Should the planned and urgently needed replacement for the ageing Saab-105Ö, like the current “105s”, take over part of the airspace surveillance or not? A good question, the answer to which is probably the linchpin of future red-white-red active airspace surveillance and will determine the future of the Eurofighter as well as the Saab successor.
But first things first, let’s start with the Saab-105Ö: Even though flight operations could be resumed at the beginning of February as a result of the reworking of the fuselage/tailplane bolts, operations are set to cease at the end of this year. This causes several problems. Number one: most recently, around a quarter of active airspace surveillance was carried out by the “105s”. In principle, this share could be taken over by the Eurofighters with their current 1,100 flight hours, but this is currently not possible on a 1:1 basis due to staff shortages and only 16 to 18 pilots available, and the flight hours are around ten times more expensive. Problem number 2: With the retirement of the Saab-105Ö, a costly skills gap has opened up in red-white-red pilot training. In addition to the expenses for the already outsourced jet pilot training (e.g. for foreign missions and stays in Lecce and Laage), there is also the problem of “proficiency” – i.e. maintaining skills. How is the young pilot, who has already received two years of training costing many millions of euros, supposed to keep his “wings” valid for many more months until the (supposedly quite expensive) Eurofighter type training? The consequence of this, in turn, is increased costs, which can hardly be avoided anyway. The supply of a successor by the end of the year is illusory, and the introduction of the system would take several years in any case. Nevertheless, a decision on the Saab 105Ö successor is now expected to be made at the end of June (after many postponements in recent years). By then at the latest, there should also be an answer to the question formulated at the beginning.
In order to avoid distortions such as those following the Eurofighter purchase, a strict government-to-government approach without middlemen or domestic representatives is currently being pursued for the Saab successor. According to information from the Provision Group in the Ministry of Defense, which is responsible for procurement, talks are currently being held with Italy, the Czech Republic, Germany and the UK. Although this approach is to be welcomed in principle, it has several drawbacks: government officials are often hardly aware of possible production slots and subsystem-related price margins of their own manufacturers. Armed forces procurers also complain about the lack of proximity to developers and engineers. Technical issues are therefore difficult to discuss, which does not simplify the type decision.
If the successor is to take over part of the airspace surveillance, as is currently the case with Saab jets, the thoroughly innovative Czech L-39NG new edition of the Albatros or Leonardo’s M-345 as well as older models – such as used British BAE Hawks – will fall through the cracks from the outset. In this case, the M-346 would probably be the stronger of the two Italian designs in question. Strictly speaking, this is a high-performance trainer and not an interceptor, but it can be armed with IRIS-T air-to-air missiles, for example, and its performance – as the only twin-engine jet among the candidates – is significantly better than the aforementioned models. A majority in the army also seems to favor the Italian model because the M-346FA, a “fighter variant” of the M-346, has recently been available with its own Griffo on-board radar. Higher investment in the Eurofighter could be an alternative to the M-346. In addition to the investments required this year for new Mode 5/S transponders (around 400,000 euros per aircraft), modern equipment with infrared night vision, electronic self-protection including radar warning receivers and radar all-weather guided missiles would cost a maximum of 200 million euros. Upgrading the Eurofighter to the sole use of airspace surveillance could also bring L-39NGs and the like back into play in order to “bring home” the expensive training. A system change from the Eurofighter to another jet such as the French Rafale or Swedish Gripen is also conceivable. According to rumors, the red-white-red military has had “information” from Saab about 15 plus three Gripen-C/D MS20s with delivery within 18 months at rates equivalent to the Eurofighter operating costs on the table since 2017.
Speaking of costs: The truly comparable operational costs (including daily maintenance, kerosene and co, excluding total system costs) for the Saab-105Ö are around 3,000 euros per flight hour. The M-346FA would be slightly more expensive at 4,000 to 5,000 euros, the Gripen C/D costs between 12,000 and 15,000 euros per flight hour and the Eurofighter between 30,000 and 40,000 euros. The purchase costs of an M-346FA, including support, are likely to be around 30 million euros, those of the M-345 and L-39NG around 10 to 12 million euros – according to our information, leasing is possible for all three variants.
You can also read our big air report on the status quo of Austrian Armed Forces helicopters and aircraft. Here you can find more news about Saab and here to further Eurofighter news.
