Register Free

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Future of Belgian Air Component

Collapse
X
Collapse
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    If Belgium does order F-35, will the country then have to contribute financially to fixing the bits that do not yet work/are not going to be there until the mid-2020's?
    No, since the contract is for full support till 2030, IIRC.
    "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

    Comment


      L'argument gographique ne compte pas. Ainsi, le fait d'"tre un bon Europen" ne suffit pas".
      -----------
      The geographical alibi does not count. Thus, "being a good European" is not enough.
      (Foreign trade minister of Belgium speaking about the F-16 replacement program)

      Source:
      RTBF.be

      Comment


        Belgium first minister just declared that NATO submit was not a limit... Tha belgium would take its time.

        Comment


          from what ive seen on last nights news, the deadline would now be mid-october, and that the French Rafale offering would be examined.
          40squadron.webs.com

          Comment


            yes. 14th of october is deadline for F-35 offer. When are elections?

            Comment


              As said above.... http://www.defense-aerospace.com/art...6-upgrade.html

              Comment


                So... The check cleared the bank I see.
                "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

                Comment


                  Originally posted by SpudmanWP View Post
                  So... The check cleared the bank I see.
                  Ha, several checks. Forgot the one from Dassault to de Briganti.

                  In all seriousness, I would think this gives legal grounds for Eurofighter and L-M to contest any decision on the Rafale. They “backdoor-ed” their way in without an official submission into process. This paves the way for a mess.

                  Comment


                    In all seriousness, I would think this gives legal grounds for Eurofighter and L-M to contest any decision on the Rafale.
                    Absolutely not, this is stated in the RFPG. The RFPG do not engage Belgium governement in any matter.

                    Comment


                      Obviously, let's compete for the Fun of it... M'enfin!



                      Meanwhile, in another "good European" country not far far away…

                      Under a deal struck with the Italian government, the remaining 29 Dutch [F-35] will all be assembled at Cameri, which is owned by the Italian government and operated by Italian state-controled defense firm Leonardo in partnership with Lockheed Martin.
                      Source:
                      DefenseNews.com
                      Last edited by TomcatViP; 18th June 2018, 22:41.

                      Comment


                        While others diffuse hot air for the fun, extract of the RFGP.

                        The issuance of this RfGP is not to be construed in any way as a commitment by the Belgian
                        Government to conclude an agreement or a contract.
                        Respondents will not be reimbursed for any cost incurred in supporting the activities leading
                        to a response to this RfGP. Any and all expenses incurred by the respondents or by any of its
                        partners in responding to this RfGP are made by their own choice and at their own risk.
                        No legal liability against the ACCaP office and by extension Belgian Defence and the Belgian
                        Government, for payment of any sorts, shall arise as a result of activities related to responding
                        to this RfGP.

                        Comment


                          While others diffuse hot air for the fun, extract of the RFGP.
                          No diffusion, just didn't remember specific parts of the RFGP.

                          Comment


                            Well, this was known (and discussed here or there) but such clauses are generally included to protect the buyer from having to commit to something either that is too expensive or that does not fill reasonably the expectation expressed in the RFP.
                            Are we there? NO. Absolutely not.

                            Nobody will turn a monolithic kind of decision making into clever management. History has blown its way up to us today
                            Last edited by TomcatViP; 20th June 2018, 15:33.

                            Comment


                              I'm sure US RFPs say the same thing yet there are laws that govern these types of programs which is why we have a process in the US where losers can protest if they think something violated one of these laws. Now, whether Belgium has these same kinds of protections against graft, bribes, etc is another matter.
                              "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

                              Comment


                                No diffusion, just didn't remember specific parts of the RFGP.
                                My apologizes if you felt offended, wasn't targeting you at all.

                                I'm sure US RFPs say the same thing yet there are laws that govern these types of programs which is why we have a process in the US where losers can protest if they think something violated one of these laws
                                And lose if they're not US (cf KC46....) hilarious. Nvm, european laws have specific contents for defense markets yhat are more flexible than general governement markets (e.g. offsets more or less allowed).

                                Comment


                                  You seemed to forget that the only reason Airbus lost was that they protested the first decision (for Boeing) which resulted in the second contest (for them). However, the second contest was not run according to the rules, which is what Boeing protested which lead to a proper third contest, which went for the original winner, Boeing.
                                  "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

                                  Comment


                                    You seemed to forget that the only reason Airbus lost was that they protested the first decision (for Boeing) which resulted in the second contest (for them). However, the second contest was not run according to the rules, which is what Boeing protested which lead to a proper third contest, which went for the original winner, Boeing.
                                    Airbus never protested any "first decision" (or any other for that matter) in the KCX program, the first decision was taken on 29 February 2008 and it was a victory for Northrop/Airbus, Boeing filed a complaint to the GAO that was upheld, a new competion was launched, with new specifications, Northrop stated that those new specifications were advantaging Boeing and got out, the USAF gave the victory to Boeing in February 2011, EADS declined to protest and said that the Boeing offer was so agressive in pricing that it entailed a very high risk of financial losses for the company (guess what happened...).
                                    Before the KCX program got launched, we had a Boeing executive and a USAF procurement chap thrown into jail for "criminal wrongdoing" (AKA corruption) after the US CONGRESS (not Airbus) had made a hell on earth about a plan for a lease contract between the USAF and Boeing for KC-767. Boeing payed fines and its CEO resigned.
                                    sigpic

                                    Comment


                                      Bart de Wever, head of NVA party (same as the mindef) declared that Rafale was of no use for Belgium... This involvement is a loud signal of politicization of the deal.

                                      Comment


                                        Political it is. Rafale is seen as too "francophone" by the Flemish side who feel culturally closer to the Netherlands and by extension the F35 while Wallonie is more open/favorable to the rafale & European solution. This fighter jet competition is another field of political rambling between the Flemish and the Waloons. I am Excepting this process to get very passionate/non rational knowing how both side hate each other.

                                        Comment


                                          There won't be much debates: the Rafale didn't compete to the procuent process. The chances that someone would ran an election with any remote chance of success while not abiding to the law and sizing themselves from their industry are properly thin. Moreover the Wallon industries was committed to the offer voicing the urgency to have a modern design, some siding with the LM offer.

                                          I only hope that those that are building themselves a wall of illusions are paying its bricks with their own money.

                                          Y

                                          Comment


                                           

                                          Working...
                                          X