The Gripen can land on a relatively short stretch of road, a team of six can get it ready for its next flight and it can take off from the same road. The F22 is not a STOL aircraft.
Given standard NATO practice of taking out the radar and the runways in the first few femto-seconds of a 'war', I think this feature makes the Gripen worthy of consideration.
That said, do features really matter in the arms trade?
> That said, do features really matter in the arms trade?
I dunno. Will the next serious war use planes at all? Or something smaller (I bet on smaller, for air and water)?
Anyway, Brazilian fighters are modeled to beat a defensive war against Venezuela. I guess the F22 is not the best fighter to use over the Amazon florest (but I don't know muh).
For water, the most cost effective is submarines, and has been submarines since before WWII. Big ships are an expensive way of giving the enemy some target practice.
Given standard NATO practice of taking out the radar and the runways in the first few femto-seconds of a 'war', I think this feature makes the Gripen worthy of consideration.
That said, do features really matter in the arms trade?