HyperionThe problem is that 2010 is the year when AESA will start production (deliveries in 2011). It may be a bit late…
IF the article is true, i think we can forget about new radars both in Rafale and EF. They will be judged based on their current radars and that’s what HAF will get.
HyperionP.S. : Even if the article is 100% true, this doesn’t mean that it can’t change in the KYSEA, if the competitors throw the towel for example. One think that i could think of, is leasing at low cost some aircrafts in the meantime, until our aircrafts come out of factory.
HyperionThat’s somewhat unrealistic. Greece has not even selected, let alone contracted a manufacturer. Typical timeframe from order to delivery is 3-4 years. NO manufacturer will be able to meet this timeline except existing customers are willed to divert aircraft and accept delays. In the case of Eurofighter this becomes increasingly difficult. The Gripen is not produced in large numbers anymore and I dobut that other export customers are willed to accept delays. I think the Rafale might be in a better position here, though it’s also not that easy for the french forces to accept slower deliveries for a period of time. Has the HAF a plan how long deliveries should run?
My friend, i agree. As i said in previous posts, DON’T necessarily believe that everything the newspapers write are true. It could be the usual journalistic BS. It’s not from a defence magazine , but from a “normal” political newspaper.
Anyway, the newspaper itself, admits that it is very difficult and so it could be decisive. To quote the article, with title “HAF: I want aircrafts by 2010” : “Yet another HAF demand, which accompanies the requirement list prepared by the HAF officers, may play a determinating role in the decisions. HAF wants at all costs deliveries (my note: the article doesn’t quantify HOW MANY deliveries) by Nov. 2010 at the latest. The available time is exceptionally small and we have to see who of the contenders can make the commitment that can do so fast deliveries. The hurry of the airforce isn’t irrational. In the next year HAF is retiring the old A-7 and some F-4E (i presume it refers to RF-4E), with the result of creating a “black hole”, since the number of retired aircrafts will exceed 100″.
Well if they are really interested in an air superiority fighter Typhoon would be a logical choice, though the Rafale would be a viable option either.
Yes, A2A is the first priority in this procurement. There are plenty of F16s that can take strike missions.
I don’t think the prices are to low, but it also depends on what is included into the price. Much more unsure are the operating costs. I don’t see where they base there figures on for operating costs. Basically operating costs differ depending on the customer and the usage of the aircraft.
Well, don’t expect too much from a normal newspaper. It’s a feat already that they managed to write correctly the names of the aircrafts. :p
HyperionIMHO if selected as winner, Dassault will work 48 hours a day for the deliveries. They are so in need for an export success.
Workers with red circles under the eyes, Sarkozy going around the factory with a whip yelling “faster!faster!” …
It’s like a Louis De Funès film. 😀
HyperionAccording to 2 new newspaper articles of the today’s press,
According to the 1st article:
1) HAF has put a new requirement in the already existing requirement list, that may be of critical importance for the winner of the tendrer. That the aircraft must start deliveries by November 2010, at the latest.
2) It was given order to the Trainning Center For Air Combat Tactics of HAF, to study and prepare within 1 month, a report on how can the Eurofighter confront the F-35. The artcile says, that logically thinking, such reports for the other competing aircrafts will follow.
* An observation. The fact that they start with EF, confirms once more, that the EF is favourite.
According to the 2nd article:
– The requirements list that was prepared by HAF officers, is complete and handed to the HAF Command and contains 400 characteristics, from which, 250 are obbligatory, while the rest “desired”. This means, that in order for an aircraft to be included in the final evalution, it must satisfy all 250 obbligatory characteristics, while the more “desired” characteristics an aircraft satisfies, the more its “scoring points” increase.
A note on operational costs as reported by the newspaper:
– Eurofighter: Price 85 million euros. Cost of use: 25000-30000/hour of flight.
– Rafale: 70 million euros. Cost of use: 20000-25000/hour of flight.
– Gripen: 50 million euros. Cost of use: 5000/hour of flight.
IMHO, the prices are prolly wrong (too low), even for fly-away prices. The difference in the cost per flight hour of the Gripen compared to the other 2 is impressive.
So, can Dassault deliver by Nov. 2010?
HyperionTo answer about a previous question about whether the SPECTRA was used in Greece.
As reported in a greek forum citing a defence magazine, more than 20 HAF pilots, flew as backseaters with the Rafale B, they said they were impressed by cockpit, data links and SPECTRA, but said they would like more engine thrust.
HyperionBTW, the EF consortium already have proposed Turkey to become “equal partner” in the EF program, 2 years ago. Still Turkey denied.
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/eurofighter-makes-turkey-an-offer-02856/
Since then, Turkey ordered 30 new Vipers.
That’s why i believe that “Turkey with EF = the big boys agreed that nobody will say no to Turkey in EU”.
HyperionLook Hyperion im albanian but living in Italy for quite a long time now.
What Turkish got was a basic Mangusta with exporting license but with all major subsystems removed.They getting a piece of crap.
I know, they want to put turkish systems on the helicopter. Of course its their right to want it and to think that they make better than the Italians… It’s fine with me! 😀 They do it to help the turkish industry, i understand it. In any case, the Italians are happy that they made an export.
Turks already need Efa and here in Italy there are some rumours that the Efa question has stalled on coproduction matter.Turks want it,but EF gbmh doesnt want to give coproduction rights.Once u get Rafale,turks will just order Efa with or without coproduction.As much as i understand they are done with Viper.
Yes, Turks always want their own assembly lines. They always have advanced demands. For example, they wanted access to source codes in the helis too. This made the Apache and Tiger to be ousted from the competition, because they were refusing. The Italians accepted and won the tender.
Well, i can’t exclude that the Turks will buy EF. If they do, i am happy that we forced them too. It’s always good to force the opponent spend money on something that under normal circumstances he wouldn’t do.
We are both from Balcans/SE europe and we know how things go there.Italy and Greece are regional powers,its a question of business,influence call it whatever u like.
Dont worry about Fyrom in 10 years Greece will get bigger and us too but pipelines will pass the same through those lands,sorry i meant Fyrom…
I suppose you intend that FYROM will be split and each of our countries will take a piece. Cause honestly Greece doesn’t have any intention to resolve this militarily. We want to be left in peace. Well, if FYROM was to be split, the Bulgarians would take the eastern part and Albania the western one (Tetovo region). Whether FYROM will be split or not, is something that Americans will decide (i wouldn’t bet my money on it).
If im not wrong greek pilots have highest flying hours in Nato,right?well less than us bomber pilots but they fly a lot and Rafale has a 1400plus radius in cap so with all those islands and airspace,its quite good.Also offers the 2 engine safety and their engine is of a modular design.So quite a lot of advantage
I honestly don’t have any idea of how many flight hours they have. I could guess that they have the most hours in readyness in Europe though, all the year (on the islands they have minimum 5 minute readyness aircrafts, in periods of tension, some have 3 minute readyness).
I am not absolutely against a Rafale solution, given also that it’s cheaper. But all articles indicate that we will buy EF. So, if we accept that as granted, then the issue is do we want Rafale exchanged for Rafale? I say yes, if the exchange is for all Mirage. I wouldn’t be happy if it was for 20 Mirage-Rafale only. If we were to buy ALL Rafale (exchage + 40 new), i wouldn’t mind either, as long as HAF thinks that the Rafale is good enough for its needs.
It’s a very complicated story.
HyperionPersonally i think that greek should continue with Dassault tradition and i really dont think the new type would have harder manteinance than Vipers or Mirage F1/2000.
This is certain! The Rafale is made to be easier to maintain compared to the M2000. My main objection, is that i don’t want a solution of 20 Rafale + 25 Mirage2000+5 as Sarkozy proposed. I would like something like 40 Rafale and 0 Mirage OR otherwise, buy no EF and instead go for exchange of all Mirage (2000 and 2000-5) for Rafale + the “new aircraft program” to the Rafale. So buy something like 60-80 Rafale. BUT, all articles, give as certain, that we will buy EF…
In second place lets remember that the Mirage represented a clear advantage 4 greek.It was quite unknown to turks and i believe french never showed it to them.Maybe they looked into the Moroccan F/1 but 2000 was off limits and so will be Rafale.
When the other doesn’t operate an aircraft, of course, you do have an advantage, i agree. We have retired the Mirage F1 btw. Even if the Turks have been shown the Mirage2000, by flying it only a few hours, you can’t get into the “secrets” of it, nor study complex tactics with it. It’s like getting a new aircraft. Your pilots, will need MONTHS before they can fly it like the old planes. The Turks DO KNOW some things about the Mirage2000, from the dogfights they have with us. BUT, they know what WE WANT them to know. Meaning, that it is often said, that our pilots, have orders, not to do everything they know/can do when flying against the Turks. It is better to have the Turks underestimasting you in peacetime and give him a “surprise” in war time. So the Turk will take your tail in peace time, who cares, if this gives him a false opinion of the Mirage that in war time you can use to shoot him REALLY down…
This is exactly why Greece has always had aircrafts the Turks didn’t operate (specially french).
I dont think that Rafale is inferior to Typhoon on electronics and weapon system in general,this time wont be limitations like those on F1 or M2000 they are offering the Omnirole F3 as i understand.Off course stronger engines will be welcomed i guess.
Yes, stronger engines, AESA radar, CFTs and helmet mounting display with IRIS-T, i would think that are very welcome for HAF.
As for Efa and turks and Berlusca…I think the man is megallomaniac so its just a question of business and a question of personal show off.Believe me u wont find a premier who is as Mr Know it All/Do everything than him.
Turks need them as their Vipers fleet aint in such a good shape like they claim and also are less modern than greek in overall capability. Focus on F4 for AG mission makes them look for an Air Superiority fighter and the fastest they can access and get is Efa.Finmecc is in charge of Efa-s marketing in the area so probably they’ll get it,im pretty much convinced and for sure they’ll get em faster when the Greek order for Rafales will be reality.
My opinion is: “IF you see Turkey ordering Eurofighter, it means that there has been a deal behind the curtains, between Turkey, Germany and France, that none of these countries will oppose Turkey’s entry in the EU”.
The Turks use the EF as a “carrot” to enter the EU. Their airforce wants the JSF and in a future, F-22. Also, the turkish money isn’t limitless either.
HyperionBerlusca is quite sure to sell Turks 60plus Efa-s…you know Erdogan is his best friend-the diplomacy of friends
Italy has about 300 companies in Turkey. Add that Italy made her export of the Mangusta helicopter to Turkey lately. Heck, even if Berlusconi can’t sell EF in Turkey, that’s enough to favour Turkey over Greece.
The Turks are playing with EF for years now, in order to “buy” their entrance in the EU. But the Turks, before buying EF, they will want assurances that they will enter the EU. Otherwise, i wouldn’t bet my money on Turkey buying EF. Turkey has a long history on buying “american only” in airforce. EF would be political purchase, but a Turkey that doesn’t take warranties that her purchase will open the EU doors to her, won’t proceed IMHO.
EDIT: An easy way to understand the relations between 2 countries it to count the number of visits of the PMs and Ministers (specially of foreign affairs) between the 2 countries. I can’t even remember when was the last time that an Italian PM or Minister of foreign affairs visited Greece or the opposite. And guess what! Italy is pro-turkish!
In the 2007-2008 period, Putin came to Greece at least 3 times, same for Sergey Ivanov and our ministers went to Moscow even more.
With the French, since Sarko took over, there is also an increased activity. Even before that, there was anyway a higher exchange of visits than with say Italy. The Americans visit us often, en route to somewhere else, but mainly to “advice” us (=threaten us), to not allow russian pipelines for gas and oil through Greece. Of course now that they see the cash ready to flow, the ambassador speaks of misunderstanding… After the NATO summit, the US organized an international meeting about banning cluster bombs. Greece had suspicions that US will use it to take “revenge” on the greek veto in NATO that made Bush lose “face”. So we were assured that FYROM will be there with its UN name (FYROM). Once there, our delegation had to abbandon the meeting, because the US changed the name on the table, putting “Macedonia”, arguing, that this meeting was hosted by USA, so USA doesn’t have to use the UN name of the country. It was an occasion that Bush used to humiliate back our PM and force the greek delegation to leave. As far as i am concerned, i am happy we left! We can’t afford to stop using cluster bombs. Turkey didn’t ban them either.
Anyway, i am amazed that they try to sell us the story that US isn’t hostile and it’s misunderstanding. What else must they do? “Export democracy” to us? We may be few, but the average Greek citizen, is very accustomed to the dirty way politics are made and can see very easily through the diplomatic BS.
So i would be extremely surprised if we would buy F16 again, for political reasons alone.
HyperionAh, for our french speaking members, i found the complete Sarkozy’s performance in the parliament:
http://www.ethnos.gr/article.asp?catid=11378&subid=2&tag=8777&pubid=1096405
(4 videos, the speech starts in the 2nd video).
After such a friendly speech and given the proved in the facts “nouvelle alliance”, wouldn’t you want to give him a hand for the Rafale too? If i were our PM i would certainly want to!
So, if there is chance for the Rafale in Greece, it is now! Honestly, listening to it again, i wouldn’t mind if we bought only Rafale and no EF for now…
Our main political allies currently, are Sarko and Putin. Sad to say, but most other EU countries, close their eyes in front of Turkey.
HyperionI wasn’t able to follow your analysis completely Hyperion, mostly due to the lack of free time these days. BTW, you are providing useful info on this matter (at least for me).
Don’t worry, i write a LOT in these days, not everyone can spend time to read it, perfectly normal. I am a HAF enthusiast and also quite worried about what is going to happen, so i write a lot. :p I just thought to give an insight on how the decisions are *really* made, behind the scenes. Each country has different factors, of different weight. For example, in Greece, during the socialist gov, each product was also getting a “score” in the technical criteria. For example in a 0 to 1 factor, you would get:
airfraft A: fuel autonomy: 0.9
aircraft B: fuel autonomy: 0.87
aicraft A: subsonic T/W ratio: 0.8
aircraft B: subsonic T/W ratio: 0.82
At the end, all the characteristics were combined in a mathematical formula, that was delivering the final ranking. The importance of each factor, was different, according to the army’s criteria. Once this was complete, then off course, you had the other factors (cost of purchase, cost of long term use, political relations with the vending country, offsets, industrial offsets for greek defence companies, eventual bribes- why not, it’s a factor honestly!-).
This goverment has changed some things in the calculation, but i don’t know the details. It’s supposed to be better now… But honestly, there are times, that simply a purchase is done because the army is “OK” with it, without actually doing a tender. This the case of the BMP-3. It’s not a critical equipment, our relations with the Russians are quite good, Putin helped Cyprus recently, the price is very good, allowing to get more than any western company would probably allow, the firepower is without equal and we know it, since Cyprus has it for years now and they like it over there. Plus our Chief of Staff likes it too. So there wasn’t really a chance for the others. You could see in defence magazines the CV-90 putting adds for example, but from what i understood, this deal ended politically when Karamanlis went to Moscow in December.
Let’s say Sarkozy “wins” this battle and you (HAF) exchanges Mirages for Rafales. When would Rafales be ready to overtake the role?
I think that both our PM AND HAF would like the exchange of the Mirage for Rafale. For our PM , the current french political support , is so important that he wouldn’t mind if we exhanged only the 20 old M2000 while keeping the 2000-5. While i imagine, that HAF wants them all exchanged. So we will have to wait and see.
When would the Rafales be ready to overtake the role? This is something that most probably, our French friends in the forum can reply. How fast can Dassault deliver? As for how fast HAF can take advantage of the planes, i think quite fast. Most probably greek pilots will go to France to learn to fly Rafale before we even get the planes and HAI has decades of experience with french aircrafts, so i don’t think there will be much delay in operational use. I would imagine that we will have more trouble adapting to Eurofighter than Rafale.
Are there any specific requirements of HAF (like AESA) that would have to be taken into account by Dassault? What version would be delivered? (F3 I guess).
Unfortunately, we don’t know. Even defence.net only made pubblic the changes in the minimum technical requirements, not what the “unchanged” requirements are. Yet, this change, is indicating a political will to include all contenders (the more competitors you have, the better deals they will offer), so i would think that the minimum requirement ISN’T AESA. Of course, if someone can offer AESA, i expect it to get more “points” in the radar requirement.
I think that the French will be able to offer F3 version, but there are no secure sources to get into details. As i said previously, the money currently on the table, between aircrafts, frigates and minor programs are a LOT and even defence magazines are playing “games” , supporting one over another. Even more, they are throwing mud on a product that isn’t the one they support. For example, one defence magazine, wrote a article on BMP-3 where it didn’t find a single good point in its favour. Even the firepower isn’t good according to it, because the Turks *might* get new AIFV that *may* withstand 30mm hits. Yeah, right. And the Turks *may* transform Leopard tanks into IFV, like the Israelis do, so ANY current IFV won’t penetrate it. So this is simple bias, prolly because the magazine is “sponsored” by some other company that wanted to sell IFV and got angry for the job going to the Russians.
Arms procurement is a DIRTY business. Dirtier than the mud itself. You try to take advantage of everything you can to lobby for your product.
Just look at this video and you will understand:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=taAqYmh1FB4
It’s hilarious. Sarko says “you know the close relations between Greece and France”, some journalist probably says “no we don’t”. 😀 😀
Of course the journalist isn’t to blame.
Today the US ambassador in Greece, stated that “Greece has wrongly misunderstood US position on FYROM issue as hostile to Greece”. He also noted that the “F16 is a very cost-effective solution for HAF”.
I mean, pulllllease! We didn’t misunderstand one thing. We know very well when someone is working against us, just like we are used to american “empty words”. We are full of them. I don’t know how many times the Americans have called us “strategic partners” in the past 5 years. Since then, they tried with every means to help Turkey over Greece and Cyprus and FYROM over Greece.
Also, when Karamanlis took over, he went to Washington. Bush was very cordial, “strategic partner i love you” etc, he asked for Karamanlis to take F16s, because the Fort Worth production line was to be closed otherwise, Karamanlis did, Bush paid him back by recognizing FYROM as Macedonia and by attacking Cyprus at every occasion.
So, now, Mr. Ambassador, tries to sell the “misunderstanding! We love you!” story again. Well, i am not Karamanlis, but after what happened in the NATO summit, i think that no matter if the Americans give F16 Block 90 and assembly line in Greece, this tender ain’t go to the Americans. Period. Payback time. They can go to ask FYROM to buy their F16s and Super Hornets. I am sure that there, they won’t even have to say that they were misunderstood.
This is how American gov perceives the Strategic Alliance with Greece: ” You will give us your defence tenders, access to Souda bay base in Crete, partecipate in peacekeeping where we start wars, and in exchange, we will help Turkey and FYROM against you, delay spare parts for US equipment when we want to make you political pressure, warn you not to let russian oil pipelines cross over Greece, because we will have competition in our pipelines crossing Turkey and FYROM and you will say “thank you George!”. Still we will be strategic partners”!. Yeah, whatever, George!
Of course, for opposite reasons, the Turks favour the Americans products… Especially in airforce, they don’t even feign an attempt of tender. They just announce that they will go with american and end of story.
While Sarko, is doing the “i love you” routine too, but at least, in the NATO summit, he PROVED that he meant what he was saying. Also, Sarko, is anti-turkish, so he probably sees Cyprus as an excuse that the French can come up with to delay Turkey’s accession to EU. So as long as Sarko remains as President, it is more likely to have the “nouvelle alliance”. After Sarkozy, this may change drastically (Segolene is proturkish), so we will have to adjust accordingly. In the meantime, we can take musual profit of the circumstances and help the Rafale and french industry in general.
P.S. Apart the frigate, it is almost certain, that we will make a purchase of 12-15 Super Puma helicopters and more VBL Panhard.
P.S.2: Even if we take 20 Rafales now, it is certain that in the future we will buy at least 20 more. So well done, Sarko!
Hyperion1) If you think Dassault has more experience than BAE, EADS and Alenia put together then imo you’re mad.
2) Exchange rates vary and France participating would have changed nothing.
Dassault, IMHO had more experience than any of the above put together in building for decades, ALONE, high performance aircraft, the ONLY aircrafts that could look straight in the eye an american competitor (from the Mirage F1, to Mirage 2000, to the aborted Mirage4000), especially in A2A.
Which other high performace european aircrafts has been built without the French? The Tornado. Ok, good plane, but can’t compete with the American ones. The Sepecat Jaguar was english-french.
So, when you don’t have the past experience of the french, there is one way to get it. Pour more money and/or spend more time. This is what they european consortium did too IMHO.
As i said before, every defence magazine in Greece, says that the Mirage2000, would be “a new” aircraft, if it had more potent engine. Why? Because look at the Mirage2000! As a design was ahead of its time! Now everyone has abbandoned trapezoid shape of wings for delta wings. The Dassault has bet on the delta wing in the last decades already. The fact alone that despite its weak engine, the M2000 can still today have its fair chances against advanced F16s, speaks volumes about the french design capabilities.
The other european industries, you can say that each, had a sector of specializaton which could be above the french (i don’t know, but let’s say it’s true). But, they have never came before all together to put down all their available technology into one aircraft. While the french have been doing this SUCCESSFULLY for decades.
So, what do we see today? We have an EADS aircraft, getting ready for multirole now, costing about 25% more than the Rafale, with some advantages in A2A (supercruising for example) and a Dassault Rafale, lacking in some parts (engines, radar range but not technology PESA vs mechanical array), but already multirole, certified in Afghanistan, costing 25% less.
Now, i may be mad, but i imagine that if EADS had the Dassault’s previous experience of “how to design a high performance plane and put everything together” and Dassault’s had EADS technology and funding at hand, now we would have a “super Eurofighter” , costing less and competing against US aicrafts at much better terms, instead of now having 3 European aircrafts vs 2 US vs 1 Russian in the greek program. It is depressing, thinking about Europe, to see that the european partecipations are the most fragmented. Instead of beating the american planes, they must beat each other first.
3) Eurofighter has achieved more exports outside the EU than inside at the moment.
True, but it could have been better. Not all countries have the money the Saudis do. And as i explained before, the performance of the aircraft alone, isn’t the only factor that decides the purchase.
4) I’m glad France isn’t in Eurofighter. With a bit of luck we can kill off Dassault in the military export market.
I am not glad. I hope one day there will be a european federation, acting as such. I also hope for a Europe independent in its foreign policy and defense, that will decide for its own interests, not following the NATO’s (USA’s) wishes. Dassault, is already “killed”, meaning that i don’t think she will build her next plane alone. So, she will become full part of EADS. So i regret the 2 different aircrafts even more, because a chance of strenghtening the european common defence industry and know-how, was postponed.
Regards.
HyperionHonestly, shouldn’t France leave the program, I can’t imagine UK or Germany with Rafale-like typhoon.
Well, yes, i guess it would have been a different plane. But now, the only real winner are the Americans. The French, had ample previous experience to build the Rafale, but had lesser funds and can’t export. The EADS had more money and more clients since the beginning (the consortium countries), but had not the experience of the Dassault and came up with a costly plane that can’t export easily outside EU , because of the unfavourable euro-dollar exchange rate.
Add to this, the fragmentation of the european defence industry, instead of uniting and become more competitive towards the Americans.
I am sure that Lockheed Martin’s CEO opened a champaign when he learnt that there will be 3 european aircrafts. Because the same applies to the Gripen.
A common european aircraft would have been quicker to build, at smaller cost, easier to sell, better.
Of course this could only happen in a true european union… So, RIP.
HyperionFrom http://www.defencenet.gr/defence/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4832&Itemid=49
The Defence Council updated the minimal requirements for the new aircraft.
The new requirements have been “widened”, so that all candidate aircrafts can “fit in”, even the JAS39 Gripen, independently from any political decision that will be taken or already taken.
The new changes in the technical characteristics required are:
– The life duration of the aicraft must be at least 6000 flight hours, instead of 8000 before. This to accomodate mostly the european competitors.
– The g limit from 9g falls to 8g.
– The operational fuel autonomy must be sufficient for strike missions up to Cyprus or for CAP over Cyprus for at least 20 minutes.
—————————————–
Unfortunately we don’t know the rest that didn’t change.
Sign In
