Bangladesh Air Force

[UKBengali]

F-16V would be a best choice for BD.
And then, there would a competition between IAF's Rafale with Meteor, BAF's F-16V with AIM-120D, and MAF's JF-17 with PL-15.

F-16V is too expensive at 80 million US dollars per plane and BAF needs an aircraft that can freely fire on Indian planes and only Chinese aircraft fit the bill. I doubt USA would give BD f-16V with AIM-120D anyway.

Let us leave JF-17 Block 3 with PL-15 out for now as even Pakistan does not have it, and like I already said Myanmar probably cannot afford anything more than it has ordered so far as it has puny 70 billion US dollar economy.

 

[LKJ86]

F-16V is too expensive at 80 million US dollars per plane and BAF needs an aircraft that can freely fire on Indian planes and only Chinese aircraft fit the bill. I doubt USA would give BD f-16V with AIM-129D anyway.

It would be foolish for BD to buy two similar mediumweight fighters at the same time.
And F-16V is just what you need.

Let us leave JF-17 Block 3 with PL-15 out for now as even Pakistan does not have it, and like I already said Myanmar probably cannot afford anything more than it has ordered so far as it has puny 70 billion US dollar economy.

It is just the matter of time.

 

[UKBengali]

It is just the matter of time.

BD will worry about that as and when it occurs.

Right now BAF needs to sign the contract for the 16 MRCA before June 30 this year and so let us see what they choose - will it be US/EU or China?

 

[Bilal9]

No need for "friendship price" with China as BD is well able to afford the 40 million US dollar unit cost of J-10CE.
Munitions such as PL-15 missile may come to half that of Western ones.
What posters do not realise is that Chinese electronics has been ahead of Russia for many years and the gap with the West is narrowing all the time.

An advantage that J-10C has over Rafale is that it is canard-delta and optimised for air superiority and with it's 140KN WS-10B engine will reign supreme over Rafale in high altitude manouverability. Even though it may be a little inferior electronically it will have advantage in getting out the first BVR missile shot.

I say buy 2 squadrons of J-10CE and 1 squadron of refurbished F-16 Block 50/52 for the same cost as 1 squadron of brand new Eurofighter Tranche 3 and then BAF has enough for next 5 years before it needs to think about anything else.

Thanks for your very clear thoughts but I hope BAF mgmt. sees through all the other 'influences'.

 

[UKBengali]

Thanks for your very clear thoughts but I hope BAF mgmt. sees through all the other 'influences'.

Yep I fear a lack of strategic foresight may occur.

BAF aquisitions and investing resources in building up BD's aeronautical industry need to go hand in hand. One cannot be separate from the other.

BD has every chance of becoming a very powerful country economically and militarily by mid-century and the decisions made now will decide the outcome.

 

[Destranator]

Calculating the price mentioned in the article the unit cost of F-16V is $70M a piece. $15M cheaper than Gripen E which costs $85M a piece. Well it's a great option for BAF although the maintenance and operating costs will be higher than Gripen. US might refuse to sell the engine for Gripen if BAF actually opted for it since they are openly stating the interest of selling their own platforms to BD.
The only question remains is the armaments that will be made available if BAF decides go for F-16V.....

What is the source of the $85 million price tag for Gripen? Saab is more open to ToT which, in addition to its inherent low operational costs, makes it a better candidate.

Brazil has ordered 36 units for $4.06 billion ($130 million/unit) but this includes ToT, joint development, set up of development centre in Sao Paulo and training of 350 Brazilian engineers and technicians in Sweden.

http://agenciabrasil.ebc.com.br/en/...-receives-first-36-fighter-jets-bought-sweden

Not sure if the deal includes maintenance as well but regardless this seems like a very good deal.

A similar deal with BAF/BAC can benefit Bangladesh for generations.

 

[Bilal9]

What is the source of the $85 million price tag for Gripen? Saab is more open to ToT which, in addition to its inherent low operational costs, makes it a better candidate.

Brazil has ordered 36 units for $4.06 billion ($130 million/unit) but this includes ToT, joint development, set up of development centre in Sao Paulo and training of 350 Brazilian engineers and technicians in Sweden.

http://agenciabrasil.ebc.com.br/en/...-receives-first-36-fighter-jets-bought-sweden

Not sure if the deal includes maintenance as well but regardless this seems like a very good deal.

A similar deal with BAF/BAC can benefit Bangladesh for generations.

Bangladesh and Brazil aren't in the same boat aerospace wise, in fact India and Brazil aren't in the same boat for that matter. Just pointing out the obvious, do not mean any disrespect brother...

Brazil has a long tradition of independent production of aerospace products, even first class passenger airliners (Embraer) and defence products (AMX A1A fighters) with Alenia/Aermacchi in Italy starting in the late eighties.

Indians on the other hand, are big on importing sub-systems and putting them together (sometimes taking four/five times longer than countries like Pakistan) to produce a finished product. This - when they had an early headstart after WWII from Mr. Willi Messerschmitt himself (Marut) but effed it up over the years...

In any case, Bangladesh will have a long road ahead, but at least we can make an earnest sincere start Somewhere....

 

[Destranator]

Bangladesh and Brazil aren't in the same boat aerospace wise, in fact India and Brazil aren't in the same boat for that matter. Just pointing out the obvious, do not mean any disrespect brother...

Brazil has a long tradition of independent production of aerospace products, even first class passenger airliners (Embraer) and defence products (fighters) with Alenia/Aermacchi in Italy.

Indians on the other hand, are big on importing sub-systems and putting them together (sometimes taking four/five times longer than countries like Pakistan) to produce a finished product. This - when they had an early headstart after WWII from Mr. Willi Messerschmitt himself (Marut) but effed it up over the years...

Bangladesh will need a lot of hand-holding for sure which will raise the cost of a similar deal for us. Yet this might work out cheaper in the long run (20-30 years), due to cheaper maintenance and upgrades (Gripens are quite futureproof), and the expertise gained would pave way for savings in future fighter deals.

One thing we must not lose sight of is that the J-10 is still unproven. Everything we know about this fighter is from Chinese sources with no scope verification form an export customer as none exists.
J-10A's may have "defeated" Gripen C's in a simulated environment but how often can the J-10 remain in the air in a real combat scenario given the engine troubles?
How frequent would the overhauls be?
We need fighters which can take advantage of the low MTBO, low servicability of Indian MKIs. J-10s might give away that advantage due to its own struggles.

 

[Bilal9]

Bangladesh will need a lot of hand-holding for sure which will raise the cost of a similar deal for us. Yet this might work out cheaper in the long run (20-30 years), due to cheaper maintenance and upgrades (Gripens are quite futureproof), and the expertise gained would pave way for savings in future fighter deals.

One thing we must not lose sight of is that the J-10 is still unproven. Everything we know about this fighter is from Chinese sources with no scope verification form an export customer as none exists.
J-10A's may have "defeated" Gripen C's in a simulated environment but how often can the J-10 remain in the air in a real combat scenario given the engine troubles?
How frequent would the overhauls be?
We need fighters which can take advantage of the low MTBO, low servicability of Indian MKIs. J-10s might give away that advantage due to its own struggles.

Well lets see what the Thai order and trialing produces. I am sure the Thais will not report things favoring the Chinese.

 

[BanglarBagh]

What is the source of the $85 million price tag for Gripen? Saab is more open to ToT which, in addition to its inherent low operational costs, makes it a better candidate.

Brazil has ordered 36 units for $4.06 billion ($130 million/unit) but this includes ToT, joint development, set up of development centre in Sao Paulo and training of 350 Brazilian engineers and technicians in Sweden.

http://agenciabrasil.ebc.com.br/en/...-receives-first-36-fighter-jets-bought-sweden

Not sure if the deal includes maintenance as well but regardless this seems like a very good deal.

A similar deal with BAF/BAC can benefit Bangladesh for generations.

You have a valid point. What BAF needs most is ToT for a fighter to really start up a aviation industry domestically. In this scenario Saab seems to be the best likely partner for BAC with the Gripen being the fighter in question. The initial process could cost us more but as I also mentioned the cost of operations and maintenance would be much lower so this choice may even out the overall costs in the long run at the same time establish a solid foundation for aviation industry.
However, there is still one catch! As you may know US has openly voiced their interest to sell advanced military platforms to BD and that includes fighters as well. Don't you think Uncle Sam may veto a deal for BAF to get Gripens? Let's not forget Gripen uses US engines, some subsystems and armaments as well. If US refuses to sell these then BAF will be in another pickle like when the SU-30SME deal backfired because not being able to complete the deal will slow down the process again for a few years. Just look at the T-129 deal of Turkey and Pakistan and you see the dangers of importing platforms which are not US ones but use US tech and systems.

After considering all these I think F-16V may be the platform BAF should go for but it is just my opinion.....

 

[TopCat]

You have a valid point. What BAF needs most is ToT for a fighter to really start up a aviation industry domestically. In this scenario Saab seems to be the best likely partner for BAC with the Gripen being the fighter in question. The initial process could cost us more but as I also mentioned the cost of operations and maintenance would be much lower so this choice may even out the overall costs in the long run at the same establish a solid foundation for aviation industry.
However, there is still one catch! As you may know US has openly voiced their interest to sell advanced military platforms to BD and that includes fighters as well. Don't you think Uncle Sam may veto a deal for BAF to get Gripens? Let's not forget Gripen uses US engines, some subsystems and armaments as well. If US refuses to sell these then BAF will be in another pickle like when the SU-30SME deal backfired because not being able to complete the deal will slow down the process again for a few years. Just look at the T-129 deal of Turkey and Pakistan and you see the dangers of importing platforms which are not US ones but use US tech and systems.

After considering all these I think F-16V may be the platform BAF should go for but it is just my opinion.....

China best fitted for TOT as BD does not have capacity neither financial means to absorb western technology.

 

[UKBengali]

Bangladesh will need a lot of hand-holding for sure which will raise the cost of a similar deal for us. Yet this might work out cheaper in the long run (20-30 years), due to cheaper maintenance and upgrades (Gripens are quite futureproof), and the expertise gained would pave way for savings in future fighter deals.

One thing we must not lose sight of is that the J-10 is still unproven. Everything we know about this fighter is from Chinese sources with no scope verification form an export customer as none exists.
J-10A's may have "defeated" Gripen C's in a simulated environment but how often can the J-10 remain in the air in a real combat scenario given the engine troubles?
How frequent would the overhauls be?
We need fighters which can take advantage of the low MTBO, low servicability of Indian MKIs. J-10s might give away that advantage due to its own struggles.

Is Gripen E “proven”? It uses a reliable US engine but everything else is new.

Look at the high availability rate of the JF-17 that is Chinese, apart from Russian engine to know how reliable Chinese planes are.

Anyway WS-10B is at least as reliable as the AL-31 it replaced and so while not as reliable as Western planes, it will be better than Russian “Hangar Queens” like IAF’s SU-30MKI.

J-10C has high altitude manoeuvrability advantage over both the Gripen E and Rafale and that should suffice to make up for any electronic disadvantage it may have.

China is desperate to sell J-10C to BD and BD should take the chance to buy the aircraft in numbers(32) on good credit terms to really build an airforce that can deter it’s main adversary India.

Remember by buying Chinese BD buys into a military industrial complex that will within 1-2 decades become as comprehensive and as advanced as that of the US.

 

[Destranator]

Is Gripen E “proven”? It uses a reliable US engine but everything else is new.

Look at the high availability rate of the JF-17 that is Chinese, apart from Russian engine to know how reliable Chinese planes are.

Anyway WS-10B is at least as reliable as the AL-31 it replaced and so while not as reliable as Western planes, it will be better than Russian “Hangar Queens” like IAF’s SU-30MKI.

J-10C has high altitude manoeuvrability advantage over both the Gripen E and Rafale and that should suffice to make up for any electronic disadvantage it may have.

China is desperate to sell J-10C to BD and BD should take the chance to buy the aircraft in numbers(32) on good credit terms to really build an airforce that can deter it’s main adversary India.

Remember by buying Chinese BD buys into a military industrial complex that will within 1-2 decades become as comprehensive and as advanced as that of the US.

1. Gripen is proven by the number of export customers using it without any major fuss. Mind you unlike many clients of Chinese airctaft Gripen users have many options open to them so they have no reason to heap unnecessary praise on the aircraft.
2. There is no way to independently verify JF-17's "availability rate" just yet as effectively the only user is Pakistan (Burma has only inducted them very recently) who have a lot of pride invested in it. Cannot expect Pakistanis to broadcast its weaknesses.

3. Russian engine, exactly. BAF's alleged MiG-35/Su-35 fiasco should provide enough indication about Russian attitude.

4. Again, zero evidence of "WS-10B" being reliable.

5. "J-10C has high altitude manoeuvrability advantage over both the Gripen E and Rafale and that should suffice to make up for any electronic disadvantage it may have."
Wow...that's a massive assumption. J-10's alleged high maneuverability will be of no use if it gets swatted out by BVR missiles aided by superior Western EW/ECM suites.

6. There is no evidence of China "catching up" to the West in fighter tech. If they did, they would be flooded with back orders for J-10s powered by "reliable" WS-10B's.

 

[UKBengali]

1. Gripen is proven by the number of export customers using it without any major fuss. Mind you unlike many clients of Chinese airctaft Gripen users have many options open to them so they have no reason to heap unnecessary praise on the aircraft.
2. There is no way to independently verify JF-17's "availability rate" just yet as effectively the only user is Pakistan (Burma has only inducted them very recently) who have a lot of pride invested in it. Cannot expect Pakistanis to broadcast its weaknesses.

3. Russian engine, exactly. BAF's alleged MiG-35/Su-35 fiasco should provide enough indication about Russian attitude.

4. Again, zero evidence of "WS-10B" being reliable.

5. "J-10C has high altitude manoeuvrability advantage over both the Gripen E and Rafale and that should suffice to make up for any electronic disadvantage it may have."
Wow...that's a massive assumption. J-10's alleged high maneuverability will be of no use if it gets swatted out by BVR missiles aided by superior Western EW/ECM suites.

6. There is no evidence of China "catching up" to the West in fighter tech. If they did, they would be flooded with back orders for J-10s powered by "reliable" WS-10B's.

Dude.....

If you do not want to think more than at a shallow and rigid level level, let me not stop you.

It seems any further attempt to explain to you why you are utterly wrong will go over your head and so I will not bother.

PS - How did you stack up at school in your cohort if you do not mind me asking, particularly in mathematics?

 

[Destranator]

You have a valid point. What BAF needs most is ToT for a fighter to really start up a aviation industry domestically. In this scenario Saab seems to be the best likely partner for BAC with the Gripen being the fighter in question. The initial process could cost us more but as I also mentioned the cost of operations and maintenance would be much lower so this choice may even out the overall costs in the long run at the same time establish a solid foundation for aviation industry.
However, there is still one catch! As you may know US has openly voiced their interest to sell advanced military platforms to BD and that includes fighters as well. Don't you think Uncle Sam may veto a deal for BAF to get Gripens? Let's not forget Gripen uses US engines, some subsystems and armaments as well. If US refuses to sell these then BAF will be in another pickle like when the SU-30SME deal backfired because not being able to complete the deal will slow down the process again for a few years. Just look at the T-129 deal of Turkey and Pakistan and you see the dangers of importing platforms which are not US ones but use US tech and systems.

After considering all these I think F-16V may be the platform BAF should go for but it is just my opinion.....

The US trying to block Gripen sales over F-16s is a valid concern. However,, this needs to be brought to the table and discussed with them.
The US did not block Gripen sales to Thailand, for example, who also fly F-16s.
One option could be to get 1-2 squadrons of refurbished F-16s to retire F-7MBs and MiG-29s. This way we transition to Western ecosystem quicker while paving way for Gripens without pissing off the Americans.
We will need single engine fighters in numbers in the long term so it is okay to maintain two different platforms.
Once both F-16s and Gripens arrive, all F-7 types can be retired.
Again, these options need to be discussed extensively with the US.

Dude.....

If you do not want to think more than at a shallow and rigid level level, let me not stop you.

It seems any further attempt to explain to you why you are utterly wrong will go over your head and so I will not bother.

PS - How did you stack up at school in your cohort if you do not mind me asking, particularly in mathematics?

Sure. Blind fanboy-ism for unproven Chinese tech and "will be/can be/should be" conjectures will solve all our problems. Carry on.
All you are doing is building one strawman over another in regards to J-10s. Pull one straw out and the stack comes crashing down.