Saab Gripen E/F (Gripen NG)

[Ainen]

With Gripens doing co-op targeting via data link to triangulate, the first indication a Russian aircraft will get that something is awry is the Meteor's own on-board radar lighting up.

Yes-yes, would be a shame if it will somehow go other way against an aircraft all round more modern, howering in dominant kinematic position. When will internet learn already.

About the Gripen being a "worse F-16": I think you need to read up about the Gripen's EW suite and the AESA radar that is mounted on a turn table, thus allowing missile guidance updating at 100 deg from centerline.

Gripen EW suite and AESA radar on turntable on Gripen C?
It's 1990s DRFM suite (without an/alq-131) and mechanical radar more or less similar/weaker than an/apg-66v7.
Everything you mentioned is true for Gripen E, but that aircraft is not even at IOC.

What really matters is the Meteor missile. It would help against the R37 and R37M.

As things stand, main problem is still that altitudes are closed to Ukrainian aircraft. Meteor can fire further than any other missile from low altitude, but it is still an unfair fight - aircraft against system.

 

[AndersJ]

Yes-yes, would be a shame if it will somehow go other way against an aircraft all round more modern, howering in dominant kinematic position. When will internet learn already.

As things stand, main problem is still that altitudes are closed to Ukrainian aircraft. Meteor can fire further than any other missile from low altitude, but it is still an unfair fight - aircraft against system.

We can always debate whose airspace is closed to whom, but +4 years into the special military operation, Ukraine are still very much masters of their own airspace. And Su-34s only being able to attack with glide bombs before hightailing it back home is proof of that. The point here is that Gripens with Meteors will push them back even further, closing this window for them. No more glide bombs.

And the C and D versions will be able to do this as well, i.e. shoot Meteors without radar lock or even TWS. So it will be a whole different ballgame for the Su-34s, who will then have to deal with no warning at all until Meteors open up their seekers within the no escape zone.

So these news that Ukraine's Gripen E deal is close to being finalized, with Meteors and Gripen C/Ds as a bonus, is game changing indeed.

 

[Ainen]

We can always debate whose airspace is closed to whom

No need to debate, airspace is divided by LOC, plus range of Russian weapons over Ukrainian side - SAMs and LRAAMs.

The point here is that Gripens with Meteors will push them back even further, closing this window for them.

Let's see. I am now doubtful much will change. Usually in Ukrainian war, overhyped older weapon systems delivered in token numbers, late, underdeliver.

And the C and D versions will be able to do this as well, i.e. shoot Meteors without radar lock or even TWS.

Shooting Russia with missiles will deliver study specimen to Russia, but otherwise there's little purpose. Meteors need fire control; they also need their launching aircraft to survive.

So these news that Ukraine's Gripen E deal is close to being finalized, with Meteors and Gripen C/Ds as a bonus, is game changing indeed.

Let's see. My take is, f-16s could've been decisive/important if delivered immediately, before autumn 2022 (or they're perfectly impactful now, thanks to APKWS, though not game changers in any capacity).
Gripen with meteor could've been hugely impactful in 2023-2024. It's already late spring 2026.

As things out, gripen C/Ds will appear instead NET late 2027, when they're likely going to be irrelevant even with meteors. Gripen E will come even later.

Weapon systems should be delivered in time. Delivering 1990s aircraft with 2010s weapon 5 years into a major 2020s war is not *in time* anymore.

 

[AndersJ]

No need to debate, airspace is divided by LOC, plus range of Russian weapons over Ukrainian side - SAMs and LRAAMs.

Which reflects very poorly on one part in this conflict: Something that should have taken days, i.e. achieving air superiority, has still not been achieved.

Shooting Russia with missiles will deliver study specimen to Russia, but otherwise there's little purpose. Meteors need fire control; they also need their launching aircraft to survive.

I think you need to look up how radar warning receivers work, and how missiles like the Meteor can be guided passively either by co-operating Gripens, or by relaying Erieye AWAC data, and without triggering the RWR set in the target aircraft.

Let's see. I am now doubtful much will change. Usually in Ukrainian war, overhyped older weapon systems delivered in token numbers, late, underdeliver.

Let's see. I am now doubtful much will change. Usually in Ukrainian war, overhyped older weapon systems delivered in token numbers, late, underdeliver.

Let's see. My take is, f-16s could've been decisive/important if delivered immediately, before autumn 2022 (or they're perfectly impactful now, thanks to APKWS, though not game changers in any capacity).
Gripen with meteor could've been hugely impactful in 2023-2024. It's already late spring 2026.

As things out, gripen C/Ds will appear instead NET late 2027, when they're likely going to be irrelevant even with meteors. Gripen E will come even later.

Weapon systems should be delivered in time. Delivering 1990s aircraft with 2010s weapon 5 years into a major 2020s war is not *in time* anymore.

Then you have nothing to worry about do you? However, when the Gripen E deal is finally signed, my guess is that this will trigger the usual response: It will both be an unacceptable escalation, crossing yet another red line, but at the same time of no consequence right?

 

[Ainen]

Which reflects very poorly on one part in this conflict: Something that should have taken days, i.e. achieving air superiority, has still not been achieved.

Well, it's the way it is. Turns out if you're absolutely unprepared to take out GBADs, GBADs won't disappear no matter how much you hate them.
Much like SWaF, VKS only really prepared how to defend/deny. Attacking is harder than denying.

Whatever the case, it's the state of affairs for the last 5 years. Russia has demonstrated absolutely zero will to try again.

Then you have nothing to worry about do you? However, when the Gripen E deal is finally signed, my guess is that this will trigger the usual response: It will both be an unacceptable escalation, crossing yet another red line, but at the same time of no consequence right?

Nothing can be done abt that. But it takes so long, they're past the period when they would've really hurt.
Maybe that's the goal for everyone.

 

[eagle]

It's 1990s DRFM suite (without an/alq-131) and mechanical radar more or less similar/weaker than an/apg-66v7.
Everything you mentioned is true for Gripen E, but that aircraft is not even at IOC.

Are you sure about that? PS-05 is afaik larger and more powerful than APG-66.
Gripen E achieved FOC in Brazil: https://www.zona-militar.com/en/202...fighters-achieve-full-operational-capability/

 

[Arjen]

It was disproven, video was taken over Sweden and was a bit AI-ed.

Disproven where? When?
https://theaviationist.com/2026/03/22/saab-340-aew-ukraine/#deny
https://www.twz.com/air/ukraines-sa...adar-plane-spotted-operating-over-the-country
https://aerospaceglobalnews.com/news/saab-340-aewc-ukraine/
Swedish donation of Saab 340 AEW to Ukraine for coordinating its military assets - F-16, M2000 to name a few. With any Ukrainian Gripen C or E especially adaptable.
Could we please return to Gripen E/F developments, and not turn this into another thread on the war in Ukraine?

 

[AndersJ]

All vks fighters in theater are data linked; it isn't exactly something new. Enough are even MADL-ed(meaning directional high bandwidth link).
That's the base point why delay matter - base Russian a2a aircraft (su-35s) is substantially better since the very beginning of the war. It didn't begin the war in a condition where good 1990s fighter couldn't engage them, but this condition came by around September 2022(LRAAM).

Since spring 2024, su-57s achieved normal operational service, before even f-16. Now, at seems, more than their first full order will come online before gripens will reach Ukraine. By then, It won't be even vanilla aircraft anymore. Even Su-35s are now waiting their own MLU, which may blunt Gripen E effect v them.
This is the point: most western weapons take too long for what they are, and come too late.

Well that may be your opinion on Western gear.

But what do others think?

The thing is, I think people now days are much more sceptical about how Russian aircraft really perform based on what we’ve seen these last 4 years. Historically, the poor performance of Russian aircraft has often been excused by blaming the operators. This was the case both in Vietnam and in the Middle Eastern conflicts. But for the last 4 years, Russian aircraft have been operated by the Russian AF themselves, and the results are no more impressive.

So I think it really is the gear that is sub-par: Just look historically: The Mig-31 was supposed to be a M=3.2 fighter, but then Belenko defected and we learned the truth. The Mig-21’s gun sight basically only works on bombers that fly straight. The SPO-15 RWR, a very central piece of gear in many Russian aircraft turned out to get blocked by its own radar signals. The wings of Mig-23 can’t swing under g-load, and the engine flames out if you fire a R23 missile etc. etc.

So when people here talk about the fantastic performance of the Kinzahl, the Su-35, the R37 and Su-57 etc. I remain sceptical: I think given time, we will learn that these systems, just like the others, are paper tigers and don’t come close to the hype and propaganda that surrounds them, not in the least as seen in the prolific postings in this forum.

But if you can list similar shortcomings in the Gripen E then I’m all ears: Does the Gripen E’s radar block its own RWR? Does the gunsight slip of the HUD in tight turns? Does the engine flame-out when you fire a Meteor?

So I think your statement ”most western weapons take too long for what they are, and come too late” is more than balanced by the fact that at least they work when fielded.....

 

[Arjen]

Gripen C/D is 1990s aircraft with 2010s weapon. Nothing less, nothing more.

This is the Gripen E/F thread.

 

[AndersJ]

This is the Gripen E/F thread.

Yes, and apparently the news article I posted that Ukraine's Gripen E deal is close to being finalized has stirred up a lot of feelings. And if I get the gist of it, apparently the Gripen E is crap, and us Swedes have no idea about aircraft engineering at all.

Makes you wonder why the Ukrainians are so eager for a deal? Maybe they are extrapolating from their experience with the CV90, Archer, Carl-Gustaf, AT4 and NLAW (originally a Swedish design) and are assuming that the Gripen E, being Swedish engineered, will do good service as well?

TBH, I think this is the reason: The Swedish systems they have been using so far have performed well, and partnering up with SAAB on the Gripen E will mean that they will be able to build up their own know-how in modern fighter aircraft engineering as well.

 

[Wotan]

Well, good news for you...

https://defence-blog.com/ukraine-confirms-gripen-pilot-training-to-start-this-year/

"Preparing Ukrainian crews to operate the aircraft will take time. Pilots must learn new flight systems, while ground personnel need training to maintain and service the jets. That process typically includes classroom instruction, simulator work, and live flights, often carried out with support from partner nations."

"The latest version, Gripen E, adds modern radar and avionics and can carry advanced Western weapons. Among them is the Meteor long-range air-to-air missile, which Ukraine and Sweden began discussing for potential transfer in early 2026. The missile is designed to engage targets at extended distances, giving pilots more time to react and increasing the chances of intercepting threats before they get close."

"Sweden has become one of Kyiv’s largest military supporters. Zelenskyy noted that Stockholm ranks among the top five donors to Ukraine’s armed forces by total funding. For 2026–2027, Sweden has set aside 80 billion kronor, or about $8.8 billion, in military aid. That nearly matches the 88.1 billion kronor provided between 2022 and 2025."

Brazil bought 36 Gripen E/F for around half of this sum.
https://sldinfo.com/2026/04/brazil-the-gripen-and-the-long-road-to-aerospace-sovereignty/

We could see a clever scheme where Sweden would pay for the first ukrainian Gripen E/F, aiding Ukraine and it`s own aviation industry in the same time.

 

[AndersJ]

Well, good news for you...

https://defence-blog.com/ukraine-confirms-gripen-pilot-training-to-start-this-year/

"Preparing Ukrainian crews to operate the aircraft will take time. Pilots must learn new flight systems, while ground personnel need training to maintain and service the jets. That process typically includes classroom instruction, simulator work, and live flights, often carried out with support from partner nations."

"The latest version, Gripen E, adds modern radar and avionics and can carry advanced Western weapons. Among them is the Meteor long-range air-to-air missile, which Ukraine and Sweden began discussing for potential transfer in early 2026. The missile is designed to engage targets at extended distances, giving pilots more time to react and increasing the chances of intercepting threats before they get close."

"Sweden has become one of Kyiv’s largest military supporters. Zelenskyy noted that Stockholm ranks among the top five donors to Ukraine’s armed forces by total funding. For 2026–2027, Sweden has set aside 80 billion kronor, or about $8.8 billion, in military aid. That nearly matches the 88.1 billion kronor provided between 2022 and 2025."

Nice. And I think this training has the potential to go faster than it usually does: FMV, the agency handling Swedish arms procurement, have together with the SwAF always been sticklers for the so-called man-machine interface on Swedish aircraft, and a lot of time and effort has traditionally always been spent to lower the pilot's work load, which will make it easier for the UkrAF pilots to transition to the Gripen.

And even if they will be flying the C and D models initially, the principles and logic for handling the on-board systems will be the same in the Gripen E, making the transition to the E-model easier when it's time for that.

 

[Scorpion82]

Nice. And I think this training has the potential to go faster than it usually does: FMV, the agency handling Swedish arms procurement, have together with the SwAF always been sticklers for the so-called man-machine interface on Swedish aircraft, and a lot of time and effort has traditionally always been spent to lower the pilot's work load, which will make it easier for the UkrAF pilots to transition to the Gripen.

And even if they will be flying the C and D models initially, the principles and logic for handling the on-board systems will be the same in the Gripen E, making the transition to the E-model easier when it's time for that.

You better hope that the E will in this respect offer more than the C/D in terms of systems management and sensor tasking in particular. Otherwise it would be hot air to some extend.

 

[AndersJ]

You better hope that the E will in this respect offer more than the C/D in terms of systems management and sensor tasking in particular. Otherwise it would be hot air to some extend.

Of course it will. And which nothing in my post contradicts.

 

[slroger]

Well, good news for you...

https://defence-blog.com/ukraine-confirms-gripen-pilot-training-to-start-this-year/

"Preparing Ukrainian crews to operate the aircraft will take time. Pilots must learn new flight systems, while ground personnel need training to maintain and service the jets. That process typically includes classroom instruction, simulator work, and live flights, often carried out with support from partner nations."

"The latest version, Gripen E, adds modern radar and avionics and can carry advanced Western weapons. Among them is the Meteor long-range air-to-air missile, which Ukraine and Sweden began discussing for potential transfer in early 2026. The missile is designed to engage targets at extended distances, giving pilots more time to react and increasing the chances of intercepting threats before they get close."

"Sweden has become one of Kyiv’s largest military supporters. Zelenskyy noted that Stockholm ranks among the top five donors to Ukraine’s armed forces by total funding. For 2026–2027, Sweden has set aside 80 billion kronor, or about $8.8 billion, in military aid. That nearly matches the 88.1 billion kronor provided between 2022 and 2025."

Brazil bought 36 Gripen E/F for around half of this sum.
https://sldinfo.com/2026/04/brazil-the-gripen-and-the-long-road-to-aerospace-sovereignty/

We could see a clever scheme where Sweden would pay for the first ukrainian Gripen E/F, aiding Ukraine and it`s own aviation industry in the same time.

I wonder how the deal would be in 2026 considering inflation. Brazil got a good deal at $4.5 billion, on the other hand Sweden is really in this to help Ukraine I would think more than trying to make money. So wouldn't be surprised if Ukraine gets an even better deal in addition to some localized production. Gripen E's EW systems, radar, and long range meteor would finally be put to the test. I'm very interested in seeing how they perform, shouldnt be behind the Israeli F16s if the Gripen-E is as good as advertised.

 

[NMaude]

Hopefully we'll see Ukraine flying the Griffen in theatre by the end of the year and I have no doubt that the Meteor AAM will give Russian pilots a nasty surprise.

The Mig-31 was supposed to be a M=3.2 fighter

I think you mean MiG-25.

 

[AndersJ]

I wonder how the deal would be in 2026 considering inflation. Brazil got a good deal at $4.5 billion, on the other hand Sweden is really in this to help Ukraine I would think more than trying to make money. So wouldn't be surprised if Ukraine gets an even better deal in addition to some localized production. Gripen E's EW systems, radar, and long range meteor would finally be put to the test. I'm very interested in seeing how they perform, shouldnt be behind the Israeli F16s if the Gripen-E is as good as advertised.

I hope you are right about the financing, but since SAAB is a business company, and the EU will probably foot the bill, I would not be surprised if SAAB at least makes some money on the deal. However, I still think it will be a win-win for all (barring the Russians) involved:

SAAB can add another customer to the list, and Ukraine will be able to build up competence in fighter aircraft development. And Ukraine has a lot of good engineers to draw on: It’s really impressive the amount of high tech military gear they’ve managed to develop these last 4 years. Just look at the range of the drones now coming out.

And even though there are signs that the special military operation is coming to an end, it looks like the Ukrainians are also prudently making plans for if the situation drags on, and in which case building up an indigenous fighter production capability based on the Gripen E makes perfect sense.

 

[slroger]

I hope you are right about the financing, but since SAAB is a business company, and the EU will probably foot the bill, I would not be surprised if SAAB at least makes some money on the deal. However, I still think it will be a win-win for all (barring the Russians) involved:

SAAB can add another customer to the list, and Ukraine will be able to build up competence in fighter aircraft development. And Ukraine has a lot of good engineers to draw on: It’s really impressive the amount of high tech military gear they’ve managed to develop these last 4 years. Just look at the range of the drones now coming out.

And even though there are signs that the special military operation is coming to an end, it looks like the Ukrainians are also prudently making plans for if the situation drags on, and in which case building up an indigenous fighter production capability based on the Gripen E makes perfect sense.

Yes indeed, SAAB still needs to earn a profit. I want to see if Gripen using the Arexis system can jam and enable the Gripens to operate over occupied Ukraine, As well whether the combined Raven AESA radar, Skyward-G IRST, datalinks and Meteor can actually push back if not destroy the Su-35s/Su-34s and the Russian GBADs. Israeli F16s have shown what capable EW and precision targeting can achieve, if Gripen can pull this the same off it would be a major win for a non stealthy Western 4th or 4.5th gen combat jet.

On the other hand if it doesnt perform as advertised initially the feedback loop will be there to quickly improve the systems especially if Ukraine is coproducing some of the systems. Either way its a win not for Swedish and EU defence companies which will get real operational data on the performance of these systems especially the Arexis EW suite and the Raven ES-05 AESA radar.

 

[DJK]

If theres no profit, Saab can't continue delivering capability and improving it. Its the new F-37 afterall

I hope you are right about the financing, but since SAAB is a business company, and the EU will probably foot the bill, I would not be surprised if SAAB at least makes some money on the deal. However, I still think it will be a win-win for all (barring the Russians) involved:

The ability of Ukraine and Saab to use feedback and improve the overall system (including Erieye and any future satellite links) will be the key to whether Ukraine can sustain any advantage. Also they would need to integrate Ukraine's new AA missile. Future may need finance for next gen AWACS and potentially an even longer ranged AA missile to target Russian bombers and AWACS to really drive the advantage home. Even a roadmap for that might convince Putin to call it quits.

And even though there are signs that the special military operation is coming to an end, it looks like the Ukrainians are also prudently making plans for if the situation drags on, and in which case building up an indigenous fighter production capability based on the Gripen E makes perfect sense.

Russia's operation is very special as far as disasters go. Zelensky previously said the Gripen E would be part of the future air force that enforces the post-war peace. Its dragging on long enough that Russia may get a taste of what significant Gripen numbers can do.

 

[Ainen]

I want to see if Gripen using the Arexis system can jam and enable the Gripens to operate over occupied Ukraine, As well whether the combined Raven AESA radar, Skyward-G IRST, datalinks and Meteor can actually push back if not destroy the Su-35s/Su-34s and the Russian GBADs.

If the idea is to try again if non-stealth can operate over contemporary defenses, it'll be more summer 2023 photos all over again and lots of surprised Pikachu faces. A very expensive way to relearn what has been known since the 1980s.

No non-stealth aircraft should do it (and very much up to debate how many stealth ones you need), and it will turn into another useless bashing of a perfectly fine platform, thrown into a wrong fight.

Israeli F16s have shown what capable EW and precision targeting can achieve,

Israeli air force has, vs Iran (country largely without an air force, and apparently with very notional ECCM).
No one other than Israel has IAF - even USAF (larger and better equipped) suffered casualties.

PSU is no Hel Haavir and will never be (mostly for its own good, as it operates in completely different circumstances); Equally, Iranian air defenses and air force are not quite what Russia has. It's telling that the discussion is circling around defeating VKS threat "as it was", completely ignoring what it actually is as of 2026 (or what it was back then, for the matter).

 

[AndersJ]

Yes indeed, SAAB still needs to earn a profit. I want to see if Gripen using the Arexis system can jam and enable the Gripens to operate over occupied Ukraine, As well whether the combined Raven AESA radar, Skyward-G IRST, datalinks and Meteor can actually push back if not destroy the Su-35s/Su-34s and the Russian GBADs. Israeli F16s have shown what capable EW and precision targeting can achieve, if Gripen can pull this the same off it would be a major win for a non stealthy Western 4th or 4.5th gen combat jet.

On the other hand if it doesnt perform as advertised initially the feedback loop will be there to quickly improve the systems especially if Ukraine is coproducing some of the systems. Either way its a win not for Swedish and EU defence companies which will get real operational data on the performance of these systems especially the Arexis EW suite and the Raven ES-05 AESA radar.

This is a good point I think: There is definitely something in it for SAAB as well, and hopefully the Gripens will perform well.

Fingers crossed that they will be able to add "battle proven" in the positive sense in their marketing material soon. AFAIK, the IAF use of the Mirage in the Middle Eastern wars was a huge boost for Dassault, so the potential for a win is certainly there.

But war is war, and I'm sure there will be some hard learned lessons both for SAAB and the UkrAF down the road if this deal is closed. But having worked on earlier versions of the Gripen, I of course have skin in the game and I'm therefore hopeful it will perform well and that the Ukrainians will be pleased with them.

 

[AndersJ]

The ability of Ukraine and Saab to use feedback and improve the overall system (including Erieye and any future satellite links) will be the key to whether Ukraine can sustain any advantage. Also they would need to integrate Ukraine's new AA missile. Future may need finance for next gen AWACS and potentially an even longer ranged AA missile to target Russian bombers and AWACS to really drive the advantage home. Even a roadmap for that might convince Putin to call it quits.

Russia's operation is very special as far as disasters go. Zelensky previously said the Gripen E would be part of the future air force that enforces the post-war peace. Its dragging on long enough that Russia may get a taste of what significant Gripen numbers can do.

Yes, teamwork with the Erieye is an important aspect as well. But people in aviation forums even so often tend to look at aircraft versus aircraft comparisons, comparing things like top speed, range, climb performance, radar range etc and forget that in a good system, an aircraft is just a piece in then puzzle.

Sweden has long championed a more network centric approach, and I hope the combo, Erieye, Swedish EW, data linked Gripens using not only active, but passive sensors as well in combination with Meterors will prove a deadly and efficient combination.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

You’ve basically never commented or liked any of my posts, so I find it interesting that you choose to jump into this thread to split hairs on the issue if the Mig-25 was “advertised” as being M=3.2. capable.

But the fact is that those were the numbers being thrown around at the time the Mig-25 was unveiled, and those of old enough can remember seeing this in aviation literature at the time.

In addition, AFAIK the Mig-25 did actually do reconnaissance flights over the Middle East at speeds in the range of M=3 to 3.2. However, what was not revealed, was that this basically ruined the engines. And that the the Mig-25 was actually limited to around M=2.8 operationally, and that it actually used vacumm tubes and mostly stainless steel instead of titanium became known only later.

And when people here post about the magnificent Su-35 and how its vaunted R37’s will brush the Gripen E from the skies, then I think a reminder about the Mig-25 story is not out of place.

So my only point with bringing up and mentioning the shortcomings in the Mig-21, Mig-23 and Mig-25 is that this has historically been the case: That the capabilities of Russian gear is often grossly inflated, but that on closer inspection the truth often turns out to be much more mundane.

So I don't think operators of the Gripen E actually need to worry that much, irrespective of all the hype surrounding the Su-35 and R37 etc. posted here. After all, let's be honest: Which are the aircraft the Gripen E has been conceived to combat?

And to me this is exactly what we’re seeing in some of the other threads in this forum as well: Russian gear is being “advertised” as being vastly superior. Just take this as an example: “the Sarmat is the most powerful missile system in the world - four times more powerful than the most capable Western counterparts. Its range exceeds 35,000 km. The missile can follow not only a ballistic but also a suborbital trajectory, penetrating all existing and prospective missile defense systems.” But based on recent video clips of attempted launches we’ve seen, making associations to the MIg-25 is inevitable. And this forum overflows with threads and posts in a similar vein.

Your attitude of total dismissal of all Russian and Chinese technology based on some dubious analysis of the past is equally as wrongheaded as the "everything Russian/Chinese is awesome" fanbois and just as annoying.

The MiG-25 not living up the overheated fantasies of DIA analysts desperate to hype up a foe (and completely contradicting the far more sober and correct CIA assessments) doesn't make it a failure as a poor weapons system.

Many successful missiles and other weapon systems (Western and non-Western) were plagued with defects in early tests and even in initial service. Some of those weapons turn out to be bad, some get cancelled, others have the defects ironed out.

Now, if we return to the topic of Gripen-E, it seems like a sensible technical solution for Ukraine's needs, but its hardly going to get in service in numbers quickly enough to make a meaningful difference to anything for years.

 

[Ad Sumus]

I wonder how the deal would be in 2026 considering inflation. Brazil got a good deal at $4.5 billion, on the other hand Sweden is really in this to help Ukraine I would think more than trying to make money. ...

$4.5 billion was the initial offer. It increased IRC to $ 5.4 billion at contract signature, in part because of additional Brazilian requests. And since signature there have been something like 12-13 renegotiations of delivery and payment schedules resulting in at least 13% cost increase and several years of delay to deliver all 36 aircraft.

 

[UpForce]

View: https://www.youtube.com/live/660YFaGkzB0

16 C/D (early 2027) and 20 E (2030) for Ukraine with a view for more going forward. As the announcement was a live video, it doesn't seem to appear here for now. The link to the news conference (dubbed in English) works though.

Edit: More:

https://www.saab.com/newsroom/press...ke-steps-towards-ukrainian-gripen-acquisition

 

[slroger]

View: https://www.youtube.com/live/660YFaGkzB0

16 C/D (early 2027) and 20 E (2030) for Ukraine with a view for more going forward. As the announcement was a live video, it doesn't seem to appear here for now. The link to the news conference (dubbed in English) works though.

Edit: More:

https://www.saab.com/newsroom/press...ke-steps-towards-ukrainian-gripen-acquisition

I thought they would go with an order of 36 Gripen E plus a donation of 12-16 Gripen C/D for a total of around 50. Because the donation had been leaked iirc at 14 Gripens, otherwise this is still a solid deal because the funding is already available and they could always make additional orders since the purchase intent is over 100 Gripens. So very solid start

 

[ComradeVortex]

16 C/D (early 2027)

https://twitter.com/x/status/2059961474840445372

View: https://x.com/i/status/2059961474840445372


Sweden announced that they are donating 16 JAS 39 Gripen C/D fighter jets to Ukraine, with the first aircraft expected to be delivered in the next 10 months.

They will also enable Ukraine to purchase up to 20 Gripen E/F aircraft using €2.5B of the EU Ukraine Support Loan, with Sweden providing maintenance and training support for the aircraft.

Furthermore, Sweden announced a military aid package for Ukraine worth approximately $2.7 Billion, including $400 million for drone production. This package likely includes the 16 AS 39 Gripen C/Ds.







Target practice for R-37Ms and Su-35S in 3... 2... 1...

 

[Ainen]

~1-1.5 year from now; pilot training can happen in parallel and doesn't require specifically Ukrainian aircraft.
I wonder if they'll be ms20 aircraft, and if yes, whether there's chance to fit PS-05 mk.5; as far as I understand, there was no news of successful upgrade delivery to date.

But it's indeed great pay off for Sweden/Saab. I wonder if we'll soon see a similar Rafale order.

 

[Archibald]

Target practice for R-37Ms and Su-35S in 3... 2... 1...

Keep the ruzzian stronk trolling out of this thread thanks. There are already enough threads infested by trolls elsewhere on this forum, proliferating like cockroaches.

By the way... METEORs are part of the deal.
https://www-opex360-com.translate.g...lukraine/?_x_tr_sl=fr&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=fr

It should be remembered that unlike R-37 which is rocket-powered and thus quickly left gliding, the METEOR ramjet propulsion ensure better manoeuvrability along the entire flight envelope.

 

[slroger]

~1-1.5 year from now; pilot training can happen in parallel and doesn't require specifically Ukrainian aircraft.
I wonder if they'll be ms20 aircraft, and if yes, whether there's chance to fit PS-05 mk.5; as far as I understand, there was no news of successful upgrade delivery to date.

But it's indeed great pay off for Sweden/Saab. I wonder if we'll soon see a similar Rafale order.

I dont see why since there is time they dont do the upgrades to install the radar between now and next year. I think pilot training has already been happening.

 

[Ainen]

I dont see why since there is time they dont do the upgrades to install the radar between now and next year. I think pilot training has already been happening.

I think replacing radar front end (it was advertised as plug out plug in) shouldn't take much time, provided the development is finished.

Which is interesting, as in some ways upgraded CD radar can be ahead of the EF one.

 

[Forest Green]

https://breakingdefense.com/2026/05...ts-on-track-to-receive-batch-of-older-models/

Ukraine to acquire up to 20 Gripen fighter jets, on track to receive batch of older models​

In a statement announcing both moves, Stockholm said that Kyiv "plans to allocate" €2.5 billion ($2.9 billion) from the European Union's Ukraine Support Loan to fund the package for the more modern Gripen combat aircraft.

 

[EmoBirb]

But it's indeed great pay off for Sweden/Saab. I wonder if we'll soon see a similar Rafale order.

Gripen E/F would render Rafale mostly redundant. There's little reason to operate Rafale, Gripen C/D, Gripen E/F, Mirage 2000, F-16, MiG-29 and Su-27 in parallel.

The MiGs and Sukhois have run their course and only exist in little numbers anyway after severe attrition and a dried up supply of available aircraft to be donated. So in the near future that headach is gone. Mirage 2000 and F-16 will ultimately turn out to be band-aids as well one would suspect, after all both are in the current era virtually obsolete, good enough to shoot at drones and launch glide bombs, but that shouldn't be the standard by which one measures multirole fighter jets.

The Gripen E/F and C/D ultimately make the most sense to keep around and build an air force around. The Rafale is a significantly more expensive twin engine fighter with a long wait list. The Gripen can utilize many of the same jointly developed or deployed European munitions, it's a single engine design, demand isn't particularly high and while not as cheap to keep running as many Saab PR people would make you believe, it's still cheaper to operate than the Rafale. The Gripen model range is the logical option for the UAF going forward. Which won't make them a top tier air force anytime soon, but it gives them comparatively dependable aircraft that are vastly more modern than anything they ever had and that can at least keep up with modernized Russian fourth generation aircraft like the Su-35S.

It's to be hoped than unlike South Africa, they'll be able to keep their fleet operational. SA has proven to be too broke to operate something advertised as a budget friendly multirole fighter. The Ukrainian economy is currently held together by loans, but if those dry up and have to be paid back, the Gripen E/F in particular could prove to be a liability.

 

[Ainen]

Gripen E/F would render Rafale mostly redundant. There's little reason to operate Rafale, Gripen C/D, Gripen E/F, Mirage 2000, F-16, MiG-29 and Su-27 in parallel.

Rafale comes as a long range strike plane with unique (and good) strike options. France delivers AASMs, something has to be able to use them.
Plus of course it's orders to France, which is far more influential (up to shadow of nuclear umbrella) than Sweden).

It's a bit forced/political rather than conscious, but I think they're a good hi lo couple.

 

[EmoBirb]

Totally ignoring the truly immense cost of the Rafale, it's tremendous maintenance cost and the already mentioned rather long wait list. Even secondhand Rafales are in high demand.

The Gripen doesn't suffer from these issues to the same extent. Especially the E/F should sufficiently provide the UAF with most of the capabilities they need, for significantly less cost. The Rafale is a great aircraft when you can actually afford to run a fleet of them and when you need an aircraft that can do it all, although nothing particularly outstanding. But when you already have a modern multirole Eurocanard, you don't need a second one. Even Qatar realized that, a country with more money than sense or ambition.

 

[Ainen]

Totally ignoring the truly immense cost of the Rafale, it's tremendous maintenance cost and the already mentioned rather long wait list. Even secondhand Rafales are in high demand.

Well, it comes from credit line anyways...and there's no such thing as too much demand.

For Gripen and Saab in general (AEW!) current events are indeed a true blessing. Like dassault 5-6 years ago, it likely ensures their survival as independent fighter design house.

 

[slroger]

Gripen E/F would render Rafale mostly redundant. There's little reason to operate Rafale, Gripen C/D, Gripen E/F, Mirage 2000, F-16, MiG-29 and Su-27 in parallel.

The MiGs and Sukhois have run their course and only exist in little numbers anyway after severe attrition and a dried up supply of available aircraft to be donated. So in the near future that headach is gone. Mirage 2000 and F-16 will ultimately turn out to be band-aids as well one would suspect, after all both are in the current era virtually obsolete, good enough to shoot at drones and launch glide bombs, but that shouldn't be the standard by which one measures multirole fighter jets.

The Gripen E/F and C/D ultimately make the most sense to keep around and build an air force around. The Rafale is a significantly more expensive twin engine fighter with a long wait list. The Gripen can utilize many of the same jointly developed or deployed European munitions, it's a single engine design, demand isn't particularly high and while not as cheap to keep running as many Saab PR people would make you believe, it's still cheaper to operate than the Rafale. The Gripen model range is the logical option for the UAF going forward. Which won't make them a top tier air force anytime soon, but it gives them comparatively dependable aircraft that are vastly more modern than anything they ever had and that can at least keep up with modernized Russian fourth generation aircraft like the Su-35S.

It's to be hoped than unlike South Africa, they'll be able to keep their fleet operational. SA has proven to be too broke to operate something advertised as a budget friendly multirole fighter. The Ukrainian economy is currently held together by loans, but if those dry up and have to be paid back, the Gripen E/F in particular could prove to be a liability.

You bring up valid points but Ukraine has the funding, experience operating and maintaining multiple combat aircraft under wartime conditions. If Egypt can operate Rafale, F16s, I dont see why they couldnt operate both Rafale and F16s I dont see how an initial batch of say 16 Rafale F3s alongside the 16 Gripen C/D would be difficult to maintain and operate. If anything the two are quite complementary. Gripen C/D can introduce better EW/AA and an AESA/ISRT sensor fusion that Ukraine doesnt currently have. And while Ukraine waits on the Gripen E, they could start off with used Rafale F3s since they bring more hardpoints, SPECTRA and proven stand-off strike capabilities.

So I could see a complimentary force structure between the Gripen C/D and Rafale before eventually Ukraine receives Gripen E. Other thing is there is already expansion of Rafale production so its not out of the realm of possibilities France could spare 16 F3s in a year from now if Ukraine can announce that deal. So I think the two will be very complementary and its a smart decision from Ukraine to aim to operate both

 

[Ainen]

Interesting thing we may see is verify 1990s theories on whether/how well optics can substitute radar for VLO targets.

I doubt VKS will risk Su-57s over Ukrainian airspace (and likely those will bite back first anyway), but S-70s?
One already got lost, it's pure financial story; probably about as expensive as oreshnik fireworks.

Speaking of which, since gripen E is 2031ish capability(probably corresponding to Rafale F5 and maybe even it's new LRAAM), and in any case it's optical package is below that of rafale. I.e. just by (potentially) coming as a war priority earlier/ahead of some commercial procurement, Rafale "hi" is a necessity.
Of course, Rafale is a native SCALP platform, i.e. it's a capability boost over Su-24M. Gripen is (will be) a KEPD carrier...we know how it goes; RBS-15 is not an equivalent.
Finally, french LW program appears to be the leader in Europe. And it's also tied to Rafale.

I.e., with already mentioned politics in mind(French loyalty is always conditional), Gripen is obvious best option for Ukrainian "line" fighter, but it's hard for Ukraine to bet on Gripen alone.

 

[Wotan]

Ukraine is negotiating with Sweden and Saab to purchase up to 150 Gripen aircraft.

Financing has been a problem, but after Hungary finally lifted its veto, Ukraine’s defense minister Mykhailo Fedorov believes that a decision regarding Ukraine’s plans to purchase Swedish Gripen jets could come within a few months.

So finally, it seems that the financing is close to being solved, and yes, it looks like lobbing glide bombs into Ukraine is about to become a much more dangerous business indeed. Svenskt stål biter!

https://www.globaldefensecorp.com/2...-to-purchase-saab-gripen-and-globaleye-awacs/
The Gripen E + Meteor + Globaleye package will mean the beginning of total domination over the ukrainian skyes.

The Varangian Rus from the North will make in a good old traditional way a massacre with the russians aircrafts. The russians have no similar modern AWACS and the old fleet of airborne radars is mostly gone, which means that the Su-35 and Mig-31 will have to try to operate on their own versus a reduced radar signature aircraft (estrimated 0.5 m2 or less from frontal aspect) and which also has a very efficient electronic warfare suite. And a very effective data link. The lack of airborne radars will mean that also the stealth Su-57 would only remain invisible until it fires its own radar trying to scan for targets.

 

[Archibald]

(French loyalty is always conditional)

Classy.
Not against Russia. Support to Ukraine is unconditional, 100%. Of course this may change next year if fucking RN and Bardella win the election and change France into Orban-land bis, their wet dream. Drats. But I'm going off topic and political, not good at all.

the truly immense cost of the Rafale, it's tremendous maintenance cost

Total B.S by the usual suspect: part -Typhoon, part -Ruzzian fangirl. That's tiring. Unlike Typhoon and closer from Gripen philosophy, Rafale maintenance has been carefully planned to be easy and cheap.