Key Points: The Saab JAS 39 Gripen is one of the most advanced fighters currently in service with the Swedish Air Force and is considered by some to be one of the best European fighters.
-It is a versatile, multi-role fighter aircraft developed by the Swedish aerospace company Saab AB and known for its agility, advanced avionics, and cost-effectiveness.

JAS 39 Gripen. Image Credit: Creative Commons.
-However, one area where the Gripen falls short is in stealth technology.
-While some argue that the lack of stealth features renders the Gripen irrelevant, the fighter still boasts a variety of features that make it a valuable tool in the skies.
JAS 39 Gripen Explained
The development of the Gripen goes back to the 1970s when Sweden sought to replace its aging fleet of Saab 35 Draken and Saab 37 Viggen aircraft. The Swedish Air Force required a new fighter that could perform attack and reconnaissance missions, hence the designation “JAS” (Jakt, Attack, Spaning).
The goal was to develop an aircraft that was smaller than the Viggen but could match or exceed its payload and range capabilities.
Saab’s design was selected for development, leading to the creation of the JAS 39 Gripen. The aircraft’s frame design provides excellent maneuverability and stability. The Gripen’s relaxed stability design and fly-by-wire flight controls were cutting-edge at the time, allowing for precise handling and agility.
The Gripen made its maiden flight on December 9, 1988.
However, during its early testing phase, the aircraft experienced two crashes due to issues with its flight control software. These incidents necessitated updates to the software, which were successfully implemented, allowing the Gripen to continue its development.
The JAS 39 Gripen is designed with a delta wing and canard configuration, which contributes to its exceptional maneuverability and stability. This design allows the Gripen to perform agile maneuvers, making it highly effective in dogfights and close-range engagements.

JAS 39. Image Credit: Creative Commons.
The aircraft is equipped with smoothing flight controls, which enhance its responsiveness and ease of handling.
Pros of the Saab JAS 39 Gripen
One of the key strengths of the Gripen is its multirole capability. It can perform a wide range of missions, including air-to-air combat, air-to-ground strikes, reconnaissance, and electronic warfare. The Gripen is equipped with advanced avionics, including radar systems, electronic countermeasures, and data links that enable it to operate effectively in various combat scenarios.
Another unique aspect of the Gripen is its ability to operate from austere airstrips and short runways.
This capability is part of Sweden’s Bas 90 system, which disperses aircraft across remote locations to reduce vulnerability to enemy attacks. The Gripen’s short-field performance and ease of maintenance make it well-suited for operations in challenging environments.
The Gripen is also known for its cost-effectiveness compared to other modern fighter aircraft. The Saab Gripen costs around $85 million per unit. While this may seem like a lot for a single plane, it is more cost-effective than many alternatives in its class, such as the Eurofighter or the Dassault Rafale.

JAS-39 by Sweden. Image Credit: Creative Commons.
Its relatively low acquisition and operating costs make it an attractive option for countries seeking advanced capabilities without the high price tag associated with stealth fighters. This affordability has contributed to the Gripen’s success in the export market, with several countries, including Brazil, South Africa, and Hungary, opting for the aircraft.
The Gripen has undergone several upgrades since its introduction. The latest variant, the JAS 39E/F Gripen, features significant improvements over its predecessors.
These include a more powerful engine, increased payload capacity, enhanced avionics, and a new electronic warfare system. The Gripen E/F also boasts improved radar systems and sensor fusion capabilities, allowing it to detect and engage targets more effectively.
The Biggest Gripen Con: No Stealth?
Stealth technology has revolutionized aerospace engineering by significantly reducing the radar cross-section (RCS) of aircraft, making them harder to detect and track.
Stealth aircraft, such as the F-22 Raptor and F-35 Lightning II, employ a combination of radar-absorbent materials, specialized airframe shaping, and internal weapon bays to achieve low observability. These features allow stealth fighters to penetrate enemy defenses and conduct missions with a higher degree of survivability.
While stealth technology offers undeniable advantages, it also comes with trade-offs. Stealth aircraft typically have limited payload capacity due to the need to carry weapons internally to maintain low observability. This can restrict their versatility in specific mission profiles.
Additionally, stealth technology is expensive to develop and maintain, making stealth fighters significantly more costly than non-stealth counterparts. I don’t want to bash stealth aircraft too much, but every design has its pros and cons.

Sweden’s JAS 39 Fighter. Image: Creative Commons.
Non-stealth aircraft, such as the Gripen, on the other hand, can typically carry a larger payload externally, providing greater flexibility in mission planning. Because stealth technology is so sophisticated, it is also vastly more expensive.
Non-stealth aircraft are much more affordable, allowing countries to field larger fleets and maintain a higher operational tempo. Furthermore, the Gripen’s advanced avionics and electronic warfare capabilities enable it to operate effectively in contested environments, even without the benefit of stealth.
While stealth is a vital feature to have, there is still a vast market for non-stealth aircraft. Many nations around the world continue to operate air forces without stealth fighters, and only three countries in the world are capable of producing them.
Countries will always be seeking affordable strike aircraft, regardless of whether they possess stealth capabilities. So, does stealth render the Saab Gripen obsolete?? It does not. If the Gripen is considered outdated, then the F-16, Dassault Rafale, and F-18 should also be regarded as obsolete.
About the Author: Isaac Seitz
Isaac Seitz, a 19FortyFive Defense Columnist, graduated from Patrick Henry College’s Strategic Intelligence and National Security program. He has also studied Russian at Middlebury Language Schools and has worked as an intelligence Analyst in the private sector.

Michael
April 26, 2025 at 2:35 am
Well, they sure are more difficult to hit when are moving fast or spread out over a vast countryside (and Canada is one of the best places in the world for dispersed road bases). ”Moviemento es vida.”
A plane on the ground is a liability, not a threat. I have 2 words for Mr. Seitz to consider:
Sitting duck.
Alex M
April 26, 2025 at 11:09 am
Your information about the cost is incorrect. The cost of that plane is officially around $60M. The figure you wrote about is for the F35. Also nothing will make it obsolete you’re wrong about it. Was your article sponsored by Lockheed Martin? Or Boeing?
James
April 26, 2025 at 8:08 pm
The articles comparing the F35 and Gripen are just getting silly now. One only has to look at what the Israeli Air Force did to Iranian air defenses to see what the F35 is truly capable of. They completely destroyed Iran’s modern air defence system from 100 miles away and they were never seen or picked up on radar, nor shot at. Neither the Gripen, nor any of the 4th gen fighters can do that. These are two different airplanes with different capabilities.
John Rambo
April 27, 2025 at 1:29 am
Gripen is light, cheap, alternative to F-16, F-18,and Dassault. Maintenance might be cost effective, but there’s always a catch.
Also, just because people suddenly found this newfound interest during political tension, let’s not put it on a podium give a fake champions trophy or even a participation trophy, because that’s socialist and liberals dumb way of self justifying forcefully in their own fantasy crazy mind. Not reality.
Plus, key word in military is COMBAT PROVEN. F-16 & F-18 have more than proven it’s worth. Unlike other countries fighter plane that have yet to prove their claimed awesomeness on paper. Checkmate end of conversation, drop the mic.
David Lowe
April 27, 2025 at 7:07 am
The days of fighter jets were over decades ago, they are purely launch vehicles and drones of varying sizes can do that, there hasn’t been a dog fight between fighters since the falklands when the harrier was destroying the Argentina jets, now we have anti aircraft missiles that can travel 100 miles, so anything can launch them, we see in Ukraine that Russia cannot overfly Ukraine territory for fear of being shot down, the cheapest launch vehicle are what air forces need, maybe large drones like the reaper or Byrakter, or small jets like trainer aircraft, but fancy fighter or any generation are a legacy leftover and are not worth the money, the cheapest is the best to launch the real weapons
Karelian Hero vet
April 27, 2025 at 9:35 am
John Rambo, that mic wasn’t dropped, it was fumbled.
And your anything BUT Rambo. Your a small boy in a fat pigs body, fighting from behind a keyboard in momma’s basement.
The JAS39 beats all the US non 5:th jets hands down. F-15, F-16, F-18 (including Superhornet) are all sub par compared.
And it has an edge against the Eurofighter and Rafale as well.
And David Lower, is that so? Wow. You’re so amazing to know better than almost ALL actual military experts in the world.
And i guess Israel’s raid on Iran was a fluke?
That said, to Isaac Seitz, that means 90% of the USAF is obsolete i guess? And only stealth jets are flying in the current conflicts in the world? No? How odd that almost all jets in current conflicts are non stealth….
Jesse Miller
April 27, 2025 at 4:18 pm
I used to work with european aircraft, as maintenance director and stockroom manager and one thing european factories lack, is reability to obtain and procure parts. Dasault takes weeks or years to ship parts, SAAB is probably the same or even worst.
Martinn Tschuemperlin
April 28, 2025 at 3:23 am
Well, I have rather Swedes controlling the fighter than Americans. They seem to blindly obey any idiotic president! If they can’t help it.. then what?