<link >

Contenders

Rafale F3 : $130 million per plane + extensive tech transfer
Super Hornet : $90 million per plane, weapons and support + will buy some parts from Brazilian suppliers.
Gripen NG : $60 million per plane. Will build half of NGs in Brazil.

Rafale F3 is favored over Super Hornet because of the promise of an extensive tech transfer.

On the subject of Rafale exports, I'm on the "once burned, twice shy" line of thought 

As long as no contract's actually signed, I'm not holding my breath. Plus, if I believe this, the Raf's the most expensive option (sure, it probably includes training, spares, everything plus the kitchen sink).

One reason I'm watching this one closely isn't solely on the aircraft chosen: with the demise of Engesa and other parts of the Brazilian arms industry in the 1990s, the Brazilian land forces' vehicle fleets are a hodgepodge of types that themselves will need replaced in due time.

 

Whichever country's company ponies up the best favor in this aircraft program, could very well garner greater support from the Brazilian government when it comes time to start buying more land warfare systems.

The country/company that doesn't want to be the most favorable to Brazil in this aircraft program, may very well throw away any decent chance said country has in winning further military orders.

 

Be an interesting market to watch for the next decade (South America as a whole, in general), especially with Brazil's Embraer aiming to break into the cargo aircraft market with its planned KC-390 platform.

A good enough dealing over the fighter program could see the Brazilian government encouraging Embraer to extend some favor in return: a lot of nations could utilize a jet-powered tanker-capable cargo aircraft the size thereabouts of a C-130, and KC-390s offered on the cheap in exchange for land combat systems perks from the other country might certainly sweeten a deal there (Sweden might not need many, but France certainly could use them to augment the troubled A400M: a lot of French fighting vehicle types could be transported by this aircraft, to include a vast array of armored cars and Caeser artillery platforms).

 

(Hmmm, maybe I should play that one up in the SP Prediction Market and check back every couple years....)

slowman > The reason Dassault is charging so much is because their bid includes an extensive tech transfer program demanded by Brazilian government, and Brazilian government has an ambition of developing their own fighter jet based on transferred tech.

actually, its been french policy in the last 15 years to make complete ToT a baseline condition to volume buyers.  They've done this to sweeten all their deals.  the reason for this is that full ToT on a platform will provide collateral technology sales for other supporting systems. so the french take a very realpolitik and commercial view that they can increase the margin by association.  (weapons systems, sensor systems, sympathetic ground based sensor systems such as mobile arrays etc....)

your response therefore doesn't stand up to scrutiny.  btw, the differences will be in how the through life support is handled.  its got zip to do with the french willingness to do ToT.  They offered the same full ToT commitment to Singapore, to India etc... 

 considering that Brazil is the big dog in Sth America, and that its seen as a way to leverage into that continent - then the french are not silly (and they never have been as far as commercial lateral thinking is concerned)

The US is now guaranteeing Super Hornet tech transfer to Brazil if they buy Super Hornet, in a written guarantee complete with Hillary Clinton's signature. < link >. All this for mere 36 fighter jets.

 

Now imagine what Boeing IDS is offering for even bigger pies like India's MMRCA and Korea's KFX. The Boeing offer was said to be so attractive it revived KFX program from stalemate.

This deal is ultimately going to be for well more than 36 jets. 

 

India  has already been offered something very similar. 

 

No, this does not somehow validate your various fanboy fantasies about Korea developing a 5th generation fighter with Boeing providing the critical technologies.

 

 

 

 

@ Rufus

 

"The plan is that..."

lol

I love how you just make stuff up and then try to assert it as fact. 

 

Nice try with the picture though... next you should try buying several different plastic model kits and combining them to make a Korean 5th generation fighter.  That way people will know the plan is really proceeding...

 

 

 

 

Some people just don't want to let the F-23 die, do they? 

 

But seriously: a plus side to this could be, Boeing could then propose a stretched model to fulfill the extended range tactical bomber role, once occupied by the F-111 family, now the F-15E, and at one time hoped-for by a conceptual FB-22 (which in all probability isn't going to happen).

 

I for one would bet the Israelis would pounce on such a platform in a heartbeat. Ditto for a number of US allies who like the idea of long range strike capabilities (UK, Australia,.. Taiwan even?) coupled to the best low-observable tech the US is willing to export (Japan, South Korea).

< link >

 

Ha Ha Ha, the US jacked up the price like crazy.

 

For $7 billion,

 

- 28 F/A-18Es
- 8 F/A-18Fs
- spares for above
- 36 AN/APG-79 Radar Systems
- 36 M61A2 20mm Gun Systems
- 36 AN/ALR-67(V) three Radar Warning Receivers
- 144 LAU-127 Launchers
- 44 Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing Systems
- 28 AIM-120C-7 Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missiles
- 28 AIM-9M Sidewinder Missiles
- 60 GBU-31/32 Joint Direct Attack Munitions
- 36 AGM-154 Joint Standoff Weapons
- 10 AGM-88B HARM Missiles
- 36 AN/ASQ-228 (V2) Advanced Targeting Forward-Looking Infrared Pods
- 36 AN/ALQ-214 Radio Frequency Countermeasures
- 40 AN/ALE-47 Electronic Warfare Countermeasures Systems
 

 

 > I for one would bet the Israelis would pounce on such a platform in a heartbeat.

"The plus side to Boeing is that they would now get a competitive platform to compete for both US Navy and international sales against single-engined F-35, with features not available for it, such as supercruise. Without a new platform(which only Korean government is willing to fund its development at the moment), Boeing goes out of fighter business."

 

See... this is the thing you just don't seem to be getting.

 

Developing a new fighter is one of those things that is so absurdly expensive that even a relatively large country(like France), with the experience and technology in house, finds it an extremely challenging and risky venture.

 

The US doesn't have their fighters funded by mid-sized players so that the US Navy can later buy them down the road.

 

You have the whole process backwards. 

 

 

IF the US decides to build such a fighter at some point in the future, perhaps Korea will buy it.  As for Boeing, they are doing just fine for business.  They are going to pick up some additional orders over the next few years and are hardly desperate.  We aren't talking about Dassault, Saab, Sukhoi or Mig here...

 

 

 

 

Yes the US uses some foreign technology, almost always European...