Scorps,

Would you call that a real capability?

Puff,

Re weapons integrations, I meant 39C/D, of course. Re offset, neither France nor the US has ever injected SUSTAINED value into a customer’s economy in the way that Gripen International has done. Re costs of operation, Gripen’s are a fraction of even M2Ks, while through life costs are dramatically lower. And the Gripen’s rapid turnarounds, and ability to operate with a tiny conscript groundcrew and minimal GSE are what give it the edge in off-base ops.

“Do you think that Harrier pilots would prefer to left the army and fly ATR 42 or SAAB 2000 instead of flying the Rafale ?”

They’re not in the army…..

They’d probably see that Typhoon represents a better option for the RAF than Rafale. But ask any RAF tanker pilot what he’d like to fly and you’d be pleased at how many of them would happily ditch their VC10s for an A310 or an A330, while many UK military helicopter pilots are very enthusiastic about NH90.

Harrier’s OSD is 2017.

New weapons include Brimstone and AGM-65.

So the Rafale, with an eight ton weapons capability and six hardpoints more than the Gripen, has less weapons capability. I see.

Yes, it has. Because Gripen is flexible enough to offer rapid integration with weapons from anywhere – Sweden, UK, France, Spain, Italy, Israel, Eastern Europe, etc. This is an area where Gripen leads the field. I’m not being anti-Rafale here – it’s an area where Gripen enjoys an edge over Typhoon, too, and over F-16, F/A-18 and JSF. No other new fighter has the weapons flexibility that Gripen enjoys.

The Gripen is NOT available now (unless they can offer used planes)

Well yes it is, actually. And they can offer used aircraft, upgraded to C/D standards. And they need an order to keep the line open and can deliver new build jets (if required) with less disruption to the domestic customer.

What industrial package can Gripen offer? Work offered to Brazil will mean work taken from someone else.

They can offer direct participation in the form of work on any aircraft built for Brazil and for future customers, but more crucially Gripen International (supported by the Swedish Government) can offer imaginative offset work. The original Brazilian deal included an innovative public transport system for Brasilia or Rio, if I recall correctly. Gripen’s offset programmes have been proven in South Africa, Hungary and the Czech Republic, and Gripen International can credibly offer to repay the full value of a defence contract through offset and industrial programmes. Neither the USA, nor the UK, nor France has got the experience, expertise, government backing, or hunger to be able to match the Swedes in this area.

If the Brazilians want at least qualitative parity with & preferably superiority over all the neighbours then Gripen would give them that in a way that Mirage 2000s cannot. Rafale would, too, and so would Typhoon, but at much higher cost and with much higher costs of ownership. For nations who don’t need an aircraft in the Rafale/Typhoon/Eagle class, Gripen is the best answer – better than F-16, better than Mirage 2000. I remain astonished that so few competitions have been won by Gripen, when so many air forces have rated it higher than the aircraft that actually won – including in Austria.

Your point about range is well made, but with AAR and with the Gripen’s legendary deployability and forward basing capability, an air force that has been doing the job with F-5s and Mirage III/5/50s is entirely capable of accomplishing its tasks with Gripen.

… And perhaps they want a jet whose centreline station is useable…..

What exactly do I mean by that? We’ll see, won’t we? I suspect that you’ll know soon enough.

No, not at all. Mirage 2000 is no longer possible. Rafale’s too expensive and too uncertain, while Rafale exports are too far in the future. Finally Rafale is more than Brazil needs in terms of capability.

Gripen is a far better F-5 replacement than Rafale, is far more affordable, has greater weapons flexibility, is available now, has lower through life costs, and promises really effective investment in local industry – not just in aerospace/defence, but penetrating into the economy and genuinely paying for the procurement. Dassault simply can’t do that.

As a developing industrial nation, Brazil wants and needs the kind of offset/industrial package that only Gripen International are offering at the moment.

Gripen IS best for Brazil, in my view – better than Rafale, better than Su-35 and (gasp) better than Typhoon. And perhaps they want a jet whose centreline station is useable…..

The SAAF doesn’t still have Canberras. We do (til July) and so do the Indians.

I don’t know whether Greece does still have any Daks, though several people still do. I dimly recall that USAF SOCOM had one very recently.

Do Boscombe still have a Harvard? If not, perhaps Martin Baker’s Meteors would probably be the oldest military registered aircraft still in UK service.