Register Free

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Finnish fighter replacement revisited

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

    #21
    @Spud

    I believe it might just be the media putting it out of context. I believe the range/speed might be in relation to the FAF requirements, and the number to the operational needs of the FAF [certain spread of a certain number of fighters, operational availability and turn-around times]

    The required number of fighters is arguably a disadvantage for the F-35. It's a bit ironic that the FAF might be a potentially larger user of the Gripen than the SwAF [If Sweden does not decide to commit to more than the 60 ordered].

    Comment


      #22
      Given that the F-35 is cheaper than the Rafale & Eurofighter, close to the Gripen & Super Hornet, and requires less operational support than any of them, I don't see how the F-35 is at any disadvantage.
      "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

      Comment


        #23
        Given that the F-35 is cheaper than the Rafale & Eurofighter, close to the Gripen & Super Hornet, and requires less operational support than any of them, I don't see how the F-35 is at any disadvantage.

        That is called religious faith
        sigpic

        Comment


          #24
          That is called religious faith
          aka Haters gotta Hate
          "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

          Comment


            #25
            aka Haters gotta Hate
            No hate on my part
            sigpic

            Comment


              #26
              @Sintra: Sorry that I was not clear enough, I was not referring to you.
              "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

              Comment


                #27
                @Sintra: Sorry that I was not clear enough, I was not referring to you.
                No problemo

                ps - I actually think Dave is almost certainly the Front Runner in Finland...
                sigpic

                Comment


                  #28
                  That is called religious faith
                  No it is called zealots fanatism... Or Dansih biased calculations...
                  Last edited by halloweene; 28th November 2017, 22:21.

                  Comment


                    #29
                    Well I don't disagree that Dave is the frontrunner in Finland, but I'm quite unsure what it really tells us about that country though.

                    Click image for larger version

Name:	Dave.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	161.1 KB
ID:	3677826

                    Comment


                      #30
                      Dave IS probably the front runner. Still, lifetie costs may not be its strongest point and budget is limited to about 100 million/aircraft.

                      Comment


                        #31
                        What does the $100 per-plane budget cover (URF, WSC, etc)

                        Click image for larger version

Name:	kNH2ymW.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	133.0 KB
ID:	3677827
                        "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

                        Comment


                          #32
                          The $80 mil number is the URF/REC Flyaway price. Every customer knows this
                          How could anyone seriously believe this ?

                          Treaty ally cost and export prices are 2 different animals. Unless the US govt is subsidizing the F-35 by 10's of millions, there is no way that the cost is under 100 or anywhere near the cost of Rafale or Gripens.

                          How much more lines of code is there in the F-35 compared to a Rafale or Gripen ? The stealth coating ect. This is just not possible. This is like saying an iPhone X is costing slightly less than a Samsung S6. Its just not reality. And if sub 100 prices are kicking around, its because someone is subsidizing it.

                          Comment


                            #33
                            Given that the F-35 is cheaper than the Rafale & Eurofighter, close to the Gripen & Super Hornet,
                            Its not possible. Listen to what you just said.

                            Again. This is IPhone X for less money than a BlackBerry Torch in the case of the Eurofighter or Hornet.

                            Comment


                              #34
                              How could anyone seriously believe this ?
                              Believe what, that the $80 will be achieved? That is for the future to see. I was just pointing out what classification the $80 belongs to.

                              Treaty ally cost and export prices are 2 different animals.
                              Yes and no. Partner & FMS sales are made at the same price that the US pays for the system. FMS "may" include fees but those are optional. This is why FMS sales are "estimates" because they depend on what the price is in any given year rather than a "promise" given years before actual procurement.

                              there is no way that the cost is under 100 or anywhere near the cost of Rafale or Gripens.
                              The URF is already well under $100 mil in the latest batch of F-35As. Per the Indian deal, the Rafale is north of $100mil for the "bare fighter" and that was before the $50 mil per fighter "customization".

                              This is just not possible.
                              The reason is simple, economies of scale. LM makes more in one year (by 2020) than nearly 5 years of Rafale production. On the development side, since the USG & Partners have already paid for the basic development, it's cost is not included in Partner & FMS sales (as per all FMS contracts).


                              I'll have to dig around, but a recent governemnt (not the US) report did an apples/apples comparison of the F-35/Eurofighter/Rafale/Gripen/SH and showed that the F-35 cheapest overall.
                              "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

                              Comment


                                #35
                                Denmark is budgeting around $97 million per unit for a fleet of 27 aircraft, 17 of which will be delivered in block 4 configuration and the remaining that will be converted to it. This unit price also includes spares, simulators and other services.

                                http://aviationweek.com/awindefense/...rement-process
                                Old radar types never die; they just phased array

                                Comment


                                  #36
                                  @Spud

                                  Just answer one of the actual realities about the cost and the man hours into the jet.

                                  Code. How much more code does the F-35 have compared to the Hornet ?

                                  Coating. A Hornet just has paint. Every F-35 has special coating. It costs way more by the gallon. Its just a raw cost that no amount of accounting gimmicks can overcome.

                                  Fighter pricing is all politics. The F-35 pricing is all poltics. Somehow, they are getting away with these numbers in the news. But those numbers aren't meant for hardcore enthusiast consumption. Even volume wise. Its not like there hasn't been high volumes of these other fighters.

                                  On the development side, since the USG & Partners have already paid for the basic development,
                                  Then you have to add that per jet to get a fair price compared to the Rafale or anything.
                                  Last edited by KGB; 29th November 2017, 05:02.

                                  Comment


                                    #37
                                    man hours into the jet
                                    The CPFH is about 14% above that of the F-16

                                    How much more code...
                                    Why does that matter? That plays no part in the F-35's cost to produce. If anything, it makes it less expensive since it has less specialized chips.

                                    Every F-35 has special coating..
                                    Yes it does, which makes it more survivable & better able to do its job without extra help.

                                    Fighter pricing is all politics.
                                    No it's not. It's all based on what it costs to create (in the US anyway) with a little profit thrown in.

                                    Its not like there hasn't been high volumes of these other fighters.
                                    Care to state when the Gripen, Rafale, Eurofighter, or Superhornet was produced at rates approaching that of the F-35 at FRP (100+ per year).

                                    Then you have to add that per jet to get a fair price
                                    Why? I quoted the price that customers are paying for it. It's not like the Rafale, Eurofighter, and Super Hornet's dev is not already paid for.
                                    "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

                                    Comment


                                      #38
                                      There is literally one threat why we need the fighters in the first place, makes no sense to buy our hardware from the said threat.
                                      Well I don't know, Finland was happy to buy MiG-21Fs from the USSR twenty years after their last bloody war with each other and armed them with R-13 missiles. And then again in 1978 for the 21bis and R-60.

                                      They also gave the MiG-23MF a good inspection in the late 1970s.

                                      Is Russia more of a threat to Finland nowadays than the USSR in the depths of the Cold War?
                                      Last edited by Cherry Ripe; 29th November 2017, 12:28.

                                      Comment


                                        #39
                                        That was because of the Cold War, & how WW2 had ended for Finland. Finland was still bound by treaties with the USSR, & required to perform a delicate balancing act between east & west.
                                        Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
                                        Justinian

                                        Comment


                                          #40
                                          As a Finn i do know, you dont. As Swerwe already explained, buying soviet stuff was a necessity because of the political situatition we found ourselves after the lost WW2, we were firmly in SU's sphere of influence. Things changed after SU collapsed.

                                          Comment


                                           

                                          Working...
                                          X