Looks good on our Prime Minister.
Eventually he’ll have a choice between the jet offered by the company that screwed over our aerospace industry, or the jet that he railed against 4 yrs ago, during his election campaign, and which a previous Liberal government made us members of the program.
Meanwhile, at least a decade has been wasted.

A little less nationalistic ranting would be appreciated from both of you.

Dassault can be rather arrogant and difficult to deal with.
But they have good reason ( and vast experience ), and at least you know what you are getting involved with.

Airbus, on the other hand, is partnered with the Italian Leonardo in ATR.
For years Leonardo wanted to develop a 100 seat regional jet successor to the ATR-42/72 range of turboprops, while Airbus always stalled them, saying the market wasn’t ready, or non-existent. Leonardo was even thinking of developing it on their own, or with another partner.
Fast forward two years, and Airbus does an end-run around Leonardo by buying into our Canadian Bombardier C-series. Which happen to be 100 ( and up ) seat regional jets, added to their Airbus range as the 220, and completely locking Leonardo out of the regional market.( that’s what the ‘R’ in ATR stands for )
How is that for dealing with Airbus.
The Italians, and Leonardo, would be better off dealing with the British, even if they leave the EU.

Don’t know.
I thought it was solely developed by the Marconi division of the Selex subsidiary if Leonardo.
If under British government contract, then the British own the know how.
I’m not sure if it applies to SAAB.
Can a company hire a foreign company to do research for their government, and expect it to be their govrnment’sjurisdiction ?

Certainly.

Here is a quote from Wikipedia…

‘In 1977, Libya sought the purchase of 20 G.222s, this was vetoed by the U.S. Government, who had imposed an embargo on military arms and equipment to Libya, which included the G.222’s T64 engines. To get around this restriction, Aeritalia developed a version of the G.222 powered by the Rolls-Royce Tyne engine and other US supplied equipment was replaced by European equivalents; the more powerful Tyne engine also reportedly gave this variant superior “hot and high” performance.”

Let me know if you need further examples.
But I thought this appropriate as it involves Italian industry.

While the radar for the Gripen may have been designed and built in England, if Italy should decide ( for whatever reason ) that Leonardo cannot sell military equipment to Sweden ( or any country buying that plane ), guess what ?

The Gripen no longer has a radar !

Funny that you would consider the Germans a more suitable partner for the Tempest program than the Italians, Eagle1.
It was the Germans who almost put an end to the Typhoon program. Twice if I remember correctly.
Meanwhile Italy patiently went along with the delays, even going as far as renting Tornado F3 and f-16 stopgap fighters.
The Germans who have never designed an operational combat aircraft ( by themselves ) since WW2.
Meanwhile Italy has at least designed some fighter/bombers and quite a few trainers.
Germany does not have the will ( or a military aircraft industry to try and preserve ), or the know-how. They have larger amounts of disposable cash than the Italians; but then, so do the Middle East nations

And Italian and British industry are already partly integrated through Selex and Leonardo ( Agusta-Westland )

Is the prop on the DP-27 directly driven from the turbine shaft ?
IOW, basically a ductless turbofan ?

That is what I consider the difference, a turboprop uses a transmission between prop and turbine shaft.

Or is it just marketing hype ?