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.
"Underkill" because the Typhoon is the least impressive regarding systems.
The questions about general Swiss needs are another matter.
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.
That doesn't make sense at all. Second hand what, Mirage 2000? Swiss Hornets are newer. EF T1? No, thanks.
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.
Swiss armed forces are strong only if you look at numbers of potential boots on the ground. Equipment is poor. The air force will be reduced to 30-40 fighter jets, without any strike or recce capability. The newest RFI actually does away with any serious aerial war fighting capability. 24/7 QRA with the option to sustain a CAP of 2 jets for sometime is required.
For comparison, Singapore maintains strong armed forces.
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.
That about hits the nail on the head.
A more serious deterrence has been buried with TTE (Tiger Teil Ersatz, Tiger partial replacement aka Gripen deal from 2012). TTE would have included regaining A/G and recce core capabilities, building a knowledge base that could have been increased in a reasonable amount of time in a crisis ("Aufwuchskern").
By: SpudmanWP
- 29th January 2019 at 02:01Permalink- Edited 29th January 2019 at 02:02
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.
Just because it's printed does not make it true, even if it's not a "tabloid".
The F-35's history is chock full of "it's can't dogfight", "it's can't climb, turn, etc", "it will never be below $100 mil", to "PCA will replace F-35", etc that all turned out to be false.
New
By: Anonymous
- 29th January 2019 at 06:12Permalink
eagle
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.
LOL We're still very early in the process. So, how does anyone know the F-35 is the most expensive??? You have a source???
New
By: Anonymous
- 29th January 2019 at 06:19Permalink
What we should be talking about is "value" or capability vs cost. Hell, the F-35 is worth 20 of the other contenders. So, the Swiss could order a few less F-35's than planned. Yet, would still have a far more effective force and for less money on top of that....
By: SpudmanWP
- 29th January 2019 at 07:28Permalink
Don't forget the cost of developing upgrades for your jet. Compare the cost to develop new ESM functions, a new IRST, AESA radar, etc when it's spread across 3000+ jets vs a few hundred.
This duo of GE404 is among the most noisy engine pack mounted on any 4th gen aircraft IMO. I don't claim my eardrum to have any form of scientific probing quality, but this feeling is generally shared among others.
Probably that this point could be a valid issue during the discussions.
New
Posts: 550
By: St. John
- 29th January 2019 at 10:42Permalink
"Underkill" because the Typhoon is the least impressive regarding systems.
The questions about general Swiss needs are another matter.
Export AESA radar is due later this year or early next year, production contracts have already been signed. It will also have the second largest AESA radar. It also has DRFM jammers and IRST, which is more than can be said for the SH. It also has longer range AAMs than the SH. In fact, a plane flying in the middle of Switzerland would be able to shoot down aircraft across the borders. It also has HMCS, which at present the Rafale does not have, with the Striker II option also available. I think you've made a very callous statement based on something that was only half-true 10 years ago.
By: halloweene
- 29th January 2019 at 11:35Permalink- Edited 29th January 2019 at 11:36
What we should be talking about is "value" or capability vs cost. Hell, the F-35 is worth 20 of the other contenders. So, the Swiss could order a few less F-35's than planned. Yet, would still have a far more effective force and for less money on top of that....
How sensible and balanced advice.... Next?
his duo of GE404 is among the most noisy engine pack mounted on any 4th gen aircraft IMO. I don't claim my eardrum to have any form of scientific probing quality, but this feeling is generally shared among others.
Probably that this point could be a valid issue during the discussions.
Definnitely a bad point for F-35 did you ever hear it? Nearly a Concorde
By: halloweene
- 29th January 2019 at 11:37Permalink
Don't forget the cost of developing upgrades for your jet. Compare the cost to develop new ESM functions, a new IRST, AESA radar, etc when it's spread across 3000+ jets vs a few hundred.
All those are developed for all contenders. Except for new F-35 IRST to replace the obsolete one (teasing but true)
New
Posts: 550
By: St. John
- 29th January 2019 at 12:43Permalink
I honestly think some of the latest F-16s might be the best option for Switzerland.
Except for new F-35 IRST to replace the obsolete one (teasing but true)
Obsolete wouldn't be the correct term as they are not obsolete, nor are the Sniper XR systems they were developed from (still used operationally and effectively, will be for some time). But they certainly aren't state of the art, how about "mature"? .
By: Sintra
- 29th January 2019 at 14:16Permalink- Edited 29th January 2019 at 14:18
""Underkill" because the Typhoon is the least impressive regarding systems.
The questions about general Swiss needs are another matter."
Eagle, in what particular way is the Typhoon the "least impressive regarding systems" by comparison with the Gripen E, the SH and the Rafale in a Swiss scenario?
By: SpudmanWP
- 29th January 2019 at 15:56Permalink- Edited 29th January 2019 at 16:03
All those are developed for all contenders.
You've completely missed the "economy of scale" benefits, both in development and production.
For example, let's say Eurofighter, Rafale, and LM develop a new AESA radar. For EF and Raf, that development cost can only be spread across a few hundred airframes. However, for LM that cost can be spread across 3000+ airframes. On the production side, EF and Raf will produce what, 1 or 2 dozen units a year while LM produces that many in a month.
By: halloweene
- 29th January 2019 at 16:00Permalink- Edited 29th January 2019 at 16:17
Ahem 3dB(twice the pression in Pa aka volume) "hardly audible? is it a joke? Second perceived sound depends a lot on frequency etc.
Typhoon systems are being upgraded no?
You've completely missed the "economy of scale" benefits, both in development and production.
For example, let's say Eurofighter, Rafale, and LM develop a new AESA radar. For EF and Raf, that development cost can only be spread across a few hundred airframes. However, for LM that cost can be spread across 3000+ airframes. On the production side, EF and Raf will produce what, 1 or 2 dozen units a year while LM produces that many in a month.
That is exactly what RAnd did not understand when they came to DA during the seventies : how can they make good cheap airplanes with so little numbers?
Nvm. The cost of devloping AESA radarswas largely shared years ago using european prgrams. And economy of scale is not a linear thing.
By: SpudmanWP
- 29th January 2019 at 16:28Permalink
There is a lot more to development than whatever was "shared" years ago. You have the specific hardware, software modes, integration, testing, etc.
While "Economy of scale" is not linear (I never said it was), it is substantial as is evident in that the F-35 being made of the latest bleeding edge tech while being less expensive than both the Rafale, Eurofighter, F-15E, etc.
Posts: 2,271
By: eagle - 29th January 2019 at 00:28 Permalink
"Underkill" because the Typhoon is the least impressive regarding systems.
The questions about general Swiss needs are another matter.
Posts: 2,271
By: eagle - 29th January 2019 at 00:31 Permalink
That doesn't make sense at all. Second hand what, Mirage 2000? Swiss Hornets are newer. EF T1? No, thanks.
Posts: 2,271
By: eagle - 29th January 2019 at 00:39 Permalink
Swiss armed forces are strong only if you look at numbers of potential boots on the ground. Equipment is poor. The air force will be reduced to 30-40 fighter jets, without any strike or recce capability. The newest RFI actually does away with any serious aerial war fighting capability. 24/7 QRA with the option to sustain a CAP of 2 jets for sometime is required.
For comparison, Singapore maintains strong armed forces.
Posts: 2,271
By: eagle - 29th January 2019 at 00:44 Permalink - Edited 29th January 2019 at 00:46
Not yet, it's now 6 to 22 h every day, since January 1st this year. Full 24/7 QRA will be available at the end of 2020:
https://www.admin.ch/gov/fr/accueil/...-id-73559.html
Payerne residents are not amused. :sleeping:
Posts: 2,271
By: eagle - 29th January 2019 at 00:54 Permalink
That about hits the nail on the head.
A more serious deterrence has been buried with TTE (Tiger Teil Ersatz, Tiger partial replacement aka Gripen deal from 2012). TTE would have included regaining A/G and recce core capabilities, building a knowledge base that could have been increased in a reasonable amount of time in a crisis ("Aufwuchskern").
Posts: 5,197
By: SpudmanWP - 29th January 2019 at 02:01 Permalink - Edited 29th January 2019 at 02:02
Just because it's printed does not make it true, even if it's not a "tabloid".
The F-35's history is chock full of "it's can't dogfight", "it's can't climb, turn, etc", "it will never be below $100 mil", to "PCA will replace F-35", etc that all turned out to be false.
By: Anonymous - 29th January 2019 at 06:12 Permalink
eagle
LOL We're still very early in the process. So, how does anyone know the F-35 is the most expensive??? You have a source???
By: Anonymous - 29th January 2019 at 06:19 Permalink
What we should be talking about is "value" or capability vs cost. Hell, the F-35 is worth 20 of the other contenders. So, the Swiss could order a few less F-35's than planned. Yet, would still have a far more effective force and for less money on top of that....
Posts: 5,197
By: SpudmanWP - 29th January 2019 at 07:28 Permalink
Don't forget the cost of developing upgrades for your jet. Compare the cost to develop new ESM functions, a new IRST, AESA radar, etc when it's spread across 3000+ jets vs a few hundred.
Posts: 5,905
By: TomcatViP - 29th January 2019 at 10:22 Permalink
This duo of GE404 is among the most noisy engine pack mounted on any 4th gen aircraft IMO. I don't claim my eardrum to have any form of scientific probing quality, but this feeling is generally shared among others.
Probably that this point could be a valid issue during the discussions.
Posts: 550
By: St. John - 29th January 2019 at 10:42 Permalink
Export AESA radar is due later this year or early next year, production contracts have already been signed. It will also have the second largest AESA radar. It also has DRFM jammers and IRST, which is more than can be said for the SH. It also has longer range AAMs than the SH. In fact, a plane flying in the middle of Switzerland would be able to shoot down aircraft across the borders. It also has HMCS, which at present the Rafale does not have, with the Striker II option also available. I think you've made a very callous statement based on something that was only half-true 10 years ago.
Posts: 4,168
By: halloweene - 29th January 2019 at 11:35 Permalink - Edited 29th January 2019 at 11:36
How sensible and balanced advice.... Next?
Definnitely a bad point for F-35 did you ever hear it? Nearly a Concorde
Posts: 4,168
By: halloweene - 29th January 2019 at 11:37 Permalink
All those are developed for all contenders. Except for new F-35 IRST to replace the obsolete one (teasing but true)
Posts: 550
By: St. John - 29th January 2019 at 12:43 Permalink
I honestly think some of the latest F-16s might be the best option for Switzerland.
Posts: 3,106
By: FBW - 29th January 2019 at 13:27 Permalink
Obsolete wouldn't be the correct term as they are not obsolete, nor are the Sniper XR systems they were developed from (still used operationally and effectively, will be for some time). But they certainly aren't state of the art, how about "mature"? .
Posts: 3,765
By: Sintra - 29th January 2019 at 14:16 Permalink - Edited 29th January 2019 at 14:18
""Underkill" because the Typhoon is the least impressive regarding systems.
The questions about general Swiss needs are another matter."
Eagle, in what particular way is the Typhoon the "least impressive regarding systems" by comparison with the Gripen E, the SH and the Rafale in a Swiss scenario?
Posts: 3,765
By: Sintra - 29th January 2019 at 14:18 Permalink
" the F-35 is worth 20 of the other contenders"
I see that good old Scooter has come back with with the good old sillyness
Posts: 5,197
By: SpudmanWP - 29th January 2019 at 15:56 Permalink - Edited 29th January 2019 at 16:03
You've completely missed the "economy of scale" benefits, both in development and production.
For example, let's say Eurofighter, Rafale, and LM develop a new AESA radar. For EF and Raf, that development cost can only be spread across a few hundred airframes. However, for LM that cost can be spread across 3000+ airframes. On the production side, EF and Raf will produce what, 1 or 2 dozen units a year while LM produces that many in a month.
Posts: 4,168
By: halloweene - 29th January 2019 at 16:00 Permalink - Edited 29th January 2019 at 16:17
Ahem 3dB(twice the pression in Pa aka volume) "hardly audible? is it a joke? Second perceived sound depends a lot on frequency etc.
Typhoon systems are being upgraded no?
That is exactly what RAnd did not understand when they came to DA during the seventies : how can they make good cheap airplanes with so little numbers?
Nvm. The cost of devloping AESA radarswas largely shared years ago using european prgrams. And economy of scale is not a linear thing.
Posts: 5,197
By: SpudmanWP - 29th January 2019 at 16:28 Permalink
There is a lot more to development than whatever was "shared" years ago. You have the specific hardware, software modes, integration, testing, etc.
While "Economy of scale" is not linear (I never said it was), it is substantial as is evident in that the F-35 being made of the latest bleeding edge tech while being less expensive than both the Rafale, Eurofighter, F-15E, etc.