What's new

Saab wins Brazil's F-X2 fighter contest with Gripen NG

Day by day Dassualt have got to be growing more desperate to clinch this Indian Rafale export order- not only is it the potential largest single order but others (Malaysia and some Arab nations) are holding off on making their own orders until India makes a move.

It's really do or die time for Dassualt's military division and they, along with the French Govt, have got to be throwing all they can at the Indian deal.


Should be very good news for India...............

The recent events will definitely increase pressure on french.

Sweden is not working alone either, be it in design with UK, with France or ITA on radar with GER on weapons, or engines with US..., so that is similar to Israel or from Germany/Japan compared to the US or Russia. But still it is the innovations that sets them apart, be it in developing modern radar and avionic systems, or weapon techs.

Remember Swedish Leather Canons?
 
.
War against countries like Iraq and Afghanistan!:omghaha:


The F-18 doesn't need to prove anything to anyone. What kind of combat experience does the Bangladeshi fighter have ? Oh, sorry....:woot:
 
Last edited:
.
Brazil Chooses Saab Jet Deal For Air Force After NSA Spying Sours Boeing Bid
Until earlier this year, Boeing's F/A-18 Super Hornet had been considered the front runner. But revelations of spying by the U.S. National Security Agency in Brazil, including personal communication by Rousseff, led Brazil to believe it could not trust a U.S. company.

Brazil Chooses Saab Jet Deal For Air Force After NSA Spying Sours Boeing Bid
 
. .
Rafale is Omni-role fighter. Su-30 though multi-role, has evolved from Su-27 which is AWACs Killer/Air Superiority Fighter.

Su-30 is mainly an Air superiority fighter while Rafale has been developed with clear emphasis on A2G role.

Apart from that it shares several similarities with Mirage. The Mig-35 was observed as bigger, more maintenance intensive Mig 29 by the Indian evaluators, according to one article on broadsword.

SH came with strings, offering very limited/No ToT and you know very well why we didn't choose F-16 Block 70 Super Viper.

Gripen was not suitable for role and it having american power plant didn't help either.

Hope it clears your doubt.



They say French are bad sellers. How much true it is?

Actually french are really bad sellers militarily or domestically . They are the only ones except usa to have nuclear power aircraft carriers , they have the worlds best non 5g naval fighter and one the best in air superiority fighters , they have catapult launching tech. great helos , LHD's, transport aircrafts, one the worlds best diesel sub. but still are exporting very less than they are capable of, even russia which produces nearly equal or below in quality than french tech have a huge export market.

Even domestically in their wircraft manufacturer airbus they let slip hundreds of billion $ worth of contract which boeing got with little. work in. the middle east.
 
.

Can u please provide the operating cost figures of rafale and su-30mki if u have any. Because i read somewhere that rafale's operating cost is also higher compared to su-30.
Otherwise if an su-30mki costs lesser and also its operational & maintenance cost are less than rafale + you already have the infrastructure for su-30's. Then does it matter if its a heavy weight aircraft, it would be just a plus point if anything. Though it would provide diversity to induct a new type that i understand but from the economic point of view not a good option.[/quote]




There's no way that's true. The MKI's operating and maintenance costs are FAR higher than the Rafale not to mention the Rafale is an easier fighter to maintain- it has been designed from day one to be worked on easily. AFAIK the Rafale costs around $14,000 USD per flight hour and the MKI around $18,000.
 
.
Can u please provide the operating cost figures of rafale and su-30mki if u have any. Because i read somewhere that rafale's operating cost is also higher compared to su-30.
Otherwise if an su-30mki costs lesser and also its operational & maintenance cost are less than rafale + you already have the infrastructure for su-30's. Then does it matter if its a heavy weight aircraft, it would be just a plus point if anything. Though it would provide diversity to induct a new type that i understand but from the economic point of view not a good option.




There's no way that's true. The MKI's operating and maintenance costs are FAR higher than the Rafale not to mention the Rafale is an easier fighter to maintain- it has been designed from day one to be worked on easily. AFAIK the Rafale costs around $14,000 USD per flight hour and the MKI around $18,000.[/quote]

Kindly give source for claim.
 
.
can any one ahare the specifications of brazillian selected aircraft model?
 
.
can any one ahare the specifications of brazillian selected aircraft model?

There are only basic specs of Saab available for the Gripen NG, proposed to Brazil, the final config of the Brazilian version still could be different:

http://www.aereo.jor.br/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/IMG_0426.JPG


Saab specs needs to be taken with care though, the payload specs are usually given too high and would need to reduce internal fuel during take off, just like the cost per h figures are often given as minimum costs and based on estimates from the Gripen C/D. There is still no final Gripen E/F prototype available, does Saab has own infos on the cost of the new engine and have to ask GE for them. So reliable specs on the final specs and cost will be available only in some years.
 
.
@sancho,

If most components are non swedish, mostly american and english like the electronics, radar, weapons and the engines then what good is an exclusive TOT to Brazil, when in most likelyhood none of the techs can be directly shared with brazil? i am going by the assumption that the US and UK will in all probability refuse permission. Secondly what crucial tech will SAAB bring to the table in its association when most important components are not available for sharing? there's hardly a 50% benefit in the TOT and the possible collaboration because they will have to depend on the OEM's for the equipmenIf most components are non swedish, mostly american and english like the electronics, radar, weapons and the engines then what good is an exclusive TOT to Brazil, when in most likelyhood none of If most components are non swedish, mostly american and english like the electronics, radar, weapons and the engines then what good is an exclusive TOT to Brazil, when in most likelyhood none of the techs can be directly shared with brazil? i am going by the assumption that the US and UK will in all probability refuse permission. Secondly what crucial tech will SAAB bring to the table in its association when most important components are not available for sharing? there's hardly a 50% benefit in the TOT and the possible collaboration because they will have to depend on the OEM's for the equipmenIf most components are non swedish, mostly american and english like the electronics, radar, weapons and the engines then what good is an exclusive TOT to Brazil, when in most likelyhood none of t
 
.
@sancho,

If most components are non swedish, mostly american and english like the electronics, radar, weapons and the engines then what good is an exclusive TOT to Brazil, when in most likelyhood none of the techs can be directly shared with brazil? i am going by the assumption that the US and UK will in all probability refuse permission.

If or what techs can be shared needs to be seen, the radar techs, at least to a good extend can be Swedish and the UK benefits from the Gripen sale as well, which is why they might reduce some restrictions. After the EF was rejected from the competition, the Brits openly supported the Gripen and some recent reports hints on US support too, incase Brazil can't or don't want the F18SH anymore. Supporting the Gripen with US parts is still better than losing Brazil completely to France.
But as I said early, Brazilian industry is already working with Saab on the Gripen E and will get a good share of the Sea Gripen developement, so even if they don't get full ToT of critical techs, the development part is a major point. When you add that the long term perspective will not only give the chance of a fully Brazilian weapon pack, but possible even so co-develop an engine with Volvo, so a lot of chances for R&D and not only taking ToT from already developed foreign parts. One reason why Brazilian industry was always in favour of Gripen, while the air force prefered the F18SH and the politicians the strategic advantages of a Rafale deal.
The coming month will be interesting, because now the final negotioations will show how much critical technology is included and what long term prospects Brazil can afford. Without the necessary money, no new carrier and no Sea Gripens are possible.
 
.
If or what techs can be shared needs to be seen, the radar techs, at least to a good extend can be Swedish and the UK benefits from the Gripen sale as well, which is why they might reduce some restrictions. After the EF was rejected from the competition, the Brits openly supported the Gripen and some recent reports hints on US support too, incase Brazil can't or don't want the F18SH anymore. Supporting the Gripen with US parts is still better than losing Brazil completely to France.
But as I said early, Brazilian industry is already working with Saab on the Gripen E and will get a good share of the Sea Gripen developement, so even if they don't get full ToT of critical techs, the development part is a major point. When you add that the long term perspective will not only give the chance of a fully Brazilian weapon pack, but possible even so co-develop an engine with Volvo, so a lot of chances for R&D and not only taking ToT from already developed foreign parts. One reason why Brazilian industry was always in favour of Gripen, while the air force prefered the F18SH and the politicians the strategic advantages of a Rafale deal.
The coming month will be interesting, because now the final negotioations will show how much critical technology is included and what long term prospects Brazil can afford. Without the necessary money, no new carrier and no Sea Gripens are possible.

Thats the point, they are going in blind and its a dark area. UK, US would of course be willing to supply the engines, radars, weapons and the EW but will they agree to a TOT sharing with a third party?

also how would the maintenance, future upgrades, overhauling and servicing be affected with multiple OEM's in the picture? will it not complicate matters and cause over expenditure and delays shifting the parts to various countries and teams?

I believe in this case any TOT sharing will have to be a tripartiate agreement between the OEM, buyer and the seller, will it not complicate the whole process?

SAAB effectively is only going on the table with 50% TOT on offer which of course isnt a great deal when its combined with any restrictions from the OEMs that might come into play. Doesnt bring in much in development options for a new partner, as you said they are working with brazil on gripen E, But then brazil will only one more partner along with UK, US and Sweden will it not?

Rafale would have been a much better option especially when they were willing to share a lot with the Brazilians and they have 100% original source equipment to offer.

One more question, How much would this loss of the brazilian order would affect the MMRCA contract both on TOT or possibly rate?
 
.
Thats the point, they are going in blind and its a dark area. UK, US would of course be willing to supply the engines, radars, weapons and the EW but will they agree to a TOT sharing with a third party?

Radar as said, will be largely Swedish and British, engines will be the bigger issue and depends on if Brazil get a licence prodution under ToT like India has for LCA engines. EW actually was aimed to be Swedish at the begining, but the more the NG developed, the more parts seems to be outsourced. The weapon pack might not have US weapons at all, I expect A-Darter, Meteor and in the long run a BRA/SAF BVR missile. Brazil also have anti radiation, anti ship and bomb developments, will be interesting to see however if Taurus will be procured.

SAAB effectively is only going on the table with 50% TOT on offer

That's not correct, since you can't demand 100% ToT of certain techs in such competitions, only give an ammount of ToT that you aim on and what ToT it should include (although not to what extent). Saab surely will offer full tot of the airframe, Sea Gripen development and most of the AESA radar parts, what need to be seen is how much ToT of foreign parts will be shared. Keep in mind that the competition is "only" for 36 fighters officially, with the prospect of more than 100 in future, so that will be important for ToT too.


But then brazil will only one more partner along with UK, US and Sweden will it not?
No, neither UK, nor US are partners of the Gripen and will only benefit with the supply of sub components, Brazil however can have a major share and might produce a credible ammount of parts for later exports of the Gripen, especially if other S. American countries will go for it.


One more question, How much would this loss of the brazilian order would affect the MMRCA contract both on TOT or possibly rate?

It won't effect it for ToT reasons, since the Indian requirement was higher and with a bigger possible order. For price negotiations it will be a benefit though, because the Indian deal is now even more important as a signal for other potential customers, like Malaysia for example.
 
.
@sancho,

What I meant was grippen does not have a lot on the table to start negotiations on TOT with, for e.g. we can negotiate with rafale for everything though its another matter how much they offer during the negotiation.

If grippen E again uses UK, US parts then they will have to partner with saab for its development.

France changed its offer on TOT and increased co development and increased tech transfer going into the competition. Now when there's only the MMRCA by way of any foreign big orders to look forward to, will it not make them more flexible in co development and pricing is what I wanted to know?

I read that the weapons package on offer on grippen is american, the ew is british and american, the engine is GE, Probably the radar is american as well......not sure.
 
.
@sancho,

What I meant was grippen does not have a lot on the table to start negotiations on TOT with, for e.g. we can negotiate with rafale for everything though its another matter how much they offer during the negotiation.

If grippen E again uses UK, US parts then they will have to partner with saab for its development.

France changed its offer on TOT and increased co development and increased tech transfer going into the competition. Now when there's only the MMRCA by way of any foreign big orders to look forward to, will it not make them more flexible in co development and pricing is what I wanted to know?

I read that the weapons package on offer on grippen is american, the ew is british and american, the engine is GE, Probably the radar is american as well......not sure.

The next big possible order for the Rafale remains to be the UAE and with the recent rejection of the EF, it is just more obvious that the UAE will go for them, the question is only when. Qatar is also on the list and seems to want a far bigger order, than initially expected, so there is still good prospect for the Rafale. Co-development is only possible on certain upgrades, not on the fighter itself and even if the Rafale did offered more critical techs to Brazil, they couldn't afford it and then the Gripen is still a good choice for Brazils operational and industrial future.

Saab offers Gripen in general with US weapons too, but Brazil will definitely integrate several own weapons.
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom