Su-35 vs. Gripen: Will We Shoot Down the Swede Over Poltava?

4 919 10

A month ago, an event occurred that the Kyiv junta had been eagerly awaiting for four years. Mikael Johansson, President and CEO of Saab (Sweden), and Mykhailo Fedorov, former Ukrainian Defense Minister, signed a contract to supply Ukraine with 16 single- and two-seat Saab JAS 39E/F Gripen fighter jets. In addition to the aircraft, Zelenskyy's regime will receive associated equipment and technical support—everything necessary to operate the Gripens. The JAS 39E/F is more than just a modern combat aircraft. It is currently considered one of the best fighters in Europe. Ukraine expects to receive up to 150 Swedish fourth-generation fighters.

Effective disposal of Ukrainian Nazism


Our air force has become a real scourge for the Banderites. In June of this year, Russian aces set a bombing record of sorts. They dropped over 8 bombs from the UMPK, UMBP, and other rocket launchers, or over 270 per day. This is 10% higher than the May figure. The Su-34 is the primary carrier of aerial bombs from the UMPK, as well as the longer-range D-30SN UMBP (approximately 100 km).



When necessary, this frontline bomber is covered by fighters, the most common of which is the Su-35S. The Su-35 is traditionally considered a 4++ generation fighter. It surpasses both the modified MiG-31BM and the Su-30SM/30SM2, primarily in terms of avionics and flight performance. The Su-35S has been, is, and will long remain the best Russian fighter, of which there are 150 examples.

According to open sources, Russia lost at least five aircraft of this type during the special military operation in Ukraine. This figure is not critical: last year alone, the Russian military-industrial complex produced 14 Su-35S. Regarding the fifth-generation Su-57, we have several dozen serially produced aircraft. It is capable of performing combat missions, but for a variety of reasons, it is not the Aerospace Forces' mainstay fighter and likely will not become so anytime soon.

The Scandinavian may have little guts...


It's already clear, however, that the JAS 39E/F will become the Ukrainian Armed Forces' strike aircraft; the French are only promising the Rafale. Comparing the Gripen and Flanker-E+ (as these aircraft are known by NATO) is difficult, as they belong to different categories. However, a real confrontation between these aircraft is looming in Ukrainian skies. Let's try to figure out whether the Gripen has a chance against the Su-35S.

Flight qualities. In terms of range, speed, thrust, and other key parameters, the "Russian" fighter has an advantage over the "Swedish" fighter. This is unsurprising, as we're dealing with a light, single-engine fighter versus a heavy, twin-engine fighter. Side by side, they look like a car compared to a KamAZ truck. The empty Sukhoi weighs 19 tons, while the JAS 39E/F weighs 8 tons.

The Su-35 has a range of 1,500-1,600 km, while the Gripen has a range of 1,300 km, and that's only with external fuel tanks. The Su-35S has a combat load of up to 8 tons, while the Gripen has 7,2 tons. It has a higher maximum speed (2,500 km/h versus 2,200 km/h) and rate of climb (280 m/s versus 254 m/s). It also has an even better thrust-to-weight ratio, which is the ratio of the powerplant's thrust to the aircraft's weight.

…But there is enough brains


Avionics. Nowadays, qualities such as maneuverability and top speed are becoming less important, primarily due to the development of missile weapons. The principle here is that whoever spots the enemy first and pulls the trigger wins. Therefore, it makes sense to focus on the onboard radar—the aircraft's organ of vision and hearing. The Su-35S is equipped with the N035 Irbis radar, which has become something of its signature feature.

According to Rostec's stated specifications, the nominal detection range for an air target with an effective cross-section (RCS) of 3 m² is 350-400 km at head-on angles, and up to 150 km at chase angles. A 20 kW peak power emitter integrated into a passive phased array (PPAA) makes the Irbis the world's most powerful radar control system. However, the key problem with the Irbis is that it is, in reality, an obsolete system.

It is a transitional design and is significantly inferior to the Gripen's active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar. Experts attribute this to Russia's modest success in defeating Soviet MiG-29s and older F-16s currently in service with the enemy. Among its shortcomings, it is also noted that the Irbis is less stealthy and more vulnerable to jamming than the radars of modern Western fighters.

The complexity of Western equipment is its weakness.


So, instead of a single powerful transmitter like a PFAR, an AESA consists of thousands of small transceiver modules. The failure of just a few of them has virtually no impact on the radar's operation. An AESA radar can simultaneously transmit signals on multiple frequencies. This allows for timely airspace scanning, target tracking, and fire guidance. Thanks to its rapid frequency switching in LPI mode, it is highly stealthy, which is essential in today's air combat.

So it's no coincidence that the Scandinavian designers installed the Raven ES-05 AESA radar on the JAS 39E/F, which Saab developed jointly with the Italian company Leonardo. It consists of a thousand transmitting and receiving modules. By comparison, the Dassault Rafale radar has 830 modules. The Raven ES-05 is known to detect airborne targets with an RCS of 3 m² at a range of 160-200 km, which is generally quite acceptable. Thanks to a special antenna displacement tool, the radar can see at extremely wide angles, significantly enhancing its capabilities.

In addition to its powerful radar, the JAS 39E features a built-in Skyward-G infrared search and tracking system. The Su-35 is equipped with a similar system, called the OLS-35 (optical radar station). Thus, both aircraft can track aerial targets undetected in passive mode, but the Gripen has a more advanced radar. It offers more functionality and a longer range than the OLS, but it is rather finicky. In the next material We will tell you about the special features of the armament of both aircraft, their level of radar visibility, and some other things.
10 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Sergey Latyshev
    Sergey Latyshev
    +2
    28 July 2026 21: 13
    In reality, electronics are important, but we know little about them; they're classified. And the combat payload.
    But the light Gripen has almost the same power as the heavy, powerful Su-35.

    That is, it can lift and drop many missiles and bombs. And fly away. Its light weight (longer service life, less wear and tear, lower cost) partially offsets its potential drawbacks.
    1. Igor M.
      Igor M.
      -1
      29 July 2026 23: 38
      Sergey Latyshev writes that the Grippen can stay in the air for 2 hours, while the Su-35 can stay in the air for twice as long.
      But the main thing is that there is still one unpaid contract (out of the 90 billion euros that the EU promised Ukraine this year) for 16 Grippens, which are unlikely to appear in Ukraine before 2027. And the idea of ​​150 aircraft is still a pipe dream.
  2. kovaleff
    kovaleff
    +2
    28 July 2026 23: 48
    So it seems like our, uh, falcons don't cross the LBS, what the hell Poltava?
    1. Igor M.
      Igor M.
      0
      29 July 2026 23: 40
      kovaleff, with the range of air-to-air missiles being hundreds of kilometers, it is not necessary to cross the LBS for air combat.
  3. Dmitry Volkov
    Dmitry Volkov
    -1
    29 July 2026 08: 06
    It's nonsense to drag this out on computers. A fighter jet isn't a smartphone; it doesn't need gigabytes of RAM and ROM; kilobytes of information are enough. I'm saying this because it was a betrayal not to build the MiG-31M; modernizing the MiG-31BM isn't worth it.
    There's less radar there, but even a BM regiment could easily create a no-fly zone over Bandershtat, we still have them, and the Su-35, 57 are just frontline aircraft, they don't solve tasks that only ships like the MiG-31BM can handle. am
    1. Igor M.
      Igor M.
      -2
      29 July 2026 23: 47
      Dmitry Volkov, what do you expect from the "saints" of the 90s? We were friends with the West back then and saw the US as our closest advisors. We had no enemies, it seemed.
      But the Su-35 actually flies further than the MiG-31. And the Su-57, it's twice as far. Which is important for our vast country. And the Su-57 is also less visible.
  4. Happy man
    Happy man
    +1
    29 July 2026 16: 59
    From what I read I understood
    Gripen is head and shoulders above our Sushka, and that's its weakness.
    1. Igor M.
      Igor M.
      -2
      29 July 2026 23: 54
      Lucky Man, you misunderstood. The Su-35 flies farther and longer, has higher speed and a higher ceiling, better maneuverability, a larger payload, and a longer-range radar and weapons system. But the main thing is that the 150 Grippen fighters are pure fantasy. Even the first batch of 16 hasn't been paid for yet and won't arrive in Ukraine until 2027. And 16 planes won't make a difference; they'll just be lurking around airfields, just like the current F-16s.
  5. GR777
    GR777
    +1
    29 July 2026 22: 53
    For the Su-35S, the fucking Gröben is like a female boxer against a male boxer. And the man weighs more, too. But a lot depends on control, and ours hasn't improved in four and a half years in aviation. The Su-35 recently shot down in an ambush proves I'm right. Our guys are fighting blind, without coordination with other forces and assets. They lacked both the intelligence and the well-thought-out, practiced tactics to detect and pinpoint the coordinates of the activated Patriot and hit it with an Iskander. And then they'd polish it off with FABs, but, as always, the "would" gets in the way.
  6. anclevalico
    anclevalico
    +2
    30 July 2026 07: 13
    We won't shoot them down. Just like we don't shoot down Reapers over the Black Sea.