NATO to acquire up to 10 Saab GlobalEye

[Yasser76]

It was the PAF that put the Erieye platform on the global stage with its massive order and its effectiveness in Sindoor.

Hope Saab does not forget that in its futures dealings with Pakistan, and "bed time promises" from India.

Makes you think, no one has come up with a proper non US ITAR free LRMPA apart from PN doing this on their own with Leonardo.
French and Germans were going to go their way with an A320 based LRMPA solution but as usual ended up arguing.

What is stopping Leonardo and PN marketing Sea Sultan with maybe a choice of Pak/European anti-ship missiles? Just like everyone seems to be seeking alternatives to E-7 surely they will seek alternatives to P-8?

 

[Ali_Baba]

Makes you think, no one has come up with a proper non US ITAR free LRMPA apart from PN doing this on their own with Leonardo.
French and Germans were going to go their way with an A320 based LRMPA solution but as usual ended up arguing.

What is stopping Leonardo and PN marketing Sea Sultan with maybe a choice of Pak/European anti-ship missiles? Just like everyone seems to be seeking alternatives to E-7 surely they will seek alternatives to P-8?

It is cheaper to buy off the shelf and not incur the R&D costs, then build yourself. It always came down to this in Europe.

However, with the antics of Trump(partly) and how the US establishment has allowed Trump to operate without any "guard-rails" on his conduct has really really shaken the core of Europe and USA allies world wide. No one can trust the USA, and everyone is now looking to remove their military/security dependency on the USA as much as possible.

Europe is heavily investing in its own home grown industry now, with preference for local solutions.

In the same way that Spain is buying the Hurjet from Turkieye, maybe Europe can also buy the Sea Sultan from Pakistan once it is completed, certified like you said. Most of the insides of the Sea Sultan is western anyway with integration of the platform being done in Pakistan, and i suspect with little in the way of Chinese technology inside it.

I suspect what will hold back the Sea Sultan, relative to the P8 is the cost compromise equation between capability and cost, where PN always goes for the cheaper solution to save money it cannot afford and other countries wanting a more higher end capable platform.

Let see - it will be funny to see Europe buying the Sea Sultan from Pakistan, given how many sanctions Europe had applied to Pakistan.

 

[Yommie]

NATO has fancy hardware but they have weak men who cannot fight.

 

[Yasser76]

It is cheaper to buy off the shelf and not incur the R&D costs, then build yourself. It always came down to this in Europe.

However, with the antics of Trump(partly) and how the US establishment has allowed Trump to operate without any "guard-rails" on his conduct has really really shaken the core of Europe and USA allies world wide. No one can trust the USA, and everyone is now looking to remove their military/security dependency on the USA as much as possible.

Europe is heavily investing in its own home grown industry now, with preference for local solutions.

In the same way that Spain is buying the Hurjet from Turkieye, maybe Europe can also buy the Sea Sultan from Pakistan once it is completed, certified like you said. Most of the insides of the Sea Sultan is western anyway with integration of the platform being done in Pakistan, and i suspect with little in the way of Chinese technology inside it.

I suspect what will hold back the Sea Sultan, relative to the P8 is the cost compromise equation between capability and cost, where PN always goes for the cheaper solution to save money it cannot afford and other countries wanting a more higher end capable platform.

Let see - it will be funny to see Europe buying the Sea Sultan from Pakistan, given how many sanctions Europe had applied to Pakistan.

Agree, but NATO chose a slightly less capable system in the GlobalEye too, and this was not predmoninantly cost based, as you say, Trump has really burnt bridges.

My guess is after 2-3 years in PN services where we have ironed out all the issues and have some good operational data, you may well see more interest in the Sea Sultan.

 

[Ali_Baba]

Agree, but NATO chose a slightly less capable system in the GlobalEye too, and this was not predmoninantly cost based, as you say, Trump has really burnt bridges.

My guess is after 2-3 years in PN services where we have ironed out all the issues and have some good operational data, you may well see more interest in the Sea Sultan.

Given that Turkey operates the ATR-72-600 for maritime patrol (same as PN with Turkish systems!), that Turkieye have not placed an order for the P8, I would "like" to think that Turkieye could be a potential customer for the Sea Sultan.

We know ASELESAN will be involved as a source of systems and technology as Pakistan will integrate alot of Turkish systems alongside Leonarado so it should be an "attractive" platform for Turkieye.

Pakistan buys the HAVASOJ, and Türkiye buys the Sea Sultan in return ... It's even got "Sultan" in the name, so they have no excuses ( except for operational doctrines ! ).

 

[Colt_Six_Nine]

Interesting to see NATO split on AEW. Trump did this.

In past it would have been no brainer for everyone to adopt E-7. That way upgrades and R&D costs shared (mostly by US), manpower, training spares all pooled. A French or UK E-3 in the past could hand off to a USAF or NATO E-3 on ops, US had manpower to share for NATO, joint upgrades (to avionics and engines) were US funded.


Now it will be Turkiye, UK and US on one side with E-7 and rest of NATO with Erieye

Trump may have been the definite catalyst but there was some uncertainty on USAF's side as well. They went back and forth on their E-7 orders. USAF was/is interested in space/satellite based AEW&C systems. NATO felt that the program wouldn't make a good financial and supply chain decision if USAF wasn't onboard with a large order themselves.

 

[Colt_Six_Nine]

Also - i do wish that PAF does not give up with the Erieye in the future and maybe one days gets(or upgrades its variants) to the new GlobalEye standard one day.

I'm not sure if PAF will ever transition to full GlobalEye suite.
My understanding is that the GlobalEye = SAAB Erieye ER + Leonardo Seaspray 7500E + some other EW capabilities. If Pak Navy is already moving ahead with the Embraer based Sea Sultan with Leonardo Seaspray 7300E (or similar), PAF may not want to have the additional capability and cost associated with the full GlobalEye suite.

But I do believe the PAF will hold onto their SAAB 2000 Erieyes as much as they can. Afterall, PAF's fleet numbers are significant. Hopefully they can get some meaningful upgrades onto the platform over the years.

 

[Colt_Six_Nine]

It is cheaper to buy off the shelf and not incur the R&D costs, then build yourself. It always came down to this in Europe.

However, with the antics of Trump(partly) and how the US establishment has allowed Trump to operate without any "guard-rails" on his conduct has really really shaken the core of Europe and USA allies world wide. No one can trust the USA, and everyone is now looking to remove their military/security dependency on the USA as much as possible.

Europe is heavily investing in its own home grown industry now, with preference for local solutions.

In the same way that Spain is buying the Hurjet from Turkieye, maybe Europe can also buy the Sea Sultan from Pakistan once it is completed, certified like you said. Most of the insides of the Sea Sultan is western anyway with integration of the platform being done in Pakistan, and i suspect with little in the way of Chinese technology inside it.

I suspect what will hold back the Sea Sultan, relative to the P8 is the cost compromise equation between capability and cost, where PN always goes for the cheaper solution to save money it cannot afford and other countries wanting a more higher end capable platform.

Let see - it will be funny to see Europe buying the Sea Sultan from Pakistan, given how many sanctions Europe had applied to Pakistan.

I don't think Europe is ever buying the Sea Sultan from Pakistan. The GlobalEye already has some MPA integration to it. The easiest would be to slap the Leonardo Seapray systems onto the Bombardier aircraft just like they are doing right now.

And then there's also the possibility of the Airbus A321 MPA as Yasser76 mentioned above.

 

[Colt_Six_Nine]

Agree, but NATO chose a slightly less capable system in the GlobalEye too, and this was not predmoninantly cost based, as you say, Trump has really burnt bridges.

My guess is after 2-3 years in PN services where we have ironed out all the issues and have some good operational data, you may well see more interest in the Sea Sultan.

The GlobalEye may be less capable in terms of AEW&C but does it not provide an additional MPA capability up to an extent?

And will NATO ever use these against Chinese EW systems? I have lost faith in Russia's ability to significantly challenge NATO after the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

 

[Colt_Six_Nine]

Additional Comments:

1. Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) is currently reviewing the possibility of adding aerial refueling to the SAAB GlobalEye / Bombardier Global 6000/6500 air fame.

2. My understanding is that the F-35 uses something called a Multifunction Advanced Data Link (MADL) to communicate with AEW&C while maintaining low observability. I do not believe the GlobalEye comes with MADL. It would be interesting to see if the Americans allow Canada/Europe to integrate the MADL into the GlobalEye program. Lack of MADL can potentially be an issue in the GlobalEye's overall capability to support NATO F-35s. (The future of Canada's order of 88 * F-35s is also surrounded by uncertainty as the Canadian government is revaluating its 2023 order of 88 * F-35s for the RCAF.)

 

[Falcon26]

Thinking of Europe buying Sea Sultan is a bad thinking. It’s better for Pakistan to market the Sea Sultan to Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Indonesia and Malaysia. They need LRMPA and with the recent Iranian disruptions of the straits of Hormuz, the need for a LRMPA is is critical.

 

[KingQamaR]

The only down side I see with the SaaB GlodenEye is that it cant be refuelled mid air. This means it has to be replaced when on long patrols , potentially doubling the number of aircraft needed for 24 hour coastal security. Otherwise this is a fantastic aircraft for Canada and for other European nations. Maybe the next version will have refuelling capability.

 

[Yasser76]

The only down side I see with the SaaB GlodenEye is that it cant be refuelled mid air. This means it has to be replaced when on long patrols , potentially doubling the number of aircraft needed for 24 hour coastal security. Otherwise this is a fantastic aircraft for Canada and for other European nations. Maybe the next version will have refuelling capability.

I guess for Pak refuelling not an issue. By the time it takes off it is practically in station. After 6-8 hours crew fatigues means we have to change anyway I guess

 

[KingQamaR]

Pakistans PAF uses the older version of the SaaB 2000, the Radar on ours maybe is the same or older one. I wonder PAF SaaB 2000 role in shooting down French Rafales is playing a huge role in Saab Sales so basically battle tested.

 

[KingQamaR]

I guess for Pak refuelling not an issue. By the time it takes off it is practically in station. After 6-8 hours crew fatigues means we have to change anyway I guess

For Pakistanis it’s perfect platform. And for NATO it’s a good selling point it’ can land in smaller airfields than the American 737 , it has around half the cost of the E7 and can operate 10000 ft higher I read.. there is plenty reason to just buy twice as many of these of E7s . It’s a very agile solution for NATO.