thats not even remotely close to being the same lol
To tag onto this from Gunjob, BAe engineers were also called in to help design the Gripen and the entire airframe uses a patented process that SAAB was only allowed access to at the time by marketing Gripen as a joint BAe-SAAB venture.
1 Like
I’d actually really like a South African sub-tree. It would provide lots of more ‘meta’ vehicles for the UK air tree and most importantly, fighters. The UK has a lot of makeshift CAS fighters but they don’t perform as well as dedicated fighters like the Cheetah and CL sabres (although the UK can get its own). Particularly alternatives between 9.7 and 11.3 would be nice to see.
1 Like
Just would like to point out:
There’s nothing domestic the British can get that meets Gen 4 standard. We went from Tornado to Eurofighter which is an insane leap in tech. South Africa is a sub tree in UK and a CW nation. It makes sense to pull from closely related nations to give UK something.
To people saying the British have a JAS39 via ETPS: No we don’t. ETPS is a private contractor, not a part of the British Government or RAF. It’s an affiliate of the RAF, but is a private company.
To further shatter this lingering stance: The JAS39 from the ETPS, is a rental. They don’t even own it, it WAS on loan for the ETPS but no longer field that jet for pilot retraining.
Also JAS39D is a trainer jet, never armed with armament by ETPS
1 Like
Absolutely it does
South Africa doesn’t have the navy, helicopters, jets, nor tanks to fill a tree.
Israel had far more on release, and it’s still not enough.
I don’t know
Yeah I find that quite laughable considering that there’s a phenomenal community project to bring to light ZAs great potential.
Of note is that BRs could be off, since this is a fairly old project, but that is besides the point since it very well shows ZAs capability.
As gunjob mentioned, a lot of the components are UK made, or derivatives of UK tech, such as the radar.
The ETPS is run jointly by the MoD and a defence contractor.
It maintains its military ethos by having a Royal Navy Commanding Officer, who works in partnership with QinetiQ civilian staff and leads his military instructors. This military link enables us to share experiences and staff, with other top military schools around the world, enabling it to maintain its place within the top four schools. With its long UK MOD heritage, ETPS is able to attract global students who are keen to learn under the prestigious brand that is ETPS.
Not really sure why people are advocating for a separate south africa tree. The result would just be making the UK tree even worse than it already is, and a half-complete south africa tree with huge gaps.
The result would be that UK has a fifth line available once more meaning that they could get a domestic dedicated light vehicles line.
In no way does removing the ZA sub-tree hugely impact the UK tree in a negative way long term, or at least wouldn’t have those years ago.
1 Like
ETPS is the defence contractor. They are a private business, not a member of the RAF. They are just contracted by the RAF.
Qinetiq is the defence contractor that runs the ETPS with the MoD.
QinetiQ was formed in July 2001, when the Ministry of Defence (MOD) split its Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA) in two. The smaller portion of DERA, was rebranded Dstl (Defence Science & Technology Laboratory).
The larger part of DERA, including most of the non-nuclear testing and evaluation establishments, was renamed QinetiQ and prepared for privatisation. QinetiQ became a public private partnership in 2002 with the purchase of a stake by US-based private equity company the Carlyle Group.
In 2003, QinetiQ signed a 25 year long term partnering agreement (LTPA) under which we provide UK MOD with innovative and realistic test and evaluation of military and civil platforms, systems, weapons and components on land, at sea and in the air. In February 2006, QinetiQ was successfully floated on the London Stock Exchange and the Carlyle Group sold its stake in the company.
You claimed it was a private contractor - it isn’t, it’s a public-private partnership. Calling it an affiliate of the RAF/MoD is like calling Lockheed Martin an affiliate of the USAF.
1 Like
QinetiQ is ETPS: ETPS
They’re literally the same thing, it’s just the name of a service they run, don’t get confused.
This is just muddying the waters, honestly lmao What is even the point in saying this? They’re a private military contractor. They have a public partnership with each other but that doesn’t change the fact that they’re a private entity and not controlled by RAF/MoD directly. The UK didn’t make ETPS. They are hiring these guys as a 3rd party company for services.
In the same way Blackwater isn’t the US Army.
It won’t be added to the game because:
A) No private entities in the game, as per Smin
B) They didn’t even own the Gripen
The ETPS existed 60 years before Qinetiq…
Wrong again…The MoD has been, and still remains, the majority shareholder since the company went public…
…
Yes. You’re aware SAAB is also a company, which produces the Gripen right?
The Gripen is in active service with the Swedish armed forces.
Y’know which plane isn’t in active service with the British? You get 3 guesses.
Nobody cares sweden does not use mi 28 nor t-80u and it still got it so can you just stop ?
Mi-28 was tested by Sweden as was T-80U.
ETPS doesn’t even own it’s own Gripen and is operated by a private company. It will never come to the game because it’s an unarmed trainer jet, and would be plastering a real world company unaffilated with Gaijin in their game.
mi 28 and t-80u are not in active service your ARGUMENT WAS ABOUT ACTIVE SERVICE THEY ARE NOT IN IT but grippen is in ACTIVE SERVICE FOR SOUTH AFRICA AND SA is in UK’s TT, so your argument is completely invalid and also if you also forgot mi 28 and t-80u were STILL crewed by Russians
1 Like