6 ms·
Various components in the Gripen, particularly the engine which Volvo licensed from GE, are from the US and the US has a veto on them. It is currently blocking
by willvarfar 2y ago
Various components in the Gripen, particularly the engine which Volvo licensed from GE, are from the US and the US has a veto on them. It is currently blocking sale of Gripen to Colombia, for example.
- toomuchtodo 2y agoAre there any other compatible engines for the platform?
- graeme 2y agoNone at present to my knowledge. The French Rafale is the only western jet fighter without any US components.
- toomuchtodo 2y agoThanks. This leads me to the conclusion reverse engineering and production of these GE engines is a priority.
- nradov 2y agoYou've got to be kidding. Reverse engineering the GE F414 for local production and maintenance is just completely impractical, or maybe impossible. It would be faster and cheaper to adapt something like the Eurojet EJ200 to fit into the Gripen.
- toomuchtodo 2y agoAre you saying the Europeans or Chinese cannot reverse engineer an aerospace engine for mass production? I have no particular preference where it’s done, any sufficiently advanced country will do. I suppose any afterburning turbofan engine will do if it fits? Again, not particularly opinionated. Just get out from under US control using the path of least resistance.
- nradov 2y agoYes, I am saying that the Europeans or Chinese cannot reverse engineer a turbine engine as sophisticated as the F414. Having some examples in hand doesn't tell you much about how it was built, nor does that give you the source code for the embedded control software and diagnostic systems. The Chinese have been trying for years to reverse engineer older Russian turbofan engines and still can't get them quite right. And those are a level below the F414 in complexity.
- CRConrad 2y agoYou don't need the source code for the embedded control software and diagnostic systems. If you're pirating the whole engine design anyway, just copy the binary from the example you're copying. (Then just make sure not to hook it up to any radio transmitter under the engine's direct control, so it can't call home to the American manufacturer and be disabled remotely.)
- willvarfar 2y agoWhy try to copy an engine which would enrage the US when you can simply replace it with an engine, a newer engine, that you already produce in Europe and Europe has soverign control over and can offer the Swedes the _right_ to produce etc? Just go talk to Rolls Royce in the UK or Safran in France.
- genewitch 2y agoIs Rolls Royce not owned by Ford motor company? Or is the aircraft engine part separate?
- rkosk 2y agoAfter the original Rolls-Royce Ltd. went bust the British government bought up all it's assets and set up a new company in 1971. The automobile division was spun off as a separate company and sold off a few years later. The engine company is Rolls-Royce Holdings Plc and ain't a subsidiary of anyone. It's the second largest manufacturer of aircraft engines after CFM. BMW owns the modern car company and licenses the name and logo from the engine company.
- eitland 2y agoRather try to get some cooperation with French industry (who already have a complete engine without US strings attached), or British Industry (which has a workings engines, but as far as I understand with some US strings attached.)
- riffraff 2y agoisn't the Eurofighter Typhoon also "US-free"? I kinda thought that was the point of it.