More Trouble for BAE

#3
Sven, plenty but that's as much as an answer you should get on an open forum.
 
#4
Sven said:
What kit does Typhoon have that contravenes the US rules on technology?
It works :D Yet another example of our biggest allies dicking us when it comes to manufacturing anything in this country. Wonder how the F35 Joint Strike Fighter will work out :roll:
 
#5
Is this just the US trying to control the sale of arms worldwide, or are they scared that the Saudi's may try and use the Typhoons against Israel in the future. Not that the US support Israel in many facets including the supply of arms of course...........

If the US were clever they'd sell the same technology to Israel in order to redress the weapons development status quo, unless the Israelis would only sign arms contracts with the US if they promised to only sell second rate out of date technology to other middle eastern powers and BAE have compromised their position.

The ironic thing is why US technology is in the plane? Surely the joint european effort could have degined and developed their own kit.......don't tell me that procurement of techonology was bought 'off the shelf'.........like people have been trying to suggest with other kit for such a long time.
 
#6
Hescoheed said:
Is this just the US trying to control the sale of arms worldwide, or are they scared that the Saudi's may try and use the Typhoons against Israel in the future. Not that the US support Israel in many facets including the supply of arms of course...........
They were too lazy to use their F15's against anyone, then again they were too lazy to maintain them, so mcdonald douglas had a nice little earner stripping down the airframes and rebuilding them for megabucks. The cheapest option the saudis have ever used is someone else's airliners into towerblocks. oh oh just opened it up to the tin foil brigade :(
 
#7
If the Eurofighter/Typhoon contains US equipment,this raises 2 points,

1 Europe probably does not have an independent technology base from which fighter jets can be developed.As the Eurofighter/Typhoon was conceived in around 1985,there has been ample time for this aeroplane to be 100% European in design.

As an afterthought,does anyone know if the French Rafale also contains US technology?

2 If US approval is required for every third party sale,which is highly likely,this can be witheld whenever the Eurofighter/Typhoon is in competition with a US designed and built aeroplane,or a sale is proposed to a country the Americans raise objections to.

Hardly bodes well for sucessful sales of this aeroplane.
 
#8
Le_addeur_noir said:
If the Eurofighter/Typhoon contains US equipment,this raises 2 points,

1 Europe probably does not have an independent technology base from which fighter jets can be developed.As the Eurofighter/Typhoon was conceived in around 1985,there has been ample time for this aeroplane to be 100% European in design.

As an afterthought,does anyone know if the French Rafale also contains US technology?

2 If US approval is required for every third party sale,which is highly likely,this can be witheld whenever the Eurofighter/Typhoon is in competition with a US designed and built aeroplane,or a sale is proposed to a country the Americans raise objections to.

Hardly bodes well for sucessful sales of this aeroplane.
No it doesn't, not a screw! All home grown
 
#9
Le_addeur_noir said:
If the Eurofighter/Typhoon contains US equipment,this raises 2 points,

1 Europe probably does not have an independent technology base from which fighter jets can be developed.As the Eurofighter/Typhoon was conceived in around 1985,there has been ample time for this aeroplane to be 100% European in design.

As an afterthought,does anyone know if the French Rafale also contains US technology?

2 If US approval is required for every third party sale,which is highly likely,this can be witheld whenever the Eurofighter/Typhoon is in competition with a US designed and built aeroplane,or a sale is proposed to a country the Americans raise objections to.

Hardly bodes well for sucessful sales of this aeroplane.
Well that's like saying because their are Non US part's in their jet's/tanks/ship's/ect they couldn't build their own either


Of course that's also the "special relationship" in a nutshell for you...... :x
 
#10
Baldrick66 said:
Sven, plenty but that's as much as an answer you should get on an open forum.
Not much! Even Airbus has to go to the US goverment to sell some of it's planes to some countrys! and even the french selling the Rafale would have to go to the US goverment for the ok because it got parts made in the US from a company called Data Device Corporation just one of many!

Just the journalist scum milking a story!

Dave
 
#11
Le_addeur_noir said:
If the Eurofighter/Typhoon contains US equipment,this raises 2 points,

1 Europe probably does not have an independent technology base from which fighter jets can be developed.As the Eurofighter/Typhoon was conceived in around 1985,there has been ample time for this aeroplane to be 100% European in design.

As an afterthought,does anyone know if the French Rafale also contains US technology?

2 If US approval is required for every third party sale,which is highly likely,this can be witheld whenever the Eurofighter/Typhoon is in competition with a US designed and built aeroplane,or a sale is proposed to a country the Americans raise objections to.

Hardly bodes well for sucessful sales of this aeroplane.
Agree if for the same reasons we are having in its introduction - is it even the right ac for the job we need it for? Is it a good enough all-rounder? I still say no.

In regard to tech advancement, you ain't going to see UK/Euro invention keeping ground with the US - there simply isn't the money going in to R&D from HMG and others to manage it. And sorry but DSTL simply doesn't cut it anymore. The only way to match up against the US is for a Euro R&D programme. (now there opens a door for the ranters :D )

Trouble is - is there even a big enough market to sell whatever ttype of innovation that organisation would come with? Doubt it.

ITAR is and will always be a big issue.

Just as a laugh - with Libya back in the good books, I think you will find there is less issue in importing kit there than there is to our good friends in the middle east. It is an expanding market. State Dept has the heebie-jeebies everytime there is an export licence required but it realises there is no longer any way of stopping industry as the Administration says it can't. Farse, eh?
 
#12
in_the_cheapseats said:
Le_addeur_noir said:
If the Eurofighter/Typhoon contains US equipment,this raises 2 points,

1 Europe probably does not have an independent technology base from which fighter jets can be developed.As the Eurofighter/Typhoon was conceived in around 1985,there has been ample time for this aeroplane to be 100% European in design.

As an afterthought,does anyone know if the French Rafale also contains US technology?

2 If US approval is required for every third party sale,which is highly likely,this can be witheld whenever the Eurofighter/Typhoon is in competition with a US designed and built aeroplane,or a sale is proposed to a country the Americans raise objections to.

Hardly bodes well for sucessful sales of this aeroplane.
Agree if for the same reasons we are having in its introduction - is it even the right ac for the job we need it for? Is it a good enough all-rounder? I still say no.
Doesn't matter; it would cost more in contract cancellation penalty payouts to cancel now than to continue with the contracts as-is and lob the airframes straight into mothballs.
 
#14
While the US has the potential to cause mischief if they really wanted to, this doesn't happen often as they realise the longer term damage it would cause their own efforts. A lot of the kit the US build and export has EU components in and IIRC they need our approval to export it - this really does work both ways you know.
 
#15
jim30 said:
While the US has the potential to cause mischief if they really wanted to, this doesn't happen often as they realise the longer term damage it would cause their own efforts. A lot of the kit the US build and export has EU components in and IIRC they need our approval to export it - this really does work both ways you know.
The instances are few and far between, Jim.
 
#16
not so few or far between as you think, any US equiptment that is even rigged to carry modern euro kit for the export market requires home country approval, and don't forget about all the german engines in american armoured vehicles
 
#17
Le_addeur_noir said:
If the Eurofighter/Typhoon contains US equipment,this raises 2 points
It might contain some US components, but is very unlikely to contain US systems (for instance, the DDC devices mentioned are probably involved in the MIL-STD-1553B bus interfaces - not insurmountable, but a pain to second-source). When I worked on the project (from the very early to the very late 1990s) we were all quite aware of the ways in which the US was willing to put the boot into arms exports, should there be a chance that a US company could win it. One shining example was the SAAB Gripen - the Volvo engine is derived from a US design, so they need US permission to sell it anywhere. There was a bit of trouble over the Czech contract, IIRC. Remember the Rooivalk's difficulties in being entered for the British AH competition?

The Tranche 1 aircraft radar was all-European, as were the engines, the airframe, flight control systems, defensive aids, guns, etc, etc. (For all that people suggest that we should have bought AMRAAM instead of Meteor, consider what that would have done to Typhoon exports - you can't sell a plane without weapons...).

Should it all get terribly awkward, there's always the fact that there are a hell of a lot of US combat aircraft with UK kit on board - moving map displays and head-up displays, ejector seats. A lot of US civil kit flogged around the world has big UK subsystems - for instance, the Boeing 777 Flight Control System was designed and built by GEC (now BAE Systems) in Rochester.
 
#18
in_the_cheapseats said:
In regard to tech advancement, you ain't going to see UK/Euro invention keeping ground with the US - there simply isn't the money going in to R&D from HMG and others to manage it. And sorry but DSTL simply doesn't cut it anymore. The only way to match up against the US is for a Euro R&D programme. (now there opens a door for the ranters :D )
No offence, but the Americans have been pouring in billions after billions into DARPA for decades now - but money isn't everything. Certainly, we were more than happy that the Typhoon radar could match the stuff from the US in capability (and exceed it in some areas).

So, where are these great technological leaps from the Americans, after all of that investment? Because I can't think of areas where "money poured into research" has provided any great advantage (although I can think of lots of "money poured into production" examples).

The Americans are great at publicity. They're great at fielding systems. But don't fall for any "the US kit is all much better than ours" line, because it's rarely true.
 
#19
in_the_cheapseats said:
jim30 said:
While the US has the potential to cause mischief if they really wanted to, this doesn't happen often as they realise the longer term damage it would cause their own efforts. A lot of the kit the US build and export has EU components in and IIRC they need our approval to export it - this really does work both ways you know.
The instances are few and far between, Jim.
F-16 and F-22 use GEC-Marconi head-up displays.

F-18 and F-35: Martin-Baker ejection seats.

F-18 and V-22: Messier-Dowty undercarriage.

M1 tank - Rheinmetall gun.

Not quite "few and far"...
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top