JSF - Norway going the way the hen is kicking...

@Previous Post

I'm not sure how many the Norwegians are buying, but I know that Israel is only picking up between 40-50 of the things. Its not exactly a bulk order to put it mildly. Also they are hoped to be arriving for 2012/13, so you have to pay for priviledge.

Jensy

reply to post by jensy



They are planning to buy 48 planes. The final decision about it will be made December 19.

hello. found this link:

www.dagbladet.no...

it is a articel for norwegians to ask Oberst Robert K. Simm about the plane, and you will find the questions and answers in english.

enjoy

Seems like several high ranking officials and technical experts are going to Sweden to discuss the choice with Saab on thursday.

Offcourse, the Norwegian officials can't give any top secret info about the F-35, but seriously, I do belive that SAAB know of both google and abovetopsecret.com.

Norwegian article:
www.aftenposten.no...

And also earlyer this week, a dude from, Robert Hewson the editor of Jane's actually came to Norway to verify this first hand, saying that he could not belive the choice the Norwegian goverment had done, and makes it look like a small bananarepublic.

Quote Hewson to "Ny Teknik" (New technology) April this year:

A better plane then the SAAB Jas 39 Gripen C/D does not exist, someone should have the balls to say "No, we don't want to buy the JSF, we wana find something better to use our money on "

Source quote

- Bedre fly enn Gripen C/D går det ikke an å få tak i, sa Hewson til svenske Ny Teknik i april. Og han la til: –Noen må ha mot til å si «nei, vi kjøper ikke JSF. Vi kan bruke våre penger bedre».

This is kinda new to me, and made my eye twitch, does Hewson know something about the JSF that has not been disclosed by the US?

Is Norway, and several others paying billions for a plane that will not do what it is designed for?

Source - Norwegian:
www.aftenposten.no...

If someone has subscribtion on Janes online, see if there is any article by Hewson and add some quotes please.

---
End:

I'm gone be honest here, I do not think Norway is getting what they are "hoping" to get, as there is too many variants of the plane, and the program has NO SPEARPARTS contract.

speculative info from me, and me alone:
US will have the supperior version, meaning better fuselage, better engine, heavier payload.

GB will have another variant, same fuselage as the W-Version, but with same engine and payload as the US versjon.

W-Version: This is the version every other country will get of the JSF, and it will...suck...
Crappy fuselage, lower or no stealth, crappy engine, payload will also be lower, internaly the plane is "basic", no advanced GPS system or radar like the US/GB version.

[edit on 2-12-2008 by Phoebus]

[edit on 2-12-2008 by Phoebus]

The difference between the UK version and other countries such as Norway etc is that they are selecting their next defensive fighter, the UK is only buying a close support/ground attack replacement for the STOVL Harrier to operate below the Typhoon (which Norway rejected - possibly rightly for them).

The F-35A is much more of a fighter than the B version which we are buying. No lift fan and weighty aft nozzle mechanics, better range, lighter, bigger weapons bay etc, so countries should not be (and probably are not) choosing the F-35 on the strength that the UK is buying it (except perhaps the Spanish, Italian, Indian and Thai Navies)

Thnx for clearing that up :-)

Yes maybe, but still. The norwegian government is hiding something.
This is an article in the local newspaper where SAAB headquarters are.
Link
The article is in Swedish so --> google translate.

This upsets me quite a bit.
Makes me wonder if Gripen had a chanse from the beginning.

The Norwegian prime minister’s announcement on 20 November that Norway had chosen the American F35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) came as a surprise to Saab. The arguments put forward seemed to have very little, or no, establishment in the preceding procurement process. We did not recognize ourselves in the assessment of Gripen’s operational capacity or the description of its costs. It sounded like the description of another aircraft. The industrial co-operation we had promised to create, to a value of up to NOK 50 billion, seemed not to have been of any greater importance.

Simulations with incomplete data

Price comparisons with inadequate assumptions

www.saabgroup.com...

AA-1 -- Non-production test aircraft. Flying.
BF-1 -- 1st STOVL flight sciences asset. Grounded, in modification
BG-1 -- 1st STOVL static test airframe. Rolled-out.
BF-2 -- 2nd STOVL flight sciences asset. Rolled-out. In engine run-up tests.
BF-3 -- 3rd STOVL flight sciences asset. Roll-out scheduled on Saturday.
AF-1 -- 1st CTOL flight sciences asset. Roll-out scheduled Dec 19.
AG-1 -- 1st CTOL static test airframe. Roll-out date is "close", later this month.

www.flightglobal.com...

Lockheed Martin F-35 Fighter Achieves Another Milestone: In-Flight Operation Of Integrated Avionics Aboard ‘Catbird’

www.lockheedmartin.com...

[edit on 10/12/2008 by C0bzz]

www.flightglobal.com...

Saab has launched a fierce attack on the assessment process which led the Norwegian government to eliminate its Gripen NG design last month in favour of Lockheed Martin's F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, accusing the nation of conducting "an incomplete, or even faulty, analysis".

Saab says Oslo's selection process was also "founded on simulations previously unknown to us. Those simulations must be based on incomplete performance indication, because such information about Gripen has neither been communicated to us nor requested from us or the Swedish government."

political for `they made it all up`; as only the swiss airforce have asked about the NG so far.



woot found another gem of a quote:

By Norway’s reckoning, the Joint Strike Fighter would be cheaper even if Sweden developed and gave away 48 Gripen NGs free of charge, Saab claims

on defence aerospace


[edit on 10/12/08 by Harlequin]

Ok, today Saab Jas had a press conferance in Norway, where they have gone over the calculation for the cost's of the Jas 39 Gripen NG.

Jas is mildly put, asstonished on how the calculations of the Norwegian goverment has been done, and suspect that this is due to the flatrate on the price that Jas gave.

And they even go further and states that even if Jas gave the planes to the Norwegian goverment and covered all the education, maintenance and developent , it would stil mount up to the Norwegian goverment picking the F-35.

Statement was made by Gripen boss, Åke Svensson.

Quote from the news:

- Kalkylemodellen som norske myndigheter har brukt, er helt merkelig. Selv om vi hadde gitt dem flyet gratis, og dekket alle utviklings- og vedlikeholsdskostnader, ville man fra norsk side fortsatt valgt amerikansk. Vi blir straffet fordi vi gav en fastpris, mener Gripen-sjef Åke Svensson.

Other things that was taken up on this "clear the air" conferance, is the cost's.

Saab Jas has said that the cost for each plane, including education, training, development and maintenance is no higher then 22 billion Norwegian kroners (about 3 billion USD), the Norwegian goverment has estimated this figure to be 24 billion NOK (3.3 Billion USD), and the sweedes are dumbstrucked by how the Norwegian goverment has found this figure, of what seems to be "thin air".

Saab also indicates that only 22% of the cost suggestion put forward by the Norwegian evaluation board, is accurate.
Forinstance, the planes have been upped from 48 purchuses to 58, and the service time has been upped from 25 to 35 years, and this is info that was deliberatly held back from Saab Jas.

Saab Jas is willing to participate in a hearing in the Norwegian goverment if they are called upon.

There are some 200 projects in Norway, allready started in the atticipation of the Jas 39 Gripen NG purchuse, some of these projects will now be scrapped and some other projects will adapt to the new position, Saab stil want's the cooperation with the establised projects to continue, manly to further the development of the Saab Jas 39.


Last, Saab went on the offensive, when it came to the simulations that was used, and the main problem is that they used the russian Sukhoi PAK-FA as adversery, a plane stil in a theoretical stage, with not even a good mock-up model made, and not any existing plane was used in the simulation, that is also somewhat strange way to performe a war simulation.


This looks more and more like a rotten apple in the Norwegian goverment, and I'm actually ashamed to be a Norwegian when I read the report.


Source Norwegian:
www.aftenposten.no...

[edit on 11-12-2008 by Phoebus]

I posted this on another thread, but it applies to this thread and more discussion is going on here so I reckon it better placed here.

I was reading the USAF FY 2009 budget Estimates and the 2013 $91 million price is the fly away unit cost which oddly doesn't include the long lead time items. The Weapon system unit cost which does is $100.112 million. Also there is the initial spares which for the USAF paying $7.76 per aircraft in 2013 so that makes $107.872 per aircraft. Which is probably the best figure to use for comparison with partner nations, other nations I guess would pay more. You could use the equivalent figure for 2014 to completion of $93 million, but since completion is something like 2027 and most international buyers looking now will be wanting all/most in the first half programmes that average would be to low for them.

And for comparison with other international orders you have to remember about training and support equipment as other sales are likely to include that.

Since this was a USAF report and the numbers of aircraft showed it was just there aircraft these figures will be for F-35A which is what Norway is after, but for example UK will be paying more for F-35B since F-35B is the most expensive version.

Today, the Norwegian goverment has put forward the "Goverment proposal nr. 36", stating the purchuse and for now the estimated cost of the planes.


This is roughly how it goes:

Norway will order a total of 56 (Fifty six), F-35 Lightning II (JSF), 52 fighters and 4 training planes.

The contract is not binding until the first plane is delivered (2014).

The purchuse, training, weapons and logistics is estimated today at 42 billion NOK (Norwegian kroner), not to be payed until deliverance of the first JSF, and this is a number that is currently increasing, estimated by 2014 is about 50 billion NOK, if not more.

The total payment for the proposed 30 year service period is set to 145 billion NOK ,This is a number that is increased every day, and by 2014 I won't even dear to estimate the real cost of the JSF.

Source - Norwegian:
www.dagbladet.no...

In their calculations, Norway apparently assumed that half of the fleet of Gripen planes would crash within 35 years!


Saab slams Norway's Gripen rejection

Furthermore, Norway assumed that nearly half of the fleet of 48 Gripen aircraft included called for in the procurement would crash within 35 years.

“This is completely unfounded if applied to Gripen’s statistics. This also adds further billions to the calculation,” said Saab.

:shk:

found something very relvant to this:

Aviationweek

Davis did say (noted here) that costs were likely to overrun, and stated that the average unit procurement cost was likely to be $80 million in 2014 dollars for the F-35A, $85-87 million for the F-35C and "a couple million more" for the STOVL F-35B.

Note: that doesn't mean that an F-35A ordered in FY14 will cost $80m - the projection is the average across 2400+ aircraft. Backtracked to today's dollars, it translates into a unit cost of $71 million - which is still a lot more than the $52 million which Norway used in its estimates

someone got the figures very very wrong when selling the F-35

Found these on another forum...

www.nrc.nl...

ftp.rta.nato.int...

ftp.rta.nato.int...




Also, I find the 70 million dollar estimate strange.... everyone else including the USAF had been saying 85 million. Strange that India rejected the Gripen and Saab protested again.

[edit on 25/1/2009 by C0bzz]

reply to post by C0bzz


Thats in today`s price , the $85 million is in 2014 estimated dollars

its looking more and more that Norway got bought in this.

reply to post by Harlequin


I thought it was 53 mil (2008) and 68.5 mil (2014) where in reality it's likely to be 85 mil 2014. It's odd how SAAB is protesting India after the Gripen got rejected again. How come nobody cided with Boeing and the tanker deal?

[edit on 25/1/2009 by C0bzz]

SAAB are saying they haven`t lost the competition and it was reported in a tabloid .....

whats an odd figure is norway - $53 million purchase price when they buy them - which is 1/3 the figure that the Genral of procurement is saying.

Originally posted by C0bzz

Also, I find the 70 million dollar estimate strange.... everyone else including the USAF had been saying 85 million. Strange that India rejected the Gripen and Saab protested again.

[edit on 25/1/2009 by C0bzz]

Well, India has made a deal with Russian aircraft manufacturer.

Sukhoi SU-30 MKI (Natoname: Flanker - H) with trust vectoring and Canards.
It's a joint venture between Sukhoi and HAL (Hindustan Aeronautics Limited), to build a plane to use India's weapons and onboard systems.

Wiki-on-SU30MKI
en.wikipedia.org...


[edit on 25-1-2009 by Phoebus]

reply to post by Phoebus


wrong aricraft deal - this is about the MMRCA , which MiG are offering the -35 , boeing the super bug , saab the gripen , dasault the rafale and eads the typhoon.

oh and the f-16 is there somewhere

[edit on 26/1/09 by Harlequin]