m.ileduetsOriginally posted by Dubya
Europe is the only place where EF2000 has a serious chance and then only with a handful of potential buyers – Belgium, Norway, Greece, Portugal and that’s about it.
Why do people keep forgetting Switzerland? It’s certainly a more likely pick than Belgium or Portugal.
m.ileduetsRe: New NATO members modernise their armies on a shoestring
Originally posted by matt
Countries like Bulgaria and Slovenia who have Russian MiG-29 fighter aircraft are trying to update them to meet NATO standards.
Seems that some journalists are still mixing up Slovenia with Slovakia … :rolleyes:
m.ileduetsOriginally posted by A-29
m.ileduets,Sorry if I had rude, it was not the intention.
I understand your point, The SU-35 is much more a deterrent than the other ones and fits perfectly for us if you consider the size of Brazil (can goes from south to the north with just one A2A refuelling or using extra fuel tanks…none) and also the enormous quantity of weapons that the jet can carry. Taking consideration of what you wrote, it will be a response to the F-16C/D Block 50/52 purchased by the Chileans and also from the Mig-29/SU-25 from Peru. Did you agree with me?
Agreed. As long as the FAB doesn’t get 200 of these “monsters”, it doesn’t really look offensive, just deterrent. One can certainly look at it this way.
Brazil doesn’t really have anything of the F-16C/Mig 29 category at the moment and it probably just wants to keep up with its smaller neighbours.
(Or if possible, be a little better :D). I wonder what Argentina will come up with next. Typhoon?
m.ileduetsPlease don’t misunderstand me: I’m not implying Brazil is not peaceful. I also agree that in the defensive role all three are pretty much equal and superior to anything around. It’s just that the Su-35 clearly offers a big offensive potential.
Anywhere threat assessment usually considers the potential of a country, not only its “peacefullness” in history. So chosing the Su-35 would send a signal to surrounding countries. That’s the way arms races are usually started.
What speaks against it (but nobody has mentioned this, so I’ll do it to counter my own argument :D) is the small number. 12 is hardly enough to do air defence, so unless you get a lot more, they don’t pose a real offensive threat.
m.ileduetsThere’s a discussion going on inthis thread.
m.ileduetsLet’s try to broaden the horizon a bit: How will Brazil’s choice affect stability in the area? Here’s a few considerations:
The Su-35 is probably the most capable of the three front runners. It’s expensive to fly and maintain, but it gives the most “bang” for the buck. What clearly distinguishes it from its competitor is its range and its payload. It makes it an excellent offensive asset. That’s probably why the FAB likes it most. As somebody has pointed out, the Su-35 is an “airplane for times of war”. If you have an asset like this, you want to use it. The flight hours are too expensive to be wasted on practice only.
The downside to this is that Brazil’s neighbours would feel threatened. Brazil is the strongest power in SA. But up to now, there was no clear advantage in the air. This balance will tip. Countries like Argentina, Chile, Peru etc. would probably feel the need to protect themselves against such an offensive asset and enter an arms race. There would probably be an influx of advanced technology to counter the threat.
The Mirage is somewhere in between. It’s A2G capabilities are well known, it has a larger payload than the Gripen, but the range is pretty much the same. Defensively it would be way superior to anything around in the area. It would increase Brazil’s offensive assets, but not as significantly as with the Su-35. I don’t think that Brazil’s neighbours will feel threatened much.
The Gripen looks more like a small point defence fighter, even though it has offensive assets. Its payload is the lightest and its range fully loaded is clearly very limited. On the other hand, it’s an excellent defensive asset with good sensors, data link, great situation awareness, and minimal logistical needs. But it would hardly increase Brazil’s offensive assets, as an upgraded AMX would offer about the same performance.
Brazil’s neighbours would probably be the happiest with this choice.
To sum things up in a very simplistic manner: If Brazil wants to go to war, it should opt for the Su-35; if it wants peace, it should buy the Gripen; if it wants to keep all options open, purchase the Mirage 😉
Feel free to rip my assessment to pieces 😉 😀
By the way, can sb correct the title of the thread? It hurts my eyes every time I read it.
m.ileduetsOriginally posted by glitter
$8,000 for a F-16 ? the block 60 I suppose ?
But, why didn’t tell us how much for the mirage ?? 😀
Would be an interesting aspect. If he doesn’t come up with Mirage figures it can only mean that the difference is marginal.
5 more powerful than the mirage ? What does that mean ?
I was wondering about that, too. But I can’t imagine the Gripen having more powerful waves than the Su-35’s. That thing is a monster. He must refer to sth. else. Can’t be range either. Very questionable claim indeed.
About upgrade, that’s more a lie than a mistake I think.
In 2044, mirage 2000 or Grippen, same thing, POS.
Well, I’m not so sure about that. The Gripen design is indeed a lot newer. Dassault developed a successor for the Mirage, so the incentive to upgrade is smaller on the long run. I guess it all depends on how well the Gripen sells in the near future.
m.ileduetsOriginally posted by A-29
m.ileduets,The fact is that the FX has been delayed so many times and the companies had plenty of time to improve their proposals. If the FX had its decision in the planned year which was 2002, no doubt that the Mirage 2000-5 would be the winner. But, the ones for the Flanker and Gripen are more attractive than for the M2000. Also, the pilots prefer the Gripen and the Flanker and this you have to take in consideration.
No matter who will be the winner, I’m sure that Embraer will be involved in the project.
Regards,:cool:
Right, OK. Thanks.
The information I read was probably mostly refering to earlier stages in the competition.
Mirage just got this reputation of selling “an old aircraft” (that’s why it also dropped out of the Austrian tender), and if the competitors keep repeating it, it might actually work.
Wasn’t Sukhoi lining up with a different manufacturer in Brazil?
m.ileduetsChief of Staff Gen. John Jumper introduced to the panel three U.S. F-15 pilots who recently flew against Russian-built SU-30 fighters and other advanced warplanes during exercises with the Indian Air Force. Results of those war games would be presented to the committee in closed session, Jumper said, adding that he expected lawmakers would find them “very interesting.”
Glitter, I’m afraid they won’t pass on these results to Singapore 😉
m.ileduetsBut of course! After all he’s the Gripen CEO. He would be mad, if he wasn’t trying to sell it.
But there’s certainly some truth in what he’s claiming (what makes the Su-35 a little less attractive are certainly the running costs, no doubt). It’s just a question how much he’s leaving out. For example he doesn’t mention Mirage flight hour costs, just F-16 and Su-35. This probably means that the price difference is marginal. There are other passages in which he’s clearly beating around the bush, like when the interviewer adresses the range issue.
I’m suprised to hear from you that it will be between Gripen and Su-35. From what I’ve read ,I got the impression that the Mirage was in the lead due to the Dassault- Embraer alliance.
m.ileduetsNot yet, but I found an interesting interview with the Gripen CEO. The claim that Gripen flight hours would be ten times less expensive than the Sukhoi’s sounds almost too good to be true ;):
“Flying Sukhoi is far too expensive”
CEO of the Anglo Swedish fighter jet criticizes the Russian aircraft, attacks Mirage of the consortium Embraer/Dassault e guarantees the transfer of technology if they win FAB’s bidding of US$ 1 billion.
Joaquim Castanheira e Marco Damiani
CEO of Gripen International, Ian McNamee, landed on Wednesday, Jan. 14th, with the purpose of conducting two strategic discussions. He met with the Swedish and British Ambassadors to discuss one specific item: how to increase the chances of Gripen, manufactured by the Anglo-Swedish consortium SAAB-BAE SYSTEMS, in the bidding US$ 1 billion promoted by FAB. Nothing is easy. Fighter jet of latest generation, the Gripen competes with the Mirage F-5/BR, manufactured in partnership with the Brazilian Embraer and the French Dassault – and in this competition (Gripen) faces a strong adversary called nationalism. Besides that, Gripen also faces the Russian Sokhoi that has the biggest flying range in the world among all fighter jets.
The Brazilian selection could be made before the end of this first semester. FAB has already issued a confidential document on the competitors and President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva created a working group to study the document. As soon as this group is formed, its members will have 60 days to conclude their work and, finally, the National Defense Council is to appoint the name of the fighter jet to be acquired, — initially 12 units. The pressure over the bidding process drags on for about 3 years and grows bigger as it approaches the final decision. On the Gripen side, as this was made clear to Dinheiro, McNamee exerts his pressure. “To be nationalist is to choose what is best for the country”, he sad. “Mirage is an old aircraft and Sukhoi has a very high operational cost”. These are his rationale:
Dinheiro: Why Gripen?
Ian McNamee: The main requirement received from the Brazilian Air Force is that they want a multi-role aircraft. The aircraft should be able to attack an enemy, defend the territory and exert surveillance of borders. Our aircraft meets all these requirements – with advantages over the competitors.
Dinheiro: Some people say that your aircraft is unsuitable to the continental sizes of Brazil, because of its short-range.
McNamee: Gripen’s range is very similar to Mirage and F-16. I accept that in relation to Sukhoi, the range of our aircraft is shorter. However, Sukhoi is 3 times bigger than all competitors and needs 3 times more fuel to operate. Another criticism that I have seen is that Gripen cannot be refueled during flight. Untrue. Our fighter jet carries a complete system of refueling during flight.
Dinheiro: Is there an economic advantage of Gripen over its competitors?
McNamee: Cost of hour/flight of Gripen is extremely low. I could mention, as a reference, that Gripen costs about US$ 2,300, while this cost goes up to about US $ 8,000 for the F-16 and US $ 25,000 to Sukhoi. This means, to fly a Gripen is 10 times less expensive than a Sukhoi.
Dinheiro: Gripen is praised by its avionics. Please comment on its radars and other equipments.
McNamee: Everything is of latest generation. Everything is digital. The aircraft can be operated with precision in accordance with each operation. Compared with other aircrafts, our radars have more range than any other. The Swedish government delivered to the Brazilian government documents of performance of these radars and its capabilities. In comparison with the Mirage, our radar is 5 times more powerful.
Dinheiro: Mirage is the choice. Is this why the aircraft is on your line of fire?
McNamee: I don’t know. I read several articles about the bidding, talk to various persons and in some instances I hear people talking about Mirage. Sometimes I hear a lot about Sukhoi. I guess Mirage could be our main competitor, because of Embraer, a world class leading company.
Dinheiro: Embraer claims that only Dassault, the manufacturer of Mirage, is going to transfer technology do Brazil.
McNamee: This is not true
Dinheiro: Are you willing to transfer technology.
McNamee: I want to emphasize that I don’t know exactly what kind of technology transfer Embraer is talking about. Is it new technology. Is it old? I have no idea. We are prepared to transfer the technology of the most advanced software used in the aircraft. Our proposal to the Brazilian government gives all details about everything we would like to transfer. What we are going to transfer should allow the Brazilians to control the weapon systems that they are going to use.
Dinheiro: With Gripen, is Brazil able to open source-codes and therefore be able to control software?
McNamee: Yes. It is part of our proposal the transfer of technology which also includes the creation here in Brazil of a Gripen Development Center.
Dinheiro: Gripen engine is made in the United States – and the Americans do not transfer technology. Isn’t this an insuperably limitation?
McNamee: We use a basic General Electric engine that is modified and developed by Volvo in Sweden. There is no embargo over these engines. GE is present in Brazil and is able to provide technical assistance.
Dinheiro: What about the weapons? Gripen uses American weapons.
McNamee: In our proposal, we offered a wide range of non-US weapons. They include weapons made in Israel, Sweden, South Africa and, even, French weapons. They are all part of the Gripen weapon system. Our aircraft can carry them, recognize them and works with them without any problem.
Dinheiro: Gripen is considered a small aircraft. Isn’t this a problem?
McNamee: One thing people seem to forget is that Gripen was designed to operate in areas without any infrastructure. Gripen can land in roads and remote areas. Its complete refueling on the ground takes about 15 minutes. Gripen is an aircraft that does not need air bases and major infrastructure. It was developed to undertake operations with maximum efficiency.
Dinheiro: Embraer claims that they have reached the highest stages of its subsonic capabilities. Is Gripen willing to teach Embraer to fly above the sound speed?
McNamee: If we have a long term relationship with Brazil and if Embraer becomes our partner – especially if we are talking about the acquisition of up to 100 aircrafts — , we would have no problem in showing Embraer how to develop supersonic technology within the company and give support so that they could support Gripen in Brazil.
Dinheiro: Have you had contacts with Embraer?
McNamee: No, but if we are selected, we are open to discussions provided we have the agreement of the Brazilian government. So far, Embraer has not asked us anything. When are have tried a contact through SAAB, the company chaired by Mr. MaurÃcio Botelho told they were not available at this point in time.
Dinheiro: What else is Gripen offering?
McNamee: our aircraft is on its early stages of life. First delivery of such aircraft started now, some 4 months ago. What we are offering Brazil is an export version of an aircraft that is likely to be in operation for the next 30, 40 years, and to be used by several countries. I don’t believe Mirage will stay in operation for the next 30, 40 years. Mirage does not simply have a path for upgrades. I would like to say that Mirage is not a bad aircraft. I just think that is it an old aircraft. It is an aircraft of an old generation.
Dinheiro: In the purchase we see a major emphasis on the offset proposal that is being offered by the competitors. How is your proposal in relation to the offset?
McNamee: What I can say is that we offered an offset that is at least the same amount of the bidding. It consists of an offset directly related to the aircraft. It is related to the willingness of Swedish and British companies to invest in Brazil. With both the experience of BAE Systems and SAAB, we have about 40 years of experience in offset programs. We never failed to comply with our obligations related to offset. We spent some 4 years investing in Brazil working with different companies through the offset principle. We should be able to do a fantastic work. We feel absolutely normal that governments seek offset in a purchase of such nature.
Dinheiro: This bidding is dragging for about 3 years. Isn’t this a stressing situation?
McNamee: Yes. Everything related to the process is stressing. Decisions involving a selection such as this are very complex. And there is no easy decision. We operate in various parts of the world and in all countries we live this difficult situations.
Dinheiro: There is in the government a strong sense of nationalism. Is it possible that the bidding is already decided in favor of Embraer?
McNamee: There is always such possibility. But nationalism does not mean you are going to choose something old and call it a national champion. Nationalism, in my view, is to chose what guarantees the future. We made an excellent offer to the Brazilian government. FAB has studied our aircraft thoroughly, in detail and with great expertise. I am convinced that the evaluation was a correct one and technically very competent.
Dinheiro: What is your view on the quality of the work done?
McNamee: FAB personnel that we have had contact are among the best we know around the world. They never believed in what we say until they check the facts by themselves during tests of the aircraft to be sure everything was true. Brazil sent to Sweden 3 outstanding pilots. They underwent tests to the limits of the aircraft.
Dinheiro: It is estimated that a fighter jet, without the weapons, could cost about US$ 30 million. Is it correct?
McNamee: Yes, depending on the configuration, this is a quite reasonable figure.
Dinheiro: What is the Gripen business performance?
McNamee: In July we offered Gripen to the Czech Republic and before Christmas we were selected to supply 14 aircrafts. To South Africa we sold 28. In the world, we placed 54 aircrafts in the last 4 years
Dinheiro: If you are selected, how long do you need to deliver the aircrafts?
McNamee: We need 36 months to deliver the first and more 12 months to deliver to complete the supply of the 12 fighter jets.
m.ileduetsSo does Saab:
here
m.ileduetsAs native German speaker I might be of help. What is it you want to have translated?
The range is given as 2000 km without- and 3000 km with fuel tanks (1800 km for the M2 version). They claim to have augmented the range “significantly” by including more internal fuel with just minor compromises to climb rate despite increased weight.
They emphase the use of better aluminum alloys that allow weight reduction and longer airframe life, increased manouvrability due to new FBW, glass cockpit, reduced radar reflection (from 15 sqm to 1,5 sqm)…
The page was set up for the Austrian contest and was probably updated last in early 2003. Most of what is written is tailored to Austrian needs and financial limitations.
Unfortunately it offers only few and rather small pics.
Here’s a data chart. Most points should be pretty obvious, even for a non- German speaker 😉 Where two figures: first datas for M/ second for M2
Abfluggewicht normal: 16.500kg/ 16.600kg
Abfluggewicht mit 5.000kg Treibstoff und 5.000kg Bewaffnung: 21.500kg/ 21.500kg
Belastungsgrenze von Aufhängungen, Zelle und Fahrwerk 23.500kg/ 23.500kg
maximale Waffenlast an 9* Aufhängungen
(*mit Tandemträger bis zu 13 Aufhängungen): 5.500kg/ 5.500kg
maximale Treibstoffzuladung intern 5.000kg/ 4.700kg
maximale Treibstoffzuladung mit Zusatztanks 9.300kg/ 9.000kg
Triebwerke 2 x RD-33 Ser.IIIM mit je 85.1kN
max. Fluggeschwindigkeit auf 200m 1.500km/h od. Mach 1,24
max. Fluggeschwindigkeit auf 15.500m 2.200km/h od. Mach 2,08
max. Flughöhe 17.500m/ 17.000m
max. Lastvielfaches 9g
operationelle Reichweite, 12.500m, Mach 0,8, interner Treibstoff 2.000km/ 1.800km
operationelle Reichweite, 12.500m, Mach 0,8, 3 Zusatztanks >3.000km
operationelle Reichweite, 12.500m, Mach 0,8, 3 Zusatztanks, 1 Luftbetankung >5.500km
max. Steigleistung 290m/s /280m/s
Startstrecke 550m
Landestrecke mit Bremsfallschirm 800m
For those among us who love to compare, there’s a good and understandibly completely unbiased 😀 chart including F-16, Gripen, EF Batch 2 and 3 here
There’s also three charts for three different offers (24+6, 18+6 & 14+4) including system price with detailed listing of what would be included here.
m.ileduetsHow long do you think it will take for true fifth generation fighters to emerge on the market? The JSF is going to be the first one, and it doesn’t seem to be coming soon. Another question is wether it is going to fullfill all it promised. The prototypes are still battling weight problems, so I heard.
If you are looking for bridgegap solutions for the next 20 years, go for all these upgrades for Migs, SUs, F-16 and F-15 (I just read that the USAF considers upgrading their F-15Cs to “Golden Eagles)!
m.ileduetsAccording to MIG it’s the Mig 29 M2.
With comparisons one should always be careful. It certainly is bigger than the F-16 and quite a bit bigger than the Gripen, but size doesn’t always matter, does it? 😉
Sign In
