Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Defending the Irish airspace

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

  • FA50 European support via airbus https://eurasiantimes.com/airbus-off...egy-to-export/
    "Why am I using a new putter? Because the last one didn't float too well." -Craig Stadler

    Comment


    • With LM and now Airbus behind it, the FA50 is becoming very attractive to all European air arms seeking to upgrade or expand.
      For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

      Comment


      • If, hypothetically, they go for a deal with LM/Airbus and went down the FA 50 route, you'd have to have a permanent team of tech reps in Baldonnel (or wherever) to help integrate the new type, which is not an Airbus product and therefore is not compatible in the slightest with anything on the island of Ireland of Airbus origin unless it has Thales computers or avionics of European origin. You'd have to have a permanent presence from the manufacturer in Ireland. One thing about dealing with Airbus (and probably the same with Boeing and Lockheed and all the rest) is that the mere act of calling them on the phone or sending an email to get their opinion on permission to do something will cost you Eu5000 right off the bat. No money, no reply. That's just to answer the phone. Getting permission to do something outside the manual costs more and is regarded as outside the Service Agreement. Doesnt sound like much but it adds up and airlines soon adopt the policy of not contacting them unless they absolutely have to. Manufacturers, as we found out with Mowag, are not your friend, no matter how good interpersonal relations are with the field guys. I'd sooner wait until someone with deeper pockets in Europe fields them and finds out the flaws. Incidentally, a few of those K-9 155s would be nice, as the 105s are getting a bit long in the tooth, but that's another story.

        Comment


        • The Polish AF are getting the FA50. No better EU nation to sort out the bugs.
          For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

          Comment


          • Royal Malaysian Air Force to get 18 FA-50 Block 20's, but one of the losing bidders (Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd evidently) has filed a challenge.

            https://www.aviacionline.com/2022/11...e-competition/

            Aviacionline report Malaysia is paying $873 million for 18 airframes ($48.5 million unit cost), but that would be without the full support, sustainment and training package that Poland has acquired ($63.8 million unit cost).

            Poland are paying $58.3 million per unit for their initial TA-50 Block 2 / FA-50 Block 0 airframes again as a full monty package, which is around $15 million more than the reputed flyaway cost of $43 million for the TA-50 B2/FA-50 B0, thus it seems the quoted $873 is for 18 flyaway aircraft.

            There are rumours that Raytheons APG-79v4 GaN AESA radar, which is going into 36 Canadian and 94 USMC F/A-18 Classic Hornets during their current SLEP/SLIP projects are also likely to be selected for the Malaysian F/A-18D's in their planned upgrades and that it may be the radar selected for the Malaysian FA-50's which also uses the F404-GE powerplant, thus having the same radar makes for even better cross fleet synergies and economies.

            When KAI/LM get around to putting the F414-GE-400K into a FA-50 Block 20 instead of the F404-102 ( 98 kN v 78.7 kN thrust) as they have indicated is on the cards, then with the APG-79v4 installed it will be one hell of a potent package for the price. That extra 20% of thrust is going to make a hell of a difference in its overall performance. At this stage the RoKAF does not need the F414 so KAI are waiting for a future customer to pay for the RTD&E.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
              If, hypothetically, they go for a deal with LM/Airbus and went down the FA 50 route, you'd have to have a permanent team of tech reps in Baldonnel (or wherever) to help integrate the new type, which is not an Airbus product and therefore is not compatible in the slightest with anything on the island of Ireland of Airbus origin unless it has Thales computers or avionics of European origin. You'd have to have a permanent presence from the manufacturer in Ireland. One thing about dealing with Airbus (and probably the same with Boeing and Lockheed and all the rest) is that the mere act of calling them on the phone or sending an email to get their opinion on permission to do something will cost you Eu5000 right off the bat. No money, no reply. That's just to answer the phone. Getting permission to do something outside the manual costs more and is regarded as outside the Service Agreement. Doesnt sound like much but it adds up and airlines soon adopt the policy of not contacting them unless they absolutely have to. Manufacturers, as we found out with Mowag, are not your friend, no matter how good interpersonal relations are with the field guys. I'd sooner wait until someone with deeper pockets in Europe fields them and finds out the flaws. Incidentally, a few of those K-9 155s would be nice, as the 105s are getting a bit long in the tooth, but that's another story.
              The same comments are relevant no matter who would potentially supply a fighter aircraft to us. Just look at the cost of the C-295 MPA package that we signed up for, it is a lot more than just the fly-away price!

              Comment


              • Well, it's essentially paying now for C-Checks and upgrades later and the availability of tech support when you are stuck. It takes a lot of the decision making out of your hands, the upside being that you can blame the supplier when things go wrong, the downside being that you are tied to one supplier (and the AC got stung on that front before now). You really have to scrutinise such packages very closely because they are designed to keep the supplier safe at all times. You really, really need to read the small print before putting pen to paper. I'm assuming that by now, the AC, DoD and Casa have a sufficiently good system running /good relationship that a new contract for the 295s is simply a smooth transition from the old 235 contract.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
                  Well, it's essentially paying now for C-Checks and upgrades later and the availability of tech support when you are stuck. It takes a lot of the decision making out of your hands, the upside being that you can blame the supplier when things go wrong, the downside being that you are tied to one supplier (and the AC got stung on that front before now). You really have to scrutinise such packages very closely because they are designed to keep the supplier safe at all times. You really, really need to read the small print before putting pen to paper. I'm assuming that by now, the AC, DoD and Casa have a sufficiently good system running /good relationship that a new contract for the 295s is simply a smooth transition from the old 235 contract.
                  Thing is, when we signed the dotted line for the Casa, They still held the Casa Nurtanio CN prefix, even though Nurtanio (IPTN) had no part in the building of aircraft for the European market by then. Since that point Casa-Nurtanio became EADS, then Airbus Military, Now Airbus.
                  Perhaps the next iteration will not be the C295, but the A295?
                  For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                  Comment


                  • RUSI recommend Gripen C/Ds for Ukraine


                    JAS 39 Gripen fighter jets escort a US B-52 Stratofortress from Bomber Task Force over Swedish airspace (Saab)

                    Made to take on Russia, Swedish Gripen fighter jets should go to Ukraine: Report - Breaking Defence 08/11/22.

                    The Russian Air War and Ukrainian Requirements for Air Defence - RUSI 07/11/22.



                    Comment


                    • More on the above.
                      For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X