Really Nic, care to explain how an aircraft made in France developed entirely from French R&D is going to be more beneficial to UK PLC and R&D then the F-35? An aircraft that as a tier 1 partner the UK helped to design…:confused:

Arguably if the F-35 gets close to the planned build number it will be worth more to the UK then Typhoon.

It’s all nice & good to be able to integrate some bits on a plane, or manufacture some parts for it, but this is VERY far from being able to design a successful fighter project from A to Z. Losing sight of the overal design concept of a fighter plane means that you get incapable of building one when you really need to. Besides, programs like fighter planes allow your technological base to master most of the very high tech fields (propulsion, aerodynamics, electronics, etc etc).

IMHO it is better to have a fighter that lags a bit behind (and will still be enough for 99% of the wars you guys will get involved in) and master all the technologies involved than master a few of technologies within a much bigger program. & right now the F35 isn’t superior to anything that’s actually in service…

Also I see everybody here has studiously ignored my MAIN POINT that despite development issues the F-35B out performs the legacy types it will replace in UK service…obviously too inconvenient a fact to deal with when it so much more fun irrationally hating the program and belittling the work of companies like BAE Systems, Martin Baker and Rolls Royce.

Considering the price of the first UK F35 was higher than the price the USMC paid for the whole harrier fleet + spares, I think bang-for-the-buck wise your main point is ludicrous.

Nic

It would also require the UK to regenerate a CATOBAR capability from a cold start. Another MASSIVE issue is Rafale does not benefit UK PLC!

Oh yes it would, because if Rafale is selected as the RN plane, the RAF can focus on the EF to make it truly multirole, and use all the money it has sinked into barrel of the danaids to invest on further development of the EF & its subsystems & the rest on stealth UCAVs like Taranis follow on.

Nic

I was watching some program on TV about the intervention in Mali (c dans l’air in case anyone wants to check it out), and they were interviewing some of the inhabitants complaining about the islamists… and while the camera moved to the side you cold see a poster of Khadaffi on the wall 😀

Nic

Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, the chaps from the “Ministére de la Defense” might hear you!!

:diablo:

I´ll get me coat 🙂

Difference is major french weapons programs are managed by the DGA & not by the manufacturers.

Nic

If they cannot rebuild C/D aircraft to E/F standard, will they be retained in service or will Sweden try to sell them? Just thinking there should be some countries looking to buy cheap used light fighters that are cheap to operate in the same way as Bulgaria, Romania were looking for useable F-16’s.

As far as I know there are already quite a number of Gripens in storage, and I’m surprised those haven’t been purchased already. More C/D might be more attractive than earlier A/B versions, but I understand that at least a number of used C/Ds are already available.

Is there an ITAR problem with the US when Sweden tries to sell some used Gripens where they are competing with used F16s? & similar issue if dealing with non aligned countries that the US don’t want to sell to?

Nic

Well total progam cost actually is supposed to include operating costs.

Nic

Are those necessarily new builds or will the be rebuilt from existing airframes?

Nic

2008 by Turkish AF in extended attacks against Kurds in northern Iraq, and very possibly in Aug 2011 attacks in same area. 2012 one was shot down by Syria.

Ah true I totally forgot about Turkey’s F4s.

Nic