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
  • Get_It
    Rank 5 Registered User
    • Oct 2006
    • 98

    Originally posted by Ginner View Post
    They can't transfer intellectual property they do not own.
    I think that that's the point that he's trying to make. They can't really enforce the promise of 100% ToT that Embraer has talked about and people from both the Swedish and Brazilian side of the deals had "singed" about.

    Originally posted by swerve View Post
    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!
    I don't disagree. But the truth is that ToT for the F/A-18 would have been more plausible since it's all under "one flag" and not under many foreign companies.

    As for any real 100% ToT, that's just a pipe dream and all the talk about it was snake oil salesman talk.

    Cheers,

    Comment

    • Ginner
      Rank 3 Registered User
      • Jan 2016
      • 119

      Hopsalot

      Don't quote me and then twist what I said. I never once suggested full tech transfer.....obviously there is a lot they don't own....just made that point here yesterday....like five posts up.

      Comment

      • swerve
        Rank 5 Registered User
        • Jun 2005
        • 13610

        Originally posted by hopsalot View Post
        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.
        I've always taken that to mean 'full transfer of the technology we own' - but as you say, that isn't what a lot of people understand by it.
        Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
        Justinian

        Comment

        • hopsalot
          Senior Member
          • Aug 2012
          • 3166

          Originally posted by Ginner View Post
          Hopsalot

          Don't quote me and then twist what I said. I never once suggested full tech transfer.....obviously there is a lot they don't own....just made that point here yesterday....like five posts up.

          Well, that shows progress at least because here is what you said previously:

          Originally posted by Ginner View Post

          Saab owns the source code and a significant amount of the technology installed in the plane. We can't touch the code on the F35 to do our own upgrades.

          Comment

          • Ginner
            Rank 3 Registered User
            • Jan 2016
            • 119

            Originally posted by hopsalot View Post
            Well, that shows progress at least because here is what you said previously:
            Yes they do. The code they developed for the platform they own.

            Comment

            • Ginner
              Rank 3 Registered User
              • Jan 2016
              • 119

              Originally posted by swerve View Post
              I've always taken that to mean 'full transfer of the technology we own' - but as you say, that isn't what a lot of people understand by it.
              That seemed self evident but that's nice and specific.

              Comment

              • maurobaggio
                Rank 5 Registered User
                • Jul 2008
                • 521

                Originally posted by swerve View Post
                I've always taken that to mean 'full transfer of the technology we own' - but as you say, that isn't what a lot of people understand by it.

                There are in Brazil about 36,000 pages that has been describing in detail all the process 100% ToT( transfer of technology) those three competitors: F/A 18 E/F, Rafale F3 and Gripen NG.

                Maybe you can clarify that those 36,000 pages, once your analysis seems clever:'full transfer of the technology we own".

                However I have a doubt about your analysis: has it been elaborated before or after the contract were signed with Brazil?

                I had always thought about that requirement of 100% ToT( transfer of technology) of the program F/X 2 from Brazil for only 36 fighters in 2005 were an unrealistic request, and it would not have been accepted by any competitor, however I was wrong, since it were accepted by three: USA (F/A 18E/F), France (Rafale F3) and Sweden (Gripen NG).


                Just Russia that seemed the most aggressive competitor, since it had offered the Su 35S as well as the MiG 35 did not accept this requirement of 100% ToT for 36 fighters. In the case of Russia 100% ToT only for a batch of at least 100 fighters.

                The Su 35S had been touted as the favorite for Brazil since his predecessor Su 35M were appointed in 2002 as the best evaluated by the Brazil Air Force of Brazil among the other competitors (Mirage 2000BR, Gripen C/D, F 16 C/D). However this competition was canceled in 2003 by the new President Lula of Brazil who had taken the office that same year.

                The main doubt could not be about the contract with the Gripen NG, but the whole process of competition from F/X 2, since it could have been created tough requirements by Government of Brazil only to exclude competitors, and for others competitors that were political convenient to Government of Brazil those tough requirements will be gradually abandoned after the end of the competition.

                Apparently the proposal from Eurojet Typhoon were not accepted by Brazil due to its high cost, however the most likely is that the European consortium has been formed for several countries did not accept the requirement of 100% ToT for only 36 Typhoons.

                Why Russia did not accept 100% ToT about 36 Su 35S?
                This could be the funny part, once Russia had been keeping a complication that none other competitors (USA, France, Sweden) it were thinking about : China.

                If Russia accepts 100% of ToT on 36 Su 35S in 2009 with Brazil as then it could say 'no away' to China on the same terms?

                The application of 100% ToT has not been an offer by competitors, but a requirement of the Government of Brazil. However if it is not implemented, there will always be the possibility of cancellation of the contract in any time.

                Comment

                • NotOnlyaSwede
                  Rank 5 Registered User
                  • Sep 2005
                  • 55

                  maurobaggio, you misinterpret "100% of ToT"!

                  Saab hasn't promised ToT of every nut and bolt in the aircraft as you seems to believe, you wont find that in those 36000 pages, they have promised 100% ToT of their technological knowledge to design and manufacture a modern fighter jet ie system integration ala Saab etc. so that Brazil in the future can build one themselves.

                  Saab own, has has been said in this thread, all the key technologies; radar source codes, EW(With in house Gallium nitride transistors (GaN)).


                  Regards
                  Last edited by NotOnlyaSwede; 20th March 2016, 11:40. Reason: grammar

                  Comment

                  • maurobaggio
                    Rank 5 Registered User
                    • Jul 2008
                    • 521

                    Originally posted by NotOnlyaSwede View Post
                    maurobaggio, you misinterpret "100% of ToT"!

                    Saab hasn't promised ToT of every nut and bolt in the aircraft as you seems to believe, you wont find that in those 36000 pages, they have promised 100% ToT of their technological knowledge to design and manufacture a modern fighter jet ie system integration ala Saab etc. so that Brazil in the future can build one themselves.

                    Saab own, has has been said in this thread, all the key technologies; radar source codes, EW(With in house Gallium nitride transistors (GaN)).


                    Regards
                    Thanks for the explanation, and in my humble opinion you could be correct with regard from Saab, however there are at least an important detail that you have been missed so far, the agreement has not been only between Saab and Embraer, but between the Government of Sweden and the Government of Brazil.

                    The agreement with Gripen NG are not between two companies( Embraer and Saab), but between two governments, once it was the Government of Sweden that has been funding the contract, beyond this was not the Embraer who has bought the Gripen NG, but the Government of Brazil

                    The Government of Sweden has had full access about all technological aspects of each single part of the Gripen NG , and it not just about the item that Saab has beem assembling or manufactoring so far. After all the Goverment of Sweden has been keeping only important suppliers from their allieds countries as ie:US and UK.

                    However this does not necessarily meaning that Saab has been keeping all knowledge about the Gripen NG, just as example the Volvo company that it has beem manufactoring the F414 engine in Sweden too.


                    Transfer of technology should not have been confused with manufacturing rights, as to develop and produce such modern fighter, then it has been necessary full knowledge in all aspects of operation and construction of each item, as well as engines and avionics.

                    I don't have any copies of these 36,000 pages that has been describing the entire process of the 100% of ToT in Brasil, however 100% of something like the Gripen NG in fact should be every single bolt and nut, as weel as its engine and avionics.

                    In fact I guess that the same 100% ToT does not apply to weapons of the Gripen NG, even the software of those, since those weapons are not part of the aircraft, but every single part that has been assemblyng in the fighter, it should be part of the 100%.

                    Unless 100% does not mean anymore 100%.If someone prove it, may be could be nominated to the Nobel Prize in Mathematics.

                    Comment

                    • Ginner
                      Rank 3 Registered User
                      • Jan 2016
                      • 119

                      Originally posted by maurobaggio View Post
                      Thanks for the explanation, and in my humble opinion you could be correct with regard from Saab, however there are at least an important detail that you have been missed so far, the agreement has not been only between Saab and Embraer, but between the Government of Sweden and the Government of Brazil.

                      The agreement with Gripen NG are not between two companies( Embraer and Saab), but between two governments, once it was the Government of Sweden that has been funding the contract, beyond this was not the Embraer who has bought the Gripen NG, but the Government of Brazil

                      The Government of Sweden has had full access about all technological aspects of each single part of the Gripen NG , and it not just about the item that Saab has beem assembling or manufactoring so far. After all the Goverment of Sweden has been keeping only important suppliers from their allieds countries as ie:US and UK.

                      However this does not necessarily meaning that Saab has been keeping all knowledge about the Gripen NG, just as example the Volvo company that it has beem manufactoring the F414 engine in Sweden too.


                      Transfer of technology should not have been confused with manufacturing rights, as to develop and produce such modern fighter, then it has been necessary full knowledge in all aspects of operation and construction of each item, as well as engines and avionics.

                      I don't have any copies of these 36,000 pages that has been describing the entire process of the 100% of ToT in Brasil, however 100% of something like the Gripen NG in fact should be every single bolt and nut, as weel as its engine and avionics.

                      In fact I guess that the same 100% ToT does not apply to weapons of the Gripen NG, even the software of those, since those weapons are not part of the aircraft, but every single part that has been assemblyng in the fighter, it should be part of the 100%.

                      Unless 100% does not mean anymore 100%.If someone prove it, may be could be nominated to the Nobel Prize in Mathematics.
                      Saab cannot transfer the IP for the Selex radar, skyward irst, britecloud and not for the engines etc....Anything the developed to make those systems function on their platform...that's another story.

                      Comment

                      • Sintra
                        Rank 5 Registered User
                        • Aug 2007
                        • 3849

                        Originally posted by maurobaggio View Post
                        Thanks for the explanation, and in my humble opinion you could be correct with regard from Saab, however there are at least an important detail that you have been missed so far, the agreement has not been only between Saab and Embraer, but between the Government of Sweden and the Government of Brazil.

                        The agreement with Gripen NG are not between two companies( Embraer and Saab), but between two governments, once it was the Government of Sweden that has been funding the contract, beyond this was not the Embraer who has bought the Gripen NG, but the Government of Brazil

                        The Government of Sweden has had full access about all technological aspects of each single part of the Gripen NG , and it not just about the item that Saab has beem assembling or manufactoring so far. After all the Goverment of Sweden has been keeping only important suppliers from their allieds countries as ie:US and UK.

                        However this does not necessarily meaning that Saab has been keeping all knowledge about the Gripen NG, just as example the Volvo company that it has beem manufactoring the F414 engine in Sweden too.


                        Transfer of technology should not have been confused with manufacturing rights, as to develop and produce such modern fighter, then it has been necessary full knowledge in all aspects of operation and construction of each item, as well as engines and avionics.

                        I don't have any copies of these 36,000 pages that has been describing the entire process of the 100% of ToT in Brasil, however 100% of something like the Gripen NG in fact should be every single bolt and nut, as weel as its engine and avionics.

                        In fact I guess that the same 100% ToT does not apply to weapons of the Gripen NG, even the software of those, since those weapons are not part of the aircraft, but every single part that has been assemblyng in the fighter, it should be part of the 100%.

                        Unless 100% does not mean anymore 100%.If someone prove it, may be could be nominated to the Nobel Prize in Mathematics.
                        The TOT conditions were negotiated between the Brasilian and the Swedish government and no, in the contract there's no clause to send the blue prints of things like the engine to Sao Paulo. Just to have an idea if Boeing had won, the 36 airframes would have been entirely built in Saint Louis.
                        Volvo does not manufacture the F414 in Sweden, that engine is built in the States, it produced the RM12, a variant of the F404, that equips the Gripen A/B/C/D. Volvo proposed an upgraded RM12 to SAAB to equip the "E", it lost to the F414 (costs). There are several bits and bobs in the Gripen that the Swedish government doesn't have the IP rights, MIDS-LVT comes to mind (albeit for the Brasilian scenario that particular piece of hardware is entirely irrelevant ).
                        sigpic

                        Comment

                        • NotOnlyaSwede
                          Rank 5 Registered User
                          • Sep 2005
                          • 55

                          Originally posted by maurobaggio View Post
                          ...however there are at least an important detail that you have been missed so far, the agreement has not been only between Saab and Embraer, but between the Government of Sweden and the Government of Brazil.
                          Where have I said that it's only between Saab and Embraer? I haven't missed anything, I know the Goverments are involved but here we are talking ToT in general terms.

                          Originally posted by maurobaggio View Post
                          Transfer of technology should not have been confused with manufacturing rights, as to develop and produce such modern fighter, then it has been necessary full knowledge in all aspects of operation and construction of each item, as well as engines and avionics.
                          I think that it's you that are confused, Brazil do not get only some "manufacturers right". They will be able to get Saab's whole system integration knowledge in fighter jet construction plus ability to upgrade the aircraft to their needs, as they desire.

                          Yes, Saab don't have IP right to everything but can still build Gripens, can't they?
                          It's part of their method to buy aircraft parts from the shelf but have control over key systems, radar, EW etc. as been said. Brazil will more or less do the same.

                          Originally posted by maurobaggio View Post
                          In fact I guess that the same 100% ToT does not apply to weapons of the Gripen NG, even the software of those, since those weapons are not part of the aircraft, but every single part that has been assemblyng in the fighter, it should be part of the 100%.

                          Unless 100% does not mean anymore 100%.If someone prove it, may be could be nominated to the Nobel Prize in Mathematics.
                          Brazil will be able to integrate all weapons of choice the same way Saab do it. BTW, the Raven AESA radar is not bought clean "of the shelf". The backend is AFAIK a collaboration between Selex and Saab where Saab owns the necessary software, I think the antenna is Selex though.

                          I expect some collaboration going on also on the IRST since Saab developed their own system(IR-Otis) some years ago.

                          maurobaggio, you keep repeating yourself, do you mean that the Brazil airforce, Goverment, companies etc. don't know this and expect 100% ToT of every bit?

                          If so, that sounds a little bit delusional to me...

                          Regards

                          Comment

                          • NotOnlyaSwede
                            Rank 5 Registered User
                            • Sep 2005
                            • 55

                            I don't know if this has been posted before, interesting never the less:

                            Saab has been working with GaN for a number of years, with Chalmers university of technology and the Swedish Defence Materiel Administration (FMV) as important contributors in the long-term development of GaN.
                            http://saabgroup.com/sv/media/storie...de-technology/

                            This is about the introduction of the ground radars.(The Gripen NG will also have EW system with GaN modules.)?


                            I'm not a tech savy person but this seems to point to Saab to be somewhat at the forefront in the (Gripen) radar/EW area?

                            This study investigates recovery time of the gain of AlGaN/GaN HEMT based low noise amplifiers (LNA) after an input overdrive pulse. Three LNAs, fabricated in two commercial MMIC processes and a Chalmers in-house process, are evaluated. The Chalmers process has an unintentionally doped buffer instead of the intentional Fe doping of the buffer which is standard in commercial GaN HEMT technologies. It is shown that the LNAs from the two commercial processes experience a severe drop in gain after input overdrive pulses higher than 28 dBm, recovering over a duration of around 20 ms. In contrast the LNA fabricated in-house at Chalmers experienced no visible effects up to an input power of 33 dBm. These results have impact for radar and electronic warfare receivers, which need to be operational immediately after an overdrive pulse.
                            http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login...mber%3D7362252

                            Comment

                            • Vnomad
                              Rank 5 Registered User
                              • May 2011
                              • 2859

                              Originally posted by Ginner View Post
                              Saab cannot transfer the IP for the Selex radar, skyward irst, britecloud and not for the engines etc....Anything the developed to make those systems function on their platform...that's another story.
                              And plenty more besides, assuming its built on a pattern similar to the legacy Gripen.



                              Comment

                              • NotOnlyaSwede
                                Rank 5 Registered User
                                • Sep 2005
                                • 55

                                The good (Or bad thing, as some want to see it...) is that Saab can source parts from where the customer wants.

                                Here a more up to date picture...



                                Here we can can see that Sweden "controls" the radar(Selex antenna among other things.), FCS, Swedish data link, EWS etc.

                                Comment

                                • maurobaggio
                                  Rank 5 Registered User
                                  • Jul 2008
                                  • 521

                                  Originally posted by Sintra View Post
                                  The TOT conditions were negotiated between the Brasilian and the Swedish government and no, in the contract there's no clause to send the blue prints of things like the engine to Sao Paulo. Just to have an idea if Boeing had won, the 36 airframes would have been entirely built in Saint Louis.
                                  Volvo does not manufacture the F414 in Sweden, that engine is built in the States, it produced the RM12, a variant of the F404, that equips the Gripen A/B/C/D. Volvo proposed an upgraded RM12 to SAAB to equip the "E", it lost to the F414 (costs). There are several bits and bobs in the Gripen that the Swedish government doesn't have the IP rights, MIDS-LVT comes to mind (albeit for the Brasilian scenario that particular piece of hardware is entirely irrelevant ).
                                  In fact there are many possibilities only about Volvo transfer technology from GE F414G to Brazil:


                                  January 19, 2000
                                  EVENDALE, OHIO - GE Aircraft Engines (GEAE) and Volvo Aero Corporation of Sweden have reached a long-term agreement under which Volvo will manufacture designated components for GEAE's F414-GE-400 fighter engine.
                                  The F414 powers the U.S. Navy's F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, mainstay of the Navy's aircraft carrier fleet into the 21st century. GEAE is currently on contract to build 176 F414 engines, but production is anticipated to exceed 2,000 engines over the next 20 to 30 years.


                                  http://www.geaviation.com/press/mili..._20000119.html
                                  May 30, 2008
                                  Volvo Aero has joined with GE to support this development program and the flight and demonstration testing that will continue beyond 2010. Cooperative relationships with both Volvo Aero and airframe manufacturer Saab have led to this milestone and will continue through the Gripen Demonstrator Program and beyond.

                                  http://www.geaviation.com/press/mili..._20080530.html

                                  The condition of 100% ToT of the Gripen NG it has been accept by the Government of Sweden, and it are not only responsibility of the Saab company.

                                  Only to remember how it has been important the agreement with Brazil about the Gripen NG to the Government of Sweden:
                                  http://www.defensenews.com/story/def...deal/74415116/

                                  Comment

                                  • NotOnlyaSwede
                                    Rank 5 Registered User
                                    • Sep 2005
                                    • 55

                                    Maurobaggio, in your last link:
                                    The agreement comes with a strong technology commitment from Sweden to transfer "everything" that Brazil will need to develop its own next-generation military jets.
                                    There you have it...

                                    Comment

                                    • Siddar
                                      Rank 5 Registered User
                                      • Feb 2013
                                      • 263

                                      Originally posted by Vnomad View Post
                                      And plenty more besides, assuming its built on a pattern similar to the legacy Gripen.



                                      Originally posted by NotOnlyaSwede View Post
                                      The good (Or bad thing, as some want to see it...) is that Saab can source parts from where the customer wants.

                                      Here a more up to date picture...



                                      Here we can can see that Sweden "controls" the radar(Selex antenna among other things.), FCS, Swedish data link, EWS etc.
                                      Better hope president Trump doesn't see the above or Saab may well lose that last american part of Gripen.

                                      Life could get very ugly for Saab if those pictures start making the rounds in Washington. Mass replacement of US parts is certainly grounds enough for US to block export of US technology those parts are based upon.
                                      Last edited by Siddar; 22nd March 2016, 09:31.

                                      Comment

                                      • Spitfire9
                                        Rank 5 Registered User
                                        • Jul 2008
                                        • 2832

                                        Originally posted by Siddar View Post
                                        Better hope president Trump doesn't see the above or Saab may well lose that last american part of Gripen.
                                        It's a shame that the EJ200 engine was not chosen over the GE414 for the Gripen E. I'm not saying it was the wrong decision if EJ200 did not produce the thrust required but if it had been rated as suitable at a suitable price, security of supply would be much better.

                                        Originally posted by Siddar View Post
                                        Life could get very ugly for Saab if those pictures start making the rounds in Washington. Mass replacement of US parts is certainly grounds enough for US to block export of US technology those parts are based upon.
                                        Are you talking about US parts being reverse engineered? If not it's just undesirable for US manufacturers if alternatives are developed and those are bought rather than US products. That's called competition, isn't it?
                                        Sum ergo cogito

                                        Comment

                                        • Sintra
                                          Rank 5 Registered User
                                          • Aug 2007
                                          • 3849

                                          Originally posted by Siddar View Post
                                          Better hope president Trump doesn't see the above or Saab may well lose that last american part of Gripen.

                                          Life could get very ugly for Saab if those pictures start making the rounds in Washington. Mass replacement of US parts is certainly grounds enough for US to block export of US technology those parts are based upon.
                                          Where did you get the idea that "those parts" are "based" on American non compliant ITAR hardware?
                                          Last time I've checked the Swedes are entirely free to use things like a new Israeli MAWS or a German radio in their new version of the Gripen.
                                          sigpic

                                          Comment

                                          Unconfigured Ad Widget

                                          Collapse

                                           

                                          Working...
                                          X