I honestly think it is a really open context.
SH provides continuity with the F18s that they already have at a really competitive price.
Eurofighter is probably the best performance wise particularly focusing on QRA, and an aircraft present in several neighbors (Germany, Italy, Austria).
Rafale won the previous context when regarding technical aspects.
F35 is the new western standard.
Gripen E won the previous context and keeps offering all the needed aspects at a reasonable price. plus an extra in the ease of use which is really convenient in this case.
20y after hard procurement all across the military spectrum to cut time from sensor to shooter, we are greeted by Opit's conclusions. Ahhh to live a live meaningful...
20y after hard procurement all across the military spectrum to cut time from sensor to shooter, we are greeted by Opit's conclusions. Ahhh to live a live meaningful...
Go get a brain. The devil is in the details. The keyword here is sensor.
By: halloweene
- 11th May 2019 at 12:17Permalink- Edited 11th May 2019 at 12:18
What is "basic" ISR?
How do you differentiate intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance from the reconnaissance part? This does not makes sense.
Simply put, F-35 - or a targeting pod with basic ISR capabilities- has nothing such as a sophisticated and dedicated 1.5T reccepod can give (be it focal, number of sensors etc.). "basi isr" is also known as NT (non traditional) ISR.
This has been discussed already when the RFI was out: if I remind correctly, maintenance and fleet sustainement can be part of the offset calculation which would make in 20year (my mem only) quite an easy sum to balance... This is very different from the MMRCA in India
Correction: it's 30years and this was even stated at the bottom of the article:
la Suisse évaluera la participation industrielle directe ou programme industriel (étendue et qualité). Surtout, elle prendra en compte aussi bien les coûts d'acquisition des systèmes que les coûts d'exploitation pendant une durée d'utilisation de 30 ans. En revanche, elle ne prendra pas en compte les coûts des éventuels programmes de modernisation ou de maintien de la performance ainsi que les frais de mise hors service.
----------------------------------------
Switzerland will evaluate direct industrial participation or industrial program (scope and quality). Above all, it will take into account both system acquisition costs and operating costs over a 30-year period of use. On the other hand, it will not take into account the costs of any modernization or performance maintenance programs as well as the costs of decommissioning.
Simply put, F-35 - or a targeting pod with basic ISR capabilities- has nothing such as a sophisticated and dedicated 1.5T reccepod can give (be it focal, number of sensors etc.). "basi isr" is also known as NT (non traditional) ISR.
A dedicated recon pod will have bigger aperture than F-35's EOTS and DAS, and possibly in wider spectrum as well. On the otherhand, F-35 can get much closer to the threat bubble than a Rafale or Gripen carrying 1.5 tons pod, so while its optical sensor might not see as far as a dedicated pod, it can get closer to see.
Furthermore, i don't think F-35 recon mode is limited with optical sensor, it is likely that APG-81 and ASQ-239 are used as well
Simply put, F-35 - or a targeting pod with basic ISR capabilities- has nothing such as a sophisticated and dedicated 1.5T reccepod can give (be it focal, number of sensors etc.). "basi isr" is also known as NT (non traditional) ISR.
Having to carry a 1.5 ton recce pod to possibly provide slightly superior ISR capability to the F-35’s incorporated sensors is a disadvantage, not an advance. “Big” SAR is coming to the F-35 in block 4.
Why “good luck”? Are you still confused on the difference between partner nation agreement not allowing offsets and an FMS customer? Hint.. you made the same mistake a few days ago with Belgium. Read what people write, especially if they actually know information about the F-35 program.
edit-for the record, I don’t think the F-35 “wins” the Swiss contract. It’s overkill for their needs, and certainly not the cheapest to operate. Still doesn’t excuse sloppy unsubstantiated posts speculating ISR rating in the competition, or an “offset” canard. Plenty of canards in this competition.
By: TomcatViP
- 18th May 2019 at 20:03Permalink- Edited 18th May 2019 at 20:15
The most annoying part of this thread for Swiss ppl might be outsider judging their defense needs and their aspiration for the operational capability of their Airforce just by the say of it.
Swiss defense strategy has always been to be the harder nut to crack in the lot against Warsaw pact for example. They have a conscript army very much like Israel (but men only - at least what I remember). So why will ppl prejudge of Israel absolute need for the 35 while looking down a the Swiss airforce?
By: Sanem
- 19th May 2019 at 07:20Permalink- Edited 19th May 2019 at 07:25
Switzerland should include the UTAP-22 in the competition, it would be way more fitting for their needs, being cheap and compact enough to launch from pretty much any base without the need for a landing strip. Give it a pair of Sidewinders (or if you can get something in R-60 class you can hang one on each wingtip) and a gunpod, and a handful of these could intercept any intruder in a matter of minutes 24/7, like reusable SAMs. It can also do ISR and ground attack to great effect, like reusable cruise missiles. At $2 million each Switzerland could field a hundred for the price of a few manned jets.
Edit: I forgot Switzerland has the Stinger, they can hang a few of those off the UTAP-22, being small and light yet giving it enough punch to be taken seriously.
By: halloweene
- 19th May 2019 at 11:32Permalink- Edited 19th May 2019 at 12:01
This has been discussed already when the RFI was out: if I remind correctly, maintenance and fleet sustainement can be part of the offset calculation which would make in 20year (my mem only) quite an easy sum to balance... This is very different from the MMRCA in India
Correction: it's 30years and this was even stated at the bottom of the article:
:rolleyes:
First off all you can use as many smileys as you want, it will not give anymore weight to your statements.
Second the total amount is 100% and who told you in switzerland th fleet sustainlment could be part of offset calculation in switzerland? Your faith?
Pour le prochain avion de combat, le groupe suisse sera désigné comme centre de compétences pour le matériel (CCM) au lancement du projet. Il réalisera les tâches, non dévolues à l'armée suisse, concernant le suivi technique du système, la gestion du matériel entre la Suisse et l'étranger et la maintenance des avions
It is already in the RFP that RUAG iwill be responsible tof fleet sustainment. Nothing to do with offsets.
Twisting facts as mch as you want will not change them.
Oh btw, did you notice that 20% of the offsets can be accounted as anterior to the RFP (RUAG, Pilatus...)
By: TooCool_12f
- 19th May 2019 at 12:30Permalink- Edited 19th May 2019 at 12:31
Switzerland should include the UTAP-22 in the competition, it would be way more fitting for their needs, being cheap and compact enough to launch from pretty much any base without the need for a landing strip. Give it a pair of Sidewinders (or if you can get something in R-60 class you can hang one on each wingtip) and a gunpod, and a handful of these could intercept any intruder in a matter of minutes 24/7, like reusable SAMs. It can also do ISR and ground attack to great effect, like reusable cruise missiles. At $2 million each Switzerland could field a hundred for the price of a few manned jets.
Edit: I forgot Switzerland has the Stinger, they can hang a few of those off the UTAP-22, being small and light yet giving it enough punch to be taken seriously.
okay but.. how do you intercept a liner or a light aircraft that has communications problem, or something along the lines of "I need help!", hummm? ^^
air policing and assistance is 99% of operational job of every european nations air force...
By: TomcatViP
- 19th May 2019 at 14:10Permalink- Edited 19th May 2019 at 14:11
First off all you can use as many smileys as you want, it will not give anymore weight to your statements.
Second the total amount is 100% and who told you in switzerland th fleet sustainlment could be part of offset calculation in switzerland? Your faith?
It is already in the RFP that RUAG iwill be responsible tof fleet sustainment. Nothing to do with offsets.
Twisting facts as mch as you want will not change them.
Oh btw, did you notice that 20% of the offsets can be accounted as anterior to the RFP (RUAG, Pilatus...)
I don't know what new phobia of you is this with Smileys (they are round faces much like a pumpkin) But for the 20%, US SOCOM bought a fair number of Pilatus (U-28) that should easily account for the 20% .
The most annoying part of this thread for Swiss ppl might be outsider judging their defense needs and their aspiration for the operational capability of their Airforce just by the say of it.
Swiss defense strategy has always been to be the harder nut to crack in the lot against Warsaw pact for example. They have a conscript army very much like Israel (but men only - at least what I remember). So why will ppl prejudge of Israel absolute need for the 35 while looking down a the Swiss airforce?
Israel though operates a lot more than 40 fighters. And while both have conscription armies (yes men only in Switzerland), Israeli army is fully equipped. Swiss army is a lot of folklore, some might say this has always been the case. I mean Hunters in the 90s? Would not have been nice against WP armies.
But still the need for new fighters is there. F-35 or not doesn't really matter imho. Provided operating cost are comparable.
More important, the SAM procurement has been split from the fighter deal. It's now CHF 6 billion for the new jets, though some have already said this isn't enough, demanding the budget to be raised to 7 billion.
However, since Belgium pays EUR 4 billion for their 34 F-35 aircraft, which is about CHF 4.5 billion, I'd say 6 billion is good enough for 40 jets.
By: eagle
- 19th May 2019 at 19:00Permalink- Edited 19th May 2019 at 19:00
Furthermore, i don't think F-35 recon mode is limited with optical sensor, it is likely that APG-81 and ASQ-239 are used as well
Sure. But it's not like Rafale/Gripen/SH have to choose between optical sensors and radar/EW-suite. Those are always there with the pod being an option F-35 and EF can't offer.
It's nice btw. to see the Rafales arriving with all the gizmos. I didn't expect Sniper though.
EF on the other hand is out imho, for political reasons. I've said it before, shouldn't have let ze Germans run the business.
More important, the SAM procurement has been split from the fighter deal. It's now CHF 6 billion for the new jets, though some have already said this isn't enough, demanding the budget to be raised to 7 billion.
However, since Belgium pays EUR 4 billion for their 34 F-35 aircraft, which is about CHF 4.5 billion, I'd say 6 billion is good enough for 40 jets.
Thanks for clearing that.
Hallow: 20% of 6billion CHF is 20MCHF ~=20M$ per plane for 60 plane.
Posts: 72
By: bandua - 10th May 2019 at 15:42 Permalink
I honestly think it is a really open context.
SH provides continuity with the F18s that they already have at a really competitive price.
Eurofighter is probably the best performance wise particularly focusing on QRA, and an aircraft present in several neighbors (Germany, Italy, Austria).
Rafale won the previous context when regarding technical aspects.
F35 is the new western standard.
Gripen E won the previous context and keeps offering all the needed aspects at a reasonable price. plus an extra in the ease of use which is really convenient in this case.
Posts: 5,905
By: TomcatViP - 10th May 2019 at 20:21 Permalink
20y after hard procurement all across the military spectrum to cut time from sensor to shooter, we are greeted by Opit's conclusions. Ahhh to live a live meaningful...
Posts: 893
By: OPIT - 11th May 2019 at 10:45 Permalink
Go get a brain. The devil is in the details. The keyword here is sensor.
Posts: 4,168
By: halloweene - 11th May 2019 at 12:17 Permalink - Edited 11th May 2019 at 12:18
Simply put, F-35 - or a targeting pod with basic ISR capabilities- has nothing such as a sophisticated and dedicated 1.5T reccepod can give (be it focal, number of sensors etc.). "basi isr" is also known as NT (non traditional) ISR.
Posts: 4,168
By: halloweene - 18th May 2019 at 13:35 Permalink - Edited 18th May 2019 at 13:36
Switzerland asked for 60% offsets going to their BIT
https://www.latribune.fr/entreprises...ir-773068.html
Good luck to F-35...
Posts: 5,905
By: TomcatViP - 18th May 2019 at 14:18 Permalink - Edited 18th May 2019 at 14:21
This has been discussed already when the RFI was out: if I remind correctly, maintenance and fleet sustainement can be part of the offset calculation which would make in 20year (my mem only) quite an easy sum to balance... This is very different from the MMRCA in India
Correction: it's 30years and this was even stated at the bottom of the article:
:rolleyes:
Posts: 1,081
By: garryA - 18th May 2019 at 14:23 Permalink
A dedicated recon pod will have bigger aperture than F-35's EOTS and DAS, and possibly in wider spectrum as well. On the otherhand, F-35 can get much closer to the threat bubble than a Rafale or Gripen carrying 1.5 tons pod, so while its optical sensor might not see as far as a dedicated pod, it can get closer to see.
Furthermore, i don't think F-35 recon mode is limited with optical sensor, it is likely that APG-81 and ASQ-239 are used as well
Posts: 3,106
By: FBW - 18th May 2019 at 14:38 Permalink
Having to carry a 1.5 ton recce pod to possibly provide slightly superior ISR capability to the F-35’s incorporated sensors is a disadvantage, not an advance. “Big” SAR is coming to the F-35 in block 4.
Posts: 3,106
By: FBW - 18th May 2019 at 14:48 Permalink - Edited 18th May 2019 at 16:53
Why “good luck”? Are you still confused on the difference between partner nation agreement not allowing offsets and an FMS customer? Hint.. you made the same mistake a few days ago with Belgium. Read what people write, especially if they actually know information about the F-35 program.
edit-for the record, I don’t think the F-35 “wins” the Swiss contract. It’s overkill for their needs, and certainly not the cheapest to operate. Still doesn’t excuse sloppy unsubstantiated posts speculating ISR rating in the competition, or an “offset” canard. Plenty of canards in this competition.
Posts: 5,905
By: TomcatViP - 18th May 2019 at 20:03 Permalink - Edited 18th May 2019 at 20:15
The most annoying part of this thread for Swiss ppl might be outsider judging their defense needs and their aspiration for the operational capability of their Airforce just by the say of it.
Swiss defense strategy has always been to be the harder nut to crack in the lot against Warsaw pact for example. They have a conscript army very much like Israel (but men only - at least what I remember). So why will ppl prejudge of Israel absolute need for the 35 while looking down a the Swiss airforce?
Posts: 593
By: Sanem - 19th May 2019 at 07:20 Permalink - Edited 19th May 2019 at 07:25
Switzerland should include the UTAP-22 in the competition, it would be way more fitting for their needs, being cheap and compact enough to launch from pretty much any base without the need for a landing strip. Give it a pair of Sidewinders (or if you can get something in R-60 class you can hang one on each wingtip) and a gunpod, and a handful of these could intercept any intruder in a matter of minutes 24/7, like reusable SAMs. It can also do ISR and ground attack to great effect, like reusable cruise missiles. At $2 million each Switzerland could field a hundred for the price of a few manned jets.
Edit: I forgot Switzerland has the Stinger, they can hang a few of those off the UTAP-22, being small and light yet giving it enough punch to be taken seriously.
Posts: 4,168
By: halloweene - 19th May 2019 at 11:32 Permalink - Edited 19th May 2019 at 12:01
First off all you can use as many smileys as you want, it will not give anymore weight to your statements.
Second the total amount is 100% and who told you in switzerland th fleet sustainlment could be part of offset calculation in switzerland? Your faith?
It is already in the RFP that RUAG iwill be responsible tof fleet sustainment. Nothing to do with offsets.
Twisting facts as mch as you want will not change them.
Oh btw, did you notice that 20% of the offsets can be accounted as anterior to the RFP (RUAG, Pilatus...)
Posts: 3,259
By: TooCool_12f - 19th May 2019 at 12:30 Permalink - Edited 19th May 2019 at 12:31
okay but.. how do you intercept a liner or a light aircraft that has communications problem, or something along the lines of "I need help!", hummm? ^^
air policing and assistance is 99% of operational job of every european nations air force...
Posts: 5,905
By: TomcatViP - 19th May 2019 at 14:10 Permalink - Edited 19th May 2019 at 14:11
I don't know what new phobia of you is this with Smileys (they are round faces much like a pumpkin) But for the 20%, US SOCOM bought a fair number of Pilatus (U-28) that should easily account for the 20% .
Posts: 4,168
By: halloweene - 19th May 2019 at 17:13 Permalink
Smiley's are just kiddish. That's all. U-28 accounting for 20% of the value of fighters? Despairing...
Posts: 2,271
By: eagle - 19th May 2019 at 18:37 Permalink
Israel though operates a lot more than 40 fighters. And while both have conscription armies (yes men only in Switzerland), Israeli army is fully equipped. Swiss army is a lot of folklore, some might say this has always been the case. I mean Hunters in the 90s? Would not have been nice against WP armies.
But still the need for new fighters is there. F-35 or not doesn't really matter imho. Provided operating cost are comparable.
Posts: 2,271
By: eagle - 19th May 2019 at 18:49 Permalink
No it has been reduced to 60% total - 20% direct and 40% indirect offsets. https://www.vbs.admin.ch/fr/defense/protection-espace-aerien.html
More important, the SAM procurement has been split from the fighter deal. It's now CHF 6 billion for the new jets, though some have already said this isn't enough, demanding the budget to be raised to 7 billion.
However, since Belgium pays EUR 4 billion for their 34 F-35 aircraft, which is about CHF 4.5 billion, I'd say 6 billion is good enough for 40 jets.
Posts: 2,271
By: eagle - 19th May 2019 at 19:00 Permalink - Edited 19th May 2019 at 19:00
Sure. But it's not like Rafale/Gripen/SH have to choose between optical sensors and radar/EW-suite. Those are always there with the pod being an option F-35 and EF can't offer.
It's nice btw. to see the Rafales arriving with all the gizmos. I didn't expect Sniper though.
EF on the other hand is out imho, for political reasons. I've said it before, shouldn't have let ze Germans run the business.
Here's a longer video of Rafales at Payerne:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MKwcxJFqNJw
Posts: 2,626
By: Spitfire9 - 19th May 2019 at 19:37 Permalink
Unaware of the political angle. Would you be able to inform me better, please?
Posts: 5,905
By: TomcatViP - 19th May 2019 at 21:13 Permalink - Edited 19th May 2019 at 21:14
Thanks for clearing that.
Hallow: 20% of 6billion CHF is 20MCHF ~=20M$ per plane for 60 plane.