Saab updates sales vision for next-generation Gripen

Saab's Gripen Demo aircraft, intended as a bridge to the next generation version of the fighter, has completed its third test flight, and is expected to log between 40 and 60 by year-end, as the project builds towards its second phase.

In its Phase I guise the demonstrator incorporates a new landing gear and weapons pylons, plus a General Electric F414G engine. Phase II upgrades will include a new modular avionics system, which Saab says will use layers and partitions to isolate system components and separate flight-critical from mission functions.

Other enhancements will include increased internal fuel capacity and a 1,700 litre (450USgal) external fuel tank, integration of small diameter bombs, enhanced satellite communications and a broadband datalink, an active electronically scanned array radar and missile approach warners.

Saab's Gripen International marketing arm meanwhile expects to announce "three to four" new customers within the next two years, says sales and marketing senior vice-president Bob Kemp. Three categories of potential customer have been identified: new NATO members seeking to replace ageing Soviet aircraft non-aligned countries looking to migrate from the Dassault Mirage and Sepecat Jaguar and current Northrop F-5, Lockheed Martin F-16 and Boeing F-18 customers planning to renew their fleets.

Kemp acknowledges that this third category of business is the "most difficult" to win, but is hopeful that Malaysia and Switzerland may follow the example of Thailand, which in October 2007 ordered six Gripens to replace some of its F-5Es.

Switzerland has a requirement for up to 33 aircraft to replace its F-5Es from 2012, with responses to its January request for proposals due during July. Flying evaluation will take place later this year, followed by best and final offers in the first quarter of 2009 and a government decision in the third quarter of next year. Boeing has already withdrawn its F/A-18E/F Super Hornet from the competition, and Kemp claims that selection of the rival Dassault Rafale or Eurofighter Typhoon would not fit with Switzerland's mooted budget of around $100 million per aircraft.

Other potential next-generation Gripen customers include Canada, which is expected to issue a request for information next year to replace 70 CF-18s, Denmark and Norway, which will both by year-end decide on how to replace their 48 F-16s, and the Netherlands, which will issue an RFP in early 2009 to replace 85 F-16s.

The putative Norwegian order is widely considered to be crucial to the Gripen NG programme. Although it is a partner in Lockheed's F-35 Joint Strike Fighter project, Oslo has part-financed the Gripen Demo project, and should the nation commit to the Swedish type it is likely that its development will be brought forward.

NATO members Bulgaria, Romania and Slovakia are also looking to replace their RSK MiG-29 fleets, but have yet to allocate budgets, while Croatia has already received RFI responses for a 12-aircraft requirement. An RFP should be released late this year, with the new aircraft to enter service in 2010.

In the "non-aligned" category, Brazil and India are seen as leading sales prospects. Brazil has allocated a budget of over $2 billion for an initial 36 aircraft, and is expected to issue an RFP and award a contract in 2009, ahead of deliveries from 2015. Bidding companies meanwhile have until 4 August to submit offset proposals linked to New Delhi's requirement for 126 multirole aircraft, 108 of which must be locally manufactured.

Kemp says his goal is to sell 400 Gripen C/D fighters over the next 10 years, plus more than 500 next-generation "E/F" examples.

**Slaps head**

So does the F-15 (figuratively speaking). That didn’t stop the Singaporeans from purchasing them. So does the rest of the teen-series. Not everyone is willing to lay down the dinero for a cutting-edge multi-role fighter (read JSF). Look at the markets the Gripen is angling to tackle. Namely, it’s users of F-5s, Jaguars, Mirages, teen-series fighters, and old-Soviet-equipped air forces.

It’s not supposed to go head-to-head in the international market with the Eurofighter or Rafale, much less the F-35. It’s supposed to tackle the moderately priced market currently held by the models such as the teen-series (although the F-15 is still pricey). Thus, I see its future competition as the MiG-35 with the J-10 at the low end and the JSF at the high end. Maybe the Rafale since the French don’t seem to be able to peddle the plane to anyone.

Now, personally, I want to see the contenders for LWFs to replace all the MiG-21s and F-5s. So far, all I see is a very limited field with the FC-1/JH-17, presumably the LCA whenever the Indians manage to get it operational, and maybe the old MiG-I-2000(?) that the Iranians might be making in modified form. I see this as a rather prominent void in Western (and even Russian) marketing. Now, I understand that nobody wants to buy an orphan and that countries that can afford better are going to opt for “medium” aircraft, but I think there is a sizeable market out there that we aren’t pursuing.

I am personally so tired of people always coming to sites that are discussing some third-party airframe, and always posting 'it must have the RCS of a barn' or 'not very stealthy, is it' or 'like lighting a flare on a starless night.' Furthermore, it is almost always by the second post!

The simple fact is, not every country in the world needs a F-22. To be honest with you, only the US (and arguably Israel and Australia) need a F-22 type plane, and would be able to justify the cost and logistics. The US' engagement doctrine requires true air-dominance, particularly since it has to storm the doors of foes that are increasingly looking at integrated air-defense networks. Israel could use the F-22 (though it will not get it for the next decade and a half due to several reasons, one being the porous nature of their defence industry, particularly to China) since it has certain nations, like Iran, that are stated foes and are also building up IADS networks. Australia, on the other hand, could use a super-cruising super-fighter to fend off any future aggression from China, but they may also not get the F-22 (and anyways, some say that the JSF could do alright, although i have doubts on that ....but either way, they are not getting it). I believe Japan would want Raptors too, and of all the nations (apart from the US) it is the only one that can AFFORD Raptors, but it will probably not get them (although of all the nations seeking Raptors, Japan would be the most likely, followed by Australia, and Israel the least likely).

All other regional powers and countries of note (e.g the UK etc) can very well do with either the JSF, the Eurofighter or the Rafale. None of them need a super-fighter like the Raptor, and while they may WANT to have it, they cannot justify the cost (and even if they could, they could not afford it anyways). Furthermore, based on their engagement doctrine (and the fact that in any 'big' engagement they would have Uncle Sam with them), the Eurofighter and JSF are more than capable of meeting ALMOST any situation they may face. And those situations that are truly hot (e.g. say a Eurofighter or Rafale had to hit a target that is protected by a IADS) they have stealthy stand-off missiles for that.

Not every country needs a F-22 Raptor super-dupe-fragilistic fighter.

Now, there are many more countries that do not EVEN need a Eurofighter or a F-35 JSF. These countries need a very competent fighter that is able to sort out any possible foes (and most importantly provide a very credible level of air defence), while at the same time not leaching their entire GDPs for the next 15 years. Such countries do not even need something at Rafale level, but they want something MORE CAPABLE than the average F-16. So they have a market all of their own, in this case the Gripen.

The market of the Gripen are most European nations (if they opt, some have), and other relatively rich nations around the globe (e.g. some in Asia and South America, and I know for certain South Africa) that need an airframe that can carry the latest missiles (e.g. AMRAAMs and even BVRAAMS like the Meteor), have advanced radar (AESA derivatives like the NORA), and high mission capability. A Gripen equipped airforce would be able to provide very high capability at very low cost, and they are very flexible (even usable on roads in case airfields get hit in an attack). And unless the enemy has Raptors, it will prove quite effective against the typical MiG-29/F-16.

Only around 3-4 nations in the world could make a case for a Raptor, and of those only 2 (the US and Japan) could afford them without handouts, and only 1 (the US) will have access to the superfighter. The other regional powers and countries of note will have to suffice with the JSF, the Eurofighter, the Rafale (and for the 'other' nations of note) the PakFa (Russian analogue of the JSF) and the JXX (Chinese analogue of the JSF ...note that the last two are only drawings at this stage). For all other nations, the Gripen is actually more advanced than anything they will ever require of it, and it is extremely cost efficient and exceedingly flexible.

And if a Gripen has a RCS of X, what about airplanes like the Mig-29, F-16, Su-27 and F-15s? They would even be less stealthy than a Gripen made of radar reflectors.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.