Sweden says it built a Russian fighter jet killer — and stealth is totally irrelevant

[Trango Towers]

Sweden cannot dare to down russia jet.Russia single satan 2 icbm can convert sweden to dust

Is that because pakistan has all the number 1 shaytans looool

 

[khanmubashir]

So according to this article in war games Swedish pilots used ew just because they were mocked by German pilots really can u do that in a professional military ???
and euro fighter a jv between UK bae which even makes ew suites for USA and German eads were powerless ???

 

[The Accountant]

https://nordic.businessinsider.com/...er-and-stealth-is-irrelevant-2019-2?r=US&IR=T

Sweden says it built a Russian fighter jet killer — and stealth is totally irrelevant

• Alex Lockie

View attachment 537872

Sweden's Saab Gripen in flight.
Oleg V. Belyakov - AirTeamImages

• Sweden's Air Force says its Gripen E fighter jets are designed to kill Russia's fearsome Sukhoi fighter jets, and that they have a "black belt" in that type of combat.
• The Gripen E can't carry the most weapons, has no real stealth, isn't the longest-range, fastest, or even cheapest jet, but has a massive and respected electronic warfare capability.
• The Gripen E is Sweden's cheap solution to killing Russia's fighter jets and surface-to-air missiles, and Russia probably can't do much about it.

The commander of Sweden's air force, Mats Helgesson, recently made the bold statement that his country's Saab Gripen E fighter could beat Russia's formidable fleet of Sukhoi jets with none of the expensive stealth technology the US relies on.

"Gripen, especially the E-model, is designed to kill Sukhois. There we have a black belt," Helgesson told Yle.fi at a presentation in Finland, where Sweden is trying to export the jets.

Russia's Sukhoi fighters have achieved a kind of legendary status for their ability to out-maneuver US fighter jets in dogfights and pull off dangerous and aggressive stunts in the air, but Gripen may have cracked the code.

The Gripen can't carry the most weapons, has no real stealth, isn't the longest-range, fastest, or even cheapest jet, but it has a singular focus that makes it a nightmare for Russia's fighter jets.


Justin Bronk, an aerial combat expert at the Royal United Services Institute, told Business Insider that like the A-10 Warthog was built around a massive cannon, the Gripen was built around electronic warfare.

Virtually all modern jets conduct some degree of electronic warfare, but according to Bronk, the Gripen E stands above the rest.

View attachment 537873

Montage showing the different phases of an acrobatic maneuver performed by a Sukhoi Su-35 piloted by Sergey Bogdan at the 2013 Paris Air Show.
M0tty via Wikimedia Commons
Gripen pilots don't like to show their cards by demonstrating the full power of the jet's jamming in training, but according to Bronk, the one time they did, it completely reversed the course of the mock battle in training.

"Several years ago the Gripen pilots got tired of being made fun of by German Typhoon pilots and came to play with their wartime electronic warfare and gave them a hell of a hard time," said Bronk. One of the Gripens was "reportedly able to appear on the left wing of a Typhoon without being detected" by using its "extremely respected" jamming ability, said Bronk.

"It would be fair to assume the Gripen is one of the most capable electronic warfighters out there," he went on, adding that the Gripens that baffled the Typhoons were of the C/D series, which have much less powerful electronic warfare capabilities than the E series Gripens Helgesson described.

Who needs stealth?

View attachment 537874

The Gripen E series fully armed.
Saab
To defeat Russia's fearsome fighters and surface-to-air missiles, the US has largely turned to stealth aircraft. Stealth costs a fortune and must be built into the shape of the plane.

If Russia somehow cracks the code of detecting stealth-shaped fighters, the US's F-35, the most expensive weapons system in history, is cooked.

Read more: A US Air Force F-16 painted like Russia's Su-57 could give the US a major combat advantage

But Saab took a different, and cheaper, approach to combating Russia's fighters and missiles by focusing on electronic attack, which gives them an advantage over stealth as they can evolve the software without a ground-up rebuild, according to Bronk.

View attachment 537875

2016 map showing Russian air defense deployments.
Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty

Saab plans to update the software on the Gripen E every two years, giving it more flexibility to meet evolving challenges, according to Bronk.

But, "the problem with basing a survival strategy around an electronic warfare suite is you don't really know if it's going to work," he said. "Even if it does, it's going to be a constant battle between your adversary and you" to get the edge on the enemy fighters as wave forms and methods of attack continuously change.

However, Sweden benefits from a Russian focus on US fighters. "Sweden is too small really to optimize your counter-electronic warfare capabilities against," said Bronk.

Read more: F-35s train in air-combat 'beast mode' in the Pacific after China deploys 'carrier-killer' missiles

If war broke out between Russia and the West, Russia would likely try hardest to push back on US electronic warfare rather than against Sweden's Gripen Es, which there would only be a few dozen of.

Flankers beware
View attachment 537876

An armed Russian Flanker.
Screenshot/

The whole concept of the Gripen E is to "operate in Swedish territory, take advantage of all sorts of uneven terrain under cover of friendly surface-to-air missiles with a superb EW suite which should in theory keep it safe from the majority of Russian missiles and air to air threats," said Bronk.

Additionally, the Gripen E can fire almost any missile made in the US or Europe.

"If you couple a very effective radar with excellent EW and a Meteor, the most effective longest range air-to-air missile which is resistant against [Russia's] jammers... There's no reason not to assume it wouldn't be pretty damn effective," said Bronk. "If you're a flanker pilot, it's probably a very scary thing to face."

Relying on jamming alone against typhoon is understandable as typhoon do not have AESA ... but with AESA equiped fighter jamming is almost impossible ir atleast really difficult ... with recent BVR missiles and aircraft having AESA relying just on jamming capability is suicidal ... i am sure that sweden do have some other advantages at hand such as being small and nimble ...

 

[gambit]

So you have to consider the circumstances around why and how the F-117 was shot down rather than just say, "Then why only one F-117 was shot down?" Depending on the circumstances, it may be possible for a more sophisticated adversary to repeat this again and again.

If we flew under US control, most likely no F-117 would be lost. Instead, we flew under NATO control which had the F-117 flew in predictable ingress/egress routes. This fact was widely known.

Being low radar observable does not mean invisible. We never claimed so. The media reports does not help but actually made it more difficult for the laymen to understand 'stealth'. Radars do not have difficulties detecting the F-117, the problem is detecting 'stealth' on a CONSISTENT basis, meaning OVER TIME.

The process is multi-parts consisting of of initial detection, time graphing the echo signals (plural), and display. The issue is in the time line. If there are multiple echo signals on that time line, the radar computer will display the target. If there are intermittent signals on the time line, the process reset to zero state for each gap that are beyond a design threshold. The low radar observable body breaks that chain.

However, if the 'stealth' body flies in a consistent pattern, the smart human operator can intuit that there is something breaking that chain. One moment the display will show a target, the next moment there is none. Over several days or weeks, someone is going to be smart enough to figure out what kind of target it is and take the missile shot. Zoltan Dani reported he fired eight missiles. Dale Zelko reported he dodged at least three missiles. And of the three, none were direct contact. It was shrapnel damaged the F-117 enough to render it unflyable.

The F-117 was hardly 'most advance' as hyped by many ignorant people on this forum. The jet had no radar, no self defense, no EW, and subsonic. Then it was flown in a predictable manner over weeks.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

Sweden cannot dare to down russia jet.Russia single satan 2 icbm can convert sweden to dust

You normally do not attack intruders in peace time.
In war time it is very different.
Turkey shot down a Russian jet, did they respond with nukes? No.
Russians are not stupid internet warriors, armed with keyboards.
They recognize that it has consequences to make mistakes.
Of course, they did not like it, but their answer was economic sanctions,
which was enough to make Erdogan realize his mistake.

We already know that Sweden will defend its borders.
When the much stronger Soviet Navy threatened to violate the Swedish territorial waters in 1981, the orders from the Prime Minister to the Commander in Chief were clear.

• Secure the border!

https://www.svd.se/nu-ar-vi-nog-i-krig

When the US SR-71 violated the Swedish territory, Sweden showed close in photos of the aircraft taken by intercepting JA-37 Viggen pilots and they stopped doing that.

Relying on jamming alone against typhoon is understandable as typhoon do not have AESA ... but with AESA equiped fighter jamming is almost impossible ir atleast really difficult ... with recent BVR missiles and aircraft having AESA relying just on jamming capability is suicidal ... i am sure that sweden do have some other advantages at hand such as being small and nimble ...

We expect that any such encounter will be on or near Swedish territory, where the defense network will keep the Gripen fighters updated with the situation. An attacking force will be at a disadvantage.

 

[maximuswarrior]

To the people trivializing Sweden's EW capability, remember that Pakistan is flying Erieye systems from Sweden. Now they better know what they are doing and have a black belt, or we are flying junk.

No one is denying Swedish electronic capabilities. Surely the Swedes have capabilities.

What is ludicrous is the fact that the Swedes think they can own the Russians which they cannot even in a thousand years. The Russians have been playing this game for a long time. They are masters of electronic warfare. You don’t build world class anti-missile systems if you don’t know electronics. These statements are only meant for public consumption.

When it comes to actual war we all know that the Russians would walk over Sweden. The Swedes are no match for the Russians.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

So according to this article in war games Swedish pilots used ew just because they were mocked by German pilots really can u do that in a professional military ???
and euro fighter a jv between UK bae which even makes ew suites for USA and German eads were powerless ???

Maybe it is good for Sweden that people are aware that Gripen is that good.
I doubt they would do it without approval.
One reason would be to find out just how well it worked.

RAF and Italian Typhoon pilots have had the same experience.

Even AESA equipped fighters like the F/A-18E/F gets beaten regularily by Gripen C.

Gripen E Electronic Warfare is better than both the EA-18G Growler and the current Rafale Spectra according to SAAB. Dassault plans to upgrade Spectra to something similar in the F4 version to be released by 2025 or so. The US is working on next generation as well.

No one is denying Swedish electronic capabilities. Surely the Swedes have capabilities.

What is ludicrous is the fact that the Swedes think they can own the Russians which they cannot even in a thousand years. The Russians have been playing this game for a long time. They are masters of electronic warfare. You don’t build world class anti-missile systems if you don’t know electronics. These statements are only meant for public consumption.

When it comes to actual war we all know that the Russians would walk over Sweden. The Swedes are no match for the Russians.

Sweden is three times the size of Afghanistan and perfect guerilla territory.
Russia can certainly try to invade, but would have to leave with their tail between their legs
once they got tired of the whole thing.

 

[randomradio]

If we flew under US control, most likely no F-117 would be lost. Instead, we flew under NATO control which had the F-117 flew in predictable ingress/egress routes. This fact was widely known.

Being low radar observable does not mean invisible. We never claimed so. The media reports does not help but actually made it more difficult for the laymen to understand 'stealth'. Radars do not have difficulties detecting the F-117, the problem is detecting 'stealth' on a CONSISTENT basis, meaning OVER TIME.

The process is multi-parts consisting of of initial detection, time graphing the echo signals (plural), and display. The issue is in the time line. If there are multiple echo signals on that time line, the radar computer will display the target. If there are intermittent signals on the time line, the process reset to zero state for each gap that are beyond a design threshold. The low radar observable body breaks that chain.

However, if the 'stealth' body flies in a consistent pattern, the smart human operator can intuit that there is something breaking that chain. One moment the display will show a target, the next moment there is none. Over several days or weeks, someone is going to be smart enough to figure out what kind of target it is and take the missile shot. Zoltan Dani reported he fired eight missiles. Dale Zelko reported he dodged at least three missiles. And of the three, none were direct contact. It was shrapnel damaged the F-117 enough to render it unflyable.

The F-117 was hardly 'most advance' as hyped by many ignorant people on this forum. The jet had no radar, no self defense, no EW, and subsonic. Then it was flown in a predictable manner over weeks.

There are a lot of factors though.

The S-125 SAM used was only capable of command guidance and the X band radar could engage only 1 target with 2 missiles. Apart from that there was a UHF band radar and an L band radar. The missiles themselves were not extremely accurate, that's why they carried a large 60 or 70Kg explosive depending on the variant of the missile, but it could do the job very well even without a direct hit. And it was a short range missile. Then there's also the question of how well these missiles were maintained. At the time of the incident, this system was already a 40-year old technology. It was completely outdated by the time 4th gen aircraft had arrived in the 80s.

Now the Serbs claimed they detected the aircraft 20+Km away and then fired their missiles when the aircraft was 10+ Km away, so the missiles should have had excellent energy throughout its entire flight.

If Dani claimed 8 missiles were fired, then there may have been at least 2 FCRs involved guiding 4 missiles in salvos of 2 each. The flight time for each salvo may have only been less than 15 seconds. And within 30-35 seconds the entire engagement was probably done. Double it if only 1 FCR was present.

Overall, this means the entire engagement was a textbook success for the S-125. Now the only question is how the F-117 was caught in such a situation. The Serbs claimed they would keep the radars operating only for 17 seconds at a time. The aircraft was detected in such a short window then. Which means it was a glorious screw-up on part of the aircraft's operators and not because the SAM operators did anything special. So it was either a case of bad timing, or as you said, the ingress/egress routes were already known.

So replicating this elsewhere is impossible since it was all mostly luck. The SAM system was too old to be effective against any 4th gen or higher aircraft. And all the F-117 had to do was fly out of the range of the missiles.

 

[vostok]

Sweden is three times the size of Afghanistan and perfect guerilla territory.
Russia can certainly try to invade, but would have to leave with their tail between their legs
once they got tired of the whole thing.

Invade for what? For more frozen forests? Russia has them more than enough. In the case of Sweden become part of NATO and attacks Russia - Russia will retaliate with dozens of tactical nuclear missles. We will burn your cities to ashes and not even one Russian soldier will come to your forests. You can have them.

 

[Oldman1]

It seems that the "West" has a fatal flaw in their supposed technological edge. Claims to stealth have been so high, the Zionist-America bet the ranch on it. Then a small nation (Serbia) manage to shoot down not just any American air force aircraft, the F-117 Knighthawk, their most advance aircraft in the 1990s, was shot down with old tech radar, Serbian enginuity and Cold War Era Surface-to-Air Missile. The same attitude was exhibited with claims of ABM Systems (Anti-Ballistic Missile). Where the Zionist-Americans double-down on their shield with deployments in Japan, Romania, Poland, Alaska, Hawaii. In response, the Russian Federation developed super weapons designed to outmatch, out-class and out-smart the Zionist-American ABM System. If anyone remembers the Cold War, this was the case in every decade, between the Soviets, Zionist-America, Britain and France. Each trying to out do the other. Yet technologically they were out matched by one and the same by another.
.

The F-117 was not the most advanced bomber. Sure didn't shoot down the B-2s that were used later on afterwards against Serbia. Wonder why the Serbs failed to do that? And shooting down 2 aircraft in nearly 3 months of bombing is considered a failure.

 

[khanmubashir]

Maybe it is good for Sweden that people are aware that Gripen is that good.
I doubt they would do it without approval.
One reason would be to find out just how well it worked.

RAF and Italian Typhoon pilots have had the same experience.

Even AESA equipped fighters like the F/A-18E/F gets beaten regularily by Gripen C.

Gripen E Electronic Warfare is better than both the EA-18G Growler and the current Rafale Spectra according to SAAB. Dassault plans to upgrade Spectra to something similar in the F4 version to be released by 2025 or so. The US is working on next generation as well.



Sweden is three times the size of Afghanistan and perfect guerilla territory.
Russia can certainly try to invade, but would have to leave with their tail between their legs
once they got tired of the whole thing.

If gripen ew was that good Indians would have opted for it instead of more expensive Rafael and after that f16 and 18 r in considerations
Truth is gripen has constantly lost contract to other jets in nearly all western allies contract even thou its cheaper then it's fellow western competitors except for maybe F16

If gripen ew was that good Indians would have opted for it instead of more expensive Rafael and after that f16 and 18 r in considerations
Truth is gripen has constantly lost contract to other jets in nearly all western allies contract even thou its cheaper then it's fellow western competitors except for maybe F16

I am not saying its sub par its a great jet can take on any fourth generation jet and give it a run for its $ but this sounds more of an exaggeration

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

If gripen ew was that good Indians would have opted for it instead of more expensive Rafael and after that f16 and 18 r in considerations
Truth is gripen has constantly lost contract to other jets in nearly all western allies contract even thou its cheaper then it's fellow western competitors except for maybe F16

Gripen E did not exist when India shortlisted Rafale and Eurofighter in 2011,
and Gripen C did not have the mandatory AESA radar.
Fighter Aircraft deals are never purely technical, the decision of Norway was influenced in a major way by the desire to sell the Joint Strike Missile to the US. Without buying the F-35, that would not happen. The Norwegians invented Gripen costs to prove that F-35 would be cheaper.
The US has significant leverage and uses it, as Wikileaks has shown.
Belgium demanded that their vendor supply tanker aircraft for all their operations. A clear sign that they do not want a competition with fair comparisions.
Denmarks behaviour was so unusual that Boeing threatened to sue.
The F-104 Starfighter deal of the century turned out to be fueled by massive bribes to European companies from Lockheed Martin, the F-35 vendor.

 

[Nasr]

Use some common sense kid if you have any. You are addressing a 'professional' and telling him what the F117 is and what it is not.

With comments like that, I doubt him being a professional ... "my F-16" hardly proves his profession. It was more ego talk than professional. And I have lived long enough, learnt and experienced long enough to be able to engage and identify a professional when I see one. Majority of times when someone talks in the manner he had, it's mostly ego and hubris, than actual intellect. Also, respond to my posts once you've learnt to not speak in a condescending tone.

The F-117 was not the most advanced bomber. Sure didn't shoot down the B-2s that were used later on afterwards against Serbia. Wonder why the Serbs failed to do that? And shooting down 2 aircraft in nearly 3 months of bombing is considered a failure.

I don't whether there is a selective lense on what people read but in the interest of clarity, I said that the F-117s "WERE" the most advance aircraft the USAF had during the air campaign over the Balkans, "AT THE (GOD DAMN) TIME!" Which is at the time of the break up of Yugoslavia back in 1991. Ihope that makes things clear for everyone reading but not actually paying attention.

 

[CriticalThought]

No one is denying Swedish electronic capabilities. Surely the Swedes have capabilities.

What is ludicrous is the fact that the Swedes think they can own the Russians which they cannot even in a thousand years. The Russians have been playing this game for a long time. They are masters of electronic warfare. You don’t build world class anti-missile systems if you don’t know electronics. These statements are only meant for public consumption.

When it comes to actual war we all know that the Russians would walk over Sweden. The Swedes are no match for the Russians.

Let's micro-analyze the claims made.

Gripen, especially the E-model, is designed to kill Sukhois. There we have a black belt

OK. They made a claim, then followed it with marketing. Let's wait for the rest of the article before jumping to conclusions.

Justin Bronk, an aerial combat expert at the Royal United Services Institute, told Business Insider that like the A-10 Warthog was built around a massive cannon, the Gripen was built around electronic warfare.

This is the same guy who has previously written about JF-17

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/so-h...is-from-rusi-think-tanks-justin-bronk.545942/

Either he is a respectable authority, or he isn't. You choose.

But how would a fighter be 'made around EW'? If we think ability to perform wideband jamming, it is only a single engine fighter which limits its power output. If we think battery powered pods then they will have limited usage time. The aircraft doesn't have any stealth features, doesn't try to control its reflection signature. So let's look at what the manufacturer has to say

https://gripenblogs.com/Lists/Posts/Post.aspx?ID=895

https://saab.com/air/electronic-warfare/ew-systems-for-fighters/arexis/

So now we start to build a picture. Three sixty degree coverage within a single fighter without use of AEWACS. Now that's something! Entire BFM strategies have been devised to mitigate the blind spot of fighter jet radar. A good 360 coverage would make most of them obsolete.

They are not just trying to jam the enemy - which would be a futile attempt against monsters such as Zhuk or Irbis. They are trying to spoof, i.e., create false images on enemy radar. Now imagine what a networked group of Gripens would achieve. Now imagine the kind of strategies they would develop around such a capability. Combine with the unusually large size of Su-30 and Su-35. The claims start to make sense.

Saab plans to update the software on the Gripen E every two years, giving it more flexibility to meet evolving challenges, according to Bronk.

But, "the problem with basing a survival strategy around an electronic warfare suite is you don't really know if it's going to work," he said. "Even if it does, it's going to be a constant battle between your adversary and you" to get the edge on the enemy fighters as wave forms and methods of attack continuously change.

This is the meat. Apply what you know about EW and think on what basis such claims could be made.

If I were Sweden, I would want to get my hands on the actual radars used by Russia. Given my sheer wealth and close contacts with operators of Russian radars, or even under the table palm greasing, I could easily get hold of them. I would employ ELINT capabilities if all else fails. I am after frequencies, modulation techniques, polarizations used. This helps me in spoofing and jamming, but I need to stay with the Russians. I need to closely monitor any advancements they make.

However, Sweden benefits from a Russian focus on US fighters. "Sweden is too small really to optimize your counter-electronic warfare capabilities against," said Bronk.

If war broke out between Russia and the West, Russia would likely try hardest to push back on US electronic warfare rather than against Sweden's Gripen Es, which there would only be a few dozen of.


The whole concept of the Gripen E is to "operate in Swedish territory, take advantage of all sorts of uneven terrain under cover of friendly surface-to-air missiles with a superb EW suite which should in theory keep it safe from the majority of Russian missiles and air to air threats," said Bronk.

So they are grounded in reality. The do realize they can't take the Russians head-on. The plan is to fly under the radar and orchestrate a creative defence rather than an outright offense. They are not simply relying on EW, but also on terrain. Sounds like a good plan. Use every advantage you have.

Additionally, the Gripen E can fire almost any missile made in the US or Europe.

"If you couple a very effective radar with excellent EW and a Meteor, the most effective longest range air-to-air missile which is resistant against [Russia's] jammers... There's no reason not to assume it wouldn't be pretty damn effective," said Bronk. "If you're a flanker pilot, it's probably a very scary thing to face."

Combine world class EW with world class missiles. Recipe for success.

 

[The Accountant]

You normally do not attack intruders in peace time.
In war time it is very different.
Turkey shot down a Russian jet, did they respond with nukes? No.
Russians are not stupid internet warriors, armed with keyboards.
They recognize that it has consequences to make mistakes.
Of course, they did not like it, but their answer was economic sanctions,
which was enough to make Erdogan realize his mistake.

We already know that Sweden will defend its borders.
When the much stronger Soviet Navy threatened to violate the Swedish territorial waters in 1981, the orders from the Prime Minister to the Commander in Chief were clear.

• Secure the border!

https://www.svd.se/nu-ar-vi-nog-i-krig

When the US SR-71 violated the Swedish territory, Sweden showed close in photos of the aircraft taken by intercepting JA-37 Viggen pilots and they stopped doing that.



We expect that any such encounter will be on or near Swedish territory, where the defense network will keep the Gripen fighters updated with the situation. An attacking force will be at a disadvantage.

Then statement is exageration ... with such a huge air power russians can take down the ground radars within few days to take away the expenses ... rather than calling a sukhoi killer we can call it a deadly fighter ...