Dismantle or not to dismantle, that is the question

Swedens coming Gripen E can be made with all new components or using some parts from Gripen A or Gripen C.

All new is 7bSEK more expensive than canabalizing Gripen C, while saving the C’s to canabalize Old Gripen A would be 3,5 bSEK pricier. 1usd=8,6 SEK (historic range 6-10 SEK/USD)

Decision expected this year so potential customers for Gripen C is in a bit of hurry! (Thailand, Slovakia, Botswana & M’sia)

http://www.svd.se/regeringens-dilemma-skrota-gripen-eller-ta-miljardnota

@ Paralay, “Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything is 42″……….. not 83%:rolleyes:.

After all its all about playing your fighter aircraft system strengths rather than rating the individual planes largely unknown performance parameters into a single digit!

UK aviation will gradually loose out to market insiders

Pretty pissed off these days…. sincerely regret giving credit to our UK customers, probably not alone with this feeling, no more credit to “Banana kingdoms”.

Hope for my own sake that French and Germans who now will command EU will manage to hang on to a decent free trade with UK and that tariffs into UK won’t be too high in the years to come.

As trade barriers and exchange risk is rising its just becoming easier to deal with EU companies when possible, aviation industry is actually a part of this world too so it would not be different. The UK aviation industry will inevitably be negatively effected by this.

possible, though not likely. typically aircraft get heavier as they age…

You know who else was going to use simulators to cut down on cost and time?

I know, your favorite pet airplane, some airforces who plan for your pet plan to cut flying a lot too, the pilots will end up playing computer games with Top Speed rather than flying :highly_amused:

Delay
–> longer times between investment and return, higher total COSTs (for exampel capital cost on investment)
–>lower production speed is under utilization of an uber effective & expensive production line –> higher unit COSTs
–>higher sustainment COSTs of old airframes, (how many Norwegian F16’s will get wing replacements?)

How will this hit US Gov, partners, other customers or Lockheed? Somebody has to take the pain that 4 sure.

Good choice for the Danes, they love participating in various exotic missions and are deeply embedded/ protected by friendly nations Germany/Poland-Baltics and Sweden / Norway. The do have the strategic depth to run limited numbers of complicated aircraft from one airbase.

Regarding the process, good old Corporal Frisk is putting it nicely in his “How Not to Choice your fighter”

https://corporalfrisk.com/

from Mspheres post in F35 thread,
on SH cost “airframe $33 million, two F414-GE-400 $4.8 million ea, avionics $9.3 million, the rest is support and ancilliary equipment”.

Conclusions
Airframe still makes up bulk of cost

Anticipations
New manufacturing techniques allow reduced weight new alloys, CRP, larger and fewer metal parts and more
New manufacturing techniques allow reduced cost in manufacturing (well old present Gripen C airframe is for free ..)
New better fluid dynamics calculations allow minor adjustments to air frame for better aerodynamics
Avionics make up a large part of the combat efficiency

The SAAB solution
Advanced avionics in a moderately updated airframe with a cost effective proven engine.

There is no way that Gripen purchase cost will approach “big boys league” even if avionics cost is dramatically increased. In example above a doubling of avionic costs is “just” a 20% increase in aircraft cost.

I disagree that adding more avionics would take Gripen into a cost level that would make the small airframe/medium sized sensor approach irrelevant. In addition to that the small, slender aircraft will have low operating costs too, so what we see are indications of a life time cost level around half of F35’s.

Regarding the wingtip indeed limited despite GaN, I presume good for finding range of incoming missile, indeed I do not know anything about its capacity.

GaN EW of future Rafale and directional datalinks on F22&35, the combo on none.

I must also admit that I was a bit disappointed yesterday… for example they have experience with ditching the pitote tube on nEuron but still present on the E.