The option of keeping typhoons would entail getting 3 more 2 seater tranche1 typhoons while still having to get a replacement for the saab 105OE.
The new type would need to be economical enough to be used as a LIFT for new pilots while capable enough to be used for all weather air policing missions.
The gripen has no build in training systems for LIFT missions, its twin seater is mostly used for operational conversions to the type.
I don’t know if austrians still have non-white man product allergies as the TA/FA-50 is built by small-eyed yellow skinned asians…
BTW going for a KAI solution could mean getting the KAI KT-1 trainer as the pc-7 replacement. A KT-1, TA-50 and FA-50 combination for all of the stated austrian requirements.
I am sure that the Teja will fit right in the equation.
I would rather trust the koreans to deliver goods on time rather than the indians.
Austria looks for new fighter as Eurofighter retirement looms.
Eurofighter: These Are the Potential Successors
They are looking at lower performance fighters with economic operating costs. Basically supersonic air policing fighters. The best fit would be the golden eagles, in TA-50 and FA-50 guise for both training and operational duties.
Croatia has sent RFI’s to USA, Sweden,ISrael and Soth Korea for Mig-21 replacements. The contennders are F-16 (usa and israel), Gripen (sweden) and FA-50 (south korea)
FC-31 model @ Paris airshow 2017
[ATTACH=CONFIG]254253[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]254254[/ATTACH]
JL-10 production line
[ATTACH=CONFIG]254250[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]254251[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]254252[/ATTACH]
So the reality remains that the Gripen E is still an expensive low performance alternative to a brand new F-16 or F/A-18.
So most of its advertised performance cannot be performed at the same time. Supercruise only when it is very cold and lightly loaded. Full weapons load only with very low fuel quantity. Full fuel only when lightly loaded with weapons. So it is much better just to get a new F-16 rather than something like this.
Thai gripens are new build airframes (as per all other gripen C/D) with hardwares (engines, radars, ejection seats etc.) canibalised from retired Gripen A/B. Bulgarian C/D offer should be similar. Used C/D from current Swedish stocks would only be offered after the E/F enters service (they wanted to canibalise the C/D for their E/F too, but realised only a few systems can be taken for the E/F (ejection seats, small parts), and those C/D is more valuable to be sold as an operational aircraft rather than canibalised like those A/B airframes)
Manpower cost?
Those indonesian f-16 are refurbished and upgraded by USAF in Ogden AFB, and i dont think america pay their servicemen there in rupiah…
They are given quite an extensive refurbishment, including new wings. The airframes are given free of charge to indonesia, so the costs is only for the refurbishment/upgrades.
But the question is how come those 8 quoted for bulgaria comes out more expensive than the 24 for indonesia. If 1/2 of the cost is for the airframes, it cant be something like euro 40 million for each used one.
How did for almost similar cost Indonesia could manage to get 24 used F-16s, while Bulgaria is only offered 8?
Argentina emerges as potential L-159 customer
Aero restarts L-159 ALCA production, touts Argentina as potential customer
There is little performance benefit of the L-159 compared to argentina’s own ia-63 pampa. Better to go for L-15 or FA-50 imo.
From the Belgian Air Combat Capability document
“” Level of Ambition
The level of ambition for the future Belgian air combat capability is to be able to
simultaneously
– guarantee Quick Reaction Alert (QRA) / Air Policing duties with 2 aircraft (24/7) – in an
alternating rotation regime with the Royal Netherlands Air Force
and
– contribute air power to expeditionary operations for a sustained period of undetermined
duration with 6 multi-role aircraft. “”
Could the 2 level of ambition be satisfied by different aircrafts?
Probably for the QRA a low cost supersonic aircraft that could also double as a LIFT. Partial replacement of F-16 and alpha jet missions. 2 squadron of 16 aircrafts perhaps? Something from the T-X competition, Gripen C/D or the KAI golden eagles?
For the expeditionary operations a common fighter with the allies (F-35?). 6 aircraft deployed would need a minimum fleet of 18 of such fighters?
Would this be a more cost effective route rather than a homogeneous new fighter fleet of 34 aircraft?
Those scenarios in annex c are quite demanding.
The question now is, what is the minimum number of airframes that is needed to maintain the operational availability of the 4 required? With just 1 type, those same airframes are also needed to develop the pilots flying experience and skills without a second type as a stepping stone to build flight experince. Then there is all the peacetime missions that is needed to be done, like QRA and air policing. Would those kind of missions can be done with a second cheaper type, while acting as a place for pilots to hone their skills and experience before moving to the more expensive to operate main fighter type?
Because the F-35A is only offered to a group of nations that are allied (or pretty much alligned) with the USA, and at least for now, delivering that particular aircraft to an airforce who happens to work with some chaps called “Sukhoi” is a big “no-no”?
Cheers
That airforce belongs to a country that is currntly having a very frosty relation to the country those “sukhoi” chaps are from due to its airline shot down over Ukraine remember?