Lokeno one got any sources telling “FAB prefert this plane” especialy the gripen they never flown, saw, tested, no one, all well planned rumors.. spining spining spining
You are wrong: The source was the first version of the evaluation report. Nobody has denied that. On the contrary, If you read the statements and reactions from Lulas office as well as Jobims office they are angry about the leaks from the FAB…. How can they be angry about the leaks from FAB if this was all invented?
Furthermore, if it was invented, why did they just not say so instead of throwing mud at Gripen and Saab?
LokeI’d make a guess for ‘as much as they can lower it’. If they can’t lower it at all, I think they will take it anyway.
Perhaps, or perhaps not… some people believe that if the French do not significantly decrease the price Lula may decide to postpone the whole thing until after the election… and thereby making it Somebody Elses Problem.
LokeRafale has won (again?)
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1115487320100111
BRASILIA, Jan 11 (Reuters) – President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva will choose the French-made Rafale jet as Brazil’s next-generation fighter plane but wants to negotiate a lower price, a cabinet member told Reuters on Monday.
Lula will opt to buy 36 Rafale multi-role aircraft made by France’s Dassault Aviation (AVMD.PA) despite the Brazilian Air Force’s preference for the Gripen NG made by Sweden’s Saab (SAABb.ST), said the minister, speaking on condition of anonymity.
“The government doesn’t decide under pressure from anybody, not even the Air Force. The ball is in the court of the French,” said the minister, “If they reduce the price, we’ll close the deal soon.”
The Rafale is reported to have the highest price of the three finalists in the bidding process, which includes the Boeing Co (BA.N) F-18
So if the deal is not closed soon that probably means that the French did not reduce the price sufficiently…
Loke…but LRIP is BELOW said projections. Showing that dispite all the changes the actual production/procurement cost of the F-35 is NOT >50% higher than projections (which is where it would have to be for full rate production to end up >$100 million flyaway) as the naysayers wish it were but instead tracking in line (a few % below in fact) with the projections.
Perhaps F-35 will turn out to be not too expensive to purchase by other countries, if, as you say, the US picks up the R&D bill and decides to not pass that on to export customers.
To me that is still a big IF.
Note that in the latest report it also said something about the possibility of passing some of the additional R&D expenses on to LM… as said before, how do you think LM will cover those expenses?
At this stage I think we are all speculating, let’s wait and see…
LokeInteresting that the Super Hornet has been rated as technically superior to both aircraft now…
Where does it say so?
LokeNow, there is the real gift for the Rafale’s supporters………
Hammer, this seems to contradict what you said about the leaks being from the final report and not the first version?
What is funny with all this, is that, after Rafale has lost several competions due to politics (at least according to Dassault and the French) it now seems that their potential first sell will be due to… politics 😉
LokeIt wouldn’t surprise me if the Dutch, just as the Norwegians, based its calculations on their history of F-16 operations.
AFAIK the Norwegian evaluation committee shared their calculations with the Dutch and I strongly suspect that the Dutch never did their own calculations but used the Norwegian ones instead. Those cost estimates have been discussed elsewhere.
LokeSignificantly higher speed yes, marginally higher speed…
The difference in the scenario presented is so marginal that it will not make a TACTICALLY significant difference.
There are of course so many other differences that such a comment is simplistic, but it can and should be corrected.
I have no doubt Gripen can fly supersonically with an almost clean airframe without using afterburner. Most modern fighter jets can.
However is that of any benefit other than to marketeers? I would argue not.
Well, current Gripen can actually supercruise w. 4 AMRAAMs 2 Sidewinders and one drop tank. Still, is it tactically significant? I think probably not, however I think you still miss the significance, and the reason why this is mentioned now: The RM12 engine is rather weak, compared to e.g. the F16 engine, still Gripen can supercruise! I doubt F16 can do that unless it’s completely clean, and the F16 has a significantly stronger engine than the RM12. The implication is that the drag of a Gripen in a2a config must be ubelievingly low. Insert a strong F414, adjust air intakes, and you can supercruise at above mach 1.2 and not just “on a cold day in Sweden”. Add to that a more fuel efficient engine and a 40% increase in internal fuel + larger drop tank, and you also get some range.
Some people claim it is still not useful, I dunno… I think the NG SC can have some advantages but probably only in a2a config.
LokeI’m a personal friend of the Folha de Sao Paulo Bureau Chief in Brasilia, he has read the leaked FAB documents and insists that they represent the LATEST report, not the first one.
Regards,
Hammer
I am surprised to hear that, since I thought that one of the things Jobim asked them to change in the new version was to remove the ranking?
Anyway, if it is the second version, then it seems that the FAB did not want to listen to the directives from Jobim….
wow
LokeI found a weight for the F414G engine for Gripen NG that is a possible candidate for LCA due to the single engine requirements. Its in the offer to the Netherlands, pg3: http://www.jsfnieuws.nl/wp-content/Saab_OfferGripenNG_170409.pdf
It says 1148 kg, wich is about 100 kg more.When it comes to the effect on the center of gravity for LCA, I can’t judge. But if its true that the rest of the aircraft has increased in weight, a heavier engine would seem as a way to balance that?
According to Wiki the EJ200 weighs only 989 kg?
If correct the difference is 159 kg. Perhaps the real problem is not the centre of gravity but that the Tejas is overweight and that they therefore prefer lightweight components? :confused:
LokeTHis was linked already, but how do we interpret it?
Jan. 6 (Bloomberg) — Defense Secretary Robert Gates has directed the military to delay the Lockheed Martin Corp. F-35 program, cutting planned purchases by 10 aircraft in fiscal 2011 and a total of 122 through 2015, according to a budget document.
More than $2.8 billion that was budgeted earlier to buy the military’s next-generation fighter would instead be used to continue its development.
The delay is a setback for both Gates and Lockheed.The defense secretary said last year he wanted to accelerate jet purchases to complete the military’s most expensive weapons program sooner and possibly save money.
For Lockheed, the world’s largest defense contractor, accelerated purchases would be more profitable because a program’s production phase brings in more revenue than research and development. In addition, the Bethesda, Maryland-based company faces negotiations that may require it to absorb a share of cost overruns during what will likely be an extended development phase. The company now absorbs no overrun costs.
Along with the delay in Lockheed’s program, Gates is calling for spending a total of $2.4 billion in 2011 and 2012 to buy 26 F/A-18E/F planes that are capable of jamming enemy radar. Those aircraft are produced by Boeing Co., the second-largest defense contractor.
Navy officials warned that if the F-35 program slipped, they’d press for more F-18s to mitigate a “fighter gap” caused by their aging, carrier-based jets.
…..
First highlighted item: Does this mean that the R&D budget just increased by 2.8 billion USD?
Second highlighted item: If LM has to cover cost overruns, then — well I guess they need to somehow get those money back… I think I know how that will happen…
Third hightlighted item: If more SH is ordered, that could cut back number of F-35s sold; which could influence the price.
To summarize: This seems to be a program that is in a critical stage, and a lot of things can change between here and the final product with a final price. I also note that the committees that have critizised LM for over-optimistic plans both in terms of costs and timelines are now being listened to by Gates, in spite of LM trying to tell him that everything is fine and dandy.
What surprises me is that some people on this forum do not seem to acknowledge that there are some “stuff” going on here, that is rather significant. Adding 2.8 billion US to the development program at this stage seems a significant event to me.
Face it: F-35 is delayed and will cost more. Nobody on this forum (neither cola, pcfem or spudmanwp) has any idea how big the delays will be or how much the thing will cost in the end.
Let’s wait and see. My guess is that the final outcome will be somewhere inbetween what the F-35 fanboys (who seems to claim that the price will not change no matter what) and the naysayers who claim that it will be horribly terribly expensive and a complete disaster.
I think it will be more expensive than what LM has been trying to tell us; However I am more worried about the operating costs, this could become a real issue, over at f-16.net a person actually working on F-22 maintanance has expressed frustration and also express doubts if F-35 stealth will be really that much cheaper to maintain that F-22 stealth… He reminds us that LM made the same promises when F-22 was developed.
LokeNow I am utterly confused: I thought the leaked report was the first version of the report since it contained a ranking? AFAIK Jobim told the FAB to remove the ranking in the new version of the report?
Google translated:
The Air Force Brazil (FAB) yesterday presented to Defense Minister Nelson Jobim its technical report on the tender for fighter aircraft to modernize its fleet, a contract worth several billion dollars, said Ministry source.
The French Dassault’s Rafale is competing with the F/A-18 Super Hornet from the American Boeing and Gripen NG Saab of Sweden to provide 36 combat aircraft multi-role in South American giant.
“The defense minister Thursday received the report of 390 pages of the FOB,” said a spokesman for the Department of Defense. The submission of this report and technical advisory has been repeatedly postponed.
The decision depends on Lula
Last week, the daily Folha de Sao Paulo, who said he had access to the confidential report, stated that the FAB preferred hunters in Swedish and American Rafale, because of the higher price of the French aircraft.
Minister Jobim who, like President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, defended the purchase of Rafale Folha said Friday it now would “analyze the report, evaluate the grading system and make (his) own conclusions submit to President Lula. ” “The decision depends on him and give him as much information as possible for analysis to help make his decision,” added the Minister.
He said the government’s priority may not coincide with the technical assessment of the military: “we must see whether the FAB classification coincides with ours which is based on the National Defense Strategy and the priority of technology transfer” .
LokeAccording to Wikipedia the dimensions of the GE404 and GE414 are identical. If so, what’s the big deal integrating the GE414? The EJ200 is 152mm narrower than the GE404 but 88mm longer, so I guess there would be more design work involved to integrate it.
AFAIK I think the problem is with the weight of the F414 (of course evil tongues would probably claim the problem is not with the weight of the F414 but the LCA :diablo:)
The explanation I heard was that the F414 would shift the “centre of gravity” (?) of the LCA too much, the lower weight of the EJ200 would not cause that to happen, and because of that the EJ200 would actually be easier to integrate than the F414. Or something like that. Perhaps some experts can confirm or provide a better explanation.
I wonder why the Gripen NG did not have that problem?
I don’t know what the weight of the F414 is, seems it’s classified:
http://www.geae.com/engines/military/comparison_turbofan.html
Lokewe are buying spanish ships, euro nh-90 and tigers through france and have brought french fighters before
we buy what we think will be best for us
in my opinion the sh has it all over the rafale, maybe in 5 years the rafale may be as capable
Rafale is more expensive than SH it seems, at least according to the Brazilian FAB, however I am not sure the difference in capability is that big, at least not for exports which will have the AESA radar. Granted, the Rafale lacks a HMD and towed decoy, but apart from that I think the a/c itself looks pretty good. Also, whereas the SH may be ahead in some areas (like radar) it may be behind the Rafale in others.
How is the SH IRST coming along BTW?
LokeI base it on the F35, A400M, A380, B787, etc, story.
As long as the plane isn’t declared operational, it’s paper specification, paper planes and paper planed invoices.
Even when it’s garantied price, like the A400M, I’m ready to bet with you 1 million $ that the states are going to pour some more money in (or cancel the whole stuff which doesn’t worth more)
I disagree with those comparisons.
The upgrade from Gripen C/D to Gripen NG can be viewed a a comprehensive MLU; alternatively it can be compared to the Hornet -> Super Hornet upgrade, albeit with the difference that the changes to the airframe itself is absolutely minimal in the Gripen case. I think I posted a link to the Hornet -> SH upgrade somewhere; if I recall correctly it was done on time and budget.
The point is that when you upgrade an existing platform instead of building a completely new one, you have much better control on all the parameters, there are much less surprises. Gripen NG is a comprehensive upgrade of a mature platform.
Another important point to notice is that different companies have different track records. The upgrade from Gripen A/B to Gripen C/D was done below budget and delivered ahead of time, AFAIK. Saab and Gripen has a very good track record.
The Gripen Demo has flown for quite some time already, and the data from those flights have been presented to the FAB. On the basis of that, they seem very confident in the concept, if not they would hardly have ranked Gripen first in the first evaluation…
Sign In
