boosts via licensed production.
Look at it as a more advanced and future-proof F-16. It's a great little multirole fighter and it won't burn a hole in your pocket.

Rafale comes in and shoot down all 4 planes

>>32030783
>F-15 finally ascending to become a true successor to the F-14.
>Chainsaw is back

We just need to bring back missiles with the operating range of the Phoenix and my erection will never diminish again.

>>32031931
You're talking about requesting other planes engage your target, we're talking about requesting missiles and then guiding those missiles ourselves; it helps protect the launcher. The launcher can also be a land or naval asset firing SM-6 missiles and there's also the near future expansion to have unmanned platforms carry missiles and fire them instantaneously at the F-35's command.

>>32032927
AIM-120D has Phoenix range.

>>32030680
Is that why everyone (including the US) seems to buy them?

File: JA37vpl17.jpg (39KB, 960x612px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 960x612px

>>32033106
No I dont. The datalink in our JA-37s could let one Viggen control another, the launching Viggen did not need to have its radar turned on at all, al radardata was transmitted via the datalink. The request would be done over the datalink or via voice communication.

It could however not guide land/sea based missiles.

File: 1470069562705.jpg (203KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 1920x1080px

Gripen gets raped and gaped hard.

>>32033106
This capability was however lost when we swaped from our own datalinksystem (TARAS/Radio 90) to the much less capable, but NATO-compatible Link 16

>>32030611
>AIM-120D >= Meteor

lol

>>32027898
Poorly. The Gripen simply does not have the thrust to weight ratio to keep up with a Raptor. F-22s will outrun, out turn, and out climb Gripens.

Gripens are still decent light aircraft for patrol and strike, but they cannot go toe to toe with a modern air superiority fighter. Against its 4th generation peers, it is roughly on par. Its rough field capabilities are where it shines, with its relatively easy maintenance.

>>32032728
But it costs about as much as a F-35, anon.

>>32033295

This.

Swedish JAS 39C/Ds do well aginst Finnish Hornets and Norwegian F-16s, but against a F-22?

Nope

I guess anything is possible, after all a dude in a parachute managed to down a jap plane with a 1911 in WW2, but the Gripen would have a huge disadvantage

>>32033350
>Swedish JAS 39C/Ds do well aginst Finnish Hornets and Norwegian F-16s
Norse war when?

>>32033342

Japan bought 42 F-35As for 238 million a pice
Brazil bought 36 Gripen Es for 136 milion a pice.

Both deals included similar packages (weapons, initial trainging, lockal manufacture, spares and simulators)

The memeprice of 87 million for a F-35 only applies for USAF who ordered 2000+ of them.

>>32033203

I thought it only worked for the Skyflash missile. Or was it upgraded for other missiles?

http://www.nextbigfuture.com/2016/11/boeing-and-saab-are-making-fighter-that.html

>>32033969
>So an Su-35 can see a F-35 well before the F-35 can detect it


your "article" does some serious mental gymnastics

>>32033969
>SOURCES - Daily Caller, Daily Mail UK, Saab, Wikipedia
Anon, I hate to tell you this late in your life, but you appear to be suffering from Extra Chromosome.

>2.4 F-35s for every Su-35
Sides fucking orbital.