Register Free

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Future of Belgian Air Component

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Deducting VAT on the India sale just makes it look that much worse and give credence to the notion that France is silently subsidizing or shifting internal costs to keep the price down in the Senate docs.

    I can't see any other explanation for $100 mil for a "bare plane".
    Senate numbers for french birds include VAT, who talked about deducting VAT from the Indian order? (besides you that is).

    Indian birds (may) cost 100 mil / bird, but it's probably because the french recoup part of the development cost (which was planned in the Rafale program from the start), and for other indian specific upgrades, development.

    France paid 68,8 Million € for 1 Rafale C including 20% VAT. Live with it (invoicing VAT on defense deals is probably yet another commie plan to steal from 1 budget column and pour the money into another, but I digress).

    I'm eager to see if you are actually going to argue that it's more expensive in 2018 when production doubled

    Nic

    Comment


      Deducting VAT on the India sale just makes it look that much worse and give credence to the notion that France is silently subsidizing or shifting internal costs to keep the price down in the Senate docs.
      No. That's the law. VAT is not charged on exports, but is on imports. It's the same all over the world. Sales taxes (& VAT is essentially a sales tax) are charged on what's sold within a country, not on what's exported from it. Same for cars, bottles of wine, jet fighters - everything.

      Why do you think it's a subsidy?
      Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
      Justinian

      Comment


        The Swedish Government has, according to Svenska Dagbladet, decided not to goahead with a Gripen bid to Belgium.
        The reason is that Belgium requires support from the vendor in the form of air refuelling and reconnaissance,
        which would require Sweden to support some NATO actions where Sweden otherwise would not get involved


        https://www.svd.se/forsvarsministern...port-av-gripen

        Comment


          after Boeing pulled out, and now Sweden, that leaves Typhoon, F-35 and Rafale

          Comment


            Typhoon, F-35 and Rafale
            If they all stay in and the detailed bids are made public, it will finally allow for an Apples-to-Apples comparison amongst the three contenders.

            Very much looking forward to that.
            "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

            Comment


              We are all.

              Comment


                The Swedish Government has, according to Svenska Dagbladet, decided not to go ahead with a Gripen bid to Belgium.
                The reason is that Belgium requires support from the vendor in the form of air refuelling and reconnaissance,
                which would require Sweden to support some NATO actions where Sweden otherwise would not get involved
                Odd. Why would Belgium want AAR from the vendor? Why not just sign up to that NATO AAR consortium which three of its neighbours have already joined, & which it's been dithering over joining? The tankers are to be based just next door in the Netherlands, IIRC.
                Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
                Justinian

                Comment


                  It is specified in the rfpg. They want transport, refuelings etc. For opex.

                  Comment


                    Understood but let's hope that no one made such promise.

                    Comment


                      The US has the resource to make the promise. Unlikely Airbus or Dassault can make it.

                      Comment


                        For free?! Having the resources and willing to is world apart.

                        Comment


                          You talk about the US, and then you talk about Airbus and Dassault?

                          I am sure France can do it -- however F-35 no doubt will be ranked higher on the technical score than the Rafale; and this, in combination with a lower price and the fact that the US and most NATO countries will operate the F-35, and the fact that the F-35 will be compatible with the nukes that the Belgians are storing makes this into a no-brainer.

                          Also please note that the Swedes did not say that they were not able to offer the support, but rather that they prefer not to, since it may force them to go into conflicts that they otherwise would not have entered into. I hope you see the difference.

                          Comment


                            The US has the resource to make the promise. Unlikely Airbus or Dassault can make it.
                            strange comparison, a country on one side and private compaznies on the other... what's more, teh Belgian government asked for intergovernments agreement, so it is between countries

                            on that level, France has the capability (UK probably as well), as for the US, its obvious they can, but it remains to be seen how they make their proposals and what belgians choose

                            Comment


                              Very sad the Gripen is out of the race, as I remain convinced it gives the most value for the buck and the lowest through-lifecycle cost, while being the most open and fast for future upgrade. But bottomline is that the RFP is too tailored to a certain candidate and that they only hold the competition because they need to legally.

                              Comment


                                So now with the F-35A price is out, we know that it is nealy 2 billion euro more than Belgium's buget for 34 new fighters.

                                http://www.brusselstimes.com/busines...-than-expected

                                So now if Belgium insists on having F-35A's, they need to
                                a) increase the budget
                                b) reduce the number of F-35A's

                                BTW would the 3.6 billion euros budget really get them 34 Rafales or Typhoons? Would a SLEP (to 13,856 flying hours) and uprade program (AESA and others stuff) to their existing F-16s give Belgium similar capabilities to Rafales or Typhoons?

                                Or a reduced F-35A buy (say 16) for expeditionary operations and retaining upgraded F-16s (say 32) for CAS in permissive airspace and national air policing? Surely that could be had within the original 3.6 billion euros budget.

                                As a recap, the intended capability

                                From the Belgian Air Combat Capability document

                                "" Level of Ambition
                                The level of ambition for the future Belgian air combat capability is to be able to
                                simultaneously
                                - guarantee Quick Reaction Alert (QRA) / Air Policing duties with 2 aircraft (24/7) - in an
                                alternating rotation regime with the Royal Netherlands Air Force
                                and
                                - contribute air power to expeditionary operations for a sustained period of undetermined
                                duration with 6 multi-role aircraft. ""

                                Comment


                                  You seemed to miss the part where the FMS announcement includes support through 2030.

                                  3.6 billion euros is for Procurement and the rest is for support through 2030.

                                  . Capability Transition Period
                                  The capability transition period is defined as the period starting at signature of the intergovernmental agreement (IGA) and ending with Full Operational Capability (FOC). For budgetary planning purposes, the FOC date is tentatively set for 31 December 2030.
                                  During this build-up period, a substantial support from the partner nation will be required. The proposal for this period of performance will cover all activities in support of:
                                  - Initial procurement and delivery of the weapon system and its related equipment;
                                  - Weapon system management;
                                  - Aircrew type conversion and continuation training;
                                  - Conversion training of all other personnel (operational, technical, support);
                                  - Operational and technical support;
                                  - Operational and technical sustainment, including updates and upgrades on already delivered aircraft or support systems.

                                  http://www.vandeput.fgov.be/sites/de...Proposal_0.pdf
                                  "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

                                  Comment


                                    The original 3.6 billion euros is the budgetary planned for everything in the capability transition period in the RfGP. That is what US DSCA is responding to.

                                    9.3. Binding Nature of the Responses to the RfGP
                                    The responses to the RfGP are official government proposals and as such will be considered as
                                    formal offers. The responses will be used as primary input for the analysis and assessment
                                    activities and will drive the outcome of the recommendation to the Belgian government.
                                    The proposal for the capability transition period will be considered as binding, as it will form
                                    the basis of the agreement(s) to be signed.

                                    Comment


                                      For 3.6 billion euros they should get 34 Gripen E/F and be done with it. Or even just order more F-16s, since they're already all set for the type. The production line is still open. No shame in not having the newest toys around the block. Defense budget of only 2.5 - 3 billion euros a year will only get you so far.

                                      Comment


                                        3.6 Billion wouldn’t get Belgium 34 of any new western fighter with support until 2030 with the extent of support stipulated. Will have to read through the RFP again but on the face of it, budget seems only sufficient for procurement, spares.

                                        Comment


                                          The Gripens would have been the better choice but since it is no longer an option I would go for that idea of reduced F-35 buys and SLEP some of the other F-16s.
                                          They don't really need the F-35s unless is strike related, which will likely be due to nato commitments. other wise the F-16s is enough for air policing that tiny airspace, or when they do patrols in the Baltic.

                                          maybe in the long term, F-35 plus TA-50s would be better, they can replace their alpha jets and some F-16s

                                          Comment


                                           

                                          Working...
                                          X