Russia and Ukraine flashpoint

[Qwark]

BFR said:

Qwark said:

The Gripen can land and fly from improvised runways, has better sensors, electronic warfare and sensors. It's also able to shoot a lot of missiles (Taurus/Meteor), not only American ones, which Trump may not want to sell.

For Ukraine the Gripen E is a solid option. It doesn't have to compete with the F22 or F35. Also it being cheaper to fly is nice. Also can the F16 outmanoeuvre the Meteor, which is fired beyond visual range.

None of that means Jack squat.

It's not about which plane is newer or has better sensors.

It's about which plane has a better COMBAT history.

If I was a military pilot, I would take the Fighting Falcon over the Gripen, in a heartbeat.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab_JAS_39_Gripen#Operational_history

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dynamics_F-16_Fighting_Falcon_operational_history

Maybe because the plane was made, by a country that has been neutral for a long time and does not actively try to overthrow about every government with oil there is. Just because a plane hasn't been used that much in combat doesn't mean it's a bad plane.

Also having more advanced hardware is pretty damn important for a fighter. A single F22 could take out an entire F16 squadron, before it's even a pixel on their radars. Now the Gripen E is nowhere close to the F22 (only the F35 is). But it's still a more advanced plane than the leftover F16 ripe for retirement that Ukraine has been getting. There is a reason thousands of F16 planes have retired.

The Rafale and Eurofigher also have barely been used for missions compared to the F16. The Gripen has done a combat mission in Cambodia for Thailand.