|Quoting TGIF (Reply 72):|
CHF 2.2B is just under $2B which would makes it ~$90M per frame. Shouldn't be a problem for the Gripen and Rafale. What about the EF?
|Quoting Art (Reply 75):|
I think that 22 would be a problem for the EF once initial spares and support were added to the (say $75 million each) airframe costs.
I think I might have found an answer to my question.
EADS’ Eurofighter, for instance, would yield about 10-12 aircraft within those constraints, based on Austria’s EUR 2 billion buy of just 18, later reduced to EUR 1.63 billion for 15.
When these factors are added up, the twin-engine Eurofighter will have a difficult task avoiding the perception of over-budget overkill. The plane’s strongest option would probably be a used aircraft sale from an existing partner nation. That may be a viable option, as Tranche 3 purchases look set to strain member country budgets, but cancellation will attract sharp financial penalties. Selling earlier models is one way to ease that strain.
Its spotty integration with several American weapons used by the Schweizer Luftwaffe could become an issue, and so could its delayed integration with the Damocles surveillance and targeting pod. On the flip side, consistent losses in export competitions (a possible sale to Libya remains its only success) will keep up the pressure on France to offer a very attractive deal. Can Dassault keep its price to about EUR 65 million per plane, including initial training and spares (i.e. 22 aircraft within the budget), and offer weapon integration relief?
The Saab/ BAE team of Gripen International offers the lowest price point of any of these aircraft, with lease-to-buy options underway in Hungary & The Czech Republic and a strong record of industrial offset deals.
An offer of 30-34 JAS-39 C/D aircraft that could mirror Switzerland’s 3 squadrons totaling 33 Hornets may be within the realm of financial possibility.
This pretty much concludes what we previously stated. It looks like the Gripen might be a front runner, unless:
- A Eurofighter partner will sell some partially used Tranche 1 aircrafts at a low price in order to make room for a Tranche 3 order. The Swiss AF
would probably need to come to a conclusion that the EF
offers needed capabilities, that the Gripen and Rafale don't offer, in order to justify the increased price, compared to the other two.
- The Rafale will include the above stated weapons integration in the price, enabeling joint weapons for Rafale and F-18.
- The Gripen falls short in the technical/operational evaluation.
Thanks for a thorough explanation!
|Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 80):|
Interesting remark about availibility for the next 50 years. Would be a good reason NOT to go for the gripen as from this moment on there will be as much (or more) F-16's built as Gripens.
The Gripen will hopefully, the MoD indicated this, be operational in the Swedish AF
for the next 40 years. That and the fact that Saab have commitments to supply CzAF
(and hopefully future Gripen NG
customers) with spares for a long time should be enough to convince the Swiss AF
|Quoting Art (Reply 85):|
I'm curious why you should say that Austria and Germany using the EF might play a big part. Ok, they're right next door but so is France using Rafale.
That struck me just as I posted my reply. So it would also apply for the Rafale. The reason this is a factor, IMO, would be simplified logistics and training opportunities.