Vietnam Defence Forum

[Carlosa]

yugo, I don´t think that you said is nice. that´s nothing special, if carlosa has different view than you, nevertheless it shouldn´t provoke you to personally attack him. different opinions from different views, different people are the most normal thing of the world.

What can you expect from a teenager? Not much different than the chinese teenagers that populate this forum with similar results.

 

[yugocrosrb95]

Yes, it is, did you see how much Brazil paid for the Gripen NG? 4.7 billion for 32 planes, make the math if you are able.

No it isn't as Brazil didn't pay 4.68 billion US dollars for Gripen NG, you're uninformed.

Maybe you need to get better informed about the radar of the SU-30SM and SU-35.

Did I mention SU-35? No.

SU-35 has a different radar than SU-30's and SU-30SM is no exception.

You should have known that.

And who the fuk are you to tell me to shut up?

Reported!!!

I am looking forward for you being banned for spreading misinformation's.

Too bad that the vietnamese military doesn't listen to you then.

Vietnam produces own piston/propeler propelled trainer planes and sooner or later they will need to replace Aero L-39 Albatross if they are still flying, at very least an assembly line if Vietnam chooses to upgrade L-39 to L-39NG standard.

yugo, I don´t think that you said is nice. that´s nothing special, if carlosa has different view than you, nevertheless it shouldn´t provoke you to personally attack him. different opinions from different views, different people are the most normal thing of the world.

I don't see point in being nice to nobody who spreads misinformation like a chinese in Viet threads.

 

[Carlosa]

No it isn't as Brazil didn't pay 4.68 billion US dollars for Gripen NG, you're uninformed..

You are the one that is uninformed and is spreading misinformation.

Brazil finalises $4.68bn Gripen NG deal

Did I mention SU-35? No.

SU-35 has a different radar than SU-30's and SU-30SM is no exception.

You should have known that
.

SU-35 radar is one of the radar options for SU-30SM

 

[Viet]

I don't see point in being nice to nobody who spreads misinformation like a chinese in Viet threads.

come on, we are here all amateurs, and not military experts, not members of governments. internet is a source of information and misinformation. the crux is to find the correct answer. carlosa is a good man. be nice to him.

 

[Carlosa]

Vietnam produces own piston/propeler propelled trainer planes and sooner or later they will need to replace Aero L-39 Albatross if they are still flying, at very least an assembly line if Vietnam chooses to upgrade L-39 to L-39NG standard.
.

What piston/propeler propelled trainer planes have to do with the subject of a replacement for Mig-21 that will need to be a sophisticated fighter jet? Interesting logic you have.

 

[Viet]

relax bro...also, I hope the US relax the rules on arms control, and allow selling and transferring technology if we decide for...my favorite Saab Gripen NG.




A Coming Shift in Vietnamese Military Aviation?
Vietnam’s People’s Air Force (VPAF) could begin flying Western fighters. Here’s why that matters.

By Robert Farley for The Diplomat
January 16, 2016

If Vietnam buys the Gripen, Typhoon, or Rafale, what exactly will it be getting?

As several other writers have noted, the acquisition of Western aircraft (most likely the Gripen, Rafale, or Typhoon) would represent a huge shift in Vietnam’s defense trajectory. Vietnam hasn’t flown a Western warplane since the Vietnamese People’s Army overran Saigon, capturing 41 F-5 Tigers in the process. The Tigers that didn’t end up in the Soviet Union or the Eastern Bloc were soon grounded for lack of spares.

To be sure, Vietnam has experience with modern jet fighters, currently flying a few dozen advanced Flanker variants purchased from Russia. These aircraft are far more capable than the older MiG-21s that make up the bulk of the Vietnam People’s Air Force (VPAF), but they remain Soviet kit. Any European aircraft will require what amounts to a revolution in maintenance, spares, weapons, and handling procedures.

Thus, the sale would likely represent a long-term relationship between Vietnam and whatever country is lucky enough to get the sale. It would likely require some technology transfer (especially if Vietnam can generate a competitive bidding process), the presence of engineers and maintenance personnel on the ground, and a long training regimen. The aircraft will (undoubtedly) return to the host country for periodic upgrades and overhauls as new weapon and software systems become available.

Nothing about this is particularly new or novel; buying a fighter jet has become far less about hooking up than establishing a long-term relationship. But it will represent one of the first of these kinds of relationship that Vietnam has established with a Western country. And it says much about Vietnam’s long-term strategic outlook that Hanoi is exploring the option in such depth.

In this sense, Vietnamese interest in the Typhoon and its competitors is part and parcel with Hanoi’s other major diplomatic initiative, membership in the Trans-Pacific Partnership. The TPP likely plays no small role in the willingness of Western states to contemplate selling their aircraft to Vietnam, including the potential for technology transfer. The TPP doesn’t mean that Western technology is suddenly secure in Vietnam, but it does imply a strong directionality to Hanoi’s economic policy. It also suggest that Vietnam is extremely serious about maintaining an adversarial posture towards China for the foreseeable future.

And so before all that long, European-built VPAF fighters may patrol the South China Sea, while European and American investment pours into the Vietnamese economy. This was not an outcome that many people envisioned in 1975.

 

[yugocrosrb95]

You are the one that is uninformed and is spreading misinformation.

Brazil finalises $4.68bn Gripen NG deal

You are simply further proving my point that you are uninformed and spreading misinformation, it is because you aren't reading carefully nor are you paying attention to details at all, Brazil's deal does not involve Gripen NG alone at all and people like you claimed what you are claming now because they didn't pay attention to detail.

Brazil's deal involves production of Gripen NG, training their engineers, technology transfer, improving and implementing Brazilian technology, facilities/factories for local production of Gripen NG in Brazil, maintainance for Gripen NG until 2050, etc...

SU-35 radar is one of the radar options for SU-30SM

Only SU-35 and SU-37 can generate enough power for utilize full potential of Ibris-E radar, using it on SU-30's is a waste because it would have identical to the best radar available for SU-30's

come on, we are here all amateurs, and not military experts, not members of governments. internet is a source of information and misinformation. the crux is to find the correct answer. carlosa is a good man. be nice to him.

I am aware of that, but I atleast check multiple sources, I pay attention to detail and compile the information like bullet points and such for understanding the context of the information...

What piston/propeler propelled trainer planes have to do with the subject of a replacement for Mig-21 that will need to be a sophisticated fighter jet? Interesting logic you have.

You have short memory.

Vietnam needs to upgrade or replace L-39 Albatross trainer/ground attack jet, they could arrange local assembly and even produce some parts, it is in interest of Vietnam's goverment and military to locally produce military equipment as much as possible.

If lets say Vietnam manages to aquire all necessary machinery, tools and documents for Soko Super Galeb G4 and give funds to Serbs to reinitiate G4 upgrade program which adds radar and other improvements. Such a jet would be good and cheap for ground attack and with radar against helicopters and maybe anti-ship if it can carry RBS 15.

 

[Carlosa]

You are simply further proving my point that you are uninformed and spreading misinformation, it is because you aren't reading carefully nor are you paying attention to details at all, Brazil's deal does not involve Gripen NG alone at all and people like you claimed what you are claming now because they didn't pay attention to detail.

Brazil's deal involves production of Gripen NG, training their engineers, technology transfer, improving and implementing Brazilian technology, facilities/factories for local production of Gripen NG in Brazil, maintainance for Gripen NG until 2050, etc....

I was very well aware that that deal includes domestic production in Brazil and its standard anyway that sales contracts include tech transfer, spare parts, maintenance and personnel training. How does that change the fact that Brazil is spending 4.7 billion for 36 Gripen NG or that the Gripen NG is actually quite an expensive aircraft to purchase which was the original point?

Mig-35 is being offered at $35 million. A fully loaded Gripen NG is not less that $80 million, flyaway price. Add spare parts, maintenance, training, etc and you get way more than 100 million which is what Brazil paid. Virtually all contracts include those extra elements and that's considered part of the price of the aircraft, that's why there are different price names for what the price includes such as flyaway price and full price.

4.7 billion is what Brazil has to pay to Saab for the Gripen NG deal including tech transfer which is quite typical for many purchases these days. Many other expenses related to setting up production in Brazil are not included in that amount since those are internal expenses in Brazil and are not expenses that have to be paid to Saab.

The problem here seems to be that you didn't know what Brazil paid for the aircraft and you denied it before checking facts and after I showed the link, you are trying to come up with excuses to make it look like paying for training, maintenance, etc is not paying for the aircraft even that is the standard case in virtually all deals. Tech transfer is something that manufactures often have to give out in order to close a sale, nothing unusual there. India for example, hardly buys anything without tech transfer.

Only SU-35 and SU-37 can generate enough power for utilize full potential of Ibris-E radar, using it on SU-30's is a waste because it would have identical to the best radar available for SU-30's

Not really, SU-30 doesn't have enough space to house the larger power supply that powers the SU-35's radar, but SU30SM, which has a modified airframe is designed to carry that power supply as an option.

Vietnam needs to upgrade or replace L-39 Albatross trainer/ground attack jet, they could arrange local assembly and even produce some parts, it is in interest of Vietnam's goverment and military to locally produce military equipment as much as possible.

If lets say Vietnam manages to aquire all necessary machinery, tools and documents for Soko Super Galeb G4 and give funds to Serbs to reinitiate G4 upgrade program which adds radar and other improvements. Such a jet would be good and cheap for ground attack and with radar against helicopters and maybe anti-ship if it can carry RBS 15.

Vietnam needs something more sophisticated than a trainer on steroids for its plan to replace the MIG-21. The fact that they are considering Typhoon, Gripen, etc, I think it already gives some clues about what they want, don't you think? The production capability required to produce a trainer is quite different than what is required to produce a sophisticated fighter jet which is the original point of the discussion brought up by Viet, he was talking about producing the replacement for the MIG-21. You bringing up the trainer production has no bearing on the subject that we were discussing.

 

[yugocrosrb95]

I was very well aware that that deal includes domestic production in Brazil and its standard anyway that sales contracts include spare parts, maintenance and personnel training.

If you were well aware of that then you would't claim that Brazil spent 4.68 billion USD on 36 Gripen NG's.

How does that change the fact that Brazil is spending 4.7 billion for 36 Gripen NG or that the Gripen NG is actually quite an expensive aircraft to purchase which was the original point?

Again, Brazil isn't paying 4.68 billion for 36 Gripen NG's alone, you said you were aware of that yet you again say that Brazil payed 4.68 billion USD for 36 Gripen NG's despite you being aware that that isn't correct and yet you called it a fact, how can something be a fact when it is incorrect?

Mig-35 is being offered at $35 million.

Russia produces Mig 35's and they buy it at exclusive price which is 35 million USD while Egypt is buying a unit at 43.5 million USD.

A fully loaded Gripen NG is not less that $80 million.

You cite acquisition price of Mig-35 for Russia which produces it and buys it at exclusive price of 35 million USD to Gripen NG where we don't know the price yet you claim 80 million USD for a fully loaded Gripen NG which with fully loaded you mean with combat armarment?!? Unfair comparison to say the least...

How do you know that Gripen NG costs 80 million USD? Is it official price for Brazil? Since it will have Brazilian electronics and parts in produced in Brazil yet I suspect that everything else produced outside of Brazil is under heavy tax which Brazilian goverments designed such a tax system to force investements and construction of factories in Brazil which is reason why Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 produced there which brought cutting edge silicon fabrication plants 90 nm and latest was 45 nm.

Not really, SU-30 doesn't have enough space to house the larger power supply that powers the SU-35, but SU30SM, which has a modified airframe is designed to carry that power supply as an option.

I can't find such information for the claims that you are making...

SU-30 SM is based/two seat version of SU.27B/SU.32 and SU.30 MKI.

Vietnam needs something more sophisticated than a trainer on steroids for its plan to replace the MIG-21. The fact that they are considering Typhoon, Gripen, etc, I think it already gives some clues about what they want, don't you think?

If happens that conflict arises between China and Vietnam, SU-30 SM's would be tasked to do tasks involving ground, sea and air with less focused defense due to three fronts while a "trainer on steroids" is pointless to you despite need of replacement of L-39 Albatross thus why not have a trainer on steroids that would do ground attacks and shotting down helicopters also possibly launching anti-ship missile...

If the conflict happens and Vietnam possibly gets cut off, unable to aquire more advanced equipment and Vietnam doesn't have production capability to produce a light ground attack jet, they would be forced to use SU-30 SM's and increase chances of losses rather than having a production of light ground attack jets which would allow SU-30's to be solely or for most part focus on air defense and naval targets...

 

[Carlosa]

If you were well aware of that then you would't claim that Brazil spent 4.68 billion USD on 36 Gripen NG's.



Again, Brazil isn't paying 4.68 billion for 36 Gripen NG's alone, you said you were aware of that yet you again say that Brazil payed 4.68 billion USD for 36 Gripen NG's despite you being aware that that isn't correct and yet you called it a fact, how can something be a fact when it is incorrect?



Russia produces Mig 35's and they buy it at exclusive price which is 35 million USD while Egypt is buying a unit at 43.5 million USD.



You cite acquisition price of Mig-35 for Russia which produces it and buys it at exclusive price of 35 million USD to Gripen NG where we don't know the price yet you claim 80 million USD for a fully loaded Gripen NG which with fully loaded you mean with combat armarment?!? Unfair comparison to say the least...
.

Fully loaded has nothing to do with weapons, weapons are always a separate thing, you are mixing up things here. Fully loaded means all the internal features. I have read an article in the past that gives the cost at not less than 80 million.

I have a folder of articles about the Gripen, I collect all the information about it that I can find, the news about the local production in Brazil have been around for quite some time.

What I said was correct, 4.7 billion is what Brazil pays for getting 36 Gripens.

Virtually all contracts include those extra elements such as spare parts, maintenance, traing and very often tech transfer and that's considered part of the price of the aircraft, that's why there are different price names for what the price includes such as flyaway price and full price.

4.7 billion is what Brazil has to pay to Saab for the Gripen NG deal including tech transfer which is quite typical for many purchases these days. Many other expenses related to setting up production in Brazil are not included in that amount since those are internal expenses in Brazil and are not expenses that have to be paid to Saab.

The problem here seems to be that you didn't know what Brazil paid for the aircraft and you denied it before checking facts and after I showed the link, you are trying to come up with excuses to make it look like paying for training, maintenance, etc is not paying for the aircraft even that is the standard case in virtually all deals. Tech transfer is something that manufactures often have to give out in order to close a sale, nothing unusual there. India for example, hardly buys anything without tech transfer.

IIf happens that conflict arises between China and Vietnam, SU-30 SM's would be tasked to do tasks involving ground, sea and air with less focused defense due to three fronts while a "trainer on steroids" is pointless to you despite need of replacement of L-39 Albatross thus why not have a trainer on steroids that would do ground attacks and shotting down helicopters also possibly launching anti-ship missile...

If the conflict happens and Vietnam possibly gets cut off, unable to aquire more advanced equipment and Vietnam doesn't have production capability to produce a light ground attack jet, they would be forced to use SU-30 SM's and increase chances of losses rather than having a production of light ground attack jets which would allow SU-30's to be solely or for most part focus on air defense and naval targets...

If there is a land war with china, a trainer on steroids has no chance against chinese air defenses, it would be useless. I have nothing in principle against having such an aircraft, but against a power like china, I don't see it and I don't see any of the Sukhoi aircraft that Vietnam has doing ground support missions, they'll be used as interceptors and for naval attack.

Russia produces Mig 35's and they buy it at exclusive price which is 35 million USD while Egypt is buying a unit at 43.5 million USD.



You cite acquisition price of Mig-35 for Russia which produces it and buys it at exclusive price of 35 million USD to Gripen NG where we don't know the price yet you claim 80 million USD for a fully loaded Gripen NG which with fully loaded you mean with combat armarment?!? Unfair comparison to say the least....

Not correct, Russia didn't buy the MIG-35 yet, can't say what price they will pay. I read a couple of times about 35 million as a price for export as a good deal. Egypt paid more because the deal is bankrolled by the Saudis, Russia doesn't have to give them their best price.

By the way, Sweden is paying 150 million for each Gripen NG including parts, maintenance and training, which is quite similar to what Brazil is paying.

If you were well aware of that then you would't claim that Brazil spent 4.68 billion USD on 36 Gripen NG's.



Again, Brazil isn't paying 4.68 billion for 36 Gripen NG's alone, you said you were aware of that yet you again say that Brazil payed 4.68 billion USD for 36 Gripen NG's despite you being aware that that isn't correct and yet you called it a fact, how can something be a fact when it is incorrect?



Russia produces Mig 35's and they buy it at exclusive price which is 35 million USD while Egypt is buying a unit at 43.5 million USD.



You cite acquisition price of Mig-35 for Russia which produces it and buys it at exclusive price of 35 million USD to Gripen NG where we don't know the price yet you claim 80 million USD for a fully loaded Gripen NG which with fully loaded you mean with combat armarment?!? Unfair comparison to say the least...

How do you know that Gripen NG costs 80 million USD? Is it official price for Brazil? Since it will have Brazilian electronics and parts in produced in Brazil yet I suspect that everything else produced outside of Brazil is under heavy tax which Brazilian goverments designed such a tax system to force investements and construction of factories in Brazil which is reason why Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 produced there which brought cutting edge silicon fabrication plants 90 nm and latest was 45 nm.



I can't find such information for the claims that you are making...

SU-30 SM is based/two seat version of SU.27B/SU.32 and SU.30 MKI.



If happens that conflict arises between China and Vietnam, SU-30 SM's would be tasked to do tasks involving ground, sea and air with less focused defense due to three fronts while a "trainer on steroids" is pointless to you despite need of replacement of L-39 Albatross thus why not have a trainer on steroids that would do ground attacks and shotting down helicopters also possibly launching anti-ship missile...

If the conflict happens and Vietnam possibly gets cut off, unable to aquire more advanced equipment and Vietnam doesn't have production capability to produce a light ground attack jet, they would be forced to use SU-30 SM's and increase chances of losses rather than having a production of light ground attack jets which would allow SU-30's to be solely or for most part focus on air defense and naval targets...

Here is one article quoting Saab saying that the Gripen NG will be about 80 million:
Replacing the CF18: Part II - The Gripen NG - CDA Institute Blog: The Forum

One part of the article:

Cost and industrial competition

Unfortunately the Gripen suffers from a problem shared by many western fighters: an inefficient production scale. With only two confirmed clients and relatively small orders, Saab cannot create manufacturing learning curves or economies of scale that would drive down costs. Moreover the NG is in a very early stage of development, with over 70% of the aircraft’s systems requiring development from the Gripen C. Consequently there is significant discrepancy in the projected flyaway and operational costs. SaabAB has suggested the aircraft’s costs will be approximately USD$80 million (2012 dollars), but the Swiss government’s fixed cost is approximately $105 million.

-------------------------------------

Here is the article that says that Sweden is paying 150 million a piece including parts, maintenance and training, again, very similar to what Brazil will pay:

Murphy's Law: Gripen Competes On Price And Being Good Enough

If you were well aware of that then you would't claim that Brazil spent 4.68 billion USD on 36 Gripen NG's.



Again, Brazil isn't paying 4.68 billion for 36 Gripen NG's alone, you said you were aware of that yet you again say that Brazil payed 4.68 billion USD for 36 Gripen NG's despite you being aware that that isn't correct and yet you called it a fact, how can something be a fact when it is incorrect?



Russia produces Mig 35's and they buy it at exclusive price which is 35 million USD while Egypt is buying a unit at 43.5 million USD.



You cite acquisition price of Mig-35 for Russia which produces it and buys it at exclusive price of 35 million USD to Gripen NG where we don't know the price yet you claim 80 million USD for a fully loaded Gripen NG which with fully loaded you mean with combat armarment?!? Unfair comparison to say the least...

How do you know that Gripen NG costs 80 million USD? Is it official price for Brazil? Since it will have Brazilian electronics and parts in produced in Brazil yet I suspect that everything else produced outside of Brazil is under heavy tax which Brazilian goverments designed such a tax system to force investements and construction of factories in Brazil which is reason why Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 produced there which brought cutting edge silicon fabrication plants 90 nm and latest was 45 nm.



I can't find such information for the claims that you are making...

SU-30 SM is based/two seat version of SU.27B/SU.32 and SU.30 MKI.



If happens that conflict arises between China and Vietnam, SU-30 SM's would be tasked to do tasks involving ground, sea and air with less focused defense due to three fronts while a "trainer on steroids" is pointless to you despite need of replacement of L-39 Albatross thus why not have a trainer on steroids that would do ground attacks and shotting down helicopters also possibly launching anti-ship missile...

If the conflict happens and Vietnam possibly gets cut off, unable to aquire more advanced equipment and Vietnam doesn't have production capability to produce a light ground attack jet, they would be forced to use SU-30 SM's and increase chances of losses rather than having a production of light ground attack jets which would allow SU-30's to be solely or for most part focus on air defense and naval targets...

My original statement about the Gripen NG being double the price of MIG-35 (which you rejected) is now confirmed correct even by your own numbers.

You said Egypt paid 43.5 million, lets accept that's the best price (which I don't think it is, but just to close the topic), that's 2015 dollars.

Gripen NG is at least 80 million, 2012 dollars, that's double right there. Those are flyaway prices in both cases, cased settled.

Price with spares, maintenance and training is about 150 million, Brazil got the tech transfer trowed in just about.

 

[yugocrosrb95]

Fully loaded has nothing to do with weapons, weapons are always a separate thing, you are mixing up things here. Fully loaded means all the internal features.

Then you should have said so in the first place rather than being vague.

I have read an article in the past that gives the cost at not less than 80 million.

All we have are estimates from Saab which are cited and those estimates are over 3 years old, I'd rather believe a Brazilian who knows on F16.net

I have a folder of articles about the Gripen, I collect all the information about it that I can find, the news about the local production in Brazil have been around for quite some time.

That isn't a good way to do it, you should combine and compile informations for proper context and connecting informations to reveal more informations or details.

What I said was correct, 4.7 billion is what Brazil pays for getting 36 Gripens.

It is incorrect, Brazil didn't pay 4.68 billion USD on 36 Gripen NG's alone.

Virtually all contracts include those extra elements such as spare parts, maintenance, traing and very often tech transfer and that's considered part of the price of the aircraft, that's why there are different price names for what the price includes such as flyaway price and full price.

Thus you can't claim that Brazil payed 4.68 billion USD for 36 Gripen NG's alone.

4.7 billion is what Brazil has to pay to Saab for the Gripen NG deal including tech transfer which is quite typical for many purchases these days. Many other expenses related to setting up production in Brazil are not included in that amount since those are internal expenses in Brazil and are not expenses that have to be paid to Saab.

From Brazilian F16.net user:
It's really hard to say. Brazil is paying a little bit more than 50 million USD per plane, but you can't just buy the planes, you need all the systems around it for it to be effective. They are also paying 1.5 billion USD for maintenance. Another 900 million USD is for the customization they wanted to do with it featuring Brazilian technologies as well as developing a 2 seat version. There is also a weapon deal and integration of Brazilian weapons, but I can't remember how much that was of the total price. Also setting up the Embraer assembly line is included in the deal and lot's of other stuff I can't remember right now.

The problem here seems to be that you didn't know what Brazil paid for the aircraft and you denied it before checking facts and after I showed the link, you are trying to come up with excuses to make it look like paying for training, maintenance, etc is not paying for the aircraft even that is the standard case in virtually all deals.

I didn't know? Says the very person that actually doesn't know and sure, I "didn't" check the facts despite doing so already and that is the reason I am arguing with you because I checked the facts a long time ago and you showed the links that I already saw a long time ago...

How are those excuses when you yourself know that those aren't excuses yet you now claim that they are excuses rather than valid argument that you yourself have accepted yet you continue with double standards and confirmation bias.

Tech transfer is something that manufactures often have to give out in order to close a sale, nothing unusual there. India for example, hardly buys anything without tech transfer.

So you choose to generalize and make unfair comparison's...

If there is a land war with china, a trainer on steroids has no chance against chinese air defenses, it would be useless. I have nothing in principle against having such an aircraft, but against a power like china, I don't see it and I don't see any of the Sukhoi aircraft that Vietnam has doing ground support missions, they'll be used as interceptors and for naval attack.

You're wrong, you need a ground attack jet to soften up positions while SU-30's and other advanced jets cover the skies while infrantry and armor could push and force retreat including ground air defense. A trainer on steroids with okay radar can be used to shotdown choppers and drones.

Not correct, Russia didn't buy the MIG-35 yet, can't say what price they will pay. I read a couple of times about 35 million as a price for export as a good deal. Egypt paid more because the deal is bankrolled by the Saudis, Russia doesn't have to give them their best price.

Russia had budget of 1.1 billion USD for 37 Mig-35's thus 35 million USD per unit and you are speculating that Egypt pays more because of Saudi's despite of standard practice that Russia like US buys own products at considerably cheaper price in comparison to the price for the export.

By the way, Sweden is paying 150 million for each Gripen NG including parts, maintenance and training, which is quite similar to what Brazil is paying.

Isn't the price of the jet.

Here is one article quoting Saab saying that the Gripen NG will be about 80 million:
Replacing the CF18: Part II - The Gripen NG - CDA Institute Blog: The Forum

One part of the article:

Cost and industrial competition

Unfortunately the Gripen suffers from a problem shared by many western fighters: an inefficient production scale. With only two confirmed clients and relatively small orders, Saab cannot create manufacturing learning curves or economies of scale that would drive down costs. Moreover the NG is in a very early stage of development, with over 70% of the aircraft’s systems requiring development from the Gripen C. Consequently there is significant discrepancy in the projected flyaway and operational costs. SaabAB has suggested the aircraft’s costs will be approximately USD$80 million (2012 dollars), but the Swiss government’s fixed cost is approximately $105 million.

Will you stop using outdated informations that are no longer relevant...

Here is the article that says that Sweden is paying 150 million a piece including parts, maintenance and training, again, very similar to what Brazil will pay:

Murphy's Law: Gripen Competes On Price And Being Good Enough

https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htmurph/20131201.aspx

...and this prove's you're wrong.

My original statement about the Gripen NG being double the cost of MIG-35 is now confirmed correct even by your own numbers.

No it isn't confirmed correct since I didn't state any numbers about Gripen NG, only referring to your number of 80 million USD based on an outdated information that you used that is over three years old.

You said Egypt paid 43.5 million, lets accept that's the best price (which I don't think it is, but just to close the topic), that's 2015 dollars.

Gripen NG is at least 80 million, 2012 dollars, that's double right there. Those are flyaway prices in both cases, cased settled.

Case is settled and the result is that you lost.

 

[Aqsuperman]

Yeah , lets just calmdown . We all have very different ideas about things , still not the reason to use such insulting words like that in here...........

Meh check out all the smoke and dust , no need for smoke grenades on this guy. He will create a smoke screen on his own :v

 

[Carlosa]

Then you should have said so in the first place rather than being vague.



All we have are estimates from Saab which are cited and those estimates are over 3 years old, I'd rather believe a Brazilian who knows on F16.net



That isn't a good way to do it, you should combine and compile informations for proper context and connecting informations to reveal more informations or details.



It is incorrect, Brazil didn't pay 4.68 billion USD on 36 Gripen NG's alone.



Thus you can't claim that Brazil payed 4.68 billion USD for 36 Gripen NG's alone.



From Brazilian F16.net user:
It's really hard to say. Brazil is paying a little bit more than 50 million USD per plane, but you can't just buy the planes, you need all the systems around it for it to be effective. They are also paying 1.5 billion USD for maintenance. Another 900 million USD is for the customization they wanted to do with it featuring Brazilian technologies as well as developing a 2 seat version. There is also a weapon deal and integration of Brazilian weapons, but I can't remember how much that was of the total price. Also setting up the Embraer assembly line is included in the deal and lot's of other stuff I can't remember right now.



I didn't know? Says the very person that actually doesn't know and sure, I "didn't" check the facts despite doing so already and that is the reason I am arguing with you because I checked the facts a long time ago and you showed the links that I already saw a long time ago...

How are those excuses when you yourself know that those aren't excuses yet you now claim that they are excuses rather than valid argument that you yourself have accepted yet you continue with double standards and confirmation bias.



So you choose to generalize and make unfair comparison's...



You're wrong, you need a ground attack jet to soften up positions while SU-30's and other advanced jets cover the skies while infrantry and armor could push and force retreat including ground air defense. A trainer on steroids with okay radar can be used to shotdown choppers and drones.



Russia had budget of 1.1 billion USD for 37 Mig-35's thus 35 million USD per unit and you are speculating that Egypt pays more because of Saudi's despite of standard practice that Russia like US buys own products at considerably cheaper price in comparison to the price for the export.



Isn't the price of the jet.



Will you stop using outdated informations that are no longer relevant...


...and this prove's you're wrong.



No it isn't confirmed correct since I didn't state any numbers about Gripen NG, only referring to your number of 80 million USD based on an outdated information that you used that is over three years old.



Case is settled and the result is that you lost.

We are going around the definitions of what an aircraft price is: flyaway or full price. Both versions of the price are correct.

You say my number is not correct because its 3 years old even that it comes from Saab? Show me the numbers from Saab. I said all along 80 million fully loaded. Your Brazilian guy said 50 million plus subsystems, so you have not showed what the actual fly away price is including everything for the version and features that were bought. Its nonsense to expect that the price will drop from 80 million to 50 million in 3 years. Since when that guy is a credible reference and without details of those subsystems?

No, I don't have to say in the first place that the price does not include weapons, anybody that understands anything knows that aircraft prices don't include weapons, you just want to avoid admitting a mistake and you go around the bushes, understandable for young kids.

Brazil payed 4.68 billion USD for 36 Gripen NG's, that's full price including what is usually included in those deals. If you want to argue about price definitions, then you have to first specify what price are you talking about, both versions of the price are correct and both are used, flyaway and full price.

A tactical ground support aircraft will get used to soften up positions assuming that it can survive. You don't want to understand that that type of aircraft can't survive in a conflict with china. By the way, for that role, Vietnam will get the Yak-130 so the one that is speculating with those ideas is you.

I know for a fact that the export price of MIG-35 was offered at 35 million because I read it more than once and I can find the articles if I dedicate some time to it.

My speculation about Egypt's price is reasonable, the arabs always pay top price.

How the article that says Sweden pays 150 million proves me wrong?

If you claim that my information is outdated, then show me more recent information that is credible.

I'm done with this topic, I have a plane to catch.

 

[Viet]

Carlosa, Yugo bro, there is absolutely no reason to resort to personal attack. Let's stay on topic.

By the way, there was an interesting article on a Viet website about the plan of establishing 4 airports serving civil as well as military purposes along the border to China. The article is deleted.

Too sensitive, I assume.

 

[Carlosa]

Carlosa, Yugo bro, there is absolutely no reason to resort to personal attack. Let's stay on topic.

By the way, there was an interesting article on a Viet website about the plan of establishing 4 airports serving civil as well as military purposes along the border to China. The article is deleted.

Too sensitive, I assume.

I hear you.

Those 4 airports sound good, make sense. Did you try making a google search for the article title? Maybe someone had a chance to copy it and post it somewhere.