Sweden will gift 16 Gripen fighter jets to Ukraine and facilitate the purchase of a further 20 new aircraft, in a deal that will see essential components built in Britain and support more than 5,000 UK jobs, the government has stated.
The announcement was made jointly by Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Minister for Defence Readiness and Industry Luke Pollard. The 16 aircraft will be gifted urgently by Sweden, while Ukraine will purchase the additional 20 new Gripens through an EU support loan to ensure longer-term air force capacity. The deal is intended to give Ukrainian forces modern multirole air combat platforms interoperable with NATO allies.
The Gripen, to a degree, is a collaborative programme between the UK, Sweden and the United States, with over 30 percent of each aircraft manufactured in Britain. At least 50 UK-based companies are set to be involved in the deal, including Saab UK in Fareham and Leonardo UK in Edinburgh, covering critical components such as the radar and landing gear.
Starmer said the deal “shows what British industry can achieve on the world stage, supporting thousands of jobs from Yeovil to Edinburgh while helping to deliver the air power Ukraine needs to defend itself against Russia’s illegal invasion,” adding that “by standing with our allies and backing Ukraine, we are securing real benefits for British workers and businesses.”
Pollard said the UK “will not waver” in its support, describing the deal as “both a big boost for Ukraine’s air power and a show of confidence in our world-leading UK defence industry, supporting thousands of good British jobs here at home.”
Combined military support from the UK and Sweden since Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022 now stands at £11.4 billion. The UK is separately providing 120,000 drones to Ukraine this year as part of its broader military assistance package.
Saab is investing £100 million in its Fareham site in the UK. BAE Systems has a long-standing presence in Sweden through BAE Bofors and BAE Hägglunds. Last summer a squadron of Swedish Gripens deployed to Poland alongside the Royal Air Force to conduct NATO air policing.
Ukraine has made a stellar comeback, Russian morale is at the lowest and Putin knows it, his days as a murderer are numbered
It seems that they have cards after all, which of course only incenses Trump. They and Carney are a beacon to the World, no wonder the unreality host is turning from Orange to Purple.
I’ve gained $17,240 only within four weeks by comfortably working part-time from home. Immediately when I had lost my last business, I was very troubled and thankfully I’ve located this project now in this way I’m in a position to receive thousand USD directly from home. Each individual certainly can do this easy work & make more greenbacks online by visiting
following website—.,.,.,.,.—>>> JobatHome1.Com
Great news i hope it comes to be
Ukraine is on board for over 100 gripens, Colombia recently signed in for 17. Brazil made a deal for 36 and likely will double that order. If Canada signs in for gripens, pkus those alreaduly ordered by the SAF, Sweeden should push for a MLU, for an Gripen e+ version…
GE has already developed a 414 enhanced engine, which delivers 20% more thrust. On top of that, improvements in painting, weapons’ pods and so on could make its RCS get much lower. More importantly, the gripen could be adapt for loyal wingman drones.
Great news all round.
Well done all Involved.
There, now you can all squabble amongst yourselves… 😁
Did you see my reply about the TVR a while ago?
Hello mate, no, sorry….
I know I asked If you had got It going, so I’m guessing you probably have ?
I’ve been getting on with my Daytona 1200 recently, swapping out the old chain and sprockets, re-storing lots of old corroded parts and generally making It look mint.
Also had a little race with a Lambo, which the Daytona won (with a little help from all the traffic !).
Hello mate, no, sorry….
I know I asked If you had got It going, so I’m guessing you probably have ?
I’ve been getting on with my Daytona 1200 recently, swapping out the old chain and sprockets, re-storing lots of old corroded parts and generally making It look mint.
Also had a little race with a Lambo, which the Daytona won (with a little help from all the traffic !).
🤔🤦♂️
Yes it is running (just an issue with the RVI tach and electronic ignition). With the Stage 2 cam, 0.50″ off the head, Goodparts header and Accuspark igniton through a 4″ Flowmaster silencer it has a nice, nasty bark and good snap (nowhere near enough to keep Halfwit happy but hey :-). AVO coilovers all ’round and a Painless replacement wiring harness so it has 12 fuses instead of 4 x 35amp. Currently finishing the interior then off to the alignment shop for a reasonably aggressive setup..
It will go to the local track for time trials and out on the road soon looking for adventures, some likely ending up on the deck of a tow truck but I have AA and a strap set to make loading easy. If I want to go fast I have a modified Mazdaspeed3 and for slow there is the ’66 Rover P5 3L or the ’67 P6 TC2000.
I could use one of those wheelbarrows Jonathan mentioned 🙂
Ha ha, I love this mate, I really think this site needs more stuff like this just for a calming effect.
Your Mazda Is a cracker from memory, Front wheel drive I think ? My wife had an RS Focus 4WD for a few years but it was rather heavy and really uneconomical… It was blistering on B roads though, better than our old Scooby and Evo7, I sort of gave up chasing speed In Cars, the Cerbera is still wrapped up In It’s bag and I just do the two wheel thing now Latest bike Is nearly Mint now, a Yellow Triumph Daytona 1200 1995, It’s really good considering It’s age . 168 mph and 147ps engine, It’s not super fast by today’s standards but fast enough to have fun.
Have fun while It still works !!!
If I change to the hi-test tune I get about 335hp at the front wheels, too much really as it is FWD so usually a step down about 300hp. If I stay off the turbo I get quite reasonable mileage. Funny thing is for a 3300lb FWD it is so much fun to drive especially on the track, I am always grinning. Take off the traction control, put on the stickies and make those brakes work hard. I’m more of a cornering afficiando.
Two wheels? 2007 Vstrom DL650, restoring my 1982 KZ750E and for giggles 1972 BSA B25T, lusting after a 1974-78 Ducati 750 or 900 SS
Then there are the bicycles, saxophones, pianos. Obviously we both love our toys……….Life Is Good!
Ha ha… 335 BHP at the front wheels sound a lot of fun. I’d love a go In that.
Toys are essential to a life of fun. I also enjoy the tinkering and Restoring part. The riding Is mostly on my own and rather naughty.
Today I’m on Portland again, doing a bit of Ship Spotting, cooking a bloody hot Curry in the “Van”. Getting up early gives me lot’s of travel options and I love heading to the South West at the moment.
Shame I can’t share the Ship Pics on here, It’s a rather International mix In Portland at the moment.
If as seems very possible Canada goes Grippen do we have a similar input I wonder or will some of it go local if it’s produced there, can’t change too much I would have thought.
There’s no contest between the F35 and the Gripen. Despite 16 years of political grandstanding, the F35 has won every competition in Canada. There’s a reason why anyone who has access to the F35 is buying them. It’s only second tier airforces that are export customers for the Gripen
There may be no contest between F-35 and Gripen, and that may be due to TR3 F-35’s being witheld from combat due to glitchy software.
The whole program for F-35 is becoming increasingly more expensive, with full combat capability thanks to TR3 and block IV software having supposed to be in service years ago, but with little hope of it in the next 5 years. Lockheed are in over their head as far as software is concerned, and in reality, combat capability is seriously lacking. The decision to cancel the Rolls Royce engine earlier in the program is also looking like a highly questionable decision, given Pratt & Whitney’s inability to deliver engines on time being a problem since 2017.
The reality is that Canada is probably more likely to join the Tempest program and be freed from one that restricts access to technologies and software.
RS,
Beware of Spy’s machinations, he is becoming increasingly adept at provoking Americans w/ tangential arguments. MAGA policies obviously infuriate him, and he feigns incomprehension of the concept that there is a very wide spectrum of political views in a country of 340+ million individuals.
The article solely concerns the impending transfer of the Saab JAS 39 Gripen to UKR. Even a cursory examination of the open lit. reveals that the Gripen E/F is a reasonably competent multi-role fighter, w/ numerous integrated munitions. Gripen is certainly capable of overmatching existing Orc assets.
It is interesting that SAAB is integrating the German Taurus cruise missile on Gripen C/D. Perhaps this is a roundabout way of getting Taurus to Ukraine?
Sweden was not an original Customer for the Taurus Cruise Missile despite it being Co-Developed by SAAB.They have now Ordered it for Delivery by 2028,Integration should be very easy for SAAB.
Sent flat packed.
🤣 Let’s hope there’s no screws missing… or loose ones for that matter, Putin has a patent on those surely.
I have no Ikea what you are on about.
What the Lada !!
Assembled with a screwdriver and a 5mm allen key.
I use a Hammer 4.
I understand that F35 is the only show in town in terms of stealth. But when it comes to getting down and dirty close the battlefield where stealth is no longer available , what’s the relative merits then? Or do F35s stay high? Will jets no longer strafe? Or do we need the L3Harris (where did they come from by the way, never heard of them before last year, now they’re huge) with their modified crop duster Skyraider II. This is a genuine question as I’m not up to speed with this level of technical stuff.
It’s been a while since anyone did low-level strafing runs; certainly nothing like WW2, Korea or Vietnam style.
Why? Probably a combination of things like low-level MANPADs, radar directed guns or just mk1 eye ball directed guns. Just recently, in Iran, I believe an F35 took a MANPAD up the rear. Modern jets are also so damn expensive its cheaper to use precision guided small-size munitions like BrimStone, SDBs etc.
Stealth isn’t going to be very effective against infra red seekers used for MANPADs terminal guidance because radar is different electromagnetic spectrum.
Are obscured jet exhausts enough to fool the IR seeker, and make it follow a flare…
I wouldn’t put my life on that bet!
Thanks – that makes sense.
Strafing from a fixed wing aircraft has got less effective and more dangerous as time has gone on since WW2, for a couple of reasons.
Minimum speeds of the aircraft have gone up, meaning that going slow enough to accurately hit something has meant being close to stall speed- which affects manoeuverability and the pilot’s ability to react to coming under fire. It’s notable that the A-10 and SU-25, about the only 2 ground attack jets in service, are both legacy platforms and a lot slower than most jets.
That kind of close support has been partly (mostly?) filled in the last 30-50 years (Vietnam is now a long time ago…!) by helicopter gunships. They can fly lower and slower than any jet, and so they’re able to use their guns and unguided rockets far more effectively than a strafing jet could. They can also get completely below treelines and carry out ambush/pop-up attacks, something jets can’t do at all. The Crop Duster gunships that you mention are a sort of half-way house between the two, again because they can safely operate at the low speeds required for accurate gun attacks.
Secondly, there are a lot more MANPADS and other AA weapons (interceptor drones taking out helicopter gunships are now a thing) that are effective at low altitudes, increasing the danger to jets- and helos. Not sure if you’ve seen the video from Ukraine of a Starstreak more or less cutting a Russian gunship in two as it flew head-on over the Ukrainian position, as you’d need to for a strafing run. It’s easy enough to find if not, and underlines the danger of any aircraft trying to do this kind of attack. It’s far better use of flight hours, machine, and pilot, for an F-35 (or a Typhoon, for that matter) to stay back and launch a precision missile or 3 at the same target that has been identified by drones or other surveillance.
It is much cheaper to shoot down a Shahed type drone with a gun rather than use an expensive Sidewinder/Asraam missile. Gunpods seem to be making a comeback for the F-35B/C. The outside mould line of the gunpod shell, can be used for other things, such as a jamming pod.
Using guns on something that much slower than you comes with a high risk of flying through the debris and sucking some into your engine, hence why APKS has become so popular in this role.
Yes, Typhoon & F-16 have both been seen with guided 70mm rockets for anti drone work, but todays pilots are smart enough to work out which angle to approach, how long the burst & which direction to turn away for gun attacks on drones. 1944 Tempest Vs V1 all over again.
Guns on drones have been a cause of fighter aircraft loss because jet engines are FOD vulnerable so shooting up the drone then ingesting the pieces into own jet intakes are not sustainable. Eternal flight to those Heros..
I suspect that Merlin engines weren’t troubled by V1 FOD because the technique was to fly alongside and flip the V1 not shoot it. That sounds brave as it relies on the V1 impact fuse not to trigger!
Still no gun pods on UK F35Bs though. Why not use that space for additional AMRAAM or ASRAAMs in a stealth pod if possible? Or, use all that energy coming put of the engine to power a podded Dragonfire compacted down?
Simpler to use the new 70mm laser guided rocket on Eurofighter Typhoon and keep F35 for missions that require stealth, I suggest.
A worked example of why weapon integration and sovereign capabilities matter. LM have other priorities, apparently…
Agreed, but I’m pretty sure the guy was asking about using F-35s as CAS platforms for strafing ground targets. That’s what my response was addressing.
I think Ukraine has been getting some good use out of trainers and prop planes for taking down Shaheds as well, saving flight hours on the more expensive jets for doing other tasks. I’m not against getting some gun pods for our F-35s though, aside from anything else they look pretty cool!
There’s no requirement for 5th gen aircraft to deal with Shaheed 136, and even 4th gen Mirage 2000 or F16 are too fast and to valuable for that job.
Light aircraft and helicopters are in the speed range and less valuable. However all manned aircraft are still putting a person at risk when Inteceptor drones have been proven effective and lower cost too.
Maybe fighter jets for the latest jet powered drones, but even then Inteceptors do work. Low cost guided missiles that integrate with laser designators seem like the sweet spot of cost, effectiveness and lower risk compared to guns.
You use what you have got. Plus the pod shell outline can be used for other purposes.
Yes, I think Ukraine are using slower trainers and prop aircraft quite effectively for this.
My initial comment was explaining why modern jets don’t really want to be getting into CAS strafing runs on ground targets though, not gunning down Shaheds…
All the OSINT evidence shows that CAS is a combination of ISTAR UAV, Artillery and FPV UAVs so putting a fighter aircraft at risk for that isn’t feasible any longer. The cost benefits have moved to UAVs and RF milbloggers now claim that there are about twenty UAVs per RF combatant. AFU claims that 90% of RF casualties are UAV strikes from their Drone Wall.
Agreed, it’s a waste of very expensive flight hours to do CAS with any 4+ Gen jet aircraft.
I was reading about Project ASGARD yesterday, seems to be the British Army project for implementing the lessons from Ukraine into the British Army: Collation of ISTAR in real time into the battlefield net; identification and prioritisation of targets; prosecution of those targets using tube and rocket artillery, and UAVs from FPV out to ~200 km winged types.
They apparently tested a base version of it last year in Estonia, and were supposed to again this month just gone with a more mature version of the system. But British Army officers were saying about 8 months ago that our battlegroup in Estonia basically has this same Recce/Strike system as the Ukrainian armed forces do- aka the drone wall as you describe it. Smaller scale, of course and probably some bragging. But it’s been developed with a lot of input from Ukraine, so I wouldn’t be surprised if we’ve got a better capability than is known publicly.
Thanks, I wasn’t aware of Project Asgard.
I’d expect such capabilities to be undersold given professional caution about being unproven in combat, and the more strategic narrative that there’s a capability gap that politicians will not fund without voter concern and complaints. Thus I wasn’t surprised by the recent exercises with AFU unmanned systems on the red team being very successful and the blue team having no good answers.
It’s a logical collaboration to put funding pressure on the politicians, probably with their consent, through democratic process that their colleagues can’t deny, any longer.
However the best answer to the Welfare or Warfare question is that public funding can’t do everything so the private investment opportunity must be taken.
The Defence Investors’ Advisory Group (DIAG) is the mechanism for that, though a bit too optional for my liking. Banks who expect to profit from a nation must defend their customers too.
So I would make defence investment a duty of every banking licence in every European country so nobody has a disadvantage. All banks must have that duty to buy defence investment bonds so reducing risk of all their customer business.
>30 percent of each aircraft manufactured in Britain
Saab UK claimed a few years ago that the Gripen was 25% built in the UK. I’m not sure why the percentage has increased but even 25% is very impressive. By comparison, the UK content of an average F-35 has dropped to just 3% as most of the production work (e.g. the F-35B lift fan) has now been moved to USA factories, and L-M has recompeted many contracts to the detriment of the original UK based suppliers.
I didn’t know that about the F-35, how was that allowed to happen?! I thought our market share would have been baked into the life of the programme…
Jeeze, if only 3%, maybe the UK should make its own F35B equivalent then? Reborn as a Harrier II? Would a navalised STOL Gripen be possible ?
Well, in theory we’re going to have to at some point- unless we replace the QE class carriers with a CATOBAR design. GCAP/Tempest isn’t going to be STOL, or even CATOBAR, so we’re going to need something else if we want to maintain a manned air capability for Carrier Strike.
But that’s for 20ish years from now, which is fine. Getting out of the F-35 programme now is probably cutting off our noses to spite our face. I’m all for spiralling lessons learned from F-35 and Tempest into a sovereign carrier-suitable platform though- whether STOL or CATOBAR.
Harrier III you mean?
Kindly cite your sources for the 3% contribution please?
And Canada….well Lockheed and Orange Idiot deserve a smacking. American arrogance is at last getting a kicking it deserves.
The article misses off the other big bit of news in this: Both Zelensky and the Swedish Defence minister linked supply of Meteor with this order.
So, once again, Ukraine looks to become the testing ground of our weaponry that we haven’t been able to properly battle-test yet.
Should give Ukraine a chance to potentially take out those Russian CAP aircraft that launch R-37 at them from inside Russian airspace- even the AMRAAM they have at the moment don’t have the legs to get them. The question will be, can they launch from high enough that the Meteor has the energy to reach the MIG-31, while also keeping the Gripen out of range of S-400 systems closer to the front? Even if not, it should make life a lot more dangerous for the Russian aviators launching glide bombs at the Ukrainian front line, as they are way closer. So Meteor should be a bonus for Ukraine, especially when teamed up with the Saab AWACs aircraft that they received last year.
Yes, good point. Currently the F16s are outranged both by RF radar and missiles so that has to change to make the glide bomb threat go away.
Destruction of RF weapon production, storage and transport are still the better air defence option because PAC3 are rare and expensive while Firepoint missiles are not. It’s not smart to await launch before dealing with the threat.
Absolutely, the tactical-level advantage that Meteor would bring is less important than the strategic-level advantage of removing Russia’s ability to build these weapons and deliver them in the first place.
But they’ll never be able to completely remove Russia’s ability to produce them (ref WW2, where the successful strategic bombing campaign never completely got rid of Germany’s manufacturing capability), so Meteor would help massively reduce the effect of those glide bombs on the situation at the front. I’ve read that guided KABs have in many ways replaced the heavier tube and rocket artillery that Russia has historically relied upon, due to the number lost to counter-battery fire and UAVs. Some RF bloggers are saying that it’s the KABs that are providing the firepower to maintain any kind of forward momentum in some sectors. If the Russian AF becomes too scared to get close enough to the front to launch the glide bombs, then Russian ground forces are going to be relying almost exclusively on mortars and FPVs for their fire support.
Indeed. While Artillery follows a ballistic trajectory so is vulnerable to counterbattery fire with the correct radar support, the glide bombs are much more difficult to destroy because their guidance doesn’t have to follow a predictable trajectory and has no rocket motor IR signature to track, either.
Much better to push their launch aircraft back so they no longer have range for glide bombs. I’m guessing their glide angle is limited, because all wings are, so the altitude required to achieve range becomes unreasonable..
Anything that makes it more expensive is a strategic win as RF are broke..
I’m guessing that only Gripen C/D are available off the shelf, while Gripen E/F are in a deep build pipeline…
Even C/D might be second hand, depending on the Swedish Air Force getting their E/F replacements first, like the F16 replacements with F35 in donor Air Forces.
Has anyone got the details, which isn’t provided here?
Gripen Production is not the easiest to follow at times,A/B were built in good numbers,C/D were basically Re-Manufactured A/B’s,but E/F are definately New Builds.I wonder if Ukraine is initially getting A/B from storage in this instance ?.
I just found this from @ZelenskyyUA @armyinformcomua
The terms:
— 16 Gripen C/D fighters transferred as bilateral aid
— Up to 20 Gripen E/F fighters to be purchased by Ukraine for €2.5 billion from the EU’s Ukraine Support Loan
— First aircraft to arrive within the next 10 months
— Ukrainian pilots and technicians are already training on the platform
This is a serious combat air force, on a serious timeline.
Definitely nothing to sneeze at! And a great boost for Saab to boot!
Indeed, and Sweden is a serious defence supplier and European NATO member that can be relied upon in the dictatorship resistance endeavour.
Slava Svenska 🇸🇪💙💛🇺🇦
Presumably there is an assumption that mission data sets and integrated supply chain do not apply with Gripen as they do with JSF F35. However ITAR still applies to Gripen components most obviously the GE Jet Engine so SAAB still have to decide if EJ230 jet engine would better suit their export aspirations. Last I heard, that depends on a strong customer demand so funding not to be USA dependent.
Canada is a sovereign state, and not the 51st state of US. Perhaps they would prefer sovereign defence capabilities and licence manufacturing of their Gripen order, including EJ jet engines…