Developing countries like Brazil, South Korea and Turkey are humiliating traditional arms suppliers like Russia and Europe. How are they doing it?

>>63861772 (OP)
>boomers are the largest demographic, old and just waiting for retirement
>gen X don't care about anything
>millennials are few, depressed and simply leave for greener pastures abroad
>zoomers are even fewer, retarded and mostly brown non-Europeans
Europe is essentially entering a 300 years long hiatus until its demographics reshuffle entirely and it becomes Brazil with snow and oak trees.

>>63861772 (OP)
>How are they doing it?
By offering "decent" products at a low cost (thanks to low wages and government subsidies) to poorer nations?

>>63861943
Europeans aren’t poor and they’re still buying Brazil‘s plane over their own.

>>63861772 (OP)
Brazilanon, I know you're excited for your the industry base winning orders, but how many threads are you going to spam? You've made like 6 or 7 390 threads so far.

>>63861972
>Europeans aren’t poor
>portugal
>lithuania
>austria
>czechs
>nederlands
They are all laughable militaries with small budgets. I'm sorry sopa de macaco uma delicia, but the main selling point of embraer planes is literally tha they are cheap.

>>63861990
There are no European alternatives. No one wants overpriced germshit anymore

>>63862014
lmao the macaco is mad. Anyone with a real military uses the C-130 or derivates.

>>63862014
My Rheinmetall stonks say otherwise

>>63861772 (OP)
<humiliating traditional arms suppliers
It's just you Russia.

>>63862014
>There are no European alternatives
lmao for a small ass cargo plane? Actual militaries either buy the A400M or the C-130J

>>63861990
Netherlands and Portugal are the only ones that need a transport plane. Both have either islands or oversea territories that could require transportation.

>>63861972
Well, no, the C-390 is a small tactical airlift. The only European alternative is the A400M -- which is a medium strategic lifter.

It's just the C-390 suits those nations requirements more.

>>63862014
Technically yes, since there's no European tactical lifter.

>>63862017
Not really, since the A400M is more capable than the C130.

>>63862042
Those nations also loan their airlift to NATO. There's going to be instances where a C-390 is going to be more suitable than a A400M or C130.

>>63862043
>Technically yes, since there's no European tactical lifter.
the C-27J is small enough.

>>63861772 (OP)
Man, macacos are truly pathetic.

>>63862047
US airlifts were exactly what you want if you gotta move kit and troops to an airspace you 100% control. This was true in these last was US was involved in.

>>63862088
I'd cast doubts on US airlift when it comes to a war Lithuania would be directly involved in to say the least.

>>63862098
That was my point. For that airlift to function uninterrupted it would require complete SEAD in the western part of russia, and since that is not possible you'd need to resupply by rail and sea which btw requires people who know how to do this shit under fire.

>>63862088
Right... okay, like I said: There's going to be instances where a C-390 is going to be more suitable than a A400M or C130. This doesn't need to be during combat operations, but day to day lift and shift.

Same way NATO offers air and sea tanker services.

>>63862130
Turns out, you can take an italian vacay on c390r but if you're ever needing to go shoot your little thing at a child killer? Well now you need to move to that location on something other than a tourist mover.

>>63862057
C-27J is really small. Its MTOW is half that of the Super Herc (C-130J), meaning its payload is also half.
The C-390's MTOW is 17 tons over that of the Super Herc.

>>63862154
I misread your post, I read it as "there's no european SMALL tactical airlift" and jumped on it since I love the C-27, I've been on one during a practice looping and tonneau with the 311th.

>>63861772 (OP)
>Developing
>South Korea
Wut?

>>63862186
Yea, airlift sizes go something like:
Spartan - power gap - Super Herc - Millennium - Atlas - power gap - Globemaster - power gap - Galaxy

>>63862033
>Be world's second biggest weapons arm suppliers
>literally funding your own procurement by selling modernized Soviet hand-me-downs to thirdies
>greatidea.jpg
>lets burn all our Soviet stocks in Ukraine, redirect foreign orders to cover losses making us look like an ureliable supplier and at the same time make all our customers have to choose between not buying Russhit and getting sanctioned
4d chess

>>63862014
Now look at who makes about 50% of the parts for those planes and reconsider your post.

>>63861772 (OP)
>The contract falls through as Brazil is unable to provide the aircrafts and/or parts for further support/maintenance.
It's Osorio all over again, innit?

>>63861772 (OP)
>Developing countries like Brazil, South Korea and Turkey
Are these even considered developing countries. I have always thought of developing countries as places as Sudan, Kenya, or India; not SK, Brazil, OR Turkey, kek. All three of those are past 'developing' anyhow.

They have the advantages of cheaper labor (cheaper than most 'western' countries), larger pool of arms developers/ engineers (South Korea), and an actual incentive to build up (SK and Turkey both either have neighbors breathing down their neck, or want to expand outwards). These all either allow or require larger arms industries.

Selling weapons is highly lucrative, especially considering most countries are looking to replace cold-war era equipment. All three of ur countries provide cheap solutions for replacement, either through lucrative agreements, local production, or generally cheaper products. Not to mention many "1st world" countries have moved much more towards service economies since the 1991.

>>63862337
Nah, Embraer's solid in that regard.
What I want to ask since the thread got hijacked by a master baiter is why not just go for upgraded C-27's?

>>63862338
its more accurate to call them middle powers

>>63861772 (OP)