Spitfire9Reading some references thrown up by search engine, there is this from Nov 2012 talking of UK-UAE:
The two countries said in a joint communique on Tuesday that they planned to establish a defence and industrial partnership involving close cooperation around the Typhoon. They did not give details of the tie-up.
http://www.arabianbusiness.com/uk-close-uae-deal-for-60-typhoon-jets-source-478848.html
Would such an arrangement be made based on UAE producing some components for Typhoon?
In Feb 2012 there is the headline in Gulf News:
The latest version of Typhoon that the UAE intends to purchase is governed by some tactical and technical capabilities of the fighter
http://gulfnews.com/business/general/uae-likely-to-buy-60-eurofighter-typhoon-jets-1.1149180
I read this as meaning that Typhoon is UAE’s preferred choice.
Spitfire9IIRC one of the sticking points for a Rafale deal is the value UAE place on their M2K’s to be taken back by France. What happens to their M2K’s if they do actually choose Typhoon?
Spitfire9with KSA, Oman and now potentially UAE taking Eurofighters… it seems that potentially the GCC peninsular shield is looking to have at least some squadrons from each “member” available for joint operations / command and thus having the same airframes would fit in logically within that context… if true, its possible that Qatar and Kuwait will also lean towards eurofighter even if for just 1 squadron’s worth each… they’ll all keep “alternative” types in service too, naturally…
I wonder how much diplomacy/good customer care counts. I recall that these were not handled at all well by France when pursuing a Rafale deal. Perhaps the “right” treatment during the UAE sheik’s visit to London will tip the balance towards Typhoon.
Spitfire9Admittedly I do not follow foreign budget situations and plans to that level.
And I don’t have your technical appreciation… 🙂
Some countries might not have the political will to join a coalition in a bomb-dropping/people-killing capacity. They would be best served by a cheap shiny jet for airshows on sunny Saturdays and national holiday fly-bys. But they could contribute in other ways.
Indeed! You don’t all need to provide the same tools in different numbers according to your strength for a combined operation.
And those cheap shiny jets can be quite good for air policing and air defence when not being used for airshows on sunny Saturdays and for national holidays flyby’s.
Spitfire9“human rights and humanitarian missions” ≠the main job of the military.
It said that in addition to curtailing Dutch maritime military operations, purchasing F-35 would also limit human rights and humanitarian missions.
As you are aware, I am opposed to several countries purchasing F-35. I have argued for years that the result of purchasing F-35 would be a decrease in overall defence capability for some countries. I don’t recall you agreeing with that view. Whether you agree or not, it looks more and more likely that that’s what will happen, doesn’t it?
By the way, whether F-35 were British, French, German, Italian, Spanish, Swedish, American or whatever, that would still be my view.
Spitfire9Dutch F-35 cost consequences outlined in report:
“A report by the Clingendael foreign policy institute earlier this year said an armed forces which includes the controversial JSF jet fighter is the least attractive scenario for the future of the Dutch military.
Clingendael says the JSF will only be needed if the Netherlands wants to take part in the opening phase of military interventions. But the high cost of the JSF will lead to ‘serious limitations’ to the country’s maritime operations – such as the role the Netherlands currently plays in protecting commercial shipping against pirates.
The Netherlands would also have less capacity to take part in human rights and humanitarian missions, the institute says.”
Spitfire9In recent months a Turkish delegation, including SSM officials, visited Saab headquarters and production facilities in Sweden. And more recently, TAI and Saab penned a preliminary agreement for technical assistance which will pave the way for a subsequent support deal.
In yesterday’s statements, Bayar said the project of designing a local fighter began last year and after some trials one of the designs has matured.
“…after some trials one of the designs has matured.”
What could that mean? Turkey is close to choosing the general configuration to be pursued?
Spitfire9Someone mentioned that the time limit on India signing a contract for Rafale was March 31. I don’t believe that this throws the competition open again but (if the time limit is correct) does anyone know if negotiations been suspended until an extension is authorised?
Spitfire9Argentina would be a candidate for Rafale in the long-run I would think.
Would you think 2020’s or 2030’s?
— risk associated with Sea Gripen concept
Rafale/Super Hornet risk is zero. Sea Gripen has risk attached. Since Gripen E is a major redesign, is it easier to navalise rather than trying to navalise an existing airframe designed with no consideration for carrier use?
— how much SAAB can offer in terms of long-term development assistance, i.e. transition to 5G
If Turkey goes for a 5G fighter design in conjunction with SAAB, SAAB should be well placed in the long term.
— technology sovereignty issues; SAAB/Sweden unable to guarantee supply.
As mentioned by several posters, the SH is riskiest on this front, Gripen second riskiest because of international content. Rafale has the lowest risk but how much would Dassault and others want for TOT? French industry is likely to want a high price for TOT, I would think.
Spitfire9According to Ministery of Defence officers “F-X project development budget will be as much as Gripen or Rafale; Turkey CANNOT spend 40 billion US Dollars like F35 project”
So basically it will be modest aircraft, Turkey cannot afford F35 like complexity. And probably cannot find a partner to develope such kind of aircraft.
Surely Turkey does not need another aircraft of F-35 complexity if it is ordering F-35.
If SAAB has or can develop LO know how to be shared with TAI, modifying Gripen should cost less than developing Rafale or Typhoon. Both of those stand at less than $20 billion so far, I think.
Spitfire9For your information Dassault also propose Brazil the lead for latin america exports…
Any potential Rafale customers in South America apart from Brazil? It seems to me that nearly all other countries (except Venezuela) are struggling to keep a small number of light fighters in the air. Correct me if I’m wrong but I think the market for fighters of the calibre of Rafale is zero.
…and access to source code.
Important plus. SAAB are offering the same, aren’t they?
However as far as ToT is concerned it should be at a clear disadvantage compared to the SH provided the US are willing to cooperate…
The US would authorise release of source codes for one of its frontline aircraft?
Main elements of the aircraft like the engine, radar or IRST are not Swedish…Which mean that any ToT is potentially subjected to restrictions from the countries of origin.
True. Again, the Super Hornet would be in the same position.
Spitfire9I can tell you the offer from SAAB and then you can tell me if that is a deal nobody dares to brake or not.
Current offer:
Brazil will be responsible for 40% of all future development in the Gripen system (globally)
Embraer will lead all future Gripen sales in latin America
Brazil can tailor the Gripen as much as they want (maybe the Sea Gripen or EPE version?)
Full access to source codes
Own production of Gripen (almost nothing will be produced in Sweden)Basically this means thet Brazil can develop their own Gripen platform since production and development mostly will be done by Embraer.
Can you give a source for the current offer you describe, please?
Where does the link with Brazilian firm Akaer fit into the plan? As far as I know Akear were given the job of designing the rear fuselage (and central fuselage?) of Gripen E.
Spitfire9What is happening with Sea Gripen? Assuming that the Rafale deal goes through in India, will it be dropped if Brazil decides to order F/A-18 or Rafale? I don’t see any other prospective buyers.
Spitfire9March 31, 2013 (by Lieven Dewitte) – Brazil canceled its plans to spend $700 million on at least 12 new fighter jets to upgrade its air force. This is a blow for Boeing who offered F-18E Super Hornets.
In October 2003 Brazil announced its plans to replace 12 ageing Mirage fighter jets. The bidding process is now canceled because technological advancements would have rendered the aircraft being considered obsolete, the air force said in a statement.The bidders included Boeing’s F-18E Super Hornet, Sweden’s Saab with the Gripen jet, and France’s Dassault Aviation’s Rafale.
Boeing spokesman Joe Stout noted that there are a lot of uncertainties involving foreign military sales. He said Boeing would be ready if Brazil were to decide to go ahead with a new competition.
The St. Loius plant has a dwindling backlog of F-18 orders, with production to end if no new orders are made. Last year, Boeing has cut hundreds of jobs from the program and said it may cut 1,000 more this year, reducing F-18 employment to about 4,000.
“The F-18 is still a very important part of our business here,” Stout said, adding that the company believes it is likely to obtain orders for 100 or more planes that would extend production through 2020.
The Pentagon had also offered to include AMRAAM missiles in the sale, which would have been Latin America’s largest military hardware purchase since the end of the Cold War.
On December 27th 2000, Chile bought 10 F-16 fighters from Lockheed Martin, marking the first sale of advanced U.S. warplanes to a South American country in two decades. The LoA was signed on February 2nd, 2002.
Defence Minister Celso Amorim, is opting to upgrade the country’s existing Mirage fighter jets to the same standards as the Rafale jet which is currently in operations with the French military.
I should keep a copy of this – you could probably use it again in April 2014, 2015, 2016… 🙂
Spitfire9Here is why the TF-X cannot be an all new jet; Turkey simply doesn’t have the money and expertise to develop and build a new type…
+1
While India’s achievements with LCA are remarkable, the project has been 20+ years to get where it is. If Turkey wants an aircraft for service entry in the 2020’s, the only way that can happen is if an experienced developer takes the leading role in design and development. To me Turkey’s involvement in development should be limited to those areas in which Turkey already has expertise or can realistically be expected to gain that expertise without delaying the project.
China created two 5th gen. fighters with less than your called funding. Also with a strong goverment support its not impossible for Turkey too.
I don’t think it’s a just question of what is possible. If Turkey wants an aircraft for EIS before 2030, it’s unlikely that could be achieved without a contractor handling the airframe design.
Sign In
