Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

SAAB Gripen and Gripen NG thread #4

Collapse
X
Collapse
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Loke
    Rank 5 Registered User
    • Jun 2008
    • 3302

    * Saab is currently working hard to sell the Gripen in "countries such as Croatia and Bulgaria," and the Swedish government is negotiating with Slovakia on eight planes.

    * A contract for at least 40 planes are expected to start in Finland.

    * A contract on the 30-36 plan, expected to launch in Belgium.

    * A previously interrupted procurement in Malaysia are expected to resume this year.

    * Indonesia procurement of fighter believed, unlike what has been reported in the media, remains open. "I think we have a good chance, and we have a good dialogue with Indonesia," said Richard Smith and mentioned that the country is considering combining fighter purchase with the purchase of radar systems.

    * Saab has been in Colombia for discussions, because it intends to replace its aging fighter fleet.

    * India: Saab have considerable hope that the recently declared intentions of cooperation under the motto "Make in India", published by Prime Minister Stephen Lfvens and Saab's CEO Hkan Buskhe's visit to the Indian Prime Minister in mid-February will lead to something.


    Switzerland was not mentioned, but during a question and answer session after the presentation said Richard Smith, Saab believe they have a good position ahead of an expected and decided resumed fighter procurement process, which is expected next year or possibly the year. A formal contract in progress not yet explain why it was not included in the review, he said.
    Hmm, rather optimistic I think. Belgium is a NATO country which has operated F-16 in close collaboration with other NATO F-16 countries, in particular the Netherlands. Current F-16 users within NATO are switching to F-35, I would be surprised if Belgium also does not do this (and rather operate a smaller number of a/c).

    Finland: difficult to say. If price is sufficiently low they will go for the F-35 -- they have expressed a keen interest in "stealth"


    Regarding Brazil's purchase of 36 Gripen said Richard Smith, the process goes according to plan. A development center is being built adjacent to a testing facility in the city of Gavio Peixoto, and last autumn arrived 50 Brazilian engineers with families to Linkping to learn aircraft construction at the company's facilities on the plains of stergtland. Eventually, 350 Brazilian engineers to be trained in Sweden through programs of between two weeks and two years.
    So it seems things are progressing well with the Brazilian tech transfer and collaboration. A hint to India...?

    Google translated from: http://www.di.se/finansiell-informat...1-2b42ae19e100

    Comment

    • Spitfire9
      Rank 5 Registered User
      • Jul 2008
      • 2832

      Prague pays some 1.3 billion krona (US $53 million) annually to operate 14 JAS-39 Gripen aircraft enabled with 2,200 flight hours per year.
      http://www.defensenews.com/story/def...tion/78307514/

      Interesting info. Fixed cost per flying hour for the equipment used looks like $US53,000,000 / 2,200 or around $US25,000. Might sound a lot but over 20 years the cost of having a squadron of functioning light fighters would be about $US1 billion. That compares very well to buying the aircraft to me. I wonder why Slovakia has opted to negotiate a purchase instead of a lease.
      Sum ergo cogito

      Comment

      • Spitfire9
        Rank 5 Registered User
        • Jul 2008
        • 2832

        * Saab is currently working hard to sell the Gripen in "countries such as Croatia and Bulgaria," and the Swedish government is negotiating with Slovakia on eight planes.

        * A contract for at least 40 planes are expected to start in Finland.

        * A contract on the 30-36 plan, expected to launch in Belgium.

        * A previously interrupted procurement in Malaysia are expected to resume this year.

        * Indonesia procurement of fighter believed, unlike what has been reported in the media, remains open. "I think we have a good chance, and we have a good dialogue with Indonesia," said Richard Smith and mentioned that the country is considering combining fighter purchase with the purchase of radar systems.

        * Saab has been in Colombia for discussions, because it intends to replace its aging fighter fleet.

        * India: Saab have considerable hope that the recently declared intentions of cooperation under the motto "Make in India", published by Prime Minister Stephen Lfvens and Saab's CEO Hkan Buskhe's visit to the Indian Prime Minister in mid-February will lead to something.


        Switzerland was not mentioned, but during a question and answer session after the presentation said Richard Smith, Saab believe they have a good position ahead of an expected and decided resumed fighter procurement process, which is expected next year or possibly the year. A formal contract in progress not yet explain why it was not included in the review, he said.
        I guess Slovakia will buy Gripen C (nobody else has a stock of cheap, surplus to requirement airframes available).

        Ditto Croatia (lease? purchase?)

        Colombia - is the SAAB spokesman talking about Gripen E? If he is, when would any be available from the Brazilian assembly line?

        In the end I think Switzerland will buy Gripen E. A number of Swiss are opposed to any replacement whatsoever for retiring fighters. Others, I think, will grudgingly support replacement with a more capable fighter but will want the cost to be as low as possible. On those grounds I think that the best chance for the government to avoid a veto in a referendum is to opt for Gripen E. Given that the electorate can challenge any proposed procurement, what minimum requirements the air force considers any candidate must meet to be considered for selection becomes largely irrelevant to me.

        India - only if Tejas Mk1A proves a disaster (development looks like it will not be finished for years and years/ proves not to fulfil requirements)

        Originally posted by Loke View Post
        Hmm, rather optimistic I think. Belgium is a NATO country which has operated F-16 in close collaboration with other NATO F-16 countries, in particular the Netherlands. Current F-16 users within NATO are switching to F-35, I would be surprised if Belgium also does not do this (and rather operate a smaller number of a/c).
        +1
        Last edited by Spitfire9; 17th March 2016, 14:49.
        Sum ergo cogito

        Comment

        • NotOnlyaSwede
          Rank 5 Registered User
          • Sep 2005
          • 55

          Short video from the first Gripen NG test aircraft production line:

          https://twitter.com/Saab/status/710494843097714692

          edit: Don't forget to go full screen...
          Last edited by NotOnlyaSwede; 17th March 2016, 17:02.

          Comment

          • TomcatViP
            Rank 5 Registered User
            • Nov 2011
            • 6107

            First: it doesn't seems as if they are advancing much. Last time we were shown some manufactoring shots, they were nearly at the same stage of assembly

            Secondly: some Image still are rather messy. There are plenty to point at. I don't understand why they show this. Swiss industrial are usually attentive to precision manufacturing (they lag in other field).

            Thirdly: paperless is good for the Auto industry. I really don't like the way they are applying it here (see the distance that the operator eye have to travel b/w the screen and his/her working position. Frankly, in this lapse of time, there is enough for many to even forget the name of their mother*.

            Click image for larger version

Name:	Image16 - Too much mat and sharp corners.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	34.9 KB
ID:	3667354

            Click image for larger version

Name:	Image15 - Cheap maintenance ... not so.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	45.9 KB
ID:	3667355

            Click image for larger version

Name:	Image19.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	22.8 KB
ID:	3667356

            As i have written before, it looks like as if this plane was made by a dozen of different teams in succession without much lead b/w.



            *written on a St Patrick day
            Last edited by TomcatViP; 17th March 2016, 22:02.

            Comment

            • Spitfire9
              Rank 5 Registered User
              • Jul 2008
              • 2832

              Originally posted by TomcatViP View Post
              First: it doesn't seems as if they are advancing much. Last time we were shown some manufactoring shots, they were nearly at the same stage of assembly

              Secondly: some Image still are rather messy. There are plenty to point at. I don't understand why they show this. Swiss industrial are usually attentive to precision manufacturing (they lag in other field).
              They lag in Gripen E assembly, too.
              Sum ergo cogito

              Comment

              • TomcatViP
                Rank 5 Registered User
                • Nov 2011
                • 6107

                Aren't they among the targeted panel of customers? Or do I lag that much?!

                Comment

                • maurobaggio
                  Rank 5 Registered User
                  • Jul 2008
                  • 521

                  Originally posted by Loke View Post


                  So it seems things are progressing well with the Brazilian tech transfer and collaboration. A hint to India...?

                  Google translated from: http://www.di.se/finansiell-informat...1-2b42ae19e100
                  With the political crisis in Brazil the agreement about 36 Gripen E / F has been seriously threatened to be revised or even canceled if the current president will be removed from office.

                  In fact the agreement has been already under investigation, since there are many doubts, specially about the criteria for transfer of technology, once during the competition were established the criteria of 100% of ToT among all competitor from the short list: F/A 18E/F, Rafale and Gripen NG

                  So far the technology transfer has been carried out only between two companies: the Saab and Embraer. However in the case of Brazil the Embraer has been a private company, either a multinational company, unlike India where the HAL has been an own state company.

                  The Embraer does not produce engines or AESA radar, and I guess that great doubt in Brazil should be something like these: who will receive 100% of the ToT of the F414 engines from GE, as well as the active modules of the AESA radar from Selex just to point two main examples?

                  Transfer of technology between companies has been quite different from transfer of technology between governments, and in the case of Brazil the Government of Brazil has been appointed without competition a private company and multinational to receive all technology that will be paid by the state.

                  Thousands of Brazil's engineers has been training every year in multinational companies from automotive segment, however so far there are not such Brazilian company that should be capable of producing automotive vehicles.

                  The secret from this success recipe: compartmentalized technology.

                  Comment

                  • swerve
                    Rank 5 Registered User
                    • Jun 2005
                    • 13610

                    Brazil makes a lot of cars. Volkswagen do Brasil builds cars designed in Brazil - & has done so for decades.

                    Some people don't understand the difference between brands & where the work is done. There's a Japanese-branded car largely designed in France, assembled in the Czech Republic from parts made in several countries, with a choice of a mainly Japanese-designed engine made in Poland or a French engine. What country is that car from?
                    Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
                    Justinian

                    Comment

                    • Loke
                      Rank 5 Registered User
                      • Jun 2008
                      • 3302

                      And against the Saab Gripen and Dassault Rafale?

                      Gripen is a bit of an unknown quantity against modern air superiority machines because it takes a fundamentally different approach to survivability. Whilst in traditional DCT exercises, Typhoon pilots have often referred to the Gripen as ‘cannon-fodder’ due to its inferior thrust-to-weight ratio, speed, agility and armament, in the few cases where the Gripen has ‘come to play’ with its full electronic warfare capabilities, it has given Typhoons very nasty shocks. Against the Su-35S, Gripen would rely on the cutting edge EW capabilities which Saab builds the Gripen (especially the new E/F) around to hide the aircraft from the sensors of the Russian jets in much the same way as the Raptor relies on x-band stealth. These EW capabilities are so highly classified that there is simply no way to assess their effectiveness in the public domain. Having said that, RAF pilots who I have talked to with experience of the Saab fighter’s EW teeth first hand say that the ability of the aircraft to get alarmingly close without detection thanks entirely to EW is very impressive.
                      Justin Bronk is a Research Fellow at the Military Sciences at Royal United Services Institute.
                      http://hushkit.net/2016/03/17/su-35-...-justin-bronk/
                      Last edited by Loke; 18th March 2016, 11:34.

                      Comment

                      • Loke
                        Rank 5 Registered User
                        • Jun 2008
                        • 3302

                        I am surprised nobody has commented on this -- so basically the tiny, low-cost Gripen with inferior TWR, inferior agility, etc. is a real threat to the air superiority Typhoon due to the EW. With a combination of Meteor and IRIS-T* tiny Gripen C will be a formidable opponent also for a/c like Typhoon and Su-35... that makes me wonder what Gripen E will be!?

                        *Typhoon has an unpleasant meeting with a Gripen with IRIS-T and HMD:

                        Far out in the periphery can I find him, I turn my head out to the max and get in their sights but no tone. For exercise, for technical reasons, I wear just a robot, and it is in this maneuver on the wrong side of the aircraft and homing is shaded by the fuselage. I continue the maneuver in a roll with the aircraft inverted and the homing device will then find the target. The battle is over 9 seconds.
                        Google translated from: https://blogg.forsvarsmakten.se/flyg...ts-perspektiv/

                        Comment

                        • Loke
                          Rank 5 Registered User
                          • Jun 2008
                          • 3302

                          Aviationweek article on Gripen in Indonesia (subscribers only):

                          http://aviationweek.com/awindefense/...ia-gripen-deal

                          Comment

                          • hopsalot
                            Senior Member
                            • Aug 2012
                            • 3166

                            Originally posted by Loke View Post
                            I am surprised nobody has commented on this -- so basically the tiny, low-cost Gripen with inferior TWR, inferior agility, etc. is a real threat to the air superiority Typhoon due to the EW. With a combination of Meteor and IRIS-T* tiny Gripen C will be a formidable opponent also for a/c like Typhoon and Su-35... that makes me wonder what Gripen E will be!?

                            *Typhoon has an unpleasant meeting with a Gripen with IRIS-T and HMD:



                            Google translated from: https://blogg.forsvarsmakten.se/flyg...ts-perspektiv/
                            What is there to say really? We just had a similar discussion about the Rafale and Spectra. EW systems are a marketer's dream. You can vaguely attribute all kinds of amazing capabilities to one and never have to worry about anyone being able to make a direct comparison to any other system.

                            The Gripen probably has a very capable EW system, just as all recent Western jets do. How does it compare to the others? Who knows?

                            It is worth nothing that in exercises nobody is likely showing off the best they have got.

                            Comment

                            • maurobaggio
                              Rank 5 Registered User
                              • Jul 2008
                              • 521

                              Originally posted by swerve View Post
                              Brazil makes a lot of cars. Volkswagen do Brasil builds cars designed in Brazil - & has done so for decades.

                              Some people don't understand the difference between brands & where the work is done. There's a Japanese-branded car largely designed in France, assembled in the Czech Republic from parts made in several countries, with a choice of a mainly Japanese-designed engine made in Poland or a French engine. What country is that car from?
                              I did not know that Volkswagen has been a Brazilian company, I thought it were German.
                              However what really matters about this issue are where those projects has been tested and approved for production.By the way: how many Brazil designs has been produced in the Germany by the Volkswagen ?

                              The fact could be resumed that a project has been made in Brazil by a company like Volkswagen will only be approved after the same had been examined by the company's headquarters ( Germany). if it were not necessary to change the design that could have been demanded by the headquarters, then its project will be approved and frozen by the headquarters.

                              Even today problems in the production or manufacturing process in many cases can only be resolved by headquarters staff (technicians, engineers), since there are a lot of control over access to sensitive technology in those companies.

                              The Embraer had been a state-owned company in Brazil until 1994, and it was privatized in 1994 due to a large financial debt in reason of the AMX program with Italy. In fact Embraer as state-owned company paid for the whole development of the AMX from Brazil side , and after this the Embraer had been donating 53 AMX for the the Brazil Air Force , once the Brazil Air Force had no budget to buy this.

                              If in the decade of 80 Embraer were a private company, now in Brazil there would not be a single AMX in Brazil Air Force, as well as the Embraer would not have had technological conditions to develop its great commercial success as the EMB 145 in the 90's. This were only possible in reason of technological advances from AMX program, besides the credibility that had been gave from AMX program in the international market from jet aircrafts.

                              The Gripen E will not be equivalent as AMX for Brazil today, once the Gripen E project has been entirely developed in Sweden. For this reason I doubt the Gripen F will be fully developed in Brazil because this reason as well the short time to accomplish this task.

                              The Brazil are perhaps the fifth largest market in the world for computer processors, however it has not been manufacturing just a single unity of this in Brazil, as well as aircraft engines today. It appears that the R&R Spey from AMX were assembled in Brazil by state-owned company called Celma in the late 80's.

                              If the promise from 100% ToT of the Gripen E will be required by Brazil, both the F414 technology should be transferred to Brazil, as well as radar technology from AESA radar of the Selex.

                              However I guess that Embraer has not interested in this aspect of the contract, once it does not produce aircraft engines or AESA radars.

                              So this is a rhetorical question: who will enforce this promise?

                              My answer: anyone in the Government of Brazil , in reason of this simple fact that same has been nominated the Embraer as fully responsible for the 100% ToT from Gripen NG.

                              Comment

                              • Ginner
                                Rank 3 Registered User
                                • Jan 2016
                                • 119

                                Originally posted by maurobaggio View Post
                                I did not know that Volkswagen has been a Brazilian company, I thought it were German.
                                However what really matters about this issue are where those projects has been tested and approved for production.By the way: how many Brazil designs has been produced in the Germany by the Volkswagen ?

                                The fact could be resumed that a project has been made in Brazil by a company like Volkswagen will only be approved after the same had been examined by the company's headquarters ( Germany). if it were not necessary to change the design that could have been demanded by the headquarters, then its project will be approved and frozen by the headquarters.

                                Even today problems in the production or manufacturing process in many cases can only be resolved by headquarters staff (technicians, engineers), since there are a lot of control over access to sensitive technology in those companies.

                                The Embraer had been a state-owned company in Brazil until 1994, and it was privatized in 1994 due to a large financial debt in reason of the AMX program with Italy. In fact Embraer as state-owned company paid for the whole development of the AMX from Brazil side , and after this the Embraer had been donating 53 AMX for the the Brazil Air Force , once the Brazil Air Force had no budget to buy this.

                                If in the decade of 80 Embraer were a private company, now in Brazil there would not be a single AMX in Brazil Air Force, as well as the Embraer would not have had technological conditions to develop its great commercial success as the EMB 145 in the 90's. This were only possible in reason of technological advances from AMX program, besides the credibility that had been gave from AMX program in the international market from jet aircrafts.

                                The Gripen E will not be equivalent as AMX for Brazil today, once the Gripen E project has been entirely developed in Sweden. For this reason I doubt the Gripen F will be fully developed in Brazil because this reason as well the short time to accomplish this task.

                                The Brazil are perhaps the fifth largest market in the world for computer processors, however it has not been manufacturing just a single unity of this in Brazil, as well as aircraft engines today. It appears that the R&R Spey from AMX were assembled in Brazil by state-owned company called Celma in the late 80's.

                                If the promise from 100% ToT of the Gripen E will be required by Brazil, both the F414 technology should be transferred to Brazil, as well as radar technology from AESA radar of the Selex.

                                However I guess that Embraer has not interested in this aspect of the contract, once it does not produce aircraft engines or AESA radars.

                                So this is a rhetorical question: who will enforce this promise?

                                My answer: anyone in the Government of Brazil , in reason of this simple fact that same has been nominated the Embraer as fully responsible for the 100% ToT from Gripen NG.
                                They can't transfer intellectual property they do not own.

                                Comment

                                • Loke
                                  Rank 5 Registered User
                                  • Jun 2008
                                  • 3302

                                  the head of the Ministry of Defense said that one of the objectives is work on the possibility of carrying out "manufacturing and assembly Gripen fighters design.
                                  "

                                  Google translated from: http://www.mindef.gov.ar/plantillaNoticia.php?notId=104

                                  It's amazing; don't Argentina and Brazil not get it that as long as there are UK components in the Gripen (like the radar) there is no way that Argentina will be able to buy Gripen. And replacing all the UK content in Gripen will make it much more expensive.

                                  Comment

                                  • Loke
                                    Rank 5 Registered User
                                    • Jun 2008
                                    • 3302

                                    Originally posted by hopsalot View Post
                                    It is worth nothing that in exercises nobody is likely showing off the best they have got.
                                    I agree -- most likely the Gripen EW system has capabilities that were not shown in the training exercises the Typhoon pilots referred to...

                                    Comment

                                    • swerve
                                      Rank 5 Registered User
                                      • Jun 2005
                                      • 13610

                                      Originally posted by Ginner View Post
                                      They can't transfer intellectual property they do not own.
                                      I know that, you know that, everybody with an ounce of sense knows it, & I'm sure the Brazilians who signed the Gripen contract know it & the contract was written to take it into account. But some people aren't interested in reason, logic & facts.

                                      I see from the series of posts leading to this that their author assumes that despite all precedents, Brazil would be able to get full technology transfer for the F-18E from Boeing - although Boeing doesn't own the technology for the APG-79, F414, ALR-67 etc., & Boeing has no control over the US State Department, which is notorious for its arbitrary refusals of ITAR permissions, or the US Congress, which has been known to override the State Department when it does grant ITAR approval. The USA's closest ally, the UK, has suffered from this, & so has Brazil, but someone here assumes that Brazil would be permanently exempt in this one particular case. Doh!
                                      Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
                                      Justinian

                                      Comment

                                      • hopsalot
                                        Senior Member
                                        • Aug 2012
                                        • 3166

                                        Originally posted by Loke View Post
                                        I agree -- most likely the Gripen EW system has capabilities that were not shown in the training exercises the Typhoon pilots referred to...
                                        Yes, and most likely the Typhoon has capabilities, both EW and electronic counter countermeasures that it did not show.

                                        That is what makes this such a waste of time. Neither the Gripen nor the Typhoon's EW teams spend much if any effort developing techniques designed to target a Typhoon or Gripen. (because they are not threat aircraft) Similarly neither team spends any great effort working out defenses against the other jet's jamming. Throw in the fact that neither is likely to show off the best they have in an international environment... what have we learned?

                                        Comment

                                        • hopsalot
                                          Senior Member
                                          • Aug 2012
                                          • 3166

                                          Originally posted by swerve View Post
                                          I know that, you know that, everybody with an ounce of sense knows it, & I'm sure the Brazilians who signed the Gripen contract know it & the contract was written to take it into account. But some people aren't interested in reason, logic & facts.

                                          I see from the series of posts leading to this that their author assumes that despite all precedents, Brazil would be able to get full technology transfer for the F-18E from Boeing - although Boeing doesn't own the technology for the APG-79, F414, ALR-67 etc., & Boeing has no control over the US State Department, which is notorious for its arbitrary refusals of ITAR permissions, or the US Congress, which has been known to override the State Department when it does grant ITAR approval. The USA's closest ally, the UK, has suffered from this, & so has Brazil, but someone here assumes that Brazil would be permanently exempt in this one particular case. Doh!
                                          You say that like it is obvious, and I agree that it should be, but we still see people here and elsewhere talking about the alleged "full" technology transfer that Saab offers.

                                          Just days ago in the Canada fighter thread:

                                          Originally posted by Ginner View Post
                                          Saab offers technology transfer and access to modify source code....F35....nope
                                          There is software in the engine, the radar, the IRST, the EW system, the targeting pod. How much of that software does Saab own? It is the same problem as the hardware itself. Saab presumably owns much of the software in the aircraft, but there are big chunks that it most certainly does not control.

                                          Comment

                                          Unconfigured Ad Widget

                                          Collapse

                                           

                                          Working...
                                          X