If you add inflation for each year the 2002 figure grows, if your going to purchase in 2014 thats 12 years of growth..
Rough back of an envelope guide is:-
@2% that equals US$74M
@3% it equals US$84M
@4% it equals US$94M
This is if inflation stay at the steady rate quoted during those 12 years.
This doesn’t include exchange rates where the dollar has been falling since 2002 by a large margin, if the US are quoting in 2002 dollars..
Must they also be quoting 2002 exchange rates for export?.
I’ve been looking for a quote where it was stated the export purchase price is set at those 2002 exchange rates – but I can’t find it yet!!.
Another thought is those prices do not include any development hickups, or capability lowering to match price, as has happened in the F-22 program.
Cheers
Ok IIRC the price often quoted is in 2002 years US$, but that the exchage rate was also set at that time too, so fluctuations i.e. the very low value of the US$ now do not benefit export customers.
But it does put the price of raw materials imported to the US up, who will pay any difference??
Cheers
Huh?? no not two threads about the jsf…. did you read the bit about ‘is Eurofighter back in??‘, that was the principle question due to the Comments that were made in the JSF brief!!
So I’ll make it a bit easier…..
Is the Eurofighter Typhoon back in the Norwegian competition (or is that as realistic as the price quote for the JSF??:diablo:)
Cheers
No thats this thread.. http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=81668
😀
cheers
look at this :-
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23855599-662,00.html#submit-feedback
It was the price the Pentagon, which sells military gear to foreign countries, quoted to Norway as it decides between the JSF and other options, including the European-built Eurofighter and SAAB Gripen.
Hmm Eurofighter back in??, or what?.
PS Anyone what to bet the JSF isn’t going to cost US$58.7M
I think someone summed up the F-35 nicely when he said it reminded him of a stealthy Blackburn Buccaneer..
make your own mind up about it being the looks or the role.
🙂
Do you suggest the UK MoD made a mistake ?
Well they went to Iraq didn’t they?? 😉
Re the Paveway III comment – it seems genuine..
Does anyone know what the anti shipping missile is now planned for the Typhoon?, AFAIK theres nothing funded.
cheers
Fellas….
Whats the story behind this?
http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e338/Hyperwarp/Junk/hmm.jpg
Apparently its a B-2 being tracked by a Rapier missile system in the UK during an airshow.
The B-2 would not normally fly so low, but it does show how well the B-2 has suppresses hot spots, however it can’t hide itself well due to the the background temp being different.
cheers
The Requirement was deleted in 2004
source
http://www.nao.org.uk/publications/nao_reports/03-04/03041159_II.pdf
Deletion of requirements for
gun (-£32m),1500L fuel tank (-£16m),
CRV7 Rocket (-£2m) & Air Launched
Anti Radiation Missile (-£21m). CASOM
integration assets (+£5m).
Notice how some of the deleted items have crept back in..
Cheers
Are the 1500 litre tanks being used on the Typhoon now?, I can’t recall seeing one being used!!!, I have this nagging feeling there were not qualified for flight or something like that.
Hmmmm has anyone got a picture of a production Typhoon using 1500 litre tanks?.
Ahhh Scorps you got there before me!!!
Those Gripen tanks are drop tanks, you can get an idea of size by looking at page 19 of the gripen capability doc on the picture of the new main landing gear position, they have a square cross section nearly as big as a Taurus missile!..
They would surely have to be dropped in combat.
The Gripen site have some good documentation on the N
source
http://www.gripen.com/en/MediaRelations/Publications/Publications.htm
but in particular:-
http://www.gripen.com/NR/rdonlyres/EE580BDA-6C9B-49C3-953F-92EBE9FF4464/0/factsheet_en.pdf
That’s just shameless teasing. 😉
Especially interesting is how Gripen N can fly 30min longer on CAP, 120nm farther out from its base compared to Typhoon, but with only 2 BVRAAMs instead of 6. So with twin pylons for 4 BVRAAMs (as planned), it would still have much longer legs than Typhoon. Impressive… 😎
Typhoon: 60min CAP @500nm, with 6 BVRAAMs, 2 SRAAMs and 3500l in 3 external tanks
Gripen N: 90min CAP @ 620nm, with 2 BVRAAMs, 2 SRAAMs and 4540l in 4 external tanks
I noticed that too..
Where are you getting the 3500 litres for the Typhoon?, AIUI it was 3000 litres, as the supersonic fuel tanks only come in 1000 litre.
There were 1500 litre tanks but I’m not sure there being used now, and they are defiantly subsonic only.
I think the Typhoon would need conformals to match the Gripen N range in this configuration, I really hope this is on in tranche 3.
what about the Gripen N’s has new 450US Gallon external tanks.. that = 1702litres so it could be a possible 6806 litres???
Cheers
Its a possibility the price is for the first lot!!, but it looks like something big beginning to happen in the area of acquisition of weapon systems.
IMHO Its becoming a mainstream problem which usually means politicians will do something about it.. and that is usually bad for the programs concerned..
I’m wondering what the feeling is in the USA now, it seems to be gathering momentum from a distance, whats the feeling over there?.
Cheers
Well from what I gather its in the public domain and is available, it shouldn’t be a problem for those used to ‘googling’.
It does show some interesting rangeloadoutspeeds for the Typhoon including supercruise and even quotes the F-22 fuel fraction as .30.
I must check out the claim the air to surface fuel fraction of the Typhoon beats the F-35!!!, (must be with external tanks..)
Cheers