What's new

Dassault Rafale, tender | News & Discussions

Status
Not open for further replies.
AKE SVENSSON - Defense News

Swedish defense giant Saab is awaiting key decisions by officials far from Stockholm: Will Brazil and/or India order its Gripen fighter aircraft?

In general, the company is gradually moving away from its reliance on the Swedish market and expanding its international business. Saab is increasingly active in areas such as UAVs, where it is developing sense-and-avoid technology, and underwater maritime systems, in which the European Defence Agency (EDA) has expressed an interest.

Ake Svensson, who began his career at Saab in missile development in 1976, has led the company since 2003. He will step down Sept. 1 to become president of the Association of Swedish Engineering Industries.


Q. How do you see Saab's export prospects in the next year or two, given that many European countries are in such deep financial trouble?

A. Saab has gradually increased its international export business, with around 5 percent annual growth every year for the last 10 years. Meanwhile, it has been reducing the amount of business it does in Sweden. Currently, about two-thirds of its business is made up of exports, and about a third is done in Sweden. The company's biggest markets are in Europe, South Africa, Australia, the U.S. and in the Middle East.

If we're talking about the fighter aircraft market, then even if the financial situation is unfavorable in buyer countries, there are solutions. If a buying country is buying with the Swedish government, there are arrangements where that country can pay over a longer period. So it is possible even for countries in a poor financial situation to take part in programs.

For smaller acquisitions, such as camouflage or training systems, the financial crisis has not had so much of an impact. We're seeing delays in major programs as countries postpone the bigger acquisitions, while the small and medium-sized procurements are continuing. In Saab's year-end report for 2009, we had fewer orders than usual because of the lack of major orders due to countries postponing these sorts of decisions.



Q. Is there a danger that Saab will be knocked out of the fighter market - both the aircraft and equipment in the aircraft - if it doesn't win contracts for its Gripen from Brazil and India?

A. No, not knocked out. The Swedish Air Force and government made it very clear last year that they see the Gripen as a core component of the long-term future of the Swedish defense forces. The defense minister has said that the defense forces are looking to use it for the next 30 years.

The defense forces also need continuous upgrades. There are also customers in South Africa, the Czech Republic and Thailand who are looking to upgrade their fighters. We already have a customer base, whether we win the Brazil contract or not.



Q. The Swedish government seems to be shifting from its traditional policy of buying domestically to one in which it will buy from foreign companies. What does that mean for Saab in terms of its areas of focus for the future?

A. I expect to see more competition in Sweden. That coincides with Saab competing more on the international market. Sweden will be looking to buy more off-the-shelf or almost-off-the-shelf equipment.

Here, we have a strong product portfolio competing inside and outside Sweden. The Swedish government realizes that by moving to off-the-shelf solutions, then some systems will need further development.

Sweden has said that it will take part in international programs such as Neuron. For Neuron, Saab is the second biggest company in the consortium behind Dassault [the French aircraft manufacturer]. We're developing a UAV almost the size of the Gripen to fly autonomously, at high speed and far away. We're producing a demonstrator UAV that will be ready to fly in around two to three years. The technology being developed for this can then be used for manned and unmanned aerial vehicles.


Q. What are the main features of Saab's more streamlined business portfolio that you have announced? Which areas are you focusing on to make profits?

A. The focus is on five main business areas: aeronautics, including the fighter business; dynamics, with the emphasis on shoulder-launched types of weapons, lightweight missiles, underwater systems and camouflage systems; high-performance electronic defense systems (e.g., radar and countermeasures); integrated security and defense systems for command-and-control and for civil security; and support and services.

There is also a new relationship growing between the customer and industry. In the past, armed forces might have just wanted a radio, but now, they want an operating radio network. They may have wanted very specific equipment and maintenance services. Now, they want capabilities.

For example: Afghanistan. In Afghanistan, Saab has sent its people to put in place the power supply and communications links for a camp. This has, with time, evolved into an infrastructure support capability that we can also apply in other areas as well, such as in civil security.

PPP [public-private partnership] business is also a big potential growth area for Saab. In a first step on this road, we have taken over responsibility for the SK 60 trainer system in Sweden, and we see more of this type of business on the horizon.

We are also looking out for partnerships or divestments for some parts of the business, but I can't say which areas for now.



Q. What future do you see for your niche missiles business? Would you consider merging your missiles division with the missiles division of another company?

A. One shouldn't rule anything out, but we're not losing sleep over that. We have a very strong portfolio in that field and lots of orders. Saab has a strong position on the lightweight missiles side. There is no immediate move to find a partner.



Q. Do you anticipate making any changes to the company's shareholding structure? Is the fact that Britain's BAE Systems owns 20 percent of Saab good for the company?

A. It is good that BAE Systems has two board members, as they are active in the board and have a lot of knowledge about the industry.

Change to the shareholding is a question for the shareholders.

As for when Saab is in competition with BAE products, the BAE members of the board leave the board meeting when such a situation arises.



Q. Do you see potential gains for Saab if Nordic military, political and industrial cooperation moves ahead? If so, in which sectors?

A. There should be an opportunity for the defense forces and industries of Nordic countries to work closer together, as we share the same geography and culture. It would have been helpful if Norway had chosen the Gripen last year, but they chose the Joint Strike Fighter. But there is potential in the Nordic region.

In terms of cooperation, there are a number of projects where a Swedish system has been sold to Finland. There is also a small Saab operation in Finland. There is potential in all the areas in which Saab is working, but it depends on the Swedish defense forces wanting to cooperate.



Q. The European Union recently agreed to look further into maritime surveillance. Can Saab provide solutions?

A. Saab has a lot of airborne sensors, airborne early warning systems, maritime patrol installations, ship-based transponders for the location of ships, and underwater technology with sensor applications for close-to-shore, harbor and out-at-sea protection. We can integrate sensors into command-and-control systems so that operators can get a full picture of the situation. We've produced a demonstrator which is a joint management tool to keep track of ships in the Baltic Sea.

We have developed the medium-sized tactical helicopter UAV system Skeldar, which is now in the final stages of customer adaptations and qualification. The systems are very easy to operate, and the helicopters can be flown from a PC-based ground control station. The operator clicks on a map and can direct the helicopter to fly to or look at a particular position.

We have received a lot of interest for the Skeldar system, and we hope that there will be sufficient customer interest to give us the opportunity to further develop its capabilities for military use as well as for coastal and harbor protection.



Q. The EDA is launching a new 60 million euro joint investment program in unmanned underwater systems, which may include new sensors and maritime mine detection capacities. Is Saab working on new products in this area?


A. Yes, we have some underwater systems. We have developed specific technology for shallow waters and low salinity. We have torpedo and sensor systems already in operation. We also acquired a U.K. company called Seaeye a couple of years ago, which has produced similar underwater vehicles for oil platforms. The combination of Saab and Seaeye offers good potential to work in an EU program.



Q. Is the UAV market a big focus for Saab? Where can Saab add value here?

A. Even if rather rudimentary, current UAVs are effective in operations, but they can only fly in restricted airspace and not civil airspace alongside military and civilian aircraft. We're developing sense-and-avoid technology for that. Part of the key to getting the market up and running is for UAVs to be able to fly in unrestricted airspace.


By Julian Hale in Brussels.


COMPANY PROFILE

* 2009 sales: 24.6 billion Swedish kronor ($3.4 billion)

* Net profit: 699 million Swedish kronor

* Employees: About 13,000

* Order bookings for 2009: 18.4 billion Swedish kronor

* Order backlog at end of 2009: 39.4 billion Swedish kronor

* Major defense products: Gripen fighter jet and weapon systems

Source: Defense News research
 
Don?t delay fighter deal idrw.org

At a time when the combat power of the Indian Air Force is at an all-time low (29 squadrons, against a sanctioned strength of 39.5 squadrons and a required strength of 45 squadrons), two significant events connected with the enhancement of its capabilities are underway without much fanfare and are hopefully gathering momentum quietly, away from the public gaze.
The first of these is the commencement of evaluation trials by teams from the Air Staff Test Establishment (ASTE) of six top-of-the-line combat aircraft from different countries which are contending for the mammoth $10-15 billion contract for 126 multi-role combat aircraft (MRCA) to be inducted into the Indian Air Force, to replace obsolescent aircraft in service and rejuvenate the fading combat strength of frontline squadrons.
The second is the maiden flight early this year of the Sukhoi-T50 (Pakfa), a fifth-generation fighter aircraft being jointly developed by India and Russia under an agreement between the two countries. The aircraft has been in the making since the early 1990s and is scheduled for production and induction into both air forces around 2015-2017. India is funding a percentage of the costs involved (between 25 to 50 per cent, according to different sources), and will also develop some of the integral software and hardware components.
The MRCA trials encompass the F-16 and F-18 from the United States, the MiG-35 from Russia, the Rafale from France, the Eurofighter Typhoon from a consortium of the European Union, and the Saab Viggen from Sweden, each a formidable contender in its own right. The trials will be under constant national and international scrutiny by the Indian government, the competing manufacturers and their governments as well as the aviation industry in general. Foreign intelligence services would also be undoubtedly watching from the sidelines, particularly of those countries with whom India’s relationships have traditionally been adversarial. Needless to say, whichever aircraft is finally selected, the induction of 126 MRCA will provide a quantum jump in the capabilities of the Indian Air Force.
The overall process is undoubtedly complex, but evaluation of the actual equipment against finite parameters and criteria set out in the Air Staff Requirements is perhaps the most objective part of it all. However, military and technical performances of the contending aircraft and financial terms and conditions of the contract only provide concrete inputs into the selection process. A critical part of the final decision has to be evolved in the more amorphous realm of India’s own geopolitical compulsions and strategic national interests, particularly with regard to the countries and blocs whose aircraft are being evaluated. These environments are necessarily unquantifiable and to that extent subjective, but nonetheless cannot be wished away.
In this broader geopolitical context, the ultimate selection of the aircraft will have to take into account the long-term relationships India wishes to maintain and develop with the vendor countries, in particular the United States and Russia, who are contesting the MRCA sweepstakes through their representative proxies — America’s F-16 and F-18 and Russia’s MiG-35. For these two countries, the contract has acquired the overtones of a prestige issue, and could even become a touchstone for future relationships with India, which at present is widely perceived as tilting towards the United States. Russia, on the other hand, is a valued and time-tested ally of long standing, though somewhat shaky on its feet after the end of the Cold War, but nevertheless a putative superpower and a potentially useful anchor for India in the context of the Sino-Pakistan axis.
Historical compulsions have created a strong Russian connection for the Indian Air Force, notwithstanding long-standing complaints at working levels in this country about difficult commercial negotiations with Russian partners. However, the government has nevertheless opted to link the overall future equipment profile of the Air Force with the Indo-Russian Sukhoi T-50 FGFA. This is where the evaluation trials of the MRCA interconnect with the development flights of the T-50 FGFA.
The Indian Air Force has traditionally suffered from excessive multiplicity of equipment and its associated problems. The same mistake should not be repeated in the case of the new MRCA. Logically speaking, therefore, the large fleet of the newly-acquired MRCA should not be inducted independent of future plans, but rather utilised as a lead-in series for the Sukhoi T-50 FGFA. This narrows down the field considerably, and there are some who suggest that instead of trials, India might as well have purchased the required additional numbers of Sukhoi-30 MKI, another outstanding aircraft from the same stable, already in squadron service with the Indian Air Force. The question that now arises is: Is the Russian fifth-generation aircraft, for which India has already committed financially, indeed the final choice for future aircraft for the Indian Air Force?
India has also to contend against itself and its institutionalised phobias of hyper-sanctimoniousness regarding defence transactions. The government has a record of abrupt and impromptu cancellations at the slightest of suspicions, no matter how grievous is the resultant self-inflicted injury on defence preparedness in terms of lost time and opportunities. While no right-thinking person can ever condone corruption, nevertheless a stage has also been reached when the country can no longer afford to throw out the baby with the bathwater by indiscriminately terminating entire series of trials of weapons under acquisition every time there is a suspicion of alleged wrongdoing, whether actual or imaginary. As these exceedingly complex trials of fighter aircraft for the Indian Air Force get under way, it is to be sincerely hoped that they are not interrupted for any reason.
The country must evolve a more rational system of investigation and fact-finding, to target specific parties within the process found to be directly or indirectly involved in any wrongdoing without halting the entire process and delaying weapons acquisition. The ghosts of Bofors have created enough havoc with the country’s defence preparedness. The time has come to finally exorcise them for the greater good of the nation.
 
Israel defense officials advised their Indian counterparts to purchase the F16s, telling them that the US warplane performed better and was
better priced.i found it a forum jp link given by them is now not working
 
Last edited:
Israel defense officials advised their Indian counterparts to purchase the F16s, telling them that the US warplane performed better and was
better priced.i found it a forum jp link given by them is now not working
But that was before the new competition was started, so they supported F16 B52 over Gripen C/D.
 
Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) for first time is considering suing BAe Systems for not providing Tools, Machinery and Spares for the construction of BAe Hawk 132 in India, In 2004 India signed a contract with British Aerospace Manufacture BAE Systems for 66 Hawk Mk. 115Y export variant Hawk 132, 24 of this jets where supposed to be delivered by BAE Systems and rest to be manufactured in India by HAL based in Bangalore.

Trouble came out in open when soon after induction, a Hawk was lost in air accident, BAe systems initially blamed Pilot error for the cause of the jet, IAF inquiry found that Faulty spares were the reasons for the jets crash, soon many incidents of unprofessional ism shown by BAe system started coming out in open, Instead of solving the problems, BAe Systems was finding loop holes in the original contract to put the blame back on India.

Even on the Induction day in Feb 2008 IAF and HAL were struggling to make HAWK jets airworthy in front of A.K. Anthony India’s Defence minister and other dignitaries present at that time ,HAL was not only provided wrong tools and Machinery but also faulty and Second hand spares ,IAF had to limit the Training of the pilots on the jets , Grounding of HTT-32 due to design flaws effected air forces Training of new pilots in a big manner last year , things moved to such a situation where IAF has issued new Request for Information on new jet Trainers instead of a follow on orders on Hawks . BAe Systems have been in past done the same with other exports customers in Middle East.

Euro fighter Typhoon jets currently in India to take part in 10 Billion $ race to provide India with 126 jets in the MMRCA competition may take the beating due to BAe systems, Euro-fighter Typhoon which is been designed with three prime partners, one of them been BAe Systems. Defence Expert Rajesh Sharma told idrw.org that HAWK experience with HAL and IAF have not gone down well with officials, order cutbacks by Development partners in Europe has forced Euro fighter GmbH a Parent company to look for major orders outside, Only Export order has come from Saudi Arabia but since most of the jets will be manufactured in Europe and HAL which will be manufacturing more than 100 of this jets in India. if Euro fighter is selected HAL may face same ordeal it faced with HAWKs, Mr. Sharma also pointed out that European firm has a higher price for the jet compared to others jets, also spares are worth Gold, even up gradation costs as much of that of half cost of the jet which he was referring to Indo-French 10000 cores upgrade package for the IAF’s Mirage2000s fleet.

Mr. Sharma also pointed out that Singapore went on and purchased F-15 due to uncertainty over Typhoon tranche 2 delivery dates and Saudi Arabia was only provided with Typhoon tranche 2 which were built for Royal British Air force , since AESA radar is the main Requirement in MMRCA deal Euro fighter Typhoon AESA is still in development and still to be integrated and accepted in any developing partner country of the jets which may delay the whole induction of this jets in Air force which is in urgent need of new jets to replace old Migs which have been phased out in recent time .

BAe Hawk 132 may shoot down Eurofighter in MMRCA idrw.org
 
chances of EF and RAFALE seems pretty grim now...come SH...
 
chances of EF and RAFALE seems pretty grim now...come SH...
That they would be the costlies was clear from the beginning, but this problems with BAE indeed could be one more problem for EF. The EF IAF would get is pretty much the British EF, because it is the most developed. UK is the only consortium member that already paid for at least some A2G arms and techs integration, that's why the EF weapon trials will be in the UK too. The AESA radar is ITA/UK development, so no doubt that we have to deal with BAE more if we go for EF.
 
Thats why i said EF is on a slippery track..
 
Typhoon is still the best choice. Eurofighter conveyed to the IAF that they would have AESA ready by 2014-15, likely be when the MRCA enters service.

I am sure the winner will blow the trumpet of a new strategic alliance with India and many future defence contracts running and yet to come. Anyway if India were to get 250 units of FGFA at $100m each, it comes to a massive $25bn, i dont think so russian will be unhappy if MRCA goes to Typhoon.

Why would IAF want to import Gripen when the indigenously designed and produced LCA satisfies the IAF's requirements?

I am really curious to find out who wins the LCA engine contract..
 
Typhoon is still the best choice. Eurofighter conveyed to the IAF that they would have AESA ready by 2014-15, likely be when the MRCA enters service.

I am sure the winner will blow the trumpet of a new strategic alliance with India and many future defence contracts running and yet to come. Anyway if India were to get 250 units of FGFA at $100m each, it comes to a massive $25bn, i dont think so russian will be unhappy if MRCA goes to Typhoon.

Why would IAF want to import Gripen when the indigenously designed and produced LCA satisfies the IAF's requirements?

I am really curious to find out who wins the LCA engine contract..

LCA must have thrust vectoring stuff
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom