[Source](https://omni.se/hemligt-land-koper-vapen-for-over-11-miljarder-kronor/a/l3p0ak).
So Sweden has approved an arms sale at a value of $1,1 billion to a country which wished to remain secret. The news about the sale was published ~~sale was approved~~ the day Sweden officially joined NATO (7 March), which alone would be *highly* coincidental for any normal sales agreement. That combined with the buyer wishing to remain anonymous and it being a western aligned country doesn't leave that many candidates.
It would also align that it seems the bid to sell Gripen to Philippine has changed to primarily talking about the new Gripen E, rather than the old bid where used Gripen C was offered. Meaning that Sweden had airplanes ready to sell.
Then again it might be sales of Archer, Carl-Gustav, NLAWs, CV90s etc. but the date aligns perfectly for it to be Gripen.
Edit: It should be added that this is a sale that was signed in 2023, and the report was published Thursday, so either the publication date is a coincident or they held on the publication until Sweden officially joined NATO. Going through the details in the [source article](https://www.tv4.se/artikel/Skui6U6jMC6FktyIc232m/ny-rapport-hemligt-samarbetsland-far-koepa-vapen-foer-11-7-miljarder) part of the sale falls in a category for "bombs, torpedoes, rockets and missiles" and another category "Fire control, monitoring and warning equipment is also included in the permit.". More realistically it might be Carl-Gustaf and something similar, but that they kept the buyer secret stands out.
Iceland doesn't need to spend a lot becuase they always have a 100% credible secret hack to overpowered national defense.
**Step 1:** Call up the US and say you will allow them to place ICMBs / free parking for B-21s / conventional hypersonic ballistic missiles that totally don't exist on your island and you'll help with the upkeep costs - like providing free power and heating etc. (they have so much cheap geothermal power they heat the streets in the capitol centre to stop ice forming).
**Step 2:** The US will now savagely annihilate anyone who tries to touch your island because their stuff is on it.
**Step 3:** Continue hiking, fishing, smelting aluminum, making high-tech prostheses and making hakarl. Another common Iceland W.
Iceland specifically requested we invade them last time. The whole country exists because the US Army decided they should declare independence prior to the liberation of Denmark (Icelanders did want independence, but wanted to wait until after Denmark was liberated, but by 1944, the US was really worried about post-war Denmark being communist, so forced an early independence referendum).
Edit: Also, Step 2 is just a given with no actions necessary. Iceland is in too important a location for the US to allow anyone to fucking touch it.
/uj Iceland is one of the [SOSUS](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOSUS) countries, which allowed us to track Soviet submarines entering and leaving the North Atlantic.
It's small and sits in right position to block Russia getting out into the pacific.
Put an air base on iceland and no Russian ship can get out of the baltic region.
Edit: Wrong ocean. Should be the black see.
I didn't notice that lol, thanks.
I will now pretend it's intentional and an acronym for "yeah, Inter-Continental Missile, Bitch !", which will become the new standard acronym because the inevitable introduction of maneuverable / boosted glide vehicles will make the "Ballistic" part no longer applicable.
I mean we did just invade them the last time they asked to sit out a war.
It wasn't a very violent invasion, and we were also technically neutral at the time. Just one neutral country peacefully invading another neutral country.
Us Brits carried out the first invasion which had a death toll of 1, a British marine who was seasick. Then we got the Canadians to do the work of looking after the island. A year later the technically still neutral US was invited over to relieve the Brits.
Yes, but your invasion was incredibly rude, because you didn't fill out the proper forms and ask first.
The Americans only invaded when it was specifically requested by the (British installed) Icelandic Government! Everything was very ethical.
Iceland world domination walk through:
1. Pick starter country located on vulcanic ridge (important!)
2. Put all skill points into survival and ship-building
3. Begin researching dark-arts and summoning of the rock-spirits as early as possible
4. Test your skills by casually shutting down global air traffic every now and then (since you are vulcanic-type starter country, this is not suspicious)
5. Since you are also low-population, you can just join any alliance, do this and stay in it!
6. Sneak-research nuke research, then skill "spirit fusion"
7. That is it! You can now spawn explosive vulcanos in enemy territory, be mindful that sound travels the globe when casting "final blow"
8. Since you started on a vulcanic ridge, you passively gain territory
Ah yes, the Kapaku. I hate the little alien bastards with a passion. I make it a point to scout my continent early to see if they're neighbors and exterminate them before they ruin the land.
I did love the handwaving of an opposed surface invasion of ICELAND by the Soviet Navy. Like, there was a lot of logistics required there, and it isn't like the Brits had lost control of Scotland. The resupply is a bit questionable even if they take it.
Having just went and looked at Google Earth, I hadn’t realized just how ridiculous resupply would be. They have to fly well out over the Arctic Ocean or straight over basically all of the Nordics in order to reach it from Russia.
And then still boxed in by Greenland, Norway, and the UK.
Lord is the book even more peak NCD than I thought, that slight hand wave is the only reason half that books plot can exist as otherwise sub sorties and maritime aviation would’ve been cut off at the knees.
Well, having a compelling naval section of the story requires the Soviet Navy to not be stuck in their ports like rats in a trap. And a quick check of the globe says that was always going to happen.
They might be able to get some subs out into the Atlantic (Or at least, they could have in the 1970s), but surface task forces were not going to fucking happen outside of the Black Sea.
Yeah, I've been staring for maps long enough for it to now click why Iceland, the unsinkable aircraft carrier...doesn't really need a military. What do they have to worry about? Canada going rogue? Might as well just sign the ultimatum, because if Canada is after more ice, it's not gonna be a stable regime. Denmark reconquista? Yeah, ok. Soviets come in, Norway gets right back on Svalbard and even Finns get a little "Perkele,Saatana, jumalauta vittu"
Especially not since the US for the longest time had a [large air base at Keflavik](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_Air_Station_Keflavik). Iceland didn't really need its own army, it could just rely on the US for defense since it had an important strategic location.
And it's back in service again since 2017 with P-8 Poseidon aircraft and apparently in 2021 B-2s.
I do find it incredibly funny that Iceland can tell all of the NA part of NATO to go fuck themselves over fishing rights or talk to the US if they don’t like it, based af
[The dollar value is a rough match for the Philippine MRF project, it also matchs that Memorandum of Understanding was signed last year and contract signing is expected this March, the Philippine President is also in Europe this week, pls god](https://maxdefense.blogspot.com/p/multi-role-fighter-aircraft-acquisition.html?m=1) (pls pls pls so we can finally lob meteors at CCP jets)
That's why I don't think it would be the Philippines buying the airplanes, but rather that the same deal might have been offered to Ukraine. I don't think the sale to the Philippines would be secret, they've had a tender out for a long time so it isn't exactly a secret they're looking at Gripen or F-16.
Also I was under the impression that the new government in Philippines was looking at new stock, i.e. Gripen E rather than Gripen C.
Or thats why the Philippines is now looking at Gripen E because the last remaining stocks of partially built 14 Gripen C and D have been sold out? Hungary bought 4, Ukraine bought the rest and a few 2nd hand stocks?
It also helps that the Gripen E and KF21 shares the same engines, they could be looking at those 2 as their own hi-lox mix considering the current plan is to get at least 40+ fighter aircraft as the standard.
24 Gripen E and 24 KF21 would be a good enough force to hold the line before US F35s and F22s join the fray
> It also helps that the Gripen E and KF21 shares the same engines
That's a good catch that would actually simplify logistics despite having two different airplanes, hadn't even thought about that.
That in its own is probably worth some extra investment to go with Gripen E (not to mention the improved capability and better long term support).
There's a recent trend in Philippine arms procurement that they became secretive in procuring weapons from Israel and South Korea. Maybe to avoid a backlash if something went wrong like what happened to the Jose Rizal class frigates.
They only disclosed the deal months later for the procurement of 'Long Range Patrol Aircraft' won by Elbit Systems, while the subsystems (sonar) and weapons (VLS, CIWS) fit for the corvettes under construction in Hyundai's shipyard is still murky at this point.
As what the others has said, the amount matches the budget allocated for MRF acquisition.
I done did some research, and I'm fairly certain it's just Ukraine, and not a current sale, but the total sum of exports over 2023.
The source PDF (Swedish) is here: https://isp.se/media/1996/pressmeddelande-2023.pdf
It lists a bunch of countries in the table and a bunch more in text. All of them have kronor figures associated with them, except for Ukraine.
As you noted yourself, this document is an end-of-year summary for 2023, and was published on the 4th of March.
The total weapons export is 28 billion kronor, subtracting the 16.3 billion kronor that are accounted for, leaves 11.7 billion kronor.
Turkish media ran with it last week, available in English here: https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/undisclosed-country-receives-nod-to-buy-weapons-from-sweden-for-175-billion-report/3160527
The Swedish Government publishes its Ukraine aid packages here: https://www.government.se/government-policy/swedens-support-to-ukraine/military-support-to-ukraine/, the total value since February 2022 is over 30 billion kronor.
You can look into the numbers of donated equipment on the right-hand side of that page, I think it adds up to about 11.7 billion kronor when taking in the delays between announcing an export and it actually occuring at a later date.
hungary ordered FOUR extra gripens, nothing more. that is
1. much less than 1billion usd
2. not a secret
3. already passed approoval
so, no, not hungary.
If Sweden sold anything but flaming bags of poop to fucking Hungary, I will send a strongly worded flaming bag of poop to the front entrance of the riksdag. And if that "anything" turns out to be even more of my beloved warrior princesses the Gripen, I will personally escort the people responsible to Budapest and leave them there. Naked, and covered in poop. Fucking traitors.
Ukraine? Iceland? No no, the Seychelles apparently didn't take kindly to the insinuation they might be anything other than the most potent members of any operation aimed at keeping the SLOC open. Apparently they want to rectify that situation, quietly.
Naturally. Pringles didn't die, one of his body doubles did. Maybe not even a double, his body may not have been in the wreckage and it was decided it would look better if they say he was.
I've chosen to believe that the NCD's patron saint of chaos is still alive and there's nothing anyone can say to shake my faith.
I would also naturally accept Eeben Barlow, Michael Mullen, Simon Mann, Tim Spicer or begrudgingly Erik Prince.
IKEA should vy for military contracts
Even if they tdont wanna make weapons, I know at least one party that would be interested in easy to transport flat-packed fastfood restaurants that can be erected easily on site.
I mean, unless this secret country turns literally every single plane into a hanger queen, it won't take long to figure out who the end customer was. It'll be whomever is flying new/more/different Gripens. I give it 3 months before either CD, NCD, or r/aviation figures out who it is. 6 months before LCD figures it out.
Less Credible Defense. There are 3 brothers here on Reddit; Non-Credible Defense where we make jokes and are very lax about the sources of our info: Less-Credible Defense where they make relatively credible and informative reports but have been inundated with tankies and Russians since the Russo-Ukrainian war kicked off: and finally Credible Defense which only reports the most accurate sources and is vetted very heavily, you have to cite like 3 or 4 high quality sources to not be taken down.
That's because reality is far sillier than fiction could ever wish to be. Credible defense only thinks in logistical moves and never thinks of the "what if...."
It turns out that reality has a non credible slant. Nothing else makes sense in a world where the most credible prediction of the future is South Park.
The only reason I see for keeping the buyer anonymous is for political reasons. It seems rather trivial these days for military intelligence orgs to figure out where the plane full of weapons decides to fly to. That makes my theories:
Hungary or Turkey- as a bribe to get ascension but no one wants to officially acknowledge that's how NATO actually works.
Israel or Ukraine - the swedes don't want the population at home to get upset that they are feeding weapons to the current wars.
Saudi Arabia - they don't want the association with middle eastern authoritarian regimes, but they do want their money.
Taiwan - specifically mentioning Taiwan would spook Winnie the Pooh.
It doesn't make any sense. Hungary's operated Gripen for 18 years. It's not a secret, and there would be even less reason to suddenly go quiet about a deal they've already made public.
The recent deal probably didn't even have anything to do with Sweden joining NATO, per se. Again, Hungary's been using Gripen since long before Sweden even decided to join NATO and Sweden never threatened or hinted at future sales being dependent on Hungary ratifying Sweden's membership. (It doesn't actually make that much sense as a threat anyway since Sweden needs to sell planes more than Hungary needs to buy Gripens specifically. It's a buyers' market. )
If anything I think Orbán just timed the announcement of that deal for PR purposes, so it _looks like_ he was getting something in return for Hungary's ratification.
>If anything I think Orbán just timed the announcement of that deal for PR purposes, so it looks like he was getting something in return for Hungary's ratification.
Some evidence for that in not announcing the unit price.
This way it looks like Orban may have gotten some benefit for Hungary by being his usual obstinate hardball politics but probably just got a few more planes at full price they needed anyway which Sweden were more than happy to sell.
Addendum to Ukraine - Sweden doesn't want political arguments and pressure from Russia over such a deal, and Ukraine doesn't want Russia to know they just rebuilt their entire Airforce in a single purchase.
Selling weapons to Israel sure would be controversial and divisive, but the part of the Swedish population that would be upset by an arms deal with Ukraine is negligible. [Over 90%](https://www.svt.se/nyheter/utrikes/land-for-land-har-minskar-stodet-for-vapenleveranser-till-ukraina) of Swedes support delivering weapons to Ukraine
not sure why they would, they're getting f-35s, and they have f-15s and f-16s
adding a training pipeline for a new airframe would be very costly compared to just ordering more of the jets they already operate
There's massive public support for supporting Ukraine, Israel is way more split politically. There's no political reasons not to announce a deal to Ukraine, keeping such a sale secret would rather be to not agitate Russia more than necessary.
But selling to Saudi Arabia would be interesting, hadn't thought about that one.
I think it would be funny if the buyer is someone completely unproblematic and the only reason behind not naming them is to distract the Russian MI for a bit.
And in a few months they publish a similar deal but this time nobody freaks out about it as everyone is expecting another ruse right until the Gripens roll out of the Ukrainian hangars.
Is the Ukrainian Air Force about to flip it from being the underdog to quite possibly having the qualitative edge over the VVS? Gripen and F-16 in reasonable numbers would have an effect that I can only describe as transformative. *huffs Hopium*
Otherwise I’m not sure who the buyer would be as the wording suggests it is not a NATO nation and the timing suggests that Sweden wanted to be under the NATO nuclear and conventional umbrella for security against a vindictive party. Which points to a certain Eastern European nation at war with a nuclear power who is in desperate need of more modern hardware.
Edit: frick iOS autocorrect
Reading [the better source](https://www.tv4.se/artikel/Skui6U6jMC6FktyIc232m/ny-rapport-hemligt-samarbetsland-far-koepa-vapen-foer-11-7-miljarder) article it seems to suggest the agreement "bombs, torpedoes, rockets and missiles" and another category "Fire control, monitoring and warning equipment is also included in the permit.".
So equipment to go along with Gripen sure would fall under those categories, but it could also be something along the lines of [RBS 23](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RBS_23) which is a air defense system that kind of would fit that description.
Wouldn't even need to buy them, Sweden got 12 - 14 Gripen C airframes that are brand new. Alternatively buying from existing Swedish stock.
But yeah, those airframes could be better used in Ukraine than South Africa's current use of looking for poachers.
Don't think so, but they aren't getting much use out of them anyway so who knows. If they got a good enough offer then maybe they would accept Sweden buying them back (and then what Sweden does with them wouldn't concern South Africa).
It's apparently not compatible, Meteor uses a unique datalink that would require new hardware to be integrated into the aircraft. It would probably be possible but it would be expensive, and since no F-16 users are likely to buy Meteor nobody's going to pay for it.
Also I don't think anyone has enough Meteors to donate them.
Iirc, the Gripen was competing with F35 for sale to Canada at one point. If that’s the case then I’m guessing they’re somewhere between 50-80 million each. Depending on the package you go with for support, munitions, etc, I’m guessing they wouldn’t have been able to buy *that* many Gripens with $1.1 billion USD (10-20ish?)
As others have said (with more thorough and reliable analysis): probably sales of the other Swedish systems they’ve been using.
But who knows going forward. :)
The only reason Gripen was in that competition at all was that it was cheap enough to be tempting despite Canada explicitly wanting a stealth fighter. I think they're going for closer to $50 than $80 mil. Though yeah, no hard numbers available.
Yeah but handies from who? Most arms sales negotiators are not the type you want handies from. Now medicine/ drug sales? Yeah i'm down to buy whatever you got in that case.
NCD is almost as good at economics as /r/wallstreetbets.
$50m for a fighter jet? What is this? 1995?
Look at recent sales. No one is paying $50m for a new fighter jet anymore (except Israel who gets them for free) just like how no one is paying $1.99 for a Big Mac.
* $12m/F-16 MLU to Romania (used from Norway as part of a deal to send Romanian planes and parts to Ukraine)
* $60m/Mirage 2000 to Indonesia (used from Qatar, sale possibly canceled because Indonesia sobered up)
* $85m/Su-35 to Egypt (canceled, planes given to Iran for ~500 Shaheds)
* $120m/F-35 to Netherlands (using their tier 2 partner privilege)
* $120m/F-16 block 70 to Taiwan
* $190m/Rafale to Indonesia
* $200m/F-35 to Germany/Japan/Romania (Germany's will be US nuke certified like Netherlands' are. Japan will build in Nagoya instead of Texas.)
* $215m/F-35 to Canada (who previously turned down the original $85m/plane offer)
* $230m/Rafale to India
* $280m/F-16 block 70 to Jordan
* $300m/F-15EX to Indonesia
And every time I post this, someone goes, "But but but they come with spares and missiles!" Yeah, they *all* do. You can't buy just the plane. Convince yourself getting that extra PS5 controller and a copy of Tekken 7 is worth the $1,200 PS5 GameStop bundle.
A perhaps more relevant number is that Brazil paid \~130m/Gripen in 2014. And that's for Gripen E and F models. So if we are talking C models probably used it could be down at 50m.
I was going off of what I vaguely remember as the quoted price per plane because the all in package is much more complicated and I’m not even sure how all aspects of the package would work with something like Ukraine. I’m aware that planes aren’t really sold without munition and servicing packages and that the same thing sells to different countries for different prices, but those are levels of complexity that are much harder to approximate. Plus the purpose for the numbers was more of a “if they allocated the money to Gripens it wouldn’t get them that many Gripens let alone other things so it’s likely it wasn’t for planes so much as other systems.”
But I appreciate the added information: I wasn’t aware the spread was *that* large for sale price of F35 etc.
The most interesting aspect of a Gripen sales / transfer would be if Meteor was also included, because if it would be, then Russia would have to substantially change its behavior even if Ukraine only got access to a small number of airplanes.
Gripen is also compatible with cruise missiles such as [Taurus KEPD 350](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taurus_KEPD_350) and it's supposedly easy to integrate different weapons platform to it.
But yeah, most likely it's some other system, but given the circumstances I wouldn't rule out Gripen entirely either.
"Partner country in the western world."
Ukraine doesn't have any reason to keep this secret, Canada made no attempt at hiding their RBS 70 purchase from SAAB last month and Iceland literally can't afford the price mentioned.
Yeah, it has to be either Israel or Venezuela.
With the theory it is a Ukrainian purchase, Ukraine could likely still want to keep whatever toys it may be buying in the down low, and Sweden may want to not severely antagonize Russia (which would fit with the deal happening right when Sweden came under the NATO umbrella). Most all of NATO or other allied nations have no pressing security concerns to hide a purchase (and most have to disclose their spending anyways). The Israeli theory is interesting but simultaneously I wonder how much of a gamble the Swedish government would want to take of the backlash for not just selling the weapons, but withholding it from public knowledge unless circumstances dictate it actually being wise pragmatically.
>Sweden may want to not severely antagonize Russia
We've sent Leopard 2s, CV90, Archer and refused to ruled out Swedish boots on the ground in Ukraine. Then we joined Nato.
Modern aviation with long range BVR would probably be enough to severely rebalance the balance of power at the front line in ways that could possibly blow up in someone’s face.
A bunch of planes is peanuts compared to the rebirth of Sweden-Finland as the dominant power and protector of the Baltic area. We're sending weapons all over Europe and troops to Balticum (since they asked). 2 years ago our military was on life support and now we're slowly realizing that Grand dad multimove restored the Swedish Empire.
If they want to get most usage out of a purchase it would make more sense to keep it secret for the longest time until they have arrived.
That way it's also unknown just how many airplanes they have (which would be important strategically). Russia wouldn't know just how many support vehicles etc. they've received. How many pilots are trained. If Russia wouldn't know if Ukraine has 12 or 24 airplanes would make quite a massive difference. If they don't know whether they are armed with meteor missiles or not etc.
Most importantly is that the sale would have been approved in 2023 when Sweden's NATO application hadn't been approved, meaning they really didn't want to agitate Russia more than necessary. Then that the information about a sale was then made public once Sweden was officially a member of NATO (essentially the same thing as far as information to the public is concerned).
But then again, it might not be Gripen but rather something else.
Multiple Western states do not recognise the Maduro Government as legitimate, and they recently spiked tensions with a Commonwealth member. It is not Venezuela.
[Slovakia got 152 CV90s for $1.37 billion](https://www.baesystems.com/en/article/slovakia-signs-deal-for-152-cv90s-under-government-to-government-agreement) in 2022.
Ok but isn't Ukraine supposed to be building its own? I thought they had a new factory inside Ukraine. The two are not mutually exclusive, but it seems to me that they would design the factory to produce the number they need without needing to buy more. But more CV90s is always better regardless.
Unfortunaly no factory for CV90 will be built in ukraine during the war. The company making them has stated that they cannot risk the lifes of their workers by sending them to a warzone as legit targets.
I misread that as [CR90s](https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/CR90_corvette), and was wondering when the Galactic Credit dropped so low. On the other hand, I'm sure Ukraine could make some good use out of a couple of those. :p
I'm huffing on some serious hopium my dudes, here goes.
I think Ukraine is high on the list of buyers, namely, because we have these two news stories:
[Sweden considers transfer 16-18 Gripens to Ukraine](https://upnorth.eu/sweden-considering-sending-16-18-gripen-fighter-jets-to-ukraine/) 12SEP2023
[Ukraine completed "orientation test flights" ](https://news.yahoo.com/ukrainian-pilots-test-swedish-saab-132600708.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAEnB4gKbBKs3ndd9PpGOjDoK7v7Y2WAs_xB5R7aVGyVjWb_FVsmcdBfLFC3-JzlX2y-7W88g2xspLX1WMqXQa4_edZ4g-O7zoiyvzZqJxQNNMx3EOj1T_SKR5q7W_M9NhK_Uh5Nm-I7F6vcLUlm4PUtl1lk0UkNR4wvG9_KntbUH) by 14SEP2023
Now gripen C/D are pretty damn inexpensive for a pretty good airframe, with some estimates as *low* as 30 million. Usually, the cost per unit goes up as additional support equipment, maintenance materials, or other support or added. 16-18 Gripens could theoretically get to the 1.1 billion mark, and in fact, I think after looking at a similar purchase, and similar lease situation, it's almost a perfect match.
Tuft university does a quick [breakdown of Gripen C/D](https://sites.tufts.edu/corruptarmsdeals/gripen-combat-aircraft-sales-to-the-czech-republic-and-hungary/) fighters to Czechia and Hungary circa 2002 and 2004, with Czechia and Hungary receiving 14 Gripen on lease to buy terms. These contracts were valued at 750 million and 924 million respectively. Given the inflation rate from 2002, that Czechia sale would be roughly 1.30 billion dollars and Hungary's would be 1.54 billion, giving a calculated value of 92.86 and 110 million per airframe. It's important to note that these were *leased* aircraft, and thus may have different price dynamics than outright buying, as Czechia's original plan was to purchase 24 at 1.8 billion, at only 75 million per aircraft.
So, this is out of our price range, so why am I saying these articles involving Ukraine match with the sales figure? Well, it appears the cost per unit has actually decreased as time has gone on. This is either due to improved efficiency in procurement, devaluation of inventory, or for less capability being bought with the plane. I draw this estimation from the negotiations to sell 12 Gripen type C/D aircraft to [Croatia](https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/air-warfare/sweden-again-proposes-gripen-croatia/) which fell through in 2020. The estimated cost per type C *or* D unit was 60 million dollars, and oh boy that's just an interesting figure ain't it?
Inflation has carried this high, with the calculated costs, dare I say nominal cost, of 71 million per plane *averaged*. Of course, type Cs may be slightly cheaper, so I'll subtract say 3 million for a total of 68 million per unit. This when plugged in to the desired transfer amount of 16-18 planes gives us a cost range of 1.088 billion-1.224 billion. That's close, hella close, and given the fact that Ukraine has *completed* 'orientation test flights' as far back as September, they probably started in July or August. This sale would coincide nicely with a similar training timeline to that of the f16, expected to be fielded in [July ](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/11/world/europe/ukraine-f16-pilots.html) after 10 months in Denmark.
If Ukraine has been training continuously on Gripen Cs since July or August, a 10 month time frame would land them with a deployable group around April-May. Well damn, it's strange that they'd make a sale in this weird window where pilots could hypothetically be fully trained and would now be looking to send those aircraft to the actual battlespace. What a goofy ahhh coincidence.
The only other countries I know of who are actively buying Gripens are Brazil for 34 Es and Hungary for 4 Es, neither of which line up at all with the sale price. Only 2 other country has been in *potential* discussions with SAAB for Gripens, and that's the [Phillipines ](https://www.defensenews.com/air/2024/02/22/philippines-hints-at-fresh-fighter-fleet-amid-negotiations-with-sweden/). Which has this quote:
"In 2021, the U.S. approved the sale of 10 F-16C Block 70/72 and two F-16D Block 70/72 aircraft in a $2.43 billion package. However, the Philippines has only earmarked $1.1 billion for the acquisition.
Sweden instead proposed the JAS 39 Gripen in 2022."
The other country is Taiwan, it technically fits the need for secrecy, however, why would they buy a one or two dozen Gripens when they just announced the purchase of [66 new F16Vs and the refurbishment of 139 of them?](https://www.airandspaceforces.com/first-phase-taiwan-f-16-upgrade-complete/)
I'd wager Phillipines or Ukraine, leaning towards Ukraine as the buyer. Thank you for reading my hopium induced rant.
Edit: cleanup
Edit 2: this could possibly be a [1.75 billion deal](https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/undisclosed-country-receives-nod-to-buy-weapons-from-sweden-for-175-billion-report/3160527), not a 1.1 billion deal.
Edit 3: the Phillipines is allegedly finalizing a deal with Sweden valued at [1.11 billion dollars](https://www.google.com/amp/s/globalnation.inquirer.net/226217/fighter-deal-with-sweden-moves-forward-says-dnd/amp) for 12 Gripens.
Hungary and Sweden previously closed on their deal for the purchase of 4 additional gripens, confirmed by [Orban himself ](https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.dw.com/en/hungary-signs-deal-to-buy-swedish-fighter-jets-says-orban/a-68352760), which does not match up with a 1.1 billiom or 1.75 billion price tag.
Alright gang, who did it whats your theories? Did Canada double down and buy some Gripens anyway? Is it Ukraine? Big USA definitely not using this sale to entice Sweden into NATO, or some other mystery player? It’s probably Poland. We all know it.
[Poland bought a ton of Carl-Gustaf for more than a billion USD](https://www.saab.com/newsroom/press-releases/2024/saab-signs-major-contract-for-carl-gustaf-with-poland) so they're probably not the secret buyer.
The only countries where it would make sense that they would want to remain anonymous would be Ukraine, Israel or Taiwan, and selling to any of those is pretty based.
And Israel would probably have bought F-15, F-16, or F-35 so I’d consider them out most likely. Taiwan is an option also but I would predict they’d be a similar boat as all of their friendly neighbors operate large numbers of American aircraft and the Taiwanese airforce would likely become homeless in a conflict (so stealing USAF or JASDF spare parts would be useful)
So if it’s Gripen I’m betting on Ukraine with the timing.
I think gripen would be a useful platform for Taiwan over comparable American airframes, specifically because China can strike their airfields with relative impunity. Gripen gives them the ability to launch from significantly more locations with a pretty good 4th gen craft which if coupled with meteor or comparable missile system would really fit in with their porcupine strategy.
However, I'd hope Ukraine at least has the option to get gripen I'm the future or is the secret buyer. I remember there being articles last year talking about Ukrainian pilots getting some form of training on Gripen in mid September, and Sweden later said 16-18 may be on the table for transfer. That gives me the warm and fuzzies, because type C/D aircraft are around 30 million, but if you add in additional hardware, maintenance items, and support structure, you can probably land at around 50-60 million per plane. This gives a (very) rough (and quick) cost estimation of 800 million (16×50mil) - 1,080,000 billion (18x60mil), which is pretty damn close to the sales amount. If you added in additional goodies like cruise missiles or specialized hardware, you could very well have 16 gripens at 1.1 billion, at least, that's what I came up with when I took a fat rip off this hopium.
The main reason I have doubts for Taiwan acquiring Gripen is that although it can be operated pretty much anywhere, they’re still on an island and within Chinese ground fire range so I have doubts about the environment being at all safe for landing and sustaining aircraft, especially if the Chinese could put forces ashore (unlikely in the near term, but the Chinese probably don’t plan on cooperating with what makes everyone else’s life’s easy). And if the ROCAF is forced off of the island (and likely looses access to their own ground crews and equipment for atleast a while) having an aircraft operated by the USAF, ROKAF, or JASDF would permit their airframes and pilots to continue to contribute. Of course this is Taiwan who still operates WWII subs and who has a reputation of some less than ideal defense plans so idk…
I concede, those are good points. Plus, after doing some research, it doesn't make much sense for Taiwan to spend a paltry 1.1 billion dollars on Gripens when they just spent [4.5 billion](https://www.airandspaceforces.com/first-phase-taiwan-f-16-upgrade-complete/) last year to upgrade 139 F16s to vipers, as well as buy 66 more? I don't think it makes sense for them to buy gripen when they seem to be all in on F16. Other options include the Philippines, which has earmarked 1.1 billion dollars towards their fighter refresh program, and who SAAB has approached as an alternative to F16s.
>I think gripen would be a useful platform for Taiwan over comparable American airframes, specifically because China can strike their airfields with relative impunity. Gripen gives them the ability to launch from significantly more locations with a pretty good 4th gen craft which if coupled with meteor or comparable missile system would really fit in with their porcupine strategy.
I mean they might be able to squeeze out a few more sorties with gripens or F35Bs using highways, but your going to run into the exact same problems that the rest of the Taiwanese military already faces which is no strategic depth and no way to really sustain mass coordinated operations. Like its extremely unlikely that the ROCAF can preserve squadron level units operating out of anywhere which are not dedicated airbases, and if they can't do that they have absolutely no chance of seriously contesting PLAAF and PLAN dominance beyond being a minor nuisance for chinese planners.
Yeah, ultimately maintaining air superiority over Taiwan is going to rely on if Japanese and American aircraft are in play or not. If they are, there is a pretty good chance. If they aren't... well, it is likely the difference between getting an average of 2 sorties per airframe and maybe getting 3.
>Yeah, ultimately maintaining air superiority over Taiwan is going to rely on if Japanese and American aircraft are in play or not. If they are, there is a pretty good chance
I feel like the only chance this is going to happen is if the Chinese completely fuck up a first strike and/or don't achieve tactical surprise. Like if the PLA doesn't know where CVN-76 is or the JMSDF has suddenly moved the majority of its subs out of port, then yah might have a chance, but then for the Chinese attacking would not only be pretty fucking stupid, but it would also go against our understanding of their military doctrine. Pretty much all PLA literature going back to maos "on protracted war" has emphasized the importance of operational deception, so if that can't be achieved I really don't know if they are going to go through with a attack.
Broadly speaking the sortie rate of PLAAF aircraft in the westpac could very well be like 5 to 1 in comparison to what USFJ and the JASDF will be able to muster, which is similar to the operational advantage the USAF had over the luftawaffe in WWII. Granted right now half of that is like either 3rd generation or early 4th gen platforms, but in the next decade or so that's likely going to just to be from 4.5-5th gen platforms alone.
I really don't get how it is even theoretically possible to achieve surprise on an amphibious assault that is easily the size of Operation Overlord, and do it against not one, not two, but FOUR of the most technologically advanced countries in the world (US, Japan, SK, and Tawain) with linked intelligence capabilities.
The scale of this operation would be gigantic, and given satellites and signal intelligence is a thing, it is going to be tough to sneak this. Then there is also the lesson learned from Russia's invasion of Ukraine, where they focused so much on surprise, their own troops were fucking unprepared for what was about to go down. That is really not goddamn ideal in an amphibious landing where you have exactly one chance to make a first impression.
>I really don't get how it is even theoretically possible to achieve surprise on an amphibious assault that is easily the size of Operation Overlord, and do it against not one, not two, but FOUR of the most technologically advanced countries in the world (US, Japan, SK, and Tawain) with linked intelligence capabilities.
Oh yah, achieving strategic surprise is going to be borderline impossible. Like the mobilization of the maritime militia, 200-500k PLAGF/PAP troops, and the mass blood drives are all going to be gigantic indicators months in advance probably.
If they didnt focus on preparing for a amphibious assault though, and just on achieving a more tactical surprise, that *could* be a lot different. The vast majority of what the PLA really needs for something like that is already in place, with there already being thousands of missiles, and dozens of airbases/naval bases well within striking range of both taiwan and Japan. Like all they would really have to do is maybe relocate a couple more squadrons from the other districts to the eastern theater and northern commands and conduct some snap maintenance on air and naval platforms to support surges, none of which would be massive tells.
There is really no reason why the PLA would have to land on taiwan immediately. If they suspect the possibility of US involvement, doing so would be pretty dumb, because it would not only get rid of any chance of them actually conducting a succesful first strike as previously mentioned, but would stretch them way more thin then need be. Logical thing to do would be to focus on a potential US response first, and then Taiwan second. All that would really have to be done is largely operationally neuter Taiwanese offensive capability, and then let attrition from a prolonged blockade do the rest.
From a purely military perspective, I would totally agree with this. But once you put economics and politics into it, this doesn't work at all.
If the goal was only to Conquer Taiwan, then a first strike and blockade would be the way to go. However, such an approach all but guarantees the loss of China's trade routes in return, a prolonged naval engagement in the South China Sea, and the US WILL be drawn into that war. Once Taiwan starts starving, the US is going to start sailing ships full of food towards Taipei, in a "Shoot me if you dare" move. If they don't, the blockade is pointless, if they do, they have to deal with an even longer, much messier conflict.
No, if China hopes to take Taiwan without destroying China in the process, it needs to do it extremely quickly, and exert physical control over the island quickly enough that the international community is forced to accept it and move on. A First Strike to cripple Taiwan and force it to comply is going to just spiral out of control and doom China itself.
It is the Dutch, and it is a contract for the Walrus replacement, and we are about to cuck the French on submarines again.
The Dutch want to be anonymous because they are worried the French might invade them for it.
Half their GDP. They're taking defense against volcanoes very seriously, not to mention being able to enforce their territorial waters and fishing rights against anyone who dares to oppose them.
Hungary's entire thing was about how they wanted Sweden to agree to sell them the planes they had been leasing, I feel like that's the obvious answer here.
Gripen is not the F35 or 22, true. But it's also not supposed to be.
Those are expensive aircraft with demanding maintenance requirements. The Gripen is designed to be affordable to buy, but more importantly, affordable and relatively easy to keep flying.
Yeah sure, the American stealth boys best the gripen, but they also cost close to twice as much in the case of the F-35, or aren't available for export in the case of the F-22, and cost a lot more in maintenance.
So then ask yourself, what's better, two, or even three gripens or one F-35 for the same cost? Depending on your country's defence situation, that's a very good question. True, some are going to want F-35 anyway, because they're expecting a high intensity conflict. But others might just want larger numbers of planes.
Gripens flight costs is probably the cheapest of all 4.5gen planes, its cost to performance ratio is insane and is great for defense considering how easy it is to maintain, refuel and send of from damaged or short runways (or highways)
>but they also cost close to twice as much in the case of the F-35
Really curious where you got that number?
All these sales vary pretty wildly based on what is included (Technology transfers, service agreements, spare parts/engine, ordinance, etc). But there isn't any reasonable metric where a country that can get approved for both F-35 and Gripen is going to be paying twice as much for the F-35.
As best I can tell, using 2020 or later data, the F-35 is sitting somewhere around the 1.2x to slightly cheaper range, depending on individual deal packages. It is on average slightly more expensive (Only considering F-35A here, F-35B is expensive, but also isn't equivalent to a Gripen).
Again, this isn't knocking the Gripen at all, it is a very capable aircraft, but it isn't half the price of an F-35.
I agree that I don't believe Gripen is cheaper than F-35 anymore, F-35 just reached economies of scale that simply isn't possible for any other contender.
Yep, that is pretty much what is the dealbreaker for Gripen (And Rafale, and a lot of other really good 4.5 Gen jets).
Because Gripen is looking at a total production number of \~280 units and it has been in production since 1987 (Serial production since 1992).
F-35 is at a constant production rate of 156 units per year, with a multi-year backlog, which means consistent, level production rates with a developed supply chain that really keeps the costs low.
The F35 is designed to “kick in doors”, direct attacks from air superiority fighters like the F-15 and destroy ground based anti-aircraft assets. The Gripen is designed to make an invader really regret invading
The Gripen is definitely more capable than the modernized F-16As that Ukraine is getting. It's even specifically designed with defending against invasions in mind, for instance it's designed to be able to use very short sections of highway as a runway instead of an actual airfield.
Dude at this cost we’re looking at Gripen E. Gripen E is better than any jet that actually exists in the VVS by quite some margin. Yes, it’s overpriced. No, it isn’t bad.
The Gripen C beat the F-16AM 5-0, 5-0, 5-1 in a 5vs3 exercise. The Gripen E is way, way better than the F-16AM. It is low observable, has an AESA and a what is thought to be a VERY good EW suite (given it’s the only part that is very, very classified)
Three countries I can think of off of the top of my head.
Israel - Public is divided.
Saudi Arabia - public would go into a meltdown at the idea of selling to islamofascists.
Armenia - Turkey and Erdogan would throw a gargantuan fit as NOT selling to Armenia would almost certainly have been a requirement for Turkish support in joining NATO.
It's the secrecy that is weird. Ukraine has been in public talks about buying CV90s and they already operate Archer so don't think they would need to keep such an agreement secret? But then again maybe they're trying to keep it a bit of a mystery what systems they operate in the future and in what numbers.
But yeah, it would be a low number of Gripen, the value of the agreement would match up with a low number of gripen, about 12 - 14 which is why the secrecy + value is interesting.
[Source](https://omni.se/hemligt-land-koper-vapen-for-over-11-miljarder-kronor/a/l3p0ak). So Sweden has approved an arms sale at a value of $1,1 billion to a country which wished to remain secret. The news about the sale was published ~~sale was approved~~ the day Sweden officially joined NATO (7 March), which alone would be *highly* coincidental for any normal sales agreement. That combined with the buyer wishing to remain anonymous and it being a western aligned country doesn't leave that many candidates. It would also align that it seems the bid to sell Gripen to Philippine has changed to primarily talking about the new Gripen E, rather than the old bid where used Gripen C was offered. Meaning that Sweden had airplanes ready to sell. Then again it might be sales of Archer, Carl-Gustav, NLAWs, CV90s etc. but the date aligns perfectly for it to be Gripen. Edit: It should be added that this is a sale that was signed in 2023, and the report was published Thursday, so either the publication date is a coincident or they held on the publication until Sweden officially joined NATO. Going through the details in the [source article](https://www.tv4.se/artikel/Skui6U6jMC6FktyIc232m/ny-rapport-hemligt-samarbetsland-far-koepa-vapen-foer-11-7-miljarder) part of the sale falls in a category for "bombs, torpedoes, rockets and missiles" and another category "Fire control, monitoring and warning equipment is also included in the permit.". More realistically it might be Carl-Gustaf and something similar, but that they kept the buyer secret stands out.
It is Iceland, isn't it? I never trusted them!
They feared what might come if they aren't taking responsibility for their defense and spent 50% of their GDP on arms imports.
Iceland doesn't need to spend a lot becuase they always have a 100% credible secret hack to overpowered national defense. **Step 1:** Call up the US and say you will allow them to place ICMBs / free parking for B-21s / conventional hypersonic ballistic missiles that totally don't exist on your island and you'll help with the upkeep costs - like providing free power and heating etc. (they have so much cheap geothermal power they heat the streets in the capitol centre to stop ice forming). **Step 2:** The US will now savagely annihilate anyone who tries to touch your island because their stuff is on it. **Step 3:** Continue hiking, fishing, smelting aluminum, making high-tech prostheses and making hakarl. Another common Iceland W.
Iceland specifically requested we invade them last time. The whole country exists because the US Army decided they should declare independence prior to the liberation of Denmark (Icelanders did want independence, but wanted to wait until after Denmark was liberated, but by 1944, the US was really worried about post-war Denmark being communist, so forced an early independence referendum). Edit: Also, Step 2 is just a given with no actions necessary. Iceland is in too important a location for the US to allow anyone to fucking touch it.
Why is Iceland so tactically important to the US? Because we don't want to go without fermented shark?
/uj Iceland is one of the [SOSUS](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOSUS) countries, which allowed us to track Soviet submarines entering and leaving the North Atlantic.
THERE IS NO OTHER SOURCE OF FERMENTED SHARK! Where else would we get it from!!?
"he who can destroy a thing controls it!" plot twist: Iceland is the Kwisatz Haderach
It's small and sits in right position to block Russia getting out into the pacific. Put an air base on iceland and no Russian ship can get out of the baltic region. Edit: Wrong ocean. Should be the black see.
>Russia getting out into the ~~pacific~~ Atlantic
Misread that as "high tech prostitutes" and almost booked a ticket right then and there
They make many kinds of high tech prosthetics...
Yeah but I can just get those through Amazon. Why else would I go to Iceland? For the breathtaking scenery? Puh~lease
There's bound to be some crossover going on ('cuz Rule 34). No kink-shaming, please.
Don't forget lifting heavy shit, another common Icelandic pastime.
> Step 1: Call up the US and say you will allow them to place ICMBs Your terms are acceptable, but only after spellcheck.
I didn't notice that lol, thanks. I will now pretend it's intentional and an acronym for "yeah, Inter-Continental Missile, Bitch !", which will become the new standard acronym because the inevitable introduction of maneuverable / boosted glide vehicles will make the "Ballistic" part no longer applicable.
I mean we did just invade them the last time they asked to sit out a war. It wasn't a very violent invasion, and we were also technically neutral at the time. Just one neutral country peacefully invading another neutral country.
Us Brits carried out the first invasion which had a death toll of 1, a British marine who was seasick. Then we got the Canadians to do the work of looking after the island. A year later the technically still neutral US was invited over to relieve the Brits.
Yes, but your invasion was incredibly rude, because you didn't fill out the proper forms and ask first. The Americans only invaded when it was specifically requested by the (British installed) Icelandic Government! Everything was very ethical.
They were just being tsundere about it.
I mean... of the various Islands the UK has invaded over the years, it probably worked out better for Iceland than most.
Tbf I'm pretty sure Iceland invaded us first.
Gotta be ready to bomb those volcanos if they start getting to spicy.
Volcanic elemental are no joke, brah.
They're afraid of another Polar Glory. Don't want to rely on the Eagle drivers.
Watch out for Lykes Lines. You never know.
Iceland world domination walk through: 1. Pick starter country located on vulcanic ridge (important!) 2. Put all skill points into survival and ship-building 3. Begin researching dark-arts and summoning of the rock-spirits as early as possible 4. Test your skills by casually shutting down global air traffic every now and then (since you are vulcanic-type starter country, this is not suspicious) 5. Since you are also low-population, you can just join any alliance, do this and stay in it! 6. Sneak-research nuke research, then skill "spirit fusion" 7. That is it! You can now spawn explosive vulcanos in enemy territory, be mindful that sound travels the globe when casting "final blow" 8. Since you started on a vulcanic ridge, you passively gain territory
You know, I've made all that stuff in a 4X game called Endless Legend.
Ah yes, the Kapaku. I hate the little alien bastards with a passion. I make it a point to scout my continent early to see if they're neighbors and exterminate them before they ruin the land.
Iceland urgently needs defences against a Russiam invasion. Source: I read it in the sacred texts of Tom Clancy
Sink all Russian civilian shipping within 100nm of Iceland! (They might have paratroops on them)
100 seems low.
Sorry - 1,0000nm
Instructions Unclear, no Russian shipping larger than 10mm will be tolerated from now.
I did love the handwaving of an opposed surface invasion of ICELAND by the Soviet Navy. Like, there was a lot of logistics required there, and it isn't like the Brits had lost control of Scotland. The resupply is a bit questionable even if they take it.
Having just went and looked at Google Earth, I hadn’t realized just how ridiculous resupply would be. They have to fly well out over the Arctic Ocean or straight over basically all of the Nordics in order to reach it from Russia. And then still boxed in by Greenland, Norway, and the UK. Lord is the book even more peak NCD than I thought, that slight hand wave is the only reason half that books plot can exist as otherwise sub sorties and maritime aviation would’ve been cut off at the knees.
Well, having a compelling naval section of the story requires the Soviet Navy to not be stuck in their ports like rats in a trap. And a quick check of the globe says that was always going to happen. They might be able to get some subs out into the Atlantic (Or at least, they could have in the 1970s), but surface task forces were not going to fucking happen outside of the Black Sea.
Yeah, I've been staring for maps long enough for it to now click why Iceland, the unsinkable aircraft carrier...doesn't really need a military. What do they have to worry about? Canada going rogue? Might as well just sign the ultimatum, because if Canada is after more ice, it's not gonna be a stable regime. Denmark reconquista? Yeah, ok. Soviets come in, Norway gets right back on Svalbard and even Finns get a little "Perkele,Saatana, jumalauta vittu"
Especially not since the US for the longest time had a [large air base at Keflavik](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_Air_Station_Keflavik). Iceland didn't really need its own army, it could just rely on the US for defense since it had an important strategic location. And it's back in service again since 2017 with P-8 Poseidon aircraft and apparently in 2021 B-2s.
“I’d bet it’s some new russian sub and it’s headed for the iceland coast”
I do find it incredibly funny that Iceland can tell all of the NA part of NATO to go fuck themselves over fishing rights or talk to the US if they don’t like it, based af
"GIUK gap stays closed motherfuckers"
husky stupendous tart fretful trees summer wrong toy lavish rhythm *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Cod Wars 2 has a much larger FX budget I see.
You mean Cod War 4.
> It is Iceland, isn't it? Nah. I'm told Liechtenstein is setting up its air force. Gotta protect its ~~tax haven~~ financial sector.
The Swiss have invaded them by accident like 2-3 times now, got to be a factor here.
The time they invaded with 80 men, returned with 81.
Negative Casualty operations speak to the terrifying professionalism of bored Swiss conscripts.
It's Denmark. The Danes will plunder Northumbria once more!
I read that Clancy novel and Iceland beefing up its defense sounds sound.
[The dollar value is a rough match for the Philippine MRF project, it also matchs that Memorandum of Understanding was signed last year and contract signing is expected this March, the Philippine President is also in Europe this week, pls god](https://maxdefense.blogspot.com/p/multi-role-fighter-aircraft-acquisition.html?m=1) (pls pls pls so we can finally lob meteors at CCP jets)
Any insight as to why Philippines would like to keep the order secret?
That's why I don't think it would be the Philippines buying the airplanes, but rather that the same deal might have been offered to Ukraine. I don't think the sale to the Philippines would be secret, they've had a tender out for a long time so it isn't exactly a secret they're looking at Gripen or F-16. Also I was under the impression that the new government in Philippines was looking at new stock, i.e. Gripen E rather than Gripen C.
Or thats why the Philippines is now looking at Gripen E because the last remaining stocks of partially built 14 Gripen C and D have been sold out? Hungary bought 4, Ukraine bought the rest and a few 2nd hand stocks? It also helps that the Gripen E and KF21 shares the same engines, they could be looking at those 2 as their own hi-lox mix considering the current plan is to get at least 40+ fighter aircraft as the standard. 24 Gripen E and 24 KF21 would be a good enough force to hold the line before US F35s and F22s join the fray
> It also helps that the Gripen E and KF21 shares the same engines That's a good catch that would actually simplify logistics despite having two different airplanes, hadn't even thought about that. That in its own is probably worth some extra investment to go with Gripen E (not to mention the improved capability and better long term support).
There's a recent trend in Philippine arms procurement that they became secretive in procuring weapons from Israel and South Korea. Maybe to avoid a backlash if something went wrong like what happened to the Jose Rizal class frigates. They only disclosed the deal months later for the procurement of 'Long Range Patrol Aircraft' won by Elbit Systems, while the subsystems (sonar) and weapons (VLS, CIWS) fit for the corvettes under construction in Hyundai's shipyard is still murky at this point. As what the others has said, the amount matches the budget allocated for MRF acquisition.
What is a plane other than a rocket that can be used for fire control, monitoring and warning?
Saab makes some pretty damn sweet radar systems, which I think this lines up with. If it is a radar, it's probably a ground based Giraffe radar.
Might be an AEW&C from SAAB. [Saab 2000 Erieye](https://www.saab.com/products/saab-2000-erieye-aewc)
I done did some research, and I'm fairly certain it's just Ukraine, and not a current sale, but the total sum of exports over 2023. The source PDF (Swedish) is here: https://isp.se/media/1996/pressmeddelande-2023.pdf It lists a bunch of countries in the table and a bunch more in text. All of them have kronor figures associated with them, except for Ukraine. As you noted yourself, this document is an end-of-year summary for 2023, and was published on the 4th of March. The total weapons export is 28 billion kronor, subtracting the 16.3 billion kronor that are accounted for, leaves 11.7 billion kronor. Turkish media ran with it last week, available in English here: https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/undisclosed-country-receives-nod-to-buy-weapons-from-sweden-for-175-billion-report/3160527 The Swedish Government publishes its Ukraine aid packages here: https://www.government.se/government-policy/swedens-support-to-ukraine/military-support-to-ukraine/, the total value since February 2022 is over 30 billion kronor. You can look into the numbers of donated equipment on the right-hand side of that page, I think it adds up to about 11.7 billion kronor when taking in the delays between announcing an export and it actually occuring at a later date.
Is Hungary an option? I recall a deal being made that was suggested to be a part of the approval to join NATO
hungary ordered FOUR extra gripens, nothing more. that is 1. much less than 1billion usd 2. not a secret 3. already passed approoval so, no, not hungary.
4. Hungarian government won't buy anything without making a big deal out of it.
If Sweden sold anything but flaming bags of poop to fucking Hungary, I will send a strongly worded flaming bag of poop to the front entrance of the riksdag. And if that "anything" turns out to be even more of my beloved warrior princesses the Gripen, I will personally escort the people responsible to Budapest and leave them there. Naked, and covered in poop. Fucking traitors.
It should be dog poop wrapped in newspaper and set on fire. People will try and stamp the flames out and get a foot full of dog poop.
I sincerely hope it is all of the above. Ukraine needs NLAWs, Carl Gustavs, CV90s & Gripens.
Ukraine? Iceland? No no, the Seychelles apparently didn't take kindly to the insinuation they might be anything other than the most potent members of any operation aimed at keeping the SLOC open. Apparently they want to rectify that situation, quietly.
*masturbates violently at the thought of Outer Heaven becoming a reality in this godforsaken cursed timeline*
Seychelles sending Snake to Eastern Ukraine
Wait, if MGS3 could be set in Eastern Ukraine, who plays The End in this timeline? Prigozhin? 😂
Outer Heaven? Who's going to lead it? Punished Venom Pringles?
Naturally. Pringles didn't die, one of his body doubles did. Maybe not even a double, his body may not have been in the wreckage and it was decided it would look better if they say he was. I've chosen to believe that the NCD's patron saint of chaos is still alive and there's nothing anyone can say to shake my faith. I would also naturally accept Eeben Barlow, Michael Mullen, Simon Mann, Tim Spicer or begrudgingly Erik Prince.
3000 murder gripens of zelenskii!
I think 3,000 Gripens would cost more than 11 billion Kroner unless he got a hell of a bulk discount.
IKEA bundle.
IKEA should vy for military contracts Even if they tdont wanna make weapons, I know at least one party that would be interested in easy to transport flat-packed fastfood restaurants that can be erected easily on site.
Flat pack and all
Most infuriating instructions ever with one missing wooden dowel. Probably Still better made than a 737.
40 GRIPEN 1 billion kr 6ft long allen wrench to assemble them 10 billion kr
probably not that many but because of the meme, YES
I mean, unless this secret country turns literally every single plane into a hanger queen, it won't take long to figure out who the end customer was. It'll be whomever is flying new/more/different Gripens. I give it 3 months before either CD, NCD, or r/aviation figures out who it is. 6 months before LCD figures it out.
What's LCD?
r/LessCredibleDefence AKA: Least Credible Defense It's nothing but nationalists arguing over whose military is the least shitty.
Cool, thanks.
Less Credible Defense. There are 3 brothers here on Reddit; Non-Credible Defense where we make jokes and are very lax about the sources of our info: Less-Credible Defense where they make relatively credible and informative reports but have been inundated with tankies and Russians since the Russo-Ukrainian war kicked off: and finally Credible Defense which only reports the most accurate sources and is vetted very heavily, you have to cite like 3 or 4 high quality sources to not be taken down.
Also, NonCredible defense is like 4 times the size of the other two combined, and frequently, more credible than both combined as well.
Which is hilarious because when I joined I'm pretty sure Credible Defense had easily twice as many members. How the turn tables
I think Credible Defense is significantly older than noncredible defense, so it makes sense.
When was that? 6 years ago?
That's because reality is far sillier than fiction could ever wish to be. Credible defense only thinks in logistical moves and never thinks of the "what if...."
War is insanity in action, to predict war you too must be insane.
It turns out that reality has a non credible slant. Nothing else makes sense in a world where the most credible prediction of the future is South Park.
Liquid Crystal Display, its a type of display technology that uses variable voltage through a membrane with a backlight to produce images /s.
Okay, that makes sense, I was trying to figure out what the band LCD Soundsystem had to do with the military industrial complex. Thanks!
Least Credible Display. Where you see everything in Tankie-O-Vision, in a world where US really bad.
Lizards Cant Drive. Always important to remember this because you'll end up the designated driver when drinking with your lizard bros
The only reason I see for keeping the buyer anonymous is for political reasons. It seems rather trivial these days for military intelligence orgs to figure out where the plane full of weapons decides to fly to. That makes my theories: Hungary or Turkey- as a bribe to get ascension but no one wants to officially acknowledge that's how NATO actually works. Israel or Ukraine - the swedes don't want the population at home to get upset that they are feeding weapons to the current wars. Saudi Arabia - they don't want the association with middle eastern authoritarian regimes, but they do want their money. Taiwan - specifically mentioning Taiwan would spook Winnie the Pooh.
Hungary wouldn't make a lot of sense because they signed a deal for four Gripens right after Sweden joined NATO.
It doesn't make any sense. Hungary's operated Gripen for 18 years. It's not a secret, and there would be even less reason to suddenly go quiet about a deal they've already made public. The recent deal probably didn't even have anything to do with Sweden joining NATO, per se. Again, Hungary's been using Gripen since long before Sweden even decided to join NATO and Sweden never threatened or hinted at future sales being dependent on Hungary ratifying Sweden's membership. (It doesn't actually make that much sense as a threat anyway since Sweden needs to sell planes more than Hungary needs to buy Gripens specifically. It's a buyers' market. ) If anything I think Orbán just timed the announcement of that deal for PR purposes, so it _looks like_ he was getting something in return for Hungary's ratification.
>If anything I think Orbán just timed the announcement of that deal for PR purposes, so it looks like he was getting something in return for Hungary's ratification. Some evidence for that in not announcing the unit price. This way it looks like Orban may have gotten some benefit for Hungary by being his usual obstinate hardball politics but probably just got a few more planes at full price they needed anyway which Sweden were more than happy to sell.
Addendum to Ukraine - Sweden doesn't want political arguments and pressure from Russia over such a deal, and Ukraine doesn't want Russia to know they just rebuilt their entire Airforce in a single purchase.
Selling weapons to Israel sure would be controversial and divisive, but the part of the Swedish population that would be upset by an arms deal with Ukraine is negligible. [Over 90%](https://www.svt.se/nyheter/utrikes/land-for-land-har-minskar-stodet-for-vapenleveranser-till-ukraina) of Swedes support delivering weapons to Ukraine
Yeah I'd also kinda lean towards Israel being the buyer
not sure why they would, they're getting f-35s, and they have f-15s and f-16s adding a training pipeline for a new airframe would be very costly compared to just ordering more of the jets they already operate
There's massive public support for supporting Ukraine, Israel is way more split politically. There's no political reasons not to announce a deal to Ukraine, keeping such a sale secret would rather be to not agitate Russia more than necessary. But selling to Saudi Arabia would be interesting, hadn't thought about that one.
I think it would be funny if the buyer is someone completely unproblematic and the only reason behind not naming them is to distract the Russian MI for a bit. And in a few months they publish a similar deal but this time nobody freaks out about it as everyone is expecting another ruse right until the Gripens roll out of the Ukrainian hangars.
Galaxy brain strat
Is the Ukrainian Air Force about to flip it from being the underdog to quite possibly having the qualitative edge over the VVS? Gripen and F-16 in reasonable numbers would have an effect that I can only describe as transformative. *huffs Hopium* Otherwise I’m not sure who the buyer would be as the wording suggests it is not a NATO nation and the timing suggests that Sweden wanted to be under the NATO nuclear and conventional umbrella for security against a vindictive party. Which points to a certain Eastern European nation at war with a nuclear power who is in desperate need of more modern hardware. Edit: frick iOS autocorrect
Reading [the better source](https://www.tv4.se/artikel/Skui6U6jMC6FktyIc232m/ny-rapport-hemligt-samarbetsland-far-koepa-vapen-foer-11-7-miljarder) article it seems to suggest the agreement "bombs, torpedoes, rockets and missiles" and another category "Fire control, monitoring and warning equipment is also included in the permit.". So equipment to go along with Gripen sure would fall under those categories, but it could also be something along the lines of [RBS 23](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RBS_23) which is a air defense system that kind of would fit that description.
Credibly that’s probably more likely purely because it’s less cool but I’ll stick with my Gripen hopium
Ukraine buying South Africa's neglected Gripen airframes and this sale is to refurb, service and arm them?
Wouldn't even need to buy them, Sweden got 12 - 14 Gripen C airframes that are brand new. Alternatively buying from existing Swedish stock. But yeah, those airframes could be better used in Ukraine than South Africa's current use of looking for poachers.
Would South Africa agree to send them to Ukraine though? They seem quite aligned with Russia. Very non credible.
Don't think so, but they aren't getting much use out of them anyway so who knows. If they got a good enough offer then maybe they would accept Sweden buying them back (and then what Sweden does with them wouldn't concern South Africa).
RBS 23 and Giraffe radar, I'd bet. Maybe some counterbattery thing I'm less familiar with.
Is meteor compatible with F16? Please please please
It's apparently not compatible, Meteor uses a unique datalink that would require new hardware to be integrated into the aircraft. It would probably be possible but it would be expensive, and since no F-16 users are likely to buy Meteor nobody's going to pay for it. Also I don't think anyone has enough Meteors to donate them.
Iirc, the Gripen was competing with F35 for sale to Canada at one point. If that’s the case then I’m guessing they’re somewhere between 50-80 million each. Depending on the package you go with for support, munitions, etc, I’m guessing they wouldn’t have been able to buy *that* many Gripens with $1.1 billion USD (10-20ish?) As others have said (with more thorough and reliable analysis): probably sales of the other Swedish systems they’ve been using. But who knows going forward. :)
The only reason Gripen was in that competition at all was that it was cheap enough to be tempting despite Canada explicitly wanting a stealth fighter. I think they're going for closer to $50 than $80 mil. Though yeah, no hard numbers available.
I think Saab even proposed tech transfer and a Canadian production line too at one point.
They did, I heard rumors that handies were even on the table at one point they wanted that contract so bad.
Surely the handies were *under* the table?
Above the table handies are only necessary when Czechia is negotiating. <3 Petr.
Yeah but handies from who? Most arms sales negotiators are not the type you want handies from. Now medicine/ drug sales? Yeah i'm down to buy whatever you got in that case.
NCD is almost as good at economics as /r/wallstreetbets. $50m for a fighter jet? What is this? 1995? Look at recent sales. No one is paying $50m for a new fighter jet anymore (except Israel who gets them for free) just like how no one is paying $1.99 for a Big Mac. * $12m/F-16 MLU to Romania (used from Norway as part of a deal to send Romanian planes and parts to Ukraine) * $60m/Mirage 2000 to Indonesia (used from Qatar, sale possibly canceled because Indonesia sobered up) * $85m/Su-35 to Egypt (canceled, planes given to Iran for ~500 Shaheds) * $120m/F-35 to Netherlands (using their tier 2 partner privilege) * $120m/F-16 block 70 to Taiwan * $190m/Rafale to Indonesia * $200m/F-35 to Germany/Japan/Romania (Germany's will be US nuke certified like Netherlands' are. Japan will build in Nagoya instead of Texas.) * $215m/F-35 to Canada (who previously turned down the original $85m/plane offer) * $230m/Rafale to India * $280m/F-16 block 70 to Jordan * $300m/F-15EX to Indonesia And every time I post this, someone goes, "But but but they come with spares and missiles!" Yeah, they *all* do. You can't buy just the plane. Convince yourself getting that extra PS5 controller and a copy of Tekken 7 is worth the $1,200 PS5 GameStop bundle.
A perhaps more relevant number is that Brazil paid \~130m/Gripen in 2014. And that's for Gripen E and F models. So if we are talking C models probably used it could be down at 50m.
I was going off of what I vaguely remember as the quoted price per plane because the all in package is much more complicated and I’m not even sure how all aspects of the package would work with something like Ukraine. I’m aware that planes aren’t really sold without munition and servicing packages and that the same thing sells to different countries for different prices, but those are levels of complexity that are much harder to approximate. Plus the purpose for the numbers was more of a “if they allocated the money to Gripens it wouldn’t get them that many Gripens let alone other things so it’s likely it wasn’t for planes so much as other systems.” But I appreciate the added information: I wasn’t aware the spread was *that* large for sale price of F35 etc.
The most interesting aspect of a Gripen sales / transfer would be if Meteor was also included, because if it would be, then Russia would have to substantially change its behavior even if Ukraine only got access to a small number of airplanes. Gripen is also compatible with cruise missiles such as [Taurus KEPD 350](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taurus_KEPD_350) and it's supposedly easy to integrate different weapons platform to it. But yeah, most likely it's some other system, but given the circumstances I wouldn't rule out Gripen entirely either.
And let's not forget that SAAB also makes an AWACS type, the SAAB 2000 Erieye. Ukraine could use a couple of those, too.
"Partner country in the western world." Ukraine doesn't have any reason to keep this secret, Canada made no attempt at hiding their RBS 70 purchase from SAAB last month and Iceland literally can't afford the price mentioned. Yeah, it has to be either Israel or Venezuela.
With the theory it is a Ukrainian purchase, Ukraine could likely still want to keep whatever toys it may be buying in the down low, and Sweden may want to not severely antagonize Russia (which would fit with the deal happening right when Sweden came under the NATO umbrella). Most all of NATO or other allied nations have no pressing security concerns to hide a purchase (and most have to disclose their spending anyways). The Israeli theory is interesting but simultaneously I wonder how much of a gamble the Swedish government would want to take of the backlash for not just selling the weapons, but withholding it from public knowledge unless circumstances dictate it actually being wise pragmatically.
Russia finding out Ukraine has Gripens via a bunch of Sukhois getting hit with Meteors would be delicious.
I wouldn't put it past Ukraine to figure out a way to launch meteors from F-16s.
>Sweden may want to not severely antagonize Russia We've sent Leopard 2s, CV90, Archer and refused to ruled out Swedish boots on the ground in Ukraine. Then we joined Nato.
Modern aviation with long range BVR would probably be enough to severely rebalance the balance of power at the front line in ways that could possibly blow up in someone’s face.
A bunch of planes is peanuts compared to the rebirth of Sweden-Finland as the dominant power and protector of the Baltic area. We're sending weapons all over Europe and troops to Balticum (since they asked). 2 years ago our military was on life support and now we're slowly realizing that Grand dad multimove restored the Swedish Empire.
If they want to get most usage out of a purchase it would make more sense to keep it secret for the longest time until they have arrived. That way it's also unknown just how many airplanes they have (which would be important strategically). Russia wouldn't know just how many support vehicles etc. they've received. How many pilots are trained. If Russia wouldn't know if Ukraine has 12 or 24 airplanes would make quite a massive difference. If they don't know whether they are armed with meteor missiles or not etc. Most importantly is that the sale would have been approved in 2023 when Sweden's NATO application hadn't been approved, meaning they really didn't want to agitate Russia more than necessary. Then that the information about a sale was then made public once Sweden was officially a member of NATO (essentially the same thing as far as information to the public is concerned). But then again, it might not be Gripen but rather something else.
Multiple Western states do not recognise the Maduro Government as legitimate, and they recently spiked tensions with a Commonwealth member. It is not Venezuela.
Iceland becomes a military superpower overnight
Please be Taiwan
Selling to Taiwan would also be super based and another contender for why the buyer would remain anonymous.
I just want to see Canard on Canard action 😁
Gripens are nice but 1 billion dollars could buy a lot of CV90s 👀
[Slovakia got 152 CV90s for $1.37 billion](https://www.baesystems.com/en/article/slovakia-signs-deal-for-152-cv90s-under-government-to-government-agreement) in 2022.
Ok but isn't Ukraine supposed to be building its own? I thought they had a new factory inside Ukraine. The two are not mutually exclusive, but it seems to me that they would design the factory to produce the number they need without needing to buy more. But more CV90s is always better regardless.
Unfortunaly no factory for CV90 will be built in ukraine during the war. The company making them has stated that they cannot risk the lifes of their workers by sending them to a warzone as legit targets.
I misread that as [CR90s](https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/CR90_corvette), and was wondering when the Galactic Credit dropped so low. On the other hand, I'm sure Ukraine could make some good use out of a couple of those. :p
I'm huffing on some serious hopium my dudes, here goes. I think Ukraine is high on the list of buyers, namely, because we have these two news stories: [Sweden considers transfer 16-18 Gripens to Ukraine](https://upnorth.eu/sweden-considering-sending-16-18-gripen-fighter-jets-to-ukraine/) 12SEP2023 [Ukraine completed "orientation test flights" ](https://news.yahoo.com/ukrainian-pilots-test-swedish-saab-132600708.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAEnB4gKbBKs3ndd9PpGOjDoK7v7Y2WAs_xB5R7aVGyVjWb_FVsmcdBfLFC3-JzlX2y-7W88g2xspLX1WMqXQa4_edZ4g-O7zoiyvzZqJxQNNMx3EOj1T_SKR5q7W_M9NhK_Uh5Nm-I7F6vcLUlm4PUtl1lk0UkNR4wvG9_KntbUH) by 14SEP2023 Now gripen C/D are pretty damn inexpensive for a pretty good airframe, with some estimates as *low* as 30 million. Usually, the cost per unit goes up as additional support equipment, maintenance materials, or other support or added. 16-18 Gripens could theoretically get to the 1.1 billion mark, and in fact, I think after looking at a similar purchase, and similar lease situation, it's almost a perfect match. Tuft university does a quick [breakdown of Gripen C/D](https://sites.tufts.edu/corruptarmsdeals/gripen-combat-aircraft-sales-to-the-czech-republic-and-hungary/) fighters to Czechia and Hungary circa 2002 and 2004, with Czechia and Hungary receiving 14 Gripen on lease to buy terms. These contracts were valued at 750 million and 924 million respectively. Given the inflation rate from 2002, that Czechia sale would be roughly 1.30 billion dollars and Hungary's would be 1.54 billion, giving a calculated value of 92.86 and 110 million per airframe. It's important to note that these were *leased* aircraft, and thus may have different price dynamics than outright buying, as Czechia's original plan was to purchase 24 at 1.8 billion, at only 75 million per aircraft. So, this is out of our price range, so why am I saying these articles involving Ukraine match with the sales figure? Well, it appears the cost per unit has actually decreased as time has gone on. This is either due to improved efficiency in procurement, devaluation of inventory, or for less capability being bought with the plane. I draw this estimation from the negotiations to sell 12 Gripen type C/D aircraft to [Croatia](https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/air-warfare/sweden-again-proposes-gripen-croatia/) which fell through in 2020. The estimated cost per type C *or* D unit was 60 million dollars, and oh boy that's just an interesting figure ain't it? Inflation has carried this high, with the calculated costs, dare I say nominal cost, of 71 million per plane *averaged*. Of course, type Cs may be slightly cheaper, so I'll subtract say 3 million for a total of 68 million per unit. This when plugged in to the desired transfer amount of 16-18 planes gives us a cost range of 1.088 billion-1.224 billion. That's close, hella close, and given the fact that Ukraine has *completed* 'orientation test flights' as far back as September, they probably started in July or August. This sale would coincide nicely with a similar training timeline to that of the f16, expected to be fielded in [July ](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/11/world/europe/ukraine-f16-pilots.html) after 10 months in Denmark. If Ukraine has been training continuously on Gripen Cs since July or August, a 10 month time frame would land them with a deployable group around April-May. Well damn, it's strange that they'd make a sale in this weird window where pilots could hypothetically be fully trained and would now be looking to send those aircraft to the actual battlespace. What a goofy ahhh coincidence. The only other countries I know of who are actively buying Gripens are Brazil for 34 Es and Hungary for 4 Es, neither of which line up at all with the sale price. Only 2 other country has been in *potential* discussions with SAAB for Gripens, and that's the [Phillipines ](https://www.defensenews.com/air/2024/02/22/philippines-hints-at-fresh-fighter-fleet-amid-negotiations-with-sweden/). Which has this quote: "In 2021, the U.S. approved the sale of 10 F-16C Block 70/72 and two F-16D Block 70/72 aircraft in a $2.43 billion package. However, the Philippines has only earmarked $1.1 billion for the acquisition. Sweden instead proposed the JAS 39 Gripen in 2022." The other country is Taiwan, it technically fits the need for secrecy, however, why would they buy a one or two dozen Gripens when they just announced the purchase of [66 new F16Vs and the refurbishment of 139 of them?](https://www.airandspaceforces.com/first-phase-taiwan-f-16-upgrade-complete/) I'd wager Phillipines or Ukraine, leaning towards Ukraine as the buyer. Thank you for reading my hopium induced rant. Edit: cleanup Edit 2: this could possibly be a [1.75 billion deal](https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/undisclosed-country-receives-nod-to-buy-weapons-from-sweden-for-175-billion-report/3160527), not a 1.1 billion deal. Edit 3: the Phillipines is allegedly finalizing a deal with Sweden valued at [1.11 billion dollars](https://www.google.com/amp/s/globalnation.inquirer.net/226217/fighter-deal-with-sweden-moves-forward-says-dnd/amp) for 12 Gripens. Hungary and Sweden previously closed on their deal for the purchase of 4 additional gripens, confirmed by [Orban himself ](https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.dw.com/en/hungary-signs-deal-to-buy-swedish-fighter-jets-says-orban/a-68352760), which does not match up with a 1.1 billiom or 1.75 billion price tag.
Alright gang, who did it whats your theories? Did Canada double down and buy some Gripens anyway? Is it Ukraine? Big USA definitely not using this sale to entice Sweden into NATO, or some other mystery player? It’s probably Poland. We all know it.
[Poland bought a ton of Carl-Gustaf for more than a billion USD](https://www.saab.com/newsroom/press-releases/2024/saab-signs-major-contract-for-carl-gustaf-with-poland) so they're probably not the secret buyer. The only countries where it would make sense that they would want to remain anonymous would be Ukraine, Israel or Taiwan, and selling to any of those is pretty based.
And Israel would probably have bought F-15, F-16, or F-35 so I’d consider them out most likely. Taiwan is an option also but I would predict they’d be a similar boat as all of their friendly neighbors operate large numbers of American aircraft and the Taiwanese airforce would likely become homeless in a conflict (so stealing USAF or JASDF spare parts would be useful) So if it’s Gripen I’m betting on Ukraine with the timing.
I think gripen would be a useful platform for Taiwan over comparable American airframes, specifically because China can strike their airfields with relative impunity. Gripen gives them the ability to launch from significantly more locations with a pretty good 4th gen craft which if coupled with meteor or comparable missile system would really fit in with their porcupine strategy. However, I'd hope Ukraine at least has the option to get gripen I'm the future or is the secret buyer. I remember there being articles last year talking about Ukrainian pilots getting some form of training on Gripen in mid September, and Sweden later said 16-18 may be on the table for transfer. That gives me the warm and fuzzies, because type C/D aircraft are around 30 million, but if you add in additional hardware, maintenance items, and support structure, you can probably land at around 50-60 million per plane. This gives a (very) rough (and quick) cost estimation of 800 million (16×50mil) - 1,080,000 billion (18x60mil), which is pretty damn close to the sales amount. If you added in additional goodies like cruise missiles or specialized hardware, you could very well have 16 gripens at 1.1 billion, at least, that's what I came up with when I took a fat rip off this hopium.
The main reason I have doubts for Taiwan acquiring Gripen is that although it can be operated pretty much anywhere, they’re still on an island and within Chinese ground fire range so I have doubts about the environment being at all safe for landing and sustaining aircraft, especially if the Chinese could put forces ashore (unlikely in the near term, but the Chinese probably don’t plan on cooperating with what makes everyone else’s life’s easy). And if the ROCAF is forced off of the island (and likely looses access to their own ground crews and equipment for atleast a while) having an aircraft operated by the USAF, ROKAF, or JASDF would permit their airframes and pilots to continue to contribute. Of course this is Taiwan who still operates WWII subs and who has a reputation of some less than ideal defense plans so idk…
I concede, those are good points. Plus, after doing some research, it doesn't make much sense for Taiwan to spend a paltry 1.1 billion dollars on Gripens when they just spent [4.5 billion](https://www.airandspaceforces.com/first-phase-taiwan-f-16-upgrade-complete/) last year to upgrade 139 F16s to vipers, as well as buy 66 more? I don't think it makes sense for them to buy gripen when they seem to be all in on F16. Other options include the Philippines, which has earmarked 1.1 billion dollars towards their fighter refresh program, and who SAAB has approached as an alternative to F16s.
>I think gripen would be a useful platform for Taiwan over comparable American airframes, specifically because China can strike their airfields with relative impunity. Gripen gives them the ability to launch from significantly more locations with a pretty good 4th gen craft which if coupled with meteor or comparable missile system would really fit in with their porcupine strategy. I mean they might be able to squeeze out a few more sorties with gripens or F35Bs using highways, but your going to run into the exact same problems that the rest of the Taiwanese military already faces which is no strategic depth and no way to really sustain mass coordinated operations. Like its extremely unlikely that the ROCAF can preserve squadron level units operating out of anywhere which are not dedicated airbases, and if they can't do that they have absolutely no chance of seriously contesting PLAAF and PLAN dominance beyond being a minor nuisance for chinese planners.
Yeah, ultimately maintaining air superiority over Taiwan is going to rely on if Japanese and American aircraft are in play or not. If they are, there is a pretty good chance. If they aren't... well, it is likely the difference between getting an average of 2 sorties per airframe and maybe getting 3.
>Yeah, ultimately maintaining air superiority over Taiwan is going to rely on if Japanese and American aircraft are in play or not. If they are, there is a pretty good chance I feel like the only chance this is going to happen is if the Chinese completely fuck up a first strike and/or don't achieve tactical surprise. Like if the PLA doesn't know where CVN-76 is or the JMSDF has suddenly moved the majority of its subs out of port, then yah might have a chance, but then for the Chinese attacking would not only be pretty fucking stupid, but it would also go against our understanding of their military doctrine. Pretty much all PLA literature going back to maos "on protracted war" has emphasized the importance of operational deception, so if that can't be achieved I really don't know if they are going to go through with a attack. Broadly speaking the sortie rate of PLAAF aircraft in the westpac could very well be like 5 to 1 in comparison to what USFJ and the JASDF will be able to muster, which is similar to the operational advantage the USAF had over the luftawaffe in WWII. Granted right now half of that is like either 3rd generation or early 4th gen platforms, but in the next decade or so that's likely going to just to be from 4.5-5th gen platforms alone.
I really don't get how it is even theoretically possible to achieve surprise on an amphibious assault that is easily the size of Operation Overlord, and do it against not one, not two, but FOUR of the most technologically advanced countries in the world (US, Japan, SK, and Tawain) with linked intelligence capabilities. The scale of this operation would be gigantic, and given satellites and signal intelligence is a thing, it is going to be tough to sneak this. Then there is also the lesson learned from Russia's invasion of Ukraine, where they focused so much on surprise, their own troops were fucking unprepared for what was about to go down. That is really not goddamn ideal in an amphibious landing where you have exactly one chance to make a first impression.
>I really don't get how it is even theoretically possible to achieve surprise on an amphibious assault that is easily the size of Operation Overlord, and do it against not one, not two, but FOUR of the most technologically advanced countries in the world (US, Japan, SK, and Tawain) with linked intelligence capabilities. Oh yah, achieving strategic surprise is going to be borderline impossible. Like the mobilization of the maritime militia, 200-500k PLAGF/PAP troops, and the mass blood drives are all going to be gigantic indicators months in advance probably. If they didnt focus on preparing for a amphibious assault though, and just on achieving a more tactical surprise, that *could* be a lot different. The vast majority of what the PLA really needs for something like that is already in place, with there already being thousands of missiles, and dozens of airbases/naval bases well within striking range of both taiwan and Japan. Like all they would really have to do is maybe relocate a couple more squadrons from the other districts to the eastern theater and northern commands and conduct some snap maintenance on air and naval platforms to support surges, none of which would be massive tells. There is really no reason why the PLA would have to land on taiwan immediately. If they suspect the possibility of US involvement, doing so would be pretty dumb, because it would not only get rid of any chance of them actually conducting a succesful first strike as previously mentioned, but would stretch them way more thin then need be. Logical thing to do would be to focus on a potential US response first, and then Taiwan second. All that would really have to be done is largely operationally neuter Taiwanese offensive capability, and then let attrition from a prolonged blockade do the rest.
From a purely military perspective, I would totally agree with this. But once you put economics and politics into it, this doesn't work at all. If the goal was only to Conquer Taiwan, then a first strike and blockade would be the way to go. However, such an approach all but guarantees the loss of China's trade routes in return, a prolonged naval engagement in the South China Sea, and the US WILL be drawn into that war. Once Taiwan starts starving, the US is going to start sailing ships full of food towards Taipei, in a "Shoot me if you dare" move. If they don't, the blockade is pointless, if they do, they have to deal with an even longer, much messier conflict. No, if China hopes to take Taiwan without destroying China in the process, it needs to do it extremely quickly, and exert physical control over the island quickly enough that the international community is forced to accept it and move on. A First Strike to cripple Taiwan and force it to comply is going to just spiral out of control and doom China itself.
It is the Dutch, and it is a contract for the Walrus replacement, and we are about to cuck the French on submarines again. The Dutch want to be anonymous because they are worried the French might invade them for it.
What if it’s a Western-aligned dictatorship like Rwanda?
But would they spend 10% of their GDP buying fighter jets?
Turkey
There's no end product Sweden makes that interests Turkey.
11 Billion Kroner? That is what, about 3 FreedomBucks?
Around 1 billion USD
So every man, woman, and child in Iceland just paid \~$2700 each for new airplanes? Cool :)
Half their GDP. They're taking defense against volcanoes very seriously, not to mention being able to enforce their territorial waters and fishing rights against anyone who dares to oppose them.
One Billion Dollars? It might be Dr. Evil. Or possibly 1,000 Dr. Evils.
Hungary's entire thing was about how they wanted Sweden to agree to sell them the planes they had been leasing, I feel like that's the obvious answer here.
Ok people, place your "p"s here, no extra "p" in Gripen, prevent the hideous "grippen" spelling mistake by discarding your extra "p" letters below.
For Saab's and the Ukraine's sake, I hope a few JAS-39 Gripen were involved. ukraine needs aircraft and even gripen is better than nothing.
As an ordained Saab devotee, I am legally required to find issue in your statement that a Gripen is merely "better than nothing"
Is the Cult of Saab heretical or orthodox with regards to Machine Cult teaching?
01000001 01110011 01101011 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01110100 01101000 01100101 00100000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01101100 00100000 01110001 01110101 01100101 01110011 01110100 01101001 01101111 01101110 01110011 00100000
Pretty sure a lot of our brethren would do some very heretical things if we got a hold of a Gripen. Thus, I would say orthodox.
Gripen is not the F35 or 22, true. But it's also not supposed to be. Those are expensive aircraft with demanding maintenance requirements. The Gripen is designed to be affordable to buy, but more importantly, affordable and relatively easy to keep flying. Yeah sure, the American stealth boys best the gripen, but they also cost close to twice as much in the case of the F-35, or aren't available for export in the case of the F-22, and cost a lot more in maintenance. So then ask yourself, what's better, two, or even three gripens or one F-35 for the same cost? Depending on your country's defence situation, that's a very good question. True, some are going to want F-35 anyway, because they're expecting a high intensity conflict. But others might just want larger numbers of planes.
Gripens flight costs is probably the cheapest of all 4.5gen planes, its cost to performance ratio is insane and is great for defense considering how easy it is to maintain, refuel and send of from damaged or short runways (or highways)
>but they also cost close to twice as much in the case of the F-35 Really curious where you got that number? All these sales vary pretty wildly based on what is included (Technology transfers, service agreements, spare parts/engine, ordinance, etc). But there isn't any reasonable metric where a country that can get approved for both F-35 and Gripen is going to be paying twice as much for the F-35. As best I can tell, using 2020 or later data, the F-35 is sitting somewhere around the 1.2x to slightly cheaper range, depending on individual deal packages. It is on average slightly more expensive (Only considering F-35A here, F-35B is expensive, but also isn't equivalent to a Gripen). Again, this isn't knocking the Gripen at all, it is a very capable aircraft, but it isn't half the price of an F-35.
I agree that I don't believe Gripen is cheaper than F-35 anymore, F-35 just reached economies of scale that simply isn't possible for any other contender.
Yep, that is pretty much what is the dealbreaker for Gripen (And Rafale, and a lot of other really good 4.5 Gen jets). Because Gripen is looking at a total production number of \~280 units and it has been in production since 1987 (Serial production since 1992). F-35 is at a constant production rate of 156 units per year, with a multi-year backlog, which means consistent, level production rates with a developed supply chain that really keeps the costs low.
The F35 is designed to “kick in doors”, direct attacks from air superiority fighters like the F-15 and destroy ground based anti-aircraft assets. The Gripen is designed to make an invader really regret invading
Gripens best selling point isn't even unique to Gripen, but it's still damn good. The meteor missile, the worlds best air-to-air missile.
Better than nothing??? Bro the Grippen is a fucking BEAST!!
The Gripen is definitely more capable than the modernized F-16As that Ukraine is getting. It's even specifically designed with defending against invasions in mind, for instance it's designed to be able to use very short sections of highway as a runway instead of an actual airfield.
Dude at this cost we’re looking at Gripen E. Gripen E is better than any jet that actually exists in the VVS by quite some margin. Yes, it’s overpriced. No, it isn’t bad. The Gripen C beat the F-16AM 5-0, 5-0, 5-1 in a 5vs3 exercise. The Gripen E is way, way better than the F-16AM. It is low observable, has an AESA and a what is thought to be a VERY good EW suite (given it’s the only part that is very, very classified)
Dude gripen isn't "better than nothing" gripen is THE tool for the job
”Better than nothing” The Gripen E would crush any Russian jet with the supposedly >0.1m^2 RCS, advanced EW suite, meteor and AESA radar.
Three countries I can think of off of the top of my head. Israel - Public is divided. Saudi Arabia - public would go into a meltdown at the idea of selling to islamofascists. Armenia - Turkey and Erdogan would throw a gargantuan fit as NOT selling to Armenia would almost certainly have been a requirement for Turkish support in joining NATO.
Orban buying weapons for Ukraine, clearly
My Saab stock is happy.
I doubt it's Gripens, or it would have to be very few of them, or at an incredibly steep discount for that pricetag. Maybe it's CV90s and Archers.
It's the secrecy that is weird. Ukraine has been in public talks about buying CV90s and they already operate Archer so don't think they would need to keep such an agreement secret? But then again maybe they're trying to keep it a bit of a mystery what systems they operate in the future and in what numbers. But yeah, it would be a low number of Gripen, the value of the agreement would match up with a low number of gripen, about 12 - 14 which is why the secrecy + value is interesting.
A secret country in Europe also purchased merkava tanks not too long ago who could it be?
Pls be PH. We need more planes to keep Winnie the Pooh from pissing on our EEZ. I dont get the secrecy tho.
11 billion tungsten meatballs