It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The underdog - The Saab Gripen

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 31 2005 @ 08:23 AM
Saab Gripen (Gryphon)
Low-cost, low maintenance multi-role 4th generation fighter jet

Length: 14.1 m

Span: 8.4 m

Height: 4.5 m

Empty weight: 5700 kg

Normal take off weight: 8500 kg in fighter configuration

Payload: 5300 kg

Fuel, internal: 3000 litres approx

External: 3800 litres

Max take off weight: 14000 kg

Range: 3000 km ferry range

Max speed: M 1.15 (1400 km/h) at sea level, close to Mach 2 at altitude

Acceleration: M 0.5 to M 1.1 at low altitude in 30 s

Turn performance: 9 G sustained, G onset rate at least 6 G/s (1-9 G in 1.2 s), min -3 G, 20+ deg/s sustained, 30 deg/s instantaneous

Climb rate:


posted on Mar, 31 2005 @ 10:13 AM
like 'em! Saw one do a display at Farnborough quite a while back (forget the year) - very manoevrable!
Off to Sweden next week to see the Viggens at Lulea Kalax before they retire!

posted on Mar, 31 2005 @ 10:15 AM
Go team SVENSKA!!!!

It is the underdog who comes through in the end!

posted on Mar, 31 2005 @ 10:19 AM
Personally, this is one of my favourite aircraft, especially as BAe are involved with it! (Fantastic eh? Cant get the Typhoon finished but they can produce a capable aircraft like the Gripen when partnered with Saab

I wish the UK would consider buying some Gripens, as they are very nice aircraft .

posted on Mar, 31 2005 @ 10:25 AM
It is a very good aircraft. Im not sure if its 4th or 5th generation as its hard to determine what makes a 4th generation different from a 5th.

posted on Mar, 31 2005 @ 10:51 AM
Certainly a sharp looking plane. I like the two seater.

posted on Mar, 31 2005 @ 11:03 AM
This is the plane that the UK should be getting instead of Eurofighter. It already exists, and fulfills 90% of the role. And, BAE is already involved in the program.

posted on Mar, 31 2005 @ 11:26 AM
This has been one of ma favorite planes for a long time. The specs are OK. Great plane!

And yes, I drive a SAAB

posted on Mar, 31 2005 @ 12:40 PM
Remarkable how a country with a population less than that of New York City can pull something like this off. Wasn't the Gripen the first fourth-gen fighter to enter squadron service? The Swedes certainly are an industrious bunch.

posted on Mar, 31 2005 @ 01:10 PM
Certainly one of the best bangs for the buck. If it's not in worldwide service today, it is only because of the stringent export laws of the Swedes, not to mention the pull of Big Brother USA on other countries.

posted on Mar, 31 2005 @ 04:46 PM

I found this pic somewhere, the Gripen is one of my all time favorites as well DAMN YOU! DAMN YOU ALL!

posted on Mar, 31 2005 @ 08:31 PM
Ok I have a question, why do most of the fighters I see form Europe have canards and a delta wing configuration? Does it have any advantages say from the F-15 wings shape or do they just like it better?

posted on Mar, 31 2005 @ 08:54 PM
It's an inherently unstable layout, making for good maneuverability.
I think canard deltas also have a good lift to drag ratio, making for short takeoff runs & landings. This is particularly important for the Swedes, as their strategy is to operate their air force from sections of public highways during a conflict.

It would be nice to have this parked in the front of your house, kinda puts the neighbor's Porsche to shame, you think?:

posted on Mar, 31 2005 @ 09:45 PM
It's an excellent fighter that is amazingly still cost effective. Personally I think that it's one of the better fourth generation aircraft out there. Kudo's to the Sweeds for putting together such an impressive fighter.

posted on Mar, 31 2005 @ 09:55 PM
The problem is the F-16C/D can carry more stuff over a longer range and is a proven in combat design. It's also cheaper or at least about the same price as a Gripen. It's not a bad aircraft, competes more against the Rafale and Mirage 2000 than anything. The problem with being the first out of the block is that it is less advanced than the others. The Eurofighter is a class above it, just as the F-22 is a class above the Eurofighter. A great light fighter though.

posted on Apr, 1 2005 @ 04:32 AM
the F-16 and Griffon are within a few million $`s of each other - so they could be called the same price. Yep , the F-16 has greater range and greater payload - the flip side is , that i would love to see the wing life of a viper over the gryphon!

I can see the gryphon being mission profiled for the JDAM - but only in a few years , and , being honest i also think the RB 15F is better than the AGM-119B .

posted on Apr, 1 2005 @ 05:07 AM

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Ok I have a question, why do most of the fighters I see form Europe have canards and a delta wing configuration? Does it have any advantages say from the F-15 wings shape or do they just like it better?

Canards add extra lift to the aircraft, whereas tailplane control surfaces dont, so you gain efficiency. Also note that the majority of aircraft with canards are smaller than traditionally laid out aircraft, but provide much of the same capability. I guess the EU likes smaller aircraft?

posted on Apr, 1 2005 @ 10:58 AM
Actually the overall net effect of a tailed design is a loss of lift (total of wing lift generated minus tailplane downforce) but before the advent of advanced FBW systems it was the only way to effectively balance an aeroplane (think; balance a model plane on your fingertips just behind the cg and place the fingers of your other hand on top of the tailplane to stop it from nosing over to get the basic idea).

That is why no major canard type made it into production despite scores of prototypes down the decades. The latest 'eurocanards' as people call them take advantage of modern flight systems that artificially stabilise the aircraft through hundreds of minute adjustments per second to the foreplanes which give perfectly straight and level flight when required but also allow the natural instability of the design to greatly benefit rapid manoevering and instantaneous turn rate with the added plus that ALL flying surfaces are contributing lift and adding to, rather than detracting from, the overall load carrying capability.

As a final note, the Wright Flyer was actually the worlds first deliberately designed naturally unstable canard and if the pilot let go of the controls it would crash instantly, the Wrights view being that they were really 'flying' the planer rather than just being along for the ride


posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 01:45 AM
I like the grip but the typhoon is better but much more expensive, I personally think the UK should buy some grips to replace the jag in the light quick stike role and recc role


posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 04:39 AM
Grippen are not really desinged for recon roles I think...

But it would be something great that another country flies the Grippen... So it can make its proofs in a2a combat!

new topics

<<   2 >>

log in