F-35A versus Saab Grippen NG

The F-35 compared with other modern jets.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 5601
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post11 Jan 2018, 21:28

ricnunes wrote:@loke,

Your posts seems a bit strange (perhaps miscommunication??) - You don't seem to admit that the Gripen E program already suffering from delays and yet you're coming up with reasons to justify the delay that you don't seem to admit :shock:
So where do we stand? If you're trying to justify the delays (such as the Swiss required this, the Brazilians requires that, and so on...) doesn't this mean that an actual delay already happened??

My point is that you can come up with all and every theory that you want because the more theories you or anyone else post the more proofs we have that the Gripen E program is currently delayed - perhaps it will or may recover from current delays but honestly I don't believe - since the first prototype was scheduled to fly in 2015 but it only flew in 2017. This is a fact, the rest are basically theories...
Moreover the first prototype doesn't seem to have the touch-screen ("ala F-35") cockpit display that the Brazilians require/requested and the Swedish Air Force Gripen Es won't have this same display as well so I fail to realise how come such issue may have affected the Gripen E first prototype's first flight (from 2015 to 2017). Don't get me wrong but this "smells" like excuses...



There is a huge effort to disguise any "delay" as no reflection on the manufacturer or the aircraft basically, and not an "actual delay" in the way we think.

It seems that to Gripen =folks they would rather the Gripen finish dead last in the foot race because it couldn't tie its shoes and never went to the start line, than to have it finish last when the pistol went off with everyone else.
Choose Crews
Offline

optimist

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 719
  • Joined: 20 Nov 2014, 03:34
  • Location: australia

Unread post11 Jan 2018, 21:39

I wouldn't put Brazil at 100% of going ahead with the gripen plan timeline. It seems they have money issues, but it isn't being cancelled. Janes confirms the oct statement for the 36. They have a BY 2014 price of $5.4b or unit price $150M, I don't know what is included.
http://www.janes.com/article/74696/braz ... uring-role
Embraer Defense and Security will play a major role in the programme and fully produce eight single-seat Gripen E and seven Gripen F twin-seat aircraft starting in June 2020, with the first Embraer-built E-model to be delivered in August 2022 and first F-model in September 2023.
Aussie fanboy
Offline

loke

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 518
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2008, 19:07

Unread post12 Jan 2018, 09:40

ricnunes wrote:@loke,

Your posts seems a bit strange (perhaps miscommunication??) - You don't seem to admit that the Gripen E program already suffering from delays and yet you're coming up with reasons to justify the delay that you don't seem to admit :shock:
So where do we stand? If you're trying to justify the delays (such as the Swiss required this, the Brazilians requires that, and so on...) doesn't this mean that an actual delay already happened??


I think we just describe the same things in different ways. If you insist that the Swiss Gripen program actually started (in spite of not having signed a contract) then you must admit that logically the Swiss Gripen program was cancelled as a concequence of the referendum.

When a program is cancelled is it then delayed indefinitely?

Then the Brazilian Gripen program started, with the signature in 2014, and planned delivery of first a/c in 2019, and first flight of test a/c in 2016. First flight of the first test a/c was then delayed to 2017, however delivery of the first Gripen to the customer is still (at least as of October 2017) planned to be in 2019.

Is this a delay of 2 years? If you think so, then we can just agree to disagree.

I find your argument for a two-year delay to be inconsistent and illogical, since Saab said back in 2008 that they would deliver Gripen to Norway in 2015. Currently delivery of the first Gripen is scheduled to be in 2019.

So if you want to be consistent you should either stick to my position and say that the Brazil Gripen development program has since the signature of the Brazilian contract seen no (or minor) delays or you should take another position and say that "Geez those unreliable Saab folks promised Norway back in 2008 to deliver Gripen N to them in 2015, now it is 2018 and still no Gripen N has been delivered". Clearly then you should argue that the Gripen program is not 2 years delayed but 4 years delayed.

I find your arguments to be very confusing.
Offline

loke

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 518
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2008, 19:07

Unread post12 Jan 2018, 09:41

optimist wrote:I wouldn't put Brazil at 100% of going ahead with the gripen plan timeline.


What makes you think so?
Offline
User avatar

blindpilot

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1120
  • Joined: 01 Mar 2013, 18:21
  • Location: Colorado

Unread post12 Jan 2018, 17:54

loke wrote:....

I think we just describe the same things in different ways. If you insist that the Swiss Gripen program actually started...
When a program is cancelled is it then delayed indefinitely?

Then the Brazilian Gripen program started, ... then delayed to 2017, however delivery of the first Gripen to the customer is .... Is this a delay of 2 years? .... Saab said back in 2008 that they would deliver Gripen to Norway .....


[SARC ON]
Good news everyone! Despite there now being more F-35 Lightning IIs flying than all the Gripen A/B/C/D/E/F/G/H/I ... 's ever built!

The F-35 Lightning II program hasn't started yet !!!!

You see the old Canadian Lightning II program was "cancelled", and the new Canadian Lightning II program hasn't started and the Denmark F-35 Program just started in 2016, and the Australian F-35"B" program hasn't even been decided much less started ...
and .... the whatchmacallit Lightning II program is still on the drawing board ... with the lasers and what not ...

Well anyway ... Apparently, the F-35 Lightning II program is not and has not ever been delayed or behind schedule ! ....

Great News!
[SARC OFF]

Give me a break! sigh...

MHO,
BP
Offline
User avatar

botsing

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 697
  • Joined: 05 Dec 2015, 18:09
  • Location: The Netherlands

Unread post12 Jan 2018, 19:59

loke wrote:I think we just describe the same things in different ways.

There is no delay since there was no defined delay, so now we have a delay to check if there is an actual delay with the delay?

In other news: The much not delayed Gripen E even went supersonic in 2017!
"Those who know don’t talk. Those who talk don’t know"
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 5601
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post12 Jan 2018, 23:25

loke wrote:
I think we just describe the same things in different ways. If you insist that the Swiss Gripen program actually started (in spite of not having signed a contract) then you must admit that logically the Swiss Gripen program was cancelled as a concequence of the referendum.

When a program is cancelled is it then delayed indefinitely?

Then the Brazilian Gripen program started, with the signature in 2014, and planned delivery of first a/c in 2019, and first flight of test a/c in 2016. First flight of the first test a/c was then delayed to 2017, however delivery of the first Gripen to the customer is still (at least as of October 2017) planned to be in 2019.

Is this a delay of 2 years? If you think so, then we can just agree to disagree.

I find your argument for a two-year delay to be inconsistent and illogical, since Saab said back in 2008 that they would deliver Gripen to Norway in 2015. Currently delivery of the first Gripen is scheduled to be in 2019.

So if you want to be consistent you should either stick to my position and say that the Brazil Gripen development program has since the signature of the Brazilian contract seen no (or minor) delays or you should take another position and say that "Geez those unreliable Saab folks promised Norway back in 2008 to deliver Gripen N to them in 2015, now it is 2018 and still no Gripen N has been delivered". Clearly then you should argue that the Gripen program is not 2 years delayed but 4 years delayed.

I find your arguments to be very confusing.


Absolutely Loke!! Because saab wasn't developing the Gripen NG since 2005 according to Saab themselves. They also weren't developing it with the Swiss they weren't make contract deals with Ruag

And of course when the Swiss referendum happened (never mind they already had won in Brazil) saab scrapped everything and started all over from scratch!!

SO the program didn't technically start until 2014 when they once again constructed the Gripen NG demonstrator and went to work from square 1! All previous work was null and void and (no work had been done anyway since saab wouldn't lift a finger for 2.5 years until the Swiss people had their say.)

It's like the F-35 It's not delayed we are just waiting on Canada!!


Thanks again for obliging me, loke! It's not everyday I say "these saab fans can't even agree on when development started" and someone demonstrates exactly that complete with the ever moving goal posts and definitions I'm always ranting about.

Is it really that hard to admit that maybe 14 years for a light fighter based variant of already in service, using a derivitive variant of an already developed engine might be a bit long??

Nothing's delayed it's just taking well over a decade of dev!

It's not taking well over a decade! There's been delays in dev!!

Priceless
Choose Crews
Offline

optimist

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 719
  • Joined: 20 Nov 2014, 03:34
  • Location: australia

Unread post13 Jan 2018, 00:44

loke wrote:
optimist wrote:I wouldn't put Brazil at 100% of going ahead with the gripen plan timeline.


What makes you think so?

"I wouldn't put Brazil at 100% of going ahead with the gripen plan timeline. It seems they have money issues,"
Delays wouldn't surprise me, Brazil's budget is news
https://www.google.com.au/search?rlz=1C ... YZPj1NrE00
Aussie fanboy
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 5601
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post13 Jan 2018, 15:32

Again a timeline would be wonderful. Especially as saab put a their NG program starting in late 2005, and Loke says that's not true or some such and says it's closer to 2014 or 2015?

Of course loke is trying to tell us there is no such things as a Gripen program. There are Brazil gripens, and Swiss Gripens, and Swedish Gripen and never should any of them have anything to do with one another.

To Think I thought Loke was one of the "reasonable" ones. My mistake!

There is no kool aid like the Gripen flavor
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 5601
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post13 Jan 2018, 16:54

loke wrote:
I think we just describe the same things in different ways. If you insist that the Swiss Gripen program actually started (in spite of not having signed a contract) then you must admit that logically the Swiss Gripen program was cancelled as a concequence of the referendum.

When a program is cancelled is it then delayed indefinitely?




1.) I don't appreciette the either, or fallacy

2.) your position is that since "no contract was signed", that for 2.5 years between when the Gripen NG was chosen and the referendum, that no develoment work was done by Saab. I was to use your own words not "started" for 2.5 years. That in and of itself would be a DELAY, since they are not doing any development and Since you are apparently trying to say that Saab didn't do anything while waiting. (Thats an absurd proposition, contradicted by Saab themselves, but whatever)

3.) "Whilst we continue to respect and follow the political process, we also continue to assemble the pre-production Gripen E. ]Also, our Swiss industrial participation programme aiming at creating business between the suppliers to Saab and Swiss companies is progressing. It has today seen 456 contracts signed between our suppliers and 117 Swiss companies valued at 315 MCHF,” says Lennart Sindahl, Senior Executive Vice President and Head of Saab’s Aeronautics business area." Source SAAB. So contracts were signed and industrial particiaption actions taken and apparently this is all for show, since nothing was "Really" happening.

4.) Just because a contract "was not signed" does not mean that no contract exited that outlined, timelines, expectations, cost, budgets and other things you say never existed. Unless you want to take the rather interesting position that the Swiss picked the Gripen NG with no numbers or costs involved. The old "blank check" method!

5.) the notion that there is a "Swiss" Gripen and a "Brazil" Gripen as if they have nothing to do with each other or the rather publicly known "Swedish" Gripen project (LOL) is not only absurd, but the fact the Swedish plan from the start was to have a Co developer so good luck seperating the whole of the Gripen Program from its required and mandated co-developers.


So who is lying? I just want to know who is FOS. Your BS make work for the kool aid drinker on Keypubs, but I assure you I'm immune to it. Loke, its not too late for Law school if you want to continue to split hairs upon hairs and contort everything for the sake of your client. The world needs Lawyers!

Image

In this image a Saab Gripen fan explains how the Light Fighter won't be fully ready until the 2020s, while simultaneously explaining there have never been delays (2018 colorized)

I really don't know why its so hard to admit, that when have a fighter that is supposed to be a follow development of another fighter already in service takes 20 years to get into full service, that there might well have been some delays. Its hard to imagine that was the plan all along, and if so, why on earth did it take so long and doesn't that destroy the entire concept of what Saab was claiming in not reinventing the wheel and doing a follow on?

Honest question.
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 5601
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post13 Jan 2018, 17:20

More:

Dec 1/11: JAS-39 Gripen Picked. Switzerland announces their choice – and it’s Saab’s JAS-39 Gripen. Swiss Defence Minister Ueli Maurer estimates the cost of the envisaged deal at up to CHF 3.1 billion (currently $3.5 billion, probably more by 2014), for 22 planes. The DDPS explicitly stated that Gripen also won because it offered lower maintenance costs that made it affordable over the medium and long term. If the contract goes through, Switzerland will join Sweden, the Czech Republic, Hungary, South Africa, and Thailand as Gripen operators.

The next step is for the DDPS and Saab to negotiate a draft contract, including details of the required matching value (100%) industrial offsets program in Switzerland. Contract options are scheduled for presentation by February 2012, whereupon the package will be proposed to the Swiss national parliament as part of the 2012 weapons plan. The catch is that the buy requires about CHF 600 million in savings from elsewhere. The government’s strategy is apparently to tie that savings program to the fighter order if a referendum is required, and even the proposal isn’t expected before 2013. This means that it’s likely to be 2014 before Saab has a production contract they can rely on

So no surprise that development would have to start taking place before a production contract could be signed.

MORE


Aug 25/12: Agreement in principle. Sweden’s government announces that they are committed to buying 40-60 next-generation JAS-39E/F fighters, as part of a joint effort with Switzerland who will buy 22 more. To fund this effort, they’ve agreed to raise the defense budget by SEK 1.8 billion (currently almost $273 million) by 2020, which is the date development is supposed to end. That would be very cheap, but the Gripen Demo interim prototype is already flying, many key components like the radar are already being financed, and the final amount remains unclear because the system development contract hasn’t been signed yet.

At the same time, the Swiss government issues a statement that there is an agreement in principle between armasuisse and Sweden, completing a Memorandum of Understanding signed on June 29/12. The countries will reportedly share support and upgrade costs under an umbrella model. Final details of specifications, delivery dates, prices, equipment and infrastructure have reportedly been settled, pending final approval from Swiss political authorities. The FDP Party is currently wavering, but if they can be convinced to approve the deal, it will go on to a national referendum. Swedish government Release

Lies and Lies and Lies?

More:

Aug 28/12: Contract terms. The Swiss government reveals the details of their Gripen deal. Their 22 planes will all be single-seat JAS-39Es, delivered from 2018-2021 at a firm-fixed-price cost of CHF 3.126 billion (currently $3.27 billion). That total is guaranteed by the Swedish government, and includes mission planning systems, initial spares and support, training, and certification.

As a bridging step, Switzerland will replace its F-5 fleet beginning in 2016 with 11 rented Gripens (8 JAS-39Cs, 3 JAS-39Ds) from Sweden, on an initial 5-year lease. They will fly beside Switzerland’s 33 F/A-18C/D Hornets, and their CHF 44 million per year cost is CHF 10 million more than the current cost of maintaining the F-5E/F fleet.

This deal will now go to the Swiss Parliament, with the aim of passing the PA12 budget, as well as a specific law covering the Gripen purchase, by November 2012. The first half of 2013 will involve further legislative reviews and reports, and if there’s no referendum, the goal is a formal contract in autumn 2013.


...So with an aggressive development schedule and a scheduled delivery date of 2018 and Guarantees given by the Swedish Government, and A co-development agreement with the Swedish Government, Saab was not in fact developing the Gripen E for 3.5 years and after the referendum?

So Saab decided that they wanted to give themselves just 4 years to develop the Gripen E, put it into production and delivery to the Swiss and would waste 3.5 years by not doing anything and have the entire program for both nations waiting on a Swiss Referendum in 2014, not to mention Brazil signing on in 2013? They did no work, and did no development on the Gripen, and the entire development program was put on hold, until the referendum could be approved and the contract officially signed?

loke wrote:
Clearly development happened before Brazil signed the contract however, Saab is a small company that will not be able to do a full-blown development program before a contract is signed.

Another aspect is that in order to define timelines, one needs to define requirements, and a budget. A fighter is not a car; normally one will not define the requirements without a customer, and also a budget cannot be defined without having a customer that is willing to pay for it.



Contract terms.The Swiss government reveals the details of their Gripen deal. Their 22 planes will all be single-seat JAS-39Es, delivered from 2018-2021 at a firm-fixed-price cost of CHF 3.126 billion (currently $3.27 billion). That total is[b] guaranteed by the Swedish government, and includes mission planning systems, initial spares and support, training, and certification


Image

Between Sweden and Switzerland I count two customers who were "willing to pay for it." Are you really trying to tell us that Saab wasn't going make a single move until they had the check in hand? REally??

So Loke, how dumb do you think we are? Why is it so hard to admit that the ball was rolling with switzerland, and anyone who has worked contracts even on the civilian side knows that signing on the doted line is the LAST step. Not the first. Contracts were made, steps were taken, development was certain to the point that the Swedish Government was guaranteeing the work you say wasn't being done.

explain yourself Loke There were contract terms about everything you outlined and they were garuenteed, and yet you are telling us this is all nebulous and nothing firm or set?

If so I'm glad the Swiss people realized that they were being utterly scammed and were making defense decisions based on fraudulent claims. Saab and the Swedes were clearly lying to them
Choose Crews
Offline

loke

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 518
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2008, 19:07

Unread post14 Jan 2018, 21:09

X,

Thanks for good (and entertaining) posts.

A correction: I did not say that Saab stopped all development activities, at least that's not what I meant. I think I used the phrase "de-risking activities". However looking at your posts it seems that Saab had full-blown development project in spite of not having a guaranteed launch customer.

Thus I stand corrected.

I notice in one of your posts it says they agreed with Switzerland in 2012 that delivery would start in 2018 (six years later)

In 2014 they made a contract with Brazil, with planned delivery starting in 2019 (five years later).

Thus a one-year delay compared to Swiss timelines, but "only" five years after contract signature. And with much more tech transfer than the Swiss deal. Hordes of Brazilian engineers were flown to Sweden for a training program; how many Swiss engineers went to Sweden before the results of the referendum were made public?


Where do I sign up to become a lawyer?

Merry Christmas! And a happy new year.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQZIXL5Y8GA
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 5601
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post14 Jan 2018, 23:00

loke wrote:X

I notice in one of your posts it says they agreed with Switzerland in 2012 that delivery would start in 2018 (six years later)

In 2014 they made a contract with Brazil, with planned delivery starting in 2019 (five years later).



Lol Yes so in the two years between 2012 and 2014 they shaved one year off development?

You got me there!! It's almost like the program was two years deeper into dev in 2014!

And all the while they had the Swedish (remember them?) contract going the whole time so it's looking to me like 7 years? And that's if we arent counting back to 2005 when Saab says the program started and then 2008 when the demo flew... as always the clock starts and stops when the fanboys desire. They don't deal in reality.

I do enjoy you trying to split the Gripen program up like it wasn't all one company building the same plane. Are you trying to tell us the Swiss Gripen and the Brazil Gripen and the Swedish Gripen were somehow not affiliated with one another? That the Swedish government hadn't entered into serious agreements with these nations? So development of the Swiss and Swede Gripen somehow doesn't count when the Swiss leave?

Your entire proposition is absurd because the second the Swiss signed on officially, sweden signed on. We have tons of documentations from saab and Sweden, and the referendum did stop the swiss, but sweden never left, and brazil signed on in the meantime. So the notion the programs was starting and stopping at the mercy if the Swiss is frankly duplicitous.

You actually make the perfect case study of the exact Gripen stereotypes I rail against. Thanks

For 3 years i had to hear about how awesome the Swiss and the Gripen were and what progress they were making and now 2 years later I have Gripen fans telling me nothing really happened at all. They were never "in"

Well ok there skippy!


Thus a one-year delay compared to Swiss timelines, but "only" five years after contract signature.


See above.

And with much more tech transfer than the Swiss deal. Hordes of Brazilian engineers were flown to Sweden for a training program; how many Swiss engineers went to Sweden before the results of the referendum were made public?


1st, what's your point?

2nd How many Gripens were going to be built in Switzerland that would require "hordes" of engineers to be flown there in the first place? Saab was going to move 35 percent of developement to Switzerland. The Swedes were the ones we saw sending "hordes" of engineers south, since they made some big agreements:


http://www.airforce-technology.com/news ... programme/

I loathe the Gripen yet know more than it's ardent fans. Lucky me
Last edited by XanderCrews on 15 Jan 2018, 02:29, edited 1 time in total.
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1310
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post15 Jan 2018, 01:17

And all of this not to mention AGAIN that the Brazilians signed up BEFORE the Swiss left the Gripen NG program (due to the referendum result) so Sweden ALWAYS had an international partner (the requirement for the Gripen NG program to carry on).

So the excuse that the Gripen E was delayed because of Switzerland is a NO excuse...
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 5601
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post15 Jan 2018, 02:32

ricnunes wrote:And all of this not to mention AGAIN that the Brazilians signed up BEFORE the Swiss left the Gripen NG program (due to the referendum result) so Sweden ALWAYS had an international partner (the requirement for the Gripen NG program to carry on).

So the excuse that the Gripen E was delayed because of Switzerland is a NO excuse...



That would have been a helluva pickle for the Swedes to be in had the Brazilians not been there when the Swiss dropped out.

They would have to go it alone at greater cost and hope for a future sale, or cut it loose until someone signed again
Choose Crews
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests