Why?

Rafale is a beast, but it costs a lot more to maintain and fly (two engines are a major factor) and it takes longer to deploy of the ground. CH needs a flexible aircraft for policing duties that is relatively cheap to run, Gripen fits that, unless the Russians decide to build a modern equivalent of good old MIG 21 only sensible choice is Gripen.

@ marksmaden

CH remained neutral because of politics, theoretically all major powers (Allies, Nazis, Soviets) could have defeated it. CH was used as neutral ground for negotiations, people that created CIA were infact heavily involved in CH. Allan Dulles dined with SS general Wolf in middle of Luzern and nobody seemed bothered.

I never said the T34 was a better weapon, even with teething troubles the Panther and Tiger were better tanks in countless ways, but (and this is a big but), the Russians had huge numbers of T34s and used their numerical superiority to eliminate the Tigers and Panthers - no matter how good the tank, it will eventually run out of ammo. In 1944, the Wehrmacht had only 304 Panthers operating in the Eastern front while the Soviets were producing 1,200 T34s a month!(the historian Basil Liddell Hart recounted that when he toured the battlefields in East Germany shortly after the end of WWII he would frequently see the remains of 20 or 30 burnt out T34s in front of one burnt out Tiger or Panther, no matter what the casualties the Red Army eventually knocked out the German tank).
I never said they were stupid The T34 was continually improved during the war (and in 1944 the Red Army came up with the better gunned and more reliable T34-85)
I said they were illiterate (perhaps the wrong word, poorly trained perhaps or barely literate), but I didn't say they were stupid. They were highly motivated (to throw the Nazis out of their beloved Rodina [Motherland]), and learnt fast.

I think you missed the point of the post, regardless the deficiencies of the T34, the minimal training of the crews, the Red Army had huge numbers of an effective weapon when it was desperately needed.

And returning to this thread, I would argue that Switzerland should get what it needs today (like the VTOL Harrier) even if not completely perfect, rather than wait for something perfect (and undoubtably more expensive) tomorrow.

The Rafale will be used by many airforces which means that spares later on will not be as expensive as the Swedish stuff. Two engines are a positive thing in many ways (made the BAC Lightning a superior airplane). And Switzerland for a long time had the Mirage in use quite successfully.

Add to this that the Rafale looks good




And why should Mr Dulles not have met General Wolf in a neutral place ? Mr Göring often was on visit to Switzerland even in WWII time and General Guisan was in Berlin more than once. Lots of contacts between the various parties took place during WWII, but the power-holders in Berlin and Tokyo remained stubborn

My point was that CH was neutral, I only mentioned Allan to support my argument.

Many countries using Rafale? Besides India (not counting manufacturers) who else is using them? Gripen is far more used/widespread. I agree two engines are much better for performance, though this comes at significantly larger cost.

I got the impression that you were arguing that less sophisticated weapons are not the way to go and then you mentioned Russians and T34 argument. Problem with that theory is the difference in resources available, CH is a tiny country with extremely limited resources. Fighting wars of annhilation would end very badly, very quickly. In order to compensate the defficiencies CH needs to rely on technological and personnel superority. Put it this way, if the Germans had less sophisticated tanks how would they have preformed against Soviets in the latter parts of the war?




Harrier?

Plane developed half a century ago? Using that logic they might as well get a Spitfire..............

Hardly. Like all good weapon platforms a good design can push the envelope for a long, long time (you mention the Spitfire: test model 1931 design, final version with the Mk 24 in 1944 [the last operationally flying Spitfire was actually a Mk 19 in 1954 - but let's not quibble] not bad going when you consider all modifications were designed by hand, not by computers)

Although to be replaced by the F35B, the Harrier is still being used, with improved avionics and weapons systems it may be too early to completely write off the Harrier (although the F35B may be a suitable choice for Switzerland).

If you believe new is always better, avoid flying on a Jumbo Jet. The first variant (747-100) designed in the mid sixties and entered service in 1970, we're up to the 747-8. Not bad for an "antique" design?

Not yet, but France will try to convince former Mirage customers for the Rafale. Dassault over the years has sold well

Replace "convince" with "legal bribery" and you're probably nearer the truth. Check the Indian Rafale selection and the long road to that deal if you want more on that story.

Much has happened with the Gripen project since this thread faded into obscurity. Armasuisse pilots have flown the new Gripen up in Sweden and the politicians here are still trying to discuss what is essentially a done deal. The fact is that no one in the military is really questioning the new fighter's rôle, rather the "Tiger replacement" aspect is being upheld, although I personally believe that all the leaks to the press which clearly showed that the Rafale was the best fighter in Armasuisse's evaluation originated from the Air Force, but I have no evidence of that.

Defense minister Maurer has tried to prolong the procurement process for a couple of years, delaying service entry to 2020, by which time, the evaluation process will not only be null and void, but new models will no doubt be available with whatever weapon systems and active scanning radars are then state-of-the-art. Anyone who knows their recent Swiss military airplane procurement history will recognize this protracted "will they" / "won't they" process. It's happened so often before and clearly this time is proving to be no different. It's kind of embarrassing if you're in this industry, because all the bidders, Dassault, EADS and Saab have held up their side of the evaluation and Switzerland is just farting around not clarifying clearly what is happening with the procurement.

Mr Maurer possibly fears to land in the situation of Defence Minister Chaudet, when working with the French . He now can either try to press through the Gripen deal, or forget it until 2020 .

Or maybe the Air Force is hoping to get the F-35 to replace and the Tigers and the Hornets. Good luck on that though... Not cheap!

Latest rumour is the "we" are looking at buying "used" Gripen jets.

How close these come to meeting the Military's requirement list is, I assume, unknown

Well, a cousin who worked as a salesman for MATRA explained to me that the "personal approach" in the arms selling business is of crucial importance. And that "personal relations" need to be built up. Various sorts of commissions and of kick-backs are also important. It is almost like in airfreight

----
and to replace the F-5 my favourites would be the Su-25


and the Hongdu K-8 Karakorum

at the rate the politicians mess up procurement of fancy planes, the air force should just order a few batteries of modern area SAMs like Aster or Patriot to get in under the political radar. They could buy them off Greece dirt cheap along with some Russian S-300s

The AIR FORCE is not in charge with the stuff you mention. The stuff you mention is in the hands of the FLAB (Flugzeugabwehr) which already is nicely equipped
http://www.lw.admin.ch/internet/luft...s/antiair.html
the fancy hightech stuff of the FLAB often is criticized due to its high costs and its doubtful effectiveness

I in early childhood knew a young chap who a decade before was in the FLAK in Berlin, and who apparently had a bad impression. I asked his mother in Memmingen much later in 1968, and got the whole story. A schoolfriend then in 1971 did his RS in the Swiss FLAB and what he could tell about it did not really convince me.

The Oerlikon 35mm guns are SHORAD and not in the same league as the systems I'm mentioning, which are more like a replacement for the cold war era bloodhound missiles the Swiss air force operated up to late 1990s. The Swiss airforce does have a history of ground based air defense and even if it didn't then tradition would be a poor excuse not to start now.

First of all, FLAB and Luftwaffe here of course have always been closely linked. But the airforce itself NEVER had air defence stuff in it arsenal. AND air defence without an airforce is hopeless. FLAB and airforce only work if being complimentary. IF either is given up, give up the armed forces in total !

Oh, I was under the impression that Bloodhound was operated by SAF. Now I check it's even on their official website, although I follow what you are saying re SAF-versus-Flab. Never really understood why Swiss bothered with Rapier rather than Oerlikon's own ADATS system. I bet some people in Switzerland cried when America won the cold war and no longer needed ADATS. Either way both are too old now. And the GDF cannon are also aged and Oerlikon is now owned by Rheinmetall so Skyshield is probably less interesting anyway. Seems that system is hardly selling aside from a few naval sales.

why Su-25 or K-8? K-8 is worse than the Hawks SAF already sold.

YES, it is on their WEBsite ! Not only this, practically ALL of the FLAB business is on the Air Force WEBsite. And OpenDays are generally done by both forces in close conjunction. But it is two forces. The WEBsite only shows how closely interlinked the two forces indeed are.

The Swiss Armed Forces have always been operating with equipment which elsewhere was in museums ! Nothing new ! We in 1972 had trucks in operation built in the late 1920ies. This oversized militia army simply is too large to be kept up to modern standards. A small professional army however could be kept up-to-date, as the enormous costs (mostly invisible) of the militia army could be reduced quite considerably.

The Su-25 and the K-8 are still in production, far better than the Hawk and fairly modern, and would be within the financial limits

Lol, never heard anyone describe the k8 as better than the hawk, which also is still in production. K8 is cheaper for sure, but hardly different from the PC-9 in capabilities and role. Who operates k8 outside china? Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Egypt??? Great club for SAF to join!!!

If SAF where looking for cheaper alternatives to gripen, something more like a newer f5, then the Chinese JF17 or south Korean golden eagle would make more sense than the frogfoot or k8, at least they are supersonic and have air-engagement radars. I would say LCA but doubt the Indians can produce them quick enough yet to satisfy export orders.

No point in speculating guys. The winner has been chosen, the JAS39 Gripen will either be purchased or nothing at all.

The Bloodhounds were operated by the Air Force, Missile Group 70 with two detachments, 71 & 72. At the time, their bases and storage facilities were top secret, most Swiss people didn't have a clue where they were. The main bunker has now been used as a cheese making facility by a dairy company. I have a bunch of Bloodhound bits, including a rather special office conference table made up using three of the Thor ramjet engines. Nice.