GlobalEye AEW&C, SAAB

Ainen said:
Well, it's 3-side realism.

First, it isn't American. This is current thing. Self-inflicted, but it doesn't matter.

Second, it solidifies division intp second tier forces in NATO. Alliance commons are limitanei. Basic subscription.

Want a premium asset - rely on the US directly, rather than via NATO. Or, pay yourself.
Click to expand...
It's time for Europe to buy european.
 
FighterJock said:
Good news for the future NATO AWACs fleet, I am surprised that they only bought ten aircraft. Will they be buying more? How many E-3 does NATO have in it's inventory right now?
Click to expand...
It's the same bird choosen by france, and France only purchase 2 units. Anorther frecnh purchase will come, as with E2D.
So, so far, Europe purchase 12 units (NATO 10 + France 2), some to come, it's sure.
 
BonPlan2 said:
It's the same bird choosen by france, and France only purchase 2 units. Anorther frecnh purchase will come, as with E2D.
So, so far, Europe purchase 12 units (NATO 10 + France 2), some to come, it's sure.
Click to expand...
France only? Pardon but whats about the 3+1 sweden bought? They didn't cancel it as far as i know
 
Last edited:
kqcke for you said:
France only? Pardon but whats about the 3+1 sweden bought? They didn't cancel it as far as i know
Click to expand...

Stretching a point, you could also add the 6 x GlobalEye that Canada is negotiating prices on. Canada may not be 'on the continent' but it is a member of the EU's Security Action for Europe (SAFE).
 
BonPlan2 said:
Very good news !
European birds. And as french, I'm happy France made the same choice.
Click to expand...
Yes, excellent indeed. Let's hope these GlobalEyes will be ITAR-free and have as little as possible of their hard- and software so they won't be able to remotely impede operations the day we will need them to face Russian agression (eg Qatar air-defences vs Israeli missiles).
 
BROF said:
Yes, excellent indeed. Let's hope these GlobalEyes will be ITAR-free ...
Click to expand...

It is a question of forming requirements carefully. The Global 6500s ordered for the RCAF, for example, will likely have some ITAR-covered components - like secure comms, Mode 5 IFF, unications, DAS, IFR (if they go through with it) and the like. That is exactly what European GlobalEye buyers need to avoid.

To avoid ITAR-related clusterfncks, European nations will need to 'buy local' and force their militaries out their procurement 'comfort zones'. So 'Yes, RTX Collins has a lovely Mode 5 brochure but, no, we're not buying it'. Rinse, repeat for an ITAR-free day ...

BTW, European procurement folks should also beware of US Department of Commerce Export Administration Regulations. Part of EAR relates to Foreign Trade Agreements - the terms of which the current administration seems happy to ignore or change on a whim.
 
BROF said:
Yes, excellent indeed. Let's hope these GlobalEyes will be ITAR-free and have as little as possible of their hard- and software so they won't be able to remotely impede operations the day we will need them to face Russian agression (eg Qatar air-defences vs Israeli missiles).
Click to expand...
I think they are ITAR Free.
All the european weapons suppliers were at one time facing ITAR, so they worked to avoid that.

And I din't see France purchasing a so important asset with such a string. We now purchase US goods only when we are obliged to (ie nuclear carrier catapults...)
 
BonPlan2 said:
I think they are ITAR Free.
All the european weapons suppliers were at one time facing ITAR, so they worked to avoid that.
Click to expand...
I think the radar may be ITAR free. The plane carrying it may not be.


BonPlan2 said:
And I din't see France purchasing a so important asset with such a string. We now purchase US goods only when we are obliged to (ie nuclear carrier catapults...)
Click to expand...
I mean, France did buy E-3 AWACS, but I agree that could be described as a situation where they were obliged to. Did any other nation have a working AEW bird at the time?

Also, I'm surprised that France hasn't been working on their own AEW radar system.
 
BonPlan2 said:
I think they are ITAR Free.
All the european weapons suppliers were at one time facing ITAR, so they worked to avoid that.

And I din't see France purchasing a so important asset with such a string. We now purchase US goods only when we are obliged to (ie nuclear carrier catapults...)
Click to expand...
Yep, those nuclear E-2Ds are very dangerous...
 
Scott Kenny said:
I think the radar may be ITAR free. The plane carrying it may not be.



I mean, France did buy E-3 AWACS, but I agree that could be described as a situation where they were obliged to. Did any other nation have a working AEW bird at the time?

Also, I'm surprised that France hasn't been working on their own AEW radar system.
Click to expand...

As a commercial bizjet, the Bombardier Global 6500 airframe is ITAR-free.

It is US-centric military conversions - like L3Harris' "missionized" Global 6000 and 6500 along with Sierra Nevada's RAPCON-X - where problems arise. Saab deked around that by choosing missions systems, radar, components, etc., not covered by American law.

For this ITAR dodge to work longer term, the Canadian parent firm will need to ditch Wichita-based Bombardier Defense and, ultimately, relocate Global wing production.

[Edit: Bombardier has now switched Global 6500 wing production from its Bombardier US Aerostructures plant at Red Oak, TX, to MHI's facility in Mississauga, Ontario. OT: I was under the impression that Global 5500 final assembly was to be at Wichita but that is now been moved to YYZ.]
 
Last edited:
BonPlan2 said:
I think they are ITAR Free.
All the european weapons suppliers were at one time facing ITAR, so they worked to avoid that.

And I din't see France purchasing a so important asset with such a string. We now purchase US goods only when we are obliged to (ie nuclear carrier catapults...)
Click to expand...
ITAR free is not the same as US free.
 
Ainen said:
ITAR free is not the same as US free.
Click to expand...

No they are not. But, from the foreign procurement perspective that is something of a difference without a distinction.

By simply avoiding US-manufactured components, one can go a long way towards evading potential ITAR restrictions.

As I mentioned previously, Global 6500, purchasers are also buying wings built in Red Oak, Texas. Because they are designated as 'dual-use', those Global wing sets now fall under US Export Administration Regulations ... but not ITAR.
 
Apophenia said:
No they are not. But, from the foreign procurement perspective that is something of a difference without a distinction.

By simply avoiding US-manufactured components, one can go a long way towards evading potential ITAR restrictions.
Click to expand...
I just remember how many Russian reconnaissance/ew aircraft programs stalled or failed after 2014-15.
Many components from idk analog devices are quite hard to meaningfully replace, unless you're dead committed to it.
China can(but even China often eats performance loss), Russia sometimes can. Sweden is just not quite on the right spot of a ruler to do that.
 
Ainen said:
I just remember how many Russian reconnaissance/ew aircraft programs stalled or failed after 2014-15.
Many components from idk analog devices are quite hard to meaningfully replace, unless you're dead committed to it.
China can(but even China often eats performance loss), Russia sometimes can. Sweden is just not quite on the right spot of a ruler to do that.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that I follow your point. If you are suggesting that Sweden is incapable of replacing all US components with domestic equivalents, then yes. But, equally obviously, that is not what Saab has done.

In its buyout of Ericsson's radar division, Saab Microwave Systems inherited the Erieye AEW&C system. That's the biggest challenge solved. I may have missed your intent but the elimination of US-controlled equipment is quite feasible.

First, establish what replacement kit Sweden already makes itself. Then, scan the component suppliers' brochures, eliminating all offerings from firms based in CT, TX, etc. A pain in the arse for Saab? Yes ... but readily achievable for GlobalEye.*

______________________________________

* More purely military projects where Saab is entangled with Boeing are another matter.
 
Another one : https://www.saab.com/newsroom/press-releases/2026/saab-receives-order-for-globaleye
$1,05 Billion

Saab receives order for GlobalEye​

Saab has received an order for two GlobalEye aircraft from a country in the Middle East region. The order value is SEK 10.1 billion, and deliveries will take place in 2030.

“This order underscores our commitment to providing customers with mission-proven, multi-domain AEW&C capability. The increasing international interest in GlobalEye reflects its effectiveness and reliability in modern air defence operations”, says Micael Johansson, President and CEO of Saab.

GlobalEye is an advanced multi-domain AEW&C solution with an array of active and passive sensors that provide long-range detection and identification of objects in the air, at sea and over land. By providing real-time information to joint forces, GlobalEye enables enhanced situational awareness of the surrounding areas and early detection of threats.

Due to the nature of the industry, circumstances concerning the customer and national security interests, no further information regarding this order or the customer will be provided.
Click to expand...
 
Ainen said:
I just remember how many Russian reconnaissance/ew aircraft programs stalled or failed after 2014-15.
Many components from idk analog devices are quite hard to meaningfully replace, unless you're dead committed to it.
China can(but even China often eats performance loss), Russia sometimes can. Sweden is just not quite on the right spot of a ruler to do that.
Click to expand...
If Sweden can no longer use the Bombardier plane due to US shenenigans then I'm quite sure that there's a little known euro firm that would love to work at integrating the Erieye AEW&C system with their offering.

You've probably never heard of them, they're just starting out in the bizjet market. IIRC they're called Dassault.
 
Apophenia said:
Then, scan the component suppliers' brochures, eliminating all offerings from firms based in CT, TX, etc. A pain in the arse for Saab? Yes ... but readily achievable for GlobalEye.*
Click to expand...
Being made in the US isn't what makes something ITAR, or even being from a US company. Good luck finding alternatives to some systems.

And of course, many other countries have their own export control laws which they can and do use to block sales/transfers to 3rd parties...

The only real freedom comes from having a national-only programme, which obviously takes effort and tends not to produce a solution that is interoperable with allies. So countries generally choose to make trade offs.
 
MihoshiK said:
If Sweden can no longer use the Bombardier plane due to US shenenigans then I'm quite sure that there's a little known euro firm that would love to work at integrating the Erieye AEW&C system with their offering.

You've probably never heard of them, they're just starting out in the bizjet market. IIRC they're called Dassault.
Click to expand...
The problem isn't Bombardier, the problem is Analog devices.
And frankly speaking, if the US really decides to go shennengians, Dassault won't fly far either. And very few civilian jets in the world will.

Irony of modern civilian jet market - no one flies without the US supply chain, yet the US supply chain is still in a bad fever state due to tumbling Boeing.
 
They can always go back to Embraer Ainen, I do not know why they went to Bombardier in the first place.
 
FighterJock said:
They can always go back to Embraer Ainen, I do not know why they went to Bombardier in the first place.
Click to expand...
it doesn't really change Ainen's point. The Embraer's also have potentially similar issues as the Bombardier under this hypothetical situation. But ultimately I think it's not a big an issue some are making it out to be. If you're a country where the US is going out of its way to block sub-components, then you're probably a country that's already closely aligned in the Russia or China camp, where at which point AEW options are available there.

In any case I wonder who the undisclosed customer is. UAE already have 5 globaleyes, so I don't think it's a follow on order. Saudi Arabia has some older Boeings that globaleyes could supplement or replace, but I would not be surprised if its ultimately Qatar.
 
red admiral said:
Being made in the US isn't what makes something ITAR, or even being from a US company. Good luck finding alternatives to some systems...
Click to expand...

Fully aware.
Any person who engages in the United States in the business of manufacturing or exporting or temporarily importing defense articles, or furnishing defense services, is required to register with the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls ...
Click to expand...

My quoted response was glib but, let's face it, the vast majority of firms covered in the above quoted ITAR registration rules are US-based. Yes, there are foreign-based registrants and, yes, "many other countries have their own export control laws" (mit einigen herausragenden).

red admiral said:
...
The only real freedom comes from having a national-only programme, which obviously takes effort and tends not to produce a solution that is interoperable with allies. So countries generally choose to make trade offs.
Click to expand...

Agreed ... in general. However, a national-only programme may not be practical for nations with smaller armed forces and industries (I would include both Sweden and Canada in those categories). Sweden gave it a try with their original Saab 340-based AEW&C conversions. But no such local option when moving to a bizjet platform.

As others have pointed out, that platform could have been sourced from multiple suppliers. Embraer was mentioned (although, AFAIK, no Legacy 650Es have been built since 2020). Gulfstream also has a long history of specialty conversions but G550 production ended in mid-2021 (and, I note that, the IAI/Elta G550CAEW conversion is covered under ITAR). That leaves Dassault ... but even the French chose Bombardier for GlobalEye.
 
red admiral said:
Being made in the US isn't what makes something ITAR, or even being from a US company. Good luck finding alternatives to some systems.

And of course, many other countries have their own export control laws which they can and do use to block sales/transfers to 3rd parties...

The only real freedom comes from having a national-only programme, which obviously takes effort and tends not to produce a solution that is interoperable with allies. So countries generally choose to make trade offs.
Click to expand...
What exactly is ITAR and annot be replaced with european alternatives in the Globaleye/Bombardier Global Express? The airframe is canadian, the engines are british Rolls-Royce BR700 produced in... Germany.

And the Eryeie radar was previously installed on Saab and Embraer aircrafts.
1920px-Saab_2000_AEW_%282671689048%29.jpg


1920px-EGVA_-_Embraer_145SA_-_Hellenic_Air_Force_-_729_%2830186004888%29.jpg
 
Last edited:
Wotan said:
What exactly is ITAR and annot be replaced with european alternatives in the Globaleye/Bombardier Global Express? The airframe is canadian, the engines are british Rolls-Royce BR700 produced in... Germany.
Click to expand...
The wings are made in the US and marked as dual-use. Rolls has a US operation importing BR700s, which makes them subject to ITAR.

Flight instruments are made in the US, and are subject to ITAR. The alternate flight instrument supplier is also made in the US.
 
Bombardier switched the flight instrument supplier for the 6000 to Sextant Avionique aka Thales.
The Engine is the BR700-710 manufactured in Germany, only the BR700-725 is manufactured in the US for the B25's and Gulfstream jets.
The wings are built by Mitsubishi in Toronto.
 
WatcherZero said:
Bombardier switched the flight instrument supplier for the 6000 to Sextant Avionique aka Thales.
The Engine is the BR700-710 manufactured in Germany, only the BR700-725 is manufactured in the US for the B25's and Gulfstream jets.
The wings are built by Mitsubishi in Toronto.
Click to expand...
And all are SOLD in the US, therefore subject to ITAR.
 
Apophenia said:
As others have pointed out, that platform could have been sourced from multiple suppliers. Embraer was mentioned (although, AFAIK, no Legacy 650Es have been built since 2020). Gulfstream also has a long history of specialty conversions but G550 production ended in mid-2021 (and, I note that, the IAI/Elta G550CAEW conversion is covered under ITAR). That leaves Dassault ... but even the French chose Bombardier for GlobalEye.
Click to expand...
To be fair, if the French wanted the radar on a Dassault plane, let's say, the new 10X with a lot of space and range, they absolutely could... BUT. They'd have to pay for airframe integration and all that stuff. Which also takes time.
Because you can't just slap that antenna on top of an existing plane and call it a day.
 
MihoshiK said:
To be fair, if the French wanted the radar on a Dassault plane, let's say, the new 10X with a lot of space and range, they absolutely could... BUT. They'd have to pay for airframe integration and all that stuff. Which also takes time.
Because you can't just slap that antenna on top of an existing plane and call it a day.
Click to expand...
Agree, time was always the most factor in their decision. Opposite to the Atlantique where they are happy to wait for the A321MPA instead of procuring the already in service P-8.
 
Scott Kenny said:
And all are SOLD in the US, therefore subject to ITAR.
Click to expand...

Nope, engines are EAR rather than ITAR and the jet is ITAR free. ITAR on items being sold into the US only applies after they have been modified for combat. The engines only become ITAR once fitted to a US military jet like the C-37A or C-37B.

The baseline civilian Global jet is ITAR free and the Erieye is also ITAR free after modification. The E-11A intelligence aircraft however is ITAR controlled.
 
Deliveries in 2030 is pretty fast … i wonder if some of these international orders could be integrated in France, especially if the big NATO order materializes ?

Sabena Technics in Mérignac (right next to Dassault lol) is supposed to do the integration work of the Bombardier airframe.

Last night, French and Swedish stakeholders gathered at the Residence de France to mark the launch of a unique defence and industrial partnership. France officially confirmed on December 30, 2025, the acquisition of two GlobalEye aircraft from Saab.

Beyond this contract, a broader framework for cooperation is emerging, spanning operational and capability domains (between ministries, Direction générale de l'armement and Försvarets materielverk, air forces, and support services), but also, and importantly, industrial partnerships between French and Swedish companies. These collaborations will extend across aircraft modification, airborne surveillance, command and control, as well as simulation and training.It was a pleasure to note the presence of Carl-Johan Bergholm,

Head of Business Area Saab Surveillance, as well as Hervé Grandjean, CEO of Sabena technics, following the framework agreement signed with Saab at Paris Air Show 2025.The French-Swedish GlobalEye journey is just beginning.
Click to expand...

[PRESSE RELEASE] Sabena technics and Saab sign agreement relating to GlobalEye Swedish defence- and security company Saab and Sabena technics have signed a framework agreement relating to aircraft modification work for Saab’s GlobalEye Airborne Early Warning and Control (AEW&C) aircraft.

The long-term agreement is intended to form the basis for future business between the companies, covering complex aircraft modification and associated services for GlobalEye.

“Sabena technics is proud to partner with Saab for such important project as it demonstrates overall capabilities of Sabena technics to participate to complex modifications on mission aircraft, in an european cooperation framework. This partnership will generate up to 50 job positions within our site in Bordeaux”, says Hervé Grandjean, CEO of Sabena technics.

GlobalEye is Saab’s advanced multi-domain AEW&C solution using Bombardier’s Global 6000/6500 business jet aircraft.

Transforming the airframe into a GlobalEye platform involves extensive technically complex work which requires highlyskilled and dedicated personnel.
Click to expand...
 
I too assume that the UAE will have to build the new large shelters, but what base will be the lucky one to receive them?
 
this is the first time Ive heard about aircraft losses on the UAE side. Surprised they werent in shelters to begin with
 
Scott Kenny said:
And all are SOLD in the US, therefore subject to ITAR.
Click to expand...

Wrong. Dual-use equipment - such as bizjet flight instruments - are subject to EAR regs (US Dep't of Commerce) but not to ITAR (US Dep't of State). In cases where authority has been transferred from the latter department to the former, ITAR no longer applies.

Dual-use equipment sold to your DOD falls under the same distinction. So, for example, conversion to E-9A Widget (and its kit) may be covered by your ITAR, but its Canadian-built Dash 8 'platform' most certainly does not.
 
Presumably this story is referring to the attack on Al-Dhafra airbase in March where two hangers where the USN was presumed to store MQ-4C, two hangers where the USAF stored MQ-9 and three hangers where the UAE stored GlobalEye were visibly destroyed though there was no visual evidence of if aircraft were in the hangers at the time.
 
WatcherZero said:
...The wings are built by Mitsubishi in Toronto.
Click to expand...

AFAIK, Global 6500 wings are still made at the Bombardier US Aerostructures plant (ex-Triumph Aerostructures) in Red Oak, TX.

[Edit: @WatcherZero was quite right, after January tariff threats, Bombardier moved 6500 wing production from its Texas facility up to MHI Canada Aerospace's Mississauga plant.]

Mitsubishi builds the revised wings for the Global 5500 ... which, ironically, goes through final assembly in the US (Global 5500 assembly being transferred to Bombardier Wichita in 2020 to free up space at Downsview YYX for Global 7500s).

[Edit: After Jan 2026, it is no longer clear that Global 5500 final assembly will be moved from Toronto to Wichita. Sept 2026 threats to 'ban' Bombardier from the US market would seem to make such a move even less likely.]
 
Last edited:
MihoshiK said:
To be fair, if the French wanted the radar on a Dassault plane, let's say, the new 10X with a lot of space and range, they absolutely could... BUT. They'd have to pay for airframe integration and all that stuff. Which also takes time.
Because you can't just slap that antenna on top of an existing plane and call it a day.
Click to expand...

Quite so and there's also less risk in mounting such radar onto a proven platform versus adapting a new prototype (however small such risks might be).

Dassault CEO Éric Trappier whinges on about Bombardier invading his space in defence while plotting to further smell up the Bordeaux region with their foreign tat.

« Ça m’embêterait quand même que mon concurrent canadien, même si j’ai beaucoup de respect pour mes concurrents, rentre dans le domaine de la défense. En plus, si j’ai bien compris, il vient s’installer dans la région bordelaise [alors que Dassault Aviation possède une usine à Mérignac, ndlr] où je me mobilise dans un contexte difficile, sur les droits de douane avec les Falcon »
Click to expand...

Do such debating techniques actually work? I suppose that M Trappier must know how to best pitch such arguments to Paris. But, it's not a good fit with current NATO trends, is it? Meanwhile, the Dassault 10X platform has lost out in maritime patrol plans (to the A321MPA) and now the E-3F AWACS replacement (to the GlobalEye)
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom