It will now consider Airbus’s Eurofighter, Boeing’s F/A-18 Super Hornet, Dassault’s Rafale, F-35As made by Lockheed-Martin and Saab’s Gripen E.
“The phase of analysis and testing starts,” the Swiss Defence Department said. “From February to March 2019, specialists from (Swiss defense procurement agency) armasuisse and the Swiss Air Force will test the aircraft in simulators” at facilities of the planes’ manufacturers.
Between April and July, the planes will be in Switzerland for aerial and ground tests, with public viewing opportunities. Assessments will continue through 2020 before a decision is made.
[...]
Switzerland wants new planes to be delivered by 2025.
Depending on how many airframe the Swiss want, it's could be too short for Dassault to offer their Rafale in the F4 standard unless they drastically increased their production rate in 2024/2025 (same old problem) .
i think, imho that Gripen-E and the F/A-18E/F are the best bets for the Swiss.
the F-35A is too expensive and concidering Switserland has no desire to use theyre fighters in foreign wars, its stealth capabilities are irrelevant for pure defencive purposes.
the Typhoon is a bit overkill and too expensive to operate, however, if Austria decides to keep its Typhoon fleet, they might jointly operate the type and the SwAF can learn from Austrian experience.
as for the Rafale, i doubt the swiss will buy it, as France has a tendency to botch up its own export potential within europe.
Gripen has a very good chance of winning as it was previously selected to replace the F-5E, if it wasnt for the referendum on the deal (witch was a ver close call of 51/49 against) it would have ordered the type already and additional aircraft could be ordered to replace the Hornets.
the F/A-18E/F speaks for itsself as the SwAF already operates the classic hornet and the SH would offer some degree of commonality with the type and ease transition of pilots and personel.
New
Posts: 550
By: St. John
- 27th January 2019 at 10:33Permalink
Gripen is the only one they can afford and the only one that'll fit in their mountain shelters.
By: halloweene
- 27th January 2019 at 10:55Permalink- Edited 27th January 2019 at 10:56
No (about fitting).
the F/A-18E/F speaks for itsself as the SwAF already operates the classic hornet and the SH would offer some degree of commonality with the type and ease transition of pilots and personel.
It is the less advanced of all contenders (except it they drastically chaned their data fusion system)...And has little to do with their classical Hornet (includin MMI)
i think, imho that Gripen-E and the F/A-18E/F are the best bets for the Swiss.
the F-35A is too expensive and concidering Switserland has no desire to use theyre fighters in foreign wars, its stealth capabilities are irrelevant for pure defencive purposes.
The F-35 is not too expensive. Rafale and Typhoon cost more.
However, because the public thinks the F-35 is super expensive, politicians might shy away from selecting the JSF.
the Typhoon is a bit overkill and too expensive to operate, however, if Austria decides to keep its Typhoon fleet, they might jointly operate the type and the SwAF can learn from Austrian experience.
Overkill it isn't, more like the opposite. The most expensive to operate probably, yes. Austria operating the type won't help Switzerland.
as for the Rafale, i doubt the swiss will buy it, as France has a tendency to botch up its own export potential within europe.
Rafale is the favourite imho. Was already the preferred choice of the military last time.
Gripen has a very good chance of winning as it was previously selected to replace the F-5E, if it wasnt for the referendum on the deal (witch was a ver close call of 51/49 against) it would have ordered the type already and additional aircraft could be ordered to replace the Hornets.
Because this time round its the Hornet replacement and Gripen lost the referendum, the chances are less good imho.
the F/A-18E/F speaks for itsself as the SwAF already operates the classic hornet and the SH would offer some degree of commonality with the type and ease transition of pilots and personel.
The SH is old. And the least impressive. Boeing should offer the F-15X. :eagerness:
In my opinion, this is a numbers game. Around 72 aircraft are needed to fully fulfill the air defence requirement, 50-60 for some degree of fulfillment (can't remember the exact word used, but look at Norways or Finlands requirement...). As only 30-40 are on the table now, this means this goal can no longer be achieved. Thus the best choice imho is the one that affords the most jets, and results in the highest sortie rates.
By: TomcatViP
- 27th January 2019 at 22:09Permalink- Edited 28th January 2019 at 00:59
However, because the public thinks the F-35 is super expensive, politicians might shy away from selecting the JSF
The recent order from Belgium should help any F-35 enthusiast in Switzerland to push their case forward.
New
Posts: 550
By: St. John
- 28th January 2019 at 10:29Permalink- Edited 28th January 2019 at 10:29
Overkill it isn't, more like the opposite.
Can we please define what is overkill for Switzerland? We're talking about a neutral country surrounded by friendly nations who hasn't fought any other country since 1815 and has never fought an air war/campaign ever. I would therefore submit that all 5 entries are overkill. The height of this aircraft's duties will involve accompanying airliners with faulty transponders.
Second hand versions of whatever Germany, Austria or France are operating probably makes a lot of sense for the Swiss, send your pilots and techies across the alps form training and get spare parts via a train journey. Keep it cheap and simple. Having said that, Austria tried the very same idea with Eurofighters and is not happy.
By: TomcatViP
- 28th January 2019 at 12:04Permalink- Edited 28th January 2019 at 13:59
[USER="77048"]St. John[/USER] John: Swiss probably know what's better for them. Switzerland has always maintained a strong army while being neutral and at peace since a long time. I won't see their approach changing any time soon, especially when populism, set ablaze like a stray of gasoline by the social media, is ravaging Europe here and there (Europe as understood in the geographical term) and beyond it's economical zone of influence. It is then even more important for them today to get some serious tactical deterrence. As I understand this, their RFI completely translate this idea, calling for a better secured Switzerland... and not for a protective buddy.
I don't think anyone can predict the future, but if you simply go by Switzerland's current defence strategy it seeks no expiditionary forces, nor does it commit to NATO, it is totally surrounded by friendly countries. Soviet forces will not roll into them a la Cold War where the Swiss sought to turn the country into a redoubt and make an invasion costly. Many of these bunkers and forts are now closed. The threat from the North East is gone. Swiss do not even have a 24/7 QRA, and are looking at creating this with 2 aircraft. The absolute worse case scenario for them is a hijacked airliner or fighter jet.
By: St. John
- 28th January 2019 at 16:16Permalink
Tomcat - I'm not sure where you're envisaging the threat coming from. By the time any threat makes it through to Switzerland, it is completely screwed. If any of its neighbours suddenly turned hostile because say Verhofstadt became the fuhrer, it is also screwed and no plane in the world is going to change that fact. If you remember what happened to Kuwait in 1990, that would be Switzerland. So if we ignore doomsday scenarios for which there is no possible solution, QRA is all they need.
Armasuisse 2030 RFI asks the pricing of a) 30 airframes or b) 40 airframes and c) a fleet of medium range SAM´s.
Thats called a) halving the Swiss fast jet fleet, b) two sqn´s capable of QRA 24/7, c) replacing a huge amount of Rapier SAM units by a much smaller force of medium range SAM´s, and thats it. What it certainly does not call is for "serious tactical deterrence", you dont do that by replacing six sqn´s of combat jet with thirty or fourty airframes.
Switzerland is not only about tax evasion, knifes, watches and cheese. They are a real people with hard fought borders and their own unique inspirational vision. They have borders, airspace and their own choice of coalition. They want fighter jets and are ready to pay for as much as any French Gilet Jaunes, any Brit Brexiter or any MAGA Iowa fan.
«Fidèle à nos traditions séculaires en matière de défense, le Conseil fédéral est par conséquent d’avis que l’armée doit recevoir les moyens les plus efficaces pour lui permettre de maintenir notre indépendance et de protéger notre neutralité. Les armes atomiques font partie de ces moyens».
Déclaration (Lien externe) du Conseil fédéral suisse, 1958
--------------------------------------------
"In keeping with our age-old defense traditions, the Federal Council is therefore of the view that the military must be given the most effective means to maintain our independence and protect our neutrality. Atomic weapons are among those means. "
I like the passion of your argument Tomcat, I do not judge Switzerland by stereotypes, so no one needs to patronise anyone here, and no one is denying the Swiss value their hard fought freedom, but you can argue the very same of say Ireland, or New Zealand, both very proud countries who have strong military traditions but now (partly due to a combination of geography and politics) face very few military threats. If your argument is simply a country has borders and needs the best defence on the market then I would argue where does that end? If you cannot really define a threat (apart from vague projections of the right wing sweeping Europe then eventually invading Switzerland) then how do you define what is enough? If however you look at the main air threats facing the Swiss now and in the foreseeable future (unidentified lone intruders), as others have pointed out, 2 Sqds of fighters seems to fit that bill.
New
Posts: 550
By: St. John
- 28th January 2019 at 18:33Permalink
Tomcat - 1977 was a very different time. The only perceivable threat is 10 times further away now. Switzerland is not part of NATO and doesn't contribute to any coalition efforts. Any enemy that reaches them has already gone through a thousand plus miles of infinitely better armed European countries before reaching them. If they really want to plan for that scenario, then they need 1,000 F-22s.
The recent order from Belgium should help any F-35 enthusiast in Switzerland to push their case forward.
As if anyone cared. Facts and figures are available, but still people chose to believe what they want to believe. F.e. just last week there was an article in my local paper describing the F-35 as the most expensive option by far. And thats not a tabloid.
Posts: 2,626
By: Spitfire9 - 12th September 2018 at 13:22 Permalink
Details of fighter replacement project timetable set out...
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/feature/5/195880/swiss-lay-groundwork-for-fighter%2C-air-defense-missile-acquisitions.html
Posts: 5,905
By: TomcatViP - 27th January 2019 at 00:39 Permalink - Edited 27th January 2019 at 01:14
Swiss get five offers to replace aging jet fighter fleet: "the phase of analysis and testing starts"
Depending on how many airframe the Swiss want, it's could be too short for Dassault to offer their Rafale in the F4 standard unless they drastically increased their production rate in 2024/2025 (same old problem) .
Source:
Reuters
Posts: 508
By: Nils - 27th January 2019 at 09:48 Permalink
i think, imho that Gripen-E and the F/A-18E/F are the best bets for the Swiss.
the F-35A is too expensive and concidering Switserland has no desire to use theyre fighters in foreign wars, its stealth capabilities are irrelevant for pure defencive purposes.
the Typhoon is a bit overkill and too expensive to operate, however, if Austria decides to keep its Typhoon fleet, they might jointly operate the type and the SwAF can learn from Austrian experience.
as for the Rafale, i doubt the swiss will buy it, as France has a tendency to botch up its own export potential within europe.
Gripen has a very good chance of winning as it was previously selected to replace the F-5E, if it wasnt for the referendum on the deal (witch was a ver close call of 51/49 against) it would have ordered the type already and additional aircraft could be ordered to replace the Hornets.
the F/A-18E/F speaks for itsself as the SwAF already operates the classic hornet and the SH would offer some degree of commonality with the type and ease transition of pilots and personel.
Posts: 550
By: St. John - 27th January 2019 at 10:33 Permalink
Gripen is the only one they can afford and the only one that'll fit in their mountain shelters.
Posts: 4,168
By: halloweene - 27th January 2019 at 10:55 Permalink - Edited 27th January 2019 at 10:56
No (about fitting).
It is the less advanced of all contenders (except it they drastically chaned their data fusion system)...And has little to do with their classical Hornet (includin MMI)
Posts: 2,271
By: eagle - 27th January 2019 at 12:28 Permalink
The F-35 is not too expensive. Rafale and Typhoon cost more.
However, because the public thinks the F-35 is super expensive, politicians might shy away from selecting the JSF.
Overkill it isn't, more like the opposite. The most expensive to operate probably, yes. Austria operating the type won't help Switzerland.
Rafale is the favourite imho. Was already the preferred choice of the military last time.
Because this time round its the Hornet replacement and Gripen lost the referendum, the chances are less good imho.
The SH is old. And the least impressive. Boeing should offer the F-15X. :eagerness:
In my opinion, this is a numbers game. Around 72 aircraft are needed to fully fulfill the air defence requirement, 50-60 for some degree of fulfillment (can't remember the exact word used, but look at Norways or Finlands requirement...). As only 30-40 are on the table now, this means this goal can no longer be achieved. Thus the best choice imho is the one that affords the most jets, and results in the highest sortie rates.
Posts: 5,905
By: TomcatViP - 27th January 2019 at 22:09 Permalink - Edited 28th January 2019 at 00:59
The recent order from Belgium should help any F-35 enthusiast in Switzerland to push their case forward.
Posts: 550
By: St. John - 28th January 2019 at 10:29 Permalink - Edited 28th January 2019 at 10:29
Can we please define what is overkill for Switzerland? We're talking about a neutral country surrounded by friendly nations who hasn't fought any other country since 1815 and has never fought an air war/campaign ever. I would therefore submit that all 5 entries are overkill. The height of this aircraft's duties will involve accompanying airliners with faulty transponders.
Posts: 100
By: Mags76 - 28th January 2019 at 11:25 Permalink
Second hand versions of whatever Germany, Austria or France are operating probably makes a lot of sense for the Swiss, send your pilots and techies across the alps form training and get spare parts via a train journey. Keep it cheap and simple. Having said that, Austria tried the very same idea with Eurofighters and is not happy.
Posts: 5,905
By: TomcatViP - 28th January 2019 at 12:04 Permalink - Edited 28th January 2019 at 13:59
[USER="77048"]St. John[/USER] John: Swiss probably know what's better for them. Switzerland has always maintained a strong army while being neutral and at peace since a long time. I won't see their approach changing any time soon, especially when populism, set ablaze like a stray of gasoline by the social media, is ravaging Europe here and there (Europe as understood in the geographical term) and beyond it's economical zone of influence. It is then even more important for them today to get some serious tactical deterrence. As I understand this, their RFI completely translate this idea, calling for a better secured Switzerland... and not for a protective buddy.
Posts: 100
By: Mags76 - 28th January 2019 at 12:22 Permalink
I don't think anyone can predict the future, but if you simply go by Switzerland's current defence strategy it seeks no expiditionary forces, nor does it commit to NATO, it is totally surrounded by friendly countries. Soviet forces will not roll into them a la Cold War where the Swiss sought to turn the country into a redoubt and make an invasion costly. Many of these bunkers and forts are now closed. The threat from the North East is gone. Swiss do not even have a 24/7 QRA, and are looking at creating this with 2 aircraft. The absolute worse case scenario for them is a hijacked airliner or fighter jet.
Posts: 4,168
By: halloweene - 28th January 2019 at 14:13 Permalink
Sry Mags, but swiss now have a 24/7 QRA. Not that it is so important in the debate.
Posts: 100
By: Mags76 - 28th January 2019 at 14:14 Permalink
I did not know it is now 24/7
Posts: 550
By: St. John - 28th January 2019 at 16:16 Permalink
Tomcat - I'm not sure where you're envisaging the threat coming from. By the time any threat makes it through to Switzerland, it is completely screwed. If any of its neighbours suddenly turned hostile because say Verhofstadt became the fuhrer, it is also screwed and no plane in the world is going to change that fact. If you remember what happened to Kuwait in 1990, that would be Switzerland. So if we ignore doomsday scenarios for which there is no possible solution, QRA is all they need.
Posts: 100
By: Mags76 - 28th January 2019 at 16:22 Permalink
Yup, what St John said!
Posts: 3,765
By: Sintra - 28th January 2019 at 17:59 Permalink
Armasuisse 2030 RFI asks the pricing of a) 30 airframes or b) 40 airframes and c) a fleet of medium range SAM´s.
Thats called a) halving the Swiss fast jet fleet, b) two sqn´s capable of QRA 24/7, c) replacing a huge amount of Rapier SAM units by a much smaller force of medium range SAM´s, and thats it. What it certainly does not call is for "serious tactical deterrence", you dont do that by replacing six sqn´s of combat jet with thirty or fourty airframes.
Posts: 5,905
By: TomcatViP - 28th January 2019 at 18:10 Permalink - Edited 28th January 2019 at 18:15
[USER="77048"]St. John[/USER] (and Mags76) : as you are speaking of Doomsday, it remind me this*:
https://www.swissinfo.ch/fre/culture...mique/43246590
Switzerland is not only about tax evasion, knifes, watches and cheese. They are a real people with hard fought borders and their own unique inspirational vision. They have borders, airspace and their own choice of coalition. They want fighter jets and are ready to pay for as much as any French Gilet Jaunes, any Brit Brexiter or any MAGA Iowa fan.
*feel free to use any online translator if needed
Posts: 100
By: Mags76 - 28th January 2019 at 18:20 Permalink
I like the passion of your argument Tomcat, I do not judge Switzerland by stereotypes, so no one needs to patronise anyone here, and no one is denying the Swiss value their hard fought freedom, but you can argue the very same of say Ireland, or New Zealand, both very proud countries who have strong military traditions but now (partly due to a combination of geography and politics) face very few military threats. If your argument is simply a country has borders and needs the best defence on the market then I would argue where does that end? If you cannot really define a threat (apart from vague projections of the right wing sweeping Europe then eventually invading Switzerland) then how do you define what is enough? If however you look at the main air threats facing the Swiss now and in the foreseeable future (unidentified lone intruders), as others have pointed out, 2 Sqds of fighters seems to fit that bill.
Posts: 550
By: St. John - 28th January 2019 at 18:33 Permalink
Tomcat - 1977 was a very different time. The only perceivable threat is 10 times further away now. Switzerland is not part of NATO and doesn't contribute to any coalition efforts. Any enemy that reaches them has already gone through a thousand plus miles of infinitely better armed European countries before reaching them. If they really want to plan for that scenario, then they need 1,000 F-22s.
Posts: 2,271
By: eagle - 29th January 2019 at 00:25 Permalink
As if anyone cared. Facts and figures are available, but still people chose to believe what they want to believe. F.e. just last week there was an article in my local paper describing the F-35 as the most expensive option by far. And thats not a tabloid.