I calculated LCC rougly on known figures.
24 fighters
flight costs 2500USD vs 3700USD
25 million USD difference in the fly away price (f-16 is 25million cheaper per fighter).
150 flighthours per fighter/year

years gripen LCC romania f-16 romania
1 609000000 13320000
2 618000000 26640000
3 627000000 39960000
4 636000000 53280000
5 645000000 66600000
6 654000000 79920000
7 663000000 93240000
8 672000000 106560000
9 681000000 119880000
10 690000000 133200000
11 699000000 146520000
12 708000000 159840000
13 717000000 173160000
14 726000000 186480000
15 735000000 199800000
16 744000000 213120000
17 753000000 226440000
18 762000000 239760000
19 771000000 253080000
20 780000000 266400000
21 789000000 279720000
22 798000000 293040000
23 807000000 306360000
24 816000000 319680000
25 825000000 333000000
26 834000000 346320000
27 843000000 359640000
28 852000000 372960000
29 861000000 386280000
30 870000000 399600000

As I said, it either means there’s very little left to develop (thus not much interest in “development learning” as such) or it wan’t be done on time..

You can’t say “it’s been developed for years and is almost finished” and, in the same time say to the brasilians “you’ll be closely associated with the development of the plane”

Something doesn’t sound right there, does it?

What’s more, if first deliveries have to be done in 2014 (I guess not on Dec 31st 2014), that means that you’d need to build a factory, tools and everything before the end of 2013, thus, having more or less finished the development by then anyway which means that the development needed to reach the operational level should be over by then… that’s 3 years of development left

Yes, and i think they thought about that…, the thing is, NG has some parts left for development in the TOT. None of the other does!

the ceasar was trialed in 2007…
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/aesa-radar-to-be-trialed-on-uks-gr4-tornados-by-2007-01960/

LOL! Looks like you know little about them.

Btw it is in Europe where technologic breakthroughs are made in the IR department and for your stament you’ll figure that even in the F2 standards, Rafale avionics are either of the same generation or newer.

The FACT that F-35 is years late doesn’t mean that single channel/bandwidth IR technologies are superior to multi-colour/Multi Channel dedicated A2A systems, looking newer and being fited on a newer airframe doesn’t make the technology.

Try to inform yourself properly. 😀

That of Rafale and Typhoon too, meaning there are a LOT of avionics and systems upgrades he never heared of.

i only said that to keep the discussion on earth, things like sensortech, and software, is still state-of-the-art and probably better than most europeans. just look at those budget figures?! it must be some goodies there!?

Why not? They have a lot of life left in them.

cheaper to buy all new Tejas instead? but maybe they arent up for the job.

but would the other Euro industries want this? a more euro-rized Gripen would take away some of the advantages of the Typhoid and Raphael who seek the same customers who want less American.

its part of the cheap prize/LCC and performance, and thats whats the gripen costumers wants.
And there you have it, thats the thing about COTS, best preformance for the buck.
You cant have it all, have it like like rafale and you double the cost…

yeah there’s something wrong with that figure..the Tejas had crossed an envelope of Mach 1.4 by the end of 2006 itself as per the Standing Committee on Defence report to the Parliament. This must’ve been at sea level or something that the DDM (the guy calls Air Commodore Rohit Varma as Commander Varma, which indicates he’s not really a defence correspondent) didn’t catch. a pity.

over 1.2 Mach at sealevel in a warm climate is BIG achievement! that needs to be confirmed.
but if its true, im impressed!