F-X deal is back on. Brazil back in action!!!

[drg]

Here:
http://www.mercopress.com/vernoticia.do?id=11806&formato=HTML
Like i said in my Brazil post in the General area
Ahem...
Waaaaazzzoooooooo!!!!

[Grand Danois]

Read the picture caption in the article and a smile will appear on your face. :D

[Todjaeger]

Read the picture caption in the article and a smile will appear on your face. :D

What, is that not accurate defence reporting?! ;)

Perhaps the photo editor needs to change the prescription for their eye glasses, or at least spend more time cleaning the lenses.

Following that sort of SNAFU, it does lead to questioning the accuracy of the article. I would think that Brazil would be more interested in 2nd hand Mirage 2K's than new Rafales. Particularly since integration work is still ongoing with it and there are other defence areas might be looking at improving as well.

A question to ask would be how important is it to Brazil to get new, as opposed to 2nd hand aircraft, as well as what is the number desired.

-Cheers

[drg]

Awww, poor little darlings...
Here you go:
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2007/11/12/219299/fighter-deal-green-light-to-update-brazilian-air-force.html
Since you have a trouble with South American English and all.

[Tasman]

Awww, poor little darlings...
Here you go:
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2007/11/12/219299/fighter-deal-green-light-to-update-brazilian-air-force.html
Since you have a trouble with South American English and all.

Well at least the photo with this article is a possible contender! :D

Tas

[Salty Dog]

The buzz in the air has the FX-2 RFPs to be issued in the latter half of 2008.

The major contenders touted are:

Dassualt Rafale
JAS Gripen
EADS Eurofighter
Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet
Lockheed F-35A Lightning II
Sukhoi Su-35 (or PAK FA)

[swerve]

EADS Eurofighter

BAe & Alenia might not like that description. :D

[Salty Dog]

BAe & Alenia might not like that description. :D

Thanks mate! My bust.

Eurofighter Typhoon

Rumour mill has the Rafale and F-35 as the top contenders.

[kato]

The Rafale would probably get some "plus points" for having a naval version available, same with the F-35 and F-18.

Throw in some discounts on those sides (i.e. carrier support) as well, and the rest can go home.

[Lostfleet]

This tender is for the Brazillian Air Force, however is there any ideas about joint or seperate acquisiton for the Navy as well? It would be nice to have some new aircraft for the ex-French Carrier.

[ROCK45]

The Brazilian government has given the service the green light to initiate an evaluation and selection process next January, and provided a $2.2 billion budget for the procurement.

Unofficially dubbed FX-2, the new project calls for the purchase of 36 aircraft in a single batch, in contrast to the stepped procurement originally envisaged for Brazil's previous F-X programme, which was formally abandoned late last yea

According to the above article they quote $2.2 billion for the budget seems too low? For that money Brazil will get a lot less then 36 aircraft. I'll attached a quote for the Morocco deal so we can get an idea on prices. Maybe the price quoted in the article isn't correct and it's $3.2 billion? On the list provided by Salty Dog as major contenders touted are:
Dassualt Rafale
JAS Gripen
EADS Eurofighter
Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet
Lockheed F-35A Lightning II
Sukhoi Su-35 (or PAK FA)

I know prices are difficult to really figure out but maybe the Gripen would come in the lowest with off sets involved? The Su-35 only a few models were built so there's no way of really knowing where it falls on the list until it goes into production. Aren't the others all above $100 million per if not more after goodies are added in? That's why I think the price is off a little.




Defense Security Cooperation Agency
NEWS RELEASE

Morocco - F-16C/D Block 50/52 Aircraft
WASHINGTON, December 18, 2007 – The Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of a possible Foreign Military Sale to Morocco of F-16C/D Block 50/52 aircraft as well as associated equipment and services. The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as $2.4 billion.
The Government of Morocco has requested a possible sale of:
Major Defense Equipment (MDE)
24 F-16C/D Block 50/52 aircraft with either the F100-PW-229 or
F110-GE-129 Increased Performance Engines (IPE) and APG-68(V)9 radars;
5 F100-PW-229 or F110-GE-129 IPE spare engines;
4 APG-68(V)9 spare radar sets;
30 AN/ALE-47 Countermeasures Dispensing Systems (CMDS)
30 AN/ALR-56M Radar Warning Receivers (RWR)
60 LAU-129/A Launchers;
30 LAU-117 Launchers;
6 Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing Systems;
4 AN/ARC-238 Single Channel Ground and Airborne Radio System (SINCGAR)
radios with HAVE QUICK I/II;
24 Conformal Fuel Tanks (pairs);
4 Link-16 Multifunctional Information Distribution System-Low Volume
Terminals;
2 Link-16 Ground Stations;
4 Global Positioning Systems (GPS) and Embedded GPS/ Inertial Navigation
Systems (INS);
12 AN/AAQ-33 SNIPER Targeting Pods or AN/AAQ-28 LITENING Targeting
Pods
5 Tactical Air Reconnaissance Systems (TARS) or DB-110 Reconnaissance Pods
(RECCE);
4 AN/APX-113 Advanced Identification Friend or Foe (AIFF) Systems;
28 AN/ALQ-211 Advanced Integrated Defensive Electronic Warfare Suites
(AIDEWS); or 28 AN/ALQ-187 Advanced Self-Protection Integrated Suites
(ASPIS II); or 28 AN/ALQ-178 Self Protection Electronic Warfare Suites
(SPEWS)
1 Unit Level Trainer
Associated support equipment, software development/integration, tanker support, ferry services, CAD/PAD, repair and return, modification kits, spares and repair parts, publications and technical documentation, personnel
Northrop-Grumman Electronic Systems Baltimore, Maryland
training and training equipment, U.S. Government and contractor technical, engineering, and logistics support services, and other related elements of logistics support. The estimated cost is $2.4 billion.
The proposed sale will contribute to the foreign policy and national security objectives of the United States by enhancing Morocco’s capacity to support U.S. efforts in the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT), as well as supporting Morocco’s legitimate need for its own self-defense. Morocco is one of the most stable and pro-Western of the Arab states, and the U.S. remains committed to a long-term relationship with Morocco. The proposed sale will allow the Moroccan Air Force to modernize its aging fighter inventory, thereby enabling Morocco to support both its own air defense needs and coalition operations. Morocco is a Major Non-NATO ally. Delivery of this weapon system will greatly enhance Morocco’s interoperability with the U.S. and other NATO nations, making it a more valuable partner in an increasingly important area of the world. The country will have no difficulty absorbing this new capability into its armed forces.
The proposed sale of this weapon system will not affect the basic military balance in the region.
The principal contractors will be:
BAE Advanced Systems Greenlawn, New York
Boeing Corporation Seattle, Washington
Boeing Integrated Defense Systems St Louis, Missouri
(three locations) Long Beach, California
San Diego, California
Raytheon Company Lexington, Massachusetts
(two locations) Goleta, California
Raytheon Missile Systems Tucson, Arizona
Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company Fort Worth, Texas
Lockheed Martin Missile and Fire Control Dallas, Texas
Northrop-Grumman Electro-Optical Systems Garland, Texas
Pratt & Whitney United Technology Company East Hartford, Connecticut
General Electric Aircraft Engines Cincinnati, Ohio
Goodrich ISR Systems Danbury, Connecticut
L3 Communications Arlington, Texas
There are no known offset agreements in connection with this proposed sale.
Implementation of this proposed sale will require multiple trips to Morocco involving U.S. Government and contractor representatives for technical reviews/support, program management, and training over a period of 15 years.
There will be no adverse impact on U.S. defense readiness as a result of this proposed sale.
This notice of a potential sale is required by law; it does not mean that the sale has been concluded.
-30-

Link
http://www.dsca.mil/PressReleases/36...occo_08-20.pdf

[Salty Dog]

According to the above article they quote $2.2 billion for the budget seems too low? For that money Brazil will get a lot less then 36 aircraft. I'll attached a quote for the Morocco deal so we can get an idea on prices. Maybe the price quoted in the article isn't correct and it's $3.2 billion? On the list provided by Salty Dog as major contenders touted are:
Dassualt Rafale
JAS Gripen
EADS Eurofighter
Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet
Lockheed F-35A Lightning II
Sukhoi Su-35 (or PAK FA)

I know prices are difficult to really figure out but maybe the Gripen would come in the lowest with off sets involved? The Su-35 only a few models were built so there's no way of really knowing where it falls on the list until it goes into production. Aren't the others all above $100 million per if not more after goodies are added in? That's why I think the price is off a little.


The FMS package you reference includes spare engines, etc. If you take a ROM unit cost of say $60 million per (24) aircraft, it roughly comes to about $1.44 billion, short of the $2.4 billion package. In Brazil's case a ROM of $60 million per (36) aircraft comes to about $2.16 billion which is about the quoted figure. It would be reasonable to say Brazil would need at least another $1.0 billion to build as full package, probably not taken into account at this time. So your $3.2 billion price tag is more realistic. Nice observation mate.

[Feanor]

The PAK-FA has not even begun flight testing. It's completely unreasonable to put it on the list. At best the Su-35 (which is currently undergoing testing) but more likely the traditional Su-30MKX.

[Salty Dog]

The PAK-FA has not even begun flight testing. It's completely unreasonable to put it on the list. At best the Su-35 (which is currently undergoing testing) but more likely the traditional Su-30MKX.

I could not agree with you more mate. I was hesitant to put the PAK-FA in with the Su-35 at first, however it's appeared that way in the Brazilian press (which tends to speculate) and IMHO thought it should be kept to stimulate discussion.

[ROCK45]

Some aircraft news from Brazil

Salty Dog on post #6 you were right

Brazil issues 120-aircraft request to five fighter manufacturers
By Craig Hoyle

Brazil has revived its delayed search for a next-generation multirole combat aircraft, and in early June issued requests for information to five bidders for its new F-X2 contest. Its initial requirement is for a batch of 36 fighters, although the total programme is for 120 aircraft to be delivered from 2014 until post-2020.

Bidders for the new contest have been restricted to the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, Dassault Rafale, Eurofighter Typhoon, Saab Gripen NG (Next Generation) and the Sukhoi Su-35. The selected type will replace some of the Brazilian air force's Alenia/Embraer AMX ground-attack aircraft and its upgraded Northrop F-5 fighters, plus a recently acquired batch of ex-French air force Dassault Mirage 2000s.
Industry sources say the RFI requests the delivery of an "established, proven airframe" with supersonic performance, network connectivity and multirole capabilities. The document does not specify whether companies should offer an active electronically scanned array radar with the aircraft, but says both within- and beyond-visual-range air-to-air missiles should be supplied.

The F-X2 programme also includes an offset requirement worth 100% of the total acquisition costs, with licensed manufacturing of the selected fighter's airframe, avionics and engines requested during the life of the programme.

Brazil's earlier F-X fighter contest was abandoned in 2005 due to budgetary pressures, and the replacement project had been tipped for launch early this year. However, the defence ministry's new shortlist will come as a disappointment to Lockheed, which was interested in offering its F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

Speaking earlier this month, Embraer officials said that unlike the previous contest, local industry will not be encouraged to partner directly with the bidding F-X2 companies, and that the Brazilian government and air force will instead head this part of the project.

Link
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2008/06/16/224662/brazil-issues-120-aircraft-request-to-five-fighter-manufacturers.html

[Feanor]

Any news on when we can expect a decision?

[Salty Dog]

Some aircraft news from Brazil

Speaking earlier this month, Embraer officials said that unlike the previous contest, local industry will not be encouraged to partner directly with the bidding F-X2 companies, and that the Brazilian government and air force will instead head this part of the project.



Now this is interesting as during the previous F-X competition there was a rush for manufacturers to partner with Brazilian firms. This could clearly give some competitors an unfair advantage as there is only one Brazilian company capable of such a partnership, EMBRAER. Discouraging this practice should even the new F-X competition.

[Salty Dog]

Any news on when we can expect a decision?

Brazil is very cash rich with a an economy showing stunning growth. The opposite was true during the original F-X competition when Brazil was in debt and low cash flow. Hence F-X1 was cancelled.

Brazilian decision makers tend be slow, however the trend has been to spend. The Brazilian Army, Air Force, and Navy have acquired or will acquire SH-70 Blackhawks and Seahawks.

Perhaps we should start a poll on which gets decided 1st. India's MRCA or Brazil's F-X2.

[ROCK45]

Can you imagine Rafale going from no sales to maybe landing sales in the UAE, Greece, and Brazil? This is interesting because Brazil jumped from 36 aircraft to 120 aircraft on this F-X2 bid. That's a nice size order when you add in spares, weapons, and training. I think if the Rafale had the F/A-18 E/F radar in it they would be signing the dotted line already.

[Vivendi]

Can you imagine Rafale going from no sales to maybe landing sales in the UAE, Greece, and Brazil? This is interesting because Brazil jumped from 36 aircraft to 120 aircraft on this F-X2 bid. That's a nice size order when you add in spares, weapons, and training. I think if the Rafale had the F/A-18 E/F radar in it they would be signing the dotted line already.

Gripen may be an interesting alternative for Brazil. If they really are going to buy 120 fighters price could become an important parameter, and Gripen would be cheaper than Rafale. AFAIK, Gripen was much liked by the Brazilian Air Force in the previous assessment, however the short legs was probably an issue. With the Gripen NG this should be solved.

It's true that Brazil already operates French Mirage; OTOH, they also operate Saab EriEye; Gripen and EriEye were designed to operate in a networked environment. From the Flightglobal story:

Industry sources say the RFI requests the delivery of an "established, proven airframe" with supersonic performance, network connectivity and multirole capabilities.

Brazil also has some collaboration with South Africa, to develop A-Darter missiles for the South African Gripen and the Brazilian F-5, AMX and Super Tocanos.

(h)ttp://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/south-africa-brazil-to-develop-adarter-sraam-03286/

Buying Gripen would make it easier to collaborate with SA on future developments of weapons systems, if that's what Brazil wants to do.

As of today it seems to me that Gripen NG could be front-runner in Brazil...?



V.

[Vivendi]

Thanks mate! My bust.

Eurofighter Typhoon

Rumour mill has the Rafale and F-35 as the top contenders.

From now-famous flightglobal story (h)ttp://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2008/06/16/224662/brazil-issues-120-aircraft-request-to-five-fighter-manufacturers.html

However, the defence ministry's new shortlist will come as a disappointment to Lockheed, which was interested in offering its F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

It seems F-35 was not invited... Perhaps you are referring to SU-35 not F-35? Or is the Flightglobal journalist misinformed?

V

[ROCK45]

Vivendi you have a good point I can't find it right now but I saw a article stating the new Gripen has more range then a Viper. I think with the other things you mention it has a shot. I shouldn't assume the Rafale has it hands down and I don't think Brazil will wait for the F-35.

[Salty Dog]

Vivendi you have a good point I can't find it right now but I saw a article stating the new Gripen has more range then a Viper. I think with the other things you mention it has a shot. I shouldn't assume the Rafale has it hands down and I don't think Brazil will wait for the F-35.

The F-35 and F-16 were mentioned by me a month ago as mentioned in articles in the Brazilian press.

The recent RFP seems to have left out Lockheed Martin completely. I do not know the reason why, but my speculation is the F-16 is too old and the F-35 too expensive.

[Salty Dog]

Boeing Delivers Super Hornet Proposal to Brazil For F-X2 Competition (http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2008/q3/080815b_nr.html)

ST. LOUIS, Aug. 15, 2008 -- The Boeing Company [NYSE: BA] delivered a detailed proposal July 30 offering its advanced F/A-18E/F Super Hornet to the Brazilian Air Force as part of Brazil's F-X2 fighter competition.

"International interest in the combat-proven Super Hornet continues to increase, and Boeing is honored Brazil is considering the Super Hornet to meet its near-term defense requirements," said Bob Gower, F/A-18 and EA-18 Programs vice president, Boeing Integrated Defense Systems.

Boeing received a Request for Information from the government of Brazil on June 12. The stated initial requirement is for 36 aircraft, with the potential for up to 120 aircraft.

The Super Hornet variant Boeing is offering to Brazil is based on the Block II F/A-18E/F model flown by the U.S. Navy and currently being built for the Royal Australian Air Force. Advanced technology -- such as Raytheon's APG-79 Active Electronically Scanned Array radar -- and proven reliability are drawing increasing international interest in the aircraft as a cost-effective and lethal air defense solution.

"The Super Hornet we are proposing for Brazil delivers cutting-edge, multi-role strike fighter capability that is ready today," said Gower. "With the Block II enhancements, the Super Hornet's combat capabilities continue to grow, offering a comprehensive multi-role solution at an affordable price."

Boeing has delivered more than 360 Super Hornets to the U.S. Navy. Australia has ordered 24 F/A-18F Super Hornets to bolster its fleet of F/A-18 Hornets. Boeing is in discussions with several other international customers about their interest in procuring the F/A-18E/F.

Source: www.boeing.com

Should be interesting which fighter competition gets done first, India's MRCA or Brazil's FX-2.

We may see an F-16BR in the Brazil FX-2.

[ROCK45]

I saw this as well and it should be interesting I'm changing my opinion on the Brazil FX-2. I thought France had it in the bag but I think American weapons and radar may be the key selling point.

I think Brazil FX-2 will select first nothing in the world could be slower then the Indian MRCA process.

[JohanGrön]

Lockheed Martin is offering a F-16 Block 60 variant to the FAB instead of the F-35A (http://www.forecastinternational.com/abstract.cfm?recno=151424)they asked for. This is in their response to the FAB RFI for 36 fighters.

The reason for LockMart not to offer the F-35A was that the RFI required the selected manufacturer to transfer all technology required to maintain the aircraft.

I can not see that the FAB will go for the F-16 Block 60 when beeing so blatantly dissed by LockMart!

[weasel1962]

Deleted

[Feanor]

Any news on Russian participation? Maybe a confirmation on whether it's the Su-35BM or Su-30MK that will be running?

[Vivendi]

Any news on Russian participation? Maybe a confirmation on whether it's the Su-35BM or Su-30MK that will be running?

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/BRAZIL082708.xml&headline=Brazil%20Offered%20F-16s,%20Not%20F-35s

The F-16BR is one of six contenders for the F-X2 program. Brazil also requested information on the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, Dassault Rafale, Eurofighter Typhoon, Saab Gripen and Sukhoi Su-35, with the field expected to be narrowed to two or three candidates ahead of a contract award early next year.



V

[nevidimka]

What about the PAK FA program? or is this FX deal to complement the PAK FA?

[Salty Dog]

What about the PAK FA program? or is this FX deal to complement the PAK FA?

AFAIK there is no comittment for Brazil to acquire the PAK FA. There is some agreement to participate in the PAK FA technology development. The conditions and depth of this colaboration is unknown. IMHO this is just political marketing as potential supplier countries (USA, Russia, France, etc) jockey for position in the F-X2 fighter competition.

[Salty Dog]

Here is a link to nice read on the current status of the Brazilian F-X2 program. It includes the earlier F-X program history as well as an analysis on the current F-X2 contenders. Some excellent information.

Brazil Embarking Upon F-X2 Fighter Program (http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/brazil-embarking-upon-f-x2-fighter-program-04179/)

[swerve]

Interesting read. It led me to some thoughts about other aircraft. I wonder to what extent the systems on the R-99s are being kept up to date? And the numbers of both R-99A & B are very small for a country the size of Brazil. Is it likely that more will be bought, either on the same platform, or perhaps a newer, longer-endurance, aircraft? More money would also increase the chances of the C-390 going ahead, both as a transport & to replace the current rather old tankers. Any news on that front?

[Salty Dog]

Interesting read. It led me to some thoughts about other aircraft. I wonder to what extent the systems on the R-99s are being kept up to date? And the numbers of both R-99A & B are very small for a country the size of Brazil. Is it likely that more will be bought, either on the same platform, or perhaps a newer, longer-endurance, aircraft? More money would also increase the chances of the C-390 going ahead, both as a transport & to replace the current rather old tankers. Any news on that front?

Good question on the R-99s. There was never any plans to have a great number of these as their primary purpose is to a fill in gaps where there is lack of coverage in the ground based radars of the SIPAAM/SIVAM system. I have not heard about increasing the R-99A/B numbers or a replacement.

The EMBRAER C-390 is proceeding along and ENAER (Chile) is now a partner in this project. The C-390 is projected for a MTOW of 60 tons with a max cargo capacity of 19 tons @ 1,250 Nm (10 tons @ 2,450 Nm). It is touted as a replacement for the C-130.

[Vivendi]

Here is a link to nice read on the current status of the Brazilian F-X2 program. It includes the earlier F-X program history as well as an analysis on the current F-X2 contenders. Some excellent information.

Brazil Embarking Upon F-X2 Fighter Program (http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/brazil-embarking-upon-f-x2-fighter-program-04179/)
Salty Dog, Thanks very interesting.

I was wondering, at the time when the first F-X competition was cancelled, what was considered the most likely winner at that time? Or did the process stop too early to allow any indications of the most promising candidate?

It's also interesting to see that the "single-engine myth" is still alive. Granted, single-engine robustness was an issue in the 70s and 80s, however modern single-engine planes should be considered very reliable. If the opposite was the case how could USN go for F-35?

V

[Vivendi]

Here is a link to nice read on the current status of the Brazilian F-X2 program. It includes the earlier F-X program history as well as an analysis on the current F-X2 contenders. Some excellent information.

Brazil Embarking Upon F-X2 Fighter Program (http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/brazil-embarking-upon-f-x2-fighter-program-04179/)
Something else: it says in this story that the budget is 2.2 Billion USD for 36 planes -- seems like a very low budget to me and it probably means that SU-35, F16 and Gripen would be the candidates? Or could Brazil get a subsidized Rafale from a desperate France? I am surprised Typhoon is in this competition at all, unless somebody plans to push old T1 planes to Brazil of course.


V

[Salty Dog]

Something else: it says in this story that the budget is 2.2 Billion USD for 36 planes -- seems like a very low budget to me and it probably means that SU-35, F16 and Gripen would be the candidates? Or could Brazil get a subsidized Rafale from a desperate France? I am surprised Typhoon is in this competition at all, unless somebody plans to push old T1 planes to Brazil of course.

V

I agree the the $2.2 Bi is low for a complete package as a new infrastructure will be required with any new model fighter. The French have a strong influence at the moment in Brazilian naval projects, which may give an edge to the non-French models. Still, there are always politics (and personalities) lurking in the background that may sway the deal.

[harryriedl]

I agree the the $2.2 Bi is low for a complete package as a new infrastructure will be required with any new model fighter. The French have a strong influence at the moment in Brazilian naval projects, which may give an edge to the non-French models. Still, there are always politics (and personalities) lurking in the background that may sway the deal.

is it likely that the French are going to try foist a big combined deal like they did on the Morocco's fighter deal and others i.e Sub's and Rafs? would this be off putting for Brazil

[Feanor]

The French tried this with the Saudis with helicopters, and instead the Saudi's turned to Russia. I'd think they learned their lesson

[ROCK45]

France tried the same thing with Libya adding more goodies to the shopping list not sure if they tried the same with South Korea. I can’t find it now but didn’t France offer maritime aircraft as well with Libya? Didn't France offer trains in one of the Rafale offers as well?

I attached a few links to past articles.

UPDATE 3-Dassault source denies reported Libya Rafale order
http://uk.reuters.com/article/UK_SMALLCAPSRPT/idUKL1475276120070114

Other items on the list include six boats, armored vehicles, radars and the delivery of upgraded Mirage F-1s already bought by Libya.
http://www.domain-b.com/defence/general/20071212_rafale.html

[Vivendi]

It seems Brazil has made a shortlist:

http://www.estadao.com.br/nacional/not_nac251435,0.htm

So, Rafale, SH, and Gripen NG is in. F-16, SU-35 and Typhoon is out.

Whereas the elimination of F-16 and Typhoon did not surprise me, I was surprised by SU-35 going out, very interesting.

I am not a betting person, but if I were, I would put my money on Rafale and Gripen NG (60-40).

Comments from the experts?

V

[Human Bass]

I would go for the Gripen. Great bang for the buck and scandinavians are the best people people to deal with, hard working and ethical, always delivery what they promise.

[Jezza]

An interesting line-up. Three nations, one US. The Super Hornet - pretty much a complete package, off-the-shelf - versus some serious industrial participation opportunities in updating Rafale or completing Gripen NG. One contender half the size of the other two. The common factor, perhaps, is that all three have or will have pretty good across-the-board capability in air combat and both land and maritime NTISR and strike. Among them, the Rafale could have very good range/weapon load, the NG attractive operating costs and the Super Hornet is lowest risk.

[rossfrb_1]

Wonder if the full APG-79 kit is on offer with the SH,
as well late model AMRAAM and even aim 9x block II and the J series goodies?
I don't know the politics of the region, so have no idea of the relationship US has with Brazil. The SH certainly offers the option of carrying a wide range of desirable things that can go bang.

rb

[zeven]

An interesting line-up. Three nations, one US. The Super Hornet - pretty much a complete package, off-the-shelf - versus some serious industrial participation opportunities in updating Rafale or completing Gripen NG. One contender half the size of the other two. The common factor, perhaps, is that all three have or will have pretty good across-the-board capability in air combat and both land and maritime NTISR and strike. Among them, the Rafale could have very good range/weapon load, the NG attractive operating costs and the Super Hornet is lowest risk.

what do you mean with lowest risk??

and Gripen offers a wide area of options when it comes to weapons too..

[Vivendi]

To me it seems offsets, and technology transfer will be very important for Brazil.

I also noticed this ( google translated):

The 36 aircraft, which would incorporate the 1st batch should be delivered from 2014, with life expectancy of at least 30 years. Thus, over the next few years, will be replaced, gradually, the current Mirage 2000 fighters, F-5M and A-1M. The set of technological knowledge and skills acquired in this acquisition will help ensure that Brazil is able to produce or participate in the production of 5th generation fighter for a future in the medium and long term.

I really don't think that the SH can win this; the US had their chance with the F-35 however offered the F-16 instead. Brazil is a rapidly growing and very ambitious nation, as demonstrated by the plans to build a nuclear sub. And they want to do more than just being a customer.


Saab has some 5. gen plans (presented to S. Korea this summer) -- what 5. gen plans do Dassult have? Could be interesting to know, and seems relevant for the Brazil tender.


V

[Salty Dog]

To me it seems offsets, and technology transfer will be very important for Brazil.

I really don't think that the SH can win this; the US had their chance with the F-35 however offered the F-16 instead. Brazil is a rapidly growing and very ambitious nation, as demonstrated by the plans to build a nuclear sub. And they want to do more than just being a customer.

V

Offsets and ToT are important.

The Brazilians preferred the F-35, but it was not available to meet their acquisition timeline, hence they were offered the F-16BR.


IMHO are the following chances for the remaining candidates:

Dassault Rafale - best chances from a political point of view

SAAB Gripen NG - best chances from a cost point of view.

Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet - best chances from an operator point of view.

[Human Bass]

Brazil could never afford the F-35. I personally like the F-16 with AESA.

[Vivendi]

IMHO are the following chances for the remaining candidates:

Dassault Rafale - best chances from a political point of view

SAAB Gripen NG - best chances from a cost point of view.

Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet - best chances from an operator point of view.
The 5.gen plans I qouted in a previous post, are those perceived as being relevant?

Why do you see the SH as having best chances from an operator point of view?

Has there been any info on what capabilities will be offered from the different vendors?


Thanks,


V

[Salty Dog]

The 5.gen plans I qouted in a previous post, are those perceived as being relevant?

Why do you see the SH as having best chances from an operator point of view?

Has there been any info on what capabilities will be offered from the different vendors?


Thanks,


V

I do not know if 5.0 gen is relevant as details of the RFP are classified. So this is open to speculation.

You should seek out each manufacturer/aircraft to see for yourself their capabilities.

IMHO the Rhino has quite a bit more operational capabilities than either the Rafale or the Gripen NG. Coupled to the fact there is a larger population of Rhinos with thousands of operational flight hours. That is my opinion, don't ask me to list.

[ROCK45]

F/A-18 have capabilities are rock solid and it's a very real and operational aircraft currently, not in a future F3 model either. The Block II E/F Hornets might be the second most advance fighters flying when adding in cockpit design, radar, and weaons systems. They carries every weapon under the sun accept naval mines. The new Gripen isn't a finished product either but that's not saying its a bad aircraft.

All three choices are huge increases in tech and capabilities over Brazil's current AMX, F-5, and older C model Mirages. Brazil will gain so much by moving forward with these types.

I hope for Brazil they move forward quickly at this point and get production started.

[the road runner]

Salty Dog and Rock45 ,i concor with your above post about the F-18E/F block 2.I think that the F18 superbugs is an awsome weapons platform that can switch form fighter to strike platform.I honestley think that for these reasons the F18E/F block 2 is one of the best strike/fighter platforms around.

1.ASEA radar that is a fifth generation radar

2.strike/fighter platform ,can be a strike platform and then turn into an air defence platform(thats 2 capabilities in 1 aircraft)

3.Beieng a Navy plane(Navy= ones who project power)it is capable of carring most of the weapons inventory of US navy.ASM,Jdam,AIM9X,Amram,ect.and all future wepons intergration onto F18EFG will be paid for by US navy.

4.Can be Re-configured to an F18 Growler electronic Jammer and use anti radiation missiles.

5. 545 super bugs beieng purchased by the US navy including 90(requirement) EA-18Growlers,plus the 24 F18 purchased for the RAAF,this aircraft will be inservice for the next 20+ years.

Basically IMHO the F18 superbug is a very flexible platform,when you start to see all the bells and whistles on this fighter,the counter measures, sensours and wepons fit available,it truley is an awsome aircraft.

Check below link for more info on F18EFG,weapons fit,sensors,counter measures ect

http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/fa18/


AS for Raphael,well i would stay away form that plane for one major reason.

1.its a barstard of a child.what i am trying to say is that the Raphael has not got one export to date(well not that im aware of).I think that tells alot about the aircraft the Raphael is loosing out too.ie GRIPEN,F18EF better capability for price paid.<<<please dont ask me to explain this one.its just what i think.

This is what SAAB's Bob Kemp, senior vice president for international sales thinks of his compeditor aircraft,especialy Raphael.................................

He says the Dassault Rafale will “never get started on the export market” because of what he called “launch customer nervousness – who wants to be the first and perhaps only customer?”(link is pasted below,its the last link i have posted)

AS for Gripen,i think this is the best single engine aircraft going around at the moment.I would like to see Brazil purchase this Aircraft and also AWACS,even ground station from SAAB to create a complete AD system.Im a big fan of how ,Thailand purchased a complete system of SAAB,in my view this is the way to go for Brazil too.

Sweden(ordered 204 aircraft),South Africa(28) who was the launch customer,now Thailand(12) who is next? India,Argentina,Ecuador,Bazil

who is leasing Gripen? Czech Republic leasing 12 aircraft,Hungry is leasing 14 aircraft and will purchase the aircraft outright after lease expires.

You can read about Gripen exports and leasing arangements here

http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/gripen/

The Gripen is single engined which would have to be the cheapest to operate out of the 3 contenders(f18,raphael,Gripen)and its multi roled too.

Also Saab is pitching the Gripen NG as an alternitive to the JSF

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2045593/posts

AS can be seen the Gripen NG is in development and will try and be a compeditor to the JSF............................................... ...............

Kemp says many potential F-35 customers were uncomfortable with the “You’re either with us or against us” approach to fighter sales. He claimed that growing dissatisfaction with technology transfer, workshare and offsets, coupled with F-35 cost escalation and slipping timescales have led “more and more JSF customers coming to talk to us about a replacement for JSF”.

What do the members think of this above Quote?
IMHO i think that countries who have sighned up to JSF will stick with the JSF program.Maybee this is just to keep the JSF team honest?

Hope my posts are getting better :rolleyes:

[zeven]

Intressting input.

just a couple of things i want to add.

1. Brasil already operate ireye

2, what Bob Kemp says is irrelevant. and i would take SAABs marketing director seriously, infact, i think its a disgrace he even mention SAAB kompetitors. same goes for, LM and their marketing department.

3, but i indeed agree, Gripen is the best singel engine platform out there, by far. and Gripen NG will be able to compete with F-35. however, both Rafale and F-18 is outstanding weaponplatforms too.

4, about Rafale lack of export success. isee it as rather unlucky, and we all know that the french aint very smooth all times. (exampel, when they said, India, bend like bamboo under preasure)
anyway. Rafale deserves export success, i even rate Rafale higher than EF in certain aspects.

[Aussie Digger]

Wonder if the full APG-79 kit is on offer with the SH,
as well late model AMRAAM and even aim 9x block II and the J series goodies?
I don't know the politics of the region, so have no idea of the relationship US has with Brazil. The SH certainly offers the option of carrying a wide range of desirable things that can go bang.

rb

It has to be. The Block II SH is the current production standard Super Hornet. It features a re-designed nose to handle the new APG-79 radar...

I doubt they'll restart production of the "old" nose...

The APG-73 radar is also not in production any longer, AFAIK and I doubt that it would be restarted in order to equip 36x fighters either.

Whether of course Brazil will get a "fully capable" APG-79 (and whether ANY foreign customer does anyway) is a different argument altogether...

[Vivendi]

Offsets and ToT are important.

The Brazilians preferred the F-35, but it was not available to meet their acquisition timeline, hence they were offered the F-16BR.


http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2008/08/26/315081/brazil-nears-first-cut-for-f-x2-fighter-bidders.html

Lockheed confirms that the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter will not be offered for the Brazilian order, which requires the selected manufacturer to transfer all technology required to maintain the aircraft.

However the acquisition timelines may have been one additional reason? Or is Flightglobal misinformed?

Israel has ordered F-35 with delivery date of 2014, but that's Israel of course.


V

[Vivendi]

I do not know if 5.0 gen is relevant as details of the RFP are classified. So this is open to speculation.


http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2008/10/06/316814/brazil-names-three-finalists-for-f-x2-contract-rejects-three.html

The government's ultimate strategy is to use F-X2 technology offsets to cultivate a domestic industry robust enough to "produce or to participate in the production of a fifth generation fighter in the medium- to long-term future", says the air force.

Seems the Brazilian air force wants a fifth generation fighter? Or is flightglobal misinformed?


V

[Salty Dog]

Many folks outside the military-industrial complex take "technology transfer" and "offsets" as directly related to the actual system or product of acquisition. Often the technology transfer and offsets are in other areas such as manufacturing, industrial research, medicine, agriculture, fisheries, etc. Much of the technology that goes into weapons systems development is proprietary to the point that the US Armed Services themselves aren't completely privy to all the technological details. They concentrate instead on developing uses and tactics to employ their systems. After all, that's why they are acquired in the first place.

[Salty Dog]

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2008/10/06/316814/brazil-names-three-finalists-for-f-x2-contract-rejects-three.html

Seems the Brazilian air force wants a fifth generation fighter? Or is flightglobal misinformed?

V

Brazil already has an agreement with Russia to "participate" (not acquire) in development of the PAK-FA 5th generation fighter program.

[winnyfield]

I really don't think that the SH can win this; the US had their chance with the F-35 however offered the F-16 instead.

V

The US isn't a company. It's Boeing and Lockheed Martin.

I'm putting money on the SH. It's known that Brazil's working towards a domestic aeropace industry and Boeing seems willing to give others some SH work (see India).

Anyone know why the Eurofighter didn't make the cut? They've seemingly lost every open tender so far.

[swerve]

Brazil already has a very successful domestic aerospace industry. Embraer is the third largest manufacturer of commercial aircraft.

What Brazil wants is access to more advanced technology than it already has. I doubt that subcontract work on F-18E structures would be enough, unless it helped them make more advanced structures, & Boeing might be reluctant to help Embraer in that field. Embraer seems to be moving towards directly competing with the 737 or its successor.

The Brazilians may be looking to boost their avionics & missile industries, where willingness to undertake co-operative development would be needed.

Saab probably has the edge industrially, because its willing to get more deeply involved than the others. It also has the best record in this area - see South Africa, which the Brazilians will be well aware of.

[Salty Dog]

Brazil already has a very successful domestic aerospace industry. Embraer is the third largest manufacturer of commercial aircraft.

What Brazil wants is access to more advanced technology than it already has. I doubt that subcontract work on F-18E structures would be enough, unless it helped them make more advanced structures, & Boeing might be reluctant to help Embraer in that field. Embraer seems to be moving towards directly competing with the 737 or its successor.

The Brazilians may be looking to boost their avionics & missile industries, where willingness to undertake co-operative development would be needed.

Saab probably has the edge industrially, because its willing to get more deeply involved than the others. It also has the best record in this area - see South Africa, which the Brazilians will be well aware of.

Interesting that you brought up Boeing. While Brazil is their biggest Latam customer for commercial aircraft, AFAIK Boeing has not sought partnerships in Brazil as they did in India. Could be due to having Embraer around.

SAAB has a nice relationship with the FAB due to the Erieye program.

I feel Israel has the closest relationship with the FAB due to their participation in the F-5 upgrade program and Python AAMs.

[Salty Dog]

The Brazilian Air Force (FAB) has issued new RFPs on 30 Oct for the F-X2 fighter competition. RFPs were issued to Boeing (F/A-18E/F), Dassault (Rafale), and SAAB (Gripen NG).

After receiving the Request For Proposals, the companies will have until the 2nd of February of 2009 to present their proposals, which will be submitted the in-depth analyses, on the basis of the requirements established by Air Force Headquarters.

In this stage, the companies must detail operational, logistic, industrial, commercial, technical, commercial compensation (offset) and technology transfer aspects of their offers.

FAB PRESS RELEASE (in Portuguese) (http://www.fab.mil.br/portal/capa/index.php?mostra=1775)

[Beazz]

Many folks outside the military-industrial complex take "technology transfer" and "offsets" as directly related to the actual system or product of acquisition. Often the technology transfer and offsets are in other areas such as manufacturing, industrial research, medicine, agriculture, fisheries, etc. Much of the technology that goes into weapons systems development is proprietary to the point that the US Armed Services themselves aren't completely privy to all the technological details. They concentrate instead on developing uses and tactics to employ their systems. After all, that's why they are acquired in the first place.

That's pure non-sense:

Technology transfer is the process of sharing of skills, knowledge, technologies, methods of manufacturing, samples of manufacturing and facilities among industries, universities, governments and other institutions to ensure that scientific and technological developments are accessible to a wider range of users who can then further develop and exploit the technology into new products, processes, applications, materials or services.

In short that means if full transfer was granted the country obtaining it could not only produce the product and SELL it but improve on it as well. When this transfer is granted, the receiving country has now gained the expense and time of the country that developed it. It happens to be one of the sticking points that has come up between the UK and the US in regards to the F35 right now. They want complete tech transfer and not sure if the US is willing to give it. I think we would be fools to give it to anyone. The US will have 60billion dollars in R&D in the F35 and then give it to some other nation because they put up 2 or 3 billion dollars?
Also read somwhere that Brazil wishes to have this as well. No way is the US going to give Brazil the tech transfer behind this a/c so they can in turn wind up selling their own version of the F35 one day? Yea right.

As for who is privy to it. The US Military/Government OWNS every piece of it and can see it as they so desire and at any time take possesion of it from LM or Boeing if they see fit. It is the property of the US government and the GOVERNMENT tells LM, Boeing, etc. what they can offer to another country for sale. It's not up to the company Salty Dog. [/COLOR]

[swerve]

In short that means if full transfer was granted the country obtaining it could not only produce the product and SELL it but improve on it as well. When this transfer is granted, the receiving country has now gained the expense and time of the country that developed it. It happens to be one of the sticking points that has come up between the UK and the US in regards to the F35 right now. They want complete tech transfer and not sure if the US is willing to give it. I think we would be fools to give it to anyone. The US will have 60billion dollars in R&D in the F35 and then give it to some other nation because they put up 2 or 3 billion dollars?
This is incorrect. The UK has not asked for technology transfer, in the sense you mean. It is asking for (& was promised, when it originally joined the JSF programme) the ability & permission to maintain & modify its own aircraft. No rights to sell, & relatively little transfer of knowledge. Mostly permission to do what the UK already has the technical ability to do (it would not have been granted a Tier 1 partnership if it had not demonstrated that ability), & access to source code & interfaces so that it can integrate its own weapons & avionics without needing to ask permission, & pay, for a US firm to do it. It's been called "operational sovereignty" by the UK. Control over the aircraft the UK buys, nothing more.

Note that the USA has full access to the UK-supplied parts of the JSF. A little reciprocity might be in order.

[Beazz]

This is incorrect. The UK has not asked for technology transfer, in the sense you mean. It is asking for (& was promised, when it originally joined the JSF programme) the ability & permission to maintain & modify its own aircraft. No rights to sell, & relatively little transfer of knowledge. Mostly permission to do what the UK already has the technical ability to do (it would not have been granted a Tier 1 partnership if it had not demonstrated that ability), & access to source code & interfaces so that it can integrate its own weapons & avionics without needing to ask permission, & pay, for a US firm to do it. It's been called "operational sovereignty" by the UK. Control over the aircraft the UK buys, nothing more.

Note that the USA has full access to the UK-supplied parts of the JSF. A little reciprocity might be in order.


Well what was *promised* by the US I would not know, and I doubt you would either. But come on, just what do you think *source code* is, if not tech transfer? That is the brains behind the machine and with it you have it all. Even integrating your own weapons systems is a thing that has to be negotiated with every a/c the US sells. Not just the JSF. I don't think that is the problem though. The source code is indeed a diff story and the US is not wishing to give it up. Why should they? You invest maybe 3 bil dollars and now want access to something the US has invested 60 billion to develop?

I am aware the UK would not be a country that would take the code and try and sell it. But that is not the point. It is not yours and simply buying 100 planes does not make any diff IMO. The US has access to the UK supplied parts because the US developed and paid for them! Every part of the JSF was developed by the US and then the partner nations were allowed to make certain parts. But the US still paid for the entire thing and owns the rights to it. If the US was unhappy with what the UK was doing, they could cut the UK, or any other nation off, and make the part themselves. The partner nations cannot however do the same to the US. Even the Rolls Royce engine will be owned by the US government if it is allowed to continue because the US government is the one paying for it.

BTW, I am not anti UK. The UK is 1 of only 3 nations I consider a friend to the US and being so one of only three I would trust to have this tech. The US may in the end allow it and I wouldnt lose any sleep over it. On the same line of thinking, do you think the US should allow said tech transfer to lets say, Turkey simply becaUSE they are a partner nation and wish to do all the things you say UK wishes to be able to do as well? My point was simply about what tech transfer is and why its not given away as some seem to think it should be was all. The brains behind stealth a/c is somthing only the US to date has done, and to give it away to anyone is no small matter.

[JohanGrön]

BTW, I am not anti UK. The UK is 1 of only 3 nations I consider a friend to the US and being so one of only three I would trust to have this tech.

Just out of curiosity who are the other two nations you consider friends to the US (no irony intended)?

My point was simply about what tech transfer is and why its not given away as some seem to think it should be was all.

Well that would effectively cut out the Super Hornet then. Lets see ... Rafale and Gripen left.

[Beazz]

Just out of curiosity who are the other two nations you consider friends to the US (no irony intended)?



Well that would effectively cut out the Super Hornet then. Lets see ... Rafale and Gripen left.

Some tech is more vital then others. Stealth tech is an American only project so far. Every nation on the planet has 4th gen a/c. We never sold the F117 or B2 tech and there's a reason for it. It's virtually unbeatable for the time being. And no way are the source codes for all things SH, F15 or F16 released to every nation that owns them either.

The other 2 nations are Australia and Israel. Maybe friends was to vague of word. The US has many more friends then that I know. But those are the only 3 nations that would come to the aid of the US if She was under attack and in danger of being defeated. I also believe that if any of those nations were ever attacked and needed US help it would be forthcoming and in full force. I would expect my country to defend those 3 nations no matter the cost in life or money.

[Vivendi]

Well that would effectively cut out the Super Hornet then. Lets see ... Rafale and Gripen left.

If complete tech transfer is a requirement then I think Gripen would have a problem as well. AFAIK Gripen NG will get roughly 50% US parts.

So that would leave Rafale...

V

[Beazz]

If complete tech transfer is a requirement then I think Gripen would have a problem as well. AFAIK Gripen NG will get roughly 50% US parts.

So that would leave Rafale...

V

I have no idea what goes into the Gripen NG, but I doubt very seriously there is any top secret US tech in it. I'd bet any thing the US is selling for the Gripen could be bought somehwere else if need be. Thats not the same thing as giving away stealth secrets, or more importantly, how to MAKE it. At any rate, the US is not going to give Brazil the source codes to the F35 or F18SH, period.

[swerve]

Well what was *promised* by the US I would not know, and I doubt you would either. But come on, just what do you think *source code* is, if not tech transfer? That is the brains behind the machine and with it you have it all. Even integrating your own weapons systems is a thing that has to be negotiated with every a/c the US sells. Not just the JSF. I don't think that is the problem though. The source code is indeed a diff story and the US is not wishing to give it up. Why should they? You invest maybe 3 bil dollars and now want access to something the US has invested 60 billion to develop?

I am aware the UK would not be a country that would take the code and try and sell it. But that is not the point. It is not yours and simply buying 100 planes does not make any diff IMO. The US has access to the UK supplied parts because the US developed and paid for them! Every part of the JSF was developed by the US and then the partner nations were allowed to make certain parts. But the US still paid for the entire thing and owns the rights to it. If the US was unhappy with what the UK was doing, they could cut the UK, or any other nation off, and make the part themselves. The partner nations cannot however do the same to the US. Even the Rolls Royce engine will be owned by the US government if it is allowed to continue because the US government is the one paying for it.

BTW, I am not anti UK. The UK is 1 of only 3 nations I consider a friend to the US and being so one of only three I would trust to have this tech. The US may in the end allow it and I wouldnt lose any sleep over it. On the same line of thinking, do you think the US should allow said tech transfer to lets say, Turkey simply becaUSE they are a partner nation and wish to do all the things you say UK wishes to be able to do as well? My point was simply about what tech transfer is and why its not given away as some seem to think it should be was all. The brains behind stealth a/c is somthing only the US to date has done, and to give it away to anyone is no small matter.
Where to start? There are so many errors in this it's hard to know.

Let's start with simple stuff: the USA has not developed every part of the F-35 & subcontracted manufacturing. It has subcontracted design & development. Non-US firms have bid to design components & subsystems, to specifications supplied by the JSF design office. Secondly, there are different levels of partnership, with different levels of partnership. The UK is the only Tier 1 partner. It is not appropriate to compare the level of access of Turkey ( a Tier 3 partner, contributing less than 10% as much as the UK) & that of the UK.

Note that there is no question of the USA "giving away" anything. It is a matter of the USA providing what has been paid for. Not $60 billion worth, but a small fraction of that.

As for what was agreed, this is something that is not known in detail, but there have been public statements by British government ministers, which have not been disputed by the US authorities, that the access requested by the UK was agreed.

[Beazz]

Where to start? There are so many errors in this it's hard to know.

Let's start with simple stuff: the USA has not developed every part of the F-35 & subcontracted manufacturing. It has subcontracted design & development. Non-US firms have bid to design components & subsystems, to specifications supplied by the JSF design office. Secondly, there are different levels of partnership, with different levels of partnership. The UK is the only Tier 1 partner. It is not appropriate to compare the level of access of Turkey ( a Tier 3 partner, contributing less than 10% as much as the UK) & that of the UK.

Note that there is no question of the USA "giving away" anything. It is a matter of the USA providing what has been paid for. Not $60 billion worth, but a small fraction of that.

As for what was agreed, this is something that is not known in detail, but there have been public statements by British government ministers, which have not been disputed by the US authorities, that the access requested by the UK was agreed.


You can't be serious? That is like saying the US gov subcontracted work to LM to design it so they DON't own it? Yea right. You know as well as I do that ALL critical parts to the JSF are under lock and key and what the UK is asking for would in effect give them the ability to literally produce and/or sell the JSF on their own if they had the money to do so. Again, I am NOT saying I do not trust the UK, because I do. But that is not the point. You seem to think because you paid maybe 3 billion of a 60 billion dollar price tag you are now entitled to the most top secret parts of this a/c that the US has devoted all that money and literally decades of R&D to bring to fruition?

Regardless of what *tier* you wish to call yourself, you have contributed maybe 5% or less of the R&D but wish to have for all practical purposes, the whole enchilada for it. You talk about Turkey contributing less then 10% as much as the UK, well the UK has contributed over 95% less then the US on this adventure. Regardless of who exactly was contracted to make any certain part, LM holds the floor plans to it and if directed by the US gov could close down every partner nation and MAKE the entire JSF right here stateside and we both know it. That's the way it works when you own something and ALLOW someone else to participate. For that matter, if the US gov wanted to they could take the whole dang thing from LM and give it to Boeing and say make this a/c and thats the way it would be. The US gov owns this a/c regardless of how you seem to be trying to paint it.

I think I will just have to respectively disagree with your entire concept on the JSF and leave it at that. Seems to be turning into a pissing contest which I am sure no one cares to read. Have a nice day and hope to see the JSF flying in both nations arsenals as soon as possible.

[AegisFC]

You can't be serious?

Yes he is serious, the fact of the matter is that you are wrong.

UK is asking for would in effect give them the ability to literally produce and/or sell the JSF on their own if they had the money to do so.

That isn't what is going on. The UK is asking for the ability to put their own equipment in these planes without having to pay Lockheed to do it, that's it.

You seem to think because you paid maybe 3 billion of a 60 billion dollar price tag you are now entitled to the most top secret parts of this a/c that the US has devoted all that money and literally decades of R&D to bring to fruition?

The UK plans on buying significantly less F-35's than the US so it is only appropriate that they put less toward development. Per plane their contribution toward the development matches the US pretty close.

Regardless of what *tier* you wish to call yourself, you have contributed maybe 5% or less of the R&D but wish to have for all practical purposes, the whole enchilada for it.

You clearly have no clue what you are talking about.

That's the way it works when you own something and ALLOW someone else to participate.

We didn't allow anyone to participate, we needed partners to pull this project off if we wanted it to remain affordable.

[Beazz]

You can't be serious?

Yes he is serious, the fact of the matter is that you are wrong.



That isn't what is going on. The UK is asking for the ability to put their own equipment in these planes without having to pay Lockheed to do it, that's it.

Here is what the UK wants: Operational sovereignty is defined as the UK having control over essential aspects of the aircraft so that it can be operated through life at the time of the UK’s choosing, says the Ministry of Defence. "We need to be able to integrate the JSF into the UK operating environment; operate, maintain, repair and upgrade the UK fleet to meet evolving through-life requirements; and certificate the aircraft as safe to fly," Drayson says.

This is considerably MORE then simply putting your own *equipment* on it and you know it!

The UK plans on buying significantly less F-35's than the US so it is only appropriate that they put less toward development. Per plane their contribution toward the development matches the US pretty close.

Oh puleeezzz.. The number of a/c you are buying is totally irrelevant and you know it. To get those same 150 a/c without the US you would have to invest the same 60 bil we did. You are trying to get 60 billion dollars worth of work at the discount price of 2 billion dollars and we both know it. There is no requirement that any level tier nation buy X amount of a/c. Italy is buying almost as many as the UK as it is now and they are just a tier 2 partner. All the *tier* leval gurantees you is a bigger say in the *requirements* of the JSF. It has NEVER guaranteed any nation the same level of access to the most secret parts of it, or the FINAL say on what the requirements are, nor should it. You think because the UK put up a measley 2 billion dollars they now can dictate and demand anything they wish about the JSF?

As for the Rolls Royce engine, I'd tell the UK if they wish to see it produced, then they can fork over EVERY dime neccesary to make it. They wish to scream and shout about this second engine that we do NOT need but on the other hand, wish of course the US to fund it right? Oh yea thats right, they paid 2 billion dollars so by all means let the US fork over how many MORE billions for this second engine that is PURELY political and NOT needed nor wanted by the US military, who just happens to be the the ONE partner that is paying the lions share of this joint venture.

You clearly have no clue what you are talking about.

You either apparently.

We didn't allow anyone to participate, we needed partners to pull this project off if we wanted it to remain affordable.

Yes we wanted to save money. But with or without the partner nations the US is going to be flying the JSF. Without the US, NONE of the partner nations would have even heard the name JSF. Personally I think it was a major mistake including Europe in this at all. Lokk how well the UF has went. They all trying to back out, sell their planes to anyone who will but them, etc, etc, the A400m with its constant delays due to Admin: Text Deleted, Post Reported. Please read the rules re acceptable posting behaviour. You can make a point without using this type of language. , and now these same folks are gonna be part of the largest US a/c buy since the F16 with us relying on them to deliver *parts* to it on time? Yea right. Major screw up if ya ask me.

[Salty Dog]

That's pure non-sense:

Technology transfer is the process of sharing of skills, knowledge, technologies, methods of manufacturing, samples of manufacturing and facilities among industries, universities, governments and other institutions to ensure that scientific and technological developments are accessible to a wider range of users who can then further develop and exploit the technology into new products, processes, applications, materials or services.


Whist that may be a good "definition" of technology transfer, that is not necessarily happens when put into practice. A country may buy a gen 4.5 fighter aircraft, however they may be limited to technology transfer to construct the wings, structural members, or flight control systems.



In short that means if full transfer was granted the country obtaining it could not only produce the product and SELL it but improve on it as well. When this transfer is granted, the receiving country has now gained the expense and time of the country that developed it.

Also read somwhere that Brazil wishes to have this as well. No way is the US going to give Brazil the tech transfer behind this a/c so they can in turn wind up selling their own version of the F35 one day? Yea right.


That is why full there is never a full technology transfer on the system that is purchased nor will there ever be. For Foreign Military Sales (FMS), part of the RDT&E cost is passed on to the customer country. This is a part of the FMS contract.



As for who is privy to it. The US Military/Government OWNS every piece of it and can see it as they so desire and at any time take possesion of it from LM or Boeing if they see fit. It is the property of the US government and the GOVERNMENT tells LM, Boeing, etc. what they can offer to another country for sale. It's not up to the company Salty Dog.

How did you come up this this? The US Government is a customer to contractors which are corporations with share holders. Systems are the property of the US Government once purchased. US Gov't just can't "take possesion" as they see fit.

All US contractors must have an export license to market their products and services overseas, so yes, the US Gov't has a degree of control in the process.

[simdude97]

You can't be serious?

Yes he is serious, the fact of the matter is that you are wrong.



That isn't what is going on. The UK is asking for the ability to put their own equipment in these planes without having to pay Lockheed to do it, that's it.



The UK plans on buying significantly less F-35's than the US so it is only appropriate that they put less toward development. Per plane their contribution toward the development matches the US pretty close.



You clearly have no clue what you are talking about.



We didn't allow anyone to participate, we needed partners to pull this project off if we wanted it to remain affordable.

Frankly I think it is you who need to educate yourself about the program. The UK has invested about 2 billion of a 60 billion dollar development program. Further the UK, in the form of Rolls Royce has gotten "free" funding for the alternative engine that they and GE are developing against the USAF's wishes. In return the UK and the other partner nations have been allowed to have a say in the mission requirements and the right to bid on work for the entire 250 billion dollar project. The UK will get about 15-20 percent of every F-35 produced so for a 2 billion dollar investment they get 40 or 50 billion dollars in economic benefit. That is a sweetheart deal and has nothing to do with affordability since the UK and the other partner nations have chipped in less than 10% of the development cost.

How anyone can come to the conclusion that such a small fraction of the development cost entitles the UK to the source code for the flight systems of the F-35 is simply amazing. Frankly, if the UK does not like the deal we should cheerfully refund their 2 billion dollars and wish them luck flying Typhoons off of their carriers. I am sure Boeing and others would be glad to take the UKs work share for the F-35.

[windscorpion]

The money is only one aspect of this, expertise and technology is another. "America" is not building this plane, private companies using nationally and commercially funded R&D are. BAE are not making part of the plane because of some charitable thoughts by the US government, i'm sure the expertise BAE have in the various exotic technolgies to be used was a more valid reason.

[swerve]

The UK will get about 15-20 percent of every F-35 produced so for a 2 billion dollar investment they get 40 or 50 billion dollars in economic benefit. That is a sweetheart deal and has nothing to do with affordability since the UK and the other partner nations have chipped in less than 10% of the development cost.
I think you need to study the programme a little more.

Firstly, the share of work done in the UK is less than that done by British companies, since a large part of it is accounted for by the US subsidiaries of Rolls-Royce (e.g. the former Allison) & BAE.

Secondly, it is written into the JSF agreements that contributing n% to development costs does not give a right to n% of workshare. There are no quotas. Work is theoretically allocated on merit*, according to quality & price. Every contract won by a British firm has been won in competition with other bidders. Would you rather have the workshare allocated according to quotas, regardless of quality & price?

*In practice, all the complaints I know of about preference being given to national firms have referred to US firms getting work that firms in other partner countries think they can do better, & IIRC have generally been caused by perceived defects in the bidding process & rather than overt bias in selection. In particular, non-US bidders not being allowed sufficient information about the requirements to prepare bids. I have read of some comical cases (all corrected eventually, I think), where non-US firms have found that their own technologies have been deemed too sensitive for non-US bidders to be informed about.

[simdude97]

The money is only one aspect of this, expertise and technology is another. "America" is not building this plane, private companies using nationally and commercially funded R&D are.

Development cost is about 60 Billion dollars. The F136, another several billion dollars. The UK and partners are spending about 5 billion total to be part of the definition phase of the JSF. Do the math. The US pretty much owns the rights to this plane since they funded it.

I think you need to study the programme a little more.

Firstly, the share of work done in the UK is less than that done by British companies, since a large part of it is accounted for by the US subsidiaries of Rolls-Royce (e.g. the former Allison) & BAE.

"The SDD phase is estimated to be worth $2.4 billion to BAE Systems in the UK and a further $750 million to BAE Systems North America. Production could be worth $16.5 billion to BAE Systems UK, and a further $4.5 billion in the U.S. These figures do not include export sales, support or other opportunities such as upgrade programs."

Source = http://www.allbusiness.com/company-activities-management/company-locations/5133261-1.html

I have done my homework Swerve. Have you?

*In practice, all the complaints I know of about preference being given to national firms have referred to US firms getting work that firms in other partner countries think they can do better, & IIRC have generally been caused by perceived defects in the bidding process & rather than overt bias in selection. In particular, non-US bidders not being allowed sufficient information about the requirements to prepare bids. I have read of some comical cases (all corrected eventually, I think), where non-US firms have found that their own technologies have been deemed too sensitive for non-US bidders to be informed about.

Care to back those claims up with facts.

[Todjaeger]

Development cost is about 60 Billion dollars. The F136, another several billion dollars. The UK and partners are spending about 5 billion total to be part of the definition phase of the JSF. Do the math. The US pretty much owns the rights to this plane since they funded it.

Perhaps it is just me, but what does the SDD and other program costs of the F-35 JSF have to do with the Brazilian F-X program? AFAIK the F-35 was not under consideration. At one point the F/A-18 and the F-16 had been in the running, but IIRC due to logistical and tech transfer issues that had been eliminated.

-Cheers

[Aussie Digger]

Perhaps it is just me, but what does the SDD and other program costs of the F-35 JSF have to do with the Brazilian F-X program? AFAIK the F-35 was not under consideration. At one point the F/A-18 and the F-16 had been in the running, but IIRC due to logistical and tech transfer issues that had been eliminated.

-Cheers

The F/A-18E/F Super Hornet

JAS-39C/D Gripen

and Rafale are the 3 short-listed fighters for the Brazilian Air Force program.

I wonder if they have observers status at the Swiss aircraft evaluation currently underway? (Technical and flight evaluations have been conducted on Rafale and Gripen so far)...

They could save a bit of cash that way I'd reckon... :)

[zeven]

The F/A-18E/F Super Hornet

JAS-39C/D Gripen

and Rafale are the 3 short-listed fighters for the Brazilian Air Force program.

I wonder if they have observers status at the Swiss aircraft evaluation currently underway? (Technical and flight evaluations have been conducted on Rafale and Gripen so far)...

They could save a bit of cash that way I'd reckon... :)

Its Gripen NG SAAB offer Brazil..

[Vivendi]

The F/A-18E/F Super Hornet

JAS-39C/D Gripen

and Rafale are the 3 short-listed fighters for the Brazilian Air Force program.

I wonder if they have observers status at the Swiss aircraft evaluation currently underway? (Technical and flight evaluations have been conducted on Rafale and Gripen so far)...

They could save a bit of cash that way I'd reckon... :)
As Zeven pointed out it's Gripen NG not C/D in Brazil -- in addition Super Hornet decided to leave the competition in Switzerland (it seems they were told by the Swiss that their chances were nil or close to nil) leaving Rafale, Typhoon and Gripen to compete for the Swiss contract. Sorry for the OT...


V

[Aussie Digger]

As Zeven pointed out it's Gripen NG not C/D in Brazil -- in addition Super Hornet decided to leave the competition in Switzerland (it seems they were told by the Swiss that their chances were nil or close to nil) leaving Rafale, Typhoon and Gripen to compete for the Swiss contract. Sorry for the OT...


V

Well there you go. I wouldn't have thought they'd submit a proposal of a plane that isn't in-service, hasn't been developed and hasn't even been ordered by anyone else yet, but rather an existing in-service type with a planned upgrade path.

Oh well. Shows what I know...

I am aware that Boeing pulled out of the Swiss competition. I think you are speculating as to the reason though. Perhaps they took a realistic appraisal of the budget the Swiss were willing to put into, what is afterall, only a partial replacement of their existing F-5 Tiger II aircraft.

The Swiss are however conducting a thorough examination of the Rafale and the Gripen. That still has to be relevent to the Brazilians. It ain't possible to evaluate the Gripen NG (except on paper) at this time...

[swerve]

Well there you go. I wouldn't have thought they'd submit a proposal of a plane that isn't in-service, hasn't been developed and hasn't even been ordered by anyone else yet, but rather an existing in-service type with a planned upgrade path.
...
The Swiss are however conducting a thorough examination of the Rafale and the Gripen. That still has to be relevent to the Brazilians. It ain't possible to evaluate the Gripen NG (except on paper) at this time...
The Gripen Demo is flying, & the Brazilians will be able to track its progress, so although there is no complete Gripen NG to evaluate, they have a bit more to go on than paper specs. Its planned systems are probably best viewed as the upgrade path for the Swedish air force Gripens. You appear to think of it as a completely new type, which is inappropriate: it's an evolution, much lower risk than a new development, & available in stages.

[JohanGrön]

Well there you go. I wouldn't have thought they'd submit a proposal of a plane that isn't in-service, hasn't been developed and hasn't even been ordered by anyone else yet, but rather an existing in-service type with a planned upgrade path.

Oh well. Shows what I know...

I am aware that Boeing pulled out of the Swiss competition. I think you are speculating as to the reason though. Perhaps they took a realistic appraisal of the budget the Swiss were willing to put into, what is afterall, only a partial replacement of their existing F-5 Tiger II aircraft.

The Swiss are however conducting a thorough examination of the Rafale and the Gripen. That still has to be relevant to the Brazilians. It ain't possible to evaluate the Gripen NG (except on paper) at this time...

The Brazilians would have to rely on SAAB on this one. As the Gripen NG made it to the shortlist they apparently have quite some credibility. Future will tell how far it will take them.

[Salty Dog]

The Swiss are however conducting a thorough examination of the Rafale and the Gripen. That still has to be relevent to the Brazilians. It ain't possible to evaluate the Gripen NG (except on paper) at this time...

The Swiss and Brazilians will most likely evaluate the Gripen Demo 39-7, a heavily modified JAS 39D which first flew on 27 May of this year. The first Gripen NG is scheduled to enter service in 2013.

[stigmata]

The Swiss and Brazilians will most likely evaluate the Gripen Demo 39-7, a heavily modified JAS 39D which first flew on 27 May of this year. The first Gripen NG is scheduled to enter service in 2013.

From what i know, they are developing a demo AESA with thales, that will not be installed on production Gripen NG.
Any news on NORA ? or will they buy an off the shelf AESA ? or will it be an up to you [customer] radar ?

[caprise]

The Gripen Demo is flying, & the Brazilians will be able to track its progress, so although there is no complete Gripen NG to evaluate, they have a bit more to go on than paper specs. Its planned systems are probably best viewed as the upgrade path for the Swedish air force Gripens. You appear to think of it as a completely new type, which is inappropriate: it's an evolution, much lower risk than a new development, & available in stages.
SAAB has Gripen NG flying in it's simulator (with the most relevant capabilities such as flight performance, range and weapons load) as told to the Dutch after De Vries(State Secretary of Defence) debated that a simulation session in Sweden was meaningless since it could not be simulated.
(He also told the parliament underhouse that SAAB didn't even know what engine Gripen NG would have, implying that the aircrafts noise level was unclear...) :rolleyes:

C.

[JohanGrön]

SAAB has Gripen NG flying in it's simulator (with the most relevant capabilities such as flight performance, range and weapons load) as told to the Dutch after De Vries(State Secretary of Defence) debated that a simulation session in Sweden was meaningless since it could not be simulated.
(He also told the parliament underhouse that SAAB didn't even know what engine Gripen NG would have, implying that the aircrafts noise level was unclear...) :rolleyes:

C.

That's impressive as he, De Viries, have had no knowledge of the submitted answers according to the Dutch defense ministry. He could perhaps apply to be the next Truxa?

Admin: Text Deleted. that comment is completely unacceptable. READ the rules about respect.

Whatever your own pet beliefs are about whats best for any airforce - you will modify your posting behaviour and control your responses accordingly.

Warning issued. they are too easy to contradict as they are now.

I think that SAAB should withdraw from the Dutch so called "competition" ...

[zeven]

Gripen NG will not be operative until 2014 2015 timeframe.

the NORA AESA project goes well and will be intergrated for Gripen NG 2015 and after. the AESA with thales will be tested next year to get valuable information.

the Swiss does not look at Gripen Demo. becuase they would NEVER consider a plattform that are not yet in service.

Admin: Text Deleted. that comment is completely unacceptable. READ the rules about respect.

Whatever your own pet beliefs are about whats best for any airforce - you will modify your posting behaviour and control your responses accordingly.

Warning issued.