6 ms·

Lost Brazil order raises threat to Boeing fighter jets

51 points by geekfactor 13y ago

rakoo 13y ago
> Brazilian Air Force Commander > Writing on an iPhone There is still some progress to do.
fiatmoney 13y ago
There's also a related issue of the F-35, where the US isn't sharing the source code with partner countries. There's always the delightful possibility that your country and the US get into a tiff, or a competitor country is smart enough to reverse-engineer it, and suddenly your very expensive air force stops working. Makes it very difficult to justify pouring money into an increasingly expensive program. http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/11/25/us-lockheed-fighter-exclusive-idUSTRE5AO01F20091125 http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/11/25/us-lockheed-fighte...
- genwin 13y ago
  > reverse-engineer it Or bribes to get the command
- bayesianhorse 13y ago
  If you get into a "tiff" with the US where you need F-35 fighters, you have more urgent troubles than these Fighters being unreliable...
  - Crito 13y ago
    That's not the point. You are assuming the fighters are only for use against the US. There is the possibility of Brazil (or any other country that has bought F-35s) getting into a diplomatic tiff with the US, losing access to their fighters because of it, and then being unable to use them for standard training exercises or boarder enforcement against neighboring countries. Having your fighter fleet grounded would be "disappointing" in far more situations than "is in a hot war with the US".
    - bayesianhorse 13y ago
      Aha, and then what other country would they use that ability in support of? Cuba? Venezuela? Bolivia? Also they would probably take a near-total hit on their weapons export bussiness...
  - Spooky23 13y ago
    You don't need to be fighting with the US. Say you're Greece, and you're fighting with Turkey. Or Iraq vs. Saudi Arabia. The US picks the winners.
    - bayesianhorse 13y ago
      Don't they always?
- ams6110 13y ago
  The password is 00000000000
  - PostOnce 13y ago
    Somewhat interesting read for people unaware of the reference: http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2013/11/nearly-two-decades-nuclear-launch-code-minuteman-silos-united-states-00000000/ http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2013/11/nearly-two-d...
- gaius 13y ago
  This is what happened in the new Battlestar Galactica.
auctiontheory 13y ago
Bad job to not win a deal despite having access to all your prospect's internal communications.
- a3n 13y ago
  Double edged sword. Once your prospect learns with virtual certainty that you have access to all their internal communications, the prospect must assume that they are your bitch, regardless of how good the deal may appear. They may also feel they've been treated more like an adversary or enemy than a potential trading partner. If I learned that the Ford dealer had been looking in my bank account to adjust their negotiations, I'd walk.
  - MisterWebz 13y ago
    I hadn't thought of that. I wonder how it'll affect the Transatlantic Trade deal or the TPP.
Mikeb85 13y ago
The F/A-18 has an old airframe, and is outclassed by every modern Russian and European plane... The only reason any of them sell is the US' political clout.
- icegreentea 13y ago
  Technically, the Super Hornet airframe is quite new. While certainly a development out of the older Hornet platforms, its fair to say that aerodynamically anyways, the Super Hornet has a pretty recent (development started in early 90s) airframe. Further, it lost its bid to the Gripen, which is approximately as old as the Super Hornet (airframe-wise anyways). You are right to say that the Super-Hornet is outclassed in a huge variety of roles by modern planes from every country, but those are hardly the only considerations. As you say, political clout is important, but it's not just an American thing. [1] is the leaked report for the Swiss Air Force from their procedurement program between the Gripen, Eurofighter, and Rafale. In summary, the Rafale was the clear winner by all metrics. The Swiss went with the Gripen. We don't have a leaked report on how -that- came to be, but likely a combination of realizing that they don't in fact need the best possible platform (likely what Brazil did as well... their final three airframes were the Gripen, Rafale, and Super Hornet, and I cannot believe that the Super Hornet can do anything better than the Eurofighter (or the Rafale)), and some political maneuvering. [1] http://files.newsnetz.ch/upload//1/2/12332.pdf http://files.newsnetz.ch/upload//1/2/12332.pdf
  - Mikeb85 13y ago
    The Gripen has some unique advantages. It's ease of operating, servicing, and STOL capability allows it to be deployed from just about anywhere - you can land it on a forest road, service it, and it can take off from a very short runway again. And it still has great performance. It's really the perfect fighter for Switzerland - a country which doesn't really need a 2-engine fighter. The Rafale's main advantages are range and payload, which does nothing for a small country whose only need is self-defence...
    - icegreentea 13y ago
rogerbinns 13y ago
It sounds nice to blame the NSA, but Brazil was unlikely to buy the Boeing jets anyway. Richard Aboulafia wrote about this, how the Brazilian Air Force budget changes with economic times, their needs and lack of prior history with the more complex (and expensive) jets: http://www.forbes.com/sites/richardaboulafia/2013/12/19/brazils-fighter-buy-that-nsa-narrative-is-probably-wrong/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/richardaboulafia/2013/12/19/braz...
- salient 13y ago
  I actually read that Boeing was in the lead for winning this contract before, but I don't remember the source.
  - ams6110 13y ago
    They were by some accounts, but others (in the Air Force?) were in favor of the less technologically complex Saab.
  - gtirloni 13y ago
    My perception from reading the Brazilian newspapers about this topic since it surfaced: we wanted the advanced Rafale but couldn't pay, Gripen wasn't perfect but it was a bargain so.. Boeing was in the lead because it was advanced and the price wasn't too bad (transferring technology would be good and was still being negotiated).... and then the NSA thing happened. Next thing we heard was our government decided to go with the Gripen. I think the conspiracy theories will go on for a while but in the end the NSA scandal really changed the final outcome. Personally, I think Brazil did a good thing choosing the Gripen. We don't have a history of participating actively in wars (besides, we usually send medical staff instead). Our main concern is the borders and people smuggling drugs.. Gripen, F-35, Rafale.. any of those would serve the purpose very well. It's not like Brazil is planning to use the jets for anything huge like going to war... unlike the US.
    - zorked 13y ago
      Yes, anything at all would have worked since those planes are only meant to keep neighboring countries and drug smugglers minimally in check, so the choice was 100% political. It is pretty clear though that the government was going to award the contract to Boeing for political reasons, which was going to align nicely with the state visit to the US. Then the NSA thing happened, the state visit didn't happen and some people in Sweden will forever thank the US government, since keeping logs of Brazilians chatting about TV celebrities and football was somehow worth losing 4.5 billion dollars to them.
willvarfar 13y ago
Its fascinating how British decryption of French diplomatic cables, which gave them deep insight into de Gaulle's position on Britain's entry to the Common Market, didn't give them a way to stop him then either. (Source: Spycatcher by Wright) Reading the mail of those you negotiate with doesn't always give you a sure bet.
protomyth 13y ago
Not a good time for Boeing with the whole South Korea fiasco. I am really not fond of the US government picking the same company for both the F-35 and F-22. Of course, I still don't think the the F-35 specification was a good idea in the first place. [edit] To explain how weird the world is, here is a agreement between Boeing and Saab http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/AW_12_16_2013_p30-645781.xml http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/AW_...
minor_nitwit 13y ago
The article acts like there's a chance that Boeing is in serious trouble, but the US government has programs to prevent the loss of defense manufacturing capabilities. The status quo is, if a product is not needed in the US, but the manufacturing base to produce it is, to cover a potential major conflict, then the US sends foreign aid to another nation, who in return agree to buy our defense products. In the end, the government just wrote a direct check to a defense contractor to build a weapon for someone else, who probably didn't need it, but it shakes out as being 'foreign aid.' For a good example of this, check out how many tanks the Egyptian government has.
- apayan 13y ago
  NPR's Planet Money podcast had a great episode about Egypt and all their extra tanks and jets that they get paid to buy. http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2013/08/23/214928040/episode-482-why-the-u-s-keeps-sending-weapons-to-egypt http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2013/08/23/214928040/episode-...

51 points by geekfactor 13y ago

rakoo 13y ago

> Brazilian Air Force Commander > Writing on an iPhone There is still some progress to do.

There's also a related issue of the F-35, where the US isn't sharing the source code with partner countries. There's always the delightful possibility that your country and the US get into a tiff, or a competitor country is smart enough to reverse-engineer it, and suddenly your very expensive air force stops working. Makes it very difficult to justify pouring money into an increasingly expensive program. http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/11/25/us-lockheed-fighter-exclusive-idUSTRE5AO01F20091125 http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/11/25/us-lockheed-fighte...

genwin 13y ago
> reverse-engineer it Or bribes to get the command
bayesianhorse 13y ago
If you get into a "tiff" with the US where you need F-35 fighters, you have more urgent troubles than these Fighters being unreliable...
- Crito 13y ago
  That's not the point. You are assuming the fighters are only for use against the US. There is the possibility of Brazil (or any other country that has bought F-35s) getting into a diplomatic tiff with the US, losing access to their fighters because of it, and then being unable to use them for standard training exercises or boarder enforcement against neighboring countries. Having your fighter fleet grounded would be "disappointing" in far more situations than "is in a hot war with the US".
  - bayesianhorse 13y ago
    Aha, and then what other country would they use that ability in support of? Cuba? Venezuela? Bolivia? Also they would probably take a near-total hit on their weapons export bussiness...
- Spooky23 13y ago
  You don't need to be fighting with the US. Say you're Greece, and you're fighting with Turkey. Or Iraq vs. Saudi Arabia. The US picks the winners.
  - bayesianhorse 13y ago
    Don't they always?
ams6110 13y ago
The password is 00000000000
- PostOnce 13y ago
  Somewhat interesting read for people unaware of the reference: http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2013/11/nearly-two-decades-nuclear-launch-code-minuteman-silos-united-states-00000000/ http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2013/11/nearly-two-d...
gaius 13y ago
This is what happened in the new Battlestar Galactica.

auctiontheory 13y ago

Bad job to not win a deal despite having access to all your prospect's internal communications.

a3n 13y ago
Double edged sword. Once your prospect learns with virtual certainty that you have access to all their internal communications, the prospect must assume that they are your bitch, regardless of how good the deal may appear. They may also feel they've been treated more like an adversary or enemy than a potential trading partner. If I learned that the Ford dealer had been looking in my bank account to adjust their negotiations, I'd walk.
- MisterWebz 13y ago
  I hadn't thought of that. I wonder how it'll affect the Transatlantic Trade deal or the TPP.

Mikeb85 13y ago

The F/A-18 has an old airframe, and is outclassed by every modern Russian and European plane... The only reason any of them sell is the US' political clout.

icegreentea 13y ago
Technically, the Super Hornet airframe is quite new. While certainly a development out of the older Hornet platforms, its fair to say that aerodynamically anyways, the Super Hornet has a pretty recent (development started in early 90s) airframe. Further, it lost its bid to the Gripen, which is approximately as old as the Super Hornet (airframe-wise anyways). You are right to say that the Super-Hornet is outclassed in a huge variety of roles by modern planes from every country, but those are hardly the only considerations. As you say, political clout is important, but it's not just an American thing. [1] is the leaked report for the Swiss Air Force from their procedurement program between the Gripen, Eurofighter, and Rafale. In summary, the Rafale was the clear winner by all metrics. The Swiss went with the Gripen. We don't have a leaked report on how -that- came to be, but likely a combination of realizing that they don't in fact need the best possible platform (likely what Brazil did as well... their final three airframes were the Gripen, Rafale, and Super Hornet, and I cannot believe that the Super Hornet can do anything better than the Eurofighter (or the Rafale)), and some political maneuvering. [1] http://files.newsnetz.ch/upload//1/2/12332.pdf http://files.newsnetz.ch/upload//1/2/12332.pdf
- Mikeb85 13y ago
  The Gripen has some unique advantages. It's ease of operating, servicing, and STOL capability allows it to be deployed from just about anywhere - you can land it on a forest road, service it, and it can take off from a very short runway again. And it still has great performance. It's really the perfect fighter for Switzerland - a country which doesn't really need a 2-engine fighter. The Rafale's main advantages are range and payload, which does nothing for a small country whose only need is self-defence...
  - icegreentea 13y ago

rogerbinns 13y ago

It sounds nice to blame the NSA, but Brazil was unlikely to buy the Boeing jets anyway. Richard Aboulafia wrote about this, how the Brazilian Air Force budget changes with economic times, their needs and lack of prior history with the more complex (and expensive) jets: http://www.forbes.com/sites/richardaboulafia/2013/12/19/brazils-fighter-buy-that-nsa-narrative-is-probably-wrong/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/richardaboulafia/2013/12/19/braz...

salient 13y ago
I actually read that Boeing was in the lead for winning this contract before, but I don't remember the source.
- ams6110 13y ago
  They were by some accounts, but others (in the Air Force?) were in favor of the less technologically complex Saab.
- gtirloni 13y ago
  My perception from reading the Brazilian newspapers about this topic since it surfaced: we wanted the advanced Rafale but couldn't pay, Gripen wasn't perfect but it was a bargain so.. Boeing was in the lead because it was advanced and the price wasn't too bad (transferring technology would be good and was still being negotiated).... and then the NSA thing happened. Next thing we heard was our government decided to go with the Gripen. I think the conspiracy theories will go on for a while but in the end the NSA scandal really changed the final outcome. Personally, I think Brazil did a good thing choosing the Gripen. We don't have a history of participating actively in wars (besides, we usually send medical staff instead). Our main concern is the borders and people smuggling drugs.. Gripen, F-35, Rafale.. any of those would serve the purpose very well. It's not like Brazil is planning to use the jets for anything huge like going to war... unlike the US.
  - zorked 13y ago
    Yes, anything at all would have worked since those planes are only meant to keep neighboring countries and drug smugglers minimally in check, so the choice was 100% political. It is pretty clear though that the government was going to award the contract to Boeing for political reasons, which was going to align nicely with the state visit to the US. Then the NSA thing happened, the state visit didn't happen and some people in Sweden will forever thank the US government, since keeping logs of Brazilians chatting about TV celebrities and football was somehow worth losing 4.5 billion dollars to them.

willvarfar 13y ago

Its fascinating how British decryption of French diplomatic cables, which gave them deep insight into de Gaulle's position on Britain's entry to the Common Market, didn't give them a way to stop him then either. (Source: Spycatcher by Wright) Reading the mail of those you negotiate with doesn't always give you a sure bet.

protomyth 13y ago

Not a good time for Boeing with the whole South Korea fiasco. I am really not fond of the US government picking the same company for both the F-35 and F-22. Of course, I still don't think the the F-35 specification was a good idea in the first place. [edit] To explain how weird the world is, here is a agreement between Boeing and Saab http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/AW_12_16_2013_p30-645781.xml http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/AW_...

minor_nitwit 13y ago

The article acts like there's a chance that Boeing is in serious trouble, but the US government has programs to prevent the loss of defense manufacturing capabilities. The status quo is, if a product is not needed in the US, but the manufacturing base to produce it is, to cover a potential major conflict, then the US sends foreign aid to another nation, who in return agree to buy our defense products. In the end, the government just wrote a direct check to a defense contractor to build a weapon for someone else, who probably didn't need it, but it shakes out as being 'foreign aid.' For a good example of this, check out how many tanks the Egyptian government has.

apayan 13y ago
NPR's Planet Money podcast had a great episode about Egypt and all their extra tanks and jets that they get paid to buy. http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2013/08/23/214928040/episode-482-why-the-u-s-keeps-sending-weapons-to-egypt http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2013/08/23/214928040/episode-...