Agreed, was tellin’ Ward last week how phenomenal it’s been, I remember first finding him at something like < 200 subs and subbing around 800 and since then the channel has just exploded. His coverage far exceeds that of the MSM and even his contemporaries and I’m glad he’s being rewarded for the effort.
I am continually blown away by the sheer amount of information Dr. Bronk is able to tell us all during these interviews, I hope you continue to have him on.
I have to totally agree: this was a quick but absolutely complete runthrough of an extremely complex topic. I really enjoy Dr. Bronks holistic description of the specific requirements of modern aerial warfare in the Ukraine., which becomes readily understandable even for an amateur such as me. This is a kind of briefing most politicians should get nowadays not only in military issues, but lots of other topics like transportation etc. Thanks a lot to both of you, Kind regards from Hamburg, Germany
Finland used FA-18's on highways much the same as Sweden used Viggen and now Gripen. Why not phase out SU's and MiGs with Hornets and Gripens? Both robust and utilize the same engine keeping spares and logistics somewhat more user friendly. Hornet and Gripen are strong at both air to air and air to ground. Good multi-role and way more digital high tech.
the older F18 Hornets in US Service have exceeded their original flight hours due to OIF/OEF support and the assembly line is no longer active to build new airframes of the older F18 Hornets (that line was taken down in 1987 after the last F/A18C model was delivered to the Navy. The D, E and F models are all Super Hornets with larger airframe and wings and I think the newer Super Hornets are probably too expensive for Ukraine to purchase fresh off the assembly line as the Navy and Marine Corps probably don't have many in cold storage to be taken out of mothballs for issue into the fight. I also think that Finland is going to be retiring their Hornets starting in 2025 and replacing them with F-35 Lightnings so they could possibly be a source for the aircraft for Ukraine to use but those birds have already had one Mid-Life rebuild by Finland and might not give the Ukrainian Air Force a long-term solution to man their air force with.
@@brucedrake5493 Ukraine needs a short term solution and will worry about 2025 closer to 2025. The bottom line is that Finland only has the 62 (out of an original 64) F18s and they aren't going to be open to transferring ANY of their fighters until their new F35s become operational and that's not likely to be until closer to 2030 - even if deliveries and training in the US might start in 2026-27. Sweden's situation is different as they have some extra legacy Gripen C/Ds if they are willing to bring existing new Gripen Es into operational service and can get political cover and compensation for the transferred aircraft from the rest of the Ukraine coalition. Unfortunately, Justin Bronk doesn't address this very important aspect of the proposed use of Gripens. I address it in detail in my more extensive post in this comment thread.
Ward, I love these videos and the rest of your content. Your interviews, news coverage and insights are top-notch. I find myself recommending your channel to friends, family and strangers on RUclips!
As a Swede I really hope we can provide Gripen, we should have at least 40 that we can spare as we're currently upgrading to the newer version. Ofcourse we'd need to join NATO first though if we're gonna draw down our airforce even for a time.
@@davedeville6540 why does everyone think that South Africa or Thailand would just give up their planes for Free to a corrupt country? The Ukrainians haven’t paid for anything. They haven’t even offered ally Turkey any aid after their earthquake. The Czech Republic maybe since they are ordering F-35’s. Hungary will never do it as they are not so much onboard with just rubber stamping free everything to the Ukraines. Remember Zelensky and China are still in the belts for roads and after this conflict is over he could side with China for aid over NATO.
Ward, first off, I have to say that I appreciate your previous service to your country as a Naval aviator. Words cannot express my appreciation for all service members no matter their respective roles however, I have a special level of respect for those who volunteer for the most front line roles in our military such as our Naval aviators. I also appreciate your continued service to country and our community of interested souls with your first hand tactical knowledge along with your obvious rolodex of global contacts such as Justin, that bring analysis and commentary that can only normally be heard at the highest government level briefings. Your work is deeply appreciated. Thank you for this video's great discussion and expert analysis, and I look forward to much more. With great respect... Joe
And as I understand it is designed to be maintained by conscripts under austere conditions operated from strips of remote highway. Id say Ukraine could use that type of equipment over my countries finely tuned high maintenance F-16 type aircraft
The versions of the Gripen that can be recommended in future deals with Ukraine are at best being older C/D. Version /E is currently being built in Linköping and they already have orders to deliver. In the case that Ukraine has a higher need in the present time, it will mostly be C/D as it can then be taken from the Swedish Air Force's own stocks if it does not expose our own defense to risks to fulfill their commitment, pretty much some up what our PM said a month ago. Personally, I don't think Ukraine needs these plans, since there are better choices for Ukraine. It doesn't just need aircraft, they need masses of planes to be able to have a greater impact over the battle zone, and Sweden don´t have that at the moment.
Perhaps the most underestimated part of Gripen is the tactical datalink between fighters. For NATO this has not been as important because they have many AEW platforms. But for Sweden the datalink is important whenever such resources are unavailable.
data links are huge for NATO and the US too. It's much easier and faster to see a target pop up on screen from a data link instead of having to hear somebody provide info over radio. If you think of how the F-22 would operate it spends most time listening and receiving information instead of making its own noise so it needs to ingest data from other sources in order to be effective.
@@gds3574 Link 16 is a simple (low bandwidth) interface for sharing target data across a lot of different platforms Gripen has a much more complex interface to share both sensor data and targets. Sweden also had an advanced datalink on their Viggen aircraft 40 years ago. F-35 and Aegis Combat System have a even more advanced MADL data link.
One thing not discussed about the Gripen: If Ukraine prevails in the war, it could probably set up its own production of Gripen E, just like Brazil is now doing. Ukraine has had a very capable aerospace industry so it would make sense for them to produce their own fighter jets in large quantities.
After the War when Russia is defeated which will happen as long as the West continues to provide support, I suspect Ukraine will be building a lot of it's own munitions. It has the capability and I suspect this will get a lot of focus as the economy of Ukraine is built up. One thing is for sure, there are going to be a lot of poor and hungry Russians as their Economy collapses
Canada didn't take all of Australias old Hornets, there are 46 that were going to be sold to the red air contractor Air USA, but that deal fell through and those 46 hornets are now sitting around.
@@mrFalconlem As Putin digs a deeper hole for the Russian military they have no chance of retaining any Ukrainian territories - just look at the current shambles for the Russians along the entire front. Wagner Group have given up around Bakhmut after suffering huge casualties, tens of thousands of new conscripts and prisoners have been sent to their deaths and Russia's military units are generally poorly trained, led and equipped. Ukraine will regain all occupied territories but it would be better for everyone if this occurred as quickly as possible which means more military supplies to Ukraine. Ukraine will need to deter or defeat any future incursions by Russia into Ukraine which necessitates a modern air force.
Mooch and Justin, thanks so much for keeping us informed on such a factual basis! Much a I love my Viper, you're spot on with it needing nice, clean, surfaces to fly from. Hopefully the politicos will come together to help Ukraine.
Ward your guest is just the most detailed weapons expert i have ever heard on any channel he is pure gold, its hard to even remember the sheer volume of knowledge of what has said, and given your own huge knowledge and experience in your own back ground your channel is such a gem of realistic knowledge from both you and your guests , thank you Ward you have the best channel on these matters.
Every time I listen to Justin's analysis, I'm blown away by his depth of knowledge and ability to transmit it with clarity. He's a brilliant resource. I love these talks.
What I ebjoy is that he reasons. He have the Scientific mindset that most others dont. Many writers or youtubers are critical of its sources and reason well but they lack fundamental indepth knowledge. I listen much to Perun who I think is great. But one often loose out on sertain aspects
I’ve been watching Mooch’s videos for a while but holding off on subscribing for some reason. This video got me to subscribe! What an intelligent and informed discussion.
One of the best discussions I have seen and heard so far. So refreshing to hear a normal, unpoliticized and non emotional, analysis of reality. For all of us, former military pilots, ground crew and even staff personnel, your analysis is exactly what we are saying as well. Unfortunately most non military politicians have no clue what they are talking about, but they do get to take the decisions. Just throwing in some aircraft is not going to solve anything. For the Ukraine I see more in UAV's and mostly mobile air defense systems, accompanied by precision artillery, HIMARS and other MLRS munitions. There is no way we can build up the required infrastructure for an effective air force for Ukraine. Problem is that nobody dares to say that to Zelinsky. Basically someone should take the Ukrainians by the hand, explain them what they need and then supply those weapons. Then the whole aircraft issue will go away. Problem is that politicians don't understand that. It would be great if the news channels would start paying more attention to your channel. You bring sanity into the very emotional discussion about the war in Ukraine. That would probably solve a lot of disinformation that is going on right now. And since your subscriber number is still growing there will come a time they will have to start paying attention to you.
@@ja37d-34 Cool. But he said they would need at least 20 of them and there are not a lot of Gripens in the world (271 have built, whereas there have been 4,500 F-16's built). What is the turn around time on 20 Gripens. Well, that is an excellent question, but Sweden is not the US, between their 3 factories they can produce 30 Gripens at max rate production. They aren't even at mass rate production, yet. Now 30 would be enough for Ukraine and could be manufactured in a year...if it were not for the fact that those 30 gripens only would be less than of a third their backlog orders. Saab is still a company that has to turn a profit and build relationships. Of their customers, who do they tell that they have to wait (even longer) for their planes that they are already waiting years to recieve? The Gripen is the best fit for this war, if it were not for the availability aspect. F-16 are the best fit when it comes to availability, but not necessarily logistically. I simply don't think that the Gripen could be made available in numbers. It is the best fit on paper, but probably not possible. If it is, I would like to hear that plan and which country said they would be OK waiting even longer on the backlog list. There are reasons why Sweden has already said no. Bumping Ukaine to the front of any list would likely be a suicide note for SAAB and its' current business relations. One of the problems with modern fighters is that they are now so complex that the numbers of units that can be built in a given year is in the dozens. THe F-35 is the exception, but to do it they have to build in one of the largest facilities in the world (if you are interested I think it is called US Air Force Plant 4). Even with all the robots used it still takes 41,500 man hours to make a single F-35. Since Lockheed Martin is set to build 156 F-35's this year that equates to 6.47 million man hours. These aren't toasters and sending those kinds of complex machines and the entrailing logistical supply chains and maintenance requirements is a big ask. I don't see Ukraine getting any Western fighters any time soon. And I am not sure that is even the best place to spend money.
@@wadopotato33 It is not about Gripen Es dude, it is Gripen Cs. Those exists and 20 plus CAN be sorted. The czech republic could hand back theirs for example. That is 12 plus 2 (Ds). Sweden does not really need to use all of their . Cs were going to be retained but they could switch to full Es instead. IF theyw ere in NATO that would NOT be a problem so much. Then you have quite a few potential airframes. Sweden has NOTt said "no", Sweden said "not now". A massive difference. But it is a thing they may have to use when Turkish inner political bickering and anon democratic country acts like an arsehole against probably the most democratic country in the world and have demands on it to change that. I would to, when arseholes act like arseholes. They will usually face karma, sooner or later. It would not be hard to supply Ukraine with Gripen Cs. It is a matter of willingness. it is THAT simple.
@@ja37d-34 Not that simple at all. And you saying it is simple is your ignornance speaking. "Earlier, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy during a summit in Brussels on Feb. 9 asked Stockholm to provide Kyiv with Jas 39 Gripen jets, but the Swedish prime minister said this was “not an option.” That sounds like a "no" to me. I ask a girl for a date and she says dating me is not an option, what should I take that to mean? That is also the Swedish Prime Minister saying basically "no". Secondly, the idea that a country has jets does not in any way, shape or form mean that they are willing to give them to another country if it means leaving their own country without jets. Czech Republic has 14 Gripens. So first off, giving away 12 would leave them unable to defend themselves. Especially given that availability rates mean that if you have 14 Gripens only 11 or so are ready to use at any given time. It is simply not going to happen. Secondly, the Gripens they do have are leased...so not a decision that they are able to make for themselves since they technically don't even own them (you can't sell a leased car to a third party, either). Thirdly they are extgending their lease on the Gripens because they are going to recieve F-35's, but those F-35's are on backorder like every nation's F-35's. That lease on Gripens is going to be extended until 2035 which is now the point at which the US will have supplied the number of required F-35's for the Czech Republic to defend their own airspace. An F-16 takes 17 hours of maintenance for every hour in flight. How is that the Ukraine is going to field enough trained people within a few months to keep a Western jet in the air for 24/7 flight operations? They can't immediately and they won't be able to for the forseeable future. It is a major logistical challenge. Come on, you are still thinking about this like these are toasters. There is nothing simple about this problem. Czech Gripens are not an option, but in your infinite wisdom they somehow became an option. The Czechs don't even own them. Find me a country that can afford to let 20 Gripens go and still maintain their own defence. You struck out with the Czech Republic. I agree that the Gripen is the best fit for Ukraine on paper, but availability wise it will more likely be the F-16. Which means huge outlays for adapting runways. The F-16 requires well-maintained, long runways comparatively. Personally, I don't see an option that is easily resolved and implemented in the short-term.
@@wadopotato33 No, they did not say "not an option", again, they said not now. How hard can it be to understand? You are not listening, I know Swedish i have seen it. A wall of text doess not make you right.
If I understand correctly the best choice is Grippen with Hornet #2. Your're reasoning makes sense. But, we need to make the decision and start training the pilots and crews now. Just my thoughts. Thank you and be safe.
This is the best analysis conversation I've heard on Y/T. Mr Bronk is the Real Article when it comes to discussing all the considerations that factor in on a major weapons upgrade like aircraft into a situation like this war in Ukraine. Excellent work, sir..
I actually had a few fellow soldiers actually get wounded from unspent cluster munitions in the Iraq war (2003). One officer kicked an unspent munition and had a chunk of foot cut off. I suppose you can call that accidental friendly fire.
While Justin is dropping really pertinent knowledge, the peanut gallery is busy tossing out their favorite aircraft into the chat and asking questions that if they would have been actually listening, they would have heard Justin answering them. You'll NEVER hear this kind of stuff on CNN or MSNBC and to not appreciate and pay attention is such a waste and hugely disrespectful of both Justin and Ward.
NOTE TO SELF: Never, ever, ever, under any circumstance, play poker with Justin Bronk. His ability to read comments during the live stream (And we know he does) and not break out into uncontrollable laughter at some of the absurdity, would make him a formidable opponent at the card table. In all seriousness, another fabulous video, Justin and Pako and all the other Subject Matter Experts bring some real well thought out information and insight.
I think it's a huge ask for Sweden to send 1/4 of it's airforce. Since our own front line capabilities and storage have already been hit hard. We have sent like 20.000 AT-4, 50 IFV's, an undisclosed number of our only long range artillery which we only had 48 of, and in reality we probably have sent 10+ to do any sort of difference on the battlefield. Among other things like Nlaws, kevlars,helmets etc.
It's utter madness. Western European Airfirces have shrunk by as much as 91% since 1995. A country like Sweden or the UK sending ANY fighters us lunacy. They'll be shot down on the first sortie and those countrues are not America, they don't have 1.98 trillion a year in defense spending. They 0.068 trillion a year.
I agree. I don't think we should be sending western aircraft at all. More Russian types with upgrades, which have proved to be available. What Ukraine really needs is more AD SAM systems, not aircraft. We also have to remember that we must only supply enough to keep the invader in check and achieve the mission. Zelinsky is friendly to the west, but it has not always been the case with Ukrainian leaders.
Good discussion. Justin is a wealth on knowledge and thoughtfulness on these subjects. I don't see any near term role where Western aircraft would be involved in air-to-ground unless it is in an anti-radar role using stand-off weapons. There would be no tactical reason to risk expensive and irreplaceable Western aircraft over a SAM and man-pad dense area that exists near the front lines. Ukraine's remaining Soviet/Russian air assets can continue the air-to-ground mission role for the time being. As Justin mentioned, the smart use of a small number of Western aircraft would be to deter the use of Russian aircraft over Ukraine proper and on or near the front lines effectively reducing the strike effect of Russian air-to-ground support. Also, any Western aircraft become a huge target for Russian cruise missile strikes, so how and where you base them becomes a real problem.
Or use aged out western aircraft parked on the ground to draw Russian cruise missile fire away from the electrical infrastructure. If it was almost headed for the boneyard anyway.
Lobbing JDAMs for up to 9 NM from AMX International hugging the hilly grounds of Donbas however would actually allow to kill all 1st and 2nd echelon trench bunkers and attrite tons of Russian forward positions (arty are luck shots, short in supply, GMRLS are reserved for the deep battle, rightfully so). But yes, you are correct about the rest.
the conversation @35:00+ reminded me of a cartoon in a trade publication in the 1980s, where two Soviet officers are sitting in front of a Parisian cafe'. One of the officers says "Too bad we lost the air-war...."
Ward, keep saying this, you are not paid enough for how important you are to keeping us informed. Thank you. Having lived in Alaska, I am so impressed by the video some 27 minutes in!
The “Russian Invasion” reminds me of Germanys spring 1918 offensive, it took territory, got depleted, Allie’s had enough reserves to effectively counter attack and breach
IMHO the JAS-39 4th + Gen is actually an excellent Mach II capable aircraft for the Ukrainian air support task. Made more rugged and for rough field operations and maintained by CONSCRIPTS this little fighter is probably the most capable and cost effective given all things considered. Also . . . when playing chess in this region the Swedes would love to get the income and begin to pump that treasure into "E" modules. Gripen C/Ds are wired and programed for NATO weapons compatibility I believe.
Agree with everything, but I would be concerned about how many Gripen can Sweden and Czechia afford to send (Hungary will probably not help). Sweden has just begun their E/F transition and have not retired many C/Ds yet. The Swedes also do not want NATO airbases on their territory. So at most, Ukraine will get a few from Sweden and all of Czechia’s provided the USA help with Czechia’s F-35 program. Logistics will also be a problem since no one else knows how to fix a Gripen outside Sweden, Czechia, and Hungary.
@@kurousagi8155 I think you are correct. The Swedish airforce is so small that there are no planes to spare for this war, and even the most hardcore Ukraine supporter in our country realize this. And besides, the old C/D version is a mediocre plane compared to the best Nato planes. Gripen E is another matter, as it is in my opinion the best fighter aircraft in the world right now. If Ukraine should get any Swedish planes at all, then the country need strong official ironclad guarantees by both USA and Britain to defend the country like if a Nato member was attacked. And atleast a few squadrons of F15 or F22 will have to be stationed on Swedish territory until the Sweden can replenish its supply of Gripens.
@@kurousagi8155 South Africa has C/D's in storage because they can't afford to fly them since the national treasury is constantly being pillaged. They probably won't sell them, since the arseholes in charge are sucking up to Putrid (currently running joint naval excercises, believe it or not) but that does mean there are a lot of technicians sitting on their hands and South Africans have become very diasporic in the last couple of decades so those guys could be hired if the pay rate is in dollars or Euro's.
@@TzunSu Okay, maybe we can send those away then. Gripen E is the best plane in the world right now. But Gripen C/D is a more mediocre plane. Its almost like comparing a Leopard1 tank with a Leopard2. So I do not think they will do much difference to the overall strategic situation in the country. But I hope that I am wrong of course. But we are having semi-experienced pilots flying against an enemy that have more experienced pilots, more planes and more powerful SAMs. But on the upsides do Gripen offer an enormous flexibility as it can hide and use highways for take off and is easy to maintain. The fast refuel and rearmament allows it to fly more sorties per day than any other plane in the world, so it could thereby compensate for some of the numerical disadvantage that Ukraine suffers from. And if Ukraine would lose 100 Gripens in the skies over the country will it not be any economic disaster - since that plane is extremely cheap and a hundred more can be built. Gripens were supposed to be used intensively if our country was attacked. If the plane was sitting on the ground most of the time when the russians attacked it would be useless to have it. But was here and now it was supposed to be used - Now or never. So flying multiple sorties per day in one year would of course be extremely exhausting for the pilots, who could never get the same sleep and time to relax as a pilot of a F14A Tomcat or a J-35 Draken which got something like 50 hours of maintance on the ground for every hour up in the sky. Gripen only needs 6 hours of maintance per hour in the sky. And well, yea you can rearm and refuel the plane in 15 minutes or so if you have an emergency, and if you lack a ground crew can you as pilot do that all by yourself in say 45 minutes. Anyways. When you use a plane so intensivly and make so many starts and landings per day, then of course you will exhaust the airframe. So after only one year of hard fighting will your plane have become a wreck if the russians havn't managed to shot that plane down first. So I guess that we will never see our Gripens coming home to Sweden again regardless how good or bad they perform in Ukraine. It will be interesting to see what the result will be. I think that this plane is nearing its age of retirement as SAAB is now developing a 6th generation fighter to replace it. If Gripen E would be sent to Ukraine armed with meteor missiles then I think it could kick ass and score ridiculus kill ratios. And the plane would also be a superb aircraft for ground attack with its capability of multiple sories per day, cheap costs per flight hour, low maintance, and a broad variaty of weapons that it could carry.
The original f18 would be perfect option. It's robust and could work off Highways etc as its land gear was designed for carriers. There are loads of them around. Can carry all the weapons Ukraine needs. Designed with low altitude operations in mind. Which is what they will need to do.
Gripen has lots of sensors which can be used by inteligence. The capacity of weapon and ability in the battle field is similar to F-16. What is different that it is the only modern fighter jet which can operate on destroyed landings or just wider roads. During real war it is a huge, huge advantage.
The Viper's weapon load and air-to-air performance is higher than that of the Gripen, it is maneuvering much better, is a higher performance jet. But every aircraft is a trade-off and you hear many of that here.
Fascinating discussion. Thank you very much for having it! More people would have an appreciation for the complexity of military strategy in a multinational coalition if they listened to Dr. Bronk speak.
Good thoughts. I think from a standpoint of availability it's got to be the F16 or F18. Seems like there are too few available of most other types. And Ukraine does not have time for the political gymnastics needed for JAS 39. In my mind, they could get some former Marine F18 hulls that we would not think are particularly serviceable but if it can hold bombs and shoot fox 3 then it could work.
Another great episode!! Thank you Ward and Justin. The USA (my home country) needs to do what it can to get Gripens to the Ukrainians, along with the Meteor missles. Even if it measns stron-arming our partners (not sure we even call Turkey a "partner" at this point).
Always a thumbs-up on this channel, but it's an instant thumbs-up when Justin Bronk is your guest. Always brilliant. And, while not a fighter, what about surplus Italian AMX? It can carry Sidewinders and bombs. It must be good at low level too.
They are giving them Aster 30 SAM and they have given them Apside SAM. All for free again because Zelensky refuses to pay for any arms and there isn’t a moment where he’s got his hand out asking for money. Did it at the Super Bowl. If TV’s where plugged into every funnels house I’m pretty sure he would go on TV asking the grieving families for money too.
Yep, thought the same. Tossing JDAMs would cull out the 1st and 2nd echelons in Donbas where they can hug the ground. The Sidewinders and 20mm would only be occasinally of use. Soon to be retired, but as awuma said, Italy... Good for stopping a ground breakthrough if it had ever happened, solid replacement for the SU-25 and not perceived as too "deep penetration offensive". But without air cover only of limited use. But great icebreakers and if an offense ever really takes off to split the landbridge, they could make great use of AGM-65 with targets of opportunity during a first breakthrough. Probably with very little friendly fire by MANPADS, since the grunts could easily tell they are not Ruzzian. But yeah, have been thinking that for quite some time. Tossing JDAMs from 5 - 8 miles would make great use fo cheap old arsenal stock, crack stationaly target near the front, all 30 to 40 on each mission could bust 150 bunkers on each sortie that could only randomly (arty, mortars) or too expensively-wastefully (GLRMS, Excalibur) be blown up. Delay mode, blow up 2 - 3 echelons, follow up with regular arty and then advance with IFVs to regain 3 km of ground, especially in the fortied areay. 30 AMX International could take out an entire battalion in one attack if they kill 5 orks per bunker. All it takes is some top cover, 4 HARM and counter battery to cover the infantry when they are threatened by Russian arty.
Here’s a practical solution for supplying Gripen to Ukraine: NATO commits to replacing the Czech Republic’s Gripen Cs with Es, which NATO collectively buys for them. In the interim NATO collectively boosts Czech airspace with collective defence commitment, while the Es get produced to replace the Czech Cs which are immediately given to Ukraine. While Ukraine gets used to the Cs, the Brazilian/Swedish production line for Es gets boosted to supply additional 4-6 Es, which NATO collective buys as monthly replacement for Ukraine losses. This solution is “super collective”. The Cs from Czech Republic are leased, so “belong” to neither Sweden nor Czech Republic; Czech Republic already has a highly integrated air defence mission with NATO (ie they are used to having NATO fighters defending their airspace) and NATO collectively replaces and then augments the fighters we hand to Ukraine. Also this allows the Ukraine Airforce to start with Cs (a simpler plane to operate and service than the E variant) until the E variant shows up later as an upgrade. The U.K. Empire Test Pilot school operates Gripen so can help to train the Ukraine pilots now. In the meantime Sweden gets a massive boost to its NATO application, which will make it harder for Hungary and Turkey to continue to deny their entry. It’s a win-win-win for everyone.
To hell with just giving them to Ukraine, the Grippen should be the standard lightweight fighter of all of NATO, including the US. With a high-low mix of aircraft, the F-22 & F-35 can be responsible for Air Superiority and DEAD/SEAD, while waves of less expensive and highly capable Grippens fill out the numbers of aircraft we need for multi-role tasks.
How to deal with an extensive ground to air (SAM, ...) coverage? Ground troops? A special arial air to ground/radar/launcher attack pattern? Can Ukraine have one of that against an overwhelming Russian anti air carpetry?
I'm blown away by how Canada, which is my country, has decided to go with the F-35 and not the Gripen especially when the features of the Gripen make it such a great asset in a Northern geography, which Canada has lots of, and which is very close to Russia.
Russia isn't that close to Canada. First off there is Alaska in between. Secondly F-35 smokes Gripen in radar and electro-optical systems department. VLO is a big help too. Up against the Felon, Gripen is toast each and every time. And against Su-35S too, and MiG-31 too. F-35 is the only half-viable choice if a peer adversary is used as bench-mark.
@@Max_Da_G Not if you go straight up from the North Pole lol. Look up Alert in Canada. It is basically the North Pole base for Canada. I feel a mix of F-35s and Gripen would have been great to have.
SAAB Griffin. The F-16 is really delicate on the ground. It's not as easy to maintain as you think. It'd hugely susceptible to FOD. The Eurofighter is a big complex aircraft. Nether of these two are optimized for operating from distributed road bases. The Griffin was literally designed for this exact fight. It offers a very good multirole fighter with NATO standard weapons. It's designed for distributed operations. The Griffin would massively upgun Ukraines airforce. If successful, and I'm pretty sure it would be, it would also drum up sales for SAAB.
get the vietnam era A4 from the boneyard.....robust, small, rough field capable, will fly from a mile of roadway, simple to maintain--surely you could find 200 of them.
The question is would you rather have a layered spread of F-16 likely 60+ based on availability in Europe or a single squadron of Grippens? While the JAS 39 is an exceptional aircraft the F-16 logistically makes sense you have neighbouring friendly nations that operate the airframe and will be able to assist with repairs/logistics and expertise. You have access to the US ground attack and air attack munitions and as the conflict develops you can start to use F-16 to replace the battered Su-25/Su-24 ground attack units then you could add Grippen to the equation for CAP roles.
Sadly not when most of the world has "gifted" their airframes to Ukraine for the F-35 they may be able to compete with Russian Su-30/35 but not with the F-35. They have the same problem as Typhoon does not enough potential customers.
@peetky8645 It's not really superior to the SU-25s Ukraine is currently operating. It had no relevant air to air capability. The logistics tail required to keep it flying is no longer in existence.
@@phillipbanes5484"Keeping FOD off air stripes is not a hard thing to do." Your experience and expertise in military aircraft maintenance is self evident.
Have met American pilots, and I would never question their intelligence. They make me feel like a child in a grade school playground. I would never raise my voice to one. You really have to respect their abilities. I often do not understand how so much intelligence can be found in a biological being.
Same thing with our Special Forces.Most could play in the N.F.L. …and are wicked smart. No, I wouldn’t raise my voice at the either. I thank them for their service.
Incredibly interesting discussion. I fully agree about the No 1 choice to be the Gripen C. (E not an option for several reasons). Not only about the fact that the system is built on the concept of airbase dispersion but also the logistical advantages. I don't recall if it was mentioned, but not to forget the amount of air defence systems to provide adequate protection of the airbases, which will drain air defence from other strategical areas and assets. The minute an airbase will go operative it will attract all kinds of counter measures from Russia and we have already seen how hard it is to keep up an 100% defensive coverage. Given the issues that Sweden is facing with lack of pilots (leaving en mass) there should be some aircrafts idle. Beside that there are two countries, Hungary and Tjeck Republic, currently running Gripen, both showing interest in F35 to replace the Gripen. So if that is solved, meaning a number of F35 approved and supplied to above mentioned countries, there should be around 24 Gripens available. Not to be forgotten, is that SAAB is likely to have a positive and supportive stance, as this may be (if not the last chance) an excellent opportunity for Gripen to market its ability. Fact is that modern western countries are, or should be, likely to assess the future airbase concept in modern warfare. Without total air and land dominance it is unlikely for a nation/coalition to maintain their current airbase structure, hence dispersal tactics of some kind will be needed.
Just as I sit down to watch this...Feb 14 (Reuters) - Two Dutch F-35 fighters intercepted a formation of three Russian military aircraft near Poland and escorted them out, the Netherlands' defence ministry said in a statement late on Monday.
12:42 @Juri Savtschenko Finland like Sweden operates from roads in times of war or high tension. So Typhoon would be no good for them. They had to chose between Gripen C's and F/A-18's, they sadly chose F/A-18's, now they had to chose between Gripen E and F-35A and chose F-35A. I kind of get the choice as having an real stealth fighter do give some advantages. But I doubt F-35A can operate from random roads that well. Probably they should have bought the F-35C instead, but it has got no internal gun, that might be why it wasn't chosen.
Best acft to send to Ukraine is the jets they already operate. Ground Support Equipment (GSE), maintenance experience, and fam (familiarity) is a HUGE part of an effective Air Force.
To me the early F-16s, including the block 15 ADF fighters that were retired early. Lotta of them have low, airframe, time lots of part for them and all we are going to do with them is turn them into drones and shoot them down over gulf of Mexico actually, minus the 20MM gun all the other weapons systems are intact, the ultimate, suicidal drone for 1 million bucks I have a few friends in the QF16 Program that does the conversions Originally they were joking about it they’ve been told not to joke about it no more because they’re re seriously thinking about doing just that
Thanks, just for taking out low level air breathing threats they would come in really handy. When I first read about the QF-16 a decade ago my chin dropped to my sternum. I got the reasoning, but boy was I blown away how old I had become... Better to have them attrited over Ukraine as bait for ALCMs of the Russians on the ground and shooting them down whilst in the air. Much better to protect the power stations and transmission knots with "legacy Sidewinder and AMRAAM missile trucks" asap.
Wondering if our 5 Wing Goose Bay Canadian Air Force base up here in Labrador Canada will have a busy spring with NATO low level flight training exercises.
4 Swedish fighter squadrons is slated for conversion to the 60 new Gripen E that is in production with the first one allready in the middle of this conversion. This means Sweden could spare about 20 Gripens if needed temporarily. The 60 old Gripen C/D aircraft will form new fighter Squadrons in Uppsala and the D will become the new advanced Trainer in Linköping. So Sweden would nedd either help in ordering more Gripen E aircraft or a sqadron of trainers like the T7 Red Hawk. To compensate for the loss. This is doable
@Stu Bur That was the original plan which has since been cancelled and additional resources made available to continue operating the 39Cs alongside the 39E.
I'm sorry but it is anything but doable, there are only two active service 39Es and the conversion process is barely begun. It will take years to produce the new aircraft and get the retrained squadrons operational. Until that is complete all 39Cs will have to be retained for service in the SweAF. With Sweden’s entry into NATO being blocked the SweAF is the first and best line of defence.
@@stupidburp no that was changed FMV got extra noney so no C/D versions would be canibalized. The only canibalization was of stored A/B units if that. The Gripen E program has had a lot of changes over the years most of them just noted in press releases
All technical arguments won't matter if Sweden is blocked from entering NATO. It won't be too eager to give up parts of it's lean air force with no treaty umbrella of protection.
Really enjoyed this whole interview. Justin has far greater knowledge of equipment and understanding of the political situation than most analysts I've heard before. Really appreciate the unbiased approach based on facts instead of opinion. Very educational!
That hat is developed for minus 40 degrees, both officer and conscripts use them when u dont wear helmet... it is very comfortable and warm, not stylish tough... fieldcap M/59 winter i believe its called
The Russian/Soviet style artificial horizon indicator in aircraft is also reversed/different compared to the rest of the world. I'd imagine that's a difficult thing to unlearn especially in a high pressure situation,... although instrument flying in a fighter may be uncommon
Justin is going to say Gripen for the obvious reasons but I hope he addresses how it's not very available to be sent. A dark horse candidate that is very available is Mirage 2000C which was retired last year. It's really just a MIG29 equivilant but it's available in large numbers & would pave the way for more capable jets to be sent like perhaps newer versions of Mirage that are getting replaced by Rafale anyway.
my understanding is that any older Mirage 2000 before 5 and D variants wouldn’t be very helpful in expanding their capabilities. That said still hoping France steps up, cynically think this would be a huge opportunity for Dessault. Justin talks about the flimsy undercarriage of f16 a lot, aren’t Mirage and Rafale carrier aircraft? Should have some hefty landing gear suited for shorter and less pristine ukrainian runways. 🤷♂️
Another brilliant discussion - I have to say as someone who was lured early on by the F14 - this channel has grown beyond all recognition.
Agreed, was tellin’ Ward last week how phenomenal it’s been, I remember first finding him at something like < 200 subs and subbing around 800 and since then the channel has just exploded. His coverage far exceeds that of the MSM and even his contemporaries and I’m glad he’s being rewarded for the effort.
This is how they get you
Agreed. 100%.
I am continually blown away by the sheer amount of information Dr. Bronk is able to tell us all during these interviews, I hope you continue to have him on.
Can’t agree more. I’ve been following Dr.Bronk since two years ago. Never seen anyone articulating these topics like him.
Agreed
Justin Bronk is my goto to information about military aviation and much more.
I have to totally agree: this was a quick but absolutely complete runthrough of an extremely complex topic. I really enjoy Dr. Bronks holistic description of the specific requirements of modern aerial warfare in the Ukraine., which becomes readily understandable even for an amateur such as me. This is a kind of briefing most politicians should get nowadays not only in military issues, but lots of other topics like transportation etc.
Thanks a lot to both of you,
Kind regards from Hamburg, Germany
Agreed. I continue to be amazed.
Finland used FA-18's on highways much the same as Sweden used Viggen and now Gripen. Why not phase out SU's and MiGs with Hornets and Gripens? Both robust and utilize the same engine keeping spares and logistics somewhat more user friendly. Hornet and Gripen are strong at both air to air and air to ground. Good multi-role and way more digital high tech.
the older F18 Hornets in US Service have exceeded their original flight hours due to OIF/OEF support and the assembly line is no longer active to build new airframes of the older F18 Hornets (that line was taken down in 1987 after the last F/A18C model was delivered to the Navy. The D, E and F models are all Super Hornets with larger airframe and wings and I think the newer Super Hornets are probably too expensive for Ukraine to purchase fresh off the assembly line as the Navy and Marine Corps probably don't have many in cold storage to be taken out of mothballs for issue into the fight.
I also think that Finland is going to be retiring their Hornets starting in 2025 and replacing them with F-35 Lightnings so they could possibly be a source for the aircraft for Ukraine to use but those birds have already had one Mid-Life rebuild by Finland and might not give the Ukrainian Air Force a long-term solution to man their air force with.
@@brucedrake5493 Ukraine needs a short term solution and will worry about 2025 closer to 2025. The bottom line is that Finland only has the 62 (out of an original 64) F18s and they aren't going to be open to transferring ANY of their fighters until their new F35s become operational and that's not likely to be until closer to 2030 - even if deliveries and training in the US might start in 2026-27. Sweden's situation is different as they have some extra legacy Gripen C/Ds if they are willing to bring existing new Gripen Es into operational service and can get political cover and compensation for the transferred aircraft from the rest of the Ukraine coalition. Unfortunately, Justin Bronk doesn't address this very important aspect of the proposed use of Gripens. I address it in detail in my more extensive post in this comment thread.
@@brucedrake5493 canada replacing theirs with f-35 aswell
I would suggest the Super Hornet as a long-term solution. The Gripen to replace the Mig-29 and the F-18 to replace the SU-27s.
@@mp40submachinegun81 Canadian hornets are in rough shape too
The Ward and Justin discussions are always great! Keep it coming!
He is a fantastic addition to your program and the amount of detailed explanation that he provides is superb !!!
Fantastic video. Ward lets his guests talk without interrupting then leading to great videos.
Hugely informative and educational.
Ward, I love these videos and the rest of your content. Your interviews, news coverage and insights are top-notch. I find myself recommending your channel to friends, family and strangers on RUclips!
As a Swede I really hope we can provide Gripen, we should have at least 40 that we can spare as we're currently upgrading to the newer version. Ofcourse we'd need to join NATO first though if we're gonna draw down our airforce even for a time.
We've got a bunch of older airframes not being used either, would probably need rebuilds though.
Also, there are the airframes leased to Hungary and Czech Republic. Also South Africa and Thailand have a squadron each.
@@davedeville6540 Hungary and South Africa would not get involved.
@@davedeville6540 why does everyone think that South Africa or Thailand would just give up their planes for Free to a corrupt country? The Ukrainians haven’t paid for anything. They haven’t even offered ally Turkey any aid after their earthquake. The Czech Republic maybe since they are ordering F-35’s. Hungary will never do it as they are not so much onboard with just rubber stamping free everything to the Ukraines. Remember Zelensky and China are still in the belts for roads and after this conflict is over he could side with China for aid over NATO.
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD Neither would Thailand. They're far more susceptible to Chinese influence than many are aware of.
Ward, first off, I have to say that I appreciate your previous service to your country as a Naval aviator. Words cannot express my appreciation for all service members no matter their respective roles however, I have a special level of respect for those who volunteer for the most front line roles in our military such as our Naval aviators. I also appreciate your continued service to country and our community of interested souls with your first hand tactical knowledge along with your obvious rolodex of global contacts such as Justin, that bring analysis and commentary that can only normally be heard at the highest government level briefings. Your work is deeply appreciated. Thank you for this video's great discussion and expert analysis, and I look forward to much more. With great respect... Joe
As a Swede, living in Linköping were JAS Gripen is manufactured, I hope we get the opportunity to provide some to Ukraine.
JAS is a small and shore range fighter aircraft but a good weapon .
And as I understand it is designed to be maintained by conscripts under austere conditions operated from strips of remote highway. Id say Ukraine could use that type of equipment over my countries finely tuned high maintenance F-16 type aircraft
Gripens are brilliant fighter
The versions of the Gripen that can be recommended in future deals with Ukraine are at best being older C/D. Version /E is currently being built in Linköping and they already have orders to deliver. In the case that Ukraine has a higher need in the present time, it will mostly be C/D as it can then be taken from the Swedish Air Force's own stocks if it does not expose our own defense to risks to fulfill their commitment, pretty much some up what our PM said a month ago.
Personally, I don't think Ukraine needs these plans, since there are better choices for Ukraine. It doesn't just need aircraft, they need masses of planes to be able to have a greater impact over the battle zone, and Sweden don´t have that at the moment.
And I hope you will sell them more and more. You have great, great fighter jets and not great success selling them.
Never ceases to amaze me how much information you have at your disposal,another great session thank you!
Always a pleasure, Justin!
Agreed. It's always great when Justin is on the show.
Really a great interview. I've enjoyed it a lot. Many thanks to both of you!
Justin and Mooch put on the best darn analysis on any public forum I have found to date. Thanks!
Perhaps the most underestimated part of Gripen is the tactical datalink between fighters. For NATO this has not been as important because they have many AEW platforms. But for Sweden the datalink is important whenever such resources are unavailable.
data links are huge for NATO and the US too. It's much easier and faster to see a target pop up on screen from a data link instead of having to hear somebody provide info over radio. If you think of how the F-22 would operate it spends most time listening and receiving information instead of making its own noise so it needs to ingest data from other sources in order to be effective.
Both US and Sweden started to develop these things separately already in the 1950’s.
eurofighter has the datalink too. gripen is nice, but not unique
US & NATO use Link 16/MIDS
@@gds3574 Link 16 is a simple (low bandwidth) interface for sharing target data across a lot of different platforms
Gripen has a much more complex interface to share both sensor data and targets. Sweden also had an advanced datalink on their Viggen aircraft 40 years ago.
F-35 and Aegis Combat System have a even more advanced MADL data link.
Always a great show when you have Justin on. Great analysis of the subject.
One thing not discussed about the Gripen: If Ukraine prevails in the war, it could probably set up its own production of Gripen E, just like Brazil is now doing. Ukraine has had a very capable aerospace industry so it would make sense for them to produce their own fighter jets in large quantities.
I hope they can prevail. Is David vs Goliath.
@@damianketcham Except David has more tanks, infantry and the backing of most of the world...
@@lukewhitehouse4103
Let’s hope David can pull through.
After the War when Russia is defeated which will happen as long as the West continues to provide support, I suspect Ukraine will be building a lot of it's own munitions. It has the capability and I suspect this will get a lot of focus as the economy of Ukraine is built up. One thing is for sure, there are going to be a lot of poor and hungry Russians as their Economy collapses
Good point. Rheinmetall already suggested a Leopard factory in Ukraine.
Canada didn't take all of Australias old Hornets, there are 46 that were going to be sold to the red air contractor Air USA, but that deal fell through and those 46 hornets are now sitting around.
So kuwait had 33 in excellent shape
46 Hornets is just what Ukraine needs. Australia and the US need to agree to provide them to Ukraine.
@@andreasbimba6519 thats right you sign the check, lol its not gonna happen, ukraine is out of of time im afraid
@@mrFalconlem As Putin digs a deeper hole for the Russian military they have no chance of retaining any Ukrainian territories - just look at the current shambles for the Russians along the entire front. Wagner Group have given up around Bakhmut after suffering huge casualties, tens of thousands of new conscripts and prisoners have been sent to their deaths and Russia's military units are generally poorly trained, led and equipped. Ukraine will regain all occupied territories but it would be better for everyone if this occurred as quickly as possible which means more military supplies to Ukraine. Ukraine will need to deter or defeat any future incursions by Russia into Ukraine which necessitates a modern air force.
@@mrFalconlem says while Russia Loses a awac
Mooch and Justin, thanks so much for keeping us informed on such a factual basis! Much a I love my Viper, you're spot on with it needing nice, clean, surfaces to fly from. Hopefully the politicos will come together to help Ukraine.
Ward your guest is just the most detailed weapons expert i have ever heard on any channel he is pure gold, its hard to even remember the sheer volume of knowledge of what has said, and given your own huge knowledge and experience in your own back ground your channel is such a gem of realistic knowledge from both you and your guests , thank you Ward you have the best channel on these matters.
Every time I listen to Justin's analysis, I'm blown away by his depth of knowledge and ability to transmit it with clarity. He's a brilliant resource. I love these talks.
What I ebjoy is that he reasons. He have the Scientific mindset that most others dont. Many writers or youtubers are critical of its sources and reason well but they lack fundamental indepth knowledge. I listen much to Perun who I think is great. But one often loose out on sertain aspects
I’ve been watching Mooch’s videos for a while but holding off on subscribing for some reason. This video got me to subscribe! What an intelligent and informed discussion.
One of the best discussions I have seen and heard so far. So refreshing to hear a normal, unpoliticized and non emotional, analysis of reality. For all of us, former military pilots, ground crew and even staff personnel, your analysis is exactly what we are saying as well. Unfortunately most non military politicians have no clue what they are talking about, but they do get to take the decisions. Just throwing in some aircraft is not going to solve anything. For the Ukraine I see more in UAV's and mostly mobile air defense systems, accompanied by precision artillery, HIMARS and other MLRS munitions. There is no way we can build up the required infrastructure for an effective air force for Ukraine. Problem is that nobody dares to say that to Zelinsky. Basically someone should take the Ukrainians by the hand, explain them what they need and then supply those weapons. Then the whole aircraft issue will go away. Problem is that politicians don't understand that.
It would be great if the news channels would start paying more attention to your channel. You bring sanity into the very emotional discussion about the war in Ukraine. That would probably solve a lot of disinformation that is going on right now.
And since your subscriber number is still growing there will come a time they will have to start paying attention to you.
It can absolutely be done.. Not easy, but war never is. It can be solved with Gripens.
@@ja37d-34 Cool. But he said they would need at least 20 of them and there are not a lot of Gripens in the world (271 have built, whereas there have been 4,500 F-16's built). What is the turn around time on 20 Gripens. Well, that is an excellent question, but Sweden is not the US, between their 3 factories they can produce 30 Gripens at max rate production. They aren't even at mass rate production, yet. Now 30 would be enough for Ukraine and could be manufactured in a year...if it were not for the fact that those 30 gripens only would be less than of a third their backlog orders.
Saab is still a company that has to turn a profit and build relationships. Of their customers, who do they tell that they have to wait (even longer) for their planes that they are already waiting years to recieve?
The Gripen is the best fit for this war, if it were not for the availability aspect. F-16 are the best fit when it comes to availability, but not necessarily logistically.
I simply don't think that the Gripen could be made available in numbers. It is the best fit on paper, but probably not possible. If it is, I would like to hear that plan and which country said they would be OK waiting even longer on the backlog list. There are reasons why Sweden has already said no. Bumping Ukaine to the front of any list would likely be a suicide note for SAAB and its' current business relations.
One of the problems with modern fighters is that they are now so complex that the numbers of units that can be built in a given year is in the dozens. THe F-35 is the exception, but to do it they have to build in one of the largest facilities in the world (if you are interested I think it is called US Air Force Plant 4). Even with all the robots used it still takes 41,500 man hours to make a single F-35. Since Lockheed Martin is set to build 156 F-35's this year that equates to 6.47 million man hours. These aren't toasters and sending those kinds of complex machines and the entrailing logistical supply chains and maintenance requirements is a big ask.
I don't see Ukraine getting any Western fighters any time soon. And I am not sure that is even the best place to spend money.
@@wadopotato33 It is not about Gripen Es dude, it is Gripen Cs. Those exists and 20 plus CAN be sorted.
The czech republic could hand back theirs for example. That is 12 plus 2 (Ds).
Sweden does not really need to use all of their . Cs were going to be retained but they could switch to full Es instead. IF theyw ere in NATO that would NOT be a problem so much. Then you have quite a few potential airframes.
Sweden has NOTt said "no", Sweden said "not now". A massive difference. But it is a thing they may have to use when Turkish inner political bickering and anon democratic country acts like an arsehole against probably the most democratic country in the world and have demands on it to change that.
I would to, when arseholes act like arseholes. They will usually face karma, sooner or later.
It would not be hard to supply Ukraine with Gripen Cs. It is a matter of willingness. it is THAT simple.
@@ja37d-34 Not that simple at all. And you saying it is simple is your ignornance speaking.
"Earlier, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy during a summit in Brussels on Feb. 9 asked Stockholm to provide Kyiv with Jas 39 Gripen jets, but the Swedish prime minister said this was “not an option.”
That sounds like a "no" to me. I ask a girl for a date and she says dating me is not an option, what should I take that to mean? That is also the Swedish Prime Minister saying basically "no".
Secondly, the idea that a country has jets does not in any way, shape or form mean that they are willing to give them to another country if it means leaving their own country without jets. Czech Republic has 14 Gripens. So first off, giving away 12 would leave them unable to defend themselves. Especially given that availability rates mean that if you have 14 Gripens only 11 or so are ready to use at any given time. It is simply not going to happen.
Secondly, the Gripens they do have are leased...so not a decision that they are able to make for themselves since they technically don't even own them (you can't sell a leased car to a third party, either).
Thirdly they are extgending their lease on the Gripens because they are going to recieve F-35's, but those F-35's are on backorder like every nation's F-35's. That lease on Gripens is going to be extended until 2035 which is now the point at which the US will have supplied the number of required F-35's for the Czech Republic to defend their own airspace.
An F-16 takes 17 hours of maintenance for every hour in flight. How is that the Ukraine is going to field enough trained people within a few months to keep a Western jet in the air for 24/7 flight operations? They can't immediately and they won't be able to for the forseeable future. It is a major logistical challenge.
Come on, you are still thinking about this like these are toasters. There is nothing simple about this problem. Czech Gripens are not an option, but in your infinite wisdom they somehow became an option. The Czechs don't even own them.
Find me a country that can afford to let 20 Gripens go and still maintain their own defence. You struck out with the Czech Republic.
I agree that the Gripen is the best fit for Ukraine on paper, but availability wise it will more likely be the F-16. Which means huge outlays for adapting runways. The F-16 requires well-maintained, long runways comparatively. Personally, I don't see an option that is easily resolved and implemented in the short-term.
@@wadopotato33 No, they did not say "not an option", again, they said not now. How hard can it be to understand?
You are not listening, I know Swedish i have seen it. A wall of text doess not make you right.
If I understand correctly the best choice is Grippen with Hornet #2. Your're reasoning makes sense. But, we need to make the decision and start training the pilots and crews now. Just my thoughts. Thank you and be safe.
Australia has 40 leftovers F18
Head & shoulders above any discussion about the stategics of the war that I've seen yet. And that's putting it mildly.
Man, that kid is soo smart and i really enjoy listening too his take on the war!💯👍He says it like it is! doesnt sugar coat!🇺🇲
A lot of expertise for his age!
fantastic conversation Mooch and Justin.
Love Doc Bronk! Thank you! I vote for the Gripen!!
This is the best analysis conversation I've heard on Y/T. Mr Bronk is the Real Article when it comes to discussing all the considerations that factor in on a major weapons upgrade like aircraft into a situation like this war in Ukraine. Excellent work, sir..
ABSOLUTELY THE BEST INTERVIEW SO FAR!
I actually had a few fellow soldiers actually get wounded from unspent cluster munitions in the Iraq war (2003). One officer kicked an unspent munition and had a chunk of foot cut off. I suppose you can call that accidental friendly fire.
I'd argue he deserves to loose a foot if he's kicking unexploded ordinance
Why did he do that? was he messing around? or did he not see it?
Why would you kick a known cluster munition??
He probably didn't know about it...
cut off? like it didn't explode, he just sliced a chunk off from a sharp edge? that's so stupid it literally hurt. him anyway XD
While Justin is dropping really pertinent knowledge, the peanut gallery is busy tossing out their favorite aircraft into the chat and asking questions that if they would have been actually listening, they would have heard Justin answering them. You'll NEVER hear this kind of stuff on CNN or MSNBC and to not appreciate and pay attention is such a waste and hugely disrespectful of both Justin and Ward.
True, but RUclips is what it is, no way around it...
Agreed. I figured Ward would have some good insights but when I saw Justim was his guest I knew it was going to be next level info!
What is CNN?
@@nevisstkitts8264 Cable News Network, one of the first 24 hour news reporting channels.
@Nevis StKitts CNN, yes cable new network, it has been extremely biased For several years .
I am all for the balloons, Україна & objects talk. Thanks Mr. Carroll. Love the content! 🤘🏼
Could watch this bloke for hours. Magnificent insight and cuts through all the fluff to get to the crux of the issues.
More please.
I LOVE hearing from Dr. Bronk!!!
NOTE TO SELF: Never, ever, ever, under any circumstance, play poker with Justin Bronk. His ability to read comments during the live stream (And we know he does) and not break out into uncontrollable laughter at some of the absurdity, would make him a formidable opponent at the card table.
In all seriousness, another fabulous video, Justin and Pako and all the other Subject Matter Experts bring some real well thought out information and insight.
I think it's a huge ask for Sweden to send 1/4 of it's airforce. Since our own front line capabilities and storage have already been hit hard. We have sent like 20.000 AT-4, 50 IFV's, an undisclosed number of our only long range artillery which we only had 48 of, and in reality we probably have sent 10+ to do any sort of difference on the battlefield. Among other things like Nlaws, kevlars,helmets etc.
It's utter madness. Western European Airfirces have shrunk by as much as 91% since 1995. A country like Sweden or the UK sending ANY fighters us lunacy. They'll be shot down on the first sortie and those countrues are not America, they don't have 1.98 trillion a year in defense spending. They 0.068 trillion a year.
I'm already feeling naked 😮 ... might need that stuff one day...also might be expensive to replace
I agree. I don't think we should be sending western aircraft at all. More Russian types with upgrades, which have proved to be available. What Ukraine really needs is more AD SAM systems, not aircraft. We also have to remember that we must only supply enough to keep the invader in check and achieve the mission. Zelinsky is friendly to the west, but it has not always been the case with Ukrainian leaders.
Great interview. Thanks to Mooch and Justin
Justin is a pleasure. He brings this old Analyst up to date.
Sobering. Thank you for bringing Dr. Bronk on.
Great stuff as always. Thanks Mooch and Justin!
Justin impresses me a lot! A lot of understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of engaging the fight!
Grippen holds apparently very good track record from Red Flag exercises against anything but F22
That’s simply not true. That story was spread by one person and has not been proven.
@@yakidin63 do you know what was the actual record of Grippen?
@@wojciechczupta How did they do against Eurofighter and Rafale?
I think if anything outdid an F22 it would be hushed up and classified anyway
cheap junk like their ikea furniture ;)
The amount of information and explanation of that info is fantastic. Always Love to see Dr. Bronk on the channel.
Dr. Bronk is extremely knowledgeable on this matter!
Good discussion. Justin is a wealth on knowledge and thoughtfulness on these subjects.
I don't see any near term role where Western aircraft would be involved in air-to-ground unless it is in an anti-radar role using stand-off weapons. There would be no tactical reason to risk expensive and irreplaceable Western aircraft over a SAM and man-pad dense area that exists near the front lines. Ukraine's remaining Soviet/Russian air assets can continue the air-to-ground mission role for the time being. As Justin mentioned, the smart use of a small number of Western aircraft would be to deter the use of Russian aircraft over Ukraine proper and on or near the front lines effectively reducing the strike effect of Russian air-to-ground support. Also, any Western aircraft become a huge target for Russian cruise missile strikes, so how and where you base them becomes a real problem.
You'd have to set the thing up that nobody sleeps in the same base more than one night, keep moving to dispersed sites on highways, etc.
Or use aged out western aircraft parked on the ground to draw Russian cruise missile fire away from the electrical infrastructure. If it was almost headed for the boneyard anyway.
Lobbing JDAMs for up to 9 NM from AMX International hugging the hilly grounds of Donbas however would actually allow to kill all 1st and 2nd echelon trench bunkers and attrite tons of Russian forward positions (arty are luck shots, short in supply, GMRLS are reserved for the deep battle, rightfully so). But yes, you are correct about the rest.
the conversation @35:00+ reminded me of a cartoon in a trade publication in the 1980s, where two Soviet officers are sitting in front of a Parisian cafe'. One of the officers says "Too bad we lost the air-war...."
Love these 2 guys and their respective breakdowns
Ward, keep saying this, you are not paid enough for how important you are to keeping us informed. Thank you. Having lived in Alaska, I am so impressed by the video some 27 minutes in!
Thank you, Ward and Justin.
Ward you're exactly right. This jet for Ukraine has to be a Turnkey Fighter. Ready to go.
The “Russian Invasion” reminds me of Germanys spring 1918 offensive, it took territory, got depleted, Allie’s had enough reserves to effectively counter attack and breach
Except unlike Germany, Russia has a SHITTON of resources such as fuel, oil, materials, energy.
IMHO the JAS-39 4th + Gen is actually an excellent Mach II capable aircraft for the Ukrainian air support task. Made more rugged and for rough field operations and maintained by CONSCRIPTS this little fighter is probably the most capable and cost effective given all things considered. Also . . . when playing chess in this region the Swedes would love to get the income and begin to pump that treasure into "E" modules. Gripen C/Ds are wired and programed for NATO weapons compatibility I believe.
Agree with everything, but I would be concerned about how many Gripen can Sweden and Czechia afford to send (Hungary will probably not help).
Sweden has just begun their E/F transition and have not retired many C/Ds yet. The Swedes also do not want NATO airbases on their territory. So at most, Ukraine will get a few from Sweden and all of Czechia’s provided the USA help with Czechia’s F-35 program. Logistics will also be a problem since no one else knows how to fix a Gripen outside Sweden, Czechia, and Hungary.
@@kurousagi8155 I think you are correct. The Swedish airforce is so small that there are no planes to spare for this war, and even the most hardcore Ukraine supporter in our country realize this. And besides, the old C/D version is a mediocre plane compared to the best Nato planes. Gripen E is another matter, as it is in my opinion the best fighter aircraft in the world right now.
If Ukraine should get any Swedish planes at all, then the country need strong official ironclad guarantees by both USA and Britain to defend the country like if a Nato member was attacked. And atleast a few squadrons of F15 or F22 will have to be stationed on Swedish territory until the Sweden can replenish its supply of Gripens.
@@kurousagi8155 South Africa has C/D's in storage because they can't afford to fly them since the national treasury is constantly being pillaged. They probably won't sell them, since the arseholes in charge are sucking up to Putrid (currently running joint naval excercises, believe it or not) but that does mean there are a lot of technicians sitting on their hands and South Africans have become very diasporic in the last couple of decades so those guys could be hired if the pay rate is in dollars or Euro's.
@@nattygsbord We have a lack of E/F models. We have significantly more C/Ds then we are currently using.
@@TzunSu
Okay, maybe we can send those away then. Gripen E is the best plane in the world right now. But Gripen C/D is a more mediocre plane. Its almost like comparing a Leopard1 tank with a Leopard2.
So I do not think they will do much difference to the overall strategic situation in the country. But I hope that I am wrong of course. But we are having semi-experienced pilots flying against an enemy that have more experienced pilots, more planes and more powerful SAMs.
But on the upsides do Gripen offer an enormous flexibility as it can hide and use highways for take off and is easy to maintain. The fast refuel and rearmament allows it to fly more sorties per day than any other plane in the world, so it could thereby compensate for some of the numerical disadvantage that Ukraine suffers from.
And if Ukraine would lose 100 Gripens in the skies over the country will it not be any economic disaster - since that plane is extremely cheap and a hundred more can be built.
Gripens were supposed to be used intensively if our country was attacked.
If the plane was sitting on the ground most of the time when the russians attacked it would be useless to have it. But was here and now it was supposed to be used - Now or never.
So flying multiple sorties per day in one year would of course be extremely exhausting for the pilots, who could never get the same sleep and time to relax as a pilot of a F14A Tomcat or a J-35 Draken which got something like 50 hours of maintance on the ground for every hour up in the sky.
Gripen only needs 6 hours of maintance per hour in the sky. And well, yea you can rearm and refuel the plane in 15 minutes or so if you have an emergency, and if you lack a ground crew can you as pilot do that all by yourself in say 45 minutes.
Anyways. When you use a plane so intensivly and make so many starts and landings per day, then of course you will exhaust the airframe.
So after only one year of hard fighting will your plane have become a wreck if the russians havn't managed to shot that plane down first.
So I guess that we will never see our Gripens coming home to Sweden again regardless how good or bad they perform in Ukraine.
It will be interesting to see what the result will be. I think that this plane is nearing its age of retirement as SAAB is now developing a 6th generation fighter to replace it.
If Gripen E would be sent to Ukraine armed with meteor missiles then I think it could kick ass and score ridiculus kill ratios.
And the plane would also be a superb aircraft for ground attack with its capability of multiple sories per day, cheap costs per flight hour, low maintance, and a broad variaty of weapons that it could carry.
Yes, Justin is so well informed!
Fantastic video - the combination of your knowledge and experience makes these a must-watch for those of us concerned about the war in Ukraine.
Westminster Hall. 1,000 years old; sacred place.
The original f18 would be perfect option. It's robust and could work off Highways etc as its land gear was designed for carriers.
There are loads of them around.
Can carry all the weapons Ukraine needs.
Designed with low altitude operations in mind. Which is what they will need to do.
Gripen has lots of sensors which can be used by inteligence. The capacity of weapon and ability in the battle field is similar to F-16. What is different that it is the only modern fighter jet which can operate on destroyed landings or just wider roads. During real war it is a huge, huge advantage.
The Viper's weapon load and air-to-air performance is higher than that of the Gripen, it is maneuvering much better, is a higher performance jet. But every aircraft is a trade-off and you hear many of that here.
Just getting better and better. Many thanks
Fascinating discussion. Thank you very much for having it! More people would have an appreciation for the complexity of military strategy in a multinational coalition if they listened to Dr. Bronk speak.
The discussions with Justin are my absolute favorites, thank you both and Slava Ukraini
Good thoughts. I think from a standpoint of availability it's got to be the F16 or F18. Seems like there are too few available of most other types. And Ukraine does not have time for the political gymnastics needed for JAS 39. In my mind, they could get some former Marine F18 hulls that we would not think are particularly serviceable but if it can hold bombs and shoot fox 3 then it could work.
Excellent, educational and informative discussion. I learned a lot as always! Thank you, gentlemen!!
Thank you Justin. I could listen to this again and again instead of the MSM. Please do more interviews.
Justin
Thanks for your expertise. Truly impressive
Reminds me of the story of a lost driver stopping a farmer to ask for directions. The farmer’s answer being, “you can’t get there from here”.
"Are you walking or driving?" "Driving" "Yes, that's the best way."
Another great episode!! Thank you Ward and Justin. The USA (my home country) needs to do what it can to get Gripens to the Ukrainians, along with the Meteor missles. Even if it measns stron-arming our partners (not sure we even call Turkey a "partner" at this point).
Always a thumbs-up on this channel, but it's an instant thumbs-up when Justin Bronk is your guest. Always brilliant. And, while not a fighter, what about surplus Italian AMX? It can carry Sidewinders and bombs. It must be good at low level too.
Italy? I very much doubt they would help.
They are giving them Aster 30 SAM and they have given them Apside SAM. All for free again because Zelensky refuses to pay for any arms and there isn’t a moment where he’s got his hand out asking for money. Did it at the Super Bowl. If TV’s where plugged into every funnels house I’m pretty sure he would go on TV asking the grieving families for money too.
Yep, thought the same. Tossing JDAMs would cull out the 1st and 2nd echelons in Donbas where they can hug the ground. The Sidewinders and 20mm would only be occasinally of use. Soon to be retired, but as awuma said, Italy...
Good for stopping a ground breakthrough if it had ever happened, solid replacement for the SU-25 and not perceived as too "deep penetration offensive". But without air cover only of limited use. But great icebreakers and if an offense ever really takes off to split the landbridge, they could make great use of AGM-65 with targets of opportunity during a first breakthrough. Probably with very little friendly fire by MANPADS, since the grunts could easily tell they are not Ruzzian.
But yeah, have been thinking that for quite some time. Tossing JDAMs from 5 - 8 miles would make great use fo cheap old arsenal stock, crack stationaly target near the front, all 30 to 40 on each mission could bust 150 bunkers on each sortie that could only randomly (arty, mortars) or too expensively-wastefully (GLRMS, Excalibur) be blown up. Delay mode, blow up 2 - 3 echelons, follow up with regular arty and then advance with IFVs to regain 3 km of ground, especially in the fortied areay. 30 AMX International could take out an entire battalion in one attack if they kill 5 orks per bunker. All it takes is some top cover, 4 HARM and counter battery to cover the infantry when they are threatened by Russian arty.
I always thumbs up an AMX comment
Here’s a practical solution for supplying Gripen to Ukraine: NATO commits to replacing the Czech Republic’s Gripen Cs with Es, which NATO collectively buys for them. In the interim NATO collectively boosts Czech airspace with collective defence commitment, while the Es get produced to replace the Czech Cs which are immediately given to Ukraine.
While Ukraine gets used to the Cs, the Brazilian/Swedish production line for Es gets boosted to supply additional 4-6 Es, which NATO collective buys as monthly replacement for Ukraine losses.
This solution is “super collective”. The Cs from Czech Republic are leased, so “belong” to neither Sweden nor Czech Republic; Czech Republic already has a highly integrated air defence mission with NATO (ie they are used to having NATO fighters defending their airspace) and NATO collectively replaces and then augments the fighters we hand to Ukraine.
Also this allows the Ukraine Airforce to start with Cs (a simpler plane to operate and service than the E variant) until the E variant shows up later as an upgrade.
The U.K. Empire Test Pilot school operates Gripen so can help to train the Ukraine pilots now.
In the meantime Sweden gets a massive boost to its NATO application, which will make it harder for Hungary and Turkey to continue to deny their entry.
It’s a win-win-win for everyone.
I think Czechia wants to give their Gripen to Ukraine because they aim to replace them with F35.
Excellent episode! Always nice to see Mr. Bronk come on.
Very informative thank you both ❤️🇸🇪
To hell with just giving them to Ukraine, the Grippen should be the standard lightweight fighter of all of NATO, including the US. With a high-low mix of aircraft, the F-22 & F-35 can be responsible for Air Superiority and DEAD/SEAD, while waves of less expensive and highly capable Grippens fill out the numbers of aircraft we need for multi-role tasks.
Mainly because of the simple maintenance and ability to operate from alternatives to standard airfields which will be the first target in an attack
How to deal with an extensive ground to air (SAM, ...) coverage? Ground troops? A special arial air to ground/radar/launcher attack pattern? Can Ukraine have one of that against an overwhelming Russian anti air carpetry?
Justin is my favorite guest on this channel so far
gripen's ease of use, cost and versatility makes it perfect for the job
Cost??? Gripen s aren’t cheap. If they were then actual numbers to prove that would be easy to find. SAAB keeps their costs close to their chest.
@@yakidin63 'Cost' isn't just purchase price, but running costs also, and compareed to F-16 and typhoon, these are much lower for the Gripen.
I'm blown away by how Canada, which is my country, has decided to go with the F-35 and not the Gripen especially when the features of the Gripen make it such a great asset in a Northern geography, which Canada has lots of, and which is very close to Russia.
One of the biggest problems with stealth coating is heat. F35s make a lot of sense in a polar environment.
Russia isn't that close to Canada. First off there is Alaska in between. Secondly F-35 smokes Gripen in radar and electro-optical systems department. VLO is a big help too. Up against the Felon, Gripen is toast each and every time. And against Su-35S too, and MiG-31 too. F-35 is the only half-viable choice if a peer adversary is used as bench-mark.
@@Max_Da_G Not if you go straight up from the North Pole lol. Look up Alert in Canada. It is basically the North Pole base for Canada. I feel a mix of F-35s and Gripen would have been great to have.
SAAB Griffin. The F-16 is really delicate on the ground. It's not as easy to maintain as you think. It'd hugely susceptible to FOD. The Eurofighter is a big complex aircraft. Nether of these two are optimized for operating from distributed road bases. The Griffin was literally designed for this exact fight. It offers a very good multirole fighter with NATO standard weapons. It's designed for distributed operations. The Griffin would massively upgun Ukraines airforce. If successful, and I'm pretty sure it would be, it would also drum up sales for SAAB.
get the vietnam era A4 from the boneyard.....robust, small, rough field capable, will fly from a mile of roadway, simple to maintain--surely you could find 200 of them.
The question is would you rather have a layered spread of F-16 likely 60+ based on availability in Europe or a single squadron of Grippens?
While the JAS 39 is an exceptional aircraft the F-16 logistically makes sense you have neighbouring friendly nations that operate the airframe and will be able to assist with repairs/logistics and expertise. You have access to the US ground attack and air attack munitions and as the conflict develops you can start to use F-16 to replace the battered Su-25/Su-24 ground attack units then you could add Grippen to the equation for CAP roles.
Sadly not when most of the world has "gifted" their airframes to Ukraine for the F-35 they may be able to compete with Russian Su-30/35 but not with the F-35. They have the same problem as Typhoon does not enough potential customers.
@peetky8645 It's not really superior to the SU-25s Ukraine is currently operating. It had no relevant air to air capability. The logistics tail required to keep it flying is no longer in existence.
@@phillipbanes5484"Keeping FOD off air stripes is not a hard thing to do." Your experience and expertise in military aircraft maintenance is self evident.
Have met American pilots, and I would never question their intelligence. They make me feel like a child in a grade school playground. I would never raise my voice to one. You really have to respect their abilities. I often do not understand how so much intelligence can be found in a biological being.
Same thing with our Special Forces.Most could play in the N.F.L. …and are wicked smart. No, I wouldn’t raise my voice at the either. I thank them for their service.
Thanks again for keeping us informed and providing such knowledgeable guests for us.
Incredibly interesting discussion. I fully agree about the No 1 choice to be the Gripen C. (E not an option for several reasons). Not only about the fact that the system is built on the concept of airbase dispersion but also the logistical advantages. I don't recall if it was mentioned, but not to forget the amount of air defence systems to provide adequate protection of the airbases, which will drain air defence from other strategical areas and assets. The minute an airbase will go operative it will attract all kinds of counter measures from Russia and we have already seen how hard it is to keep up an 100% defensive coverage.
Given the issues that Sweden is facing with lack of pilots (leaving en mass) there should be some aircrafts idle. Beside that there are two countries, Hungary and Tjeck Republic, currently running Gripen, both showing interest in F35 to replace the Gripen. So if that is solved, meaning a number of F35 approved and supplied to above mentioned countries, there should be around 24 Gripens available.
Not to be forgotten, is that SAAB is likely to have a positive and supportive stance, as this may be (if not the last chance) an excellent opportunity for Gripen to market its ability. Fact is that modern western countries are, or should be, likely to assess the future airbase concept in modern warfare. Without total air and land dominance it is unlikely for a nation/coalition to maintain their current airbase structure, hence dispersal tactics of some kind will be needed.
They need an aircraft with a sturdy landing gear and preferrably a short take off distance.
The Gripen is a good candidate.
And the builtin diagnosis and maintenance system.
Just as I sit down to watch this...Feb 14 (Reuters) - Two Dutch F-35 fighters intercepted a formation of three Russian military aircraft near Poland and escorted them out, the Netherlands' defence ministry said in a statement late on Monday.
12:42 @Juri Savtschenko Finland like Sweden operates from roads in times of war or high tension. So Typhoon would be no good for them. They had to chose between Gripen C's and F/A-18's, they sadly chose F/A-18's, now they had to chose between Gripen E and F-35A and chose F-35A. I kind of get the choice as having an real stealth fighter do give some advantages. But I doubt F-35A can operate from random roads that well. Probably they should have bought the F-35C instead, but it has got no internal gun, that might be why it wasn't chosen.
Delightfully informative. Thank you!
Thanks Mooch for a most concise discussion of the issue.
well... the story of the Polish pilots in the RAF does come to mind
Best acft to send to Ukraine is the jets they already operate. Ground Support Equipment (GSE), maintenance experience, and fam (familiarity) is a HUGE part of an effective Air Force.
The jets they already operate are limited by radar and missiles.
This was a great discussion. Thanks for explaining everything to noobs like me.
Very good job. I enjoy and appreciate these discussions.
Wow this was sooooo informative thank you
To me the early F-16s, including the block 15 ADF fighters that were retired early. Lotta of them have low, airframe, time lots of part for them and all we are going to do with them is turn them into drones and shoot them down over gulf of Mexico actually, minus the 20MM gun all the other weapons systems are intact, the ultimate, suicidal drone for 1 million bucks I have a few friends in the QF16 Program that does the conversions Originally they were joking about it they’ve been told not to joke about it no more because they’re re seriously thinking about doing just that
Pre block 50 F-16s would be good for this and there are a lot of those around. Could be used in volume to overwhelm and damage some air defenses.
Block 15 ADF fighters were sold to other nations via FMS, especially Taiwan. We’ve been shooting down QF-16C Block 25s and 30s for years now.
There sure are a lot F-16s at Davis Monthan last time I looked...
Thanks, just for taking out low level air breathing threats they would come in really handy. When I first read about the QF-16 a decade ago my chin dropped to my sternum. I got the reasoning, but boy was I blown away how old I had become...
Better to have them attrited over Ukraine as bait for ALCMs of the Russians on the ground and shooting them down whilst in the air. Much better to protect the power stations and transmission knots with "legacy Sidewinder and AMRAAM missile trucks" asap.
Wondering if our 5 Wing Goose Bay Canadian Air Force base up here in Labrador Canada will have a busy spring with NATO low level flight training exercises.
4 Swedish fighter squadrons is slated for conversion to the 60 new Gripen E that is in production with the first one allready in the middle of this conversion.
This means Sweden could spare about 20 Gripens if needed temporarily.
The 60 old Gripen C/D aircraft will form new fighter Squadrons in Uppsala and the D will become the new advanced Trainer in Linköping.
So Sweden would nedd either help in ordering more Gripen E aircraft or a sqadron of trainers like the T7 Red Hawk. To compensate for the loss.
This is doable
Sweden’s old C/D Gripen are being disassembled for rebuild into new Gripen. Thus they don’t have that many old aircraft to spare.
@Stu Bur That was the original plan which has since been cancelled and additional resources made available to continue operating the 39Cs alongside the 39E.
I'm sorry but it is anything but doable, there are only two active service 39Es and the conversion process is barely begun. It will take years to produce the new aircraft and get the retrained squadrons operational. Until that is complete all 39Cs will have to be retained for service in the SweAF. With Sweden’s entry into NATO being blocked the SweAF is the first and best line of defence.
@@stupidburp no that was changed FMV got extra noney so no C/D versions would be canibalized.
The only canibalization was of stored A/B units if that.
The Gripen E program has had a lot of changes over the years most of them just noted in press releases
All technical arguments won't matter if Sweden is blocked from entering NATO. It won't be too eager to give up parts of it's lean air force with no treaty umbrella of protection.
Really enjoyed this whole interview. Justin has far greater knowledge of equipment and understanding of the political situation than most analysts I've heard before. Really appreciate the unbiased approach based on facts instead of opinion. Very educational!
Justin is a breath of fresh air.
That hat is developed for minus 40 degrees, both officer and conscripts use them when u dont wear helmet... it is very comfortable and warm, not stylish tough... fieldcap M/59 winter i believe its called
It looks like a Swedish Afro.
Eller björnfittan. :)
@@ja37d-34 well yes but that is maybe a bit offensive as a euformism nowadays... ;-)
The Russian/Soviet style artificial horizon indicator in aircraft is also reversed/different compared to the rest of the world.
I'd imagine that's a difficult thing to unlearn especially in a high pressure situation,... although instrument flying in a fighter may be uncommon
Justin is going to say Gripen for the obvious reasons but I hope he addresses how it's not very available to be sent.
A dark horse candidate that is very available is Mirage 2000C which was retired last year. It's really just a MIG29 equivilant but it's available in large numbers & would pave the way for more capable jets to be sent like perhaps newer versions of Mirage that are getting replaced by Rafale anyway.
Gripen, not Grippen. It´s pronounced "Gree-pen" ;)
Mirage 2000s had low service life rated airframes. How many are viable moving forward?
@@LRRPFco52 they’re not going to last long anyways, why does it matter?
my understanding is that any older Mirage 2000 before 5 and D variants wouldn’t be very helpful in expanding their capabilities. That said still hoping France steps up, cynically think this would be a huge opportunity for Dessault. Justin talks about the flimsy undercarriage of f16 a lot, aren’t Mirage and Rafale carrier aircraft? Should have some hefty landing gear suited for shorter and less pristine ukrainian runways. 🤷♂️
@@andersnoren6070 Ah sorry, typo
Justin, really enjoyed your knowledge. 👍🏻👍🏻🇬🇧🇬🇧
Wow! I've never heard of this guy but he is full of knowledge. Thank you