If you were well aware of that then you would't claim that Brazil spent 4.68 billion USD on 36 Gripen NG's.
Again, Brazil isn't paying 4.68 billion for 36 Gripen NG's alone, you said you were aware of that yet you again say that Brazil payed 4.68 billion USD for 36 Gripen NG's despite you being aware that that isn't correct and yet you called it a fact, how can something be a fact when it is incorrect?
Russia produces Mig 35's and they buy it at exclusive price which is 35 million USD while Egypt is buying a unit at 43.5 million USD.
You cite acquisition price of Mig-35 for Russia which produces it and buys it at exclusive price of 35 million USD to Gripen NG where we don't know the price yet you claim 80 million USD for a fully loaded Gripen NG which with fully loaded you mean with combat armarment?!? Unfair comparison to say the least...
.
Fully loaded has nothing to do with weapons, weapons are always a separate thing, you are mixing up things here. Fully loaded means all the internal features. I have read an article in the past that gives the cost at not less than 80 million.
I have a folder of articles about the Gripen, I collect all the information about it that I can find, the news about the local production in Brazil have been around for quite some time.
What I said was correct, 4.7 billion is what Brazil pays for getting 36 Gripens.
Virtually all contracts include those extra elements such as spare parts, maintenance, traing and very often tech transfer and that's considered part of the price of the aircraft, that's why there are different price names for what the price includes such as flyaway price and full price.
4.7 billion is what Brazil has to pay to Saab for the Gripen NG deal including tech transfer which is quite typical for many purchases these days. Many other expenses related to setting up production in Brazil are not included in that amount since those are internal expenses in Brazil and are not expenses that have to be paid to Saab.
The problem here seems to be that you didn't know what Brazil paid for the aircraft and you denied it before checking facts and after I showed the link, you are trying to come up with excuses to make it look like paying for training, maintenance, etc is not paying for the aircraft even that is the standard case in virtually all deals. Tech transfer is something that manufactures often have to give out in order to close a sale, nothing unusual there. India for example, hardly buys anything without tech transfer.
IIf happens that conflict arises between China and Vietnam, SU-30 SM's would be tasked to do tasks involving ground, sea and air with less focused defense due to three fronts while a "trainer on steroids" is pointless to you despite need of replacement of L-39 Albatross thus why not have a trainer on steroids that would do ground attacks and shotting down helicopters also possibly launching anti-ship missile...
If the conflict happens and Vietnam possibly gets cut off, unable to aquire more advanced equipment and Vietnam doesn't have production capability to produce a light ground attack jet, they would be forced to use SU-30 SM's and increase chances of losses rather than having a production of light ground attack jets which would allow SU-30's to be solely or for most part focus on air defense and naval targets...
If there is a land war with china, a trainer on steroids has no chance against chinese air defenses, it would be useless. I have nothing in principle against having such an aircraft, but against a power like china, I don't see it and I don't see any of the Sukhoi aircraft that Vietnam has doing ground support missions, they'll be used as interceptors and for naval attack.
Russia produces Mig 35's and they buy it at exclusive price which is 35 million USD while Egypt is buying a unit at 43.5 million USD.
You cite acquisition price of Mig-35 for Russia which produces it and buys it at exclusive price of 35 million USD to Gripen NG where we don't know the price yet you claim 80 million USD for a fully loaded Gripen NG which with fully loaded you mean with combat armarment?!? Unfair comparison to say the least....
Not correct, Russia didn't buy the MIG-35 yet, can't say what price they will pay. I read a couple of times about 35 million as a price for export as a good deal. Egypt paid more because the deal is bankrolled by the Saudis, Russia doesn't have to give them their best price.
By the way, Sweden is paying 150 million for each Gripen NG including parts, maintenance and training, which is quite similar to what Brazil is paying.
If you were well aware of that then you would't claim that Brazil spent 4.68 billion USD on 36 Gripen NG's.
Again, Brazil isn't paying 4.68 billion for 36 Gripen NG's alone, you said you were aware of that yet you again say that Brazil payed 4.68 billion USD for 36 Gripen NG's despite you being aware that that isn't correct and yet you called it a fact, how can something be a fact when it is incorrect?
Russia produces Mig 35's and they buy it at exclusive price which is 35 million USD while Egypt is buying a unit at 43.5 million USD.
You cite acquisition price of Mig-35 for Russia which produces it and buys it at exclusive price of 35 million USD to Gripen NG where we don't know the price yet you claim 80 million USD for a fully loaded Gripen NG which with fully loaded you mean with combat armarment?!? Unfair comparison to say the least...
How do you know that Gripen NG costs 80 million USD? Is it official price for Brazil? Since it will have Brazilian electronics and parts in produced in Brazil yet I suspect that everything else produced outside of Brazil is under heavy tax which Brazilian goverments designed such a tax system to force investements and construction of factories in Brazil which is reason why Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 produced there which brought cutting edge silicon fabrication plants 90 nm and latest was 45 nm.
I can't find such information for the claims that you are making...
SU-30 SM is based/two seat version of SU.27B/SU.32 and SU.30 MKI.
If happens that conflict arises between China and Vietnam, SU-30 SM's would be tasked to do tasks involving ground, sea and air with less focused defense due to three fronts while a "trainer on steroids" is pointless to you despite need of replacement of L-39 Albatross thus why not have a trainer on steroids that would do ground attacks and shotting down helicopters also possibly launching anti-ship missile...
If the conflict happens and Vietnam possibly gets cut off, unable to aquire more advanced equipment and Vietnam doesn't have production capability to produce a light ground attack jet, they would be forced to use SU-30 SM's and increase chances of losses rather than having a production of light ground attack jets which would allow SU-30's to be solely or for most part focus on air defense and naval targets...
Here is one article quoting Saab saying that the Gripen NG will be about 80 million:
Replacing the CF18: Part II - The Gripen NG - CDA Institute Blog: The Forum
One part of the article:
Cost and industrial competition
Unfortunately the Gripen suffers from a problem shared by many western fighters: an inefficient production scale. With only two confirmed clients and relatively small orders, Saab cannot create manufacturing learning curves or economies of scale that would drive down costs. Moreover the NG is in a very early stage of development,
with over 70% of the aircraft’s systems requiring development from the Gripen C. Consequently there is significant discrepancy in the projected flyaway and operational costs. SaabAB has suggested the aircraft’s costs will be approximately
USD$80 million (2012 dollars), but
the Swiss government’s fixed cost is approximately $105 million.
-------------------------------------
Here is the article that says that Sweden is paying 150 million a piece including parts, maintenance and training, again, very similar to what Brazil will pay:
Murphy's Law: Gripen Competes On Price And Being Good Enough
If you were well aware of that then you would't claim that Brazil spent 4.68 billion USD on 36 Gripen NG's.
Again, Brazil isn't paying 4.68 billion for 36 Gripen NG's alone, you said you were aware of that yet you again say that Brazil payed 4.68 billion USD for 36 Gripen NG's despite you being aware that that isn't correct and yet you called it a fact, how can something be a fact when it is incorrect?
Russia produces Mig 35's and they buy it at exclusive price which is 35 million USD while Egypt is buying a unit at 43.5 million USD.
You cite acquisition price of Mig-35 for Russia which produces it and buys it at exclusive price of 35 million USD to Gripen NG where we don't know the price yet you claim 80 million USD for a fully loaded Gripen NG which with fully loaded you mean with combat armarment?!? Unfair comparison to say the least...
How do you know that Gripen NG costs 80 million USD? Is it official price for Brazil? Since it will have Brazilian electronics and parts in produced in Brazil yet I suspect that everything else produced outside of Brazil is under heavy tax which Brazilian goverments designed such a tax system to force investements and construction of factories in Brazil which is reason why Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 produced there which brought cutting edge silicon fabrication plants 90 nm and latest was 45 nm.
I can't find such information for the claims that you are making...
SU-30 SM is based/two seat version of SU.27B/SU.32 and SU.30 MKI.
If happens that conflict arises between China and Vietnam, SU-30 SM's would be tasked to do tasks involving ground, sea and air with less focused defense due to three fronts while a "trainer on steroids" is pointless to you despite need of replacement of L-39 Albatross thus why not have a trainer on steroids that would do ground attacks and shotting down helicopters also possibly launching anti-ship missile...
If the conflict happens and Vietnam possibly gets cut off, unable to aquire more advanced equipment and Vietnam doesn't have production capability to produce a light ground attack jet, they would be forced to use SU-30 SM's and increase chances of losses rather than having a production of light ground attack jets which would allow SU-30's to be solely or for most part focus on air defense and naval targets...
My original statement about the Gripen NG being double the price of MIG-35 (which you rejected) is now confirmed correct even by your own numbers.
You said Egypt paid 43.5 million, lets accept that's the best price (which I don't think it is, but just to close the topic), that's 2015 dollars.
Gripen NG is at least 80 million, 2012 dollars, that's double right there. Those are flyaway prices in both cases, cased settled.
Price with spares, maintenance and training is about 150 million, Brazil got the tech transfer trowed in just about.