Are there joint multinational exercises since 2016 that include published post-exercise analyses referencing Gripen and F-35 interoperability?
Executive summary
Yes — since 2016 there have been multiple multinational exercises that included both JAS‑39 Gripen and F‑35 aircraft, and some official and industry write‑ups describe interoperability themes (e.g., data sharing, coordinated missions) though publicly available, detailed post‑exercise technical analyses specifically focused on Gripen–F‑35 interoperability are limited in the provided sources (examples: NATO Allied Air Command summary of Denmark–Sweden 5th‑gen drills and Saab/press accounts of Gripen in CRUZEX 2024) [1] [2].
1. Gripen and F‑35 have flown together in multinational drills — the public record
Reporting and official NATO archives show Gripens and F‑35s participated in the same multinational exercises from roughly 2024 onward: Denmark and Sweden ran the first inter‑Allied 5th‑generation training drills involving Danish F‑35s and Swedish Gripens in March 2024 as logged by NATO Allied Air Command [1], and larger NATO events such as Steadfast Defender / northern drills and Ramstein Flag included both types operating in shared airspace (Reuters on Steadfast Defender and Ramstein Flag reporting) [3] [4]. Saab also publicised Gripen E’s debut at CRUZEX 2024, a multinational exercise featuring many international participants, which Saab framed as a high‑complexity operational outing for the type [2]. These sources establish the co‑participation necessary for interoperability work, though co‑presence is not the same as detailed, published interoperability studies [1] [2] [3].
2. Public summaries stress cooperative missions and information sharing, not deep technical post‑mortems
News coverage and official statements about these exercises emphasise cooperative objectives — integrating different generations of fighters, improving combined operational capabilities, and leveraging F‑35 sensor/data advantages to benefit partners such as Gripen — rather than publishing step‑by‑step technical after‑action reports comparing systems (Allied Air Command statement and Aeroflap coverage quoting Danish command on data sharing benefits) [1] [5]. For example, Aeroflap quotes NATO officers saying the F‑35 “is capable of generating and sharing a situational picture” from which Gripen can benefit, a claim framed at the operational‑cooperation level rather than as a technical interoperability validation [5].
3. Exercises where both types appeared — scale and geography
Examples in the provided material include northern European drills tied to Sweden’s NATO accession (Steadfast/Arctic‑area sorties with U.S. and Norwegian F‑35s operating alongside Gripens) and large multinational exercises such as Ramstein Flag and CRUZEX 2024 where Gripens and F‑35s were both listed among participants (Reuters on Nordic drills; Saab PR on CRUZEX; Ramstein Flag press reporting) [3] [2] [4]. Media accounts of Ramstein Flag and other NATO ‘‘Flag’’ exercises cite over a hundred aircraft from many nations, and explicitly list both F‑35s and JAS‑39s among participants [6] [4].
4. Published post‑exercise analyses specific to Gripen–F‑35 interoperability — sparse in these sources
Among the sources provided, there are operational summaries and commentary but no comprehensive, publicly released technical post‑exercise analysis deeply evaluating sensor fusion compatibility, data‑link integration, or classified interoperability metrics between Gripen and F‑35. NATO/Allied Air Command releases and trade press describe goals and outcomes in general terms, and Saab/industry pieces highlight Gripen performance and NATO interoperability claims, but the detailed, formal after‑action technical reports you might expect (with measured interoperability metrics) are not present in the supplied corpus [1] [2] [5].
5. Competing perspectives and possible agendas in reporting
Industry and national sources frame findings differently: Saab and sympathetic outlets emphasize Gripen’s NATO interoperability and successful multinational exercise appearances (Saab press release; 19FortyFive pieces noting Gripen integration claims) [2] [7], while other coverage and analysts flag the F‑35’s unique sensor/data‑sharing role and note that widespread F‑35 adoption in NATO makes F‑35 integration a baseline for many alliance operations (Aeroflap quoting NATO commanders; NPR coverage on the F‑35’s alliance role) [5] [8]. These differing emphases reflect clear institutional agendas: manufacturers and bidders highlight their jet’s strengths and interoperability claims to influence procurement debates; NATO and national military releases focus on operational cohesion and political signalling [2] [1] [8].
6. What a researcher or policymaker should do next
If you need detailed, technical post‑exercise analyses comparing Gripen–F‑35 interoperability, available sources here do not include such reports. Recommended next steps: request after‑action reports or technical briefs directly from the exercise lead (Allied Air Command or host nation air commands), check defence ministries’ formal exercise summaries, and search for accredited defence‑analysis white papers or NATO technical publications that might be classified or published after these press pieces (not found in current reporting) [1] [2].
Limitations: this summary uses only the provided articles and official statements; those items document co‑participation and operational claims but do not contain full technical post‑exercise interoperability studies in the public domain [1] [2] [5].