Saab Gripen E/F (Gripen NG)

C/D sold to Czech Republic, South Africa, Hungary and Thailand,
E/F sold to Brazil, Peru, Thailand

Export to Argentina and Pakistan was blocked, Colombia has said this year it firmly intends to place an order, been half a dozen more bids where it has generally lost out to the Rafale or second hand F-16's.
 
WatcherZero said:
C/D sold to Czech Republic, South Africa, Hungary and Thailand,
E/F sold to Brazil, Peru, Thailand

Export to Argentina and Pakistan was blocked, Colombia has said this year it firmly intends to place an order, been half a dozen more bids where it has generally lost out to the Rafale or second hand F-16's.
Click to expand...
Peru and Colombia are not done deals yet.
 
WatcherZero said:
Better foreign sales than Russian SU-57 or SU-75 have achieved. Especielly when you look at how well the flanker and Mig-29 did in exports.
Click to expand...
An interesting bar to measure against especially given Su-75 is at this point just concept art. The other issue with Gripen export is almost all A/C exports were just remanufactured aircraft, not new builds.

Saab have talked up big exports for over 25 years, often speaking of exports in the hundreds but that has never materialised.
 
If New Zealand government decides to reverse Helen Clarke's bit of high-treason when she disbanded the RNZAF's air-combat wing 2002 and restore I have no doubt that the Griffen E/F would be at the top of the list.
 
NMaude said:
If New Zealand government decides to reverse Helen Clarke's bit of high-treason when she disbanded the RNZAF's air-combat wing 2002 and restore I have no doubt that the Griffen E/F would be at the top of the list.
Click to expand...
I'd actually expect FA50s or M346s to be higher. Cheaper to operate and adequate for air policing.
 
NMaude said:
If New Zealand government decides to reverse Helen Clarke's bit of high-treason when she disbanded the RNZAF's air-combat wing 2002 and restore I have no doubt that the Griffen E/F would be at the top of the list.
Click to expand...
There is zero chance of that happening. With what NZ has to afford over the next 20 years including replacement of the ANZACs, new transport aircraft to replace the 757, new naval helicopters, long range drones etc per the 2025 capability plan there is no money to return to manned fighter aviation.
 
Ozair said:
There is zero chance of that happening. With what NZ has to afford over the next 20 years including replacement of the ANZACs, new transport aircraft to replace the 757, new naval helicopters, long range drones etc per the 2025 capability plan there is no money to return to manned fighter aviation.
Click to expand...
If the Kiwis are lucky, they can just buy new fighter-CCAs in 20-30 years. Drone fighters that can fight without needing a quarterback.
 
The recent debacle of Novo (the partnership b/w Volvo and the crazy startup Northvolt) wasn't that much profitable with billions of losses that halted/hampered Volvo investments... ;)
A soul makes you follow self preservation instincts and adhere to sanity, which in the industry simply translates by putting knowledge owners in charge instead of screaming monkeys.
 
Gripen sales have time and again been kneecaped by US on bogus ITAR grounds only to sell F16 with same gear . And not only Gripen , when croatia wanted to buy Used F16 from israel ,US knecaped that sale as well , French picked up the pieces of that spat ,by providing political services US could not.

Besides BAE that was in charge of Gripen international sales kinda burned trough their budgets for hookers and blow they were pushing to sell Eurofighters in addition to billion dolar bribes that got laundered in public . Left Gripen bribes,hookers and blow budget dry.End of the day that is what sells jet fighters.

Gripen is also not very price competitive compared to F16 variants let alone used f16

End of the day Gripens foreign part content makes it easy to block sales , US and UK both do .But its also only way countries like Korea ,Turkey or Sweden can make a jet by having 80+% foreign content.

As for chinese cars, Volvo would likely not exist anymore without them and end up like Saab ,same story with UK car industry
 
Last edited:
Mr.T said:
Gripen sales have time and again been kneecaped by US on bogus ITAR grounds only to sell F16 with same gear . And not only Gripen , when croatia wanted to buy Used F16 from israel ,US knecaped that sale as well , French picked up the pieces of that spat ,by providing political services US could not.

Besides BAE that was in charge of Gripen international sales kinda burned trough their budgets for hookers and blow they were pushing to sell Eurofighters in addition to billion dolar bribes that got laundered in public . Left Gripen bribes,hookers and blow budget dry.End of the day that is what sells jet fighters.

Gripen is also not very price competitive compared to F16 variants let alone used f16
Click to expand...
Yes quite the chequered run...
Mr.T said:
End of the day Gripens foreign part content makes it easy to block sales , US and UK both do .But its also only way countries like Korea ,Turkey or Sweden can make a jet by having 80+% foreign content.
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone doubts that but if you build a fighter and plan to export it then using a significant portion of US parts including the engine then you limit your market to only those countries that the US will let you deal with. I expect that Saab was hoping Swedish entry in NATO might also open up some additional sales but there is sufficient impending competition to make the Gripen E less appealing now than it might have been years ago when it was supposed to originally IOC.
 
Gripen sales have time and again been kneecaped by US on bogus ITAR grounds only to sell F16 with same gear
Click to expand...
Just live Viggen before it, in the 1970's - India, for a start.
 
Ozair said:
Yes quite the chequered run...

I don't think anyone doubts that but if you build a fighter and plan to export it then using a significant portion of US parts including the engine then you limit your market to only those countries that the US will let you deal with. I expect that Saab was hoping Swedish entry in NATO might also open up some additional sales but there is sufficient impending competition to make the Gripen E less appealing now than it might have been years ago when it was supposed to originally IOC.
Click to expand...

Like said that was an unavoidable choice Swedes had to make , and at the time export was not first priority, 404 is a good engine made in huge numbers. Euro engines were not on the table at the time plus likely cost much more than 404 or 414 ,EJ200 and M808 are practicaly coach built ,given the low manufacturing numbers i would not be supprised if they are 2x the cost or more , and if they ever came head to head French ,EU would block them as well.
 
WatcherZero said:
Better foreign sales than Russian SU-57 or SU-75 have achieved. Especielly when you look at how well the flanker and Mig-29 did in exports.
Click to expand...

You're comparing a single engine, rugged budget fighter to a heavy twin engine stealth fighter (most likely double the cost, maintenance not included) and an aircraft in development yet to make its first flight.

That aside, weren't the Gripens in Hungary or Czechia just on a lease too? I remember reading once that a country just leased the Gripen, I think it was in eastern Europe.
 
Last edited:
WatcherZero said:
C/D sold to Czech Republic, South Africa, Hungary and Thailand,
E/F sold to Brazil, Peru, Thailand

Export to Argentina and Pakistan was blocked, Colombia has said this year it firmly intends to place an order, been half a dozen more bids where it has generally lost out to the Rafale or second hand F-16's.
Click to expand...

South Africa probably regrets their purchase in retrospect

 
@Mr.T the thing is that now that every former F-16 user is switching over to the infinitely more capable F-35 the market is flooded with used F-16s, some of which not even that old. Add to that an ocean of spare parts, people with technical know how and decades worth of experience having fixed most issues, it's just far more attractive than the still rather pricey Gripen E/F which has none of the above really. Just look at SA being not able to keep their Gripens flying, it's after all still a very expensive machine, it's in a sense a luxury item.

And in a market where on the NATO side of things the F-35 gets picked up by everyone who's allowed to get them, the use F-16s being thrown out at bargain prices and select few opting for advanced Eagles or the Dassault Rafale there isn't much space for the Gripen.

While many countries more on the neutral side of things gravite to mixed air forces of various origins or much cheaper alternatives like light combat aircraft or second hand fighters.

As it stands in the current environment the Gripen, as much as I love it and I truly do, isn't a convincing offer. Especially when it cannot edge out competitors on technical grounds and not even on political grounds anymore. It's unfortunate but that's how things played out
 
EmoBirb said:
@Mr.T the thing is that now that every former F-16 user is switching over to the infinitely more capable F-35 the market is flooded with used F-16s, some of which not even that old. Add to that an ocean of spare parts, people with technical know how and decades worth of experience having fixed most issues, it's just far more attractive than the still rather pricey Gripen E/F which has none of the above really. Just look at SA being not able to keep their Gripens flying, it's after all still a very expensive machine, it's in a sense a luxury item.

And in a market where on the NATO side of things the F-35 gets picked up by everyone who's allowed to get them, the use F-16s being thrown out at bargain prices and select few opting for advanced Eagles or the Dassault Rafale there isn't much space for the Gripen.

While many countries more on the neutral side of things gravite to mixed air forces of various origins or much cheaper alternatives like light combat aircraft or second hand fighters.

As it stands in the current environment the Gripen, as much as I love it and I truly do, isn't a convincing offer. Especially when it cannot edge out competitors on technical grounds and not even on political grounds anymore. It's unfortunate but that's how things played out
Click to expand...

The Czechs have a lease for the older model. Hungary has a lease and buy, and by next year they'll fully own it.

The Gripen series as a whole, has generally been relatively successful for Saab/Sweden. It's achieved more exports than the Viggen (none), and the Draken. Both in terms of number of countries operating them and total numbers exported. I believe the total numbers built, its about the same as the Rafale.

However at the end of the day, most countries prioritize strategic interests when buying warplanes or other major weapon systems. Buying American, French, Chinese, Russian, or the UK, means you're also buying into their support system (whether its spares, or political support). For countries that have an active threat or high security concerns, building such connections are important. Hence why a country like Qatar went nuts buying American, French, and UK products around the time when its neighbors started ganging up on them.
Sweden in contrast, is a smaller country with less global influence, and until now, a neutral foreign policy. I think they punch above their weight in what they've accomplished in the defense sector, but at the end of the day, they're limited on what they can do, and end up having to rely on foreign suppliers for a number of things.
It doesn't mean the Gripen is a no-go for these countries, but that it is at a disadvantage to products from the P5.

For countries without a major threat, the Gripen has more appeal, especially if that country has a policy where it does not want to lean too heavily to any of the P5 members. These are countries like Thailand (which ended up with Gripens), Brazil, or Malaysia (not a Gripen user but fits the category as well as having a foreign policy where they lean west but also wants to keep some independence from them).
The thing is, many of these countries, don't really have a strong demand for fighter jets because they're generally at peace, so orders numbers are generally low (12-24).

Gripen E/F, has a high price tag, equal or higher than the F-35. But supposedly a low sustainment cost, which means the savings will be more noticeable over its lifetime. But that high unit price tag might also deter some countries, especially as there's a ton of much cheaper used F-16s. Spare parts are plenty and the F-16 will likely continue to be produced for a while, perhaps longer than the Gripen. Due to its widespread use and history, the F-16 does offer alternatives for potential users. For example, if a user doesn't have access to the latest AMRAAM missile, they can use European or Israeli missiles instead. Even the Turks are rapidly developing a wide variety of munitions for the F-16. I believe that was the case for Chile or another country, where the US initially refused to export the AMRAAM, so they went with Israeli weapons.
 
WatcherZero said:
Better foreign sales than Russian SU-57 or SU-75 have achieved. Especielly when you look at how well the flanker and Mig-29 did in exports.
Click to expand...
There's the so-called time involved.
Su-57 appeared a few years ago right into the war. Su-75 isn't even a true index (plane doesn't exist, it's a proposal). It's a future Aircraft.
Current Russian sales portfolio is Su-35s, Su-30sm2 and Mig-29M2. Outselling gripen under CAATSA and 2022-.

Gripen is with us for over 3 decades. It had some success playing the affordable/neutral card, but by now it lost both. It never had the tech transfer one, as there's not that much to transfer. Of course it never had any political services or equal offsets.

Now it's only card ironically is "advanced", but it's a tough card to play when you're small and 4.5 gen.
4.5 gens bruteforce your perceived advancedness, and being "advanced" when you can't even fight the world standard on even terms is a very tough sell.

In this case, the only option seems to be pro-american Latin America, if someone, for some reason, doesn't want second hand F-16 and US can live with it.
 
Last edited:
Basically Gripen is squeezed between a) second-hand F-16s that are dirt cheap b) Rafale (or Typhoon) as european alternatives if no F-35 possible and c) F-35 itself, full stealth.
The Grippen should thrieve on being "cheap because single engine" unfortunately the F-16, first hand or second hand, is crushing that market.
 
Archibald said:
The Grippen should thrieve on being "cheap because single engine" unfortunately the F-16, first hand or second hand, is crushing that market.
Click to expand...
They had an opportunity at a great sales pitch in Ukraine (just 1-2 meteor ambushes would've made it name and history), but Sweden somehow failed to grasp even that (half assed it), despite sending many times more money to Ukraine.

And it would've hidden another glaring downside of gripen order - that Sweden can't add the main requirement for making interceptor effective - it can't provide air defences.

Bad luck, lil fighter.
 
Last edited:
helmutkohl said:
For countries without a major threat, the Gripen has more appeal
Click to expand...

While Sweden doesn't directly border Russia, Gripen definitely is designed for a geostrategic situation where a major threat exists. The requirement originates from the days of Sweden's neutrality, no less (albeit there were de facto bilateral security guarantees from the U.S). Swedish fighter export efforts have some very idiosyncractic challenges, it being more of a networked system within a network of total defense systems; I'm unsure as to how much its current export clients have wanted or been able to emulate that. They've made their decisions regardless.

The Gripen's "natural" environment is the arctic and the Baltic region (Brazil's involvement with their aviation sector may yet result in some localization). Denmark and Norway's procurement history is more tied to NATO, Finland went with the F-35 as well, the Baltic countries can't afford fighter wings individually, and SAAB couldn't possibly have scaled up to Poland's urgent needs so they went with U.S. and South Korean products, and so forth. Circumstances and trends somewhat impossible to predict during the commercial life of a fighter.

Some of Gripen's qualities certainly would be a good fit for Ukraine; too bad a Gripen "U" production line based on the C/D apparently isn't in the cards. I certainly wondered (even aloud) whether enough legacy equipment exists/existed for that to happen/have happened. A complicated proposition in any case.
 
yeah thats a good point and one I wanted to bring up earlier but didn't. Gripen, like the Viggen, was designed for Sweden's defense needs first and foremost, which means integrating it with its other defense systems, that might be lacking in some potential customer countries.

On the topic of the FA-50, that's another potential rival to the Gripen in addition to used F-16s. The FA-50 has overlaps slightly with the F-16, but the Gripen overlaps both.

the FA-50 has the same engine as the Gripen, and in terms of exports, about the same number has been exported. The current FA-50 isn't as capable as the older Gripen, let alone the Gripen-E, but it wins out in low unit and sustainment costs. The upgrades the Poles are pushing for (AESA, AMRAAM, etc) will put the FA-50 on par with the older Gripens. Which for some air forces, is good enough to do air policing.
 
This remains a bit of a wildcard:

www.saab.com

Gripen for Canada | Saab

Canada is choosing a new fighter. A decision that will see a new fighter defend Canada, deter her opponents and meet her international commitments. The decision on which a fighter Canada choses is a once in a lifetime opportunity. One of those choices is Gripen from Saab.
www.saab.com www.saab.com

SAAB said:
Gripen for Canada

The "no compromise" choice for Canada's new fighter. Gripen offers advanced capabilities, the best economic benefits and budget stability - a once in a generation opportunity.

Made, maintained and upgraded in Canada

Gripen is the only remaining competitor offering a guaranteed price and economic benefits. The newest and fastest fighter on offer, Gripen was built for Canada's climate conditions and strategic requirements. It has the longest range and best fuel efficiency. Best of all, Gripen is a revolutionary breakthrough in fighter design that makes technological upgrades fast and easy - a critical feature for military equipment intended to serve for decades.

Gripen and Aerospace R&D Centers

Saab has teamed with leading Canadian companies such as CAE, IMP Aerospace and Defence, Peraton and GE on the Gripen offer. As part of the industrial package for Canada Saab will establish two new aerospace centers in the Greater Montreal Region. These centers will help support a resurgent aerospace industry in Canada, building on domestic excellence, while spurring development in new areas of research and giving the next generation of talented Canadians a career route and future.
Click to expand...

A recent article going over the same considerations debated here, from a Canadian perspective (May 27, 2025):

thewalrus.ca

What Would It Take for Canada to Build Its Own Fighter Jets Again? | The Walrus

Carney throws a grenade into the F-35 defence deal as the US becomes a less reliable ally
thewalrus.ca thewalrus.ca

But as fighter plane and other defense salesfolk go around, they also come around (slightly dated, April 15, 2025):

 
Well, Canada is indeed a political opportunity for Saab (in a same way one German AF Commander lost his job mentioning F-35 too much...at least anecdotally), opened by last election.

But CAF will fight bitterly against it.

Though, if successful, this will of course outdo any opportunities gripen had before this point.
 
NMaude said:
If New Zealand government decides to reverse Helen Clarke's bit of high-treason when she disbanded the RNZAF's air-combat wing 2002 and restore I have no doubt that the Griffen E/F would be at the top of the list.
Click to expand...
Funny how despite it being over 20years since then, including two conservative ones, there has been no effort to reverse. Maybe this is because it wasn't treason but rather, considered, sensible policy generally supported in New Zealand.
 
Ozair said:
There is zero chance of that happening. With what NZ has to afford over the next 20 years including replacement of the ANZACs, new transport aircraft to replace the 757, new naval helicopters, long range drones etc per the 2025 capability plan there is no money to return to manned fighter aviation.
Click to expand...
And no need
 
On the "bit of a wildcard" scenario:

www.flightglobal.com

Audit projects Canadian F-35 acquisition costs will nearly double

The total cost of acquiring 88 Lockheed Martin F-35As will rise to more than C$33 billion ($24 billion), according to a Canadian government auditor, nearly double the originally estimated C$19 billion.
www.flightglobal.com www.flightglobal.com

Ryan Finnerty said:
...

A report from the office of the Canadian Auditor General finds the Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) will ultimately pay nearly twice the 2022 estimate of C$19 billion ($13.8 billion) to field 88 Lockheed Martin F-35As.

...

Notably, that projection does not include an additional C$5.5 billion in spending on munitions and infrastructure upgrades that will be required to reach full operational capability on the F-35 fleet.

...

The RCAF is in the process of fielding an entirely new fleet of training aircraft, but has notably not yet identified an advanced jet trainer to prepare aviators to operate the complex F-35A.

...

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, who was swept into office riding a wave of anti-Trump sentiment in Canada, has directed the Department of National Defence to review the planned F-35 acquisition, including looking at alternative options.

However, the RCAF will field at least a portion of the 88 F-35s currently planned, for which Ottawa is already contractually committed.

“We’re taking delivery of a number of F-35s already under the existing contract,” Carney said in April.

“What we’re reviewing, in effect, is the back end of the contract to ensure that we’re getting value for money, that we’re sure that we’re maximising not just our ability to protect Canada, but the economic benefits here in Canada — and we are considering it in the context of alternatives,” he added.

...

In a March editorial, retired General Tom Lawson argued that abandoning the F-35 would harm Canada far more than it would the USA, both in terms of military capability and in the likely loss of lucrative supply contracts that dozens of Canadian aerospace firms won under the F-35 programme.

...

By contrast, former Canadian air force chief Lieutenant General Yvon Blondin has urged caution, describing the current F-35-only solution to fighter modernisation as “irresponsible” and likening it to “hoping for the best”.

...

Both officers acknowledge the financial and logistical challenge that a small force like the RCAF would face in operating a mixed-fleet of multiple fighter types, should Ottawa opt to reduce its F-35 buy and also procure Dassault Aviation Rafales or Saab Gripen E/Fs.
Click to expand...

A very clarifying article. SAAB is apparently trying to offset any F-35 supply contract losses Canada might face with their "made in Canada" offer. Undoubtedly Gripen doesn't require nearly the kind of infrastructure investment the F-35 does, being designed for easy maintenance and dispersed operations by conscripts and reservists from the get go. I'm also half seriously wondering whether Gripens (at least two seaters) could somehow be classified as "advanced trainers"; this also raises the possibility that Canada will end up with far less than 88 F-35s but a whole heap of "KAI FA-50C" advanced trainer/light combat jets. In any case Canada could get ~1.5 times Gripens and ~2 times FA-50Cs for the price of every F-35, perhaps even more, considering infrastructure and maintenance.
 
Embedded AI agent tested successfully in BVR fight 3 times:

During the flights, Gripen E successfully handed over control of the aircraft to Centaur, which autonomously performed complex maneuvers in a BVR combat environment* and gave the pilot instructions to fire.

– This is an important milestone that demonstrates Saab's technologically advanced capabilities. We have in a short time both integrated and successfully test-flown Helsing's AI in Gripen E, which is proof of the rapid increase in capabilities we can offer our customers. We look forward to continuing to develop and explore how we can use this and other AI agents in our combat aircraft. [...]

Gripen E's unique design means it can fly with the AI software fully integrated and onboard the aircraft, meaning that flight tests are not limited to being carried out at military test sites or with experimental aircraft.

– We explore and blur the boundaries between today and the future. With software, it is no longer a question of fighter aircraft generations, but rather of the speed of development, says Peter Nilsson.

The third flight, conducted on the 3rd of June, focused specifically on the performance of the Centaur, pitting it against a real Gripen D aircraft in a series of dynamic BVR* scenarios with real-time data integration, using sensor data to track the target aircraft.
Click to expand...

5c4ede35-36a8-490f-bb64-13ebe41154e0


news.cision.com

Saab genomför första flygningarna med AI i Gripen E

Saab har, i samarbete med Helsing, framgångsrikt genomfört de första tre flygningarna med Helsings
news.cision.com news.cision.com

Notice that this would compare to the Old SAGE system maneuvring F-86D, F-94, F-89 and others Grandma airframe. The accent being put on Dogfighting AI agent by US DoD has always been to demonstrate that if it can do that, it will certainly do all the other more pertinent things...
 
Last edited:
Peru order of 24 Gripen E to replace their Mig-29 and Mirage 2000 is to be formally signed on the 10th of July for $3.5bn beating out Rafale F4 and F-16 Block 70 in the procurement competition. Saab won by promising the order could be delivered within 24 months of contract signature rather than the 60 months of F16/Rafale and being a third cheaper than either of its competitors. Peru has stipulated that at least two aircraft must be delivered by July 23, 2026 for its air force day celebration
 
Last edited:
WatcherZero said:
Peru order of 24 Gripen E to replace their Mig-29 and Mirage 2000 is to be formally signed on the 10th of July for $3.5bn beating out Rafale F4 and F-16 Block 70 in the procurement competition. Saab won by promising the order could be delivered within 24 months of contract signature rather than the 60 months of F16/Rafale and being a third cheaper than either of its competitors. Peru has stipulated that at least two aircraft must be delivered by July 23, 2026 for its air force day celebration
Click to expand...
The whole order delivered in 24 months or just the first two aircraft?

They won't be getting those from the Brazilian line in that timeframe so the Swedish Air Force will have to give up their first deliveries to make this happen.

Not sure an air force selecting an aircraft based on its delivery timeframe over capability or potentially cost is the right pathway forward.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom