Pakistan to get more SAAB 2000 Erieyes

[Tank131]

Sweden not selling offensive weapons has nothing to do with human rights and everything to do with $$ and perception. Pakistan is percieved to be a wild card nation, unpredictable and in some cases obstinate like Turkey is. But more than that, there is a strong financial motivation not to sell offensive weapons. 1)Indian cash flow to their government in terms of lobbying and likely expat contributions to swedish political causes. 2) they worry if they sell to Pakistan that India wont buy their wares.

They dont care about issues of democracy, nukes, or human rights. They hace offered weapons in the past and if Gripen isn't selected for the IAF airforce tendor, they may do so again if PAF has the need and money. @Bilal Khan (Quwa) @Bilal Khan 777, @MastanKhan or @Oscar please correct me if im wrong but i have read that Sweden had in the 70s/80s offered the Jas 37 Viggen to PAF but US Blocked the export, same happened in 1994 when the Jas 39 Gripen A/B were offered.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Sweden not selling offensive weapons has nothing to do with human rights and everything to do with $$ and perception. Pakistan is percieved to be a wild card nation, unpredictable and in some cases obstinate like Turkey is. But more than that, there is a strong financial motivation not to sell offensive weapons. 1)Indian cash flow to their government in terms of lobbying and likely expat contributions to swedish political causes. 2) they worry if they sell to Pakistan that India wont buy their wares.

They dont care about issues of democracy, nukes, or human rights. They hace offered weapons in the past and if Gripen isn't selected for the IAF airforce tendor, they may do so again if PAF has the need and money. @Bilal Khan (Quwa) @Bilal Khan 777, @MastanKhan or @Oscar please correct me if im wrong but i have read that Sweden had in the 70s/80s offered the Jas 37 Viggen to PAF but US Blocked the export, same happened in 1994 when the Jas 39 Gripen A/B were offered.

The PAF was deep in negotiations with Saab for the Saab 105 trainer, but outcry towards the situation in East Pakistan canned the deal. I heard rumours about the JAS-37 Viggen, but by the 1970s the PAF was generally content with the Mirage III/5. It had even bought a large stockpile of ATAR turbojet engines. I imagine the Viggen might have entered the conversation in the late 1970s and early 1980s along with the Mirage F-1, Mirage 2000 and F-16.

But yeah. Sweden's general willingness to offer India the Gripen (as well as selling it artillery and small arms) in spite of the outcry over Kashmir yet point to Musharraf (which ended a decade ago) is puzzling.

 

[Super Falcon]

Hope these systems should be put on more faster aircraft like Gulfstream etc

Propler on those ATR with limited speed is a Target practice for enemy

 

[Arsalan]

Hope these systems should be put on more faster aircraft like Gulfstream etc

Propler on those ATR with limited speed is a Target practice for enemy

These are not meant to be operating in enemy airspace and rely on fighter jets and friendly ground forces for defense. Speed is not a defensive advantage anymore with missiles reaching speeds much higher than even fighter jets. Propeller aircraft means more on station time, THAT is what will be of critical importance in case of an AEW&C. Plus no point in operating three AEW&C from one plane and the other three from a different type while they could have easily been the same. No need to create more difficulties for the air force.

 

[Tank131]

Hope these systems should be put on more faster aircraft like Gulfstream etc

Propler on those ATR with limited speed is a Target practice for enemy

Saab 2000 was selected because it provides near jet like performance (150kph slower than embraer 145 which in terms or escaping a fighter jet or missile is negligible difference) but has far far lower cost of buying and operating. Additionally it provides far better loitering time or time on station and is more easily serviced. It requires less turnaround time between missions, Ect.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

These are not meant to be operating in enemy airspace and rely on fighter jets and friendly ground forces for defense. Speed is not a defensive advantage anymore with missiles reaching speeds much higher than even fighter jets. Propeller aircraft means more on station time, THAT is what will be of critical importance in case of an AEW&C. Plus no point in operating three AEW&C from one plane and the other three from a different type while they could have easily been the same. No need to create more difficulties for the air force.

The Jet based GlobalEye has longer loitering time than the prop based EriEye.
It is larger of course.

 

[Arsalan]

The Jet based GlobalEye has longer loitering time than the prop based EriEye.
It is larger of course.

More LOITERING time sir? are you sure?
Not range but loitering time. This must be a bigger platform i suppose. Any details will be appreciated.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

More LOITERING time sir? are you sure?
Not range but loitering time. This must be a bigger platform i suppose. Any details will be appreciated.

Just looking at the SAAB website for GlobalEye = 11 hours, EriEye = 9,5 hours.
GlobalEye uses Bombardier Global 6000.
It is 3 meters longer, providing more space for equipment and fuel.

 

[SQ8]

Just looking at the SAAB website for GlobalEye = 11 hours, EriEye = 9,5 hours.
GlobalEye uses Bombardier Global 6000.
It is 3 meters longer, providing more space for equipment and fuel.

Cost per hour also factors in.

 

[[--Leo--]]

waste of money just get the SAM for defence

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

Cost per hour also factors in.

Purchase price of GlobalEye is much higher also.

 

[Bossman]

waste of money just get the SAM for defence

Smart a$$ or just stupid, who will give SAMs an early warning that bogies are heading their way?

 

[[--Leo--]]

Smart a$$ or just stupid, who will give SAMs an early warning that bogies are heading their way?

we have many early warning craft 8 are enough

 

[CriticalThought]

The PAF was deep in negotiations with Saab for the Saab 105 trainer, but outcry towards the situation in East Pakistan canned the deal. I heard rumours about the JAS-37 Viggen, but by the 1970s the PAF was generally content with the Mirage III/5. It had even bought a large stockpile of ATAR turbojet engines. I imagine the Viggen might have entered the conversation in the late 1970s and early 1980s along with the Mirage F-1, Mirage 2000 and F-16.

But yeah. Sweden's general willingness to offer India the Gripen (as well as selling it artillery and small arms) in spite of the outcry over Kashmir yet point to Musharraf (which ended a decade ago) is puzzling.

Sir jee, a group of PAF pilots thoroughly test Gripen C/D, and for all that effort they get their design copied in the form of JF-17. Do you think they are going to be happy with this? I almost feel as if Gripen NG was created with a vengeance to outshine the Thunder And of course they will sell it to India so it can go head to head with the... ahem, 'competition'

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Sir jee, a group of PAF pilots thoroughly test Gripen C/D, and for all that effort they get their design copied in the form of JF-17. Do you think they are going to be happy with this? I almost feel as if Gripen NG was created with a vengeance to outshine the Thunder And of course they will sell it to India so it can go head to head with the... ahem, 'competition'

Besides maybe the cockpit, the PAF didn't copy anything from the Gripen. Ultimately, the Gripen, Tejas and JF-17 belong to the same weight and capability group.