Posted on 06/18/2010 8:26:10 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
Saab waits on Brazil and India for Sea Gripen go ahead
By Gareth Jennings
18 June 2010
Saab will only develop an aircraft carrier-capable version of its JAS 39 Gripen NG fighter should either India or Brazil select the land-based variant to fulfil their fighter replacement programmes, the company has said.
Eddy de la Motte, Gripen campaign director for India, told reporters on 12 June that development of the aircraft has, to date, been driven by its core customer, the Swedish Air Force (SwAF). With no Swedish requirement for a navalised aircraft, it requires a customer with a carrier capability to serve as a catalyst for any such development of the proposed Sea Gripen.
"[Development of the Sea Gripen] only makes sense if India or Brazil buy the NG as Sweden has no carriers," he said during a briefing at the company's Linköping facility in southern Sweden.
According to de la Motte, the 'land' Gripen needs only rudimentary changes to make it carrier compatible. These include a strengthened undercarriage, bigger brakes and a tail hook (which the NG will have). The standard Gripen has a large number of the attributes for carrier operations, such as a high precision landing capability, a high pitch and roll rate authority and precision glide slope control, a reinforced airframe and enhanced anti-corrosion
(Excerpt) Read more at janes.com ...
I didn’t know the South African Air Force had any planes like that...interesting.
The South African arms industry is still as good as it was during the Apartheid era,churning out a number of advanced systems including UAVs, missiles,artillery and electronic systems. The only thing holding them back is the lack of a large domestic customer base.
Thanks for the post
ping
After all, how hard can it be to navalize a land aircraft?
I wonder why the Swedish AF version doesn’t have a tail hook? Many fighters do, especially those that extensively use contingency runways.
Yah sure is does
first flight 1982 F-16XL 
First flight 1955 
The Swedish AF contingency runways are also called "roads"
I know that, but do they not have barrier cable capabiliy? I recall that the contingency runways built in Germany on the autobahns had housing pre-installed for barrier cables.
Click on pic for past Navair pings.
Post or FReepmail me if you wish to be enlisted in or discharged from the Navair Pinglist.
The only requirement for inclusion in the Navair Pinglist is an interest in Naval Aviation.
This is a medium to low volume pinglist.
http://www.flightglobal.com/landingpage/gripen.html
Does this Demo model they mention in their remarks (not the chart data) stack up rangewise with the F-14D "Bombcat"?
I understood the F-14D to have a range in the vicinity of 2400 nm. By range are we talking "ferry range" or "tactical radius"? -- "Range" gets tossed about pretty informally, it seems.
I was mentally comparing the F-14 and the Gripen to the Su-33, MiG-29K, and other competitors. I think the F/A-18F is good for 1800nm "range", something like that. Still not out there in "Tomcatland" where they need to be, to protect CBG's in my NSHO.
Most of the smaller fighters like the F-16, Rafale, F/A-18A/B, and MiG-29 have ranges under 900nm or thereabouts, more like 700-800nm, iirc.
Hmmm...good question. Perhaps they figure it doesnt need one? It does have a very short take off landing capability (the swedes used to use very long stretches of road as landing strips, with secret refueling/rearmament bases dotted around).
Wasnt there a plane between the Draken and Gripen, the Viggen?
Bot really. The F-16 has a narrow chord slightly tapered fin, while the Dtaken and Gripen have a broad chord truncated triangle
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.