%2Bfifth%2BGeneration%2BStealth%2BFighter%2BJet%2Bfrom%2Bits%2Bflight%2Bplaaf%2Bpakistan%2Bair%2Bforce%2Bpaf%2B(6).jpg)
BAE Systems rolled out its first two Eurofighter Typhoon aircraft ready for the Royal Saudi Air Force yesterday, as part of the controversial $20bn “Al-Salaam” deal.The rollout marks the start of delivery of 72 aircraft to Saudi Arabia, which is part of a more than twenty-year agreement between the UK and Saudi governments to supply the Middle Eastern kingdom with defence equipment. Delivery is due to start later this summer, and a skeleton staff of aircrew and technicians have already started their training for the aircraft in the UK.The rollout was attended by the Saudi assistant minister of defence and aviation, and the Saudi king’s eldest son, His Royal Highness Prince Khalid Bin Sultan bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud.“The industrial benefits of the project are substantial for both nations and will help to sustain several thousand skilled jobs in the UK and Saudi Arabia over the next ten years,” the minister for the armed forces Bill Rammell said.The news comes a day after doubts were expressed that Saudi would maintain its commitment to buying the remaining 48 jets it signed up for.
19 comments:
to friends
20 billion just for 72 aircraft
now see 85 gripen NG was offered to a european country for 6 billion
and gripen NG would employ an aesa radar and 6 tons of payload and future meteor missile
so which deal is better
250 JF-17 for $5 billion is better. Or even better 500 J-7 for $5 billion.
250 jf17 better for 5 billion but each gripen ng carry 6 tons payload compared to 3.5 tons payload of jf17
f414 is way better than f414 in maintaince and fuel consumption
look at the design of GRIPEN NG and jf17 which one is more refined
radar is aesa in gripen NG
compare the 8000 hours life of gripen NG and f414 with jf17
u will know difference
compare per hour cost of operation of gripen NG VS JF17 ,u will know differnce
ok, now compare EF Typhoon with Grippen
to anon above
only advatage typhoon has against gripen NG its aesa radar
AMSAR will have 1400 t/r modules compared to 1000 t/r modules in vixon500 aesa radar for gripen NG so amsar provide more detection range
both typhoon and gripen NG carry 6 tons paylaod
giepen NG has lower operating cost per hour than typhoon becoz of single engine
both aircraft have almost same technical hour life that is 8000 hours along with their engiens
so u urself conclude which deal is better
------------------------------
comparing technical life total life hour of gripen NG with jf17
jf17 still has to cross 5000 hours of airframe life and its rd33 still has to cross 4000 hours of life
it actually isnt as bad as some make it out to be . 20 billion of that are weapons which will be for a 30 year period. Also engines raidars upgrades trainnig etc over the 30 year period. The jets themselves only cost 4 billion. Also the 38 billion will include manufacturing plants built in saudi to assmeble and upgrade future eurofighters on saudi soil. its a very good deal over 30 years.
Actually eurofighter is the best 5th generation multirole aircraft outside usa,it has support of several nation's so its future is secured.it has supercruise which very few aircraft have.gripen is good but is basically a lightweight fighter suited for defending small airspaces (sweden)and limited endurance and most important few customers.
No offense but people tend to talk out of their a$$ when they compare different price offers, especially between western aircraft. The Gripen NG is not even flying yet and SAAB always uses an agressive pricing strategy, basically offering either a stripped down AC or very unfavourable financial conditions. For 20 bln the Saudis are getting: the aircraft, the weapons package, training and training hardware such as simulators, a separate assembly line for Saudi Arabia and industrial offsets.
This is a pretty decent long-term contract and no, I am not being paid by EADS.
PS: I stand corrected on the Gripen NG. The AC itself is flying, however its new radar package is not. Unfortunately that is the most significant aspect and SAAB is still sorting out issues with actually getting the hardware for that.
to friends
20 billion for 72 typhoons and this includes training,weapon package,simulators,ground based and support infrastructure
and this cost 277 million per typhoon and some say it still cheap no aesa in these jets as of now just captor pulse doppler radar
all companies do agressive marketing so saab is no exception
now russians offering mig29k with aesa,ground based equipment,training,simulators etc in 75 million and this is the price likely to be offered for mig35 as well
and same price likely to be offered for gripen NG
radar for GRIPEN NG has been sorted out which is VIXON 500E
"and this cost 277 million per typhoon and some say it still cheap no aesa in these jets as of now just captor pulse doppler radar"
No it does not. It is not a per-unit-price and if you do not understand just what I wrote about the contract details before, I can't help it.
If you want to have any idea of per-unit-cost, then you need to look at the original figure of 7 bln US-$ for 75 EF in 2007, when further elements like support and local assembly were still being negotiated.
By the way, the Gripen as of now still has a MSAR too, IOC for the AESA is sometime around 2012. If SA wants to retrofit Typhoons with CAPTOR-E, they can do so easily even before that time.
"all companies do agressive marketing so saab is no exception"
Oh yeah? Have a look at the fighter procurement in Austria and you can see what I mean with SAAB and marketing strategies. Whats the last time SAAB actually offered ToT or assembly line rights?
SAAB is in a very unconvenient position because of their extensive connections with BAE and US-technology, they just cannot offer the same benefits as the EF consortium or even Dassault, even if they would have an AC design that, in pure specs, would offer the same capabilities as the EF or Rafale - which it does not.
The only reason the Gripen NG was started is because Gripen is a light-weight fighter trying to go head-on in exports with medium AC like EF, Rafale and carrier AC like Hornet.
As long as they look at small countries who want to buy limited numbers and look at per-unit prices for AC which are primarily A2A with the option of having a limited strike capability, they will be happy with Gripen. But if they want to have a true multirole AC that does A2A and strike on a at least 50/50 basis without completely saturating airframe capabilities and more-than minimum performance specs (range, agility, wear), SAAB will always face shortcomings unless they build a completely new and heavier AC.
this cost 277 million per typhoon and its obvious that this includes training,weapon package,simulators,ground based and support infrastructure as well so its no so cheap
and austria bought typhoon because the payment for typhoon purchase could be paid in next 18 years yes its 18 years.and something saab didn't offer
"this cost 277 million per typhoon and its obvious that this includes training,weapon package,simulators,ground based and support infrastructure as well so its no so cheap"
Are you kidding me?
"and austria bought typhoon because the payment for typhoon purchase could be paid in next 18 years yes its 18 years."
No, it is 18 6-month-rates, that adds up to nine years, not eighteen. And SAAB submitted an offer for this, I can even tell you exact numbers here: With interest rates that added up to 2.257.421.222,83 Euros for the Gripen and 2.399.925.234,67 Euros for the Typhoon.
para dont compare apples with oranges, eurofighter is in a higher class than gripen,gripen being an entry level fighter.r u being paid by gripen?
@pankaj:
If you would read previous comments here, then you would see that first, another user started comparing these AC and second, I certainly do not favor the Gripen.
But you just wanted to throw your blurb at someone and didnt really care what was going on, didnt you...
some people here have doubt about gripen capabilities and saying its good for only sweden as sweden is small country so gripen range is limited but they are wrong
Fuel fractions (Full internal fuel in liter/full internal fuel in liter+ empty weight in kg):
F-16 C (~3160/3160 + 8270): 0.28
Typhoon (~5000/5000 + 11000): 0.31
Rafale (~4600/4600 + 9500): 0.33
Gripen NG (~3150/3150 + 7100): 0.31
F-15J (~5260/5260 + 12700): 0.29
Thrust to weight ratio (Thrust in kg/Full internal fuel in liter+ empty weight in kg + 4*BVR, 2*WVR ~1000 kg)
F-16 C (13147/3160 + 8270 + ~1000):1.02
Typhoon (9185*2/5000 + 11000 + ~1000): 1.08
Rafale (7652*2/4600 + 9500 + ~1000): 1.01
Gripen NG (11975/3150 + 7100 + ~1000): 1.06
F-15J (10809*2/5260 + 12700 + ~1000): 1.1
--------------------------------
now considering fuel fraction gripen NG has one engine and typhoon has two engines so on internal fuel both fighters have similar range,
in full afterburner both fighter have almost similar t/w ratio
now the only advantage typhoon has is its larger aesa so more detection range and 500kg more payload capability
but typhoon is almost 2 times as costly as gripen NG so no complains
those who have doubt about gripen NG range they better look at this link they will come to know what is truth
http://i36.tinypic.com/2e2jgv7.jpg
of all the debate of gripen vs typhoon my favorite aircraft will be the excellent f-16 the king of kings, an aircraft that will give both the gripen and eurofighter a run for their money inspite of being designed in the early 70's, old is gold is very true in f-16 sense.
saudis should help muslim country
pakistan, by buying jf-17. AT
REASONABLE PRICE,
Post a Comment