Brazil picks Gripen NG over Super Hornet after US spying

[grimey]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/12/ ... 7W20131218

Dec 18 (Reuters) - Brazil awarded a $4.5 billion contract to Saab AB on Wednesday to replace its aging fleet of fighter jets, a surprise coup for the Swedish company after news of U.S. spying on Brazilians helped derail Boeing's chances for the deal.

The contract, negotiated over the course of three presidencies, will supply Brazil's air force with 36 new Gripen NG fighters by 2020. Aside from the cost of the jets themselves, the agreement is expected to generate billions of additional dollars in future supply and service contracts.

Saab did not immediately comment on the purchase. In addition to Chicago-based Boeing Co, France's Dassault Aviation SA was a contender for the contract.

[xchox]

It's a great aircraft. I strongly believe it is what Canada needs to replace it's F-18's as well.

[AuxBatOn]

The Grippen, really? Please elaborate and substantiate.

[FICU]

I'd much rather see the Su-27SM flying around our skies... what a beautiful machine!

[frosti]

I'd much rather see the Su-27SM flying around our skies... what a beautiful machine!

I'd rather see the P51 Mustang in current RCAF colors based on nostalgia reasons.

It's a great aircraft. I strongly believe it is what Canada needs to replace it's F-18's as well.

Gripen would be a downgrade from our current A/B model hornets.

[xchox]

The Grippen, really? Please elaborate and substantiate.

Yes. I've been looking at this with a realistic view from a pilots perspective, NATO Member perspective, Tax payer perspective etc.

The problem with the JAS.39 is that most people look at the original as outdated. Which it is. This is not the one I am talking about. I am talking about the NG. It is like comparing an A model 18 with a Superhornet E/F model.

1. Cost to purchase, Cost to operate, Cost to maintain: The baseline 39 was the cheapest 4th gen to operate.

The baseline 39 is equivalent to our current 18's in terms of tech.

2. It can be used from snow gravel or dirt. Snow only requires 2,600feet. Turn-around time of only 10 minutes.

3. As per one of my EO buddies in the RAF in the UK. He stated that he got to work on a ETPS Gripen and said it was a mechanics dream compared to the Tornado and the Typhoon.

4. Reduced RCS (compared to a 4th gen aircraft), typically 10% or less
Reduced IR signature
sensor fusion
AESA
IR sensors
built-in RWR, MAW
advanced, built-in ECM,
limited super cruise
NG has beamed data link.

5. The datalink on the Gripen is directional, making it far harder to intercept and jam compared to omnidirectional datalinks like the Link-16. Furthermore, the datalink automatically shares radar and ew tracks, aircraft status etc. The only other fighter fith a directional datalink in service today is the F-22's IFDL. AFAIK

6. Does Canada really need stealth? Does Canada really need a 5th gen when a 4th or 4.5 gen will do the job for the next 20+ years? Does Canada really require a twin engine jet? I do not believe so.


*Important that you read this part.* Clearly the best a/c we can buy would be an F-22 or PAK-FA. Clearly the nicest aircraft we can buy would be (enter your personal preference here) Which would I love to see? Super Flankers. I am simply stating MY OPINION and THOUGHTS as to why I believe the Gripen would be Canadas best fit.

Gripen would be a downgrade from our current A/B model hornets.

No.

[xchox]

Great site I just found:

http://gripen4canada.blogspot.ca/2012/0 ... anada.html

[L-1011]

Considering where they can be based from... You can put them everywhere... A lot better then Cold Lake and Bagotville. And at the cost of 50 F35's you could possibly get 100 Gripens. Base them from Resolute, Victoria, St. Johns Yellow Knife, Old Crow, Beaver Creek etc. and not just 2 locations in this vast country of ours.

[goldeneagle]

and even more important. With all that money saved, we should be able to buy a couple gliders for the cadets, and keep that program running.

[AuxBatOn]

Considering where they can be based from... You can put them everywhere... A lot better then Cold Lake and Bagotville. And at the cost of 50 F35's you could possibly get 100 Gripens. Base them from Resolute, Victoria, St. Johns Yellow Knife, Old Crow, Beaver Creek etc. and not just 2 locations in this vast country of ours.

And you build support infrastructure everywhere? We went from 10 bases to 2 in the 90s for a reason. Centralizing ressources for optimal cost management. With 2 Op Squadrons, it's hard to base ourselves at more than 2 bases... We can deploy pretty much everywhere with a 5K runway.

JSF: 95 Mil (all included, top of the line, new technology, longer legs, more weapons)
Grippen: 60 Mil (no real support included other than the source code for us to modify, a step back in technology)

[L-1011]

Considering where they can be based from... You can put them everywhere... A lot better then Cold Lake and Bagotville. And at the cost of 50 F35's you could possibly get 100 Gripens. Base them from Resolute, Victoria, St. Johns Yellow Knife, Old Crow, Beaver Creek etc. and not just 2 locations in this vast country of ours.

And you build support infrastructure everywhere? We went from 10 bases to 2 in the 90s for a reason. Centralizing ressources for optimal cost management. With 2 Op Squadrons, it's hard to base ourselves at more than 2 bases... We can deploy pretty much everywhere with a 5K runway.

JSF: 95 Mil (all included, top of the line, new technology, longer legs, more weapons)
Grippen: 60 Mil (no real support included other than the source code for us to modify, a step back in technology)

With the money saved you can put a jet fuel tank and a diesel-run GPU in pretty much every community in Canada with a population over 5000.

5K Runway? That's nice and all but the Gripen can do that in 2,500ft.

Longer legs? What? a difference of 37nm combat radius? Is that really worth the 35mil price difference? And with drop tanks... the Gripen has a larger ferry range then the F35A and B. The C has greater range.

Either buy the Gripen, F18, F16, Rafale, Typhoon, Su-35, or Mig-35 and be done with it.


The JSF is a ridiculously over-priced paper weight which only has stealth going for it. Don't believe me? Read this:

http://www.parl.gc.ca/pbo-dpb/documents ... ate_EN.pdf

[AuxBatOn]

It has way more than stealth. In fact, I care very little about stealth.

What you don't understand is that we will need to spend the extra 35 mil to integrate weapon systems to the aircraft, what we do not have to do with the JSF.

I don't care it can land on a 2500' runway. The one where we have suitable infrastructure to land armed jets all have 5k in Canada. You cannot land anywhere with an armed Jet...

[xchox]

It has way more than stealth. In fact, I care very little about stealth.

What you don't understand is that we will need to spend the extra 35 mil to integrate weapon systems to the aircraft, what we do not have to do with the JSF.

I don't care it can land on a 2500' runway. The one where we have suitable infrastructure to land armed jets all have 5k in Canada. You cannot land anywhere with an armed Jet...

Not anywhere but you can land on a shitty country road, grass field, or a frozen lake.

Can you elaborate on the weapons systems? From what I have been told... it uses the same generic weapons as the current CF-18.

Guns: 1× 27 mm Mauser BK-27 Revolver cannon with 120 rounds (only available on single-seat A/C model)
Hardpoints: 8 (three on each wing and two under fuselage) and provisions to carry combinations of: Rockets: 4× rocket pods 13.5 cm rockets
Missiles:
6× Rb.74 (AIM-9) or Rb 98 (IRIS-T)
4× Rb.99 (AIM-120) or MICA
4× Meteor (under development)
4× Rb.75
2× KEPD.350
2× Rbs.15F anti-ship missile

Bombs:
4× GBU-12 Paveway II laser-guided bomb
2× Bk.90 cluster bomb
8× Mark 82 bombs

[AuxBatOn]

JDAM (GBU-38, GBU-31(v2)), GBU-49. Those are smart weapons, meaning they need to talk to the mission computers in order to employ them. Anything else (LGBs, dumb bombs) are controlled mechanically (litterally pulling wires to activate components, like the fuze and Computer Control Group).

Also, the litening pod (the one supported by the Grippen) is years behind what we already have (Sniper XR).

Integrating all this cost mucho dinero, as we experienced with the Hornet. Weapon systems doesn't mean explosives. It means systems enabling succesful weapon delivery.

As far as landing on some road somewhere? With no maintenance support nearby, no thanks.

[xchox]

JDAM (GBU-38, GBU-31(v2)), GBU-49. Those are smart weapons, meaning they need to talk to the mission computers in order to employ them. Anything else (LGBs, dumb bombs) are controlled mechanically (litterally pulling wires to activate components, like the fuze and Computer Control Group).

Also, the litening pod (the one supported by the Grippen) is years behind what we already have (Sniper XR).

Integrating all this cost mucho dinero, as we experienced with the Hornet. Weapon systems doesn't mean explosives. It means systems enabling succesful weapon delivery.

As far as landing on some road somewhere? With no maintenance support nearby, no thanks.

Agreed to a certain extent. The Litening your talking about is out dated. But the NG uses the 3rd Generation GIII FLIR/LDP. Which last I heard is just below what the F22, F35, PAK-FA and certain updated Flankers with the Rear Fire control have.

My main argument is not that the Gripen is the best plane out there... Just that when you can buy 40% more jets, or use that money for future updates... it just makes sense.

And as for landing on a road somewhere? All you need is one of our new G-Wagons to mosy on over, give the pilot a nutri-grain bar... and away he goes. haha

Reference:
http://www.saabgroup.com/Global/Documen ... Gripen.pdf

[AuxBatOn]

The Sniper XR (which we already have) is far superior to whatever the Grippen has integrated. In fact, the JSF uses the Sniper. We would have to buy the pod the Grippen has integrated in its software or integrate the Sniper to the Software. Neither venture is cheap. The JSF comes fully equipped witj everything we need to go across the line as a multi-role platform. The Grippen does not. It would require substantial investments (short, medium & long term) to make that happen and sustain the capabilities.

[xchox]

The Sniper XR (which we already have) is far superior to whatever the Grippen has integrated. In fact, the JSF uses the Sniper. We would have to buy the pod the Grippen has integrated in its software or integrate the Sniper to the Software. Neither venture is cheap. The JSF comes fully equipped witj everything we need to go across the line as a multi-role platform. The Grippen does not. It would require substantial investments (short, medium & long term) to make that happen and sustain the capabilities.

Can you give dollar amounts? ie: The extra money spent on the JSF will be less then doing any mods to a Gripen?

[TG]

I'm surprised the Brazilian didn't go for the French Dassault Rafale.

This guy put some thought into having it here, pro and con (forget about the Gripen for Canada that you will see and just scroll down)
http://gripen4canada.blogspot.ca/p/the- ... afale.html

[xchox]

If you read every page on that persons web-site... it just further makes me believe the Gripen NG is the right jet for the RCAF.

[Rockie]

If you read every page on that persons web-site... it just further makes me believe the Gripen NG is the right jet for the RCAF.

Does it come with two engines?

[FICU]

If we do get the JSF I can't imagine the fallout the first time one is lost due to an engine failure. A wee birdie could bring down tens of millions of dollars of tax payers money and potentially a life. It boggles my mind why the DND isn't considering a twin.

[xchox]

If you read every page on that persons web-site... it just further makes me believe the Gripen NG is the right jet for the RCAF.

Does it come with two engines?

It has two inlets sooo... NO of course it doesn't have two engines. LOL

[xchox]

If we do get the JSF I can't imagine the fallout the first time one is lost due to an engine failure. A wee birdie could bring down tens of millions of dollars of tax payers money and potentially a life. It boggles my mind why the DND isn't considering a twin.

Look at every single engine jet ever made. They're not bad or less reliable in the field then a twin.

[Rockie]

If we do get the JSF I can't imagine the fallout the first time one is lost due to an engine failure. A wee birdie could bring down tens of millions of dollars of tax payers money and potentially a life. It boggles my mind why the DND isn't considering a twin.

Look at every single engine jet ever made. They're not bad or less reliable in the field then a twin.

Except for the times when that engine stops working of course. Simple arithmetic:

1-1=0
2-1=1

That "1" is what gets the jet and the pilot home as opposed to a very expensive hole in the ground and (at least in Canada's far north) a dead pilot.

Is your last name Mackay?

[boeingboy]

Go on you tube and look for all the F-16's that had an engine failure and tell me how many didn't have to punch out. There have been a few stories out there where CF-18's have suffered engine failure - only to make it home cause they still had 1 turning.

Canada needs and in fact should have a twin engine fighter. We also need more than 65 planes. That wont do squat.

All this talk of money for upgrading 4th gen planes and such is BS, at least the darn thing would work. We should get a proven airframe that has had the bugs worked out of it. Any of you that think the F-35 isn't going to have issues for years to come is on drugs. Software upgrades, integration of systems that should have worked from day 1, add-ons and fixes to problems that haven't even come up yet. Not to mention the engine is new and not proven yet. Look at all the purchases we've made where decades later they are still not preforming the way they are supposed too. The F-35 has major things going against it.

Personally - i'd like to see the Rafale in the inventory.