By: TooCool_12f
- 19th April 2019 at 19:34Permalink
Not. And not by a long shot, the final ratings of the 2008/2009 Swiss Eval were related to the (then) Gripen MS21, Eurofighter P1E and Rafale F3, all these configurations were years in the future.
not exactly.. they were related to what's been demonstrated and then they made an evaluation of credibility of different makers with their projects for the timeframe when the swiss order would have to be delivered
New
Posts: 3,337
By: BlackArcher
- 19th April 2019 at 22:00Permalink
not exactly.. they were related to what's been demonstrated and then they made an evaluation of credibility of different makers with their projects for the timeframe when the swiss order would have to be delivered
Exactly. They were rated on the basis of what was demonstrated. They were then also credited based on what was in the works, since all 3 types were offering a configuration that wasn't demonstrable at that time. That is not the case anymore, with the Rafale F3R, F-35 and Super Hornet Block III at least. Gripen E is still very much in development, so they too may not be able to demonstrate all the features that they will offer on the Gripen E.
New
Posts: 3,337
By: BlackArcher
- 22nd April 2019 at 21:23Permalink
More interesting info from AW&ST
The Swiss plan to spend $8 billion on combined fighter and ground-based air defense purchase
The air force is stepping up its air policing efforts to 24-hr. coverage in 2020
And the neutral land-locked nation is taking its air defense more seriously than ever. At the beginning of this year, the Swiss Air Force increased its readiness levels, putting armed aircraft on standby for air policing duties for 16 hr. a day, 365 days a year. The next step is to provide round-the-clock coverage at 15-min. readiness by the end of 2020.
The changes are in response to criticism that the service was unable to respond to the 2014 hijacking of an Ethiopian airliner that landed in Geneva just before 6 a.m., 2 hr. before military personnel even arrived for work. The escort of the airliner was left to the French and Italian air forces, with which Switzerland has air defense accords.
The embarrassing wake-up call highlighted a dangerous gap in the country’s air defense security, and one that its air force was simply not funded to fulfill.
Such incidents have added credibility to the country’s 8 billion Swiss franc ($8 billion) Air 2030 plans to purchase up to 40 fighter aircraft and a new ground-based air defense system, all from the same pot of money.
How that will be split is yet to be determined, but OEMS have been requested to provide pricing for fleets of 30 and 40 aircraft.
..
Raytheon’s Patriot and the Eurosam consortium’s SAMP-T system will be considered for the ground-based element.
Switzerland is one of a handful of nations that call for in-country evaluations of future combat aircraft. Finland is another, with Helsinki planning a winter test in 2021.
The Swiss need, say officials, is driven by the country’s unique topography. Although simulation is now capable of answering many of the questions asked by the Swiss customer and has enabled the number of evaluation flights to be reduced from around 20 in 2008 to just seven or eight this year, officials still need to understand how the aircraft’s sensors, notably the radar, will deal with the cluttered Alpine environment. Of the seven or eight flights, two will be technical, testing the sensors in the Alpine environment, says Kaj-Gunnar Sievert, spokesman for the Swiss defense materiel agency, Armasuisse. Five of the flights will be representative of operations performed by Swiss fighters such as quick-reaction alert—scramble and intercept.
Because some of the aircraft, notably, the F-35 and Gripen E, are only single-seat, data collection will be dependent on company test pilots and recordings of flight-test data. Swiss test pilots will monitor from the rear seat of two-seat aircraft where available.
Aircraft that do not show up for the evaluations are automatically disqualified from the competition.
Sweden’s Saab is optimistic about its prospects, particularly as the Gripen was selected previously, but the aircraft is arguably the least mature of the types taking part in the evaluation. The Gripen E’s appearance in June will be the first time the aircraft has left Sweden; it will be accompanied by C and D models.
For the F-35, the deployment marks the type’s first overseas evaluation because most national evaluations have been performed in the U.S. Four U.S. Air Force F-35As will make the transatlantic crossing, heading to a U.S. air base in Europe, probably Ramstein, Germany, before making the short hop into Switzerland. The company is hoping to build on its recent European successes; Lockheed notes that Switzerland already makes use of U.S.-built platforms, which means some equipment and weaponry could be reused. Questions remain, however, whether a nation that only uses its fighters for air defense duties really needs the low-observable capabilities offered by the fifth-generation fighter.
Being the incumbent could be valuable for the Super Hornet’s chances in Switzerland. This year’s evaluations will also mark the F/A-18E/F’s debut, as Boeing pulled the aircraft from competition prior to the trials in 2008.
Airbus, working with the German government is using British Royal Air Force (RAF) aircraft for the tests because the configuration of RAF Typhoons with the Phase 3 Enhancements package is the closest operational configuration to what Switzerland is being offered. If selected, Swiss Eurofighters would be in the same configuration as the aircraft soon to be ordered by Germany as Tranche 1 replacements, fitted with the new active, electronically scanned array radar.
Dassault is expected to offer its F4 upgraded version of the Rafale, with Paris leaning on its recent purchase of Pilatus PC-21 trainers and its close relationship with the Swiss government to get an edge.
Armasuisse will initially use the data from the trials to confirm the answers provided by the manufacturers in the first request for proposals (RFP) issued last July. Later, it will be used to make direct comparisons in support of a second RFP planned for 2020. A possible hurdle to this schedule is another referendum, also planned for 2020. Rather than ask whether the government should buy a particular platform, the referendum will likely be more fundamental, officials say, such as asking if the country should modernize its air defenses.
With a green light, contracts would be signed after parliamentary approvals in 2022, and deliveries would begin in 2025-30.
Smart to look for an integrated system for air dominance instead of "i want XX planes" isn't it?
Not necessarily, IMO. Switzerland cannot even maintain 24/7 watch of its own airspace currently. Dominance is hardly something to aim for when you cannot even scramble a single jet in response to an air violation for several hours of the day and instead depend on your neighbors to do it for you.
The first target has to be adequate number of airframes and pilots to be able to meet a 24/7 QRA requirement 365 days of the year.
All of the contenders are more than adequate for the task, capability wise. But with such lack of will to get such a basic defense requirement met, it seems to me that the cheapest solution that meets your needs should do. The Gripen E will be more than enough for most of the roles that a neutral Switzerland will ever require of it. High availability, lowest cost of operation and maintenance (being a single engine jet with a reliable engine), an extremely capable long range BVRAAM (Meteor), modern WVRAAM (IRIS-T and R-Darter) and the ability to support and deploy a wide range of ground attack weapons if needed.
Capability over a certain baseline is overkill for Swiss needs. They'll never need to use it. Affordability and the ability to work in a network comprising ground radars and air defence missile systems will be the key. Add the ability to operate from Swiss airfields and use their extensive tunnels.
Not necessarily, IMO. Switzerland cannot even maintain 24/7 watch of its own airspace currently. Dominance is hardly something to aim for when you cannot even scramble a single jet in response to an air violation for several hours of the day and instead depend on your neighbors to do it for you.
The first target has to be adequate number of airframes and pilots to be able to meet a 24/7 QRA requirement 365 days of the year.
Switzerland thus far can't mantain a 24/ QRA because 24/7 QRA wasn't required before 2014. Not because there aren't enough airframes. It's currently being implemented, to be completed before the end of 2020 - as it says in the link you posted above.
You don't need more than 24 airframes for that.
30-40 jets are required for round the clock CAP for some days, as specified in official requirements.
I agree though that this is not about air dominance. Not even proper air defence - 60-70 fighters are required to provide credible air defence.
Besides 24/7 QRA and limited CAP, the 30-40 fighters should allow to regain knowledge in the fields of A/G and recce, lost in 1994 and 2003 resp.
Switzerland thus far can't mantain a 24/ QRA because 24/7 QRA wasn't required before 2014. Not because there aren't enough airframes. It's currently being implemented, to be completed before the end of 2020 - as it says in the link you posted above.
You don't need more than 24 airframes for that.
30-40 jets are required for round the clock CAP for some days, as specified in official requirements.
I agree though that this is not about air dominance. Not even proper air defence - 60-70 fighters are required to provide credible air defence.
Besides 24/7 QRA and limited CAP, the 30-40 fighters should allow to regain knowledge in the fields of A/G and recce, lost in 1994 and 2003 resp.
if all Switzerland needs is simply just numbers capable of doing QRA and CAP all the time, they should just go for the cheapest one.
and I guess out of that list, it would be the Gripen.
if all Switzerland needs is simply just numbers capable of doing QRA and CAP all the time, they should just go for the cheapest one.
and I guess out of that list, it would be the Gripen.
Gripen can probably do A2G well enough for them though. You aren't going to see the Swiss bombing militants in MENA and so they don't need a heavy focus there.
Gripen can probably do A2G well enough for them though. You aren't going to see the Swiss bombing militants in MENA and so they don't need a heavy focus there.
Yes probably, unless they have some very specific needs. The A in JAS 39 Gripen stands for ground attack. (J=Fighter A=Attack S=Reconnaissance)
By: eagle
- 9th May 2019 at 18:50Permalink- Edited 9th May 2019 at 18:55
Why? In what scenario would the Swiss air force undertake strike missions?
As I said, to regain basic knowledge. So that in the event of a crisis, it doesn't take x years to rebuild the air force, but x minus y years only. That's the theory.
Scenario? The mission of the Swiss Army, of which the Swiss AF is part of, is to defend Switzerland. Any national defence scenario that requires air defence probably requires A/G too.
Surely all the contenders provide good enough basic A/G capabilites.
SH, Rafale and Gripen have the edge in recce capabilites thanks to their dedicated recce pods - but I don't think the Swiss AF asks for more than RecceLite etc. can deliver.
By: TomcatViP
- 9th May 2019 at 19:28Permalink- Edited 9th May 2019 at 19:28
SH, Rafale and Gripen have the edge in recce capabilites thanks to their dedicated recce pods - but I don't think the Swiss AF asks for more than RecceLite etc. can deliver.
I understand that you want to appease the debate but this stands as an astounding assumption. Do you really think that F-35 fusion comes in a tea spoon? (that one as an "in" in front :rolleyes: ).
[LEFT][COLOR=#222222][FONT=Helvetica][SIZE=13px]A combat aircraft purchase is a long term decision. Who knows what the world will look like in 30 years?
They know how things will be in 30 years. Switzerland will be neutral.[/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR][/LEFT]
Posts: 3,259
By: TooCool_12f - 19th April 2019 at 19:34 Permalink
not exactly.. they were related to what's been demonstrated and then they made an evaluation of credibility of different makers with their projects for the timeframe when the swiss order would have to be delivered
Posts: 3,337
By: BlackArcher - 19th April 2019 at 22:00 Permalink
Exactly. They were rated on the basis of what was demonstrated. They were then also credited based on what was in the works, since all 3 types were offering a configuration that wasn't demonstrable at that time. That is not the case anymore, with the Rafale F3R, F-35 and Super Hornet Block III at least. Gripen E is still very much in development, so they too may not be able to demonstrate all the features that they will offer on the Gripen E.
Posts: 3,337
By: BlackArcher - 22nd April 2019 at 21:23 Permalink
More interesting info from AW&ST
Posts: 4,168
By: halloweene - 23rd April 2019 at 13:13 Permalink
Smart to look for an integrated system for air dominance instead of "i want XX planes" isn't it?
Posts: 2,626
By: Spitfire9 - 3rd May 2019 at 09:30 Permalink - Edited 3rd May 2019 at 09:58
deleted
Posts: 3,337
By: BlackArcher - 8th May 2019 at 22:39 Permalink
Not necessarily, IMO. Switzerland cannot even maintain 24/7 watch of its own airspace currently. Dominance is hardly something to aim for when you cannot even scramble a single jet in response to an air violation for several hours of the day and instead depend on your neighbors to do it for you.
The first target has to be adequate number of airframes and pilots to be able to meet a 24/7 QRA requirement 365 days of the year.
All of the contenders are more than adequate for the task, capability wise. But with such lack of will to get such a basic defense requirement met, it seems to me that the cheapest solution that meets your needs should do. The Gripen E will be more than enough for most of the roles that a neutral Switzerland will ever require of it. High availability, lowest cost of operation and maintenance (being a single engine jet with a reliable engine), an extremely capable long range BVRAAM (Meteor), modern WVRAAM (IRIS-T and R-Darter) and the ability to support and deploy a wide range of ground attack weapons if needed.
Capability over a certain baseline is overkill for Swiss needs. They'll never need to use it. Affordability and the ability to work in a network comprising ground radars and air defence missile systems will be the key. Add the ability to operate from Swiss airfields and use their extensive tunnels.
Posts: 2,271
By: eagle - 9th May 2019 at 00:51 Permalink
Switzerland thus far can't mantain a 24/ QRA because 24/7 QRA wasn't required before 2014. Not because there aren't enough airframes. It's currently being implemented, to be completed before the end of 2020 - as it says in the link you posted above.
You don't need more than 24 airframes for that.
30-40 jets are required for round the clock CAP for some days, as specified in official requirements.
I agree though that this is not about air dominance. Not even proper air defence - 60-70 fighters are required to provide credible air defence.
Besides 24/7 QRA and limited CAP, the 30-40 fighters should allow to regain knowledge in the fields of A/G and recce, lost in 1994 and 2003 resp.
Posts: 163
By: J-20 - 9th May 2019 at 10:16 Permalink
if all Switzerland needs is simply just numbers capable of doing QRA and CAP all the time, they should just go for the cheapest one.
and I guess out of that list, it would be the Gripen.
Posts: 4,168
By: halloweene - 9th May 2019 at 12:03 Permalink
Che"ck, A2G missions are needed.
Posts: 333
By: XB-70 - 9th May 2019 at 12:40 Permalink
Gripen can probably do A2G well enough for them though. You aren't going to see the Swiss bombing militants in MENA and so they don't need a heavy focus there.
Posts: 4,168
By: halloweene - 9th May 2019 at 13:02 Permalink
A combat aircraft purchase is a long term decision. Who knows what the world will look like in 30 years?
Posts: 2,626
By: Spitfire9 - 9th May 2019 at 13:09 Permalink
Why? In what scenario would the Swiss air force undertake strike missions?
Posts: 9
By: Pants - 9th May 2019 at 15:22 Permalink
Yes probably, unless they have some very specific needs. The A in JAS 39 Gripen stands for ground attack. (J=Fighter A=Attack S=Reconnaissance)
Posts: 621
By: Yama - 9th May 2019 at 15:45 Permalink
Dunno, but apparently they have figured that out, as Strike is one of the requirements for new Swiss fighter, which it wasn't for F/A-18.
Posts: 2,271
By: eagle - 9th May 2019 at 18:50 Permalink - Edited 9th May 2019 at 18:55
As I said, to regain basic knowledge. So that in the event of a crisis, it doesn't take x years to rebuild the air force, but x minus y years only. That's the theory.
Scenario? The mission of the Swiss Army, of which the Swiss AF is part of, is to defend Switzerland. Any national defence scenario that requires air defence probably requires A/G too.
Surely all the contenders provide good enough basic A/G capabilites.
SH, Rafale and Gripen have the edge in recce capabilites thanks to their dedicated recce pods - but I don't think the Swiss AF asks for more than RecceLite etc. can deliver.
Posts: 5,905
By: TomcatViP - 9th May 2019 at 19:28 Permalink - Edited 9th May 2019 at 19:28
I understand that you want to appease the debate but this stands as an astounding assumption. Do you really think that F-35 fusion comes in a tea spoon? (that one as an "in" in front :rolleyes: ).
Posts: 2,626
By: Spitfire9 - 9th May 2019 at 23:33 Permalink
Article revealing Swiss government's possible strategy aimed at avoiding a second plebiscite rejection of the fighter procurement programme:
https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2019/05/09/swiss-air2030-program-clears-hurdle-of-external-review-with-tweaks/
Posts: 333
By: XB-70 - 10th May 2019 at 00:13 Permalink
They know how things will be in 30 years. Switzerland will be neutral.[/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR][/LEFT]
Posts: 893
By: OPIT - 10th May 2019 at 09:25 Permalink - Edited 10th May 2019 at 09:26
Whatever. Basic ISR is not recce.
Posts: 3,106
By: FBW - 10th May 2019 at 14:10 Permalink - Edited 10th May 2019 at 14:13
What is "basic" ISR?
How do you differentiate intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance from the reconnaissance part? This does not makes sense.