What is the thrust-to-weight ratio of the Saab Gripen E?

1. Engine: the commonly cited thrust number

Saab chose the GE F414‑GE‑39E for the Gripen E; multiple accounts list its maximum (afterburning) thrust at roughly 22,000 pounds (≈98 kN) and dry thrust around 14,400 lbf (≈64 kN), which is the core datum most commentators use when discussing Gripen E T/W ^{[1] [2] [5]}.

2. Why T/W is not a single number — weight assumptions matter

Thrust‑to‑weight is thrust divided by aircraft weight at a chosen condition. Published weight figures for Gripen E variants differ across sources (empty weight, typical combat weight, max takeoff). Some sources cite an empty/structural weight or a maximum takeoff weight near 36,400 lb / 16,500 kg in context pieces, but many summaries and articles do not pair those weights directly with the 22,000 lb thrust to produce a single, documented T/W ratio ^{[1] [6]}. Because of this, one can see different T/W values in secondary sources depending on which weight they use ^{[6] [3]}.

3. Instances of specific T/W claims in reporting

At least one aviation site quotes an “exceptional thrust‑to‑weight ratio of 1.04” for the Gripen E/F without showing the weight basis for that number ^[3]. Other outlets describe the aircraft as having an “outstanding” or “high” power‑to‑weight ratio and emphasize the 22,000‑lb engine capability, but stop short of a formal T/W calculation ^{[4] [5]}. A Saab technical/product page highlights the F414’s power and other performance features but does not publish an official T/W ratio paired with a specific weight case ^[7].

4. How to compute a T/W yourself (and why numbers will vary)

If you divide the cited afterburning thrust (≈22,000 lb) by a chosen aircraft weight, you get different ratios: using a commonly cited maximum takeoff weight near 36,375 lb gives ~0.60, while using a much lower “empty” or lighter combat weight yields higher ratios approaching or above 1.0. Several enthusiasts’ sites and blogs perform such back‑of‑envelope math and arrive at conflicting T/W claims because they use different input weights or do not disclose the inputs ^{[1] [6]}.

5. Independent commentary and context — maneuverability vs. raw T/W

Commentary in defense press emphasizes that Gripen E’s agility and operational concept rely on a combination of engine power, low structural weight, wing and control design, and systems (sensor fusion), not on raw T/W alone; writers note Gripen can supercruise and is optimized for short‑field operations and fast turnaround, framing T/W as one ingredient among several performance drivers ^{[1] [8] [5]}. Some reports even call the Gripen E’s power‑to‑weight “outstanding” or “exceptional” but do not standardize the metric ^{[4] [3]}.

6. Conflicting or dubious sources — treat specific numeric claims with caution

Fan sites, blogs, and aggregated specs sometimes publish precise T/W figures (for example the 1.04 claim) without disclosing weight case or method; these should be treated as estimates or secondary reporting unless tied to primary manufacturer or verified military datasheets ^{[3] [6]}. Saab’s own public materials emphasize engine thrust, fuel and payload improvements, and operational capability rather than a single published T/W value ^{[7] [1]}.

7. Bottom line and recommended citation practice

If you need a defensible, repeatable T/W ratio for analysis or comparison, compute it yourself using an explicitly stated thrust figure (use 22,000 lb / 98 kN with afterburner as given in multiple sources) and the exact weight condition you want to compare (empty, typical combat, or max takeoff). Note that most public reporting shows the 22,000 lb thrust but does not pair it with a single, official Gripen E T/W figure, so any published ratio should cite both the thrust source and the precise weight assumption ^{[1] [2] [3]}.

Sources cited in text: Saab/engine and performance reporting ^{[1] [7] [2]}, specific T/W claim and secondary reporting ^{[3] [4] [5]}, and enthusiasts/blogs showing varied calculations ^[6].