Top speed is the most misconstrued number when it comes to the modern fighter. A non-stealth jet with a superior Mach number than a stealth jet may appear to be a decisive victory, particularly when it comes to air-policing operations over extensive and vacant zones. However, once the comparison is being accepted as the proxy of the overall effectiveness, it begins to be an institution that hides the engineering fact which was a motivation behind the slower design standing in the first place.
Theoretically the Saab JAS 39 Gripen E has a top speed of approximately Mach 2, and the F-35A is usually listed at approximately Mach 1.6. These numbers are not imaginary and they can be repeated easily when offering arguments on interception and sovereignty patrols. Neither are complete descriptions of what the aircraft were designed to withstand.
The F-35 is not capped by a deficiency that “happened” to the jet. Low observability decisions, including shaping, the internal carriage of weapons, and thermal management, dominate the fifth-generation design since remaining difficult to perceive often counts much more than being the first to arrive. The sustained supersonic speed motions result in heating of the surface, and heating is not a cosmetic concern on a plane whose mission requires its coating and edge treatments to remain within very tight limits. Having the raw speed as a self-inflicted penalty rather than a benefit, once the signature-control materials have begun to be destroyed by heat and increase the infrared visibility.
That one limitation provides some insight into why “faster” is not necessarily “better” when considering the functions as commonly mentioned in the Arctic: find, identify, coordinate, and, if necessary, participate in a larger air picture. Under such circumstances, there is a probability that detection range, quality of track, and the capability to share targeting information than an additional fraction of Mach on the top.
The Gripen, however, was not a speed story. Sweden constructed the type on another national rationale, high readiness, independence, and survivability by dispersal. The aircraft was intended to be a road-based and short/state-runway flyer, low ground-crew requirements were the main requirement, and a high turnaround was the imperative, not the exception. The same focus is transferred to the Gripen E concept in the larger picture of lean, maintainable and capable of going airborne despite the lack of infrastructure.
Its avionics philosophical approach is also of more significance than the Mach headline admits. Gripen E also includes sophisticated AESA radar and electronic warfare and is designed to work in a cooperative mode where networked sensors and datalinks can be used to provide a workable picture without requiring an individual aircraft to charge blindly into the most heavily defended airspace. According to a former Gripen/Viggen pilot who went on to serve as the operational advisor in Saab, the stakes were as follows: The mission to reliably detect, track and verify real objects in a complex battlespace using a lot of sensor input from multiple sources is one of the biggest challenges for fighter platforms today. To create full situational awareness, it demands fully fused data. This is a matter of life or death for any pilot.
The frequent recurring fighter conversation in Canada often becomes a mere interception problem in maths. The internal assessment information that subsequently leaked onto the media put the F-35A at 57.1 out of 60 (95) points versus the Gripen E at 19.8 points (33) in the rated criteria of the 2021 evaluation. However the finery of basing and sustainment models and industrial involvement, it is those numbers that are highlighting what the competition was actually quantifying: mission performance within a networked coalition architecture, not the rapidity with which a jet can dart.
Top speed still is useful, especially in repositioning and some intercept designs. However, the more revealing question is not in the space that stealth, signatures and data determine who you see first, which fighter can hit Mach 2. It is the one that can retain its benefits intact even when engaged within the sensor and missile system that characterizes modern air warfare.
