Military Aviation News and Discussion

[Terran]

Just for the sake of being Debbie Downer. The Engine isn’t the only American component of the Gripen. Same for the Typhoon and Rafale. They all use any number of critical components that come from the U.S.. Rockwell Collin’s, Northrop Grumman, Honeywell, The Lee Company, HiRel Connectors, Inc. Honeywell especially is in all three providing life support.

 

[John Fedup]

Just for the sake of being Debbie Downer. The Engine isn’t the only American component of the Gripen. Same for the Typhoon and Rafale. They all use any number of critical components that come from the U.S.. Rockwell Collin’s, Northrop Grumman, Honeywell, The Lee Company, HiRel Connectors, Inc. Honeywell especially is in all three providing life support.

Then the US (Trump actually) has a decision to make, restrict key components and there will be no suitable Canadian fast jet for NORAD other than the 16 committed to, unless delivery is refused. It will also send a powerful message to NATO and Asian allies that all future military kit should contain SFA American content to prevent a SH POTUS from disrupting production.

 

[Sandhi Yudha]

Not totally unexpected given the current and deteriorating relationship between ex-friends. Unless Gripen can be configured with a non US engine, Typhoon seems a better option, especially if we can invest into Tempest. Realistically, more than 16 F-35s are needed until an alternative plan is sorted, perhaps 32-45. Delays are not all negative, we can see how TR3 and block 4 progresses (or not). Lost revenue from the program, zero confidence our partner agreement on the F-35 program will be honoured by Trump. A really hard look at the P-8 acquisition should follow if Trump continues his BS along with other long term planned US acquisitions.

Some time ago Bombardier and PAL Aerospace were developing the Global P-6 MPA, based on the Global Express 6500. Is this project canceled?

 

[John Fedup]

Some time ago Bombardier and PAL Aerospace were developing the Global P-6 MPA, based on the Global Express 6500. Is this project canceled?

The project was PAL And Bombardier's attempt to replace the CP-140 fleet. The P-8 won. Not sure what the status is now, a possible restart should the tariff situation worsen.

 

[Ananda]

PAL Aerospace already have facility in Abu Dhabi UAE call PAL Aerospace Services Aircraft Maintenance LLC. This company then last year already sign MOU agreement with Indonesia DI on P6 MPA. Thus P6 already find customer, and eventough it is last year still MoU agreement, P6 already become leading candidate for Indonesian Ocean Class MPA. Indonesia already have MPA with CN235 but consider as Litoral Class.

P6 also face Boeing P8 for this catagory for Indonesian contract. So if this MoU become effective then the production line for P6 already open. Canada as builder country then can decide whether still want to continue with P8 or switch to P6.

 

[SolarisKenzo]

Just for the sake of being Debbie Downer. The Engine isn’t the only American component of the Gripen. Same for the Typhoon and Rafale. They all use any number of critical components that come from the U.S.. Rockwell Collin’s, Northrop Grumman, Honeywell, The Lee Company, HiRel Connectors, Inc. Honeywell especially is in all three providing life support.

True, of course, but you can't compare the amount of US components (or, if you prefer, the "share") that are in the Gripen with the Typhoon or even better the Rafale.
Of course they all do receive support (from Honeywell for example, as you correctly said) but the Gripen is really, really reliant on US made components, the other two much less.
European companies are also working to solve this, for example Microtecnica Spa (an italian-based company that produces components for the Typhoon) was bought by Safran in a joint french-italian operation from Collins Aerospace, with the objective to reduce at minimum the involvement of USA in the program.

That being said, your message is absolutely correct, US is still very important for european companies and systems, but to compare the Gripen with the Rafale would be a mistake.

 

[Terran]

True, of course, but you can't compare the amount of US components (or, if you prefer, the "share") that are in the Gripen with the Typhoon or even better the Rafale.
Of course they all do receive support (from Honeywell for example, as you correctly said) but the Gripen is really, really reliant on US made components, the other two much less.
European companies are also working to solve this, for example Microtecnica Spa (an italian-based company that produces components for the Typhoon) was bought by Safran in a joint french-italian operation from Collins Aerospace, with the objective to reduce at minimum the involvement of USA in the program.

That being said, your message is absolutely correct, US is still very important for european companies and systems, but to compare the Gripen with the Rafale would be a mistake.

The thing is ITARS don’t care.
The British put the Kibash on sales of a number of western fighters to Argentina based simply on the ability to veto due to the Martin Baker ejection system.
The Honeywell life support system is an essential component as the plane is just as grounded without it as if it lacks an engine. The Rafale has a U.S. based electrical system and hydraulics meaning that without the OEM’s support the plane isn’t a plane it’s an expensive sculpture.
If you are convinced that the U.S. government is going to block access to parts and “kill switch” F35 the way it did F14 until the Iranians reverse engineered and patched in parts then ALL modern western fighters and Transport aircraft are just as vulnerable. Farther as with Iran it’s not an easy process to replace said parts. Due to the specialized nature of the manufacturing and CQ as well as getting them into the mold lines.

It’s the right to repair V Tesla problem. Yes in theory you should be able to fix your own car… But major Tech OEMS have a habit of restricting sales of spare parts to those outside of a selected group of approved buyers. Buying a fender or making your own to fix the car isn’t always an option.

 

[Sandhi Yudha]

In that case, if the US refuse to deliver parts for European aircrafts, other countries can do the same. Parts of the air-conditioning system of a 737 are made in Mexico, many composite material access panels are made in Canada and Malaysia, parts of the under carriage in Poland, Engine Vibration Computer in Switzerland, and of course the CFM56-7 engines are not 100% General Electric made. F-35 partner countries can also refuse to deliver F-35 parts to the US, and to find an american domestic replacement will take a lot of time and money and will disrupt the production.

 

[Terran]

So it’s self destruction across the board.
The main thing I am trying to convey is that everyone has bandwidth. The sudden urge to purge US involvement in the MOD supply chains may feel good but it eats bandwidth. Well you are focusing on the potential ITARS risks of F35 well holding up European fighters those same risks are at play. All the while the political bandwidth will likely be drained from other major issues in the defense portfolio.
The UK’s Nuclear deterrence is built on American built Trident missiles with British warheads, however there is nothing built in that could prevent PM Starmer from leveling Mar’lar’go save for the retaliation against Chequers.
ITARS veto power is reactive preventing resale of a system or protest of its use not preventing. Mich as how the UK has prevented Argentina from rebuilding its air forces in retaliation for the Falklands war.

In Canada’s case the re re competition of the fighter program may prevent other unrelated but essential programs in a system known for moving at a glacial pace. Like the UAS program or naval programs, long overdue replacement for it helicopters.


Longer term, fine upgrades to replace some American components might be worth it, however European venders do not often have 1:1 replacements and in full products the U.S. is often the only manufacturer outside of Russia or China.
Yet as seen in the not to distant past the biggest issue in NATO is not nation of origin but stocks.
Both Russia and Ukraine are constantly running short of Howitzer barrels and shells. With Ukraine drawing from across NATO when it started transitioning to 155mm yet the lack remains. Not because the U.S. president turned away but because across the board NATO allies slashed production capacity to sustainment levels based off training rates (at best) of attrition.

Lack of Air defense capability isn’t because there isn’t an indigenous European equivalent to PAC series but because as a whole the organization neglected to generate and sustain the capacity to maintain a deep reserve of systems and ammunition assuming an attrition rate based off Asymmetric conditions.

 

[John Fedup]

In that case, if the US refuse to deliver parts for European aircrafts, other countries can do the same. Parts of the air-conditioning system of a 737 are made in Mexico, many composite material access panels are made in Canada and Malaysia, parts of the under carriage in Poland, Engine Vibration Computer in Switzerland, and of course the CFM56-7 engines are not 100% General Electric made. F-35 partner countries can also refuse to deliver F-35 parts to the US, and to find an american domestic replacement will take a lot of time and money and will disrupt the production.

Exactly right and this is potentially a bigger supply chain issue than COVID, not that the IOTUS could ever figure that out!! Long term, many manufacturing companies around the world, MIC AND commercial, will seriously be re-evaluating their US supply chain dependence.

 

[John Fedup]

So it’s self destruction across the board.
The main thing I am trying to convey is that everyone has bandwidth. The sudden urge to purge US involvement in the MOD supply chains may feel good but it eats bandwidth. Well you are focusing on the potential ITARS risks of F35 well holding up European fighters those same risks are at play. All the while the political bandwidth will likely be drained from other major issues in the defense portfolio.
The UK’s Nuclear deterrence is built on American built Trident missiles with British warheads, however there is nothing built in that could prevent PM Starmer from leveling Mar’lar’go save for the retaliation against Chequers.
ITARS veto power is reactive preventing resale of a system or protest of its use not preventing. Mich as how the UK has prevented Argentina from rebuilding its air forces in retaliation for the Falklands war.

In Canada’s case the re re competition of the fighter program may prevent other unrelated but essential programs in a system known for moving at a glacial pace. Like the UAS program or naval programs, long overdue replacement for it helicopters.


Longer term, fine upgrades to replace some American components might be worth it, however European venders do not often have 1:1 replacements and in full products the U.S. is often the only manufacturer outside of Russia or China.
Yet as seen in the not to distant past the biggest issue in NATO is not nation of origin but stocks.
Both Russia and Ukraine are constantly running short of Howitzer barrels and shells. With Ukraine drawing from across NATO when it started transitioning to 155mm yet the lack remains. Not because the U.S. president turned away but because across the board NATO allies slashed production capacity to sustainment levels based off training rates (at best) of attrition.

Lack of Air defense capability isn’t because there isn’t an indigenous European equivalent to PAC series but because as a whole the organization neglected to generate and sustain the capacity to maintain a deep reserve of systems and ammunition assuming an attrition rate based off Asymmetric conditions.

No question the EU and Canada have military kit acquisition issues wrt inventory and production. Dependence on US items, for both military and commercial stuff, needed for production of domestic product, is is just as much a problem as the US need to secure reliable supplies of rare earths. Thanks to the IOTUS, the West is screwed and China is benefiting as is Russia, until Xi puts the screws to Putin.

 

[Ananda]

Couldn't find dedicated DPRK AF thread. Understandable as before unlike other part of their Armed Forces, DPRK AF seems bit left behind on progress. Still seems they begin to rebuild their AF or part of it.

Some photos circulating online on their large UAV resemblance of US Globalhawk (edit my mistake thanks to @FormerDirtDart), and their AEWC base on IL-76. Seems Kim's recent closeness with Putin begin to pay off.

 

[John Fedup]

Perhaps, if the stuff shown is actually real. Can't believe China is particularly thrilled with fat-boy's new toys, assuming they are real. I won't be around when China finally turns on loser states Russia and NK but the day will come. NK might last a little longer by re-aligning totally with the partner that matters.

 

[Ananda]

won't be around when China finally turns on loser states Russia and NK but the day will come.

I don't think Russia and NK doing is done without consent of China. Even South Korean don't see that what NK has lately from Russia is not dine without China acknowledge.

https://bemil.chosun.com/nbrd/bbs/view.html?b_bbs_id=10044&branch=&pn=1&num=227819

Bemil ussualy got insight from ROK military circles and seems they also understand China involvement with any NK and Russia doing. China seems playing their hand on not shown direct advance transfer tech but let (at least in surface) Russia doing it alone. Afterall NK still under International especially Western sanctions. China let Russia doing it on Surface as Russia has nothing to loose anymore against Western sanctions.



Look at this interior of DPRK AEW&C IL-76. The lay out more inline with recent Chinese architecture lay out then Russian ones. In my opinion shown both China and Russia are still behind DPRK military build up.

 

[FormerDirtDart]

... Some photos circulating online on their large UAV resemblance of US Globemaster ...

Ummm ....
US C-17 "Globemaster III"


US RQ-4 "Global Hawk"


A large UAV resembling a C-17 would be seriously impressive

 

[Ananda]

large UAV resembling a C-17 would be seriously impressive

Uupppss My Bad ..Will going to edit that..But considering the advance of UAV technology and China already playing with cargo drones, who knows.