Gripen E and NG only carry 8 missiles iirc
Edit: was wrong about missile load my bad.
Also the Gripen E thrust should bring it up over the .97 the C has, i dont have the exact figure but the current C models are all still A models as none of the C’s even use a radar used in the C. The C carried the PS0/5A MK.II when the MS18 was added. With the addition of GBU-39 they should buff the radar to PS0/5A MK.IV
@Timpun do you have more info for the Gripen E specifically? exact figures is all over the place for the most part engine wise. Im better with the EW and the radar than its flight performance.
Gripen E with 10 hardpoints (9 for weapons, 7 for Meteor and 2 for IRIS-T as you guys already mentioned).
For flight charateristics I think it has closer to 1.1 - 1.2 thrust to weight along with it being a tad longer and wider and the wings rear en being closer to straight than the angle it had before meaning it has a much larger wing area. so more T/W and lower wing loading compared to the C variant meaning it can climb faster and loose less energy when turning.
The Gripen C has from my understanding a worse wing loading at empty weight compared to the Rafale and Eurofighter but similar to the EF at gross weight with the Rafale being worse. At max weight then the planes are more spaced apart with the EF beingh the best, Gripen C in the middle and Rafale worst again. Keep in mind that the Rafale has a slightly higher payload capacity than the EF (from what I have found in open sources) and that the small Gripen has a much lower payload.
Gripen E is better than the C in all aspects and matches/beats even the Eurofighter in wing loading with gross weight.
I made a small Excel sheet for just putting the numbers I’ve found from looking around different sites. Also took a top down view of all planes in question (except for the Gripen E) in to CAD and just traced the wings + canards to see if the numbers line up (scaled to the length and width of each plane of course). the Wing area for the JAS 39C lined up almost perfectly while the Rafale was almost 10 m^2 lower than what I read online and the Eurofighter was about 5m^2 lower.
Just keep in mind that these can be wrong both from the sources and my findings so what I say here can be entirely wrong in many directions and were just for me a quick way of compareing the differences I’ve found.
Also to quickly point out, I think the 39 E has the most advanced EW suite, even compared to the F-35 that it outpaces all the other planes by quite a lot. I have read Typhoon pilots that have said that the JAS 39C was incredibly scary to fiight against becuase of the already powerfull EW suite on the 39C. same goes for F-16 and F18 pilots in other Nordic air forces.
I appreciate the info, most people aren’t sure exactly what the Gripen E brings over the C which is why im a huge advocate to get the C broight up tonits actual standards so that the E doesn’t suffer those problems. The E has no right being added as a MS20 clone.
Entirely true, it is an entirely new plane, shares little to nothing with the 39C except how it looks and feels. Cockpit is laid out so that the pilots know exactly where stuff is from the 39C and the weapon hardpoints still have the cool hand held winch for maintinance crews to hang weapons and pull out the engine.
Still need my flight path checklists on the legs
There are some rumors going around in Swedish media that the Swedish military is about to acquire the Taurus cruise missile, nothing official yet though but cool if true.
I think been talk about it for quite some time.
But i wouldn’t mind launching cruise missiles at T-80’s.
Just found this:
The Swedish Defenceforce’s Material Supplier has gotten an order to buy the taurus:
So in practice the Defence forces has told the material supplier to purchase the Taurus but no info on if they are actually ordered yet. :P
really wonder that do PS-05 have better non-AESA variant than what they currently have in the game?
Yes there are a few variants.
Dunno about specifics tho.
Oh absolutely. you can check my report on it here:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/iu69IhxGXgQJ
PS-05/A we have in the game now I think is pretty accurate to the first version Gripen A launched with. Gripen C should have a lock range of somewhere between 130km and 160km with the MK3 radar pre MS20.
MS20 Gripen C should have even longer and the MK3 upgraded should have around 290km range and better detection of low RCS aircraft. At the same distance the non upgraded MK3 could see a plane with 4m RCS the upgraded MK3 can see a 0.4m RCS. And in the same distance the MK4 non-AESA can see a 0.1m RCS.
These numbers line up pretty well with testimonys from Thai pilots and the current radar range in game in terms of percentages.
Sounds about right. a bit sad that they kept the same Mk upgrade for the JAS39C
Yeah, it is an interesting decision as the 39C has been upgraded in all aspects over it’s service. The 39C the Swedish airforce has today is closer to the 39E than the 39C in it’s begining stages haha.
And the fact that they do not want to specify which MS version is strange to. Both the Rafale and Typhoon have specific generation, Tranche, Block, whatever they call it, specified.
Also wonder a bit how the 39C/D upgrades will turn out in the close future. Will be interesting to see.
This document talks quite a lot about it actually (if you know Swedish).
I am Swedish so I hope I know some :D
Will look through them in a bit.
Just read the parts about the planes, Strv 123 and Visby corvette. They say only what is needed hahaha. That is how it goes with classified information.
Also I am not a big fan of the future 39C/D upgrades being MS20 Block 2.1 (which from my understanding already is in service), MS20 Block 3 and Block 4. MS21 is the first of 39E modifications which will be taken in to active service to a limited degree in the end of this year by the looks of it.
I had hoped that there would be a MS21 39C but instead we get blocks
Ah. Storm Shadow’s better.
Nah, they are about the same size and weight and their warheads are similar in operation and weight. Both are dual stage and delayed fuze of the main warhead to penetrate deep bunkers. Both rely on the same guidance modes and both have IR cameras to aquire the final target.
What is different is the engines. Storm Shadow/Scalp has a turbojet and KEPD 350 has a more efficient turbo-fan. This means that the KEPD 350 has about twice the range of the Storm Shadow/Scalp.
