This is not surprising. The Gripen, even the heaver Gripen NG, is half the weight of the JSF, and cost and operating costs vary pretty directly with size.
What appears to have happened is that the Norwegians compared the purchase price of the Gripen that included, "included initial training, initial spares and all mission planning and support systems," to unit flyaway costs for the American fighter, and even then, the cost quoted is about $20 million a pop less than what is bandied about in the media.
Bill Sweetman, talking to his sources, suggests that the Norwegians were concerned about the cost to them if the Gripen turned out to be a market failure.
If only 100 or so were sold, and that is a real possibility, or worse, that SAAB is taken down by the financial crisis, than upgrades throughout its life cycle would be very expensive, while there will be thousands of JSF's produced, as there are already thousands of JSF's on order by around a dozen nations, and the program is backed by the "full faith and credit of the United States".
Their strong language appears to be all about mollifying left wing parties in the government.
SAAB's full rebuttal is here (PDF), here are their bullet points:
- claims that Gripen does not meet the Norwegian air force’s demand rests on simulations containing incomplete or non-existent capacity information
- the alleged life cycle cost does not rest on experience of the Gripen system but hasbeen calculated by applying own assumptions and models of calculations.
- conditions underpinning the calculation are in parts radically altered and based on internal Norwegian assumptions.
0 comments :
Post a Comment