Gripen-E Can Complement Tejas Mk2 in IAF Fleet due to Similarities in Systems, Engine, and MTOW, Affirms Saab Amidst MRFA Tender

Saab India has asserted that the Gripen-E fighter jet can effectively complement India's indigenous Tejas Mk2 within the Indian Air Force (IAF) fleet. This statement comes amidst the ongoing Multi-Role Fighter Aircraft (MRFA) tender for 110 jets, where Saab is positioning the Gripen-E as a strong contender.

While some defence analysts argue that acquiring the Gripen-E might lead to unnecessary duplication, Saab emphasizes the potential synergies between the two aircraft.

Both the Gripen-E and Tejas Mk2 belong to the same weight class, with the Gripen-E having a Maximum Take-Off Weight (MTOW) of 16.5 tons and the Tejas Mk2 slightly higher at 17.5 tons.

This similarity has fueled debate about the strategic necessity of procuring the Gripen-E when India is actively developing the Tejas Mk2, which offers marginally better range, endurance, and weapons-carrying capacity.

However, a Saab India official highlighted several advantages of having both aircraft in the IAF fleet. Firstly, both aircraft utilize the same F-414 engine, leading to significant benefits in logistics, maintenance, and training. This commonality could streamline operations, reduce costs, and simplify supply chain management for the IAF.

Secondly, the Gripen-E's modular software architecture allows for seamless integration with various weapons systems. This aligns with the Tejas Mk2's capabilities, ensuring both aircraft can operate with similar armaments and enhancing interoperability.

This compatibility would allow both types of jets to operate from the same airbase without requiring specialized infrastructure for each, offering a significant operational advantage.

Saab's argument focuses on strategic synergy rather than competition between the two platforms. By integrating the Gripen-E, India could leverage Saab's advanced combat systems technology and extensive combat experience, complementing the ongoing development of the Tejas Mk2. This approach could provide India with a diverse yet compatible fighter fleet capable of addressing various combat scenarios.

Despite these arguments, defence analysts remain divided. Some see potential benefits in technology transfer, immediate operational capability enhancement, and reduced logistical complexity.

Others argue that investing in the Gripen-E might not be the most cost-effective strategy when India is already committed to scaling up Tejas Mk2 production and development.

As the MRFA tender progresses, the debate over fleet composition will likely intensify. The decision will hinge on balancing indigenous capabilities, immediate combat readiness, and long-term strategic and financial investments.

Saab's proposal for the Gripen-E, emphasizing coexistence and synergy with the Tejas Mk2, offers a compelling case for how international partnerships can support national defence ambitions without undermining local development efforts.

 

[sanket]

In the beginning, engine commonality exists, but later, Tejas Mk2 is likely to get a 110 kN engine. Second, combat radius is a factor (compared to twin-engine fighter jet contenders in MRFA), plus weapon carrying capacity is another factor. Most importantly, Gripen components are imported from other countries, while Tejas Mk2 will have indigenous components, and after 110 kN integration, it will have close to 90% indigenously produced components, while Gripen will depend upon US-manufactured components and engines. With the same GE-404 engine experience, Saab doesn't have any plans to develop its own engine in the future; they just want to sell the airframe, as Bharat is going to locally manufacture 80% under ToT of the GE-414 engine, and Saab wants to just wash their hands. It is the IAF's requirement, not Saab's. Earlier in MRFA, a single-engine process was started, and thereafter it was canceled, and MRFA was floated, including single and twin-engine. Saab should not forget that.

See the cleverness of European fighter jet OEMs: modular software architecture allows for seamless integration with various weapon systems, but the European Meteor system can't be integrated on other non-European fighter jets. This is pure marketing, nothing else. There was news recently that European OEMs have made a consortium to prevent allowing the Meteor system on other fighter jets that are not European. This way, European fighter jet manufacturers are exposed. Just to get business deals, they can integrate any weapon system on their fighter jets, but can't sell the Meteor missile system for integration on other non-European platforms.

The same theory was applied for Mirage-2000 further upgradation with AESA radar and Meteor BVR missile integration, just to enhance the value of Rafale and other European fighter jets. Integration of the AESA radar and Meteor missile system would have definitely affected the sale of Rafale fighter jets. That's why I say when comparing F-16, MiG-29, and Mirage-2000 upgrade programs, the Mirage-2000 today stands as an outdated fighter jet among these 3 fighter jets, with mostly a ground attack role. Once the MiG-29 is upgraded with the Uttam AESA radar plus Astra BVR series missiles plus the Rudram anti-radiation missile, and in the future BrahMos-NG, it will be a very potent fighter jet among all 3 fighter jets of the same era.

Most importantly, Bharat may be looking for technology sharing under MRFA. The IAF needs a twin-engine fighter jet that can operate on both borders. Gripen doesn't have that much combat range and weapon carrying capacity for performing sorties.

 

[Anant]

Is coexistence possible? Definitely. Is it plausible? Not so much. Is it practical? To be entirely honest, no.

 

[Venkat S]

Is coexistence possible? Definitely. Is it plausible? Not so much. Is it practical? To be entirely honest, no.

I agree with your views. It will be a criminal waste of money. IAF could have gone in for J39 in the absence of TEJAS MK2 project.

 

[Venkat S]

@sanket
J39 has reasonably good sensors, radar, and EW systems in place. But buying the J39 would only be a duplication since Tejas MK2 will have similar capabilities.

 

[sanket]

@sanket
J39 has reasonably good sensors, radar, and EW systems in place. But buying the J39 would only be a duplication since Tejas MK2 will have similar capabilities.

The IAF needs a twin-engine medium-category fighter jet. Tejas MK2 is likely to be inducted with over 250 orders. The initial Tejas MK1A order was 83, then a follow-on order of 97. The IAF is looking for a twin-engine fighter jet rather than a single-engine under MRFA (combat radius and weapon carrying capacity are crucial factors).

 

[Venkiteshwaran]

Gripen is a very good fighter with the capability to take off from short runways or highways. As Tejas Mk2 is in short supply, Gripen is the perfect aircraft against the Chinese. The Prime Minister should induct at least 200 Gripen jets at short notice. India should develop AMCA with 6th-generation capability to leapfrog over the Chinese and Pakistanis. It is a waste of money pursuing Tejas development. It's for defence bureaucrats to think wisely.

 

[Himanshu]

If there is some serious consideration in MFRA, it would be typhoon or rafale. However, if by some miracle the engine issue with GE is resolved, maybe we can see SU57 and it is a daam good plane, it's a modified SU30 with lesser RCS and any trained pilot would do wonders with it.

 

[Kira]

I believe Gripen E would have been decent enough back in the day, say from 2015-16, as HAL could have roped in SAAB to help design and produce the Tejas-MK2 directly instead of the MK-1A detour.

The IAF could have signed a deal for about 100 or so Gripens about a decade back. Then HAL and SAAB could have set the stage for MK-2 production beginning by 2025 or so, with the IAF ultimately inducting 100 Gripen followed closely by about 200 Tejas.

 

[Shrujanam Syama]

Why can't India have light planes (Tejas) & heavy planes (Su-30)? What purpose will medium planes serve that can't be done by a combination of heavy & light planes? Su-30 has a 3000km ferry range just on internal fuel, which is huge.

 

[ASHOK CARROL]

The Gripen's costs and equipment cobbled from many countries do not make it a cost-effective choice for a single-engine aircraft for the IAF. At over 80 million, its cost is in the same league as the F-35. A cost-effective solution at 25-30 million would be the Su-75 with complete transfer of technology to India, with source codes to integrate Indian weapons and sensors and keeping mainly the airframe and IZ-30 engine from Russia. The Indian government could consider joining the Su-75 program and starting an Indian production line at NASIK to build over 12-15 squadrons of the single lightweight stealth fighter starting in 2027-28 with a production run of 24 aircraft per annum.

 

[sumeet biswas]

MRFA listening since I was a kid...

My suggestion to the Saab head in India: please don't waste your time here in India. Our defence planners will definitely not buy it because our defence planners are planning to keep the MiG-21 for the next 50 years. 😂 They will send Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman on it again.