Saab, Dassault and Eurofighter are keeping their dreams alive as the F-35 lurches and staggers into developmental test, according to Aviation Leak‘s Bill Sweetman:
People at Saab, Eurofighter and Dassault are of one voice on JSF and do not believe it will deliver its promised affordability, whether in acquisition, upgrades or operational cost, or that it will deliver capability on its present schedule. They expect that when JSF emerges from development, its stealth technology will be less valuable than expected, and that it will be inferior in other respects to European products.
The non-competitive selections of the JSF by the Netherlands, Norway and Canada are attributed to three main factors: political pressure by the U.S. (suspected for years but confirmed in 2010 by WikiLeaks), U.S.-oriented air forces, and political vacillation enabled by the fact that full-rate production JSFs are not available for order.
This worldview underpins the Europeans’ determination to keep their programs alive until the JSF program runs its course, or unravels, as they expect it to.
India’s decision to eliminate all but two contenders for its Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) requirement was a blow to Boeing and Saab, the companies in the losing group who had reason to hold out most hope in the competition (see p. 21). For the survivors, Eurofighter (Typhoon) and Dassault (Rafale), it means a bruising duel to win the contract and—for the winner—a major challenge to fulfill it.
The Gripen is a dated design, although Saab is doing what they can to update the platform. The Typhoon was designed for air superiority over the emerging MiG-29 and Su-27 threat, while the Rafale compromised air-to-air lethality for multi-mission flexibility, enhanced by advanced electronic attack features.
The F-35?
Well, I guess we’ll see.
Watch Brazil’s FX-2 competition – almost a redux thus far of the Indian M-MRCA, but this time with more Administration horsepower behind the US approach.
Ref India’s M-MRCA, F-16 was a non-starter from the get-go because of Pakistan’s F-16s and the Super Bug was challenged because of its size (larger/heavier than what the IAF envisioned) and the fact the IAF already has a gen4/4.5 with the SU-30 MKI and a gen 5 fighter coming with the 2-seat T-50 (reportedly cosntituting half of the total Sukhoi prodiction of the T-50). Also have to wonder how much of actually seeing the Rafale in action over Libya with it’s newly integrated range of smart weapons may not have breathed new life into the proffer. Finally, still a lot of lingering resentment over previous US sanctions that was coloring the civilian defense establishments views (despite the contracts for the P-8 and C-130H).
Competition’s a lot keener out there today than it was in the 80′s and, to be blunt, as much as we’ve vested ourselves in stealth and netcentric capabilties for our forces, for overseas sales it puts us in a tough position when competing for scarcer resources ($-wise) and perceptions that if I buy from the US, I won’t fully own all of the product (US controls over export of technology being in play).
w/r, SJS
Saner heads, with limited dollars and immediate needs, if they had their druthers, would buy a mix of Typhoons and Rafales to cover the air-air & CAS msns and say BY-BY to even the thought of the 35s, otherwise it’ll be like “Waiting for Godot” revisited–the military version..
Bill Sweetman has never said one positive word about the F-35. While I’m sure there are problems with it, I don’t think the sky is falling like Bill does.
Agree, Mr. Sweetman has never had a positive thing to say about the F-35. He has his reasons and he will make valid points, but his view on the F-35 needs a healthy dose of salt to go with it.
This is more-or-less the best time for any F-35 competitors to ramp up efforts to knock a few purchases off the JSF bandwagon. Once we start filling out the first training wing in Florida things will start looking better for the F-35, from a business point of view at least.
Have to note that the Gripen has a US engine which might have killed its chances if there was a anti-US sentiment for the contract.
India’s decision to go for the Rafale and Typhoon somewhat surprised me, in that I figured both jets (as well as the Super Hornet) were a bit more aircraft than they were looking for. I was leaning towards the Fulcrum winning because it would offer some commonality with the MiG-29Ks ordered for the carrier. Now my money is on the Typhoon, but I’ve already been wrong once. Should the Rafale loose the India tender, its last shot at having more than a handful of export orders (a la Brazil’s requirement for about 24) will be Japan’s F-4 replacement bid, if that even happens anytime soon with the problems they have at the moment.
Frankly, all engineering design is the result of compromises dictated by design constraints. The F-22 and F-35 are no different.
The legitimacy of the F-22 line shut down is not just in question, it simply doesn’t exist and will live in infamy along with the unlamented memory of Gates. The F-22 may not have the strike capability of, say, an F-15E, but it had some strike ability, but would be a killer in A2A combat, which was the point. Since the F-35 will cost more than the F-22, it’s time to shut it down and cut our losses. Order some stealthed F-15s from Boeing and start teh work needed to give the Navy an F-22 equivalent.
It’s worth remember that the “F”-35 isn’t a proper fighter. It’s an attack aircraft with a useful secondary air-to-air capability. If you want an air superiority machine, JSF is not it.
As to ditching it, there is a strong case to be made for either killing F-35 completely or restructuring the program to keep the airframe, especially the F-35B (which is unique), but replace the avionics with off-the-shelf hardware.
Then buy a mix of more F-22s and late-model F-16s for the Air Force, more E/Fs and carte blanche for NGAS for the Navy.