Swiss Air Force combat fighter competition 2.0

Read the forum code of contact

Member for

8 years

Posts: 145

And SAAB is out!

Well, this is unexpected. And me thinking that the chaps were the frontrunner.

https://saabgroup.com/media/news-pre...-flight-tests/
https://www.vtg.admin.ch/content/vtg...tml/75184.html

I suspect that this has just become something between Dassault and the Americans

They are not out.
The offer stands.
They will not do the flight test right now.
The big question is whether they do the flight test later or not.
If not, then they probably going to face a degrading of all scores.

Member for

16 years 7 months

Posts: 3,765

Saab is out. The end. That was officially stated by these chaps called "Armasuisse". And the chance of doing the flight test on a later date is dead.
And that is on "Armasuisse" official site, right on the front page. Saab is officially excluded from the Swiss competition.

Member for

15 years 8 months

Posts: 2,626

Saab is out. The end. That was officially stated by these chaps called "Armasuisse". And the chance of doing the flight test on a later date is dead.
And that is on "Armasuisse" official site, right on the front page. Saab is officially excluded from the Swiss competition.

Agreed. End of saga.

Member for

12 years 1 month

Posts: 4,168

End in switzerland. Finland is far from over.

Member for

13 years 1 month

Posts: 1,120

Gripen E was the top contender for me...Now my bet is on the rafale followed by the F35.

It has been tested with the brand new F3R standard with targo HMS, while Typhoon, F18SH, and F16 are tested with older systems (must be in service). With the rules set up by Armasuisse, Typhoon, SH & F16 should be left behind at least in the technical evaluation in all logic.

Then there is the F35 which is the "unkonwn for me", it has indeed strong arguments but not sure how it would perform in the Swiss context.

My 2c is that the rules were made to discard some contenders like the gripen E. Then Armassuisse will not automatically end up withthe cheapest "good enough/politically correct option". They want to be spoiled. You don't need to have a cristal ball to understand that this set of rules will favour the rafale and the F35 and left other behind.

Member for

12 years 3 months

Posts: 3,106

Then there is the F35 which is the "unkonwn for me", it has indeed strong arguments but not sure how it would perform in the Swiss context.

My 2c is that the rules were made to discard some contenders like the gripen E. Then Armassuisse will not automatically end up withthe cheapest "good enough/politically correct option". They want to be spoiled. You don't need to have a cristal ball to understand that this set of rules will favour the rafale and the F35 and left other behind

This has been the Rafale's contest to win from the outset. The competition includes two aircraft at their peak in terms of systems maturity, proven capabilities (Rafale, F-18 E/F), the Typhoon which increasingly looks like it will never fully capitalize on the potential of that airframe with a timely upgrade path & technology roadmap, one aircraft in the F-35 with enormous potential and future capabilities planned and funded but certainly on the front slope of the maturity/reliability curve. And our eliminated Gripen, which is a question mark in potential and future capabilities.. though I admit bias on my belief that the Gripen E/F project is Cinderella showing up the ball at 11:58.

Add to that the political element of strong lobbying with the EU for support of continental defense solutions (Trump doesn't help), and I've thought this is the Rafale's competition to lose.

Member for

13 years 1 month

Posts: 1,120

This has been the Rafale's contest to win from the outset. The competition includes two aircraft at their peak in terms of systems maturity, proven capabilities (Rafale, F-18 E/F), the Typhoon which increasingly looks like it will never fully capitalize on the potential of that airframe with a timely upgrade path & technology roadmap, one aircraft in the F-35 with enormous potential and future capabilities planned and funded but certainly on the front slope of the maturity/reliability curve. And our eliminated Gripen, which is a question mark in potential and future capabilities.. though I admit bias on my belief that the Gripen E/F project is Cinderella showing up the ball at 11:58.

Add to that the political element of strong lobbying with the EU for support of continental defense solutions (Trump doesn't help), and I've thought this is the Rafale's competition to lose.

It is never easy to hold the position as favorite, that's for sure. One "unusual" argument for the rafale is that the senior chaps supervising the technical evaluation were probably familiar with the mirage III in their young years. A bit of nostalgia with Dassault aircrafts does not hurt.

More down to earth you have potential agreements with Switzerland to expend their airspace for training in case of a rafale win.

One thing I slihgtly disagree with you statement is that the next rafale standard (F4) will be in many ways groundbreaking and it will have a value proposition where even the F35 will not be able to match everywhere. So while the F3R standrs is tested now, they will get the F4 if the rafale win.

Member for

12 years 1 month

Posts: 4,168

Rules are somhow a little more complicated.

- Armassuisse tells which std they wanna test

- Future enhancements are not taken into account except on acceptance -or not- frome the designed tested plane.

Member for

9 years 9 months

Posts: 1,765

May I say that those rules are quite absurd?
They will be evaluating planes in a configuration that would be outdated when they would acquire them without considering not just a future version , with all possible developmental risk associated to this option but even an already existing, just still not operative one.

Member for

12 years 1 month

Posts: 4,168

i think i linked above the complete document. Summing it up may lead to misunderstanding.

Member for

15 years 8 months

Posts: 2,626

Typhoon AESA:

Eurofighter AESA radar delay impacts competitiveness

The status of Eurofighter’s future AESA radar, however, remains murky, and it is not even mentioned in Eurofighter’s June 20 statement on the LTE study.

Clearly, studying how to keep Eurofighter operationally relevant “for decades to come” without replacing its 20-year old mechanically-scanned radar leaves a glaring gap in its market credibility, yet Eurofighter continues to evade the issue.

At a press conference at the Paris Air Show on Wednesday, Eurofighter officials refused to say when, and if, the Leonardo Captor-E active electronically-scanned array (AESA) radar developed for Eurofighter will be procured by the four partner nations.

Company spokesman Adam Morrison dismissed a question about the status of Captor-E by saying that “all things come in good time,” and refused follow-up questions. He later added that there might be some good news regarding the radar at some unspecified, future time.

His position is in line with Eurofighter’s long-standing evasiveness about the status of the Captor-E radar. Companies working on the program refer questions to Eurofighter, which is the nominal customer, but Eurofighter brushes off unwelcome questions with the claim that "We cannot provide any further details at this point for reasons of commercial sensitivity."

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/article-view/feature/203668/aesa-radar-still-lacking-as-eurofighter-looks-to-future-improvements.html

When the Swiss competition started for the second time I did not think Eurofighter had much of a chance of being selected Now I think they have no chance at all.

Member for

18 years 7 months

Posts: 4,461

The entire article is misleading. The AESA is in development and will be fitted to Kuwaiti aircraft. A proposal has in fact been submitted by Eurofighter, but a contract has yet to be signed. I'm confident that Germany and Spain will contract the AESA retrofit soon. It would be ready for Switzerland within envisaged timescales. As said Kuwaiti aircraft will feature it. Britain is known to pursue its Radar 2 version for a long time, that doesn't mean they won't get it at all as the article appears to imply. IMO big headlines, little substance. As the AESA development is on contract there is no need to include it into LTE, other than integrating it with the new avionics architecture. That's the reason why it isn't mentioned and subject of LTE.

Member for

15 years 8 months

Posts: 2,626

#Scorpion

I don't know if the article is misleading or not but in terms of the Swiss contest, were the Typhoons evaluated fitted with production versions of AESA? I believe that the terms of the evaluation are that the aircraft tested were to be versions currently in service.

Member for

18 years 7 months

Posts: 4,461

Hello Spitfire,

no they weren't as I have outlined not long ago. So for the flight test evaluation it's not being considered. But if Switzerland would select Typhoon, it would receive AESA equipped aircraft.

Member for

13 years 3 months

Posts: 3,337

Feel sorry for Saab. The Gripen E seems like the best fit for Switzerland in terms of cost and the level of capability they actually require. This rule by Armasuisse is probably to avoid contesting claims of bias but they have eliminated the most suitable candidate. F-35 and Rafale are both overkill for their needs. F-35 operating costs will certainly be significantly higher than the Gripen E and the Swiss really have no need for stealth given they almost never will operate offensively.

Member for

6 years 2 months

Posts: 163

Feel sorry for Saab. The Gripen E seems like the best fit for Switzerland in terms of cost and the level of capability they actually require. This rule by Armasuisse is probably to avoid contesting claims of bias but they have eliminated the most suitable candidate. F-35 and Rafale are both overkill for their needs. F-35 operating costs will certainly be significantly higher than the Gripen E and the Swiss really have no need for stealth given they almost never will operate offensively.

IKR

Switzerland is TINNYYYYY

Switzerland is like only 300KM at its widest! it would take any supersonic jet less than 10 minutes to get to the farthest end.

they dont need some long range jet.

They may need Range if they participated in bombing poor countries abroad... but Switzerland is NEUTRAL!!!!!

Bruh, they aint flying anywhere too. So they dont need range at home, and they aren't fighting abroad. You could say they could just do well with good SAMs

I suspect the Rafale selection is the Bias of Geneva, and that Bern was beaten out.

well since Rafale will win here it is

[ATTACH=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"full","title":"rafaelerc_title.jpg","data-attachmentid":3866190}[/ATTACH]

Attachments

Member for

18 years 7 months

Posts: 893

they dont need some long range jet.

True, they need play time.

Member for

14 years 3 months

Posts: 3,259

funny when you think about it.. a guy comes here saying switzerland is tiny and any fighter would suffice, yet, in the last trials, a Gripen managed to be bingo fuel before succeeding to intercept a simulated liner over swiss territory.. go figure... I guess the pilot should've passed on keypub boards, prior to the test, so that some posters explain to him that any fighter would do it :highly_amused: