azyr
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2018
- Messages
- 382
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
The Gripen is on my "all time favorites" list for fighter jets and I have immense respect for Swedes for coming up with it. Like some of the countries in the region Sweden could've laid back, funneled the money to other needs and depended on the EU and US to defend her if any need arose - but instead she went far and beyond to develop one of the most sensible aircraft in recent times.
Having said that, modifying and engine is not the same as creating one. The first and foremost issue is that you're dependent on the US (specifically GE in this case) and also prone to sanctions (granted, this is very very unlikely).
The other issue of building on top of an existing IP and tech is that you won't be able to harvest the fruit of your labor and sell it to 3rd party customers. You've poured hard work on someone else's work and if a customer should arise guess who will be calling the shots? Considering the fact that jet engines are in high demand and low supply in todays world, this is a big bummer.
Lastly "if a need arises to create a jet engine we have the capacity to design one" is a fallacy. Nearly every country in the world with a modern(ish) education system and somewhat diverse production facilities is actually "technically" able to create a jet engine. The issue is it's immensely expensive AND takes a very long time (as you also need to create facilities the engine is dependent on).
So if the Swede's and the US had a major falling out OR if Sweden wanted some part of the delicious pie called world arms sales she would be a sitting duck for a considerable amount of time. Even if Sweden poured her resources into creating an engine NOW we're looking at 10+ years at a minimum (and that's being kind) until a product worthy of sale is on the market.
You won't be able to build on your current engine at all - since you don't hold the IP. You also don't have the infrastructure to build the %50 part you're now outsourcing because it's cheap.
So all Sweden has done right now is saved "some" money on a brand new engine in order to rush out her jet but sacrificed all those man hours and engineering feats on someone else's property.
Comparing this to the UK, the US, China, Russia and France isn't fair as all of these countries have the necessary facilities, know-how AND IP rights in place to create a Jet engine. The quality they can come up with can be debated but if all these nations decided to start work on a new engine and the Swedes wanted to compete you'd be in a HUGE disadvantage.
So now let's compare Sweden and Turkey in this regard. Right NOW the capabilities and engineering know-how on engine tech is comparable between both these powers. Both have capabilities to manufacture huge portions of some variants of US jet engines. Both countries also have valuable technology and know how on different parts of a jet engine. BUT Turkey has decided to go one step further, so we've put in motion a plan that will help us join the league of countries that can develop a modern jet engine.
Sweden also has the funds and capability to do this, but they've decided not to (for the time being).
Today we're more or less on equal footing, but today Turkey also decided to start sprinting while Sweden is still walking. A few years from now Turkey will eclipse Sweden in this capability.
Final note (I know, this has been a VERY long comment, sorry) - Turkey leapfrogging Sweden doesn't actually matter at all, as neither countries have any beef with one another, nor is there any likely scenario where they will. They also don't compete on arms exports. I just compared the two as we're in a topic about a Turkish fighter jet and you've been adamant to thump your chest about your own accomplishments here.
While I applaud the Swede's for their great work, we had to have a fact check.
Cheers!
