Nodeo-Franvier
Airman 1st Class
- 122
- Jul 13, 2020
Excluding Avionics how do you think Gripen and JF-17 compare to F-20?
F-20 vs Gripen vs JF-17?
- Thread starter Nodeo-Franvier
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
GreenKnight121
Senior Airman
- 601
- Mar 16, 2014
Gripen & F-20 have the same engine.
The JF-17 doesn't really have the electronic sophistication of the Gripen, but in terms of affordability it offers a similar but slightly less capable weapons carriage capability for a fraction of the cost. It's performance is below that of the Gripen and it's lighter, and being cheaper it's ideal for those air forces strapped for cash, like Argentina for example, that want a multi-role strike fighter.
The Gripen has become an export success story through vigorous marketing by British Aerospace a few years back, although that deal has since ended and it still ranks as one of the modern day export successes, whereas the JF-17, despite heavy promotion at airshows is not 'yet' an export success. A few countries have ordered it but in small numbers only and Pakistan is the primary operator; interesting that Pakistan's technology share partner China has not chosen to put the JF-17 into service, which is problematic for the Pakistanis as they have to foot the production costs alone, which they want to offset with foreign orders.
Of interest is that Argentina has placed interest in ordering 12 of them, while Brazil has ordered the Gripen. Perhaps the only place where side-by-side comparisons between operators will be made?
The Gripen has become an export success story through vigorous marketing by British Aerospace a few years back, although that deal has since ended and it still ranks as one of the modern day export successes, whereas the JF-17, despite heavy promotion at airshows is not 'yet' an export success. A few countries have ordered it but in small numbers only and Pakistan is the primary operator; interesting that Pakistan's technology share partner China has not chosen to put the JF-17 into service, which is problematic for the Pakistanis as they have to foot the production costs alone, which they want to offset with foreign orders.
Of interest is that Argentina has placed interest in ordering 12 of them, while Brazil has ordered the Gripen. Perhaps the only place where side-by-side comparisons between operators will be made?
correct in relation to a/b, later gripens enjoy of additional lbs coming out from F414 engine
kitplane01
Airman 1st Class
- 132
- Apr 23, 2020
Well ... compared to either the F-20 or the JF-17 ... the Gripen has a more modern engine, more modern structure, and more modern aerodynamics. The Gripen-E has about twice the range and (i think) needs less runway. The Gripen carries more weapons of more total weight. And an easier cockpit. And more modern avionics, which is the most important part of the plane.
The Gripen looks better too.
The F-20 has a better thrust/empty_weight ratio.
You can buy three JF-17s for the cost of a Gripen, and you can buy a JF-17 without oversight from Swedish politicians.
I'd bet on the Gripen in a dogfight because of the delta-canard, and it's obvious who wins in a beyond visual range encounter.
The Gripen looks better too.
The F-20 has a better thrust/empty_weight ratio.
You can buy three JF-17s for the cost of a Gripen, and you can buy a JF-17 without oversight from Swedish politicians.
I'd bet on the Gripen in a dogfight because of the delta-canard, and it's obvious who wins in a beyond visual range encounter.
China has enough of money to buy, fuel and maintain the pricy and more capable hardware. Not just the bigger, heavier and more expensive J-10, but a whole host of 2-engined fighter-bombers.
Grippen cost to buy and operate is probably 2/3rds of what will Rafale or Eurofighter cost?
vikingBerserker
Lieutenant General
I'd go with the Grippen
- Thread starter
- #9
Nodeo-Franvier
Airman 1st Class
- 122
- Jul 13, 2020
Well you can't really compare 1980s Avionic with modern ones on JF-17 and Gripen.
- Thread starter
- #10
Nodeo-Franvier
Airman 1st Class
- 122
- Jul 13, 2020
Pretty interesting that the little Gripen is more expensive than F-16.
Agreed 100%.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Well when you put surveys like this together consider that in the modern era that avionics are an integral part of the design and in today's world some aircraft are designed around avionics
that was my point - and because avionics is main design driver of contemporary combat airplanes making such comparison is pointless, F20 is nonexistent airplane from different era, JF17 is cheap substitute of combat machine and you are putting this on the same level as JAS39, it is like asking question with one widely and well known answer
- Thread starter
- #14
Nodeo-Franvier
Airman 1st Class
- 122
- Jul 13, 2020
Well I think we can compare Airframe,Pay load,range,maneuverability etc though.
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
Would the JF17's airframe be able to handle avionic upgrades? Could the great "What-If", the F-20, have been able to have been upgraded as well? How modernized are current F5-E's avionics bay and wouldn't the F-20 handle similar upgrades?
Full disclosure: I am biased towards the F-20 'cause I'm a sucker for a pretty face.
Full disclosure: I am biased towards the F-20 'cause I'm a sucker for a pretty face.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Absolutely. The Canadians installed upgraded avionics in their F-5s during the last years they were flying them, similar to what was found in the F/A-18. The issue is when you have to mount sensors and antennas that might be built into a modern airframe designed from the ground up to accommodate those avionics. You may give an older airframe new life but may inhibit some performance aspects because of "bolt on" improvements.
Sure we can but... - JF17 and F20 have been build using airframe 30 years older than JAS39. If we are talking about E/F version of the grippen it's powerplant has the same age advantage. With this airplane SAAB has used every piece of their broaden experience with aerodynamic design (it is logical development of Drakken/Viggen families). I think you are trying to compare tier 1 light fighter with two tier tier 2/3 ones. More logical is to make comparison of JAS39, F16, and Mirage 2000 could be MiG29 as well (at least in dynamic aspects). JF17 is totally different story (from the very beginning has been designed as a cheap substitute for poor customers) and F20 is not even worth of mentioning because early stage of development this project has been dropped talking about quality of this design is pure speculation.
kitplane01
Airman 1st Class
- 132
- Apr 23, 2020
You literally cannot fit a modern radar into the skinny nose of an F-20. A full sized antenna won't fit. That's why no modern fighter has an F-20 style nose.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
That's my point, see post 12 (depending on the equipment you're talking about)
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
But if you're talking F-5s
duotechservices.com
Aircraft Radar System F-5 Radar Upgrade NEMESIS RADAR
Aircraft Radar System F-5 Radar Upgrade Learn more and request more information. Contact Duotech about NEMESIS [email protected]
duotechservices.com
