Military Review

The chances of the Swedish fighter JAS 39 Gripen against the Russian Su-35

74

The Swedish JAS 39 Gripen is called a serious competitor to the Russian Su-35 multirole fighter. A number of Western media even claim that Gripen is superior to Su, but is it really so?


To begin with, the Swedish concern Saab, which is the manufacturer of Gripen, is extremely interested in conquering the world market of new generation fighters. But in order to realize this task, he needs to gain competitive advantages over his rivals or, if this is not possible, to convince potential buyers of the superiority of their products. And here competent PR comes into play, to which Saab has always been quite attentive.

Gripen forte


During a visit to Finland, Commander-in-Chief of the Swedish Air Force Mats Helgesson stated that the JAS 39 Gripen would be able to destroy the Russian Su without any problems. Moreover, Helgesson said that it was Gripen that were the aircraft designed to destroy Russian fighters. Such a “remarkable” property, in his opinion, is determined by the ability of JAS 39 Gripen to jam the radio signal and thereby stealthily enter the line of attack.

British military expert aviation Justin Bronk of the Royal United Institute of Defense Research also praised the Swedish aircraft, arguing that thanks to advanced electronic warfare, the Gripen is superior to all other modern fighters. Concern Saab, striving to surpass the competitors, chose not the development of stealth technologies, but the development of electronic warfare equipment: you can always upgrade them without rebuilding the entire aircraft.

Indeed, electronic warfare is a strong point of the Swedish aircraft. But this is not enough to talk about the superiority of the JAS 39 Gripen. For example, in Syria, the Russian Su-30SM and Su-35S could not oppose anything serious even to American aircraft equipped with modern high-end airborne radars. Perhaps the survivability of the Swedish aircraft due to the use of modern electronic warfare systems will actually increase, but this does not mean that it will be able to fight the Su-35 on equal terms.


Light fighter is not a competitor to heavy


It is worth paying attention to the fact that the Swedish Air Force does not have a division into classes, so the JAS 39 Gripen is considered as a universal aircraft, which can be set for any tasks. But in fact it is a light multi-purpose fighter. As shows история air fights of the last decades, in real military operations such fighters always lost to specialized aircraft. Su-35 belongs to the class of heavy fighters.

Moreover, the plane has already been “run-in” in the conditions of real hostilities in Syria, unlike the Swedish Gripen, and it has established itself quite well there. It is worth considering that the Gripen E is much lighter than the Su-35S, inferior to it in engine thrust, it has lower flight speed and lower maneuverability.

The Swedish concern equipped the aircraft with a General Electric F414 engine, but it is also less powerful than the AL-31 used on Russian Su-27 fighters. Will modern electronic warfare equipment cover all these shortcomings?

Therefore, if we compare the Swedish aircraft with Russian competitors, it is clearly not with the Su-35, but with MiGs that are closer in class.

Finally, do not forget about another factor that is very important in any aerial combat - individual pilot skill. Russian pilots flying the Su-35 have behind them an impressive experience of real combat operations, which cannot be said about the military pilots of Swedish aviation. Accordingly, the level of skill, especially when it comes to the ability to act in a real air battle, they have a higher definition, and therefore the chances for the “Gripen” are frankly small.

It is difficult to disagree with Igor Morozov, a member of the Federation Council of the Russian Federation, who advised the Swedish Air Force not to create mythical “destroyers” of Russian aircraft, but to decide on the organization of defense of its own airspace.
Author:
74 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. alone
    alone 12 May 2020 14: 06 New
    17
    Only real aerial battles can tell who is capable of anything ... The rest is from the category of "Who has dad stronger!"
    As for Grippen, you should not discard it .. The Swedes have a powerful military-industrial complex, so making a good fighter is not a problem for them
    1. NIKN
      NIKN 15 May 2020 11: 38 New
      0
      Another masterpiece of writing from the series who is stronger than a whale vs an elephant ... Even to simulate a situation of an unexpected meeting face to face (in modern realities) is quite difficult. Well, whoever has better security and organization along with detection and security tools does not even relate to the topic of aircraft. Aircraft should be considered according to other criteria, including even the parameters of the cost of maintenance, etc.
  2. knn54
    knn54 12 May 2020 14: 07 New
    +6
    If the Swedes often repeat about superiority, then they themselves doubt it.
    1. 210ox
      210ox 12 May 2020 15: 16 New
      +2
      It's not about the Swedes. And those who sit at the controls of these fighters, their training and of course weapons. The Swedes are stubbornly promoting the aircraft around the world.
    2. Morgan
      Morgan 12 May 2020 16: 37 New
      +2
      “Swedes often repeat about superiority, so they themselves doubt it” - read the articles on this site 90% about the superiority of Russian weapons.
    3. Kalmar
      Kalmar 15 May 2020 16: 17 New
      0
      Quote: knn54
      If the Swedes often repeat about superiority, then they themselves doubt it.

      Ordinary self-promotion: you have to somehow sell your planes.
  3. iouris
    iouris 12 May 2020 14: 11 New
    +6
    What are Sweden's chances of surviving in the event of a world war?
    1. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 12 May 2020 14: 36 New
      11
      The biggest .... like in 1 and 2 world wars.
      1. Cowbra
        Cowbra 12 May 2020 14: 42 New
        +5
        Who cares about 10 million Swedes sitting on bare rocks in an embrace with Karlsson?) In half the cities of China there are more people
        1. Zaurbek
          Zaurbek 12 May 2020 14: 43 New
          +1
          They are simply neutral and have not participated in wars since the time of Karl.
          1. Cowbra
            Cowbra 12 May 2020 15: 05 New
            +3
            These wild Russians scared fish-eaters))) Wow, aggressors! Well, nothing, we will build a Saab and once again snatch from them near Poltava! laughing
            1. Zaurbek
              Zaurbek 12 May 2020 15: 08 New
              +4
              They will simply climb into tenders with Mig35 .... they have a good niche, smaller and cheaper than F16. With all the arsenal of missiles.
              1. Sailor
                Sailor 12 May 2020 21: 35 New
                +2
                Gripen is not a bad aircraft, especially if there are Meteor missiles, it may not be as maneuverable as the Mig, however, as well as the Su, but still a dangerous opponent if a good pilot is at the helm. I don’t understand why the MiG-35s are always belittled in comparison with the Su-35, in the melee the MiG is more maneuverable and even the avionics of the MiG have grown.
          2. Kuroneko
            Kuroneko 12 May 2020 15: 08 New
            +4
            Quote: Zaurbek
            They are simply neutral and have not participated in wars since the time of Karl.

            Only on paper.
            During the Soviet-Finnish War (1939–1940), assistance to the Finns was organized in Sweden. Svenska frivilligkåren (Swedish Volunteer Corps) from former and active members of the Swedish army, numbering 9640 volunteers, traveled from Sweden to Finland. At the same time, Sweden argued that it was not a party to the conflict and continued to maintain neutrality. Sweden also provided Finland with significant cash loans, sent weapons, and organized fundraising.
            1. Zaurbek
              Zaurbek 12 May 2020 15: 11 New
              -1
              Help is not war .... they worked for the Germans and their Jews themselves organizedly gave the Germans.
              1. Kuroneko
                Kuroneko 12 May 2020 15: 14 New
                +5
                Quote: Zaurbek
                Help is not war ...

                I specially highlighted the key phrase with a bold.
                Or also CAPSOM should highlight the phrase "from the former and acting soldiers of the Swedish army "? ^ _ ^
                And almost ten kiloryls - this, you know, is pretty serious. A simple "help" is no longer pulled. Several regiments, in fact a division. Very solid for a country with a low population.
                1. Zaurbek
                  Zaurbek 12 May 2020 15: 25 New
                  -3
                  However, Sweden is not an aggressor country according to the results ..... the Russian Federation did not fight against Ukraine ... either. and the USSR itself attacked Finland. So volunteers went. The Swedish squadron did not appear in Murmansk.
          3. Insurgent
            Insurgent 12 May 2020 17: 04 New
            +5
            Quote: Zaurbek
            They are simply neutral and have not participated in wars since the time of Karl.


            But what about the so-called “Finland war” of 1808-1809?

            As a result of which, on September 5 (17), 1809, a peace treaty was signed in Friedrichsham, the essential articles of which were:

            - the conclusion by Sweden of peace with Russia and its allies (France fellow and Denmark);
            - The adoption of a continental blockade and the closure of Swedish harbors for the British;
            - the concession of all of Finland, the Aland Islands and the eastern parts of West Botnia and Lapland, to the eternal possession of Russia.

            That's when it came genuine swedish neutrality. No creeps yes .
          4. Yngvar
            Yngvar 12 May 2020 17: 08 New
            -3
            What are they "neutral"? Hitler was helped with ore, bearings and ready-made mechanisms for the technique! Remember the Oerlikon anti-aircraft guns, a very powerful and formidable weapon for those times! The fact that there was a kind of “neutrality” was caused only by the fact that their territory was really not interesting to anyone on their own, and if the real aggressor needed something from them, they would give it up themselves ...
            1. Zaurbek
              Zaurbek 12 May 2020 17: 12 New
              -1
              They are not in NATO .... and sovereignty declared ... and ore is a business! Russia to Ukraine and coal and GOS always sold
            2. Kuroneko
              Kuroneko 13 May 2020 04: 58 New
              +3
              Quote: Yngvar
              Remember the Oerlikon anti-aircraft guns, a very powerful and formidable weapon for those times!

              You are already confusing Sweden with Switzerland. Oerlikon Contraves AG is a Swiss company. https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oerlikon_Contraves
          5. Alanart
            Alanart 12 May 2020 17: 15 New
            +2
            Well, why? In the 19th century, they tried to intervene in the European showdown on the side of England. And they were left without Finland following the results of the Russian-Swedish war of 1809.
            Although, if you had in mind Karl number 13, who ruled at that time, and not 12, sorry, I was wrong :)
          6. Herman 4223
            Herman 4223 13 May 2020 15: 13 New
            0
            In the 19th century they still tried to participate.
      2. BARKAS
        BARKAS 12 May 2020 14: 54 New
        -1
        Will not a single nuclear charge fall on Sweden?
        1. Zaurbek
          Zaurbek 12 May 2020 14: 56 New
          +1
          What purpose? Get a fascist grenade from a Soviet soldier?
    2. alexey3312
      alexey3312 14 May 2020 13: 42 New
      0
      The later barks in our direction, the more chances. But if it comes to a vigorous strike, tady oh, like everyone .....
  4. HAM
    HAM 12 May 2020 14: 13 New
    +8
    "... is determined by the ability of JAS 39 Gripen to jam the radio signal and thereby stealthily enter the line of attack."

    I was very interested in this particular maneuver --- how can I suppress a radio signal without radiating anything, but I myself can remain invisible ??
    1. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 12 May 2020 14: 36 New
      -3
      The Russian Federation professes the same approach with its Su35C.
    2. opus
      opus 12 May 2020 14: 52 New
      +4
      Quote: HAM
      I was very interested in this particular maneuver --- how can I suppress a radio signal without radiating anything, but I myself can remain invisible ??

      If "radiating", then theoretically it is very easy
      electromagnetic waves in free space are transverse waves in which the electric and magnetic field strength vectors oscillate perpendicular to the direction of wave propagation

      the signal reflected from the aircraft only needs to be studied with the same power and amplitude signal as EM B, but in antiphase

      and there will be ZERO at the input of the radar receiver of our SU-35s
      Threat. it's just theoretically ONLY
      1. HAM
        HAM 12 May 2020 16: 26 New
        +1
        But, anyway, you need to radiate something ... and not the fact that the emitted signal will be a copy of the reflected one and it is in antiphase .. is that so? Although, you answered ---- only theoretically ...
        1. opus
          opus 12 May 2020 16: 44 New
          +1
          Quote: HAM
          But, you still need to radiate something

          Can I have some more:
          1. Absorb approximately 70% of the incoming energy, then reflected by the target and reaching the receiver will be perceived as a hindrance
          2. “bend around”: make EMV go around the target
          3. to disperse the received EMV not in the direction of the receiver
          1 + 3 is 117,22,35
          Quote: HAM
          .and not the fact that the emitted signal will be a copy of the reflected signal and it is in antiphase .. so?

          it is necessary to modulate the signal precisely in the reverse phase, with almost 100% coincidence in frequency, amplitude and time.
          =================
          need a super duper computer, which for 3-4 packets of received signals will calculate, calculate and give generation commands.
          Well, antennas, radiators throughout the body are needed essno
      2. Pete mitchell
        Pete mitchell 12 May 2020 17: 10 New
        +5
        Quote: opus
        it's just theoretically ONLY
        In practice, they use changing radiation pattern: if the enemy’s radar is working, then the signal is not emitted into this space element / the chart is adjusted both in direction and in power-range / and it turns out that the enemy does not receive information about the working radar
    3. tlauicol
      tlauicol 12 May 2020 14: 53 New
      0
      Quote: HAM
      "... is determined by the ability of JAS 39 Gripen to jam the radio signal and thereby stealthily enter the line of attack."

      I was very interested in this particular maneuver --- how can I suppress a radio signal without radiating anything, but I myself can remain invisible ??

      just like dazzling with headlights
      1. opus
        opus 12 May 2020 15: 35 New
        +1
        Quote: Tlauicol
        just like dazzling with headlights

        it won’t work out that way.
        Headlight and will be destroyed first
        1. tlauicol
          tlauicol 12 May 2020 16: 12 New
          0
          Those blinded? No
          1. opus
            opus 12 May 2020 16: 25 New
            +1
            Quote: Tlauicol
            Those blinded? No

            how can I blind the receiving radar path with radiation from another radar station I do not know.
            But everyone will see the "blinding"
  5. Vladimir_2U
    Vladimir_2U 12 May 2020 14: 32 New
    -2
    Yes, Saab forgotten how to make cars, but then a solid plane. )))
  6. tlauicol
    tlauicol 12 May 2020 14: 32 New
    +2
    another stopitsotoy article on the topic: "what is such an electronic network, electronic warfare, AFAR? - we are their maneuverability, maneuverability"
    nothing new
    1. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 12 May 2020 14: 38 New
      +5
      Well, we don’t have an AFAR, the Swedes are strong in communications, NATO has its own missile arsenal. Along with Avax, a completely normal fighter. But a niche. Because flies not very far. And the price is like 1,5 Su35S
      1. opus
        opus 12 May 2020 15: 46 New
        +3
        Quote: Zaurbek
        And the price is like 1,5 Su35S

        belay
        Russian State Corporation "Russian Technologies" 24 May 2018 at the opening of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, announced that in 2015 Russia and China signed a supply contract 24 Su-35S fighters worth $ 2,5 billion. TO Russia has already delivered 14 Su-35S planes to China,
        2500/24 ​​= $ 104,17 million SU-35s
        SAAB Gripen 39 Unit cost US $ 30–60 million for JAS 39

        Finnish Air Force
        The Air Force plans to retire its fleet of F / A-18C / D Hornet jets between 2025 and 2029. The HX-FP carries an estimated price tag of € 11.4 billion (US $ 13.1 billion), a cost that includes life-cycle service and maintenance overheads on a fleet of 64 multirole aircraft.
        The government received proposals from four countries, including the United States, Sweden, France and Britain.

        $ 13.1 billion: 64 total $ 20,468 million

        Swiss Air Force
        Both houses of the Swiss Parliament, the National Council (Nationalrat) and the State Council (Ständerat), received the approval of most of their members for the purchase of Gripen E in August 2013 and September 2013, respectively. In December 2014, FMV placed a $ 50 million purchase order with Saab for Gripen E.

        WHERE TALES ARE ABOUT
        Quote: Zaurbek
        And the price is like 1,5 Su35S

        ??
        1. Zaurbek
          Zaurbek 12 May 2020 15: 53 New
          +3
          I'm talking about Grippen NG, which with AFAR
          1. opus
            opus 12 May 2020 16: 29 New
            0
            Quote: Zaurbek
            I'm talking about Grippen NG, which with AFAR

            and I
            Gripen NG, designated JAS 39E / F
            they are all with AESA (AFAR) Raven ES-05 from Selex ES
            Neither Finns nor Swiss will buy JAS 39A, B, C or D with PS-05 / A Ericsson / GEC-Marconi
        2. Zaurbek
          Zaurbek 12 May 2020 16: 36 New
          +2
          It is reported that the choice was made mainly because of the commercial attractiveness of the Swedish offer - the Swedish side offers the supply of eight JAS-39C / D Gripen aircraft at a price of 1 billion leva (510 million euros),
          1. Zaurbek
            Zaurbek 12 May 2020 16: 38 New
            +2
            63 million .... not for E / F
            1. Pete mitchell
              Pete mitchell 12 May 2020 17: 12 New
              +3
              Quote: Zaurbek
              63 million .... not for E / F

              Plus a relatively cheap hour; plus 100% off set deal, which is beneficial to the buyer
              1. Zaurbek
                Zaurbek 12 May 2020 17: 14 New
                +1
                I do not argue. But for NG voiced at $ 100 million .... and Su35 for the Chinese +2 trd + training - $ 100 million
                1. Pete mitchell
                  Pete mitchell 12 May 2020 17: 31 New
                  +5
                  I think they, SAAB, do not claim to be “an indisputable victory” - this is all verbiage from politics. But in fairness: the aircraft was originally built on an elementary base of the 4th generation, it is imprisoned for all missions - change the suspension and forward, very unpretentious. Decent machine, you can not underestimate. I talked like that with the wing commander, but I was told more by a classmate who had the opportunity to meet.
          2. opus
            opus 12 May 2020 17: 14 New
            +1
            Quote: Zaurbek
            It is reported that the choice was made mainly because of the commercial attractiveness of the Swedish offer - the Swedish side offers the supply of eight JAS-39C / D Gripen aircraft at a price of 1 billion leva (510 million euros),

            by whom, by whom?
            Quote: Zaurbek
            63 million .... not for E / F

            You see better

    2. Emphasis
      Emphasis 12 May 2020 14: 40 New
      +2
      And so it is! Oooh and defeated the enemy. Directly trampled without giving any chance at all.
      In general, as it were, yes, every frog praises its aviation, which is probably the way it should be. Advertising, as they say, is the engine of progress !!!
  7. Eug
    Eug 12 May 2020 14: 39 New
    +5
    EW tools often themselves become the goal, so it’s not a panacea, although, as for me, it is more rational than stealth to the detriment of aerodynamics and strength. It is strange that they are silent about the superiority of the JAS-39 over the Su-57, most likely it is not exported so far.
  8. opus
    opus 12 May 2020 14: 45 New
    11
    Quote: Ilya Polonsky
    Moreover, the plane has already been “run-in” in the context of real hostilities in Siriand, unlike the Swedish Gripen, and proved to be quite good there. It’s worth considering that the Gripen E is much lighter than the Su-35S,

    belay
    ... and what did this break-in give?
    flight watches for pilots?
    were there (in Syria) any air battles (Su-35 vs bearded) were there?

    Quote: Ilya Polonsky
    Therefore, if we compare the Swedish aircraft with Russian competitors, it is clearly not with the Su-35, but with MiGs that are closer in class.

    in real battle, no one will compare anything
    Gripen will not wind circles waiting for MIG-29/35
  9. Maks1995
    Maks1995 12 May 2020 14: 49 New
    +3
    And, already measured a month ago, who has longer ...
    Naturally, the Swedes are praising their own to sell.

    But the plane, everyone agrees, is good. Lightweight, single-engine, economical, cheap, takes a lot of load.

    And so until there are training sessions., It is not clear. Supersound is not particularly suitable for aerobatics, but single-engine ones are often maneuverable due to lightness.

    Built-in electronic warfare is also not bad.
  10. Pavel57
    Pavel57 12 May 2020 15: 44 New
    +2
    The author forgot to give at least some comparison on the detection range in a duel battle and the missile launch range.
    1. shahor
      shahor 12 May 2020 17: 46 New
      +1
      Quote: Pavel57
      missile launch range.
      Reply

      And here it is interesting. The Swede, as far as I know, has already been shot by Meteors. These missiles are already part of its armament. What can Su say here?
  11. martin-159
    martin-159 12 May 2020 15: 44 New
    +6
    For example, in Syria, the Russian Su-30SM and Su-35S could not even be seriously opposed by American aircraft equipped with modern high-end airborne radars.
    When in Syria, our fought with American planes? Did I miss something?
  12. Courier
    Courier 12 May 2020 16: 16 New
    +3
    For example, in Syria, the Russian Su-30SM and Su-35S could not even be seriously opposed by American aircraft equipped with modern high-end airborne radars.


    According to rumors, about a hundred F 35 were shot down
  13. Finn
    Finn 12 May 2020 16: 42 New
    +1
    And if Peter 1 is at the helm? Everything, they all have boats just in case.
  14. cniza
    cniza 12 May 2020 18: 13 New
    +2
    He advised the Swedish Air Force not to create mythical "destroyers" of Russian aircraft, but to decide on the organization of defense of its own airspace.


    Very practical advice ...
  15. APASUS
    APASUS 12 May 2020 21: 11 New
    +1
    It’s not customary to say something from scratch. We compared the performance characteristics, conducted training fights, took them to Syria, Libya, Iraq for testing, so far only ambition, now it’s called: aggressive PR
  16. Sarkazm
    Sarkazm 12 May 2020 21: 49 New
    0
    JAS-39 is, as far as I remember, the first 5th generation aircraft in the world. At the same time, cruising supersonic speed and the widespread use of stealth technologies were not set, but the task was to create a light multi-functional fighter with a low cost of operation.
    Many starting to ernichat and clever, forget some numbers - the population of Sweden is only 10 million. people, think ... At the same time, the Swedes ALREADY have their own 5th generation fighter, have their own submarines with an air-independent installation, have modern corvettes and boats, a modern infantry fighting vehicle, as well as vehicles based on it, excellent air defense systems, by the way MANPADS RBS70 / 90 is one of the most effective in the world, RPG Karl Gustov is one of the most common in the world, the last modification has no serial analogues, modern ATGMs, remember the attack from above and whose development it is, AWACS aircraft, articulated ATVs, communication systems and control systems tions, magnificent artillery systems, systems for reconnaissance and electronic warfare they are superior to almost all NATO countries, and can compete with us, etc., etc. Moreover, it is one of the most socially oriented and comfortable countries for citizens to live in.
    And note ALL of the above ALREADY NOW is in service, not tomorrow. Now ask yourself how many 5th generation fighters are in service with us? How many submarines with VNU? How many DRLO aircraft? How many modern infantry fighting vehicles? ... And then let's have a bit of fun and a little chorus.

    The Swedes are VERY serious about defense issues, see what training a Swedish soldier is taking, take the level of training of a regular infantry / motorized infantry unit shooter, the level of training of reservists, they are much superior to ours. So do not underestimate the Swedes, they are stronger than the Finns, and I recall the Finns were able to withstand orders of magnitude superior to Finland against the USSR. So with regard to the Swedes, and the very Finns, hatred, a kind of arrogance and condescension are very, very inappropriate. IMHO, you need to take arrogance and arrogance and learn a lot from them diligently, including in matters related to defense, management and development of the military-industrial complex. As a humorous retreat, remember the climate of Sweden or Finland, then remember the statements made by some domestic geniuses or woodpeckers that, according to climatic conditions, Russia is already initially uncompetitive.

    The Swedish JAS-39 is by far the best fighter in its class of light multi-function, elementary, or as they say “stupid” non-standard, if we take the ratio of the mass of electronic systems to the total mass of an empty aircraft, our Su-35S can be equal only if we recall that "Soviet microcircuits are the largest in the world", and they relate to Russian ones only by production date. The last modernization of the fighter was not an easy upgrade, the modernization is very deep, the Swedes do not have our capabilities, so the modernization and preparations for it went gradually, now in addition to radar, OLS, new missiles and systems, significant changes have been made to the airframe, for example, pay attention to difference on the chassis. It would be difficult for our Su-35S to have superiority or fight on an equal footing with early modifications of the JAS-39, I think with the last modification its chances will be less.

    The Swedes themselves have a different ideology and aircraft, and the use of aviation. The number of personnel of their Air Force is very small, while in operation about three hundred units of aircraft, of which almost a hundred are JAS-39, plus vehicles in reserve and pilots are reservists.
    Information is now slipping through the press about plans to create a light fighter for us, if it’s rough, we have suitable serial engines, it’s quite possible for us to create a light single-engine multi-function fighter with relatively low costs using the avionics of Su-57, Su-35S and MiG- 35, and an ideology close to JAS-39E. True, our analysts immediately write about a niche export fighter, they say it must fill in this and that in our export deliveries - as always, everything is take-away, everything is for sale. And why not develop and put it into service with your Air Force? The MiG-35 jumped out of the niche of an inexpensive fighter, including in operation, for example, the Chinese-Pakistani JF-17, mostly Chinese, flies on just one MiG engine. Look how far the Chinese went in modernizing the old MiG-21UB, creating on its basis the JL-9 (FTC-2000), and then the FTC-2000G, it turned out to be something like an Italo-Brazilian AMX. But the Chinese are constrained, because they do not have a normal engine, and therefore revolve around the old, old and mastered, but what problems do we have? It’s enough to recall the design of the Sukhoi S-54, -55, -56 multi-functional single-engine fighter (ship) fighter, because everyone is good, the ideology is great, but ... where is this fighter, and you need it especially now, in conditions when everything is eaten and stolen, have an inexpensive and multi-functional fighter in production that is very close in ideology, preferably equal to or as close as possible to the Swedish JAS-39.
    The heavy Su-35S is good, but next to the Swede it has unconditional advantages only in terms of radius and combat load, and for example, it does not have a significant qualitative advantage over the Swede, painted with amy gorlopans.
    1. Gust
      Gust 12 May 2020 23: 46 New
      +1
      I also suspect the speed, duration of the afterburner, maneuverability, ceiling, rate of climb, gun ballistics. Yes, AFAR is certainly better, but modern combat is not only dueling and launching missiles. There and AWACS, and ground-based EW, and the use of terrain and much more.
      Well, yes, then the F-16 is also the fifth, and the Su-57 is generally 6 ++.
    2. Herman 4223
      Herman 4223 13 May 2020 16: 18 New
      +1
      Now it’s clear why you have such a pseudonym, you cannot be read without sorcasm
  17. Radikal
    Radikal 12 May 2020 23: 18 New
    +1
    Quote: Yngvar
    What are they "neutral"? Hitler was helped with ore, bearings and ready-made mechanisms for the technique! Remember the Oerlikon anti-aircraft guns, a very powerful and formidable weapon for those times! The fact that there was a kind of “neutrality” was caused only by the fact that their territory was really not interesting to anyone on their own, and if the real aggressor needed something from them, they would give it up themselves ...

    Oerlikon - Swiss cannons. You as Bush Jr. confused Sweden with Switzerland. The Swedes produce guns company "Beaufors". hi
  18. Sarkazm
    Sarkazm 13 May 2020 02: 46 New
    -2
    Quote: Rafale
    I also suspect the speed, duration of the afterburner, maneuverability, ceiling, rate of climb, gun ballistics. Yes, AFAR is certainly better, but modern combat is not only dueling and launching missiles. There and AWACS, and ground-based EW, and the use of terrain and much more.
    Well, yes, then the F-16 is also the fifth, and the Su-57 is generally 6 ++.
    The speed on the afterburner in the JAS-39 is more than sufficient for its niche, combat radius and possible theater of operations, and cruising supersonic speed WITHOUT the afterburner was not a task. Everything costs money, you have to pay for all the vagaries and the effectiveness of any weapon is measured not only by efficiency factors, but also in money. Well, here’s a simple example, we supplied Armenia with the Su-30SM, heavy multi-role fighters, but look at the map and evaluate the size of Armenia ... Our MiG-29s have nowhere to turn around, either Azerbaijan or Georgia send us notes because our MiGs fall out into their airspace, the MiG is crowded there, but what can the Su-30SM do there ...?
    He has more maneuverability than he, it is made according to the scheme of a duck, has an EMF, which is clearly not a tribute to fashion.
    AFAR is better, in order to get closer you need to find the enemy and preferably before him, to get closer for the sake of getting closer, this is a flight into the void "go there I don’t know where, bring that I don’t know what."
    AWACS - see the Swedish Air Force. How many airplanes we have for every 100 fighters, the Swedes have 2 and 2 in operation, two more in reserve, plus EW aircraft in addition to ground-based equipment.
    F-16 is the fifth generation because it is also single-engine? ... Or just because you want to criticize and argue, well because you want ... The monkey is also very similar to a person, but the intelligence levels are different, the same difference between the American and Swedish fighters.
    Su-57 is the fifth generation, almost. We have not yet been able to realize much if we are developing it to the peak of the F-22, or we hold the latter for a landmark or milestone. Unfortunately, we are technically and technologically behind the United States, our financial opportunities are very unequal, to put it mildly, even if developing an airplane is one in one according to its capabilities, even at our domestic prices it will be too high for the budget — legs should be stretched out along the covers. Therefore, he wrote that it was necessary to study, including the Swedes - quietly, without noise and dust, they created a 5th generation fighter for their needs and conditions, sufficient for the defense of their country. We also have no options how to go along the same path with the Su-57, we will have to refuse something from the set, play something and gain an advantage, nevertheless we need to understand that we are late it’s also an advantage, because many technologies implemented in the American fighter have become cheaper and more affordable, new materials have appeared, just new approaches, the plane is part of a large complex, and not a lone knight in the sky.
    As for me, who is not the strongest in aviation, so far the Su-57 needs to be built in small quantities, 1 per month, or even less - 10 per year, gradually bringing all its systems, and waiting for new engines and missiles, mastering and fighting against children's sores that will necessarily come out during operation in parts. In the same period, more to build 4 ++ fighters, this is the Su-35, and a certain amount of MiG-35 and a MANDATORY light multipurpose single-engine fighter very close to JAS-39E in ideology and solutions. Speaking about the latter, it is the low cost of the new aircraft and its operation, high resource and service life, the ability to operate from any aerodromes, highway sections, the small number of required ground personnel and ease of maintenance, avionics at the level of a 5th generation fighter and the possibility of using missiles and other ammunition. That is, the MiG-21 of the 21st century.
    1. Gust
      Gust 13 May 2020 22: 20 New
      +1
      Quote: Sarkazm
      F-16 is the fifth generation because it is also single-engine? ... Or just because you want to criticize and argue, well because you want ... The monkey is also very similar to a person, but the intelligence levels are different, the same difference between the American and Swedish fighters.
      Su-57 is the fifth generation, almost.

      Then decide on your criteria for the "fifth" generation. They are seriously different from your generally accepted ones.
      Quote: Sarkazm
      In the same period, more to build 4 ++ fighters, this is the Su-35, and a certain number of MiG-35s and a MANDATORY light multi-purpose single-engine fighter very close to JAS-39E in ideology and solutions. Speaking about the latter, it is the low cost of the new aircraft and its operation, high resource and service life, the ability to operate from any aerodromes, highway sections, the small number of required ground personnel and ease of maintenance, avionics at the level of a 5th generation fighter and the possibility of using missiles and other ammunition. That is, the MiG-21 of the 21st century.

      Nobody argues that he is needed. But it will be forced to share one clearing with the MiG-35, this is not good. By the way, the Americans have already tried to make such a universal, inexpensive single-engine aircraft according to your latest requirements, guess what the name is? And it turned out they had exactly the opposite - and expensive, and slowly, and with a resource of the problem, and about the operation from any airdromes, that’s the song in general. With avionics and AFAR turned out, yes.
      Don't get it wrong, I like Gripen too. But if you put an engine and a radio from Mercedes S600 in Priora, it will not go into the S class. And if garage craftsmen are the last in power, these craftsmen still can not be compared with Ferrari or Bugatti. And there is nothing shameful in this, but to shout at every corner about the Lambo analogue is silly and naive.
    2. EvilLion
      EvilLion 14 May 2020 11: 32 New
      0
      Sorry, but you wrote nonsense. As for the EMDS, so everyone has it, and what the Su-35 and Su-57 are doing in the sky clearly show whose EMDS are the very best in the world. Max. the speed of the "flu" even exceeds this indicator of universal machines, like F / A-18 or Rafale, however, these aircraft are just not oriented towards interception, France is not very relevant, and the Americans had F-14. As for the dynamic indicators, there are no miracles; just look at the thrust-weight ratio of the "flu" and larger machines. The equation of existence of the aircraft does not leave small aircraft a chance for a high specific gravity of the power plant and fuel. Acceleration and climb for large aircraft will be better. And acceleration, most likely, is even more important than maximum speed. From 0.9M to 2M, if at all achievable, it takes time to accelerate.

      And we do not need any light fighters. Maximum MiG-35 can be used for object-based air defense in the European part of the country and as a light bomber. In all other cases, the Su-35 is more profitable both in terms of performance and cost. Fewer aircraft, fewer pilots, fewer airfields.
      1. Lozovik
        Lozovik 14 May 2020 21: 35 New
        0
        Quote: EvilLion
        Acceleration and climb for large aircraft will be better. And acceleration, most likely, is even more important than maximum speed. From 0.9M to 2M, if at all achievable, it takes time to accelerate.

        It is possible to compare the Su-35 and 9-12 according to these characteristics:

        -------------------------------------------------- ---Su-35---------MiG-29
        Acceleration time at an altitude of 1000 m
        from 600 km / h to 1100 km / h---------------------13,8-----------13,5
        from 1100 km / h to 1300 km / h---------------------8,0------------8,7

        The maximum rate of climb
        (N = 1000 m), m / s----------------------------------280------------310
  19. EvilLion
    EvilLion 13 May 2020 08: 44 New
    +2
    EW? "Growler" laughs fast and furiously. As if other EW aircraft do not. But the dynamic characteristics of the "flu" have nothing to catch even against smaller machines. As an interceptor, he was the last in the Swiss competition, which is not surprising.
  20. Herman 4223
    Herman 4223 13 May 2020 15: 00 New
    0
    Well, our aircraft also have electronic warfare systems, and they are more powerful than what the flu has. Together with AWACS aircraft and other goodies, he can of course overwhelm any aircraft in theory. But on his own, he vryatli success will achieve.
  21. Sarkazm
    Sarkazm 13 May 2020 17: 36 New
    -1
    Quote: Herman 4223
    Now it’s clear why you have such a pseudonym, you cannot be read without sorcasm

    Everyone has their own opinion, you need to be a fool to claim and present yourself as the ultimate truth, in the service I have encountered only aviation ammunition, I have nothing to do with aviation. But there are obvious things and it’s very annoying when we either without any weapons or its latest generation, proudly lifting our nose, criticize everything and everyone, or compare ourselves, the country with 140 million. population and vast territory, with the country 14 times smaller, that is, more than an order of magnitude, such as a bug with children in a sandbox, decided to measure forces. When it comes to Sweden, I will repeat the country with a population of 10 million. and our show off against its background, what sarcasm is there, psychiatry is already here, although if this goes further, we will not only compare us with Africans in terms of per capita income, but also in military-industrial products.
  22. vkd.dvk
    vkd.dvk 13 May 2020 19: 32 New
    0
    Quote: Zaurbek
    The biggest .... like in 1 and 2 world wars.

    If she, like a groundhog, hides in a hole, and will not remind anyone of her existence. Both in 1 and in 2 World Wars.
  23. venaly
    venaly 14 May 2020 04: 23 New
    0
    Like f-35, the west is pushing its flying. They are not worth it in the course.
  24. Viktor Sergeev
    Viktor Sergeev 14 May 2020 21: 07 New
    0
    REB scare us? This is ridiculous. Rather, the Su35 will clog the Swede and interrupt it due to optical systems and super maneuverability.
  25. FRoman1984
    FRoman1984 15 May 2020 06: 01 New
    0
    They forgot the main thing in the article to write - who has a more modern radar and detection range. AFAR is harder to score with interference than VFAR. We still have no serial AFARs.