No-Confidence Vote Over Eurofighter Fails in Austria
This has been dragging out for a while now and it seems that Austria 's government might be making a mistake. If they go through with this cut down order there be buying used Tranche 1 models instead of the newer Tranche 2 or even future Tranche 3 models. I assume older models need more maintenance and in time need to be upgraded so why invest in this early model in the first place? I'm confuse here because how does a country whom are renting F-5 II, there first real fast movers jump up to what $70 to $80 million dollar per Typhoons? Wouldn't used $20 million dollars Vipers be a better deal for there needs? Does anybody know what other aircraft the Typhoon's beat out? This doesn't sound right to me maybe somebody can explain it, thanks.
The whole story
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?F=2880291&C=europe
A no-confidence vote brought by opposition parties over the purchase of Eurofighter warplanes failed Thursday in the Austrian parliament.
The Green party and the far-right Freedom Party (FPOe) joined forces against Social Democrat Defence Minister Norbert Darabos but were outgunned in the 183-seat parliament, where the ruling Social Democrat-Conservative coalition held fast with its majority of 134 votes.
“I made the best decision for Austria, saving 400 million euros [$544 million] and without risk of a lawsuit,” Darabos told the legislature.
Darabos had signed a deal in June with the European aerospace group EADS to purchase only 15 jets, down from the initial 18 ordered four years earlier.
But the new contract met opposition from the Social Democrats’ coalition partner, the conservative People’s Party, who signed the initial 2 billion euro contract with EADS in 2003.
In addition to the cuts, the new contract states that Austria will only receive so-called “Tranche 1” Eurofighters, rather than the more modern “Tranche 2” aircraft, and that the jets will be equipped specifically for air surveillance, allowing the country to save some 370 million euros.
But the conservatives complained that instead of the newest technology, Austria would now be receiving “old and used” planes and voiced doubts over how much money would really be saved as fewer planes would be used more frequently leading to higher maintenance costs.
The Social Democrats have sought for months to pull out of the initial contract, saying it was too extravagant for a small, neutral state like Austria.
But they failed to keep their campaign pledge to scrap it entirely, as legal constraints in the contract meant any attempt to cancel it outright would have been costly, according to legal specialist Helmut Koziol.
The two coalition partners have often been at loggerheads — over education, immigration and pensions — since the Socialists narrowly defeated the incumbent conservatives in elections last October. But they in the end closed ranks over the Eurofighter deal on Thursday.
This has been dragging out for a while now and it seems that Austria 's government might be making a mistake. If they go through with this cut down order there be buying used Tranche 1 models instead of the newer Tranche 2 or even future Tranche 3 models. I assume older models need more maintenance and in time need to be upgraded so why invest in this early model in the first place? I'm confuse here because how does a country whom are renting F-5 II, there first real fast movers jump up to what $70 to $80 million dollar per Typhoons? Wouldn't used $20 million dollars Vipers be a better deal for there needs? Does anybody know what other aircraft the Typhoon's beat out? This doesn't sound right to me maybe somebody can explain it, thanks.
The whole story
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?F=2880291&C=europe
A no-confidence vote brought by opposition parties over the purchase of Eurofighter warplanes failed Thursday in the Austrian parliament.
The Green party and the far-right Freedom Party (FPOe) joined forces against Social Democrat Defence Minister Norbert Darabos but were outgunned in the 183-seat parliament, where the ruling Social Democrat-Conservative coalition held fast with its majority of 134 votes.
“I made the best decision for Austria, saving 400 million euros [$544 million] and without risk of a lawsuit,” Darabos told the legislature.
Darabos had signed a deal in June with the European aerospace group EADS to purchase only 15 jets, down from the initial 18 ordered four years earlier.
But the new contract met opposition from the Social Democrats’ coalition partner, the conservative People’s Party, who signed the initial 2 billion euro contract with EADS in 2003.
In addition to the cuts, the new contract states that Austria will only receive so-called “Tranche 1” Eurofighters, rather than the more modern “Tranche 2” aircraft, and that the jets will be equipped specifically for air surveillance, allowing the country to save some 370 million euros.
But the conservatives complained that instead of the newest technology, Austria would now be receiving “old and used” planes and voiced doubts over how much money would really be saved as fewer planes would be used more frequently leading to higher maintenance costs.
The Social Democrats have sought for months to pull out of the initial contract, saying it was too extravagant for a small, neutral state like Austria.
But they failed to keep their campaign pledge to scrap it entirely, as legal constraints in the contract meant any attempt to cancel it outright would have been costly, according to legal specialist Helmut Koziol.
The two coalition partners have often been at loggerheads — over education, immigration and pensions — since the Socialists narrowly defeated the incumbent conservatives in elections last October. But they in the end closed ranks over the Eurofighter deal on Thursday.