UK Eurofighter Bill Goes Up By £4 Billion?
 

Eurofighter To Cost Several More Billion Euros

BERLIN — The bill for the Eurofighter combat jets developed by a consortium of four European countries is going to cost over 10 billion euros more than expected, the German magazine Focus has reported.

For the countries involved in developing the Eurofighter, Britain will have to spend an additional 5.8 billion euros (8.2 billion dollars), Italy 2.16 billion, Germany 1.97 billion and Spain 820 million, the weekly reported in its edition to appear Jan. 28.

Focus cited a letter from Eurofighter-GmbH, the German branch of the consortium, addressed to Germany’s defense ministry.

“Other clients” for the Eurofighter will also have to pay more, the magazine said.

The cost of developing the military jet has increased due to certain “systems” and other modernization, Focus said........

Why will we (the UK) "have" to pay more?
Have we not already signed all the contracts?
Who is asking for more money?
Will this be tagged onto the bill for the next tranche?
Is this not subsidising the Saudi deal?

I wonder how much of the figure represents industry clawing back the inevitable extra costs caused when the politicians have delayed the project, failing to sign contracts on time, messing about changing their minds on particular capabilities, etc.

German procrastination in the early days was once estimated to have cost £5 Bn - and since then HMG has been responsible for a delay of almost a year in signing Tranche 2. You can't slam the brakes on like that without incurring costs.

Makes 2 CVF look cheap as chips in comparison .............

Ready for the inevitable Jacko ...........

Sorry Oggs, I'd missed the contractually guaranteed 'hard' price for JSF.....

Oh no, wait a minute, there isn't one.

Nor any sign of a really robust ITAR agreement (as opposed to an ill-defined face saving compromise), either.

The Eurofighter
 

You Sir, Name! wrote,

Kwachon wrote,

Never! :E

Two CVFs, cheap.

But then you know what it costs for a fighter slower and less agile than Typhoon, with less range and a mighty 2,000 pound offensive weapon load...

And merrily did 't Bungling Baron chortle......

on the subject of carriers, does anyone know roughly how much the yanks pay for their flattops and if we ask nicely, could they knock us off a couple???

Even if they did, we would not have enough CBLFs to crew one. Last I looked a Nimitz had a crew of over 5000.

Fair point, but we can actually employ a person to do more than one job at a time!!!! We have people who can cook chips and also butter the roles at the same time.

How quaint!!!! :O

Yes but can they also polish shoes? :ouch:

We're buying the wrong version, should've got the CV - greater payload, stacks of gas. In any case, it's not meant to be a dogfighter, but a strike fighter.

!!!!

....well I guess there go any ideas of C-17 numbers 7 & 8 then! :mad: (Or FSTA, A400M or any other potentially useful projects in the pipeline)

If accurate, I wonder what the true repurcussions of this will be? :sad:

In view of the old joke about the statistician and the cat's tail, where do you start measuring? EUR5 billion more than the price when?

CAS will have more zoomy things in his playmobil airport set. Pity half of them are broken beyond repair.

Not a dig at the Typhoon guys, I am sure you'll do a great job. Our priorities are a bit 1950's centric though!

I happened to be reading something else today and this coincidently popped up.

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news...l_jsf_070430m/

Not all journalists are the same. There are a handful who confound the PPRuNe received wisdom, who know what's going on, and who tell it exactly like it is.

Two UK aviation journos stand head and shoulders above the rest, in my view. Both write beautifully. Both have massive intellects, great contacts, and enough raw enthusiasm and natural curiosity to keep on top of their respective areas of expertise. Both have incisive and analytical minds, and I view anything that they write as being well worth reading. I count my time well spent, reading a technical or in-depth programme piece by Doug Barrie (Aviation Week, ex-Flight, ex-JDW).

Just as I view anything by Francis Tusa as being just as useful a guide to the more political and personal (how key movers and shakers are thinking) factors that lie behind the news. His newsletter (Defence Analysis) is expensive, but it's always thought provoking, informative and invariably amusing. If you have the cash, you should subscribe, even at £300 per year or so.

Francis told me that it is his understanding, having got an in-depth translation of the original report, that this €5bn extra (or a large part of it, perhaps) is the "cost" of the UK having to "buy" "extra" aircraft to replace those that we are selling to Saudi Arabia.

It is not a net cost, but a gross one, and takes no account of Saudi money coming in in payment for these jets, nor of the lower UPC that will result from the increased production total...

We seem to have utterly forgotten to observe rule *1.

NEVER trust German newspaper reports on defence: they are inevitably riddled with errors!

Story has been out for over 24 hours without a government rebuttal. Silence on matter mean in all likelihood story is true.

Governments are run by politicians and any politician worth the name isn't going to let a false statement about a 5 billion cost overrun stand if the statement is false are there are mitigating factors.

Theres some denial here!!

cheers