It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Switzerland Replacing its F-5s, buy Gripen?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 07:18 AM
link   
www.defenseindustrydaily.com...


The F-5E/F Tiger II was a follow-on upgrade to the wildly successful F-5 Freedom Fighter, a low-budget aircraft designed to capture the lower tier of the non-Soviet global fighter market in the 1960s and 1970s. A number of countries still operate F-5s, but the airframes are very old. The Swiss bought 72 F-5E/F fighters in 1976, and another 38 in 1981, for a total of 110 (98 single-seat F5E, 12 two-seat F-5F).


they`ve leased some to Austria whilst they wait for the Typhoon`s - but 3 of the 5 squadrons are due to go soon.

They have an interesting position =- a fixed budget for the replacements means they really want numbers over `the best tech` - on offer is:


At present, the competitors are BAE/Saab (JAS-39 Gripen), Boeing (F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet), Dassault (Rafale), and EADS (Eurofighter Typhoon). With an expected budget of just CHF 2.2 billion (currently about $2 billion/ EUR $1.36 billion).



They want numbers;


EADS' Eurofighter, for instance, would yield about 10-12 aircraft within those constraints

(Boeing's F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet It is difficult to imagine a scenario in which the Swiss budget yields much more than 15-18 aircraft, though continued decline in the US dollar could help some.


Can Dassault keep its price to about EUR 50 million flyaway per plane (i.e. 20-24 aircraft within the budget), and offer weapon integration relief?


but in this case there is one quite clear leader:


An offer of 30-34 JAS-39 C/D aircraft that could mirror Switzerland's 3 squadrons with 33 Hornets may be within the realm of financial possibility



We could well see another order , and thus available funds for further developement of the Gripen - in this case of a fixed budget - Sweden could very well come out on top - US lobbying not included




posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 08:16 AM
link   
www.defense-aerospace.com...

hmmm i do really think Norway will drop out of the JSF programme to buy Gripen - and cite climbing costs as the reason ; and can see Denmark following suit as well tbh - with `in service` costs now well above $100 million - the purchase price gets you a nice paper weight but thats it , the tier 3 countries i can see drifting away.


Norway has been running a purchasing process for a while, and has now commissioned FMV, the Swedish Defence Material Administration, to submit a binding offer for up to 48 aircraft.



edit:

What will appear to be very tastey offer for both Norway and Switzerland (and likely Denmark as well) will the inclusion of the Ericcson `Nora` AESA radar



Other upgrades are also in the works. Saab's JAS-39N submission to Norway, for instance, touts the AESA radar and a new engine while offering a heavier aircraft with more fuel capacity (empty weight adds 300 kg to 7,100 kg4, max. takeoff weight rises from 14,000 kg to 16,000 kg); increased external and internal fuel capacity (internal fuel rises 38%, and… an increase from 8 to 10 weapons/fuel pylons; new and repositioned landing gear; plus improved computing and avionics including satellite communication, Link 16 capability added to the Gripen's existing datalink [done, see June 11/07 entry below], and improved electronic warfare via jammer pod integration and other measures.


it would appear they are offering a JAS-39/NG as the sales model.

www.defenseindustrydaily.com...

[edit on 21/1/08 by Harlequin]



posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 08:38 AM
link   
The Gripen is undoubtedly the true F-16 of this generation (4/4.5/5 whatever you want to call it) - and Saab can expect widespread sales accordingly.


The JSF in contrast, is overly complex, over budget, and not open enough.



posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 08:58 AM
link   
Im suprized myself that the Griphen hasnt sold well yet. I heared some bad stories about maintainance but is that it?



posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 08:59 AM
link   
reply to post by kilcoo316
 

The Gripen is only a 4th generaton fighter, dating back to the 1980's... Its a nice aircraft, but the Draken was cooler. They should have modernized it instead. Its futuristic design owned every other plane at the time.



posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 09:33 AM
link   
www.gripen.com...


“In Hungary we just don’t have large numbers of aircraft to train with, but in Spring Flag we faced COMAO (combined air operations) packages of 20, 25 or 30 aircraft. The training value for us was to work with that many aircraft on our radar – and even with our limited experience we could see that the Gripen radar is fantastic. We would see the others at long ranges, we could discriminate all the individual aircraft even in tight formations and using extended modes. The jamming had almost no effect on us – and that surprised a lot of people.”

Other aircraft couldn’t see us – not on radar, not visually – and we had no jammers of our own with us. We got one Fox 2 kill on a F-16 who turned in between our two jets but never saw the second guy and it was a perfect shot.”



there are features quite readily ignored about the Gripen - its size being 1 thing; i do disagree with it being a flat `4th gen` fighter - it really is up there with the Typhoon and Rafale - and with the F414 engine , higher weight , more pylons and an AESA radar (all JAS-39/NG features) then it really is a potent airplane.



posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 10:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by tomcat ha
Im suprized myself that the Griphen hasnt sold well yet. I heared some bad stories about maintainance but is that it?


Maintenance?


The Gripen has by far the lowest cost per flight hour of all combat aircraft in the world.




I think you mis-heard or were told bad information there



posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 10:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by merka
The Gripen is only a 4th generaton fighter, dating back to the 1980's... Its a nice aircraft, but the Draken was cooler. They should have modernized it instead. Its futuristic design owned every other plane at the time.



Sorry, but the Gripen is far more than any bog standard 4th gen fighter.


Harlequin has pointed out one instance of the Gripen's RCS not being as high as many imagine, I have read more accounts alluding to the same thing.


The original Gripen's only real weakness is the lack of grunt under the bonnet, which would be rectified if they moved to an EJ200 based powerplant (studies indicate it would fit without too much modification).

*Don't know about the NG powerplant, anyone fill me in please...




Bottom line, the Gripen is very much an under-rated aircraft, and is more than capable of filling the shoes of the F-16 for many of its current operators.



posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 11:15 AM
link   
One issue that hindered early Gripen sales were the avionic and computer glitches that caused several prototype crashes and a bad reputation (at least around here) But those glitches seemed to be ironed out as Gripen pilots are nowadays landing rather than ejecting (contrary to a Finnish joke of the '90s)



posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 11:15 AM
link   
One issue that hindered early Gripen sales were the avionic and computer glitches that caused several prototype crashes and a bad reputation (at least around here) But those glitches seemed to be ironed out as Gripen pilots are nowadays landing rather than ejecting (contrary to a Finnish joke of the '90s)



posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 11:21 AM
link   
reply to post by kilcoo316
 


www.geae.com...


Max. Power at Sea Level (Lb.): 22,000

over the F404 with
Thrust Range: 10,500 - 18,100 lbs.


MBF

posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 11:45 PM
link   
I have a place they can park those F-5's if they want too. I love the F-5's and T-38's. They are great, cheap little planes.



posted on Jan, 22 2008 @ 09:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by kilcoo316
Sorry, but the Gripen is far more than any bog standard 4th gen fighter.

Well yeah, but its still a 4th generation fighter even if its a very good one



posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 10:30 AM
link   
reply to post by merka
 


The problem with the Gripen is that it is made, sold and supplied with maintainance parts from a neutral country. Even if the Swiss are also neutral, when the Gripen fighter is needed, it will be in an adversarial position. The question will be, can Sweden continue to support the fighter in the event the Swiss get involved in a protracted engagement? The French (Rafale) and Germans (Typhoon) will continue to support Switzerland in the event the Swiss get in a fight with some other country.



posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 10:36 AM
link   
I think it will go for the Eurofighter myself, as a privileged partner of the EU some lobbying will be going on to give money to EADS.



posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Harlequin
\ US lobbying not included


Whats the difference? Im sure the EU will be putting the screws on just as tight



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 12:41 AM
link   
Wow! I'm impressed that there is still a non third-world nation still flying around in F-5s! Its a good little plane for what it was made to do but I think the airframes would have to be getting quite fatigued by now!

The Gripen would be the logical choice. Its cheap, easy to maintain, and fits the requirement. The Rafale and Eurofighter, especially the former, are overpriced.

Euro for Euro, I think the French have imported more deodorant and razors than exported Rafales and "parts"!

[edit on 28-1-2009 by CreeWolf]



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join