AspisGripen export tailand and southafrica.With Iris T
Typhoon export A.Saudi and Oman.A.Saudi have f-15,tornado,lot american weapoms air forces,but typhoon play in other league.
The Typhoon plays in deed in another league, but also the Arab wallet plays in another league. ๐
The Gripen in deed knows its league and thus sells despite not being able to offer any political offsets. Because exactly, they are ready to integrate almost *anything* as soon as they hear a customer hint about it.
AspisOk, I get your point. But I think that is the biggest problem with the Rafale and Typhoon from an export point of view. Dassault had fantastic export success with the Mirage series of light fighters. Then they decided to go heavy with the Rafale and so far it hasnยดt been as successful as the predecessor M2K and probably never will. The same goes for the British I think. They used to have geat success with types like the Vampire and the Hunter. Light and affordable planes that most countries could operate. Then they made the heavy Lightning and the Tonka which never became as successful in terms of export. Now, they got the Typhoon will probably follow the same path for the same reason IMHO.
The reason why “heavies” like Typhoon and Rafale never will become great export successes is not because they are bad aircraft but because the concept is “wrong”.
In deed, i never meant to say that the eurocanards are worse aircrafts. As a matter of fact they are better! Nor do i think that being heavyweights are of no use. The problem is, that they are not fitted quickly enough with weapons and systems, so to be able to show to the – few- countries interested for a heavyweight, that it’s worth to buy them instead of the american ones.
Also, the problem also is, that time has passed. In the Mirage era for example, there was the cold war. Those that were in the sphere of influence of USSR, would buy russian. Those that weren’t could buy American (specially NATO countries) or French or British mainly.
The Mirage did export better, because:
– It wasn’t too expensive.
– It could beat the F16 in dogfight.
– It was a solution for non aligned countries or for countries that didn’t want to depend on only one vendor (see previous message on resupply reliability).
– At that time, the american aircrafts, in term of weapons, didn’t offer all that much variety.
For example, take the M2000. We bought it as anti-F16 that could guarantee that in a time of crisis, we wouldn’t depend 100% from US or other NATO countries for ammunition. But we also thought that it wasn’t worth to take A-G weapons for it, so it was oriented to A-A.
I see here the Indians, used it as multirole, so they bought (i presume also french iron bombs), these:
Aerospatiale AS-30L
Hawker-Matra Martel Missile
At that time of the purchase, what could an F16 give you more in terms of multirole? The usual F16 weaponry, were the various Mk8X bombs, the first Mavericks and Paveways. And that was it. So you took those 2 french missiles, you were fine. The Mirage + french weapons, did cost more than the F16 + US weapons, but it was an acceptable solution, because it was giving you some advantages, operationally and politically. And at least in Greece, the M2000 has had the reputation of more expensive and A to A limited, but both in the original EGM and in the 005-mk2, there were insistent press articles that the EW suite that the french were giving each time, was superior of the corresponding american one. And also, while our F16s mostly took a first structural strenghtening at about 3000 hours (despite the theoretical lifespan), the Mirage never had the need for. From what we have read, in the F16s we have encountered a wide crack problem. With the Mirage we haven’t.
TODAY, together with the changed reality (who would ever think back then, that the Sukhoi would be a contender in a greek competition or the ex Soviet Pact countries would buy F16s…), things have also changed. The market is more open to everyone , since there is no more so strict political “lines” drawed. You see India may go for US aircraft for example for the first time.
And here comes then THIS:
But i really don’t think there are “cheap” fighters anymore, the f16/gripen cost 30-40 millions, a bit too expensive with the inherent risks of the single engine planes, and even them are way too costly for bombing tasks, what is the deal getting supersonic speed, when using dumb/”smart” bombs you must get near of your target at low speed/altitude?
The added electronics, ECM, fancy radars etc, advanced engines .. has turned more and more expensive the new planes,IMO i think they need to be double engined
YES. With every new generation, the aircraft becomes more expensive. The “cheapness” of an F16 today, is simply relative. But given what are the alternatives, it IS cheap. So given that you can’t buy anything cheaper, that’s the “cheap” one. I mean, exactly because doing CAS with iron bombs is a risky business and it’s not worth to send your F16, we still fly the A-7. But you can’t fly with it forever. So , the F16 will HAVE to take its place and something new will take some tasks of the F16s.
Also, the missile technology has evolved a lot since the time of the M2000. Both is SAMs and A-A. Nowdays the SAMs , even in a non so high tech airforce, can be linked together and not need to use their own radar. Passive systems have been integrated that make even HARM’s job more difficult. And BVR missiles, do the job of a “bomb truck” with no BVR missile for self-protection, very hard, once detected.
What i mean is. Yes, you could export your Mirage2000 for the reasons mentioned. What bad could happen that couldn’t happen to the F16 or what other weapon could the F16 use that was so different in costs and performance? Enemy SAMs weren’t so advanced, “fly low, hit hard” was the motto to deal with them. Enemy CAP aircrafts were mainly depending on the reliability of the WVR missiles, so even a “bomb truck” could hope in some time delay before the enemy closes in.
Today,
– the US arsenal has prepared a much wider variety of missiles in all price range and performance.
– enemy SAMs aren’t the ones that used to be.
– BVRs aren’t the “Sparrow” “hit and miss” anymore.
– The new aircrafts cost always more.
So, your new aircraft isn’t as expendable as the A-7 was. But in order to survive, it needs not just the pure performance, but also:
– Many weapons alternatives, as the iron bomb is the last choice. The problem is, the iron bombs were dirt cheap. The smart ammo, is needed to avoid the SAMs and enemy CAP, but costs a lot. So the more variety you have in your choice, the more such ammo you can afford to buy. You can’t just use AASM and LGB for just any target out there that isn’t of strategical importance nor you can buy 1000 SCALP so to solve the problem. (most people think as all buyers are USAF, so they can rely on an endless number of available aircrafts and ammunition. Which is the opposite of how a buyer thinks).
– At the class of the F16 and Mirage, one could close an eye back then at the price difference, because at the end, they didn’t cost much to acquire and fly. So ok, the F16 is said to cost about 8-9000 euros/flight hour, the Mirage about 10-11.000, well ok, we got the MICA, that’s it. One can live.
– The 2 engined aircrafts provide better performance and reliability, but at the same time, they do cost much more and burn twice the fuel. And since they cost much more , the point about weapons flexibility is even more relevant.
– And also the high costs, dictate, that you must buy something that can do all tasks. So yes, supercruise, CFTs, Aesa, AG weaponry are all welcome. Exactly because you can’t afford to buy something more expensive than in the past and think “hmm, i ‘d better not send it to this mission”. You want something that can sweep off the sky the enemy bombers at least, and preferably, upon need, to be able to bomb too.
The american aircrafts, aren’t better than eurocanards. But they offer this flexibility. And exactly, the countries that don’t have any potential real threat , want something cheap. Cheap meaning, cheap as possible. There, the Rafale/Typhoon can’t sell easily. Because, you want to say that Typhoon costs 62 mln euros fly away? (i suspect that for export customers the price isn’t as much as for the members of the consortium, because a vendor wants his share of export profit, but let’s take this assumption). Fine. Now take ANY eu country (except Greece) and try to find why they should choose the Typhoon, with its current weaponry, instead of F16 or Gripen. What’s the enemy of the Austrian Typhoons (without BVR missiles no less)? The occasional airliner that got lost or in the worst case got hijacked. And you need to pay 30.000 euros/hour to do that?
How many countries train pilots to actually be ready for an all out war and have encountered hostile aircrafts that wasn’t in a “friendly” trainning excercize? Why would these countries want supercruise or the best EW suite? Bombing the usual terrorist or the unlucky terror country, usually means “Let USAF demolish all enemy defences and then we can bomb merrily what’s left and if some kamikaze pilot decides to take off, he is dead meat anyway, because he will be immediately outnumbered 5 to 1 and get the jamming of his life from a swarm of EW aircrafts”. So yes, this is the mentality that says “oh well, i have a couple of AG weapons integrated, that should be enough”.
And it goes back to the Mercedes thing. If you want to sell Rafale/Typhoon, there *is* where to sell. Maybe it’s not so many as the countries that want an aircraft for a happy flight over their lands, but usually the “paranoid” customers are the ones that eventually buy more aircraft. But these customers, want that their new and more costly aircraft, can use a cheaper stand off missile for a less defended target, a medium stand off missile for a more defended target, a strategical missile for a long range, highly protected target, possibility to do TASMO against a high value naval asset of the enemy and be able to kill the enemy airforce too. THAT’s what MULTIROLE is for the customers that COULD buy the more costly aircrafts and be willing to spend 30.000 euros/flight hour.
The euro-producing countries, have soon forgotten their own “paranoia” about the Soviets marching over europe, so now the “Paveway” has become the “cheap weapon that is enough for any low to medium value target” and for the rest there is SCALP/Taurus/Storm Shadow. Tell that to the others that are still “paranoid” and don’t even have nuclear deterrence that made the probability of conflict much lower.
Yeah, and to go hunt the enemy shorads that have IR camera, kill enemy tank formations , enemy ships, you will go with Paveway…
Israel finished its “smart” ammo over Lebanon in about a week-10 days. Money doesn’t grow in trees. The F16 can go tank or even shorad hunting with Maverick and even do light damage to a ship. The JDAM is the poor man’s “new iron bomb” nowdays.
As i said, each user that isn’t USAF and has in mind a potential war without USAF sweeping everything off the floor for his aircrafts, has different views about what’s multirole and what’s worth the extra money. That includes Aesa, HMD, missile variety (you can’t go on with 2 AG missiles anymore like when the M2000 was selling with that), engine performance, EW suite, links, etc.
If the eurocanards don’t understand this, they can only hope for some more politically influenced sales (on reduced numbers) and that’s it. The French must put an HMD ASAP. When USAF isn’t around, some people actually do believe that WVR will still play a role against other airforces. The Rafale can kick the beat the F16s in WVR , but without HMD, the F16s chances are vastly improved. The HMD will allow to the Rafale to take back supremacy in WVR too. Because the HDM isn’t panacea either. Otherwise we ‘d put HMD on A-7s and kill the Typhoons using A-7. ๐ The one with better performance will still get the best firing solution first. As a greek JHMCS pilot said, the HDM gives you about 5 more seconds at maximum g. It can’t win you the battle if the other is already outmanouvering you, but it can give you the win if the other has no HMD.
And the Typhoon must put the AESA and do something about its AG solutions.
Otherwise, i have the feeling the Swedes will find more export countries, because they have understood what their potential buyers’ needs are. So ok, yes, the Gripen is single engine, so if you have engine failure in flight, most probably you will lose the entire aircraft. But from the airforces that potentially are interested in Gripen or F16, how many do actually stress their aircrafts to the point that a more than adeguate maintenance is performed? How often do they fly them and how much strain do their aircrafts need to take in every sortie in their regular service?
Those that can really think of the 2 engines as a big “plus”, are those whose airforces are actually strainning their aircrafts, because they send them on “combat-like” missions and have lost many aircrafts and pilots:
http://www.insitu.gr/PSOIPA/afoi/startup.html
(Back to the discussion about which countries would be interested in eurocanards instead of something like F16 or Gripen).
Most likely, the attrition rate in peace time of an aircraft in Greece and in Hungary will be very much different… So the Hungarians won’t sweat about 2 engines.
Aspis@Aspis: As far as I know, Paveway IS integrated for Rafale already. That doesn’t really affect the broader issue, of course, but it means it perhaps isn’t quite so bad as you made out there.
Yes. I made a common list speaking for both Rafale and Typhoon. The Typhoon has some other of those weapons integrated.
What i don’t know is whether different Paveway versions require separate integration or not (since they ride the beam and go).
But as i said, take that as an example. For each country, the “stock” changes. I don’t know for example what the Indian stockpile is or the Korean or the Singaporean. (i only know the turkish one :D). But those users know their own stuff and when evaluation comes, they do give different scores based on that too, because it becomes part of life cycle costs. For example, it’s different if you can use your existing A-A missile than to have to buy a new brand type of missile for your new aircrafts.
That’s why the F35 will most likely come to HAF too eventually. When the F16s will start phasing out , who will use the US weapons? Who will do the CAS? The F16s with “dumb” bombs. Who will use the Amraams? The F16s. Who will use Mavericks/cluster bombs/SEAD with Harm? The F16s. Well the F16s can’t live for ever, nor avoid all missiles. So someone else must take part of their burdon off their shoulders (LM loves you). The European ones will probably have “limited” tasks if selected (just like the M2000 was only for A-A and secondarily for TASMO and only recently we got the SCALP). Or of course you can buy everything “european” again, starting from european iron bombs and going up to Storm Shadow. But that’s most of an Arab sport i would imagine.
AspisOh and one of the reason that politics DO matter in arms purchases, is exactly the issue of political relations with the vendor, when you will need a “resupply” of ammunition, specially in airforce where the ammunition costs much and the cheap iron bombs are every pilot’s last wish.
So when you buy an aircraft, you want to be sure that the vendor will : resupply you/ or treat you equally with your enemy /or you can have alternative vendor that can supply you / or friendly country that can pass you the needed ammo under the table.
AspisHow does this fact make the Typhoon a “Mercedes”?
Well, i tried to explain. Maybe being too analytic was counterproductive at the end. I do consider for specs and performance and costs the Typhoon as a Mercedes. A “heavyweight” contender.
I thought the Gripen NG would get IRST, HMD, AESA etc. Maybe Iยดm wrong?
The Gripen NG may take all this, but it still isn’t a heavyweight. Just like the Mirage2000 wasn’t Mirage4000 and the F16 was never F15.
The F35 has Aesa, HMD, IRST. So does the F22. Is the F35 the F22?
AspisAt least the limited number of smart weapons at hand will end every true war with Greece in a few days, because they run out of stock or got help from the NATO.
Oh yes. And when the smart ones minus those that will go down with the aircrafts that will be shot down before using them,end, what remains? This is why i was telling in another thread that people count numbers of aircrafts, but not ammunition… The ammo is extra $$$ that you must give that burdon the initial purchase of aircrafts.
It will be a good advice for every citizen not to ask the own military how many days they the can run a real war without outside support, before they do running out of ordonance or spare parts for they expensive toys. ๐
Sssshhh! Don’t wake anyone up. How many days was it after Israel started bombing Lebanon that urgently asked for a US resupply of “smart” missiles? Now imagine what happens to countries less “ready” than Israel.
AspisRegarding AESA or not AESA, it seems the NG is doing better than the EF, at least it they are testing directional antennas, any directional ESA antenna is much better than a static AESA array
In the Aesa sector, everyone is doing better than the Typhoon… Swedes, French, Americans… I am sure that even the static array would be welcome enough for the potential customers that do value the presence of Aesa.
The problem probably is how the EF or any eurofighter could offer less, and offer a cheaper cost
For example, the IRST could be a modular design, probably not everybody will want it, so from there you could decrease the cost, btw, im not talking about just adding pods..
The EF RAfale and all the other modern fighters are now way too expensive for bombing duties, seriously i do not expect fitting laser bombs or FLIR pods would give them any real advantage, but, for anti ship missions, cruiser missile platforms, HARM etc..they are OK
Modern fighters are also expensive to be single engine designs
That is , multirol fighters should be used only against high defended targets , in which you should use ASM’s than dumb, or “smart” bombs
The problem of cost is real for most countries. The problem is, how do you expect to design a high performance twin-engine aircrafta and hope to sell it cheap? It’s like designing a Mercedes class model, with dimensions and engines worthy of the Mercedes high-end tradition and then try a way to figure, how you can sell it to buyers that for what they need, a Smart or a 1400cc is enough. It is simply vain. If you designed a Mercedes class, then your goal should be to beat the competition of BMWs for example. And in order to do that, you have to provide the same or more, at the lowest price possible. The BMWs are aircrafts like the Sukhoi or the Super Hornet currently.
In fact, the Gripen, that wants to sell in the Smart or 1400 category, is doing the right thing. They try to sell a cheap “super Smart”, that can carry all kind of weapons and modern electronics, all at low cost. The kerozene alone, at least as mentioned in greek newspapers, is about 9000 euros/hour for F16, 20-25000 for Rafale and 25-30 for Typhoon.
Just like a car, if you have trouble to pay its gazoline and service and you don’t really need it, you don’t buy it. You buy a smaller one that does your job and consumes less.
Weapon integration sounds nice, yeah…but why would you want to integrate bombs on a expensive plane , which work at short range, only used safely against some “terrorists” living in caves??, like watching the B-2 bombing the taliban caves and claiming is “multirole”, but what is the cost per flight? what is the mission availability?, i’m not talking just about the EF/Gripen/Rafale, is about the “multirole fashion” arround
This is part of the problem. The producing countries, yes, at best, MAY partecipate in a scenario against “cave terrorists” , where the opposite airforce is inexistent or a joke, so IN DEED, why hurry for Aesa, HMD, cheap weapons (included the short range ones) and so on.
The problem is EXACTLY the potential customers that WOULD be interested in buying “Mercedes”. These are customers that have potential conflicts or “cold wars”, so, no matter how unlikely a real use of them may seem to outsiders, as the proverb says, the “improbable happens a lot, the impossible never” (The warsaw pact collapsed overnight, 9/11 happened, global economic crisis, all came as a surprise, so “**** happens”). SO. Who would actually be interested in “Mercedes”?
– Austria: Got few of them (a half-complete squadron), probably because the cousins produced it and to reduce the cost bought no BVR missiles (!). This alone shows how exceptional this case is.
– The Arabs. Well, they do love expensive things.
– Poland, Romania, Bulgaria are/were interested in NATO compliant aircrafts. The F16 was sold instead or probably will.
– The Hungarians/Checzs took the Gripen. Why would they need the “Mercedes” to patrol their airspace?
– Then we have, the ones that could be interested in something “big” because they have a potential danger: Singapore/S. Korea/ Japan/ Israel / India / Pakistan/ Greece / Turkey/ Arabs. Just to mention those that could buy western made aircrafts.
THIS IS the crowd for which you have to battle the Americans and Russians at. Austria got her 14 (?) and it’s enough. They may as well buy another 20 after 20 years.
The problem with the above countries, is, that they don’t want them for “cave terrorists”, but for some other potentially enemy airforce, which also thinks the same way. So these are the guys that may be interested in Mercedes. And to sell to these guys, you need to offer your nice design airframe, with MANY INTEGRATED weapons and as modern sensors are possible, in good price. Because, politics aside, if you don’t, the US companies will rush in and maybe they want offer a better pure performer, but will offer a better all around weapons platform.
Also, such users, have usually already a large stock for existing missiles of all kinds. Not offering the integration for most of them, makes you lose points in the evaluation. Ok, leave the “dumb bombs/iron bombs” aside, presuming that his second line aircrafts will use them. But, if the user has a big stock of say JDAMs / Mavericks/HARMs/Amraams , not offering the option to use them with the newcomers too, while the American does, is a way to lose points in the evaluation.
I don’t know about other airforces, so once again, i will take HAF as example. This is 2008 data (available or that had been ordered):
Air to Ground
– 40 JSOW
– 100 GBU-31 (JDAM)
– 200 CBU-103 Wind Corrected Munitions Dispenser (WCMD) (cluster bomb).
– 100 Enhanced Paveway II with BLU-109
– 136 Enhanced Paveway II with MK-84 Warheads
– 84 AGM-88B HARM
– 90 SCALP-EG
– 70 AFDS
– 39 AM 39 Exocet Block 2
– 200 AGM-65G Maverick IIR
– 284 AGM-65 A/B
– 200 GBU-24A/B Paveway III
– 1.162 Paveway I & II
– 250 BLU109
– various cluster bombs antipersonnel
(dumb iron bombs ommitted because ok, you will send your old ones with these).
Air to Air
– 130 Amraam C7
– 340 Amraam B/C5
– 250 MICA EM/IR
– ? Iris-T still under delivery
(Older missiles excluded)
You tell me why a more modern and capable aircraft, that is supposed to be out there to even replace the first F16 blocks and later the more modern F16 blocks, can’t use the 80% roughly of the above. This is the problem that the Austrians don’t have. What are you going to do with 470 Amraams if you get the Rafale? Use them all on the F16s. Fine. And who will be shooting all the US AG weapons in the meantime? And why buy AASM from the French for the Rafale? The same applies to Typhoon especially in the AG weaponry.
You go to sell to airforces that have a weapons stock with an aircraft with few “precious” (and expensive) items and expect to win (politics apart), while your offer is also more expensive?? I will tell you what happens if you have a weapons stock that you don’t support while the other does. No matter what happens, you will buy again, sooner or later, from your previous vendor. Greece will buy American AGAIN, because you can’t rely only on the F16 forever. The Indians will buy Russian AGAIN for the same reason. Israel will buy American again (even if politics wasn’t a factor). Same for Turkey.
What are you going to do in a case of war? Have the F16s load and unload all the time all the US weapons, and hope they don’t get massacred because you won’t be able to use them and in the meantime you must have payed yet another big sum of money for “european” or “french” expensive “new” missiles that basically do the same job, but they are european? Hint, hint… Why didn’t Greece ever buy a single AG weapon for the Mirage? Exactly because you can’t go on with the “i will buy the white elephant weapon”. So we bought only A-A to spare us the money. Something similar can be done for Typhoon if used for air superiority only. But for the Rafale, how can you do that? Or if a country really wants it be multirole, how can you compete with a cheaper american solution that tells the customer “no worries, you can use all your existing US weapons, from the dumber to the smarter”? Buy Brimstone! Buy Taurus! Buy AASM, buy MICA is the european answer… This may work for a customer that has only an old missile stockpile, so doesn’t bother upgrading after 20 years that last bought something. But this does become a problem for users that buy missiles often.
Or the hidden cost of arms procurements… I can’t find an article, this is from a news page of a retired Noratlas pilot that keeps this a hobby, but a taste of what it means to buy “new” missiles:
2003: 100 MICA + 50 pylons, 34 SCALP and “additional material and services” = 220,5 mln euros (offsets 115%, with 59 mln working load for greek companies)
22. 12. 2003 ฮ ฮกฮฮฮฮฮฮฮ ฮฮฮฮฮฮคฮฉฮ
ฮฅฯฮตฮณฯฮฌฯฮทฯฮฑฮฝ ฮฟฮน ฯฯ ฮผฮฒฮฌฯฮตฮนฯ ฮผฮต ฯฮท ฮณฮฑฮปฮปฮนฮบฮฎ ฮตฯฮฑฮนฯฮตฮฏฮฑ MBDA FRANCE ฮณฮนฮฑ ฯฮทฮฝ ฯฯฮฟฮผฮฎฮธฮตฮนฮฑ 100 ฮฒฮปฮทฮผฮฌฯฯฮฝ ฮฑฮญฯฮฟฯ-ฮฑฮญฯฮฟฯ MICA, 50 ฯฮฟฯฮญฯฮฝ ฮผฮตฯฮฑฯฮฟฯฮฌฯ ฯฮฟฯ ฯ, 34 ฮฒฮปฮทฮผฮฌฯฯฮฝ ฮฑฮญฯฮฟฯ-ฮตฮดฮฌฯฮฟฯ ฯ SCALP ฮบฮฑฮน ฮตฯฮนฯฯฯฯฮธฮตฯฯฮฝ ฯ ฮปฮนฮบฯฮฝ ฮบฮฑฮน ฯ ฯฮทฯฮตฯฮนฯฮฝ, ฮฑฮฝฮฑฮบฮฟฮนฮฝฯฮธฮทฮบฮต ฮฑฯฯ ฯฮฟ ฮฅฯฮฟฯ ฯฮณฮตฮฏฮฟ ฮฮธฮฝฮนฮบฮฎฯ ฮฮผฯ ฮฝฮฑฯ.
ฮ ฯฯฮฟฮผฮฎฮธฮตฮนฮฑ -220,5 ฮตฮบฮฑฯฮฟฮผฮผฯ ฯฮฏฯฮฝ ฮตฯ ฯฯ- ฮญฮณฮนฮฝฮต ฮผฮต ฮฑฯฮตฯ ฮธฮตฮฏฮฑฯ ฮฑฮฝฮฌฮธฮตฯฮท ฯฯฮทฮฝ MBDA FRANCE. ฮฮน ฯฮฑฯฮฑฮดฯฯฮตฮนฯ ฯฯฮฝ ฮฒฮปฮทฮผฮฌฯฯฮฝ MICA ฮธฮฑ ฮฑฯฯฮฏฯฮฟฯ ฮฝ ฯฮฟฮฝ ฮฆฮตฮฒฯฮฟฯ ฮฌฯฮนฮฟ ฯฮฟฯ 2006 ฮบฮฑฮน ฯฯฮฝ ฮฒฮปฮทฮผฮฌฯฯฮฝ SCALP ฯฮฟฮฝ ฮฮบฯฯฮฒฯฮนฮฟ ฯฮฟฯ 2007.
ฮ ฮฑฯฮฌฮปฮปฮทฮปฮฑ, ฮผฮต ฯฮทฮฝ ฯฮฑฯฮฑฯฮฌฮฝฯ ฯฯฮฟฮผฮฎฮธฮตฮนฮฑ ฮท ฮตฯฮฑฮนฯฮตฮฏฮฑ MBDA FRANCE ฯฮฑฯฮตฮฏฯฮต ฯฯฮฟ ฯ ฯฮฟฯ ฯฮณฮตฮฏฮฟ, ฮฑฮฝฯฮนฯฯฮฑฮธฮผฮนฯฯฮนฮบฮฌ ฯฯฮตฮปฮฎฮผฮฑฯฮฑ ฯฮต ฯฮฟฯฮฟฯฯฯ 115% ฯฮทฯ ฮฑฮพฮฏฮฑฯ ฯฮทฯ ฯฯฮฟฮผฮฎฮธฮตฮนฮฑฯ. ฮ ฯฯ ฮฝฮฟฮปฮนฮบฮฎ ฮฟฮฝฮฟฮผฮฑฯฯฮนฮบฮฎ ฮฑฮพฮฏฮฑ ฯฯฮฝ ฯฯฮฟฮณฯฮฑฮผฮผฮฌฯฯฮฝ ฮฑฮฝฯฮนฯฯฮฑฮธฮผฮนฯฯฮนฮบฯฮฝ ฯฯฮตฮปฮทฮผฮฌฯฯฮฝ ฮฑฮฝฮญฯฯฮตฯฮฑฮน ฯฮต 59.619.000 ฮตฯ ฯฯ, ฯฯฮทฮฝ ฮฟฯฮฟฮฏฮฑ ฯฮตฯฮนฮปฮฑฮผฮฒฮฌฮฝฮตฯฮฑฮน ฯ ฯฮฟฮบฮฑฯฮฑฯฮบฮตฯ ฮฑฯฯฮนฮบฯ ฮญฯฮณฮฟ ฯฮต ฮตฮปฮปฮทฮฝฮนฮบฮญฯ ฮตฯฮฑฮนฯฮตฮฏฮตฯ, ฯฯ ฮฝฮฟฮปฮนฮบฮฎฯ ฮฟฮฝฮฟฮผฮฑฯฯฮนฮบฮฎฯ ฮฑฮพฮฏฮฑฯ ฯฮตฯฮฏฯฮฟฯ 30.000.000 ฮตฯ ฯฯ.
And to be fair a US contract of 2006:
The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as $104 million. Items requested include:
40 AGM-154-C Joint Standoff Weapons (JSOW). The JSOW-C precision glide bomb incorporates an imaging infrared seeker for high precision, and adds a Broach multi-stage warhead that has both hard target penetration and blast-fragmentation capability. The JSOW glide-bomb is also popular with Greece’s rival Turkey;
100 GBU-31 Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM) GPS/INS guidance Kits;
200 CBU-103 Wind Corrected Munitions Dispenser (WCMD) with FZU-39 Proximity Mechanisms – these are similar to JDAM, but are cluster bombs. The CBU-103 variant is a 1,000 pound bomb with anti-personnel munitions inside. See DID article;
100 Enhanced Paveway II with BLU-109. The BLU-109/B is an improved 2,000-pound-class bomb designed as a penetrator for hardened targets like bunkers. Enhanced Paveway kits add GPS as well as laser guidance to bombs.
136 Enhanced Paveway II with MK-84 Warheads. Mk-84 warheads are conventional 2,000 pound bombs.
“Multirol” , fighters would be cost effective for ECM support, long range ASM launchers (better for supersonic ones), reco missions or even targeting/painting for A-10/su-25 planes, but for bombing, risking a 40 millions plane, comparing with close support aircraft readiness, is inpractical, only maybe for very small air forces
Granted, you won’t send the Mercedes for CAS, but if you do enter a real war against a real airforce , you will be throwing anything you have available at the moment to win, even if that means to mount a “humble” JDAM or Maverick, rather than a spectacular (and extremely expensive) Storm Shadow.
This is the problem. The countries that intend for their own airforce to go bomb some cave terrorists, expect from countries that have their own neighbourhood problems, which don’t include cave terrorists, to be happy with their choices. And somewhere at that point, the Americans rush in and say “Hey fellas, maybe we won’t give you the super 4.5 gen aircraft, but here: We have for you the cheap 1 engine F16 and the 2 engined Hornet. You can use plenty of cheap weapons as well as more expensive”. “You want AESA? We have one!” “You want CFTs? Buy the F16!”.
The Swedes do the same as the Americans in order to compete with the users that would be content with something like the F16 and with “NG” with something better, but costs low, burns low, and uses all kind of weapons. That’s why without political advantages and arab rich friends, the Swedes have managed some exports.
As for the Russians, they come too and say “Buy US-killers , dirt cheap and effective”. And they sell too.
Simply, the user that doesn’t want the IRST, or the AESA or the OSF NG or DASS, most likely doesn’t want to buy “Mercedes” in the first place! He is looking for F16 or Gripen. The ones that could buy a “Mercedes” are those that want the leather seats and electric mirrors, and so, want IRST, HMD, AESA , etc.
AspisNorwegian Cargo Ship Attacked By Somali Pirates
ATHENS (AFP)–Somali pirates Wednesday attempted to seize a Norwegian cargo ship south of Yemen, the Greek Shipping Ministry said.
The pirates were repelled by the crew of the Norwegian ship, Sigloo Tor, which alerted the Atalante anti-piracy mission under which European Union navies patrol Somalian waters, a statement said.
A boat suspected of the attempted hijacking with five Somalians on board was intercepted soon afterwards by the Greek frigate Psara. The boat was searched but no action was taken due to lack of evidence, the statement said.
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
April 01, 2009 07:20 ET (11:20 GMT)
According to the announcement in the greek navy’s website:
The frigate approached the suspected boat at 06:10. The suspected pirates on board, immediately tried to escape, but with no success. The 5 suspected were arrested by the frigate’s “Seals” unit and were brought aboard for interrogation. They were released due to lack of evidence , which as the announcement said, “is possible that was thrown offboard to the sea” before being captured.
2 photos here:
http://www.hellenicnavy.gr/newsphotos.asp?hn_new_id=1541
Call me suspicious, but i see no nets or phishing activity. It could be that they are “learning” the rules and now get rid of any weapons before they get arrested.
AspisThe website of the greek navy, released a video from the Frigate Psara with the arrest of the 7 Somalis that tried to board the FGS SPESSART (see my previous post):
http://www.hellenicnavy.gr/psara_arrest.wmv
According to the greek Navy press release, the 7 Somalis where captured at 21.30. Their boat was tied to the left flank of the Frigate Psarra and disarmed, while they remained under surveillance of the “SEALS” unit of the frigate, until 06:30 next morning when they were handed to the Germans.
And 3 photos
AspisCrew of โPsaraโ Frigate Arrests Somali Pirates
March 30
The crew of the Greek frigate “Psara” arrested suspected pirates. According to official information, seven Somali pirates, being on board to a high speed vessel attempted to take over the German oil vessel FGS SPESSART. But their plans were prevented when the German crew contacted the commander of EUFOR ATALANTA Antonis Papaioannou who ordered PSARA frigate as well as the patrol aircraft of Spanish frigate SPS VICTORIA to prevent the attempt of piracy. The Greek Naval arrested seven Somali pirates and handed them over to German frigate FGS RHEINLAND PFALZ. They are now being detained and are going to be prosecuted for having committed acts of piracy. The operation launched for their transport was completed successfully today.
http://news.ert.gr/en/20726-syllipsi-peiraton-apo-ti-fregata-psara.htm
Note: The “patrol aircraft” is of course a “helicopter” (generic journalists do such mistakes).
A crew member from the Greek Frigate HS PSARA monitors the ship’s instruments as it patrols the Arabian Sea and the Gulf of Aden in search for Somali pirates March 8, 2009.
REUTERS/Fouad Juez (ARABIAN SEA CONFLICT SOCIETY MILITARY)
Mind the flags ๐
AspisAnd a small story, to see how one can organize a crisis, which, like in Jan 1996, will leave you outsiders wondering on who started.
The greek helo was a SAR Super Puma. It took off from Rhodes island to go to this little island, beause there was a phone call by cellular phone to our coast guard, that there was a sunk ship in the area and immigrants were risking to drown. When the helo arrived to the area (a bit before arriving to the greek island), it was contacted 6 times by the turkish military radars, warning it that it was in turkish airspace and asking it to go back. Soon after, it was intercepted and buzzed, while trying to land to a nearby island. A greek patrol ship was sent to the area, and the Turkish coast guard sent a turkish ship. This scenario was prolonged for days, even the next day after our President of Repubblic was in the island. To all this, Turkey replied with protest (!), saying that both our ship and helo were violating turkish airspace and waters.
This, because since 1996, the Turks have included this island, along with 149 more, in an arbitrary list of “uknown sovereignty islands”. It’s hilarious, but it’s true. Maybe the inhabitants are also of “uncertain nationality” too.
The fun part doesn’t end here. It was soon after determined, that the phone call to the greek coastguard, was made by cell phone from the turkish coast. Meaning, it was all a setup. In fact, no sunk ship was found or reported missins at the end, no immigrants alive or bodies of them were found. January is always a “lively” month in the Aegean.
The final goal of Turkey is to arrive at a point to say “Well, under dispute there are 500 issues, look, we are peaceful people, we will be happy with 100, you can keep 400”. Either with or without use of weapons, this is the ultimate goal of Turkey.
AspisAnd a small story, to see how one can organize a crisis, which, like in Jan 1996, will leave you outsiders wondering on who started.
The greek helo was a SAR Super Puma. It took off from Rhodes island to go to this little island, beause there was a phone call by cellular phone to our coast guard, that there was a sunk ship in the area and immigrants were risking to drown. When the helo arrived to the area (a bit before arriving to the greek island), it was contacted 6 times by the turkish military radars, warning it that it was in turkish airspace and asking it to go back. Soon after, it was intercepted and buzzed, while trying to land to a nearby island. A greek patrol ship was sent to the area, and the Turkish coast guard sent a turkish ship. This scenario was prolonged for days, even the next day after our President of Repubblic was in the island. To all this, Turkey replied with protest (!), saying that both our ship and helo were violating turkish airspace and waters.
This, because since 1996, the Turks have included this island, along with 149 more, in an arbitrary list of “uknown sovereignty islands”. It’s hilarious, but it’s true. Maybe the inhabitants are also of “uncertain nationality” too.
The fun part doesn’t end here. It was soon after determined, that the phone call to the greek coastguard, was made by cell phone from the turkish coast. Meaning, it was all a setup. In fact, no sunk ship was found or reported missins at the end, no immigrants alive or bodies of them were found. January is always a “lively” month in the Aegean.
The final goal of Turkey is to arrive at a point to say “Well, under dispute there are 500 issues, look, we are peaceful people, we will be happy with 100, you can keep 400”. Either with or without use of weapons, this is the ultimate goal of Turkey.
AspisThere’s something to that… :rolleyes:
About Eurofighter, the biggest problem at the moment is the partner nations themselves, Britain especially seeking ‘flexibility’ on their commited purchases and Tranche 3 in the air because of it, even before one considers the radar. I actually think EF/Captor’s proposed hybrid mech/AESA would be superior (at high angles) to RBE2-AESA, but it’s fairly certain Captor-E needs signifigantly more development than RBE2 at this point. (The last time HAF got their hands on Rafale it may still have had PESA, but AESA is in production for France now and the Swiss apparently tried it also, so Typhoon is definitely behind there… )
I think it’s reasonable that if Greece picks Rafale F4+HMS, for Thales’ GaN AESA to be available by 2015 or so, in the timeframe JSF is delivered to Turkey (without GaN unless budgets and schedules are to be totally destroyed). Given Captor-E and Tranche 3 is in a holding pattern for the moment, their migration to GaN (which will happen) seems likely to lag just for budget reasons (doubly since half the EF partners are interested in JSF, pinching funds for Typhoon upgrades/purchases), just when JSF is being deployed by Turkey.
Rafale F4 + HMS + more powerful engine. Yes, that would be a much more luring proposal. Unfortunately, right now, all companies have presented their realistically possible configurations and it is based on that , besides politics, that HAF will make her final proposals to the goverment.
Which IMO means, that if Typhoon is selected now, there will be no Rafale, because we must get the F35 sooner or later. It is also a problem the presence of M2000 and Dash-5. Unless one of the 2 types disappear, acquiring the Rafale becomes difficult.
Now, if we do not take any Typhoons right now, but say F16s instead or because of unstable goverment and anticipated elections we go to a further delay, then i think Rafale’s chances will be better, if they manage to include in their proposal the HMS+Iris-T+better engine.
The situation is very complicated, because the current goverment in Greece, is literally trembling. It’s not working as it should, all parliament members have their mind in the elections, that although aren’t officially proclaimed, everyone can sense in the air. Because when you have such an unstable goverment, ruling with a very thin majority and in a very inefficient manner, the only logical solution is to go to anticipated elections. The goverment doesn’t announce them yet, because they are desperately trying to overcome their inefficiency, by some miracle, and save their current seats in the parliament. Not that the opposition is unfortunately inspiring any particular confidence, but this goverment is obviously at a point that can’t function as such. This means, that unless the current goverment makes a decision before the elections, the entire issue will be handled by the next goverment and things may change. Although the opposition leader is known to be more pro-american than pro-french… unfortunately.
Ordering Tranche 2 now because Eurofighter is in chaos, and upgrading later to AESA seems a waste of Greece’s money. But who knows? Maybe there could be an F2 ‘loaner’ until F3 is available so Greece doesn’t need to upgrade… In any case, I don’t think Typhoon’s higher thrust is really much of an issue: There is the higher thrust engine available on Rafale if necessary, but if they opt for Rafale, I honestly think HAF will make the same choice as France, and save on fuel/engine life.
The thrust issue has been observed by some HAF pilots that flew on the Rafale, so for them, it must be an issue. Greece isn’t UAE, but in summer, temperatures can arrive at 45 C under shadow. The fuel has to go with the turkish counterpart. Intercepting an F16 with a Rafale or Typhoon at regular basis, isn’t advisable. If the F35 however has a similar fuel consumption, then it becomes acceptable.
re: Eurobonds, of course it only saves about 1-2% on financing… That amount of money could trivially be found by selling off state owned land or similar measures. I really think the value is lending more confidence NOW in the bonds of Greece and particularly other countries much worse off, by the mere fact that Germany/ECB is publicly contemplating such moves. I agree cutting military imports is a smarter solution if times are really that tough for Greece.
I agree. Military imports isn’t just the only place to find money. The cost of the bureaucracy of the pubblic sector in Greece, amounts for over 6% of the GDP (eurostat data of a year ago). Tax evasion is the rule for anyone that isn’t on a salary, because of the inefficiency of state control meccanisms. There is also the “black economy” that don’t do serious steps to reduce it. Hence, the money exist. It’s the inefficiency of the goverment/ fear of political cost, that can’t collect it. If you add it all, the money from it, would suffice to pour as much liquid money as the state would wish and leave the defense budget intact too. This is why i hope that there will be no eurobonds. It’s a golden opportunity for Greece to go a step further in the process of streamlining the economy and sanitizing the pubblic sector. It’s exactly like the Olympics. Our politicians, would go at slow pace for years. Suddenly, when the final year before the games begun, then realised that there is no other way out, other than… preparing the games! So, they did in 1 year, the work that they hadn’t do in 5 years. It’s the same today. If they see that they have no choice, other than sanitizing the pubblic sector, they will have to do it. So, dear ECB, please, don’t issue any eurobonds!
Realistically, I don’t think Greece need be worried by Turkey in the immediate future in terms of a real war erupting – the factors about EU mentioned with Cyprus play into that. Greece is more interested in maintaining overall long-term deterrance with Turkey, so that in the future if they feel the temperature is rising, they won’t be starting from scratch.
The bold part is the bottom line. You can not rebuild your armed forces overnight. Also, Turkey is a a bit disenchanted about her EU progress right now. You can never know. Also, a reason to clash could be found everyday. I believe a greek member has posted in a thread before the video of regular overflying of a small inhabited greek island in January. There were a series of provocations in January, including the turkish authoritities contacting a helo of ours, which was on routine flight towards the island, telling the pilot to go back, because “he was in turkish airspace”. The helo was intercepted by TuaF, but continued its flight, although there were some rumours that it stalled for a moment and risked crashing while being buzzed. Over anoother small island nearby, there were daily reports in January of simulated bombing (diving manouvers). This is a video that shows 2 pairs of turkish F4E overflying the island heading towards west, while the fisherman is bringing a journalist to the island.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbSXGOzNrOQ
As the fisherman says “This is daily routine for us”. Our President of Repubblic chose to go that island of 100 inhabitants, to celebrate Epiphany. Do you know many countries that allow their soil to be overflown by foreign aircrafts and limit themselves in just intercepting them? This is the usual greek policy of the moment: “We will not fire first, unless they invade”.
As someone had said, in Greece we don’t have “peace”. We simply have a “non war” situation.
Also consider, that in Turkey there is an array of arrests, that has been going on for months, of retired army officers with the accusation of preparing a coup against the turkish PM. What if they had succeeded? Who could predict then how the turkish policy could change? Nationalist cycles in Turkey are in favour of a turn away from europe and in favour of the east and influence in turkic populations of the Caucasus and so on. We have to be ready for anything. Also a swift victory against a “sleeping Greece”, would be an awesome way for turkish military to regain its full political power and influence in the struggle against the islamists.
yes, and the fact that the french hates the turcs, and they are the only one in europe that can provide an independente expedition force and aircraft carrier to help our greecs friends, the german haven’t any capabilities and the british are pro islamist turkey…
Politics and close for decenies greek french relationship ex “cyprus crise” in this region will keep away any weasel european advanture into the greek competition…
My french friend, i have no doubt that in a case of conflict, the French would probably sympathize for us. As people. But goverments operate in a more cynical way. There won’t be any expedition force. And don’t imagine that there will be a long war. Turkey doesn’t want an all out, “to the death” war. Simply wants to alter the status quo in the Aegean. Turkey would like to occupy some land and then show “good will” to the voices that will be calling for peace and drag Greece to negotiations, where Greece will be forced to accept most of the turkish claims in the Aegean.
Our ex FM Pangalos, has pubblically admitted, that in his hands has arrived a turkish navy “instructions manual”, on how to conduct things after the occupation of the greek island of Chios. He said that there were step by step instructions, like “pay a visit of courtesy to the local bishop”, “open the schools as soon as possible and try to encourage people to make students resume lessons”. And things like that. Another turkish plan we ‘ve heard of, was speaking for turkish attempt to send a naval task force behind the first greek lines in the land border. I think it was leaked by the same ex FM, but i am not sure.
Any clash will be over within a week. You won’t send expeditionary force. EU and USA will be trying to achieve ceasefire. USA in the moment more cosy for Turkey, let’s hope EU in the moment more cosy for Greece.
THe funniest part in all this. Our Foreign minister repeats “We support the entrance of a demoratic Turkey in the EU. A Turkey that respects international law and treaties and acts as a state of law”. All well in words. But nothing has changed in facts. While Cyprus, that has frozen some chapters from the accession talks of Turkey, is more likely to see some tangible result to her problems. Greece? Nah, we ‘re merrily asleep. Don’t wake us up! The Turks will change attitude by divine intervention and because they are more democrats now that they changed some of their laws on paper. “Dear Santa, bring me the reformed Turkey next year! Thank you!”.
AspisThere’s something to that… :rolleyes:
About Eurofighter, the biggest problem at the moment is the partner nations themselves, Britain especially seeking ‘flexibility’ on their commited purchases and Tranche 3 in the air because of it, even before one considers the radar. I actually think EF/Captor’s proposed hybrid mech/AESA would be superior (at high angles) to RBE2-AESA, but it’s fairly certain Captor-E needs signifigantly more development than RBE2 at this point. (The last time HAF got their hands on Rafale it may still have had PESA, but AESA is in production for France now and the Swiss apparently tried it also, so Typhoon is definitely behind there… )
I think it’s reasonable that if Greece picks Rafale F4+HMS, for Thales’ GaN AESA to be available by 2015 or so, in the timeframe JSF is delivered to Turkey (without GaN unless budgets and schedules are to be totally destroyed). Given Captor-E and Tranche 3 is in a holding pattern for the moment, their migration to GaN (which will happen) seems likely to lag just for budget reasons (doubly since half the EF partners are interested in JSF, pinching funds for Typhoon upgrades/purchases), just when JSF is being deployed by Turkey.
Rafale F4 + HMS + more powerful engine. Yes, that would be a much more luring proposal. Unfortunately, right now, all companies have presented their realistically possible configurations and it is based on that , besides politics, that HAF will make her final proposals to the goverment.
Which IMO means, that if Typhoon is selected now, there will be no Rafale, because we must get the F35 sooner or later. It is also a problem the presence of M2000 and Dash-5. Unless one of the 2 types disappear, acquiring the Rafale becomes difficult.
Now, if we do not take any Typhoons right now, but say F16s instead or because of unstable goverment and anticipated elections we go to a further delay, then i think Rafale’s chances will be better, if they manage to include in their proposal the HMS+Iris-T+better engine.
The situation is very complicated, because the current goverment in Greece, is literally trembling. It’s not working as it should, all parliament members have their mind in the elections, that although aren’t officially proclaimed, everyone can sense in the air. Because when you have such an unstable goverment, ruling with a very thin majority and in a very inefficient manner, the only logical solution is to go to anticipated elections. The goverment doesn’t announce them yet, because they are desperately trying to overcome their inefficiency, by some miracle, and save their current seats in the parliament. Not that the opposition is unfortunately inspiring any particular confidence, but this goverment is obviously at a point that can’t function as such. This means, that unless the current goverment makes a decision before the elections, the entire issue will be handled by the next goverment and things may change. Although the opposition leader is known to be more pro-american than pro-french… unfortunately.
Ordering Tranche 2 now because Eurofighter is in chaos, and upgrading later to AESA seems a waste of Greece’s money. But who knows? Maybe there could be an F2 ‘loaner’ until F3 is available so Greece doesn’t need to upgrade… In any case, I don’t think Typhoon’s higher thrust is really much of an issue: There is the higher thrust engine available on Rafale if necessary, but if they opt for Rafale, I honestly think HAF will make the same choice as France, and save on fuel/engine life.
The thrust issue has been observed by some HAF pilots that flew on the Rafale, so for them, it must be an issue. Greece isn’t UAE, but in summer, temperatures can arrive at 45 C under shadow. The fuel has to go with the turkish counterpart. Intercepting an F16 with a Rafale or Typhoon at regular basis, isn’t advisable. If the F35 however has a similar fuel consumption, then it becomes acceptable.
re: Eurobonds, of course it only saves about 1-2% on financing… That amount of money could trivially be found by selling off state owned land or similar measures. I really think the value is lending more confidence NOW in the bonds of Greece and particularly other countries much worse off, by the mere fact that Germany/ECB is publicly contemplating such moves. I agree cutting military imports is a smarter solution if times are really that tough for Greece.
I agree. Military imports isn’t just the only place to find money. The cost of the bureaucracy of the pubblic sector in Greece, amounts for over 6% of the GDP (eurostat data of a year ago). Tax evasion is the rule for anyone that isn’t on a salary, because of the inefficiency of state control meccanisms. There is also the “black economy” that don’t do serious steps to reduce it. Hence, the money exist. It’s the inefficiency of the goverment/ fear of political cost, that can’t collect it. If you add it all, the money from it, would suffice to pour as much liquid money as the state would wish and leave the defense budget intact too. This is why i hope that there will be no eurobonds. It’s a golden opportunity for Greece to go a step further in the process of streamlining the economy and sanitizing the pubblic sector. It’s exactly like the Olympics. Our politicians, would go at slow pace for years. Suddenly, when the final year before the games begun, then realised that there is no other way out, other than… preparing the games! So, they did in 1 year, the work that they hadn’t do in 5 years. It’s the same today. If they see that they have no choice, other than sanitizing the pubblic sector, they will have to do it. So, dear ECB, please, don’t issue any eurobonds!
Realistically, I don’t think Greece need be worried by Turkey in the immediate future in terms of a real war erupting – the factors about EU mentioned with Cyprus play into that. Greece is more interested in maintaining overall long-term deterrance with Turkey, so that in the future if they feel the temperature is rising, they won’t be starting from scratch.
The bold part is the bottom line. You can not rebuild your armed forces overnight. Also, Turkey is a a bit disenchanted about her EU progress right now. You can never know. Also, a reason to clash could be found everyday. I believe a greek member has posted in a thread before the video of regular overflying of a small inhabited greek island in January. There were a series of provocations in January, including the turkish authoritities contacting a helo of ours, which was on routine flight towards the island, telling the pilot to go back, because “he was in turkish airspace”. The helo was intercepted by TuaF, but continued its flight, although there were some rumours that it stalled for a moment and risked crashing while being buzzed. Over anoother small island nearby, there were daily reports in January of simulated bombing (diving manouvers). This is a video that shows 2 pairs of turkish F4E overflying the island heading towards west, while the fisherman is bringing a journalist to the island.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbSXGOzNrOQ
As the fisherman says “This is daily routine for us”. Our President of Repubblic chose to go that island of 100 inhabitants, to celebrate Epiphany. Do you know many countries that allow their soil to be overflown by foreign aircrafts and limit themselves in just intercepting them? This is the usual greek policy of the moment: “We will not fire first, unless they invade”.
As someone had said, in Greece we don’t have “peace”. We simply have a “non war” situation.
Also consider, that in Turkey there is an array of arrests, that has been going on for months, of retired army officers with the accusation of preparing a coup against the turkish PM. What if they had succeeded? Who could predict then how the turkish policy could change? Nationalist cycles in Turkey are in favour of a turn away from europe and in favour of the east and influence in turkic populations of the Caucasus and so on. We have to be ready for anything. Also a swift victory against a “sleeping Greece”, would be an awesome way for turkish military to regain its full political power and influence in the struggle against the islamists.
yes, and the fact that the french hates the turcs, and they are the only one in europe that can provide an independente expedition force and aircraft carrier to help our greecs friends, the german haven’t any capabilities and the british are pro islamist turkey…
Politics and close for decenies greek french relationship ex “cyprus crise” in this region will keep away any weasel european advanture into the greek competition…
My french friend, i have no doubt that in a case of conflict, the French would probably sympathize for us. As people. But goverments operate in a more cynical way. There won’t be any expedition force. And don’t imagine that there will be a long war. Turkey doesn’t want an all out, “to the death” war. Simply wants to alter the status quo in the Aegean. Turkey would like to occupy some land and then show “good will” to the voices that will be calling for peace and drag Greece to negotiations, where Greece will be forced to accept most of the turkish claims in the Aegean.
Our ex FM Pangalos, has pubblically admitted, that in his hands has arrived a turkish navy “instructions manual”, on how to conduct things after the occupation of the greek island of Chios. He said that there were step by step instructions, like “pay a visit of courtesy to the local bishop”, “open the schools as soon as possible and try to encourage people to make students resume lessons”. And things like that. Another turkish plan we ‘ve heard of, was speaking for turkish attempt to send a naval task force behind the first greek lines in the land border. I think it was leaked by the same ex FM, but i am not sure.
Any clash will be over within a week. You won’t send expeditionary force. EU and USA will be trying to achieve ceasefire. USA in the moment more cosy for Turkey, let’s hope EU in the moment more cosy for Greece.
THe funniest part in all this. Our Foreign minister repeats “We support the entrance of a demoratic Turkey in the EU. A Turkey that respects international law and treaties and acts as a state of law”. All well in words. But nothing has changed in facts. While Cyprus, that has frozen some chapters from the accession talks of Turkey, is more likely to see some tangible result to her problems. Greece? Nah, we ‘re merrily asleep. Don’t wake us up! The Turks will change attitude by divine intervention and because they are more democrats now that they changed some of their laws on paper. “Dear Santa, bring me the reformed Turkey next year! Thank you!”.
AspisIf the European Central Bank, starts issuing Eurobonds to finance Greek debt, then we must forget about buying anything not made in the Eurozone.
The Typhoon has been the favourite for years. In Greece there is a tendency to oversimplify or overcomplicate everything in a conspiracy like model.
1) I don’t believe that the ECB will issue Eurobonds, unless it sees an imminent danger for the euro.
2) The eurobonds wouldn’t be “greek-specific” nor they are “free” money. They are simply a way to borrow liquid money at lower interest rates then the greek bonds themselves. However, in the recent issue of greek bonds, there was no problem in selling the bonds. On the contrary, the request was x2 than the target.
3) If eurobonds automatically mean Typhoon, i guess we will soon see Typhoons with irish and portuguese colours too? Now that’s good news for EADS! “All the exports that you would like to have, but you were afraid to ask!” :p
4) Despite the fear and destruction that is customary in Greece from the media, in pre-electoral periods, the greek economy isn’t at the brink of collapse, nor its current borrowing rates are dramatic (there is much worse out there, both in EU countries out of the euro-zone) and outside EU. Let’s say that if the greek sovereign credit rating collapses to the point that is unable to borrow at acceptable rates, most likely we will have a global doomsday before that happens.
Please see:
http://img517.imageshack.us/img517/2792/99247829.png
http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2009/2/7/business/3207456&sec=business
We would probably save more money, by simply freezing every new defence procurement if things were so desperate, rather than spending billions and wait for the eurobond, that could save us what… between 1-2% over our current rates?
The Typhoon has been favourite since PM Simitis era, who had made a public anouncement about it. Mixing in this the eurobonds, is imo, the usual greek way of complicating things. Why should we thank Germany with Typhoon and not by accepting immediately the 1st U214 at full price too? What should Ireland and Portugal buy from Germany?
And today our FM met Hillary. Next month the PM will meet Obama. If Obama appears more positive than Bush towards greek positions, then what? We will deny to buy some F16s , because ECB may issue eurobonds?
P.S.: I repeat, that IMO, there won’t be any eurobonds in the short future and this is actually a good thing for us. It’s an occasion for the goverment to start cutting the money wasted in bureaucracy and inefficiency of the public sector. There is no real need for eurobonds. The wasted money in the pubblic sector, is x3 the amount we would gain from getting the ability to borrow liquid money at 1-2% lower than our current rate. It is only waiting for someone to collect it. And as usual, in Greece, the politicians work better, when there is no other way out, than to do what must be done.
Sign In
