4 ms·

I'm sure this news will annoy many a Swedish military nerd. JAS 39 Gripen was designed for takeoff and landing from highways just like its predecessor JA 37 Vig

I'm sure this news will annoy many a Swedish military nerd. JAS 39 Gripen was designed for takeoff and landing from highways just like its predecessor JA 37 Viggen (developed in the 70's) could. In fact, that JAS 39E/F is easier and cheaper to operate (disputed of course) was one of its main selling points. The Finnish air force, however, choose F-35A over JAS 39E/F.

red_admiral 3y ago
Switzerland, too, has been doing this for ages: http://aircraftnut.blogspot.com/2012/11/swiss-air-force-jets-landing-on-highway.html http://aircraftnut.blogspot.com/2012/11/swiss-air-force-jets...
izacus 3y ago
Was Grippen actually cheaper to operate? Because I've been following Swiss and Finnish purchase orders and they claimed that F-35A came out both cheaper to procure and was not more expensive to operate (mostly due to much higher production numbers since every other NATO country seems to be procuring them, making spare parts and per unit costs lower).
- H8crilA 3y ago
  The savings are due to the production scale and expected operation time. F-35 is so cheap (amortized) because it is a) bought by everyone and their mother, b) expected to operate for many, many decades.
  - tapland 3y ago
    I think that's one of the reasons the newer Gripen uses the same engine as the F/A-18. I miss the old Gripen howl =)
  - ChrisMarshallNY 3y ago
    > F-35 is so cheap Things I never thought I would hear...
    - H8crilA 3y ago
      Since we're on HN I should also add that the most delay producing part of the plane was, by far, the software. Also, both of my points are important. The very long expected lifespan may be even more important.
    - izacus 3y ago
      It's surprising isn't it? After all the costs and overruns... but the economies of scale kicked in becaues EU NATO countries are buying them in large numbers (and they're noticably more advanced than competitors now that software is actually working).
      - Teever 3y ago
        Aren't a large portion of the F-35s that have been made to date practically complete write-offs because they're not going to update the software on them to support features from the most recent version?
  - d3vmax 3y ago
    But to the accounts department, it is cheaper and rightly so?
LtWorf 3y ago
Well I'm sure one of the backroom conditions for being let into NATO is that they must shop USA armaments, regardless of which is better/cheaper.
- Toutouxc 3y ago
  Huh? Plenty of NATO members use their own or other members’ gear. Why would that be a condition (even a non-written one) now?
  - LtWorf 3y ago
    Finland is a new NATO member and required approval from existing members. And sweden is not a member so doesn't vote. Of course uk and germany can do whatever they feel like, because they are already in NATO.
- simion314 3y ago
  >Well I'm sure one of the backroom conditions for being let into NATO is that they must shop USA armaments, regardless of which is better/cheaper Since you are so sure, what is a cheaper alternative? FYI Romanian wants to buy 48 F35 , we found no better alternative . Let me thank Putin and his plan for finally forcing my country to modernize our aviation , navi and ground forces because we were decades behind.
  - LtWorf 3y ago
    Here in sweden they just took advantage of the war to ask to join nato, abandon neutrality, swiftly change the constitution, cut funds to social programs, without a public uproar, just pushing the narrative that russia was going to invade any moment.
    - simion314 3y ago
      And is history not showing Russia is always invading someone? Is Sweden entering NATO increasing your defense budget or what is making you not liking this ?
jabl 3y ago
It's not only about being able to takeoff and land from a highway. The Gripen is designed to be maintained by conscripts, and the entire maintenance system is designed for dispersed operation from the get-go. E.g. all the usual spare parts and tools are located in shipping containers even in "normal" usage on an airbase. The hangars have slots in the sides where they place the containers, the containers thus becoming an integral part of the hangar storage. When it's time to disperse, they just shut the container doors and lift the container up on a truck and drive it away. From what I understand the F-35 maintenance system is designed around the aircraft being based on permanent air bases. Could a next generation maintenance system be similarly designed around dispersed operation? I'm sure it could, but it's not the reality today. As for the cost, I can definitely understand the F-35 being cheaper just due to all the fixed costs (R&D, etc.) being amortized over a huge number of aircraft over the life of the program.

red_admiral 3y ago

Switzerland, too, has been doing this for ages: http://aircraftnut.blogspot.com/2012/11/swiss-air-force-jets-landing-on-highway.html http://aircraftnut.blogspot.com/2012/11/swiss-air-force-jets...

izacus 3y ago

Was Grippen actually cheaper to operate? Because I've been following Swiss and Finnish purchase orders and they claimed that F-35A came out both cheaper to procure and was not more expensive to operate (mostly due to much higher production numbers since every other NATO country seems to be procuring them, making spare parts and per unit costs lower).

H8crilA 3y ago
The savings are due to the production scale and expected operation time. F-35 is so cheap (amortized) because it is a) bought by everyone and their mother, b) expected to operate for many, many decades.
- tapland 3y ago
  I think that's one of the reasons the newer Gripen uses the same engine as the F/A-18. I miss the old Gripen howl =)
- ChrisMarshallNY 3y ago
  > F-35 is so cheap Things I never thought I would hear...
  - H8crilA 3y ago
    Since we're on HN I should also add that the most delay producing part of the plane was, by far, the software. Also, both of my points are important. The very long expected lifespan may be even more important.
  - izacus 3y ago
    It's surprising isn't it? After all the costs and overruns... but the economies of scale kicked in becaues EU NATO countries are buying them in large numbers (and they're noticably more advanced than competitors now that software is actually working).
    - Teever 3y ago
      Aren't a large portion of the F-35s that have been made to date practically complete write-offs because they're not going to update the software on them to support features from the most recent version?
- d3vmax 3y ago
  But to the accounts department, it is cheaper and rightly so?

LtWorf 3y ago

Well I'm sure one of the backroom conditions for being let into NATO is that they must shop USA armaments, regardless of which is better/cheaper.

Toutouxc 3y ago
Huh? Plenty of NATO members use their own or other members’ gear. Why would that be a condition (even a non-written one) now?
- LtWorf 3y ago
  Finland is a new NATO member and required approval from existing members. And sweden is not a member so doesn't vote. Of course uk and germany can do whatever they feel like, because they are already in NATO.
simion314 3y ago
>Well I'm sure one of the backroom conditions for being let into NATO is that they must shop USA armaments, regardless of which is better/cheaper Since you are so sure, what is a cheaper alternative? FYI Romanian wants to buy 48 F35 , we found no better alternative . Let me thank Putin and his plan for finally forcing my country to modernize our aviation , navi and ground forces because we were decades behind.
- LtWorf 3y ago
  Here in sweden they just took advantage of the war to ask to join nato, abandon neutrality, swiftly change the constitution, cut funds to social programs, without a public uproar, just pushing the narrative that russia was going to invade any moment.
  - simion314 3y ago
    And is history not showing Russia is always invading someone? Is Sweden entering NATO increasing your defense budget or what is making you not liking this ?

jabl 3y ago

It's not only about being able to takeoff and land from a highway. The Gripen is designed to be maintained by conscripts, and the entire maintenance system is designed for dispersed operation from the get-go. E.g. all the usual spare parts and tools are located in shipping containers even in "normal" usage on an airbase. The hangars have slots in the sides where they place the containers, the containers thus becoming an integral part of the hangar storage. When it's time to disperse, they just shut the container doors and lift the container up on a truck and drive it away. From what I understand the F-35 maintenance system is designed around the aircraft being based on permanent air bases. Could a next generation maintenance system be similarly designed around dispersed operation? I'm sure it could, but it's not the reality today. As for the cost, I can definitely understand the F-35 being cheaper just due to all the fixed costs (R&D, etc.) being amortized over a huge number of aircraft over the life of the program.