Thai Air Force Pilots Itching To Fly Latest Gripens, Seen As A New Force In The Region

[DP25]

The comments on the Gripen as so superior are really quite ludicrous. The F-16, for example, is still a better all-around aircraft. Now the Gripen may be a better choice for Thailand, but that does not make it a better aircraft, much less 30 years ahead.

Thailand already has 60 F-16s minuse the couple that crashed the other week, and chose this over more of them

[Steele404]

I'm more interested in looking at photos of them "itching" to test the aircraft, than the aircraft itself.

[bonobo]

The comments on the Gripen as so superior are really quite ludicrous. The F-16, for example, is still a better all-around aircraft. Now the Gripen may be a better choice for Thailand, but that does not make it a better aircraft, much less 30 years ahead.

Thailand already has 60 F-16s minuse the couple that crashed the other week, and chose this over more of them

Please read my entire post. The Gripen is probably a good choice for Thailand given Thailand's projected military needs, the cost of a Gripen over an F-16, and the ease of maintenance of the Gripen.

But to say that the Gripen is a superior aircraft over the F-16 is really hot air, especially when comparing current F-16 versions. There is very little that a Gripen can do better than an F-16 (low speed dogfights possibly, and cold weather take-offs on a shortened runway, sure).

A Toyota makes good sense as a taxi, but to say that makes it a superior car to a Lamborghini makes as much sense as saying a Gripen is superior to anything else out there.

[Just1Voice]

PILOT: “Ok, where are we now?”

REAR: “Uhhh, I think we’re approaching Khon Kaen.”

PILOT: “You think? Don’t you know for sure?”

REAR: “Well, not really. After all, they only taught us how to fly them, not read the instruments.”

PILOT: “Oh, yeah, sorry. Anyway, we’ve got some bad visibility ahead, and my altimeter is fogging up. Can you give me an idea of what our altitude is?”

REAR: “Oh, no problem. We’re at 600.”

PILOT: “Meters?”

REAR: “Oh, wait, that’s airspeed.”

PILOT: “OH, CRAP!”

EVENING NEWS: One of the new Grippy jets crashed into Parliament today while Parliament was in session. Both pilots and all the members of the Parliament were killed when the plane, fully loaded with rockets and bombs, exploded. The good news is that over 90% of MP’s were away on vacations, holidays, or visiting their favorite mia noi at the time, so there are still plenty of them left to run the government as usual.”

[Garry]

Agree totally,dont criticise Thailand for spending a vast amount of monies, to defend themselvs from laos/cam/viet/mal. against laos they would only need 1 gripen fighter, it would take care of all 8 from laos. any corruption in the deal--oops dam_n.. now I will be told to go home if I dont like it here. I,m fairly familier with military aircraft, as its been my hobby all my life (aircraft) if the claim is correct and can take down 8-1. then why hasn.t usa /europe/ bought them ??? don't fly anywhere near Chiaphum guys !!!!!!!!!!

Be interesting to see how an equal number of Raptors stacked up against an equal number of Gripens. Would make for an interesting air superiority exercise.

edit: meant to add, I don't see how it can be a 8-1 take down when the Gripen's PS-05/A radar is only capaible of controling four pieces of ordnance at any one time on tracked targets. Good radar though.

Edited February 23, 2011 by Garry

[maxman71]

Gripen JAS-39 C/D...

A fine aircraft.Good to know that it can shoot down enemy fighters on a one to eight basis.

There are however a few problems with the Thai purchase - price (including the notorious "extras" and "accessories"), relevance to purpose, spending prioritisation, civilian overview of military procurement, corruption track record of both Gripen and the Thai military etc etc

What you can be sure however is that uncritical admirers of the Thai military will never have a rational discussion of any of these subjects.

Agree totally,dont criticise Thailand for spending a vast amount of monies, to defend themselvs from laos/cam/viet/mal. against laos they would only need 1 gripen fighter, it would take care of all 8 from laos. any corruption in the deal--oops dam_n.. now I will be told to go home if I dont like it here. I,m fairly familier with military aircraft, as its been my hobby all my life (aircraft) if the claim is correct and can take down 8-1. then why hasn.t usa /europe/ bought them ??? don't fly anywhere near Chiaphum guys !!!!!!!!!!

Why would the US want the Gripen??? The F-22 Raptor is the world's finest fighter jet in use. Although the Chinese have come up with their J-20, which is basically a copy of sorts and won't be in service for years.

[Steely Dan]

Aw give them a break for once. If the aircraft they are replacing are so obselete then eventually you have to bite the bullet and make the outlay.

[FOODLOVER]

It would be lovely if they spent some of that money on the Thai toilet infrastructure. 30 years behind ).(

Edited February 23, 2011 by FOODLOVER

[bonobo]

Why would the US want the Gripen??? The F-22 Raptor is the world's finest fighter jet in use. Although the Chinese have come up with their J-20, which is basically a copy of sorts and won't be in service for years.

True. The Raptor, the Typhoon, and the SU-35 are all superior in almost all performance aspects than the Gripen. Only in price does the Gripen beat any of them.

A better comparison is with the F-16, the Rafale, and the Tejas. While the Rafale is usually compared to the above aircraft, I think the Gripen is a match for it. And the Gripen is certainly a better plane right now than the ever-in-development Tejas.

[anterian]

Phased aerial arrays are rotated by electronically altering the phase relationship between static arrays, there are no moving parts.

How do you use fighter planes in jungle warfare?

war planes can destroy territory but it takes bodies to occupy it.

[tim73]

True. The Raptor, the Typhoon, and the SU-35 are all superior in almost all performance aspects than the Gripen. Only in price does the Gripen beat any of them. A better comparison is with the F-16, the Rafale, and the Tejas. While the Rafale is usually compared to the above aircraft, I think the Gripen is a match for it. And the Gripen is certainly a better plane right now than the ever-in-development Tejas.

Jet fighters are like cavalry in World War I, becoming obsolete. You can armor the horse, hone your skills to perfection and be the best horse rider ever but it does not change the fact things are changing. Nowadays they are just adding more and more missiles and cannons to the fighters because there is nothing more to do. They have pushed the envelope in manned jets as far as it could go.

With the price of one Gripen, you would get tens of high flying drones or hundreds of low flying drones. Networked warfare is the future of war. You could do tens of Gs with those babies. If one goes down, the replacement costs are quite tolerable and you do NOT lose the skilled pilot. The same thing with aircraft carriers, those would be obsolete in real war. China has 500+ supersonic missiles from Russia already. Both the jet fighters and carriers are just bloated fat juicy targets.

[benbear]

Gripen JAS-39 C/D...

A fine aircraft.Good to know that it can shoot down enemy fighters on a one to eight basis.

There are however a few problems with the Thai purchase - price (including the notorious "extras" and "accessories"), relevance to purpose, spending prioritisation, civilian overview of military procurement, corruption track record of both Gripen and the Thai military etc etc

What you can be sure however is that uncritical admirers of the Thai military will never have a rational discussion of any of these subjects.

Agree totally,dont criticise Thailand for spending a vast amount of monies, to defend themselvs from laos/cam/viet/mal. against laos they would only need 1 gripen fighter, it would take care of all 8 from laos. any corruption in the deal--oops dam_n.. now I will be told to go home if I dont like it here. I,m fairly familier with military aircraft, as its been my hobby all my life (aircraft) if the claim is correct and can take down 8-1. then why hasn.t usa /europe/ bought them ??? don't fly anywhere near Chiaphum guys !!!!!!!!!!

Why would the US want the Gripen??? The F-22 Raptor is the world's finest fighter jet in use. Although the Chinese have come up with their J-20, which is basically a copy of sorts and won't be in service for years.

For some weird reason I can't see those pictures either, it says it's an unregistered domain and the box has a picture of a frog (lets hop those are the aircraft, missed the e on purpose on hop)

so

http://www.google.co.th/search?q=Gripen+JAS-39&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a

[TAWP]

Erieye System

The Erieye radar system, is an Airborne Early Warning and Control System (AEW&C) developed by Saab Microwave Systems (formerly Ericsson Microwave Systems) of Sweden. It is based on the Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA). The Erieye is used on a variety of aircraft platforms, such as the Brazilian Embraer E-99 or EMB-145. It has recently been implemented on the Saab 2000 aircraft.

The Erieye Ground Interface Segment (EGIS; not to be confused with the Aegis combat system) is a major component of the software used by the Erieye system.

The radar provides 300 degree coverage and has an instrumental range of 450km and detection range of 350 km in a dense hostile electronic warfare environment—in heavy radar clutter and at low target altitudes. In addition to this, the radar is also capable of identifying friends or foes, and has a sea surveillance mode.

The Erieye system has full interoperability with NATO air defence command and control systems.

Aha, thanks for that, presumably they fly a lazy S to make up the extra 60 degrees of coverage?

Well, yes and no, the angle straight from the side isn't a stationary corridor of passage since the airplane travels forward. So an airplane would need to know the exact angle of travel of the scanning aircraft and following it alongside or travel towards/away from it at an small incline. Both scenarios would exclude an attack-pattern against the aircraft itself as the attacker would need to come from the same overall direction...

[ginjag]

Gripen JAS-39 C/D...

A fine aircraft.Good to know that it can shoot down enemy fighters on a one to eight basis.

There are however a few problems with the Thai purchase - price (including the notorious "extras" and "accessories"), relevance to purpose, spending prioritisation, civilian overview of military procurement, corruption track record of both Gripen and the Thai military etc etc

What you can be sure however is that uncritical admirers of the Thai military will never have a rational discussion of any of these subjects.

Agree totally,dont criticise Thailand for spending a vast amount of monies, to defend themselvs from laos/cam/viet/mal. against laos they would only need 1 gripen fighter, it would take care of all 8 from laos. any corruption in the deal--oops dam_n.. now I will be told to go home if I dont like it here. I,m fairly familier with military aircraft, as its been my hobby all my life (aircraft) if the claim is correct and can take down 8-1. then why hasn.t usa /europe/ bought them ??? don't fly anywhere near Chiaphum guys !!!!!!!!!!

Why would the US want the Gripen??? The F-22 Raptor is the world's finest fighter jet in use. Although the Chinese have come up with their J-20, which is basically a copy of sorts and won't be in service for years.

Cleaver stuff maxman-but if you did read my sarcastic post--replying to the fact that is 1---to down 8 others, please read my reply again and see that I meant if it was that brilliant--Then why didn't u.s.a. and britain buy it. I,m quite aware of the f22 and I am agreeing with your post. I,m not that stupid to say the states and u.k. should have bought it. dont be unkind to me I,m very frail and hurt now.

[bonobo]

True. The Raptor, the Typhoon, and the SU-35 are all superior in almost all performance aspects than the Gripen. Only in price does the Gripen beat any of them. A better comparison is with the F-16, the Rafale, and the Tejas. While the Rafale is usually compared to the above aircraft, I think the Gripen is a match for it. And the Gripen is certainly a better plane right now than the ever-in-development Tejas.

Jet fighters are like cavalry in World War I, becoming obsolete. You can armor the horse, hone your skills to perfection and be the best horse rider ever but it does not change the fact things are changing. Nowadays they are just adding more and more missiles and cannons to the fighters because there is nothing more to do. They have pushed the envelope in manned jets as far as it could go.

With the price of one Gripen, you would get tens of high flying drones or hundreds of low flying drones. Networked warfare is the future of war. You could do tens of Gs with those babies. If one goes down, the replacement costs are quite tolerable and you do NOT lose the skilled pilot. The same thing with aircraft carriers, those would be obsolete in real war. China has 500+ supersonic missiles from Russia already. Both the jet fighters and carriers are just bloated fat juicy targets.

Strictly as an A2A fighter, yes, there is truth to what you say. And that is why most modern aricraft hare multi-roled, and why an F-16 is a "better" aircraft than a Grippen. It's A2G capabilites are much better.

Except for the advances in stealth technology, where aircraft are virtually invisible, there are also good arguments for the mass unmanned approach. That is the entire selling point (or attempted selling point) for the Tejas. For the same money, throw 5 planes at the target, and one should get through.

But as a former infantry officer, I would say that for all the cruise missiles and unmanned drones, a good A2G platform, be in fixed wing or rotary, is a great security blanket. Give me a Warthog or an Apache in direct support (this coming from a Marine), and I am a happy camper.

[ginjag]

Agree totally,dont criticise Thailand for spending a vast amount of monies, to defend themselvs from laos/cam/viet/mal. against laos they would only need 1 gripen fighter, it would take care of all 8 from laos. any corruption in the deal--oops dam_n.. now I will be told to go home if I dont like it here. I,m fairly familier with military aircraft, as its been my hobby all my life (aircraft) if the claim is correct and can take down 8-1. then why hasn.t usa /europe/ bought them ??? don't fly anywhere near Chiaphum guys !!!!!!!!!!

Be interesting to see how an equal number of Raptors stacked up against an equal number of Gripens. Would make for an interesting air superiority exercise.

edit: meant to add, I don't see how it can be a 8-1 take down when the Gripen's PS-05/A radar is only capaible of controling four pieces of ordnance at any one time on tracked targets. Good radar though.

I know what will happen, on delivery the Thai will photocopy the 4 pieces of ordnance--Hey presto you can have an 8-1 ratio !!! Another thought was the plane to be used for a multidude of attack targets-as in crossing the border jobs-dog fights. surely the F16, would do for attack targets, if its incoming aircraft why didn,t they go for low priced missile defence. Money is tight--for hospitals-subsidise corn oil-infrastructure-railway updates needed NOW........should not have spent now... surely. you do NOT spend when your country has its huge problems. Buy more spares for your ageing F16s. if you do have a air strike threat get the missiles

[dighambara]

There are however a few problems with the Thai purchase - price (including the notorious "extras" and "accessories")

The notorious "extras" and "accessories" as you call them include these

I presume that is some kind of advanced warning/detection aircraft.

I wonder what will become of the blimps??????

OK, I'm interested in the rectangular lump on the top - presumably this is not like the ones that most airforces use for early warning etc as they have rotating radar on top of the fuselage (I presume) for 360 degree coverage. How do these ones work - anybody have an idea?

Edit google is my friend

The blurb says that the Erieye (great name by the way, if you go by the pronunciation Eerie Eye) can scan large airspace volumes, i.e presumably straight ahead at whatever angle the the transmit receive modules work at, but not 360 degrees. Please correct me if this is not correct.

Edit again - just noticed 2 radar apertures, 1 facing forward, 1 back, presumably with a blind spot either side.

My oh my - all this talk about State-of-the-Art weaponry - Hyperbole - smoke & mirrors. MAintenance is the greater cost of keeping any equipment operational...

Plus, someone seems to be living in the 80's, as phased array radar doesn't require a rotating antenna... Rotating antennas are a sign of either cost savings or outmoded equipment, but we are back to my point about maintenance.

Is anyone in the Thai Air Force trained in the proper maintenance of these aircraft..?? Serious doubt. If maintainers were trained well enough to keep these babys flying, they would walk out of the military and make real money in the civilian sector almost anywhere in the world. These aircraft will soon become permanent fixtures wherever they are assigned - nice monuments to waste. I seem to remember an Aircraft Carrier that only runs when other countries supply the fuel and the maintenance...

There is a 30 to 1 cost difference of the Gipen to many older fighters (F-5 for example) so a 8 to 1 shoot down is completely meaningless. Reminiscent of Sherman tanks in WWII - the US could put more units in the field than the Germans could destroy, even at 20 to 1, so technology doesn't always win out, or didn't we learn anything with the Vietnam War..??

[Johpa]

Toys for the boys but air supremacy is a known factor in defense and essential. No complaints from my side. Go for it.

The Defense Department in Thailand is focused upon defending the ruling elite from internal opposition. As others have noted, there is no external threat to Thailand from the air. And in heavily forested and jungle-like terrain common along Thailand's borders, fast movers are pretty useless. This is all about a few generals finding an excuse to buy pricey items that allow for a handsome kickback into their private bank accounts. Although not quite as useless as the purchase of the aircraft carrier, it does rank up there in corruption.

[WarpSpeed]

has technological advantages 30 years ahead of even the US-made F-16 fighters,

This is almost comical in scope since the F-16 is more then 30 years old and the Gripen is well...

...New Still it's certain the F-16 is more then a match for any regional conflicts now if they can just get the pilots and or maintenance up to the same standards..

Edited February 23, 2011 by WarpSpeed

[ginjag]

has technological advantages 30 years ahead of even the US-made F-16 fighters,

This is almost comical in scope since the F-16 is more then 30 years old and the Gripen is well...

...New Still it's certain the F-16 is more then a match for any regional conflicts now if they can just get the pilots and or maintenance up to the same standards..

Exactly what I said --NO NEED to spend this money**Seen as a new force in the region.**. what the dickens are they talking about--is it meaning its all for show. to impress WHO ???? same same 55555--I buy a new range rover because I want to show others I can...amazing again.

[WarpSpeed]

has technological advantages 30 years ahead of even the US-made F-16 fighters,

This is almost comical in scope since the F-16 is more then 30 years old and the Gripen is well...

...New Still it's certain the F-16 is more then a match for any regional conflicts now if they can just get the pilots and or maintenance up to the same standards..

Exactly what I said --NO NEED to spend this money**Seen as a new force in the region.**. what the dickens are they talking about--is it meaning its all for show. to impress WHO ???? same same 55555--I buy a new range rover because I want to show others I can...amazing again.

You know what the say about the guy with the fanciest, sportiest car???

I wasn't necessarily saying they shouldn't update but the comparison was like comparing a new Saab and it's technology to an 80's model Chevy Caprice Special Police Edition with new tires and updated suspension, and still saying the surrounding Ladas are even comparable to the older Caprice..It's apples and oranges..

Edited February 23, 2011 by WarpSpeed

[Darkman]

The aircraft spec looks impressive. But Sweden is a neutral country with little or no real fighting experience hence little chance to really test their own technology. Personally I think it'll be a fart in the wind compared to other aircraft in the pipeline. But it's cheap enough which suits Thailand, oh and it can take off and land on roads although the roads in most of Thailand aren't really suitable. Look at the Draken operated by less than half a dozen countries in northern europe or the Viggen a none starter except with Sweden. Still it may keep the old swedish boys coming back to Patong each year.

[phiphidon]

Erieye System

The Erieye radar system, is an Airborne Early Warning and Control System (AEW&C) developed by Saab Microwave Systems (formerly Ericsson Microwave Systems) of Sweden. It is based on the Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA). The Erieye is used on a variety of aircraft platforms, such as the Brazilian Embraer E-99 or EMB-145. It has recently been implemented on the Saab 2000 aircraft.

The Erieye Ground Interface Segment (EGIS; not to be confused with the Aegis combat system) is a major component of the software used by the Erieye system.

The radar provides 300 degree coverage and has an instrumental range of 450km and detection range of 350 km in a dense hostile electronic warfare environment—in heavy radar clutter and at low target altitudes. In addition to this, the radar is also capable of identifying friends or foes, and has a sea surveillance mode.

The Erieye system has full interoperability with NATO air defence command and control systems.

Aha, thanks for that, presumably they fly a lazy S to make up the extra 60 degrees of coverage?

Well, yes and no, the angle straight from the side isn't a stationary corridor of passage since the airplane travels forward. So an airplane would need to know the exact angle of travel of the scanning aircraft and following it alongside or travel towards/away from it at an small incline. Both scenarios would exclude an attack-pattern against the aircraft itself as the attacker would need to come from the same overall direction...

and presumably there's an up and down window as well (I'm sure there's a technical term for this but I don't know it) - oh for the days when you could just come down at them with the sun behind you, well they did in my comics..................

[ginjag]

# 53, phi phi, You and your comics,brought back a few memories. 8,o'clock bandits-roger. .........I still think keep the budget tight for now posh up your aging F16s.........get some ground to air missiles placed. if the threat is coming from the air. the army is one of the biggest in asia, to deal with ground attack. And for those sillys who said the F16s are old and outdated---This might sound stupid but why fly Thai--when their planes are 20 years old,-or many are.

[Thongkorn]

I would say that the Gripen is a single engine , which would help in the running costs and maintenance. A plane and any plane is only as good as the weapons that it carries. it called a bed. The Euro fighter has fire and forget weapons it can hit a target 300 miles away and the target pilot would not even know he has been targeted.It is totally different to the Gripen, the A10 thunderbolt, can carry a Gatling gun or one cannon.. it is very slow and designed for tank busting, again different. the raptor is good but again depends on the weapons, The future is unmanned drones or airplanes.

[ginjag]

I would say that the Gripen is a single engine , which would help in the running costs and maintenance. A plane and any plane is only as good as the weapons that it carries. it called a bed. The Euro fighter has fire and forget weapons it can hit a target 300 miles away and the target pilot would not even know he has been targeted.It is totally different to the Gripen, the A10 thunderbolt, can carry a Gatling gun or one cannon.. it is very slow and designed for tank busting, again different. the raptor is good but again depends on the weapons, The future is unmanned drones or airplanes.

The headline says to be seen as a new force in the region. if something is drastically needed o.k.--But is the cost on -when the country is in turmoil- and could well do with the dosh for other vip things-health-education. priorities first. No big threat on near Thai. to warrant this expence.