News: Czech Republic select European Fighterjets over F-16

"Per Nordenberg" wrote in message
...

"Air Force Jayhawk" skrev i meddelandet
...
Bribery still works!


Apparently threat doesn't...

Would that be an accusation? Face facts--the Swedish government agreed to
accept all of the expenses of this lease, which is far beyond what the US
did for the Poles in terms of offering advantageous loans when they selected
the F-16. One has to wonder why Saab felt it necessary to go to such
extremes when they were placing their alleged "fourth generation" Gripen up
against a bunch of MLU'd F-16's and F-18's? Why did they feel so threatened
by what they continaually refer to as "last generation" aircraft? Desperate
much?

Brooks



Regards,

Per Nordenberg

On 17 Dec 2003 15:01:41 -0800, (Karl) wrote:

The Czech cabinet decided Wednesday to select new SAAB/BAe JAS 39C
Gripen 4th Generation Multirole jetfighters as replacement over
their MIG-21 fleet.
The Swedish offer outbid 4 other contenders, with the US offer of
used F-16's ending in last place, the Belgian F-16 offer came 2nd.

http://www.gripen.com
http://www.saab.se

Gripen have now been selected by the four nations;
Sweden, South Africa, Hungary and the Czech Republic.


In related news, Saab Bofors Dynamics received Tuesday a further
order from MBDA UK on the development of the METEOR missile.
JAS 39 Gripen will become the aircraft to test the system.

"Meteor is a beyond visual range missile approximately 3.5 meters in
length, for use against air targets. In the future it will replace the
American AMRAAM system. The development of the Meteor air-to-air
missile is being carried out as an international industrial project
involving the UK, Germany, Sweden, France, Italy and Spain."

The Grippens are a gift. When something is completely "free"
it rather skews the "cost/benefit" equation. This was simply
a PR stunt on the part of the Swedes.

Al Minyard

In message , Alan Minyard
writes
The Grippens are a gift. When something is completely "free"
it rather skews the "cost/benefit" equation.

I know, I've been involved in competitions against US FMS

--
When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill

Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk

Alan Minyard wrote in
news
On 17 Dec 2003 15:01:41 -0800, (Karl)
wrote:

The Czech cabinet decided Wednesday to select new SAAB/BAe JAS
39C Gripen 4th Generation Multirole jetfighters as replacement
over their MIG-21 fleet.
The Swedish offer outbid 4 other contenders, with the US offer
of used F-16's ending in last place, the Belgian F-16 offer came
2nd.

http://www.gripen.com
http://www.saab.se

Gripen have now been selected by the four nations;
Sweden, South Africa, Hungary and the Czech Republic.


In related news, Saab Bofors Dynamics received Tuesday a further
order from MBDA UK on the development of the METEOR missile.
JAS 39 Gripen will become the aircraft to test the system.

"Meteor is a beyond visual range missile approximately 3.5
meters in length, for use against air targets. In the future it
will replace the American AMRAAM system. The development of the
Meteor air-to-air missile is being carried out as an
international industrial project involving the UK, Germany,
Sweden, France, Italy and Spain."

The Grippens are a gift. When something is completely "free"
it rather skews the "cost/benefit" equation. This was simply
a PR stunt on the part of the Swedes.

Al Minyard

On the other hand it shows that it is possible to produce
an advanced and effective weapons system at a manageble
cost. In the words of Colonel Per-Olof Eldh:

http://www.gripen.com/gripen_news/gr...ws_2001_01.pdf

“Compared to other fighter aircraft
currently in service, Gripen is a totally
superior product,” he boasts. “It is a
perfect blend of simplicity and sophistication,
and by far the best handling aircraft
I have ever flown.“

“While its flyaway price is comparable to that of a
new F-16 C/D, Gripen’s operating cost of less than
US$2,500 / flying hour (including fuel and all levels
of maintenance) is unrivalled.


Regards...

Alan Minyard wrote:
The Grippens are a gift. When something is completely "free"
it rather skews the "cost/benefit" equation. This was simply
a PR stunt on the part of the Swedes.

If this goes through, the Czechs will pay $806,000,000 for this free gift.

"Glenn P." wrote in message
...
Alan Minyard wrote:
The Grippens are a gift. When something is completely "free"
it rather skews the "cost/benefit" equation. This was simply
a PR stunt on the part of the Swedes.

If this goes through, the Czechs will pay $806,000,000 for this free gift.

There is some debate about that; Saab's own earlier relaease stated that the
Swedish government had agreed to absorb ALL costs for this lease.

Brooks

In article ,
Kevin Brooks wrote:

There is some debate about that; Saab's own earlier relaease stated that the
Swedish government had agreed to absorb ALL costs for this lease.

That must be an misunderstanding. The deal is that the Swedish government
will lease, to the Czech Republic, aircraft it has ordered from Saab, but
no longer needs, and that the lease should cover all costs that the Swedish
government have had for the leased aircrafts, i.e. the lease deal is cost
neutral for the Swedish government.

--
Göran Larsson http://www.mitt-eget.com/

"Goran Larsson" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Kevin Brooks wrote:

There is some debate about that; Saab's own earlier relaease stated that
the
Swedish government had agreed to absorb ALL costs for this lease.

That must be an misunderstanding. The deal is that the Swedish government
will lease, to the Czech Republic, aircraft it has ordered from Saab, but
no longer needs, and that the lease should cover all costs that the
Swedish
government have had for the leased aircrafts, i.e. the lease deal is cost
neutral for the Swedish government.

All I can say is that this is the exact wording from Saab's press release on
Dec 1, 2003:

"Sweden is offering to loan the Czech Republic 14 new Gripen fighter
aircraft for five or 10 years...If the Czech Republic chooses the Gripen the
Swedish state will fully cover any costs associated with the loan."

Source: http://www.saab.se/node3299.asp?id=2003120101310

The only thing I deleted from that excerpt was an explanatory bit about the
JAS-39 NATO compatibility.

Brooks



--
Göran Larsson http://www.mitt-eget.com/

In article ,
Kevin Brooks wrote:

All I can say is that this is the exact wording from Saab's press release on
Dec 1, 2003:

"Sweden is offering to loan the Czech Republic 14 new Gripen fighter
aircraft for five or 10 years...If the Czech Republic chooses the Gripen the
Swedish state will fully cover any costs associated with the loan."

Source: http://www.saab.se/node3299.asp?id=2003120101310

This text:
If the Czech Republic chooses the Gripen the Swedish state will fully
cover any costs associated with the loan.
can be interpreted in several incompatible ways. The Swedish version of
the text, available from http://www.saab.se/node3299.asp?id=2003120101300,
is much more clear if you understand Swedish.

Om Tjeckien väljer Gripen har den Svenska staten full kostnadstäckning
för de kostnader som uppstår med anledning av utlåningen.

The Swedish text says that the Swedish state will be fully covered for
any costs associated with the loan.

--
Göran Larsson http://www.mitt-eget.com/

"Goran Larsson" wrote:
In article ,
Kevin Brooks wrote:

All I can say is that this is the exact wording from Saab's press
release on
Dec 1, 2003:

"Sweden is offering to loan the Czech Republic 14 new Gripen fighter
aircraft for five or 10 years...If the Czech Republic chooses the Gripen
the
Swedish state will fully cover any costs associated with the loan."

Source: http://www.saab.se/node3299.asp?id=2003120101310

This text:
If the Czech Republic chooses the Gripen the Swedish state will fully
cover any costs associated with the loan.
can be interpreted in several incompatible ways. The Swedish version of
the text, available from http://www.saab.se/node3299.asp?id=2003120101300,
is much more clear if you understand Swedish.

Om Tjeckien väljer Gripen har den Svenska staten full kostnadstäckning
för de kostnader som uppstår med anledning av utlåningen.

The Swedish text says that the Swedish state will be fully covered for
any costs associated with the loan.

What version of the "story" did the Czech Republic get told?