Swiss RFP For Fighter By End May.

Thunderboltdrgn · Tue Feb 05, 2013 11:58 am

New article: http://www.srf.ch/news/schweiz/wende...uergerliche-unterstuetzen-den-kauf

Also from what I've heard, the development program of the Gripen E version
only needed to use 60% of its budget
.

[Edited 2013-02-05 04:00:43]

[Edited 2013-02-05 04:01:19]

Thunderboltdrgn · Fri Jan 17, 2014 9:32 pm

A date for the public referendum have been set to Sunday May 18th this year.

The referendum will be whether funds should be allocated for the purchase of the Gripen fighters.

http://www.news.admin.ch/message/index.html?lang=de&msg-id=51687

94717 · Fri Jan 17, 2014 11:10 pm

with Brazil on board Gripen E/F will happen with or without teh Swiss airforce. This should make some voices in the parlament change.

TGIF · Mon Jan 20, 2014 9:13 am

Quoting olle (Reply 202):
This should make some voices in the parlament change.

The referendum will be a public vote where the citizens of Switzerland will have their say. The parliament (both chambers) has already approved the purchase and the funds.

jumpjet · Mon Jan 20, 2014 11:17 am

OK, so here we go...

Being 100% serious and without wishing to offend anyone out there, what would happen if Switzerland didn't re-equip with anything? What would happen if they just got rid of all their fast jets? I can't work out what the Swiss Air Force actually does? Why do they actually need hugely expensive jets?

Ireland enjoys a "neutral" standing similar to Switzerland, and they seem to have got by without spending billions on sophisticated equipment. Where is the potential threat coming from that means Switzerland needs to do this? It's landlocked, so there's no coastline to police, and the country's surrounded by powerful "friends".

Correct me please if I'm wrong, but I haven't noticed them joining in any recent international "policing" conflicts, so what do they do that justifies such massive expense?

Just a thought up for discussion....

Kiwirob · Mon Jan 20, 2014 12:01 pm

Quoting jumpjet (Reply 204):
What would happen if they just got rid of all their fast jets? I can't work out what the Swiss Air Force actually does? Why do they actually need hugely expensive jets?

Yup I have thought the same as well, NZ did it, Ireland never had them (that I know off) some countries probably don't have an real justification for having an air combat force. I'd also add Austria and Belgium to that list.

jumpjet · Mon Jan 20, 2014 12:21 pm

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 205):
I'd also add Austria and Belgium to that list.

I can understand Belgium, historically it's literally been trampled into the mud as major powers have tried to get at each others throats! 1914 & 1939... Also there's Belgium's NATO commitments, but I don't believe Austria or Switzerland have those.

With regards to New Zealand, there's a very special historical relationship between Australia, New Zealand and the UK. I don't believe for one moment that the UK would stand idly by if NZ was ever threatened and Australia certainly wouldn't. In the UK we'll never forget the sacrifices made by the thousands of young Austeralians and Kiwis during WW1 and WW2, that closeness (on and off the rugby field) counts for something very precious.

seahawk · Mon Jan 20, 2014 2:11 pm

Very few European countries need fighter jets today.

jumpjet · Mon Jan 20, 2014 2:26 pm

Quoting seahawk (Reply 207):
Very few European countries need fighter jets today.

I agree 100%! But they still go ahead and buy them....., which is my point, so why do they?

I appreciate that for NATO members, there's pressure to be a member and to contribute to any NATO operations. But for those smaller European countries, like Switzerland, why on earth do they bother?

SAS A340 · Mon Jan 20, 2014 7:38 pm

Quoting jumpjet (Reply 208):
I agree 100%! But they still go ahead and buy them....., which is my point, so why do they?

well.... Sweden is also a small country and not a meber of NATO,and i dont recall any country promises to help if we would end up in trouble...not even Norway or Denmark since they are obligated to Nato,and as Mr Rassmusen said when he was in Sweden,to be sure to be protected by a nato member,you have to be a nato member.

jumpjet · Tue Jan 21, 2014 11:30 am

Quoting SAS A340 (Reply 209):
well.... Sweden is also a small country and not a meber of NATO,and i dont recall any country promises to help if we would end up in trouble...not even Norway or Denmark since they are obligated to Nato,and as Mr Rassmusen said when he was in Sweden,to be sure to be protected by a nato member,you have to be a nato member.

You may be missing the point but Sweden is a completely different case to that of Switzerland anyway. Sweden is the largest country in northern Europe at 450,295 km2 and is the fifth largest country in Europe. 'The population is about 9.5 million. Sweden has a huge coastline that needs policing, it has a wealth of valuable resources and unlike Switzerland, it has some near neighbours who have a history of beligerance.

I can fully understand Sweden's wish to maintain strong armed forces, but the Swiss - they simply don't need it. Any aggressor would have to cross a neighbour and NATO member to get to them. Why do they need fast jets?

seahawk · Tue Jan 21, 2014 11:37 am

I can understand ~12 jets for Air policing, just like Austria does. But the Swiss will have a way bigger fleet.

SAS A340 · Tue Jan 21, 2014 12:37 pm

Quoting seahawk (Reply 211):
can understand ~12 jets for Air policing, just like Austria does. But the Swiss will have a way bigger fleet.

Initially, Yes, but we must not forget that when the Gripen NG is delivered by 2018-2020 their F-18 is between 20-25 years old. Regarding the referendum to Gripen,the Word is that it is the Gripen fighter or no fighter...
Also don´t Think that the Gripen only is a replacement for today's F-5 tigers as these pilots often are reservists wich have a second flight mission as a main job.
So within 10-15 years from now,it,s not unlikely that the Swiss Airforce contains of 22Gripen NG,s and that,s it.
However,my gut feeling tells me that the people of switzerland will say no to this deal,mainly because the Money can be spent elsewere(Sweden are obligated to atleast 100% offset) and what the alternative look´s like,i have no clue.

[Edited 2014-01-21 04:48:50]

tommy1808 · Tue Jan 21, 2014 2:48 pm

Quoting seahawk (Reply 211):
I can understand ~12 jets for Air policing, just like Austria does. But the Swiss will have a way bigger fleet.

The Swiss Airforce is planned to be able to defend the nation. They think that requires ~70 jets in total. Austria made a big leap forward with the Eurofighters, with the old Draken air policing was limited to day time.
The difference is very obvious. When ever convenient NATO ignores that Austria is a nation state with a neutral sky, Swiss Sky gets not violated like that.

best regards
Thomas

jumpjet · Wed Jan 22, 2014 11:59 am

Quoting tommy1808 (Reply 213):
The difference is very obvious. When ever convenient NATO ignores that Austria is a nation state with a neutral sky, Swiss Sky gets not violated like that.

Can you elaborate please?

tommy1808 · Wed Jan 22, 2014 1:48 pm

Quoting jumpjet (Reply 214):
Can you elaborate please?

From time to time the Austrian Airforce catches NATO flights in its territory. For example the USAF tried to sneak two F117 through Austrian airspace with a fake KC-10 flight plan on 18. october 2002, there where also incidents with AWACS, F16s, Hercules but i would need to research...
But it kinda seems to have stopped with the Eurofighter coming into service....

best regards
Thomas

jumpjet · Wed Jan 22, 2014 3:06 pm

Quoting tommy1808 (Reply 215):
From time to time the Austrian Airforce catches NATO flights in its territory. For example the USAF tried to sneak two F117 through Austrian airspace with a fake KC-10 flight plan on 18. october 2002, there where also incidents with AWACS, F16s, Hercules but i would need to research...
But it kinda seems to have stopped with the Eurofighter coming into service....

best regards
Thomas

Ah! I see.... Thanks

Kiwirob · Wed Jan 22, 2014 6:06 pm

Quoting jumpjet (Reply 210):
it has some near neighbours who have a history of beligerance.

Damn those pesky Danes to the south, they still want Skania back!!!!!

jumpjet · Thu Jan 23, 2014 9:15 am

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 217):
Damn those pesky Danes to the south, they still want Skania back!!!!!

Having watched Wallender and The Bridge, they're welcome to it!!!! There can't anyone left alive....

aviationmaster · Thu Jan 23, 2014 6:45 pm

Quoting jumpjet (Reply 210):
I can fully understand Sweden's wish to maintain strong armed forces, but the Swiss - they simply don't need it. Any aggressor would have to cross a neighbour and NATO member to get to them. Why do they need fast jets?

Geography makes Switzerland's airspace one of Europe's busiest and is strategically quite interesting.

Swiss law requires the Swiss Armed Forces to be able to guarantee for the safety and defense of the country. Being able to conduct air policing missions are one of those duties, even in peactime.

Yes, Switzerland at the moment does not have any potential direct threats nor will that be the case in the near future. However, here in Switzerland, many view the armed forces as a necessary evil, since you never know what may happen down the road. In addition to that, fully "outsourcing" air policing to neighbouring countries/NATO members would probably cause a major uproar among the Swiss population, no matter how unpopular the Swiss Armed Forces may be viewed at times.

And now the short answer: Because air policing with a Pilatus PC9 or PC21 does not work.

Thunderboltdrgn · Fri Jan 24, 2014 10:41 am

Quoting aviationmaster (Reply 219):
Yes, Switzerland at the moment does not have any potential direct
threats nor will that be the case in the near future

I think this applies for most or possible even all countries in Europe.

I don't think there will be local neighbouring conflicts like Switzerland invading Austria.
If there there will be a conflict I think it will be a larger conflict involving the majority of
the countries in Europe and in that case Switzerland like any other country needs to have their
own defence even if the smaller countries won't be able to have as large defences as the larger countries.

ThePointblank · Sat Jan 25, 2014 1:09 am

Back to the order: There is controversy in Switzerland over Saab's financing of advertising and promotion related to the referendum. Although this is legal, it means Saab's entering into a political fight, and has to expect to be treated as a enemy by some politicians and political parties. In fact, the political parties that support the purchase is saying that Saab's meddling in the Swiss political process is counter-productive to the sale, and they have been distancing themselves from Saab.

http://www.thelocal.se/20140122/swis...-over-saab-meddling-in-gripen-vote

Quote:
Swiss fury over Saab 'meddling' in Gripen vote

Published: 22 Jan 2014 08:40 GMT+01:00

Swedish defence contractor Saab has been slammed over claims of attempting to influence a referendum in Switzerland that could determine whether or not the Swiss air force purchases 22 new Jas Gripen fighter jets.

Swiss Social Democratic MP Evi Allemann claims that Saab has been quietly financing campaigners in favour of the deal, worth an estimated 3.1 billion Swiss francs ($3.47 billion).

While Saab's support of the pro-Gripen campaign may not be technically illegal, Allemann sees the Swedish firm's behaviour as bordering on scandalous.

"We don't have any clear rules for referendum campaigns, as a result, foreign companies feel they can shamelessly get involved in national decisions," she told the TT news agency.

Saab has neither confirmed nor denied the accusations, citing Swiss rules which "also include refraining from comment on campaign financing".

prebennorholm · Sat Jan 25, 2014 2:58 am

Quoting jumpjet (Reply 204):
Being 100% serious and without wishing to offend anyone out there, what would happen if Switzerland didn't re-equip with anything? What would happen if they just got rid of all their fast jets? I can't work out what the Swiss Air Force actually does? Why do they actually need hugely expensive jets?

First of all they need them for their airshows.

So they in a hundred years on sunny Sundays can make formation flights with Gripen, Hunter and Vampire.

But more serious, they need them to protect Swiss air space from intruding Danish F-16 fighters.

Some 30 years ago a Danish F-16 squadron exchanged base with an Italian F-104 squadron in northern Italy. On the first day the Italian squadron leader took the Danes on a flight to get familiar with the landscape. During the debriefing the Danish squadron leader commented that according to his navigation log they had passed through a valley north of X-mountain, which seemed to be Switzerland on his map. And then he asked whether that was allowed.

The Italian squadon leader answered: "No, it isn't allowed, but they can't catch us".

The Danish squadon leader wrote that in his book about his time in the air force.

Thunderboltdrgn · Sat Jan 25, 2014 11:22 am

Quoting ThePointblank (Reply 221):
Back to the order: There is controversy in Switzerland over Saab's financing of advertising and promotion related to the referendum

This is another French propaganda lie by media put out in hope of spoiling the
Swizz purchase of Gripen so that the French Rafale will get a new chance.

What really happened was that they rather had an information tent during the Alpine World
cup round in Wengen. Media then wrongfully reports this as that Saab have financially
supported the yes option. Basically it's the regular standard media exaggeration or
as we say "Making a hen out of a feather".

I don't see anything wrong by putting up an information tent where they inform
the regular people about their product.

Here is a picture and article: http://www.blick.ch/news/politik/saa...-ja-zum-gripen-kauf-id2626419.html

Imo I think the no option is just upset at themselves for not coming up with this idea themselves.

[Edited 2014-01-25 03:22:50]

flyingturtle · Sat Jan 25, 2014 8:13 pm

Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 222):
The Italian squadon leader answered: "No, it isn't allowed, but they can't catch us".

Well, I have helped to collect signatures for the Gripen referendum...

David

Dreadnought · Sun Jan 26, 2014 4:50 am

Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 222):
The Italian squadon leader answered: "No, it isn't allowed, but they can't catch us".

At the time the premier Swiss interceptor was the Mrage IIIS, which was faster than the F-16.

flyingturtle · Sun Jan 26, 2014 11:16 am

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 225):
At the time the premier Swiss interceptor was the Mrage IIIS, which was faster than the F-16.

Then it depends on where the Mirage IIIS was stationed... today at least, the SE part of Switzerland doesn't have any fighter bases.

Quoting ThunderboltDrgn (Reply 223):
What really happened was that they rather had an information tent during the Alpine World
cup round in Wengen.

It looks like this - a tent and a full-scale mockup:

They gave away free Gripen T-shirts, but I still frown upon such PR activities - it's widely considered as bad style if a company tries to influence the popular vote in any way.

David

Powerslide · Sun Jan 26, 2014 4:37 pm

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 226):
It looks like this - a tent and a full-scale mockup:

Wow that thing looks small, even for a full-scale mockup. Doesn't look like the pilot even needs a ladder, he just 'steps' in the aircraft.

flyingturtle · Sun Jan 26, 2014 5:39 pm

Quoting Powerslide (Reply 227):

I'm quite sure it was a 1:1 scale mock-up, and the organizers of the Dittingen Air Show say on http://www.flugtage.ch/d/index.php/e...layseng/78-saab-gripen-hautnah-eng it has the same size as the original...

David

Dreadnought · Sun Jan 26, 2014 9:05 pm

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 226):
They gave away free Gripen T-shirts, but I still frown upon such PR activities - it's widely considered as bad style if a company tries to influence the popular vote in any way.

I remember visiting the very popular Transport Museum in Luzern a couple of years ago, and there was a Eurofighter Typhoon on similar display there for over a year I believe. The display you showed looks like it was at an airshow. If such displays are against the rules (and frankly I don't see why it would be) then I would think that the Typhoon display was a far more egregious violation.

Devilfish · Sun Jan 26, 2014 10:46 pm

Quoting jumpjet (Reply 204):
Being 100% serious and without wishing to offend anyone out there, what would happen if Switzerland didn't re-equip with anything? What would happen if they just got rid of all their fast jets? I can't work out what the Swiss Air Force actually does? Why do they actually need hugely expensive jets?

If I'm not terribly mistaken, Switzerland is still a major depositary of the world's wealth. It follows that it would need some serious force to protect that wealth and status.

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 226):
They gave away free Gripen T-shirts, but I still frown upon such PR activities - it's widely considered as bad style if a company tries to influence the popular vote in any way.

Infinitely better to be transparent and aboveboard than to sway politicians and defense officials in an underhanded manner!

prebennorholm · Sun Jan 26, 2014 11:24 pm

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 225):
At the time the premier Swiss interceptor was the Mrage IIIS, which was faster than the F-16.

Yeah, and luckily the Danish F-16s and the Italian F-104s were flying at one fourth their maximum speed - otherwise there wouldn't have been many unbroken windows in that valley. And as a Danish taxpayer I would have had to take up the bill.

SAS A340 · Mon Jan 27, 2014 10:00 am

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 229):
remember visiting the very popular Transport Museum in Luzern a couple of years ago, and there was a Eurofighter Typhoon on similar display there for over a year I believe. The display you showed looks like it was at an airshow. If such displays are against the rules (and frankly I don't see why it would be) then I would think that the Typhoon display was a far more egregious violation.

I agree with you, SAAB has this exhibition with them at many air shows, there is a bit of their repertoire and is not unique in any way, and free t-shirt has been placed out in the hundreds of thousands by SAAB through the years so please....

tommy1808 · Mon Jan 27, 2014 2:50 pm

Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 222):

The Italian squadon leader answered: "No, it isn't allowed, but they can't catch us".

Even the Austrians managed to catch F-16s with their stone age Saab Draken and made it well enough that they could have gunned them out of the sky.
And pretty much every fighter can catch an F-16 ... it is not exactly fast with its air inlet.

best regards
Thomas

solarflyer22 · Mon Jan 27, 2014 3:35 pm

Quoting Stoney (Reply 3):
It's about replacing the aging fleet of F-5s which consisted of 110 planes and are now down to less than 50 planes in service

That's a great point. I guess 110 made sense during the cold war but its an old frame in need of replacement. Its a shame that they are down to that number and it may be too pricey to ramp up to 100 air frames.

Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 5):
It's a shame there's no F-20 Tigershark to offer them now

That was a great plane and had they bought it in the 1990-1995 frame they might not be so desperate now. Would have really met their needs too.

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 122):
- anyway, to finance the aircraft the federal government needs to cut in education, science, agriculture and infrastructure

That's a shame. I don't know why a wealthy stable country can't afford guns and butter so to speak. Having to support a modern air force is a normal but important thing for a first world country. Plus they have no Navy to fund.

Quoting tommy1808 (Reply 233):

And pretty much every fighter can catch an F-16 ... it is not exactly fast with its air inlet.

This is news to me, I thought F-16 was pretty fast in AA config.

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 230):
If I'm not terribly mistaken, Switzerland is still a major depositary of the world's wealth. It follows that it would need some serious force to protect that wealth and status.

I agree and they are not part of NATO to maintain their historic status as a neutral country. They needn't spend money on a Navy so I'd really expect them to have a sizable Air Force.

I would really like to see them go F-18 on this. If it ultimately means a larger air force because of savings in training and support for 1 type then I say go for it. All of these planes are pretty close in capabilities and the super hornet can handle all of the missions they need. Unless they want to step up to JSF class. Gripen would be a good fit too though I don't know how much the 1 engine setup would save them long term.

tommy1808 · Mon Jan 27, 2014 3:51 pm

Quoting solarflyer22 (Reply 234):

This is news to me, I thought F-16 was pretty fast in AA config.

It is a fast plane in many regards, but top speed is limited by the fixed air intake. Pressure recovery is good till ~1-5 -1.6 Mach, but at Mach 1.75 it drops to 0.85 (meaning a 100kN engine will only deliver 85kN) at Mach 2 its just 0.75, at Mach 2.25 just 0.6. It runs out of thrust, as the engine is starved of air. Movable inlets offer more flexibility. The Eurofigher has 0.87+ at Mach 2.25.

Quoting solarflyer22 (Reply 234):
Gripen would be a good fit too though I don't know how much the 1 engine setup would save them long term.

About half the money in fuel and engine maintenance and probably the only way to keep the quantity up. Operating 70+ F/A-18E/F might be a bit costly. If they choose the Gripen i would not be surprised to see a Grippen only fleed down the road.

best regards
Thomas

flyingturtle · Mon Jan 27, 2014 3:58 pm

Quoting solarflyer22 (Reply 234):
That's a shame. I don't know why a wealthy stable country can't afford guns and butter so to speak. Having to support a modern air force is a normal but important thing for a first world country. Plus they have no Navy to fund.

Our budget is still tight.

In 2012, we spent 23.4 billion US$ on welfare (old age pension, disabled, jobless, healthcare...), and 7.43 billion US$ on education and research. Defense clocks in at 4.93 billion US$. Total budget was 69.1 billion US$.

And large cuts in welfare as well as transportation (about 8.3 billion) are not expected in the near future. The Gripen deal would add some 3 billion to the defense costs.

David

tommy1808 · Mon Jan 27, 2014 4:02 pm

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 236):
23.4 billion US$ on welfare (old age pension, disabled, jobless, healthcare...)

Are those covered by taxes or by money contributions while having work?

Best regards
Thomas

flyingturtle · Mon Jan 27, 2014 5:44 pm

Quoting tommy1808 (Reply 237):
Are those covered by taxes or by money contributions while having work?

In theory, they're funded through deductions from the pay. Old age's pension, jobless insurance, disability insurance as well as "Erwerbsersatz" (to cover your pay while serving in the military or civil service) altogether amount to 7% of your pay, and are automatically deducted. Your employer has to pay the other 7%.

In theory, the old age's pension (AHV) is pay-as-you-go, they cannot spend more than they receive in through these deductions.

But there are financial holes, and they have to be covered through taxes. And it's very difficult to raise the pension age in a time where less-skilled workers are often jobless in their early sixties.

David

bennett123 · Mon Jan 27, 2014 8:20 pm

IMO, this business with SAAB advertising is a storm in a teacup.

All firms promote their products, lobbying behind the scenes is a far bigger issue.

Also if you can buy Swiss votes with Teashirts, then it is money well spent.

Somehow I doubt that Swiss votes do come that cheap.

prebennorholm · Tue Jan 28, 2014 3:11 am

Quoting tommy1808 (Reply 233):
Even the Austrians managed to catch F-16s with their stone age Saab Draken and made it well enough that they could have gunned them out of the sky.

Sure the "stone age" Saab Draken could have done that, especially since this "incident" was at low level (it had to be not to interfere with controlled air space). In fact, at low altitude the Draken was one of the very fastest fighters ever made.

Denmark had some 50 Drakens until 20 years ago, and I heard Draken pilots brag that even the US Air Force had nothing which could follow a Draken down on the deck. A Phantom would only see distant smoke from a Draken when down low.

Even if the Austrian Draken of 1963/64 vintage - second hand Swedish J35D version - was almost 10 years older than the Danish Darken - Saab code name A35XD (eXport Denmark), based on Saab J35F - then they shared the same engine version (Volvo RM-6C) and aerodynamics.

[Edited 2014-01-27 19:16:35]

tommy1808 · Tue Jan 28, 2014 7:49 pm

Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 240):
Sure the "stone age" Saab Draken could have done that, especially since this "incident" was at low level (it had to be not to interfere with controlled air space). In fact, at low altitude the Draken was one of the very fastest fighters ever made.

Of course they have the flight performance to do that, but in theory no Dranken shouldn´t be able to surprise an F16 due to AWACS support.

Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 240):
Denmark had some 50 Drakens until 20 years ago, and I heard Draken pilots brag that even the US Air Force had nothing which could follow a Draken down on the deck. A Phantom would only see distant smoke from a Draken when down low.

Very common, there where quite a few Jets in operation US Fighters had a hard time following. Blackburn Buccaneer, Tornado, Draken ..... but with look down radars it wasn´t that important and in a real war none of those could outrun those fighters with a bomb load attached to them.

best regards
Thomas

Thunderboltdrgn · Sun Mar 16, 2014 9:31 pm

According to Swedish television, SVT, currently about 60% of the Swizz people
would vote no to acquiring new fighters,

http://www.svt.se/nyheter/sverige/schweizarna-kritiska-till-gripen

[Edited 2014-03-16 14:33:19]

SAS A340 · Wed Apr 22, 2015 2:49 pm

OK, what do you say? Are we in for another round?

1. Gripen
2. Rafale
3. F-18 E/F SH...?

http://www.janes.com/article/50817/s...nch-f-5-replacement-effort-in-2017

Sooner787 · Wed Apr 22, 2015 3:53 pm

Quoting ThunderboltDrgn (Reply 242):
According to Swedish television, SVT, currently about 60% of the Swizz people
would vote no to acquiring new fighters,

I would imagine the way Putin is acting these days, the Swedes
might look more favorably on new fighters for their air force

SAS A340 · Wed Apr 22, 2015 5:53 pm

Quoting Sooner787 (Reply 244):
I would imagine the way Putin is acting these days, the Swedes
might look more favorably on new fighters for their air force

We have ordered 10 extra Gripen E/F to 70 units, but also makes other efforts to protect the archipelago from unwanted submersible vehicles and we also possessed Gotland (again) with tanks and combat personnel

Yes we are a small country, i know

larshjort · Wed Apr 22, 2015 8:00 pm

I do hope for the Gripen E/F to be chosen by both Denmark and other nations. For what it offers at the capability/cost vise I think it is a good choise for small nations.

Quoting SAS A340 (Reply 245):
We have ordered 10 extra Gripen E/F to 70 units, but also makes other efforts to protect the archipelago from unwanted submersible vehicles and we also possessed Gotland (again) with tanks and combat personnel
Yes we are a small country, i know

I thought they were just on vacation

And how are you going to protect yourself from submarines if you cannot find them

art · Tue Nov 28, 2017 11:09 am

Sorry if already reported elsewhere but here we go again:

- Swiss defence ministry announces 8 billion Franc budget for aircraft renewal

- aim is to make a fighter choice 2020 or earlier with a view to deliveries starting 2025 onwards

(In French) http://www.air-cosmos.com/suisse-8md-de ... bat-102975

Dutchy · Wed Nov 29, 2017 9:33 pm

Will the Swiss vote for this proposal this time around?

Ozair · Wed Nov 29, 2017 10:04 pm

Dutchy wrote:
Will the Swiss vote for this proposal this time around?

Someone else can probably confirm but I believe they have to for an expenditure of this size.

Will be an interesting competition again and especially so if the evaluation is leaked again. The options likely are
Rafale – Would be looking to offer the F4 version.
Eurofighter – Will likely have all P3 enhancements in service and perhaps some P4.
SH – A potential last export for the SH but given the Swiss operate Classic Hornets may be in with a chance. Boeing withdrew last time but have indicated they will bid this time.
Gripen E – Pending any delays will be reaching FOC in 2025 but the E is not as cheap as the C was last time albeit more capable.
F-16 or F-35 from LM – Not sure what LM will offer but F-35 will be in FRP so will be very price competitive. Would likely be a last desperate grasp for the F-16.

Last time the Swiss, using the Classic Hornet as the baseline found the Rafale, and in some areas the Eurofighter, exceeded classic Hornet capability but Rafale and Eurofighter have come a long way since then while the Gripen C, and subsequent NG, fell short in all areas. The last Swiss report is found here and includes both the original and RFP 2 scores. https://www.scribd.com/doc/81390363/Swi ... the-Rafale

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net