AspisEurofighter not good for Greece? How about one of these
Rather not cheap enough i ‘d say. Besides, it would be overkill. Our PM today admitted that we ‘ve been in talks with Turkey since 2002, the content of which can’t reveal, because “the content is confidential and no records are kept”. This is also called “secret diplomacy”. Buying something expensive, would be money thrown away. I told you already what the conclusion will be. We will split things as Turkey wants. Because as you may imagine, when you have negotiations with someone that recognizes another law, you can’t possibly arrive to “legal” solution.
I will email the drawing to a nephew of mine who makes model airplanes. It might serve as inspiration to make a “greek” Pak Fa… Otherwise the chances of us buying something reasonable like the Su35 which the Russians already are willing to sell or in future the PAK Fa, are non existant. Because of politics, we have more chances to buy Typhoon , even if we will have to fly it half the time of the current aircrafts.
AspisDid you ever consider, for a moment, that the European Union may actually be seen a dominating force that a country may want to avoid, and that not all countries populations may want to be part of your superblock? Taking the UK as an example context, how is the EU some saviour from domination, whereas the USA is some dominant force to fear? It is the EU that year on year imposes its will on the British people, the USA doesn’t impose anything upon the UK.
As for this idea that we can negotiate as a block, thats great and all, but why should we surrender our independence, and live under that monster of EU regulation? I’d much rather take our chances alone, than be stuck in the EU with the mainlanders. The idea of being insignificant alone is really just hot air, peddled by pro-integrationists to leverage that good old persuasion tactic… fear!
Also we’d like a refund, payable in gold preferably or perhaps steel/aluminium/rare earth metals ect, you can keep your Euros 😉
I am afraid that the issue for Britain is dual:
1) Matter of power/political influence. Britain isn’t some small country, used to watch what others do and has interests in many places. The more the EU integrates, the more weight it will be getting politically. If Britain stays out, simply you will become irrelevant politically. Or, to put it milder, you will become 2nd rank players. The world is becoming multi-polar. To the traditional poles of USA and Russia, will be added (hopefully) the EU and the Asian powers (China, India). Maybe Brazil too. Britain will lose ground. To many simple citizens, this may be OK for Britain. I am not so sure about those who are used to have political influence.
2) Economical. I have somewhere an excellent article from the german edition of financial times, explaining that Kohl invented the EU and the euro, so that the german economy can penetrate throughout the continent and neutralize the competition given by other countries. If you think about it, this is what happened. Today, even France has accepted that Germany has the 1st word in Europe. All European countries have trade deficit and Germany the only with a huge trade surplus (which is why the others have all deficit). The plan was really simple. The Deutsche Mark was too strong of a currency. Competitors could compete by having weaker currencies, giving lower prices. The euro plus the common EU regulations, evened the game.
For example, in early 80s, in Greece, italian cars were very popular. Why? Because they were considerably cheaper. Having a german car was a sign that you were earning more than the average. With the euro, the Italians lost the advantage that the italian lira was giving them. No wonder, in Greece now 50% of the market is held by german cars and believe it or not, Greece is the 1st country in Europe in number of sold Porsche Cayenne (if you were wondering where the big greek tax evaders were spending their money, now you know). Because, the euro is very strong currency. All countries’ citizens that had a weak currency, found themselves with more purchase power. And in particular, more purchase power towards the products that were the most costly before. Like… the Porsche Cayenne for example! 🙂
Even the EU structural/cohesion funds, are in reality the equivalent of a farmer having found outside his farm a thin cow. You can you do 2 things with the cow:
1) Ignore her and let her go her way.
2) Take her into your farm, feed her and then use her daily for milk, reproduction->cattle->meat, etc. (Greek shepard now has road, greek shepard now lets donkey and gets Wolkswagen).
The Germans do option no.2. The Germans, with the euro, achieved what failed to do in WWII. Conquer Europe. At least economically, this is what they ‘ve done.
The question at this point is: Can Britain sustain in the long run her own economic policy against a continental block that works this way?
I really don’t know. From the one side, having liberty to modify the pound’s strenght at will, may help you compete. From the other side, the Germans, are continuously penetrating more and more the european market and their position becomes more and more dominant. At the end, you risk ending up like a small vendor trying to battle against a multinational.
But i think the worst problem with Britain is that in the people’s soul, there is no will for the EU. And this makes it very difficult to work. And also is bad for the EU too.
AspisGrim901 is right.
In order for all the Europeans to fight together, it will require a common interest. This may only come if the EU becomes one day a federation, something like USA. As things are today, each country thinks “what do i have to gain if i partecipate”? Especially the small countries know very well, that the usually in wars, the bigs get the oil contracts, while the small ones are called to bleed for “glory”. And glory used to be enough in ancient times, but not so nowdays.
The EU has a loooong way to go before a real European army appears that can act with cohesion like the US one. As long as the EU is separated by state interests, there will be negotiations, excuses, veto, etc.
The problem with Europe is that it wanted to copy the US, but it started based on economic greed and having done nothing to bring the people together. The Americans may have started as settlers, but they were forged together by historical events that “glued” them. Not just the $.
In EU things started on the opposite side. Based on a german plan to dominate economically in Europe, through the euro, it is attempted to build the “United States of Europe”. Well, doing things this way take a long time.
One doesn’t send his sons to die for “glory” nowdays. The big countries send them to die for the country’s interest. The small ones know they won’t get anything, so they contain themselves in the smallest partecipation possible that their legal obbligations dictate and this half-hearted.
We will probably all be dead before the EU gets an army where all countries are willing to give the totality of their power, like the Americans do.
AspisI think that is probably predicted lifetime cost of ownership divided by predicted number of hours flown. It depends on price paid (including development cost for Germany), how many hours the aircraft are flown, etc.
The very much lower figures (in single numbers of thousands of dollars per hour) for some fighters are probably the difference in cost between the aircraft sitting on the ground for an hour, & flying for that hour, i.e. the marginal cost of each hour flown.
Before comparing costs, you need to know the basis.
Well, i am certainly used in more simple minded definitions of flying cost. In any case, this isn’t the first time we hear about high costs. In Britain there was similar talk.
This doesn’t look encouraging either:
“
In February 2009, three Eurofighter attended the air show Aero India 2009 in part. India plans to purchase 126 new fighter aircraft. The Eurofighter is in competition. The promotional flight lasted 96 hours and it cost 7.1 million €. 180 000 € asked the Air Force charged.”
Even if we accept the complicated explanation about flight costs, it still says that it’s double the cost of Tornado. This can’t be a good thing. If we assume that the Tornado has a flying cost similar to an F-16 (being twin engined and european i somehow doubt it), it would mean x2 flying cost compared to F16 class fighter.
Now for Germany or the GB, this may be a logical cost. For Greece, especially in the current condition, it isn’t. In Greece, whatever they use to calculate that, the costs that most often appear on newspapers are 9.000 euros for the F16 and 11.000 euros for the Mirage. We should stay around there if we want to keep flying like now.
AspisMadrat, all i can say is that i admire your resilience, patience and professional presentation (you even made a colour map!).
Aspisgood post Alpis,
I support Gripen NG for HAF to replace all your Mirages! 🙂
I support the Gripen NG to replace any to-be-retired aircraft type in HAF. The 2000-5mk2 will probably be flying for the next 30 years in HAF. But the 2000, the F4 AUP, the A7, the RF4, the F16B30, are on the waiting list one after the other to say “goodbye”.
And Gripen is the most logical option for Greece, even more given the economic situation. I am waiting to see how much the F35 will cost and what performance it will have outside the brochures, but i fear that even if it has contained purchased cost, it will have high maintanance cost to take care of the stealth. Maybe not, but i don’t trust brochures. When it will start being used for real, THEN we ll see the real costs.
Of course, i fear that politics will once again dictate everything. I wouldn’t be surprised if Merkel, before saying yes to the “rescue plan”, has made the greek PM sign in blood that “I, the greek PM, swear on the life of my children, that as soon as i manage to exit the economic emergency, i will purchase 20 Eurofighters, without waiting for bribe. May i bleed from my eyes, lose the few hair i have left and burn in hell if i don’t”.
And then of course, we have this:
The operating costs for the aircraft are to SPIEGEL information significantly higher than expected: With the price is € 73 992 per flight hour, almost twice as high as originally planned. The “Tornado”, the most expensive aircraft in the Air Force, costs only € 43 000 per hour.
77992 euros per flight hour?! 😮 This wasn’t in the brochure, i am sure!
Let me tell you what will happen if our irresponsible politicians buy it. We will pay 4-5 billion for 20 aircrafts, which we will fly every Xmas and Easter, while the other 363 days of the year, nothing will change, with the usual F16s and Mirage doing the job.
No wonder all Eurofighter countries have cut down the number of the aircraft!
As for the Rafale, there is the usual story about prices of spares and weapons.
In 2 words, in order to buy these and operate them regularly, you must be an Arab. Otherwise, either you fly them every Sunday or if you fly them every day, as soon as Greece (if) gets out of the emergency, it will fall to new bankruptcyl
And even if we avoid the 2 european ones, chances are that LM will strike again. And if the F35 has similar costs, we ‘re back to square 1.
The only logical options for new HAF fighter are Gripen NG and , as the current issue of Strategy says, Su-35 BM/S. (Defencenet always supports EADS when it comes to western systems and Roosboronexport products. Both have stable and many pubblicities in the magazine and the site).
Doesn’t the brochure sound nice? According to defencenet, the Russians propose production line in Greece:
“A proposal, that among other things, includes local production line of a fighter on which will be placed the same weapons and 80% of the sensors of the PAK Fa”
http://www.defencenet.gr/defence/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=13654&Itemid=49
According to it, the “HAF will have decided at the latest within 18 months”.
Wrong! The politicians will have decided (hopefully) within 18 months. HAF will simply arrange the criteria so that the one that the goverment wants, is selected.
And think that the Russians give it cheaper than the F16! But buying Su won’t happen in Greece. I have a glimpse of hope for the Gripen NG, because if we made once the surprise with the Erieye , maybe we could do it again. But it’s tough.
Absolutely.. Emotional attachments are always there.. I can’t agree with this one :
”On the other side the main advantage of the F16 was the engine and the radar. The radar no more”
Oh yes , Radar more than ever … If he compares Block 52+ with M2K-5 I can’t say .. But Block 60′ s AESA radar vis-a-vis Mirage 2000-5 ?? that would be too much ..
I enjoyed reading your posts Aspis… Incisive and objective..
In greek fora, there is distinct separation between F16 and Mirage supporters. Judging from various HAF videos, the pilots of the 2 sides, seem to have equally stuborn opinion and ego. At some points it arrives to rivalry. So it’s not a surprise that a Mirage mechanic supports the Mirage. Unfortunately no F16 mechanic is registered in that forum. Or rather it may be a fortune, because they could end up in a “mechanics’ flame war”. At the same way, there is no Mirage airman there.
What i can tell you from a fairly reliable source which i have spoken to, is that young HAF cadets, in their majority want to go to F16s. Because they will have more weapons variety, the F16s are more, and more likely to receive upgrades due to lower cost.
Also, a characteristic of the Mirage squadrons, is that you go there as soon as you finish your cadet trainning. You don’t go to other type and then pass to Mirage. You go there directly as a rookie and stay there. You become 100% Mirage pilot. While in F16 squadrons, you may have passed from other aircraft type before. I don’t know why exactly this happens…
Yes, he compares the B52+. In greek fora, when they compare weapons, usually, unless else specified, the comparison is between the latest types in the greek or turkish inventory. If someone writes the “Leopard 2” , he means the greek 2A6 version. When they compare other countries’ versions, it’s specified to avoid misunderstanding. In this case, it is “intended” that the mechanic compares between the versions within greek inventory (he will probably have some info about F16 mechanics from colleagues).
What he says about radar of the B52+ is true, if i believe the military magazines in Greece, at least as far as range goes. The RDY-2 has better one. And has also that particularity that doesn’t change emission type when passing from tracking to weapons guidance, which can come handy (the enemy can’t tell whether you are tracking him or shot and guiding a missile on him). At least until he becomes aware of the missile. In other functions the radar of the B52 may be better though, i don’t know.
AspisYesterday the SAAB delegation visited Belgrade. They offered 12 Gripens with possibility of repayment in 10 years. Are there any more details about that?
Exactly the offer that would suit Greece! I hope SAAB comes with such payment offers in 2013-2014.
AspisAh, one last thing, since i stumbled again upon it. Of course in a forum nobody asks you an ID, so take it as you like.
User “Pacos” post # 94:
“I used to be a mechanic in Mirage2000… and F1. The main advantage of the Mirage against the F16 was the instantaneous turn rate that our pilots with continuous trainning had evolved to great advantage. The other was the Magic 2 compared to the contemporary sidewinder versions. The M2000 can confront anyone both in closed or in open air combat, particularly in the Mk2 version with MICA and its EW suite.
On the other side the main advantage of the F16 was the engine and the radar. The radar no more.
As far as construction quality goes, easyness in maintanance, reliability, endurance in time , the Mirage wins hands down. Its other advantage is the smaller radar signature it has (it gets detected several kilometers further) compared to the F16, which in combination with the passive MICA, the countermeasures and tactics, is great advantage. This negates any advantage new versions of Amraam may bring in range.
All the rest about Exocet, SCALP etc is known and already been said. Personally i believe that all must be upgraded and get integration of IRIS-T with HMS”.
Of course it is understandable that being a Mirage engineer, he probably has a bias towards them. But still, it’s interesting. He is sure entitled to have an opinion on the subject more than i do.
AspisAh, to put an end to my long posts, here’s the definitive answer which i had mentioned earlier, but now i can quote directly:
GeorgeHAF serves in HAF F16 SQ, i just have missed in what capacity. But the one who asks seem to imply that he flies.
Post #1106
User “Andrew” asks user “GeorgeHAF”:
George, my friend, here’s a stone cold question: Mirage2000-5 with 6 MICA vs F16 Block 52+ Adv (the latest HAF batch) with 4 Amraam and 2 IRIS-T, which do you think will win? Which do you think is better? Forget what you fly.
Reply:
” First, stop the irrelevant questions. It’s the last time i am quoting you. As for reply, don’t even think about it.
You do understand on you own, that there is no reply to what you ask. There are 1.000.000 factors and i have said more times that you don’t compare aircrafts in a forum. Unless you mean 1 vs 1, which doesn’t count anywhere.
On the same page, luckily for me, a member quotes what i mentioned previously:
Post 1107
Strategy magazine, issue 190, page 46, interview to Mirage pilot who says:
– “Don’t you have visibility problem towards the rear? Don’t you miss a bubble type canopy, just like in the F16? i ask him again, noticing a distinctly different sense of the space compared to the F16.
– “No, not at all. First i have the mirror and second and more important, i don’t need to look at my back, because i never get an F16 on my tail. They get us on their back and they need such type of canopies so that they can see us”.
That’s why i can’t say that one or the other eats the other for breakfast. I ‘ve seen videos and photos where both have killed the other, both seem cocky about their own aircrafts or refuse to comment. So based on that, in absence of statistical data, and since i am not a pilot of F16 and Mirage myself so that i can compare, i have to stay with what *i* consider “solid” proof. Because if i start believing what the fanboys of the 2 sides say, i must become split personality.
There isn’t much else i can say.
AspisThe acceptance of the last 15 new Mirage 2000-5 MK2 the HAF ordered in 2000 had been postponed for years due to ICMS EW problems. Not to mention the serious RDM problems the HAF had to deal with when they first received their M 2000’s..
I didn’t deny the RDM issues. I just added the F16 issues in my previous post.
My position overall on this issue is and has always been that Mirage 2000assembly line was shut down in 2006, because it coudn’t compete with F-16The Viper has driven the Mirage out of business because it was considered a much better multirole fighter and better value for money by all the potential customers. ..Had Dassault received further orders after 2006 ,he would have continued to produce the Mirage regardless of the situation with RAFALE..
I respect your opinion, i simply can’t confirm it, based on what i ‘ve seen on videos, photos and interviews from HAF. That’s all. That it can’t compete as multirole, i can confirm. That it can’t compete politically with US, i can also confirm.
I also know that we don’t have much money and that HAF wants to upgrade the 2000 but can’t get the money. I also know that buying 15 is not a HAF “blessed number” (no airforce sane in mind wants 75% of a squadron), but a political “cut” on the number.
I also know that according to greek newspapers, the Mirage costs 2.000 euros per flight hour more than the F16, that 1 MICA costs about 3 Amraams and that spare parts are expensive (not knowing how much).
Also from defencenet articles, i know that the upgrade cost of 1 Mirage was 28 mln euros, while LM asks from 9 to 12 for each F-16 (deoending which block you want to bring to what block). So we ‘re talking here about more than TWICE the cost, not simply “more expensive”.
Also, according to this magazine, in 31 years, we ‘ve done 137.000 flights of interception and recognition (IDing). Multiply this with the cost of fuel and spare parts and you may understand that HAF isn’t your average airforce in the middle of Europe where you go out every Sunday for a nice ride and if you ‘re sort on money you can postpone. Nor can we cut on ammunition, like Austria did , that bought EF without Amraams. We probably have more ammunition compared to bigger European countries than us.
EDIT For some reasons (maybe because it’s too long or half in greek and half in english), the above link doesn’t open, so here’s a screenshot. It’s in greek, but just to show that the number is true.
http://img828.imageshack.us/img828/9797/32507309.png
From http://www.diplomatia.gr (magazine about diplomacy).
And out of the approx. 6,5-7 bln of greek defence budget, only 1 bln goes to new procurements. The rest goes to functional costs/maintance.
So, for you, we may have money. For me, we don’t have as much as you may think. It’s been 15 years that there is talk to substistute the G-3 assault rifle in the greek infantry and so far, only the SF and elite units got M16. The simple infantryman will have to wait indefinitely. Not to speak about the hordes of M113. No wonder HAF never tried to buy a single french bomb for the Mirage, like other nations do.
According to this:
http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/4398/60240260.png
The cost per flight hour varies from 10.000 to 20.000 euros, with an average of 15.000 (it depends the duration on the duration of the flight).
From 2000 to 2008, HAF made 27.527 hours for interception or IDing (shadowing), multiplied by 15.000, gives 416,3 mln euros. This without counting the expenses for the regular trainning program (the interceptions are “extra”).
No wonder we denied the French exchange deal to give back the Mirage and get Rafale. It’s not that the Rafale isn’t better than the Mirage. But a greek proverb says “once you ‘re burnt by the soup, you start blowing even on yogurt before bringing the spoon in your mouth”. The reply wasn’t that the Rafale is worse than the Mirage. The minister said that it was deemed an economically not good offer and Defencenet wrote that the HAF’s position, was that the exchange ratio wasn’t satisfactory, because wanted to keep higher numbers of aircrafts.
You want to hear more? The daily cost of keeping operational 1 frigate with a typical use of 70% at sea and 30% in port, is 55.000 euros, all inclusive (from food to the crew, to fuel and maintance). The cost goes down to 25.000 if you make it 50% at sea and 50% at port.
As i said, i don’t know if the Mirage is inferior in A2A, i know it can kill the F16. The F16 may be to kill the Mirage easier, it’s a possibility, i just don’t know.
I know though, that in political influence, there is no competition between France and USA. And i also know that the French are much more expensive and in the specific case of Greece, we ‘re not UAE. As of matter of fact, we ‘re bankrupt! 😀 I also know that greek politicians usually don’t buy according to which is better, but to which will give them more political gains and bribes. So judging which is “best” by what Greece buys, is bad judgement.
I remember when i first read that the greek army would buy Mercedes trucks in large numbers, i thought “wow, someone got generious with the Army in the ministry! Mercedes!”. Today we know that Daimler Benz had bribed , so no wonder today the greek army is full of Mercedes.
Or, Greece when buying new sub, was between U214 and Scorpene. The U214 won easily. To tell the truth it was also to be expected because the greek submariners were already “german bred” since the 70s. But just to say, if you ask me if this is proof that the U214 is better, i will reply to you that i “don’t know”. Because today we know that Ferostall had bribed the (same) greek goverment.
As for LM… When you give free scholarships to HAF pilots’s kids, your chances of getting a portion of HAF staff to back you up, increase. Even if you leave alone the political influence and lobbies in USA.
No wonder Boeing never really attempted to make a serious campaign to sell a fighter to Greece. Only now they propose the Super Hornet, they too put adds in military magazines and the speculation is that they made the attempt, with the hope that Obama will back them up, since Boeing has a factory in Obama’s home state. So for the 1st time, they decided to try their luck against LM in Greece.
So, if there’s one country where you can’t use its history of purchases to draw a conclusion about who beats what, it’s Greece. Cause the factors that involve politics, lobbies, bribes etc, are way too many.
For example, the new minister of defence said yesterday that one of the programs of the previous gov that he has approved to continue is the BMP-3 (after he renegotiated the deal). You think that the BMP-3 is the best IFV in the world? Other candidates were the swedish CV90 and the german PUMA. Both are overall higher quality. The BMP-3 has better firepower and is cheaper. In all other sectors, the other 2 are better. But the real reason is that it was a deal to seal the cooperation with Russia, by buying something that wouldn’t upset too much our other sellers. And the new MoD doesn’t want to trash the relations with Russia because there is still hope that the Burgas-Alexandroupolis pipeline will be built and that’s good for Greece geopolitically and secondarily economically.
Also the fact that HAF receives “priviledged treatment” usually in the defence budgets, doesn’t mean that has unlimited resources and doesn’t care about costs. Nor does it mean that the Navy and particularly the Army don’t whine for this priviledged treatment. So we have 25 Mirage -5 and 20 Mirage2000. If it was in HAF’s hand, it would probably be 60 Mirage2000-5 (3 full squadrons) or at least 50 (2 reinforced squadrons, even this isn’t a common practice). Which, if you think the fact that the F16 must also do SEAD and CAS, would be a very reasonable number. But the greek MoD simply won’t give the money to buy more french and politically the french start from losing position too.
So go figure.
AspisFor the history, the reason that i can’t express a definitive opinion about the 2 aircrafts, is that i have seen visual proof of both getting killed by each other and because both sides seem to be stuborny certain that they can kill each other.
Here for example, is a video from HAF’s “Top Gun” School. Despite all pilots having an ego, only the pilot of the Mirage and the F16 are positive about their victory. The A7 pilot can’t say of course that he will shoot them down, his job is another, the F4 AUP pilot contains himself in a “of course there is always competition between pilots, each one wants to show that his squadron is the best and deserves its role”. The 2 being cocky about it are the F16 and Mirage pilot. The first says “I believe that this will be the year of the F16”, the second says “The Mirage will win”.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_lAbTTa4v8 (if you have a greek friend he can confirm you their confidence).
Unfortunately we don’t know what happened.
Also, in a recent article from Tanagra, max 2 months old (i don’t remember if i read it on magazine or over the net, but it was journalistic article, not rumour), the journalist asked a Mirage pilot: “Don’t you miss a bit the rear hemisphere visibility of the bubble canopy of the F16? You can’t argue that the visibility is much better than that of the Mirage”. His answer was “No, not really, i have 3 mirrors that cover everything and besides, the F16 won’t make it to my tail”.
I am sure other greek members have read it too. You may register to defencenet.gr forum and ask for confirmation.
Of course, the F16 can make it to his tail. The fact is, that the pilot is confident enough. I mean, this isn’t talking of someone who knows he is beat. What the F4 AUP pilot says is more like someone who knows that he starts with disadvantage.
As i said, i am no pilot and have no independent statistics to support either claim. I know one thing, that in real life, all weapons, don’t compare as in papers, but in different conditions and operators, give different results. This holds true from a humble M113 and goes up to Eurofighter. And aircrafts don’t perform linearly in all speeds and heights either.
AspisThey would not have ordered the Mirage .. That’s the point .They ordered 30 F-16’s in 2005 instead of Mirage . The Mirage 2000 assembly line was in full operation and I am sure Dassault was doing everything to strike a deal when the order for Viper was placed… Aspis, what do you think ? I mean if the Mirage was so good as you say ( scaring the sh…t out of Turkish F-16 pilots ) why the Greek government has choosen the Viper?? dont tell me it was because the Mirage was more expensive because I wont buy it .
Fortunately i am not here desperate to sell it to you. 😀 One may believe what he wants and i am old enough to know when someone has already made his mind.
I wrote a very long post explaining things, you stopped in the first 2 lines… What should i do? Rewrite it again?
Ok. He got F-16 because it was the best, even better than the EF, which was what the previous gov had announced despite than HAF was asking for 4th gen aircraft since 2002. Here’s the proof of the vast superiority of the F16 over the Eurofighter:
Greek Defense Minister Spilios Spiliotopoulos, according to Bloomberg, wants the new F-16s delivered in 2008 and 2009.
Last year Greece decided to scrap their agreement with the European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company (EADS) to buy 60 Eurofighter jets.
http://www.f-16.net/news_article1414.html
Also by fortunate coincidence, the greek order was the one that allowed the Fort Worth line to remain open and was decided after our PM visited Bush with his agenda of political requests. But i am positive it was only a damn good luck for the american workers that our order happened just when the Fort Worth factory was about to close. Bush might have mentioned that. “Hey Kostas, you know what? You arrive just on time! I ‘ve a factory closing with just the type of aircraft you asked me!” Kostas: “No way, i don’t believe it! What do you know!”.
Also by weird coincidence, it was the first time, where Greece ordered aircrafts in odd number of 30 (1 1/2 squadrons) , after the previous gov had anounced decision for 60 Eurofighters.
Again by weird coincidence the same goverment ordered 15 Mirage2000-5 (75% of a squadron) and the upgrade of 10 of the old Mirage2000, leaving 20 Mirage2000 without upgrade. Now, i know we have plenty of money, but wouldn’t it be much more rational to either upgrade the 30 old Mirage or decide not to upgrade them at all, but simply get 20 Mirage2000-5 brand new? Or better yet, leave the Mirage alone and get 40 F16s (2 full squadrons). From the french we could get more VBL, Super Puma, some FAC for the Navy… No reason to further ruin HAF.
Oh yes, since we talk about 2005, i have to add an item:
– Let me now tell you why Greece was buying american:
1) Because the US was the only one capable to topple balances in the greek turkish relations.
2) Because Greece was hoping to US intervention for a solution for Cyprus (before every US election, every US president was gathering the greek americans, saying that he will work hard for a just solution and so on).
3) Because Greece was getting free military aid (second handed, but still…) in 7:10 proportion compared to Turkey. And Greece wanted to maintain the 7:10.
4) Because at the time, the NATO was the only “friendly” organization that could help you defend against the comunist countries.
5) Because the US is the only country with influence to the UN mediation in the FYROM issue (by pure luck, the UN mediator is Matthew Nimitz, ex US undersegretary of State). And before him, it was Cyrus Vance, also ex US secretary of state. Can you beleive how lucky ex US segretaries of state are? They all end up UN mediators and they all end up in the FYROM issue. Never play poker with ex US undersegretaries of State. They ‘re so lucky they may have aces in every hand. 🙂 I may risk a tough prediction here, but, should Nimitz decide to retire at some point, i wouldn’t be surprised, even if the 3rd UN mediator for the FYROM issue , turned to be, again some lucky ex US undersegretary of State.
P.S1: Contrary to you, i didn’t say which one is best, i said that i have no tangible proof. I quoted the same urban legends, to show their value.
P.S2: I know one thing for sure. That the LM lobby in Greece and within greek-Americans is beyond compare with anything the french have.
– AHI President Aleco Haralambides and Executive Director Nick Larigakis attended a ceremony at Lockheed Martin’s facilities on March 19 to commemorate the initial delivery of the latest generation of F-16 fighter aircraft to Greece under an agreement with the United States. Lt. Gen. Ioannis Giagkos, chief, Hellenic Air Force General Staff; and Bruce Lemkin, undersecretary of international affairs, U.S. Air Force; also took part in the ceremony to mark the F-16 Peace Xenia IV program for Greece.
http://www.ahiworld.com/newsletters/vol36no239.html
The American Hellenic Chamber of Commerce:
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
…
Plessas Dennys, Vice President Business Development Initiatives Europe, Middle East, Africa
LOCKHEED MARTIN (INTERNATIONAL) S.A.
http://www.amcham.gr/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=56&Itemid=73
So tell me, when a greek PM goes to Washington and meets with the greek- American lobby, what do you think that they ask him to buy? Ships? The americans lost this definitely since Maastricht to the Germans and French. Ground vehicles? The Germans have pretty much covered that too. (Ah, yes, because since Maastricht, the US ceased to be the only politically interesting country for Greece). Another eventuality is that they tell him “we can lobby but you must tell Greeks to drink more Coca Cola, the US President needs to be “encouraged”. If you all drink more Coca Cola then we will have better chances”.
Ok, the Mirage is beaten badly, but we ordered 15 more anyway and left 20 unupgraded. (not that we don’t have the money to afford the upgrade… It’s just that we like old aircrafts). Ok. Then, why didn’t we at least try to find another aircraft type that could beat the F16? For example the F15 proposed to us and ranked 1st in 1999 by HAF or the Sukhoi? Or this might actually be the definitive proof that the F16 eats those 2 for breakfast too.
So, F16 eating for breakfast Mirage with sauce of Eurofighter, accompanied by feathers of Sukhoi and a pickle of F15. 🙂
The problem is, that you have a very keen eye in seeing “politics” where’s there’s something french. Not so keen eye when there is an american sale, even though the politics there are so big, that you should have a sore eye by now. 😀
I know you won’t buy my story, it’s ok, i don’t buy your either. So we ‘re even.
AspisOn paper, a first attempt to make a European Force has been already made with the formation of “EU Battlegroups”:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlegroup_of_the_European_Union
But, as things are today, with very little to no coordination and standardization, any attempt to partecipate in real war would probably end to operational and logistical nightmare.
AspisI agree with you,
In the end it’s the french taxpayer helping greece pay back those greedy and careless french banks; Greece is too big to be allowed to file for bankrupcy. And it’s unfortunate enough to be in the EU.
In the end it always end up with the taxpayer being racketed by the banks or the military/pharmacy/chemical giants.
Nic
The problem is, that with this plan, it’s not even certain that bankruptcy will be avoided. It’s too abrubt and short, even Trichet warned the EU about it. And of course there are foreign investment houses which have invested billions in the greek bankruptcy and will do their best to get the money they hope (each time Greece will go to the markets, there will be barrage of fear spreading articles). Already during August the first articles made again their appearance because in a few days Greece will go to sell short term bonds and some want to buy at very high interest…
And yes, at the end, the taxpayer is the one who pays the price. The EU banks by 2012 will have been repaid for the best part of the greek debt. If Greece then defaults, it will be of little interest, since the EU loans are state loans, meaning with state warrancies. Basically, if we defaulted now, we could cut 50% of the value of all greek bonds and EU banks would get something like 150 bln damage. If we default on 2012, the banks are safe (or with minor damage) and the EU state loans, will be repaid by ceizing greek state property. While if we defaulted now, foreign banks would have no claims to greek state property. They would have simply worthless paper.
Of course should 2012 come and Greece defaults, the greek goverment will have to escape by helicopter to Germany, together with the german award, because it might cross the mind of the population that it was all a sharade to save the EU banks, by making an impossible to follow “bail out plan”, which included to practically sell out pubblic property in order to save the EU banks.
Either way, i support the IMF plan, as long as it brings structural reforms. I wouldn’t bet 1 euro on the final result of it, but it’s something that even if fails, it will serve to turn the population against the 2 major parties.
Of course there might be some other political deal behind the curtains that we don’t know. For example one greek journalist says that already Trichet is preparing the ground in the IMF so that Greece will repay to the IMF the loan after 5 instead of 3 years. And then the opposition parties accuse the IMF as being the worst of the bunch!
After 2012, the worst implication of a greek default won’t be economical directly (that’s why all EU countries are pushed to correct their budgets quickly, so that if Greece defaults, the “domino effect” won’t be so likely), but political. It will show that the EU failed in its “rescue” plan (political defeat) and it will teach the next one that will eventually come to the same position that “it’s better to default immediately” rather than struggling with everlasting cuts that lead nowhere.
* Of the package of 110 bln from the IMF-EU, the 10 are for the greek banks… Basically the goverment cuts pensions to find 1 bln, and the banks get 10…
AspisThe funny thing is that the current PM passes as “serious” and “virtuous”. He just got an award from the Germans actually… Yes, now he is virtuous, because he carries on the IMF-EU plan. If he didn’t want the plan, Greece would bankrupt. Even worse for the Greeks. But out of the 300 bln of greek debt, only 40 was in greek hands. Who had the rest? EU banks. So, now he is virtuous and must continue to be “serious” up until the EU banks get the money that the IMF-EU gives to Greece.
It’s a tragicomical situation. If the greek debt was held by say Icelandic banks, we would have declared bankruptcy now, nobody would have cared. Now, it’s more like someone who owes money to the bank, can’t repay and in order to repay he borrows money from a loan shark , who also happens to be stock owner of the bank. So, the EU countries, really want to save their banks. But they can’t say to their people that “we must save them again”. So they give the money to Greece , to give them to their banks, while Greece pays the loans with 5% interest (while in average they get the money at 3%, like loan sharks do). The ironic is that the rhetoric in Greece is mainly against the IMF because it’s easier to present as evil (Argentina case), while at least the IMF wants 3% interest (not 5%) and Trichet had tried to explain to the EU that a 5 year plan was needed, 3 was too short, but some inside the EU didn’t want it. Of course, how can an economy in recession become competitive while paying 5% interest while the others pay 3% and must reduce the deficit by 11 points in 3 years (never done before in the history of mankind) that’s another question too.
Here though is what the “serious” PM was saying last year in order to win the elections. Although in greek, the title “best video of the year” is significant. His slogan is “there is money!” (Lefta iparhun!). Because his opponent was saying that he can’t promice raises, because there aren’t available money.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odVGroOBs-Y
While the director of the bank of Greece, had warned both him and the PM of the time, that the deficit unless taken immediate measures would hit double digit by the end of the year.
Of course after being elected he adopted the fairytale that “he didn’t know” that money wasn’t there.
And here he is in 2008 (when he was in opposition), protesting against the attempt of the conservatives to make a mildly sticter pension reform.
http://img814.imageshack.us/img814/3032/44515751.jpg
Of course, now he had to make himself a much tougher pension reform… Oh, the populism… How nice is to be in the opposition and promice the sky with the stars!
The “conservatives” are also riding (as always) the populism train. They accuse the goverment of bending to the memorandum and call it the “memorandum goverment”. Like if they have no responsibility.
Really, the most dangerous aren’t the Turks. It’s these 2 parties, that enjoyed 40 years of absolute power = absolute corruption. The sooner they will lose their ability to form goverment on their own, the better. I don’t care if they have to rule together with the party of greek Hunters, as long as they don’t rule alone.
What the Germans who awarded him haven’t realised, is that the current PM doesn’t rule. He is allowed to rule. If the healthy part of the population that wants reforms is tired of raising all the burdon or sees that the plan goes bad, the PM won’t be allowed to rule anymore and nothing will be able to stop that, because there won’t be 500 people alone to protest out of the parliament. They will be thousands and will get into the parliament.
Currently the greek gov has been quick in making cuts, but that’s easy. In the tax collecting sector it lost many months doing nothing and moving very slowly in putting the mecchanisms back in shape and the IMF plan has already miscalculated the inflation (5% instead of 1% predicted). And the recession is bound to worsen. And the most uncapable minister is in the ministry responsible for growth, without which, this program becomes a death trap. If the goverment doesn’t manage to strike hard the black economy, which accounts for 25%-30% of GDP, there’s no way to pull this off in 3 years. And unfortunately, until now, it’s been very slow to that front.
Sign In
