AspisIf it was done as a single contract, they can probably get away with that as the Greek government has not made the final payments of the contract.
Maybe, but as i said, unless you have your hands on the contract, all you can do is guess.
I don’t want to underestimate the stupidity of greek politicians, but i want to believe they ‘ve put clauses to safeguard the greek side too, specially when you are supposed to get the… prototype too. The Papanikolis, maybe now “within parameters” but it’s not a “normal” U214 as the rest. Apart the initial problems in hydraulics, ISUS etc, the inclination problem as i understood it, was due to bad distribution of weight in the various sectors of the sub. In the Papanikolis, since they found out about it when the sub was already finished, they didn’t cut the hull and start from scratch and instead did many smaller (and weird) “fixes”. The rest of the subs, were still under construction and were able to correct this problem before closing the hull. As a result, the Papanikolis, is “sui generis” as submarine. It may be “within parameters” now, but it’s not identical to the other U214s, which had the chance to be corrected “on the fly” while they were being built. This alone could be seen as a vice.
It’s like ordering 20 F22 and being delivered with 19 F22 and 1 YF-22 (test prototype), modified to be within the parameters of the production line F22s, but not identical in everything to them.
There is also the issue of the wear and tear that the sub has been submitted to in 4 years of testing. If i remember correctly, the fuel cells alone, should be replaced after 1 year. It’s like ordering a car, being given the prototype, which isn’t exactly like the commercial cars of the same model, but modified to perform on par and in the meantime there is the small inconvenience that it has some thousand miles on its mileage counter, the engine is a bit used, the oils need changing , etc. I certainly wouldn’t buy that car.
Then on the U209 contract, the delay is even worse. The ministry prepaid 80% of the cost and the 1st sub got into water only a few months ago. Way behind schedule. I want to believe that there MUST be a clause protecting the client from such delays.
I don’t know, lawyers can work miracles. But i wouldn’t sing victory just yet if i were Thyssen.
AspisHello, i only saw this by luck today.
One basic thing in Greece right now, is ELECTIONS.
We have anticipated (not a surprise) elections on October 4.
By “pure coincidence”, On Sept 21 Thyssen decided to denounce the contracts of both U214 and the upgrade of U209.
One certain thing, is that the timing is not casual, they dealt an unexpected political blow to the goverment, which is already behind in polls , since now newspapers write about the “1400 innocent workers, victims of the submarine row” and they apply political pressure to the next goverment, which is 99% sure that will be the current opposition (aka the socialists).
The other certain thing, is that the Navy is upset, because it’s -7 in its original calculation of submarine force (4 U214 + 3 upgraded U209).
For the rest:
– There is no source indicating any official reply from the greek part, concerning the juridical position that the greek ministry will pursue. As a matter of fact, this goverment, at 13 days before the elections, couldn’t care less about what strategy will follow in the international chamber of commerce. Not only because at 13 days before elections , your mind is how to win the elections, but also because… the current goverment WON’T win the elections. So the whole handing of the case will pass on the socialist goverment.
– The socialist goverment after this move from Thyssen, may choose to find a new deal, instead of waiting 1+ years for the verdict of arbitration. This, in order to avoid having the 1400 workers fired during its term shouting about how the state left them on their own and the navy protesting for having crippled the sub fleet. This is pure speculation though, from my part, based on the -soon to be- socialist MoD, who said “we will view the issue based on public interest, the needs of the Navy and the protection of employment”. The fact that the Germans haven’t closed yet the shipyards, as was rumoured since last spring (i have written about it since then in here), enforces i think that Thyssen is waiting for the possibility of a “political” deal with the new goverment.
– Thyssen denounced the 2 contracts of U214 and upgrade of U209 and refuses to deliver any of them unless they get paid for the combined sum of 520 mln euros (including delayed interests), 300 of which, are owned to the Skaramanga shipyards “daughter” company , which the Germans consider thus closing as “not profitable”. I think i also read in one article that Thyssen also froze the offsets that was supposed to offer. But not 100% sure about that (my memory sometimes can fail me).
– If you read anti-goverment newspapers, they accuse the goverment saying that from the moment that a few months ago the Navy Chief admitted that the Papanikolis after the last modifications is withing parameters, it’s the goverment’s fault for not accepting it.
– If you read pro-goverment newspapers, they say that it is unacceptable to have paid 80% of both contracts and having received none. (The 4 U214 according to contract, should have ended deliveries by March 2008 and as for the 3 U209, only 1 has been set to sea, the navy wants it, but Thyssen has now frozen delivery).
– Another rumour quoting “goverment sources” is that the Germans, after failing to convince the Polish and the german navy (as Thyssen had threatened to do) to buy the Papanikolis , was searching for an excuse to close the Skaramanga skipyards, as does worldwide with various of her “daughter companies”. Even more since the Germans, right after buying them, inherited an EU Commission fine on these shipyards regarding competition laws, which amounts to about 150-200 mln euros if i remember correctly and by closing them, the fine would become void.
– The current minister of defense, on the only time he was asked about it in TV, said that he has no problem with the arbitration of the ICC, because Thyssen will be forced to change her position. (of course before elections he can’t say anything else… so that doesn’t say much). Also the govermental side accuses the opposition, which when it was on power ordered the U214, while it was only “on paper” and here’s the result of having to deal with the prototype of the series.
– An article quoting “navy source” says that the navy has lost 7 subs from its power while having paid 5 of them. Where are the 5 for which we paid for?
– Though as i said, with the elections so close, nobody really sweats about what will happen in ICC in 1 year from now, from what i understood from the press, there is no need to “countersuit”. It’s an arbitration in the ICC, where both parties will present their claims and the ICC will decide who is interpreting the contract correctly and who isn’t.
* Most arbitrations take 1+ years to arrive to the hearing in ICC. Although some exceptions exist, which ended in 2 months. In any case, most probably, this will end after 1+ years.
* I think this is the last time Greece buys some system which includes the “prototype”.
* For more reliable information on what the greek MoD will do, one will have to wait until the new goverment takes office and starts reviewing the whole deal.
* My personal evaluation: One has to have the contract in his hands to see what’s written. I don’t exclude that at the end we may have to accept the Papanikolis despite its “sinful past” (in Greece everyone knows it as the “inclinated sub” and it’s already object of various jokes). Because of the fact that it finally came “under parameters”. But, i don’t think Thyssen will have a healthy walk either, since it exceeded the timetables in the deliveries of both contracts and has actually refused to deliver even the paid systems.
AspisPartecipation of Frigate “Navarino” in thwarting piracy attempt
17/8/2009
1) Consensual inspection of the pirate vessel which attempted to board a merchant ship, of turkish flag M/V ELGIZNUR CEBI, was performed in the first hours of 14th August by the UDT unit aboard the frigate Navarino, in cooperation with the helicopter of the german frigate “BREMEN”.
2) In particular, while the frigate Navarino was cruising towards the port of Djibuti, it received in the international emergency channel, a call for help from the merchant ship in danger and proceeded towards it. The boat from the greek frigate, approached the 6 Somali pirates and disarmed them.
3) The frigate Navarino, is part of the ΝΑΤΟ SNMG-2 task force, deployed in the gulf of Aden, under the operation “Allied Protector”.
http://www.hellenicnavy.gr/new_details.asp?hn_new_id=1619
Photos:
Aspis
Two pilots survive military plane crash in Turkey
Thursday, July 23, 2009
ISTANBUL – Hürriyet Daily News with wires
Two pilots were slightly injured when a military training plane crashed in the eastern province of Malatya on Thursday, news agencies reported.
The pilots parachuted to safety moments before the F-4 Phantom jet crashed into an empty field after takeoff from the Erhaç Air Base in Malatya. Gov. Mehmet Ulvi Saran said the pilots were hospitalized after the incident, which took place near Mısırdere village in the Yazıhan district.
According to Yazıhan Mayor Ali Kaya, the plane crashed after it lost its fuel tank. Witnesses told the Doğan news agency that the plane was in flames while it was losing altitude.
The cause of the crash will be determined after an investigation.
Aegean dogfights
In related news, fears that the repeated dogfights over the Aegean Sea between Turkish and Greek fighters would soon lead to a tragic accident grew Wednesday after a plane ran into trouble over the eastern Aegean.
According to the Greek Air Force, six Turkish F-16 jets entered Greek air space at 4.11 p.m., Greek daily Kathirmerini reported. Two of these planes broke off from the formation and flew at a height of 3,000 feet over Farmakonisi, then at 1,000 feet over Agathonisi and at 3,300 feet over Fournoi, the paper said.
Two Greek fighters approached the Turkish planes in a bid to force them away from the islands. At that point, the paper reported, one of the Turkish F-16s issued an emergency warning due to problems with its flight-control system.
Turkish air force officers immediately contacted their Greek counterparts in a bid to secure a clear, quick route for the F-16 to return to its base in Eskişehir, in northwestern Turkey. The plane reportedly left Greek air space after flying at 15,000 feet over Icaria.
AspisNo, there has never been a program terminated for poor performance :rolleyes:
Off the top of the head…
A-12 wasn’t terminated and the contractors aren’t being assessed $1.6B by USG
P-7A wasn’t terminated
USAF Tanker lease contract wasn’t terminated
Aerial Common Sensor wasn’t terminated
AH-66 Comanche wasn’t terminated
Crusader artillery system wasn’t terminated
VH-71 Presidential helicopter wasn’t terminated
DD-21 wasn’t terminated
and there are plenty more…
Actually, those who get cancelled, are usually those that go REALLY badly (development deadend) or become unnecessary or too costly. Those with poor performance, usually do arrive in the field and then get “upgraded”.
Just by a quick search:
P-7A
The program was finally cancelled by the DAB at the end of 1990, on the grounds that it had fallen behind schedule, which called for the two prototypes to be delivered in 1992
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/p-7.htm
A12
The companies encountered numerous problems with the technology needed to develop a stealthy aircraft suitable for aircraft carrier operations.
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogscript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog:27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post:8ff3fac0-a078-4f7c-a6c2-9ce5784709cb
Commanche
On 23 February 2004, the U.S. Army announced their decision to cancel the Comanche helicopter program in view of the need to provide funds to renovate the existing helicopter fleet of aging attack, utility, and reconnaissance aircraft.
Technology developed for the Comanche will be integrated into the Apache and other U.S. military helicopter developments. The Army was developing the Bell ARH-70 to replace the OH-58D in place of the RAH-66, but after cost overuns, the ARH-70 was canceled in October 2008.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAH-66_Comanche
DD-21, the Destroyer for the 21st century. However the program was cancelled in November 2001, with a cheaper version of the DD-21 emerging as the DD(X) or Zumwalt class destroyer.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SC-21_(United_States)
AspisAnd another trend that is proving itself worldwide over the years, is , the more complex and hi tech a new weapon is, the more likely it will present youth problems after it’s released and the more demanding in its maintanance it will be.
This is something guerilla fighters worldwide have seen and that’s why the AK47 is still the most popular and reliable weapon is the most adverse conditions and with the most inexperienced soldier handling it and (not) maintaining it.
Going back to aircrafts, the trend worldwide, is also that newer gen aircrafts are considerably more expensive than previous gen aircrafts. This doesn’t agree of course with LM’s brochure about F35’s costs. And i am afraid it won’t agree even more with the maintenance costs of the F35. USAF has the money to pay 49000 $ per flight hour for the F22. Let’s say the F35 is more ironed out and will fall to 35000. That’s still a hell lot of money for most other users out there. And if you are unable to do full maintenance locally, in your own country, that cost will become unbearable. LM may sell it at 25 mln. Whoever wants to have a squadron operational and the rest disabled, can still buy it. But those who want a decent availability, won’t or will buy it in few numbers.
Fortunately, the consortium members will do the guinea pigs for the rest of us. After a few years in foreign service, we will know about maintanance costs, besides what LM will be claiming.
AspisI agree. But even in some Western nations there is a reluctance to get tough…does anyone REALLY expect France and Germany to get hold EADS accountable for the A400 program?
Truth is, that once you ‘ve signed a contract, you, the customer are going to live with the conseguences and discover what they dealer didn’t tell you. And once a company has achieved a contract with her home army, the Parliament can only mitigate damages by renegotiating future orders.
Weapons companies are no angels, be them western, russian or chinese. Nobody of course will come and tell you the problems that you will face AFTER you have signed the contract. On brochure they all work fine.
– Was the F22 operating cost supposed to grow instead of going down? What are you going to do to LM? Cancel the rest?
– How many Congress approved military vehicles or weapons didn’t prove themselves in Vietnam or GWs and were withdrawed or sent for upgrade? Did someone close down Colt for not having the M16 delivering to the GI’s expectations? No! Just buy the M16A1. Your M1A1 Abrams is been penetrated by Iraqi RPGs? No worries! For a cheap upgrade, you get the M1A2! Your Humvee is becoming a deadly trap from enemy gunfire? No worries! We have an excellent additional armor for it!
“Further improvement” = Some soldiers lost their lives because of our cheapness and bad design, now you have the opportunity to pay again in order to save the rest.
– Recently German Eurofighters lost electrical power to MFDs while in flight. You bet that wasn’t in the brochure and you can also bet that EADS won’t get an order cancelled or anything. Of course a question comes natural. Since this issue was presented in large scale in the Luftwaffe, to the point to issue a directive where only experienced pilots will be flying, how come wasn’t it presented to the other Typhoon countries? Was a defective assembly of the german Typhoons? Or did it went “hush hush” to the other airforces?
– Rafale’s OSF has been quoted as obsolescent in the IRST compartment. You bet that if you had bought it, they wouldn’t have mentioned it nor would they replace it for free. Just like when the Indians were buying the Mirage, probably nobody told them nor did they imagine that one day they would be asked to pay 40mln per plane for upgrade.
Usually, producing countries, live with the problems that their local weapons companies created. Because at the end, it’s their product, people get jobs and national tech grows. They simply pay them again to “correct” the errors.
Foreign customers, are also asked to basically do the same, unless the problem is something obvious that you can see at the moment of delivery.
To that, you have to add that you have to save the prestige of your company. So what are you going to do about it? Here’s a short list of “shortcomings” compared to “advertized” brochures we ‘ve heard in Greece, according to military press:
– Mirage2000 EGM and solution of performance problems of RDM radar.
– Mirage2000-5mk2 and solution of EW problems (years).
– Erieye and solution of problems in the greek configuration and links (years).
– Russian Zubr hovercrafts have a surprisingly fast rate of deterioration of the “skirt”, which thus needs to be replaced more often than one would imagine.
– F16s at very bad weather had a canopy reflection problem before 2000, that could lead to pilot disorientation. This is why in the 1996 crisis with Turkey, the F16s were on hold in both sides and only Mirage and F4 were doing CAP.
– F16 B52+, came with initially water leaking through access panels (resolved quickly). The EW suite has still not be accepted 100% from HAF and they fly without. The 2-seated B52+Adv have water condensation issue inside the EW compartment.
-F16 lower structural endurance than expected, after years in service.
– U214, the prototype was rolling like mad. Why sell the prototype in the first place would be a good question. People don’t buy the prototype of a car, why should they with a submarine… Of course according to german press and HDW, the sub never had a problem.
– Leo2A6, armor penetrated frontally in the german field tests, after adding armor, hairline cracks appeared, still unresolved, KMW has put Kassel university to find cause and solution. Of course according to german press, this never happened.
– C-27J Spartan, there are some repeated defective spare parts and an initial report of water leaking in the cockpit (resolved quickly).
– Chinook helicopters. There is a very rare condition that i don’t recall in detail and made one of our helicopters go down. Boeing later acknowledged this ” very rare” problem. Pay and fix.
– Various barrel decortication issues in different cannons , when used with specific ammunition.
– NH90 delivery schedule delays and non compliance with agreed contract terms issue.
Did any Parlament do anything to “punish” the producing companies? No… Especially if you are the procucing country, you will keep the product and hush hush about its issues or learn to live with them, for prestige reasons or the simple fact that you gave job to your own industry.
As we say in Greece, “after you have paid, no mistake is recognized by the vendor”.
The brochures are for the romantics, independetly from nationality. And Parlament members, are usually funded by the same people who sell weapons and make sure no serious punishment will fall to their company, no matter what they did.
AspisAnd speaking of costs…
Take this, and apply it to F35.
That’s cost too. “Stealth baby-care”. And actually much worse than a one-off payment. It will be sucking you dry for 30 years… If USAF is struggling with maintenance of her own aircraft, despite her resources, what will happen to foreign airforces that don’t have USAF’s funds? What good is there in buying a plane at 50 mln $ and then paying its weight in gold just for “re-stealthening” it after every flight? If rumours that want Italy being the only “certified” european facility for repairing stealth issues is true, then it’s a logistics nightmare. Well, unless you are happy with 30% availability.
AspisSorry but I believe such a price tag when I see it, not those empty marketing promises to keep the customers onboard.
It is obvious that the figures that appear in LM brochures, are… brochures, from the fact alone that they present the F35 to foreign customers but, aren’t in position to give an approximative price or even a “max price”… There isn’t much else to say… They did official presentation to HAF and couldn’t give ANY “approximative” price. How lame is this? Why didn’t they give the “40mln” for F35A +-10 mln? Reminds me of films with used car dealers where you ask the price and they pretend they didn’t hear and go on with advertizing the “graces” of the vehicle.
– “Right, but how much is it again?”
– “Oh, look here too! The air conditioning works fine!
– “Great. Now how much is it?”
– “I ‘ll tell you, but first let me show you in what a lovely condition the engine is!”
– “Ok, now how much do you want?”
– “And did i mention the electric mirrors?”
If LM knows that the F35A costs 40mln or approximately 40mln, then by all means, don’t keep it to yourself and brochures! Tell so to the customers! Don’t be shy! They want to know!
Sure the costs will go down once full rate production ramps up, but I’m still sceptical about those figures. Just take a look at the F-16 which is still in production and how expensive new build aircraft are. So you want to tell me the F-35 won’t be more expensive with all that stealth and technology involved? That’s ridiculous at best.
Yes, new tech and stealth, all cheaper than F16 (old LM tech is more expensive). I ‘ll take two. Just wrap ’em up please. 😀
AspisWhat went totally unnoticed and was left unreported by India’s mainstream media was that a seventh independent bidder too had presented its detailed bid—this being SIBAT—the Foreign Defense Assistance and Defense Export Department of the Israel Ministry of Defence, and Israel’s counterpart of Russia’s Rosoboronexport State Corp, France’s Office Francais d’Exportation de Materiel Aeronautique (OFEMA), the United Kingdom’s Defence Export Services Organisation (DESO), and Pakistan’s Defence Export Promotion Organisation (DEPO).
Huh? How can that pass unnoticed??? :confused: And now suddently one discovered it? Wow… And that consortium was including also Pakistan’s Defence Export Promotion Organization?? 😮 Is this a joke??
Fishy indeed! Everything that can be verified with sources turns out to be false in the JPost article (Israeli components in the Gripen IN which there are none). That makes me very dubious about the rest of the article.
One thing is for sure, that suddenly people come up with wild stories. First Israelis, now Indians. Some people have serious credibility issues, because how is it possible to come up with such “detailed” reports , totally fake and nobody cares to comment on them? First J Post quoting “Israeli sources”, then this Indian Mr. Prasun K. Sengupta, who comes up with an ultra-detailed explanation, albeit the most weird i ‘ve ever heard…
My take on the story is that it could be planted, possible to by used by IAI against the US to gain favours. Then again, IAI has a lot to loose on this story as it’s discrediting them as serious supplier.
In deed, i see no way of how this “news” from JPost is going to help IAI’s relations with USA. It’s IAI that’s going to suffer more by pissing USA, not the opposite. Basically the 2 big US companies, if all this is imaginary Israeli BS, are going to be seriously pissed towards IAI , because they will see this as slandering attempt, in order to raise fears in India towards US tactics.
I don’t know who’s telling the truth here. Someone involved should come out and make an official statement. Many $$$ at stake in the Indian tender. If some people are playing media games, trying to win it, ok, i understand. But, the involved parties that are dragged into this, should come out and deny the claims (Pentagon, Israeli gov, IAI, Indian gov, SAAB, someone!).
· Agreeing to a win-win option under which Gripen International and the two US-based M-MRCA OEMs would not present competing bids in countries that are expected to procure new-generation combat aircraft, albeit in far smaller numbers than what the IAF will be procuring, with these countries including Argentina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Croatia, Denmark, Greece, Malaysia, The Netherlands, Romania, Slovakia and Switzerland.—Prasun K. Sengupta
So, i presume that within days either Saab or Boeing and LM will withdraw from the greek tender too? Hmmm…
AspisThe JPost article is wrong about any Israeli components in Gripen to India. The EW suite is Swedish, the secure comms is German (Rhode & Schwarts) and the AESA is Swedish/British.
According to my contacts any partnership between Saab and IAI would be for tapping into IAI:s existing footprint on the Indian market, in particular Air force integration.
Well, if your contacts are correct, i don’t see how the Pentagon can stop IAI from that… Where’s the “secret” US tech in that? :confused:
Not that journalists can’t write BS, but if that’s true the entire JPost article is pure fiction. From the official reason of US tech that must not be exported to the unofficial claims that “US did that because feared they ‘d have to reduce prices of their own aircrafts”.
I mean, those Israeli journalists must be really drunk or something.
AspisI think its a bunch of BS to be fair. SAAB already has shown its radar which is not any IAI derivative.
It is supplying EW equipment for Sukhois anyway so I don’t think any of this will cause delays.
Well, if the radar isn’t Israeli and EW isn’t either, then what is? I mean the Israeli press seems making fuss about it. There must be something israeli…
In any case, i have no doubt, that given the time, the Swedes could come up with everything theirs. Radar included and deliver in time. The problem i see (if J Post is correct), is, what will you include in your candidacy file? And how will this affect your candidacy?
For example, let’s suppose that IAI was to make the EW suite. And the reason is that IAI has more advanced research on EW suites at the moment. SAAB could come up with a suite on par, no doubt, if you give her time, but what is she going to include in her candidacy file NOW? Her currently available solutions may be inferior to the IAI (there must be a reason why you don’t install your own). This, means that the Gripen will be penalized in the ranking. Which is how you lose a tender in the technical criteria at least.
If Americans want to pull the plug on the Gripen they can do so by denying rhe engine.
I have the suspicion that Saab must have made some kind of agreement with USA when she got the license for the engine on the Gripen, that she will be free to export it. While… Israel, didn’t. :diablo: So Israel is the weakest link to strike, if you want to hit Gripen’s chances.
Well, i will be the first to be happy if all this proves to be some Israeli hallucination and in reality there was nothing they had to deliver to Saab.
AspisDunno about the radar I thought Selex was giving radar for the NG.
I don’t know why IAI has to give EW suite, I think SAAB makes their own. Wasn’t the Israeli components in the MKI replaced with SAAB ones for the Su 30 MKMs ?
Well, i haven’t followed the evolution of such things. I used Jerusalem Post’s article as source:
IAI was supposed to provide the electronic systems – radar, communications and electronic-warfare – for the plane.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1246443717576&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
If it’s not true, well, then, not entirely my fault 🙂
If Jerusalem Post is right, theoretically, while SAAB *could* work their own, the question is, has SAAB enough time to change plans and propose a viable and credible alternative (without reducing the quality of her initial candidacy file and thus Gripen’s chances) to India now or is it too late?
Of course the argument of “not wanting western tech to India” is not holding water, since 2 US aircrafts are ready to give full ToT to India. So it’s US tech ready to be given by US hands. What’s the difference if Israel was to do the same? Simply, US wanted the Gripen out of its way and for good. And probably did so successfully.
AspisAnd an older activity. May 11 – May 15. In the framework of cooperation between AdlA and HAF, a french delegation from the Operational Training Unit (OPU) of Gazaux AB visited HAF’s 363 Trainning Squadron, at Kalamata.
The french delegation included 3 Alpha Jets, which together with HAF’s T2E/C, conducted a flight program , which included A2A and A2G scenarios, with mixed crews.
(photos by HAF)
Aspis….And THALES, which was told to stop the integration of its AESA antenna on the gripen NG after the demo aircraft.
Might hurt for the Brazilian competition as well.
Yes… The IAI was supposed to provide radar, EW suite and comms.
Now what? They ‘re practically out of the competition. Who’s left to seek cooperation from? The Russians? :p And the time for the final evaluation is almost over. What will the Swedes present in their candidacy file now? “We will find someone to give us radar, please accept us and have faith that we will?” And i think this was exactly the US intention. Not letting the Swedes time for reaction, unlike the first time when Thales stepped back. So they waited up to the last moment before pushing the Israelis to announce that they step out of the cooperation with SAAB.
Although i wonder whether this US attitude will have any political repercussions to the Indians. Could it increase the fears of what political leverage US would have to India in case of US aircraft procurement ? Would it make the US appear too cynical and ruthless making the investment on US aircraft and more importantly weapons be seen as too risky in case India was to find herself against the US policy?
Our Indian friends would be the more appropriate to answer that. Personally i think that if the Indian goverment has already decided to buy american, it won’t change much (meaning that politics impose the contract and everything else is thus irrelevant). But if not, maybe it could raise an eyebrow.
Dear Swedish, the next time join EADS and Dassault and make just one EU fighter. Selling weapons is a dirty business and you ‘re like a small fish swimming next to the sharks when political pressure and ruthless tactics comes to play.
Sign In
