For 85%+ of combat missions, F-35s are designed to operate in a 4-ship. Since a third of all combat jets are down for maintenance at any point of time, that leaves Denmark with two 4-ships. A single 4-ship has the ability to penetrate a sophisticated IADS, eliminate DCA and defending SAMs, and kill several high value targets with GBU-31s.
If it is your opinion that 12 F-35’s would suffice to cover 85%+ of combat missions, would you think that ordering 50 or 40 or 30 would be grossly wasteful?
Cost.
I think you missed SAAB’s statement earlier this year in which they said Gripen E/F would have a lower price than C/D. I believe this is at least in part because the F414 engine used has a lower price than the F404 version produced by Volvo used in the C/D.
Should not be surprised that as soon production for India start, deliveries to French force will cease
Switching all deliveries to India could suit the French and Indian governments well even if AdA might not be too happy. I think the British did the same with Typhoon deliveries to Saudi Arabia.
I believe Dassault is assembling 11/12 Rafale at a rate of about 1 per month but can easily assemble them at a much higher rate. I wonder if their suppliers can increase production rate quickly to cover some of the extra airframes needed.
As for the Gripen as a Tejas replacement, India can license produce the Gripen for under $50 million a copy if they stick to a modest target; an C/D airframe, a mechanical radar, existing avionics, etc. Afterall, Saab is preparing to submit a Gripen based trainer to the USAF T-X trainer contest, which implies a low unit cost is possible from the Gripen.
Why would India be interested in producing Gripen C/D, given that E/F will be much more capable. At a lower price! If Tejas were abandoned and IAF urgently needed more airframes, it would be better to lease C/D’s currently unused by Sweden and licence production of E/F.
In the words of @MadRat: Phase out F-16’s and add just a small contingent of leased Gripen. By shifting hours around on F-16 airframes you can keep numbers up on the best candidates to last through to the transition. Gripen is mostly ready for NATO compatibility so leasing is a great option.
That way they also have a first hand info on Gripen system
when it’s time to decide, but above all bought time for accurate info on what
F-35 will cost the state.
Sounds like a very practical solution to me! Committing to F-35 without knowing the purchase price within a window that gives known extra F-16 costs, without knowing operating cost and without knowing that it will be available in the window needed is… RISKY.
Better wait and see what the operational cost is in service,
after that an informed decision can be made.
That’s an idea. Order/don’t order F-35 when that information is available. Which would be when? 2019? 2020? But that would mean spending €500+ on keeping the F-16’s in a flyable condition to find out.
Minister Hillen has gone on record saying there is budget for at least 56 JSFs.
According to defence-aerospace the report says:
“The investment budget reserved by the Ministry of Defence is not adequate to replace the current number of F-16 aircraft (68), never mind to procure the planned number of JSFs (85).”
“In June, the Ministry of Defence estimated the cost of 85 JSFs at €8 billion. It had reserved no more than €4.5 billion to replace the F-16s. Of this sum, €4.05 billion is still available.”
Either the Dutch Court of Audit has got it wrong or the minister has got it wrong. €4.05 billion might buy 56 F-35’s but will not suffice to bring 56 F-35’s into service so I am inclined to believe the Dutch Court of Audit whose job it is to ensure that it gets its figures right.
The court also said:
“The Ministry of Defence will have to apply half its total capital expenditure budget for seven years to order 68 JSF aircraft and for nine years to order 85 aircraft. Given this budgetary impact, it seems inevitable that fundamental decisions will have to be taken on other weapons systems, which might also affect the navy and the army.”
56, 68 or 85 F-35’s would mean a minimum of 6 years of F-35 taking 50% of the Dutch military spend on equipment. The way I read it that would involve major spending reductions on other procurements and a corresponding reduction in overall capability.
Court of Audit’s afterword
The minister chiefly confirmed our conclusion that the Ministry of Defence needs to take fundamental decisions on the composition and capability of the Royal Netherlands Air Force. If 56 JSFs were procured, the operational objectives of the armed forces, and thus the Netherlands’ contribution to NATO, would have to be reconsidered.
Just realised never put a link to the article.
Bulgaria plans to sign for 8 used fighters in 2014 (or possibly new Gripen)
Anyway, with the ongoing discussion with India, it’s not a surprise that any potential customer of Rafale is holding his breath, waiting for the final decision.
If you wan to be more cynic, another issue is that UAE asked many many things to France, got 99% of them, so, obviously they must think of another “gift”. :diablo:
I was not being cynical. The article I read in English was not an accurate translation of what had appeared in Le Parisien (which I have now read in French).
By the way, why are potential Rafale clients holding their breath until the Indian negotiations are concluded? I am just interested to know.
Just theater. Israel badly needs some enemy, they only can welcome someone donating $400mil to Hamas. I would not be surprised if half of the money was Israeli.
I think Israel has been generating enemies for quite some time. I don’t think it’s short of enemies. Still, one more might be of some political use.
Actually, and it may just be a translation issue, the UAE did not say they would lower the procurment from France, they actually did lower it. From a french article publiched earlier this week, it appears that pushing to much for a Rafale contract as had a real negative effect on other contracts and relationship with the UAE.
Definitely not translated correctly.
From Le Parisien’s interview with M le ministre de la Défense:
Vos interlocuteurs émiratiens ne vous ont pas non plus parlé du Rafale?
Non. Pourquoi? Parce que ce dossier empoisonnait nos rapports. Il y a eu un effilochage de notre relation depuis dix-huit mois. Les EAU, qui effectuaient 70% de leurs dépenses militaires en France, ont fait passer ce pourcentage à 10%.
Strange that the minister was told that UAE intends to reduce its military spending on French equipment to 10% from a previous level of 70%. What happened? I know that UAE were not happy with negotiations re: Rafale but this sounds like them saying that they no longer want to deal with France.
Bring on the speculation about them buying something else…
plus the costs for adapting the KDC-10’s as they have no Hose and Drogue system.:rolleyes:
Fair comment. I’m just trying to be realistic:
– there is an upcoming problem (need to replace F-16)
– as things stand, the proposed F-35 solution cannot be carried through (the budget is far too small)
– it makes sense to look at alternatives
– Gripen NG is an alternative that is worthy of consideration (any other solution that avoids spending on F-16 extension?)