Switzerland without Gripen

[winz]

True, you'd struggle to fine them if they weren't also registered in the US. But they can have any licences they hold removed and be prevented from being allowed any access in the future. And that's going to be a really big problem for a company which wants to sell a product as they won't be able to guarantee support in the future.

Agreed, getting baned from doing business in the US is something any company will try to avoid.

[brydling]

I don't know whether the radar would even fall under such an embargo anyhow, if I remember right the one slated for the E/F is "all Ericsson", so to speak.

 

The ES-05 Raven radar chosen for Gripen E/F is made by Selex. The older PS-05 is made by Ericsson in cooperation with some other party that I don't remember.

[Eddie]

Agreed, getting baned from doing business in the US is something any company will try to avoid.

 

But it wouldn't just stop you doing business in the US, it'd stop you doing it anywhere as you wouldn't have anything to sell. If you can't get the sub components to make your system/aircraft etc. you won't get very far. ;)

 

Think of it this way. You build and sell PCs, and the CPU you use cones from Intel (a US company) as it's determined to be subject to ITAR intel need a licence to sell it to you and even discuss it with you in any detail. You also need a licence from the US to sell the PC on as it is also subject to ITAR.

 

If you try and sell your PC to someone who doesn't also have an ITAR licence you could be fined (even if you're not a us company as you've signed a US legal agreement) , or even worse loose your licence which means Intel will no longer be able to sell you anymore CPUs to build PCs with, or replace any broken or faulty items you've already sold.

[EtherealN]

The ES-05 Raven radar chosen for Gripen E/F is made by Selex. The older PS-05 is made by Ericsson in cooperation with some other party that I don't remember.

 

Ooop, yeah, you're right, I misread a document.

[EtherealN]

But it wouldn't just stop you doing business in the US, it'd stop you doing it anywhere as you wouldn't have anything to sell.

 

The issue that's relevant here though is the customer perspective: would such a possible embargo cause them to no longer be able to get spare parts etcetera. In the case of an embargo against sweden, the interesting aspect is whether they'd still be able to get their components from places like the UK (since UK companies are heavily involved), Brazil, etcetera etcetera.

 

Basically, would a theoretical swiss Gripen fleet be seriously hampered by an embargo against sweden? I'm not sure - had it been the older gripens then definitely, but with the E/F being a lot more international I'm less convinced.

[Scrim]

Yes, but those can only affect US based companies, and those operating in the US. You cannot fine a swedish based company, that isn't operating in the US, because they broke some US law.

 

 

Wasn't this more the case of the spanish having a US based sub-contractor that produced parts for the heli? And if they went on to sell the heli to Venezuela the US authorities could ban the US based subcontractor to export the part? If they (theoreticaly, because I cannot see that to be feasible) switched the sub-contractor for a spannish based, they should be imho ok.

 

If a Swedish company were to strike a deal whereby they include e.g. ITAR regulated components, they would sign up for the risk of severe repercussions should they break that law. I don't know exactly how they'd deal with it, maybe freeze bank accounts of the responsible people, pressure the Swedish government into doing something to prevent the sale, etc. But what is certain is that that company would not be allowed access to any American militarily related technology ever again, and it would face the wrath of the Swedish government, as they'd cause a massive American distrust towards the entire Swedish arms industry.

 

I looked it up, and it was some sort of maritime search plane that had American avionics and engine parts regulated by ITAR. That Spanish company lost a $500US million dollar deal, and it was because they were directly answering to American authorities as well as Spanish since they had agreed to it in order to be allowed those components. They asked for permission to sell the planes, but didn't get it.

 

Well, that's not what I'm talking about though. I'm talking about this situation:

 

1) The Swiss voted yes instead of no

2) The plane gets developed (including their specifications), and delivered

3) A decade in the future, sweden comes under a US embargo

 

What is the problem for the swiss then? The key american component is the engine (in the E/F, that is), but that can be purchased from the british company that made them anyhow - or, indeed, from the americans themselves. Weapons can be purchased from the brits, euros, americans and brazilians still, etcetera etcetera. (If I recall correctly, the brazilians will include the capability to use some of their current and upcoming domestic A2A weapons. The Swiss might not have opted to have that installed in their planes, ofc, but given the commonality they could in future do that; especially considering that the Brazilians are expecting to have a fully capable Gripen production line of their own!)

 

My answers in blue.

Well, in that case there would be some issues similar to the ones I mentioned. Basically, a mess for Sweden, as we can't modernize them on to the degree of being comparable with other Western fighters. This means that the Swiss will have to take over very large, expensive Research and Development, one of the things they tried to avoid by buying foreign planes. I'm not very certain of the proposed responsibilities Sweden would've had if the vote had been a yes, but in most cases we do offer very many treats, such as training pilots, some maintenance, etc. so I guess we would be unable to fulfill some of our obligations, which may or may not result in repaying the Swiss. Beyond the R'n'D part is just my speculations.

 

Not strictly relevant - they would already have purchased it since, as you know, Sweden is not under embargo at this point, nor are there any indications that it would be in the future. (I would, indeed, rate swedish accession to NATO as more likely than that. The yankees have great use of the swedes as well, for example through renting that sat relay for their UCAV's and UAV's up at Esrange.) But yeah, not applicable since the swiss would already have it, and the price decrease would affect Sweden (and the UK), not Switzerland.

 

I think I've covered that in the previous paragraph. Regardless, it'd hardly be a dance on roses for Sweden of course.

 

Still not what I asked though. I asked what would be the effect on Switzerland if they had purchased Gripens today, and in future Sweden comes under embargo? Remember, you are the one that said that the risk of a future embargo on Sweden is one of the reasons it's a good idea for Switzerland to not purchase Gripen. THAT is what I am asking about.

 

And, btw, they wouldn't need Americans anyway, they probably could use the brits that already control large parts of the Gripen manufacturing chain.

 

Well, as I wrote above, they'd probably be very unhappy, since they'd end up with huge outcomes in R'n'D to keep the Gripen modern. I'd expect them to decide it's not worth the money any longer, since the lower costs of keeping the Gripen jets operational would be overtaken several times over by the R'n'D costs.

 

I'm not saying that actual embargoes would be a risk if the Swiss had bought the Gripen, but rather foul play. After the leak of American diplomatic cables, it's been found out that they exerted pressure against Norway simply because they had taken part in a deal to modernize the Gripen slightly or something to that effect.

 

Couple issues there though: such a limited embargo could easily lead to the americans seeing themselves, in turn, blocked from continuing a lot of license production and other purchases that they already are making from swedish industry. (Though, obviously, swedish law already technically prohibits those sales and always did since the US in engaged in wars, but you know how it goes. :P )

 

More relevantly though: the swiss doesn't really need the swedes if push really comes to shove, excepting possibly the radar and some other things. As mentioned: compatible weapons come from three continents, engine already is american/british. I don't know whether the radar would even fall under such an embargo anyhow, if I remember right the one slated for the E/F is "all Ericsson", so to speak. The one in the older ones is Swedish/British. (A collab between Ericsson and BAE, based on a previous british design - a cousing to the Eurofighter radar.)

[EtherealN]

I'm fairly sure embargoing would fall under a force majeure clause. It would be suicidal to not have one of those in there.

 

You also forget the Brazilians. It wouldn't have been just the swiss and swedes. The brazilians will be the largest operator of the type, if I recall correctly, with their own R/D and manufacturing capabilities.

 

But the bigger issue anyway is: are you really concerned enough with the risk of an american embargo against sweden that you feel it's enough to block a purchase? And considering that the Gripen was in competition with the Eurofighter and Rafale - how is any of it different for those?

[Scrim]

Well, as I've said, actual embargoes I don't see coming, just the same old usual dirty tricks which could potentially mess things up a bit one day is the Gripen comes into direct competition with American jets.

 

The Eurofighter and Rafale are different. They're not as cheap as the Gripen, and thus less popular in comparison to American jets. And more importantly, they both come from NATO members, whereas Sweden stands outside NATO.

[brydling]

As for the Gripen's tactical link being superior, no one else than SAAB says that, so I'll chalk that up along with McDonnell Douglas saying that the F/A-18 was superior to the F-22/F-35 (can't remember which one it was) as far as credibility goes.

 

Didn't see this the first time :)

 

It is very superior for it's purposes. It seems I was wrong about "downgrading" though. The TIDLS link seems to be there in parallell with Link16 on the Gripen. They complement each other. TIDLS is being used for stuff like sharing sensor information, for example using several aircraft's radars in passive mode to triangulate targets and other tricks you can use with several radars integrated in real-time. Very much more detailed information than Link16 can share, but it only works with a group of fighters whereas Link16 can be used to communicate with lots and lots of units.

 

Edit:

 

The first two-way aircraft-to-aircraft fighter link was deployed on the JA 37 Viggen in the 1980s. It was disclosed after the Viggen was retired in 2005 that it was capable of a “silent” AIM-120 Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile attack, performed by two aircraft using their PS 46/A radars in passive mode.

- http://aviationweek.com/awin/saab-takes-next-step-fighter-development

 

Sweden has been VERY early with data links and exploiting the possibilities they give.

Edited May 20, 2014 by brydling