Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Some prices

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Some prices

    Here are some relevant aircraft prices (USD 1998) for whom it may concern.

    CN-235= 12m (i.e 1x Boeing blow job= 5x tactical transport or MPA a/c)
    C-130H=30m
    Hawk-eye 2000= 200m (see air defence would not be cheap)
    AlphaJet2= 12m (attack optimised with self defence capability)
    Hawk100/208=19.3m (100 series= trainer, 208 single seat light multirole fighter [point defecne + ground attack]).
    MB339FD=55.7m (this is the one that allegedly flew out to the Don, yes it/was is more expensive than an F-16)
    C-101DD=7m ( an apparently very capable trainer/light attack aircraft, probably equivalent to an L-59)
    L-159B=8.9m (2002 price USD, we've all heard about this one before.)

    Any more prices available for things?
    Let you local wishlister know.
    "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

  • #2
    Just let me get my cheque book:D

    Comment


    • #3
      :D

      Comment


      • #4
        Problem with prices like these is that they don't take into account the price of spares/support and the maintainability (ie MTBF) of the gear. Running costs are at least as important as the outright capital cost of equipment when striking a deal.

        Still, its fun ...

        On the CN 235, I'd expect the MPA version to be considerably more expensive (between 30-50% more) than the basic airlifter. For comparative purposes, a C-27J is expected to be in the region of $27.5 mill, with a CN-295 about 30% less. A C130J was about $55 mill in FY95.

        The price for a MB-339FD has to be wrong, £55 mill should get you a F/A-18E/F or an F-15E, 15mill more should get you an F/A-22 ... (yeah right).

        And they're pricing an Eads MAKO at $22-25 mill, probably more now due to the fact that the programme has stalled.

        Flug revue (at http://www.flug-revue.rotor.com/FRTypen/FRL-159.htm) has the following for the price of an L-159A or ALCA,

        "On the export market, the L159A is likely to cost 14 to 16 million US-Dollars, it was stated in mid-1999."

        Doesn't contravene what you say C-Q, but a handy figure all the same.

        For that kind of money I'd be looking at a refurbed F-16 block 15-25. Hell, the USAF list an A-10A at $9.8 mill in 1998 figures ...

        Comment


        • #5
          Thats the price I have for the MB-339....
          The L-159 price was actually from an advertisement in an industry rag...
          It's all a moot point anyway, the 200-250m of a decent radar network or AEW craft would kill whatever political will another emergency could put behind an AD fighter program...critiscising a lack of capabilities is what one does in opposition, not in government.

          On the other hand 5 tactical transports could do some good, for relatively cheap...just imagine trying to call aid deliveries or disaster relief war mongering, even Irish people would think twice about it (well 1.5 times anyway.).

          And doesn't the F/A-18 cost around US$80m?
          "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

          Comment


          • #6
            Agreed on the Tac Transport issue. And while Aid/Disaster relief are only the start of the potential roles for such a/c, they'd undoubtedly be the ones that'd garner the greatest amount of public support. Would take years to build up a serviceable fleet, so 1 in 04, 1 in 05 and 2 in 06. Now theres a wishlist!

            C-295 seems to be the best value for money ...

            The cost of a proper AD system means that a major initiative would be needed - meaning serious political support - meaning a see change in our foreign policy. Its not something to enter into lightly or on the cheap. Better to walk before you can run, build capacity cheaply in those areas you actually /need/ now. SAR, Heli ops, MPA and tac trans.

            Costs of US warplanes are notoriously difficult to pin down, mainly cos of the politics involved and the fact that development costs have to be factored in ... as order numbers get changed so too does the unit cost. the figure of $55 mill I had came from Flug-Revue and is probably out of date, the US Navy list the price per unit at $57 mill. I'd heard figures up to and over the $80mill cost you posted as well.

            http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/.../air-fa18.html

            Comment


            • #7
              And lets not forget the price of the radar installation. The RHAF have just signed for 12 C-27Js for E297m, delivered 2,2,2,2,4 I think. It's slightly more expensive than the CASA, plus we already have contacts with CASA, something we don't have with Alenia/Lockheed Martin.

              Methinks that 3 CN-295s would go a long way to saving the army and the Aircorps....Self deploy a battalion to the balkans in three refueled flights, take more to bring the heavy equipment but it would mean that we could theoretically do more than wave a finger next time someone decides to pick on an Irish unit overseas( even if it would mean staffing every Bks in two commands with reservists).

              For the moment I'm focused on the TT fixed wing and rotary TT fleet needs, with a similar concern for rotary utility needs.

              But if they nearly got away with 540m for a football field, who knows what might tip favour in the way of an AD network.....ask me in the next boom
              "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

              Comment


              • #8
                Yup, three would do it, with one as a spare.

                Competitive tender, Alenia, EADS/Casa and Antonov would probably apply, pick the best and then phase them in over three years. a/c.

                Well, we seem to have the fixed wing TT sorted out.

                All we need is about €90 million and then we can start work on the helicopter problem.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I just asked my mate he says he shasn't got that much handy, hang on and I'll check my other trousers
                  "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Yeah, I'll empty out the pint glass of change and have a root down the back of the sofa when I get home. Should cover it with enough left over for a few pints.

                    Actually, in Government terms, its not a /lot/ of money. If it became a priority, I'm sure the money could be found in very short order. Given that there are some very important practical reasons why the state should have this capacity, I wouldn't be at all surprised if we saw some movement on this front over the next few years.

                    Then again, I am an optimist.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      True its not a lot in government terms, and transports would be a good investments, but may I query to the L-159 as a possible fighter,

                      Firstly its only a bastardised trainer.

                      Secondly, it was only developed and bought by the CZAF to keep Aero afloat,

                      Thirdly,- its a small single engined fighter, not really sutiable for operating over our vast territorial waters, where the real military threat comes from realistically.

                      Fourthly- Turkey once accused me of not wanting figghters because I was afraid of the noise, which I untrue, I wouldn't, but I'm fairly sure the wife and the neighbours would, there is a need for an training area for low flying aircraft, and that would cause problems with NIMBY.

                      The real problem with irish air defence is that we would need a big two engined sophisticated fighter in the Eurofighter/F-15/F-14 class to defend our airspace,

                      then again, this is like wondering what life would be like if Mrs G liked the idea of me going out with other women.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Its what I've been saying for years, it all comes back to geography*. Unless we were willing to allow another country take care of the long range CAP/BARCAP or intercept stuff, we'd have to invest in a big, heavy BVRAAM shooter to have any real hope.

                        The L-159 can only be considered a fighter if your adversaries were flying 1950s era A/c. Badly.

                        *Except for the bit about Paul and his missus, thats not particularly geographical.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I didn't ay anything about the L-159 as a fighter I just gave some prices for things that usually show up on peoples wishlists
                          "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Paul G makes a good point about noise, but I find that strange as he has stated repeatedly that he is against us having a DF anyway 'cause he is under the illusion that we will never be attacked, even citing my mapreading ability as being faulty. Hey dude I was reading maps in the sixties, Irelevent, just like noise, it's just a problem to be overcome.
                            The L-159 is not the ideal choice of interceptor, but it may be our best choice, for all it's shortcomings, it's quite a potent aircraft, not my opinion, I'm only going by what I've been told by a friend formally in the air-defence busness,BUT it's more likely going by yarns I have heard that our 'government' is presently engaged in purchasing L-39za aircraft,[personally I am not convinced].
                            All these aircraft will provide is a veneer of air-defence, better then nothing, but not much.
                            No, we need the L-159, but as an advanced trainer/wepons trainer/ground strike aircraft, we need Gripens or F-16's for the air-defence requirment.
                            Some chance!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
                            "We will hold out until our last bullet is spent. Could do with some whiskey"
                            Radio transmission, siege of Jadotville DR Congo. September 1961.
                            Illegitimi non carborundum

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Have never said that ireland shouldn't have a defence forces,. I have argued that it should have a defence forces capable of carrying out realistic missions (which it doesn't), it should have a properly trained defence force,( it doesn't, before anybody jumps down my throat read December's an cosantoir, which bluntly admits that while the 2002 exercises were exceptional and unique for the DF, they are routine in armies, Slag him if you want, but if Smith has achieved a situation where a battalion from every brigade undertakes a major exercise every year, then he is ireland's best ever minister of defence), have the ability to send units overseas on training exercises with the basic equipment to carry out its bread and butter day to day business in Ireland ( still needs more APCs, ATGW a 5.56mm LMG, Night capable utility helicopters, and offshore patrol vessles, they don't even have enough bullets for f£&ks sake). And until that point is reached, fantasing about supersonic fighters is a bit silly.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X