Finnish DefMin Interest in F-35s NOT Gripens

Program progress, politics, orders, and speculation
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

madrat

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2601
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12

Unread post18 May 2020, 12:59

Its already been said ad naseum throughout the forum. The high cost of Gripen really comes out when you look at upgrades over time. There is no fighter that can afford to be frozen at its introduction. Saab has to spread costs across a small fleet. The costs spread across all F-35 variants will make it cheaper to add follow-on capabilities.
Offline

magitsu

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 577
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2015, 22:12

Unread post18 May 2020, 13:07

XanderCrews wrote:Now I happen to know that Canada's CF-18 fleet before the arrival of the Aussie Birds was under about $1 billion for the entire fleet per year --full deal.

Sounds a bit expensive, but they are also very old.

Some Finnish numbers from the FInance Ministry.

HN-flight hour cost (euros): 7469 (2015 realized), 9000 (2016 predicted), 9250 (2017 estimate)
HN-fleet yearly flight hours: 8999, 8800, 8800
Number of HNs: 62

Finnish Hornet flight hour (2010-15): avfuel 12%, consumables 16%, bought services 33%+, and rest are split into multiple smaller sources.

In FY16 euros it's been calculated that total cost of ownership for the Hornet is: 45% acquisition cost, use and maintenance 43%, MLU upgrades 12% (all 62 received them).

FiAF Hornets cost at most 250M euros/year.
The whole FDF budget for 2020 is 3.16 billion euros.
Offline

kimjongnumbaun

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 377
  • Joined: 08 Dec 2016, 21:41

Unread post18 May 2020, 23:35

hornetfinn wrote:
Finland uses conscripts to maintain our F-18s and their engines and there has never been a problem with that. I bet the Swedes use the same kind of system as we do. Basically there is always professionals (officers and mechanics for example) around and conscripts (and reservists) are used as assistant mechanics, for refueling and rearming (not sure about actual live ammo though in peacetime), general support and security duties. So actual professionals do the more demanding stuff but there is a lot of things conscripts can do with 1-2 month training and then learning on the job. It must be remembered that these conscripts have to apply themselves for this and have to prove their abilities and willingness before they get there.

I agree that Saab making big thing about conscipts being able to maintain the jet is just marketing gimmick. I doubt there will be much problem even with F-35 and their systems. Or any other candidate aircraft.


We have the same system in the US. Saab is implying you can take someone off the street and they can easily maintain the Gripen without instruction. Every aviation maintainer goes through months of schooling otherwise they won't even comprehend how to read the TM. Saab is no different and I wouldn't fly an aircraft being maintained by someone with zero training, even if they were supervised.
Offline

loke

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 958
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2008, 19:07

Unread post23 May 2020, 11:00

MMRCA in India is not dead: so there is still a possibility that Gripen E/F can be produced in sufficient numbers and operated by sufficient number of countries, to keep the costs of operating and upgrading it to acceptable levels. If India buys 114 then I predict it will become more attractive also for others. Also, if India buys it, then for sure it will fly for the next 50 years, if not longer :D

NEW DELHI — The Indian Air Force is overhauling its plan to induct 114 medium-weight multirole fighters, with a senior service official saying the aircraft will be built in India with significant foreign technology transfer and no foreign procurement.

https://www.defensenews.com/global/asia ... t-program/
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6370
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post24 May 2020, 02:10

loke wrote:MMRCA in India is not dead: so there is still a possibility that Gripen E/F can be produced in sufficient numbers and operated by sufficient number of countries, to keep the costs of operating and upgrading it to acceptable levels. If India buys 114 then I predict it will become more attractive also for others. Also, if India buys it, then for sure it will fly for the next 50 years, if not longer :D

NEW DELHI — The Indian Air Force is overhauling its plan to induct 114 medium-weight multirole fighters, with a senior service official saying the aircraft will be built in India with significant foreign technology transfer and no foreign procurement.

https://www.defensenews.com/global/asia ... t-program/


Ahh India. My favorite part of Finland
Choose Crews
Offline

krieger22

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 86
  • Joined: 10 Jul 2018, 22:02

Unread post24 May 2020, 09:33

I genuinely don't know what is funnier loke, your faith in the Indian procurement system or your excretions over this thread.
Offline

loke

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 958
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2008, 19:07

Unread post24 May 2020, 11:06

XanderCrews wrote:Ahh India. My favorite part of Finland

OK I agree the connection is far-fetched, but the thinking was that if India goes for Gripen E/F then it will reduce two of the main issues against Gripen in Finland (high costs due to few airframes; and uncertainty about upgrades after 2050 or so). Other issues remains (lack of stealth being one...), and of course F-35 will most likely win this.
Offline

hythelday

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 603
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2016, 12:43
  • Location: Estonia

Unread post24 May 2020, 12:24

loke wrote:
XanderCrews wrote:Ahh India. My favorite part of Finland

OK I agree the connection is far-fetched, but the thinking was that if India goes for Gripen E/F then it will reduce two of the main issues against Gripen in Finland (high costs due to few airframes; and uncertainty about upgrades after 2050 or so). Other issues remains (lack of stealth being one...), and of course F-35 will most likely win this.


This is logical, yes, but for this to happen India needs to proceed at lightning speed - they need to select Gripen before "best and final offer" is made to Finland.
Even IF India chose Gripen tomorrow, would 18 months (or even less) be enough to start production in volume so that the benefits would emerge in the hard data showing Gtipen being cheaper? Hardly.
Besides, Gripen "made in India" is probably a bigger risk for security of supply than the current F-35 setup.
Besides, India wants tech transfer. It has already been shown that Gripen E has many critical components made in US, meaning Uncle Sam can harm SAABs chances if India really goes through with their Gripen vs F-16 showdown.
India really has no influence on Finland. Linköping Unicorn is on its own in this one.
Offline

magitsu

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 577
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2015, 22:12

Unread post24 May 2020, 16:37

India is totally irrelevant for the HX decision. Even Germany won't be able to seal its deal before the HX decision is due, but it can be taken into account as a somewhat reliable indication how they see Typhoon's development compared to Super Hornet. Luckily BAE probably didn't lean forward by offering ECR to Finland, because that was quite effectively shot down by the Germans.
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6370
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post24 May 2020, 20:38

magitsu wrote:India is totally irrelevant for the HX decision. Even Germany won't be able to seal its deal before the HX decision is due, but it can be taken into account as a somewhat reliable indication how they see Typhoon's development compared to Super Hornet. Luckily BAE probably didn't lean forward by offering ECR to Finland, because that was quite effectively shot down by the Germans.



Thanks to Lukfi, this thread became I think the 3rd or 4th Gripen battlefront. Hes banned now and I'll never get my apology. :(

Russians learned the hard way about working with India. I don't think it would be very pleasant and lots of finger pointing follows. I'm gonna be really meanie head and say I knew people (Boeing) involved with the first MRCA and they basically "tapped out" quickly because they simply couldn't lie about how low they could go. They basically put out a number and watched Dassault waltz right by it with a silver tongue. Guess how that worked out? For all the complaints about the US arms industry a lot of US arms are preferred because they're well vetted and tested and usually the sales words are not hollow. Boeing wasn't going to lie to them to the level it took, and they watched D assault slit their own throat with big promises everyone but the Indians knew would never happen.

so in short I don't think Finland should take anything regarding India and Saab to mean anything even If india bought Gripen E tomorrow.

loke wrote:
XanderCrews wrote:Ahh India. My favorite part of Finland

OK I agree the connection is far-fetched, but the thinking was that if India goes for Gripen E/F then it will reduce two of the main issues against Gripen in Finland (high costs due to few airframes; and uncertainty about upgrades after 2050 or so). Other issues remains (lack of stealth being one...), and of course F-35 will most likely win this.



I don't know that it does. I honestly wouldn't want the future of my fighter fleet hanging on New Delhi's defence "planning".
One of the cruxes of the Gripen NG sales concept is the "build at home, and then you can even sell to other nations!" is that you are creating separate assembly lines, but also growing theoretical competition between the various gripen users, and those user have to also not want to set up their own line. For far example there won't be Swedish or Brazilian Gripens going to india by and large. So we once again create a redundant assembly line of dubious produced amounts with little export success from an already established assembly line. This is going to force people to eat the factory cost, each time which means again, we have an fighter that would be very expensive. Now of course its not going to be presented as such (and rightly so in some cases) as I've said I don't begrudge a nation spending a bunch of money on "pork" in order to grow jobs at home, thats just kind of how life is. But the bottom line is it adds costs and creates other issues. The simple fact is that by not having a single line, maximized effeicncy will never be reached and for all the fans screaming to "look at the original gripen" they ignoring the fact that this is a completely different production model. Right down to Saab just making so many of them there were "spares" to loan out and sell to many nations. They never tried to build a factory in Thailand or South Africa :roll:

Edited to Add:

I'm not trying to move the goal posts. Obviously more Gripen is better than fewer Gripen. i'm just pointing out there is always a new pitfall and there might not be as much of a linear path given the "sales concept" behind the Gripen NG.


hythelday wrote:
loke wrote:
XanderCrews wrote:Ahh India. My favorite part of Finland

OK I agree the connection is far-fetched, but the thinking was that if India goes for Gripen E/F then it will reduce two of the main issues against Gripen in Finland (high costs due to few airframes; and uncertainty about upgrades after 2050 or so). Other issues remains (lack of stealth being one...), and of course F-35 will most likely win this.


This is logical, yes, but for this to happen India needs to proceed at lightning speed - they need to select Gripen before "best and final offer" is made to Finland.
Even IF India chose Gripen tomorrow, would 18 months (or even less) be enough to start production in volume so that the benefits would emerge in the hard data showing Gtipen being cheaper? Hardly.
Besides, Gripen "made in India" is probably a bigger risk for security of supply than the current F-35 setup.
Besides, India wants tech transfer. It has already been shown that Gripen E has many critical components made in US, meaning Uncle Sam can harm SAABs chances if India really goes through with their Gripen vs F-16 showdown.
India really has no influence on Finland. Linköping Unicorn is on its own in this one.


For all the Gripen fans screaming conspiracy I've always wondered why the US who is constantly obsessed with sabotaging the Gripen doens't simply say US engines are off limits. :mrgreen:

Obviously more is more, and GE wouldn't be happy but these sales are drops in the bucket compared to Super Hornets, which of course carry double the GE. Had the US thrown the wrench into the works with the Brazil deal for example. Super Hornet may have been chosen. in which case double the sales :mrgreen:

for some reason super american evil capitalism is failing to do what its accused of.
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6370
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post26 May 2020, 19:16

Image
Choose Crews
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3906
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post28 May 2020, 14:32

I do like the graphic, boils it down nicely as to the pluses and minus's..

But you lost me on... Chad F-35? For some reason, I can't see an African nation flying or fighting in them, LOL.
Offline

kimjongnumbaun

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 377
  • Joined: 08 Dec 2016, 21:41

Unread post28 May 2020, 16:47

mixelflick wrote:I do like the graphic, boils it down nicely as to the pluses and minus's..

But you lost me on... Chad F-35? For some reason, I can't see an African nation flying or fighting in them, LOL.


It’s “Chad” the stud muffin vs the “virgin” Gripen.
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2664
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post29 May 2020, 18:40

Xander's image above prompted me to search and re-post the following "classic" below (from circa 2010 if I'm not mistaken) which was stored in my HDD:

Image
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6583
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post01 Jun 2020, 01:28

Won't be long and the F-35 will be able to carry 4 Air to Air Missiles internally with the same weapons load. :wink:
PreviousNext

Return to Program and politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests