21AnkushCould I have any source of that pleeeeeease. If not, you must work on SAAB I´ll suppose.
No, I don’t work for Saab. but its elementary. the wing loading of a fighter defines how sprightly its performance is. the lower the wing loading, the more responsive the fighter is to instantaneous inputs..
in earlier times, before FBW was invented, strike aircraft like Jaguars were designed with high wing loading, which helps keep them steady at low altitudes, where gust loads can make the pilot’s ride very uncomfortable. Fighters designed to be used for air interception (such as the Mirage-3 or 5) were designed with large wings that gave them good maneuverability, but made them uncomfortable to ride in at low altitudes because they were not so steady.
nowadays, fighters with low wing loading such as the Mirage-2000 can still perform this ground-hugging profile well because their FBW compensates for such gusts and responds very quickly to keep violent, jarring motions down, making it a smooth ride at low altitudes.
However, this wing loading still matters. If you make a fighter heavier but keep the same wing area, the wing loading increases. This is why an F-16A/B which is much lighter than an F-16 Block 50, is considered more agile and nimble, even though the Block 50 produces much more thrust.
On the Gripen A/B/C/D, the difference in weight is not so great. So, between these types, you won’t find a big difference in flight performance. However, on the NG, they’ve added a lot of internal fuel, and a higher payload as well. To keep the wing loading the same as that on the C/D, they should’ve increased the wing surface area a little. They didn’t, so the wing loading is now higher on the NG than on the C/D, which means its performance will suffer and won’t be as good as the C/D in a dogfight.
21AnkushOk, sorry. I thought a paperplane was just a project that was early in the development and had not yet reached the goal of being built into a functional prototype. I thought of paperplane like, “blue-prints”. I think several of your comrades on this site like quadbike and me thought it meant something else.
Yes I understand what a paper plane meant originally, but somewhere down the line it became a rather derogatory word to use for any fighter. I remember how Gripen fans got angry when someone called the Gripen NG a paper plane.
But what do we now about the Mk2.? New engine, AESA radar, improved avionics, EWS and stuff like that. These are pretty basic upgrading stuff, but we have no idea what engine or radar it will be. Besides that nothing. One report said “larger wings”. What does that means? Larger wings usually means major redesign of the aircraft, how will that affect aerodynamics and such. No one knows….because the information from HAL/ADA/DRDO or whatever is nothing. Absolutely nothing. They say something (not even trough official channels) like “larger wings” then it is up for us to speculate.
Since HAL/ADA/DRDO are all govt. run, they don’t have ANY urge whatsoever, to do any PR or go around shouting from rooftops what the Tejas Mk2 will be like. Some top official may mention in an interview that “it’ll have new wings, intakes, new engine, AESA radar, etc.” but that doesn’t mean that it covers ALL the work that will be done. Even you can understand that. The aircraft program that I work for, the company does a lot of marketing, but even that doesn’t come close to giving details of how much work is done in the engineering departments or what work is being done in specifics.
Like I said earlier, HAL/ADA/DRDO do not understand the importance of PR simply because they are in direct touch with their main customers- the Indian Armed Forces. They do not need to market their products to any other customer in most cases, with the Dhruv being an exception now and because of that attitude, they tend to not give out too many press releases which give details.
To shape public opinion and how that influences the perception of any project is an alien concept to these guys. I know it sounds bad, but that’s the truth. They are very secretive at times about issues that they need not be secretive about at all and consequently, instead of explaining the science behind the niggling issues, they look like bumbling idiots. And India’s media is sensationalist to the core. If you watch Indian tv news channels, you’d know what I mean. They are always looking for sensationalism where none may exist and are truly enamoured with the “parda faash” or “curtain pull” trick, where they think that they’ve exposed the truth. In reality, their lack of scientific education means that they simply do not appreciate the scale of the engineering challenges or how pathetic the situation in India can be due to funding coming in piddly trickles and streams instead of constantly flowing.
However, if you look at the Tejas itself, there is plenty of information available in the public domain on the history of the project, technologies incorporated, issues faced, troubles, delays and achievements. And there are several sources for these- the most respected and accepted are those by people associated with the program, such as (retd.) Air Marshal Philip Rajkumar, an IAF test pilot who led the program till 1999, or those who were known to have very good links with people associated with the program (such as B.Harry). Then, there are stories that originate from “leaks” of information coming from actual sources and at times “leaks” from fictitious sources which are not true, or twisted by journalists who do not understand what it actually means because they lack the necessary education to comprehend it.
Just like the crazy regime in Iran says on a News report on TV (not a official channel), “We´re developing a 5th generation fighter that is impossible for the enemy to spot on radar”. And then it´s up for speculations. No facts, no data, no animated pics of how it would look like and no time schedule for the 1st flight or when it when it would be ready for service. It´s just speculations that remains. (No I don´t think Iran have the remotely possibility to even make a 3rd generation fighter. I was just comparing about the information-flow we outsiders get from different fighter projects. In this case India is as bad as Iran – cause no one knows anything. And that makes me think….Hmmm… Do THEY really know how they are gonna make the Mk2. happen. For me (as a Swede) direct, correct and honest information is everything. Perhaps it is different attitude in India, I don´t know.
There are big differences between Iran and India and so such a comparison is actually not even worth talking about, but I’ll still try to explain. Iran claimed that they had a new fighter developed and it turned out to be the Saqaeh, which was an F-5 with twin fins, that’s all. They believe in propaganda, whereas in India, such statements relating to defence are not made by the PM or President. They’re made by Scientists or engineers associated with the program, who are mostly stating facts and not interested in propaganda.
A lot of information was gleaned about the Tejas Mk2 from Aero-India 2009 in January 2009 itself. Most related to the types of things that ADA guys said the Tejas Mk2 would have or they wanted it to have. And most of this information came from a couple of posters on Bharat-Rakshak forums who went and did a lot of ground work, attending lectures/seminars and asking people in person.
But, if I quote their posts, many people will refuse to believe it, saying its not official info, so unless you really want to hear what they heard, I won’t post that stuff. Suffice to say that in this case, unless someone writes a paper, or a book, you or I will never get official info on what the Tejas Mk2 has apart from a new engine and related modifications.
And when HAL states in their 2008-9 Annual report that work is progressing satisfactorily on the Tejas Mk2, then obviously they aren’t lying just so internet forums can use that info. There will be config studies, preliminary designs, analysis and wind-tunnel tests, CFD, prototype mockups, etc. to come up with a new intake and air channel design. Same will be true if they actually are working on a new wing to keep the low wing loading of the Tejas Mk1 on the Tejas Mk2 as well. But obviously they cannot go in detail design since they haven’t yet chosen the new engine. Once thats done, they will start doing the detailed design as well.
In fact, the Gripen NG keeps the same wing as the C/D, which means that when carrying more fuel/weapons, its wing loading will be higher and consequently, its performance will not be as good as that of the C/D. I know they’re concentrating on the avionics and range more than anything else, but this is a fact.
Anyway, its at least better than information on Chinese projects. If its available, its in Chinese which we can’t read, and mostly its secret, so no one knows the accurate updates on the developments, delays or challenges facing a Chinese project. And sometimes, ignorance is bliss. No one knows that problems exist, so every one thinks that things are going great. In Pakistan’s case, no mention is made till the time the product is tested or inducted, which implies that either Pakistan had nothing to do with its development (as in the case of many products they claim to be theirs) or else that they simply don’t inform the public. So, once again, no information is available about what challenges are being faced or what problems a particular product has. And I’m an engineer, I don’t believe that any product exists that doesn’t have problems or is perfect from the get-go. That’s just fiction and some idiots want to believe that their country basically has projects with no issues whatsoever just because they never hear about them.
As for showing me Indian pilots flying LCA it would be like me Swedish pilots flying Gripen. Have you ever heard a pilot dissing the fighter plane they are flying for their countries defense? It´s pointless. Just like those:”- Uhhm, here´s an report from exercise X vs Y. Our french Rafale pilots killed 153 F-22s, 12 Aircraftcarriers, 5 nuclearsubmarines and the Death Star!!!. Man the Rafale ROCKS!!!!” . Totally pointless… BTW, isn´t there a Indian reporter who has flown all the planes in the MRCA race and his favorite is the Gripen? For me it does´nt make any difference, I´m just bit jealous of the *******. 🙂
It might seem totally pointless to you, but those are first-hand accounts of IAF test pilots from NFTC, to the ADA, the agency that develops those fighters. They won’t give “Very Good” rating to its handling qualities if they don’t like it. They are after all, tasked with developing the Tejas from the pilot’s point of view. And if you think that a test pilot’s opinion is not a valid opinion, then whom would you believe if they said a particular aircraft was great for pilots to fly?
BTW, the first LCA test pilot, Wing Cmdr Rajiv Kothiyal was awarded the Ivan Kincheloe trophy for test pilots in the US, after reviewing the paper he presented on the LCA program and how they achieved first flight.
21AnkushWhy do you put a ” around the word paperplane? Is´nt it a paperplane until they actually show a prototype and gives some details of what it is expected to perform? I think Iran have stated several times that they are working on a invisible 5th generation fighter, does that make it a paperplane or what?
because the term “paper plane” is used generally in a derisive way to indicate that the airplane’s future is questionable. there is a big difference when you look at the credibility of HAL/ADA when they say that they’re working on a fighter. its not like someone has just dreamt of this; its in work, funding is approved, and the customer has expressed more than just an interest in purchasing 5-7 squadrons of these.
we’ve already seen the Tejas Mk1 flying, and the Mk2 is simply a derivative of it. to compare it to some Iranian invisible aircraft project is nonsense, to be polite.
Why would´nt anyone like the fact India is working on a Mk2? The reason I visited this site many years ago was because I love fighterjets, and I would love to see some more in the air. If India is gonna succeed on doing this or not I´m not so sure of. Let´s see hows the Mk1 is doing first, but I certainly hope they will succeed. The aviation world is much more fun with a variety of fighters in the sky. (And I also hope FC-1 will make it, so I´m not a Pakistan hater).
I’m not questioning whether someone wants to see another fighter in the air or not. I know some Chinese and Pakistani posters would dearly love to see India’s aeronautical industry wither away and depend solely on imports (even though imports end up being very capable, generally) because its a prestige thing- they dearly want to be able to say “your nation’s industrial and engineering ability sucks !”. which overlooks several ground realities.
I mean for instance, a fighter like the AMX, the IAF wouldn’t even look at it considering its specs, far from induct it in any worthwhile numbers. yet, it was an achievement for Italy and Brazil, and the learning from that can be used over several other programs.
But wanting/expecting something and thinking rationally over how things looks is another thing…. I really hope, but I still have my doubts…
what if I show you a youtube video of an Indian Air Force test pilot saying that the Tejas Mk1 is a wonderful aircraft to fly ? would that prove anything to someone who doesn’t want to believe ? in their testimony to Parliament, ADA has stated that all 11 test pilots who flew the Tejas Mk1 rated its handling qualities as “Very Good”.
I mean these are on record statements, not some blog or some article which quotes Un-named sources, which are dubious considering how the Indian media works.
and mind you, the Indian Armed Forces at times can set un-realistic expectations as well. for e.g. the first time they asked for an attack helicopter, the Eurocopter Tiger, Agusta Westland Mangusta, Mil Mi-28N and the Kamov Ka-28, all fell short of their stated requirements of service ceiling, climb rate, power reserves at high altitude, etc..
does that mean that these helicopters suck or that they’re not in service anywhere else ? the tender got cancelled, they toned down their requirements and it was re-tendered to include Apache and Super Cobra (Bell eventually pulled out saying it couldn’t do a deal without FMS).
had it been for an indigenous attack helicopter, the IA or IAF would just stick to its guns and say that the helicopter doesn’t meet ASRs and so an import is required.
keep in mind, Indian indigenous programs will never bring in bribes (no PSU will EVER bribe another Govt. service like the Armed Forces) whereas imports involve shady arms agents and can bring financial windfalls to many guys who make decisions in the higher rungs of the military. several years ago, several IA officers were even caught on camera by a news network, Tehelka, boasting how they influenced arms deals for this or that.
21Ankushlet’s back to the LCA topic , we know:
LCA-Tejas has completed 1266 Test Flights successfully. (12-Dec-09).
* LCA has completed 1266 Test Flights successfully
(TD1-233,TD2-305,PV1-236,PV2-129,PV3-189,LSP1-54,LSP2-119,PV5-1).
* 236th flight of Tejas PV1 occurred on 11th Dec 09.
* 119th flight of Tejas LSP2 occurred on 11th Dec 09.so we might can learn something from the number of test flights.it seems that the test of LCA hasn’t finished yet, and we couldn’t find much info about the paper plane MK2. It’s already 2010 now. 2012 is not far away. dear indian friends,there are too many things to do before make any wishful announcement. time is running up.
the LCA (Tejas) Mk1 in Dec. 2009 has finished flight tests of ALL the envelope points that are required for it to enter Initial Operational Capability service with No.45 “Flying Daggers” squadron in Sulur. this includes weapons captive trials as well as weapons use trials. and with the new F-404 IN20 engine, the Tejas Mk1’s performance shortfalls with the earlier F-404 F2J3 engine seem to have vanished. This was confirmed by the Chief Test Pilot Air Commodore Rohit Verma, Director NFTC.
So, as it stands, its on track to enter squadron service in the IAF by year end. a BVR missile will be integrated with the LCA Mk1 before it enters Final Operational Capability (FOC). that is scheduled for 2012.
The “paper plane” LCA Mk2 is already under design. This was confirmed by none other than Hindustan Aeronautics Limited’s (HAL)Annual Report, 2009. and its in English only, so if you want, you can go download it and read it to confirm.
it says on Page 9
Design and Development projects viz. the Light Combat Helicopter (LCH)and ALH (WSI) besides IJT and LCA Mk-II have progressed satisfactorily..The Focus during the current year 2009-10 would be on consolidation, in particular in the following areas:
– Limited Series Production of the IJT and pursue for follow on orders for its Series Production
– Limited and Series Production of the LCA and development of LCA Mk-II
– Production of the Hawk with possible follow-on orders
– Phase 3 and Phase 4 production of the Su-30MKI
– Production of the ALH with emphasis on developing an export market for it
– Realisation of the first flight of LCH
– Customer services with a view to improve fleet serviceability
and whether you call it paper plane or not doesn’t change one fact- that the IAF has confirmed (ex-Air Chief Marshal Major as well as current Air Chief Marshal Naik) in repeated interviews that they want anywhere between 100 to 140 Tejas Mk2s in addition to the 40 Tejas Mk1s. So, whether you like it or not, or however much you fight the facts on the internet, on the ground, the facts won’t change.
the replies to the RFP for the new engine have been sent in and by mid-year a selection will be made. After that, engine integration work will begin in earnest. I’d expect the Tejas Mk2 to be in-service around 2014-2015 after extensive flight testing. Regarding the indigenous AESA radar, it’s a work in progress but I’m not sure if the Tejas Mk2 induction will hinge on it being on-board. they may go with an interim radar and then when the AESA is ready, go for a fleet-wide upgrade (or maybe Tejas Mk1s will stay with the pulse doppler MMR hybrid).
21AnkushWe are veering off topic — But — up against a far bigger foe – nuclear weapons are the ultimate detterent against aggression. Guaranteeing that you will not use them ‘first’ – amounts to inviting aggression. If you had a foe 6 times your size – and the main thing stopping this giant giving you a good hiding was the gun you carried – would you agree to no ‘first’ use of the gun? So in that situation is your gun for MCD or not?
it doesn’t necessarily work that..China is the big giant in India’s neighbourhood and has no such no-first-use policy either. Yet, India uses a no-first-use policy even against China, which has far larger conventional forces.
21AnkushMKM and MKI are different beasts, with the latter being considerably better in AA role.
Vikas, you meant MKK I presume ? the MKM is very similar to the MKI, as its a Malaysian MKI variant with some French/SA avionics in place of Israeli avionics. the MKK (Chinese variant) is inferior to both the MKI, MKM and MKA.
21AnkushAnkush, of the top of my head PAF used mushak/super mushak, T-37/K-8, and FT-5/FT-6 before the pilots went to (normally chinese made) A-5 or F-7 units for conversion. I know there was talk of FT-5 upgrade to keep in service for a while longer (till a long term solution could be found), though Im not sure what came of it. As for PAF’s future options, as of now it seems they would go the chinese way, i.e. JL-9 (most likely) or L-15, may be depending on the current situation with FT-5. As for PAF expressing a desire to use K-8 as IJT/AJT, its possible as long as they find a replacement for FT-5/FT-6 before their conversion at squadron level.
So, if I understood correctly, supersonic lead-in fighter training is a part of the PAF syllabus before any pilot joins an operational squadron, since the K-8 is not the final trainer on which a pilot trains before joining operational units, right ?
that would mean that the K-8 which is subsonic will not be able to replace the FT-5/FT-6 without compromising on that part of the training.
on a side note, it makes me wonder why two nits kept arguing about the role of a supersonic LIFT in the IAF. just for the heck of trying to poke holes into the possible use of the Tejas twin-seater as a possible option for a LIFT in the IAF, I guess.
21AnkushI do not think India is the peaceloving nation in the neighbourhood. Every neighbour has some “situations” with it.
and yet every war between India and Pakistan was started by Pakistan..strange indeed, na ?
The problem is that th eIndian politicians need the “superpower” title and if that means instability then they take that for granted. The main problem between India and Pakistan is that Kashmir issue is not solved. It was part of Pakistan but India did not agree with it.
envy on your part is understandable, but twisting history to claim that Kashmir was a part of Pakistan is not. you might want to keep your version of history out of this thread unless you want it to de-generate into something else.
Now India is not willing to settle the dispute so the whole arms race will go on till it is settled.
The question is how much longer can Pakistan afford to try to keep an arms race going with India ? India will try to grow, and has more of an eye on China’s capabilities.
About restraint of the Indian government. 🙂 I do have to smile. They were already talking about Pakistan and taking punitive actions. They even sended heavily armed MKI to show muscles. I do not think that it shows restraint. It is like shooting down unarmed trainer plane cause it “crossed” accroding them in a swamp area. I think it shows cowboy mentallity. It was unreal to see how Indians were stealing pars to show them ito the press. Inhumane and certainly disrespectful to the many aviators that were killed.
again, keep your political discourse out of this thread. it is simply your opinion, not facts. India has for years been severely harmed and needled by terrorist attacks that are sponsored, planned and instigated by Pakistan. had India been a country with a Govt. with more balls, things would’ve gone much further than they have till now. the fact that India is a democracy where a civilian govt. makes the decisions and not the military has been a boon for Pakistan.
21AnkushBut it will have a larger wing and intake … so not exactly the same ! … and esp. these small differences are intersting !
Besides that … is there a chance of getting a model kit preferrable in 1/72 scale of that bird ??? PLEASE !!!
Deino
oh it will definitely look a little different from the Tejas Mk1, thats for sure. but it’ll likely be only when you pay close attention. someone pretty reliable said that the IAF wanted a couple of additional pylons as well, but that information is purely a rumour as yet.
look at the Gripen Demo- to most untrained eyes, its almost the same as the Gripen D from which it was built. only when you look closely will you see the new fairing for the landing gear and the size of the intakes look very similar, although it was made larger for the Gripen Demo.
as for getting a 1/72 scale model of the Tejas- I don’t think we’ll see one, not till it enters service in a big way and even then I’m not sure..I mean look around, you won’t find a single model of the Dhruv either, and its been in service for several years now and been exported. most model makers concentrate on western and Russian makes and China has some model makers who make Chinese aircraft models too. In India, scale aircraft modelling is not at all popular. When I was a youngster looking to model aircraft, kits were imported and cost a lot in India. it was easier to make models by yourself using stuff available at home.
21AnkushLets not leave the venerable FT-5 out of the confusion party here 🙂
http://www.pakdef.info/pakmilitary/airforce/articles/paftraining.html
NOte:This article is old from the time when F-6 was still serving and FT-6 was used for OCU. FT-7s replaced FT-6s in same role.so basically
Basic Trainer -> FCU -> OCU
Tweety -> FT-5 -> FT-7K-8 i believe is serving the purpose of basic as well as FCU and replacing Tweety/FT-5 mix mostly.
There was a good article in AFM which is probably outthere somewhere on the net in the form of scanned images that lists everything in detail. Can’t seem to find it.
so since the FT-5 is mostly obsolete and so is the FT-6, the PAF must be on the lookout for a supersonic trainer once they retire, right ? are they looking at the JJ-9 (FTC-2000) or the Hongdu L-15 ?
21AnkushShocked and amazed we are allowing these posts on the forum, and this guy to continue posting.
when you are allowed to survive on this forum despite all your flaming and trolling, what could be more surprising ?
21AnkushYes, but even this was’t done in time ??? (to admit similar to all other current fighters) … and when will the Mk.2 be fylaing … when will it be cerified …. and when will it be in service in substantial numbers ???
the Tejas Mk2 is already under work. HAL’s annual report states that satisfactory progress has been made in this regard. the new engine should be selected by this year and after that, it shouldn’t take more than 2 years to modify the airframe and get the engine integrated.
to support this assumption, I’d take the example of the IJT Sitara (HJT-36). it flew with the Snecma Larzac, then the IAF updated its ASRs and wanted a higher thrust engine. so, HAL contracted for the AL-55I derivative of the Al-31 engine from Saturn-Lyulka. this engine was delivered more than 1 year late and that delayed the entire Sitara program. however, when they did finally send the engine from Russia, the engine was integrated and flown within less than 1 year. and now the Sitara is due to enter squadron service in June 2010. of course, being a mechanically controlled aircraft with no FBW, its flight testing was very short compared to the Tejas.
I’m not aware of any changes to the Sitara itself due to the new engine (more airflow leading to a larger air channel and intake?), so I’d add another year to the Tejas to compensate for that, but at the most, the new variant should take 3 years to be readied for flight. 1 to 1.5 years of flight testing with the new engine would mean that the Tejas Mk2 should be able to enter IOC in IAF service by 2014-2015 at least. the IAF will be lucky if it gets the MRCA to enter squadron service by 2014. and by then the 2 Tejas Mk1 squadrons will be fully op and more Tejas twin-seaters may be ordered as well (as per some news reports).
Are You sure ?? … If I’m correct – but sorry; I don’t remember the source – it was stated that HAL could currently only deliver 8-12 Tejas per year even if they wanted to produce more.
HAL’s hands are completely full and this is the worrisome aspect. they have production of the Dhruv, Hawk, Su-30MKI and Tejas Mk1 already undergoing. The Hawks were supposed to be completed in 2014, unless a follow-on purchase is made (which is likely). In addition to this, the IJT Sitara will be in production and the LCH will be undergoing flight testing. Then, the Light Utility Helicopter (LUH) will be undergoing design and needs to be readied by the time the foreign LUH will be fully inducted. add to that, the fact that HAL is the designated production agency for the MRCA, and also has some share in the FGFA project (Indian version of the PAK-FA). Add to that the MiG-29 UPG and Mirage-2000 upgrades are to be done in India at HAL facilities. and then add the Jaguar DARIN III upgrades as well.
they’re facing a manpower shortage now and there was a news report saying that they would add another 500 engineers to their workforce due to the unprecendented amount of work in hand.
21AnkushOK, so say HAL wins an international order for 60 LCA MK2?
They dont even have production facilities set up to fufil that order, not evening worrying about teh fact they dont have a flying LCA MK2!!!!!
and how will HAL win an order for 60 Tejas Mk2 when its not even flying as yet ? thats as stupid as assuming that what will happen if the JF-17 with western avionics, western engine, western weapons will be ordered by another foreign operator (heck, even Pakistan is a foreign operator) when its not even in existence. :rolleyes:
when it will eventually fly, get certified and enter IAF service, only then will foreign customers even look at ordering any Tejas Mk2. and by then, HAL will have larger production facilities (its already setting up a line to manufacture 8 Tejas Mk1s per year till 2013).
your post above is typical of your posting- nonsensical stuff just adding to your post count and basically with just one blatant aim. make a mockery of anything Indian.
21AnkushThere is a lot of talk about the LCA Mk2. Does anyone knows a link where one can read about all the updates and such. Preferable one with pictures how it will look and when they are planning the 1st flight and when did the Indian government give the go ahead for the project etc.
And not a link to some blogger or another fansite. I mean a link to an official site. I tried to search for the Tejas official site but was only directed to wikipedia.
would you believe HAL’s annual report at least, if not any fansite or blog ? HAL’s 2009 annual report mentions that work is progressing satisfactorily on the Tejas Mk2.
ADA’s website is a joke. they don’t update anything on that website and if you use that as a reference, you’ll end up with the Tejas Mk1’s configuration before the actual empty weight of 6500 kgs was revealed. Public and Media Relations in Public Sector Enterprises in India, is a complete farce and they don’t seem to care about it either. HAL only recently actually closed down the very small department that it had which catered to producing an internal magazine called Minsk Square Matters, meaning they have no Media/PR dept. at all AFAIK !
21AnkushYes, but what has been explained dozens of times in this thread alone is that there is a difference between a fly away cost and buying an entire new system of aircrafts that incorporates everything from spares, training, infrastructure, simulators etc to simple things like new tank trucks etc. SAAB also includes a life-cycle costs, a commitment, of 20-30 years in those deals.
Do you understand?
Buying new fighters to your airforce is not like you buying a pair of new shoes and you go around and compare prizes, it´s a bit more complicated then that…
agreed. but I have put up a link in the Brazilian air force thread, where Saab’s Gripen NG proposal to Netherlands was given. It didn’t include anything like 20-30 years of life-cycle costs or weapons. It was simply the cost of equipment directly related to the Gripen (radars, airframe, pylons, aircrew equipment, EW equipment, etc.) and the cost of simulators, support, training, manuals, etc. and it worked out to nearly $60 million per fighter. The Gripen C/D will be cheaper, but looking at the recent Thai purchase of 6 Gripen C/Ds, it wasn’t quite as cheap as $35 million.
Sign In
