Switzerland

News and discussion threads on defence in other parts of the world.
Post Reply
User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Switzerland

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

They have woken up from the sleepy period about thank threat (a decade long nap):
" Light Anti-Tank Weapon (NLAW) system to Switzerland. Valued at $120 million, the company will also provide associated training equipment, including indoor training simulators, as well as supply maintenance for the training equipment. The sale will go towards filling a Swiss capability gap left by the retirement of the M47 Dragon in 2008. NLAW was developed by Saab and produced by Thales UK in a joint program to re-equip the British and Swedish armies with a new short-range weapon able to destroy main battle tanks. Since then, Finland and Luxembourg have purchased the system"

Light is all relative, on the infantry scale of 1-4 from light to heavy it is 3; but then again, when you mount stuff on vehicles there is hardly a limit (Spike NLOS started its life as an anti-tank system on an MBT chassis).
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Switzerland

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Switzerland has not even started yet with the replacement of their Hornets that were to expire 5 years earlier than Finalnd's.

Not so, anymore. With USD 468m they (soon will) have extended the force by 20% (some have been lost, though, so they can't be extended):

"the F/A-18 fighter jets, which perform Quick Reaction Alert (QRA) service to defend Switzerland’s airspace, will reach the end of their lifespans of 5,000 flight hours in 2025. In its new fighter jet strategy, the defence minister recommended to extend their flight hours to 6,000 by evaluating and reinforcing structural weaknesses as well as replacing certain parts of the jets."
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Switzerland

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:With USD 468m they (soon will) have extended the force
and beyond the a/c themselves, they will be less legacy Hornets with many upgrades (looks like these are for 20):

"The US State Department has approved a foreign military sale (FMS) package to upgrade Swiss F/A-18 [Super] Hornet aircraft. If approved by US Congress, the sale of the Service Life Extension Program for the aircraft would include as many as 50 Multifunctional Information Distribution System Joint Tactical Radio Systems with Concurrent Multi-Net 4 capability, 50 ARC-210 GEN 5 RT-1900A(C) radios with a second-generation anti-jam tactical UHF radio for NATO frequency hopping, and 20 joint helmet-mounted cueing system/night vision cueing display systems. Also included in the deal are software enhancements to the APG-73 radar, improvements to the F/A-18 Software Configuration Set 29C, and sustainment for the ALQ-165 Airborne Self Protection Jammer system. "

So add up to $115 million for the kit, so for the price of half a dozen new planes they can continue to be flying a fleet of three times as many (and have a little breather, as to what planes next)
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7931
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: Switzerland

Post by SKB »

:shock:

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2762
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
United Kingdom

Re: Switzerland

Post by dmereifield »

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... ys%3F.html

Switzerland and Austria to consider joint procurement programme for fighter jet replacement. Anyone thing their is any mileage on this, or what will eventually be provided by Switzerland or Austria (individually or jointly)?

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Switzerland

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

dmereifield wrote: Anyone thing their is any mileage on this
the Swiss fighter evaluation report:
“The evaluation of a combat aircraft together with a cooperation partner is not appropriate….[At most, we could] strive ...for.. information exchange.”)

Only if Switzerland (again) chooses NG as the replacement, this time for the Hornets, then leasing Gripen C's by both, for Austria as a permanent solution and for Switzerland to manage the transition would make sense.
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Switzerland

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Switzerland was kicking the can down the road with some pretty clever updates to their Hornets, but is starting to run out of road,
now only
" left with 22 F-5E and 32 F/A-18C/D frontline fighters.

The new program will cover the replaceming both the Northrop F-5 Tiger and the McDonnell Douglas F/A-18 Hornet. Selection could be made in 2020, with deliveries planned for 2025.

In November 2017, the Federal Council said it wanted to spend CHF8 billion ($8.4 billion) on new fighter jets and missile defences"

So let's see how long Canada can make theirs last (the Swiss timing seems to fall in line with the longer running Finnish Hornet replacement competition).
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2762
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
United Kingdom

Re: Switzerland

Post by dmereifield »

Outside chance for the Eurofighter?

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7931
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: Switzerland

Post by SKB »

Better chance than being a T31e customer. :mrgreen:

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Switzerland

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

dmereifield wrote:Outside chance for the Eurofighter?
It could be... only 20-ish of those Hornets will be modernised so around 2025 there will be 40-ish jets to be replaced
- not known how big a slice of the $8.4 bn will go towards SAMs (Patriots?)
- but a mix of used and new EFs might fit "the bill"
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Switzerland

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Defence IQ has had sight of briefings to Gvmnt (prior to the financing decision now made, so still written in "options" format):

"An internal 200-page report seen by Defence IQ seems to support an option of 30 new combat aircraft plus the GBAD system. However, Parmelin [the DefSec] has pushed instead for a “more realistic” solution, aimed at appeasing both military and political parties. The most expensive option meanwhile cited 55-70 fighters and long-range SAMs for around $15-18bn."

Despite the fact that the monies now approved are for about half of the above max, the deliberations indicate that " the SwAF intends to regain an air-to-ground capability lost in 1994 with the Hawker ‘Hunter’ and a recce-capability lost in 2003 with the retirement of the Mirage IIIRS."
- - So, in fact "the constant kicking of the can" has caused the need to replace the capabilities of four distinct types of fighter with one, modern multirole type.

Defence IQ (in Sept 2017) also outlines the timeline, leading up to the financing being approved: Referendum on Gripen 2014, new evaluation commission set up in 2016, building the bridge (as per below quote) in 2017:
"The new motion is not said to be disturbing plans to extend the service-life of the existing F/A-18s. In spring of 2017, Switzerland’s ‘Army Report 2017’ was accepted by majority, including a $509m agreement to upgrade and modernise the Hornet fleet. The aircraft will receive structural upgrades, replacement of obsolete avionics and a new BVR missile. Ministers however rejected (97 against 85) the proposed plan to add an air-to-ground capability. That capability has reportedly been added to the new jet procurement plan."

The MoD is requesting almost three times the $3.2bn it would have cost to procure 22 JAS-39E Gripens to replace the obsolete F-5 Tiger, which fell through in May 2014."
- from the Federal Council voting numbers (182 votes) it seems that mini-referenda :) on the matter have already been held

An interesting price comparison is the Denmark F-35 purchase (a new type for them and roughly the same number of a/c):
[by] Beth Stevenson, London - IHS Jane's Defence Industry
19 February 2018

"The Danish Central Bank has completed the hedging of payments of USD3.7 billion so that the department of defence is able to acquire the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter at fixed price in its local currency.

Copenhagen agreed in 2016 to acquire 27 conventional take-off and landing F-35A variants of the fighter to replace its incumbent F-16 fleet, and has hedged the dollars so that they are available at a fixed price when they are needed."
- what is even more interesting is that the bid with which LM won in 2016 was $3.1 bn
- so it looks like the Swiss "clock work" estimate for the Gripens was much more comprehensive (scope?) than the above. Boeing cried "foul play" afterwards, but can't remember those details anymore
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Switzerland

Post by Lord Jim »

The Gripen would still be a good fit for the Swiss Air Force and one of the lowest risk options except for the egg on the face of a number of Politicians.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Switzerland

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

It will be in the race. Just that A2G is a clear 2nd priority (vs A2A) on its development path as both main customers (Sweden and Brazil) have other a/c (incl. versions of Gripen) to do the earth moving
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Switzerland

Post by Lord Jim »

Does anyone have details on the costs of planes they think could be in the running? How does the Gripen compare to the F/A-18E/F? I am pretty sure the Rafale and Eurofighter are far more expensive as new builds, and I cannot see the F-35 being part of the competition. Are there any other options? A combination of the Gripen E with Meteor would be a perfect fit for the Swiss, and their operating doctrine is very similar to the Swedes and the Gripen was tailored to the latter's needs, like operating from dispersed sites and being easily maintained by National Service personnel. Whether the Gripen is cleared for all the ordonnance the Swiss plan to use could be an issue, but besides Maverick, I think the Swiss do not have much in the way of guided/smart A2G weaponry. The Super Hornet may be able to use much of the existing infrastructure that is in place but I always believed it designed to operate as part of a mission package and not as the sole platform. It is also a big platform which may affect its ability to utilise some existing infrastructure. Second hand Typhoons would be a good fit but these would require a fair amount of work to bring them up to the standards of the Gripen and Super Hornet, as these would probably surplus Tranche 1 platforms. It will be interesting to see how things turn out.

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2900
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
United Kingdom

Re: Switzerland

Post by abc123 »

Nice system, but a bit pricey IMHO.

https://militaryleak.com/2020/04/26/swi ... ar-system/

Not an expert, but 400 mil. for 32 relativly simple non-turret ( like Patria's NEMO or AMOS ) mortar?
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Switzerland

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

From the text it is unclear whether they are buying new vehicles with the mortars or putting then partly on high-top Piranhas and partly on trucks?
"the Swiss parliament approved the procurement of 32 systems of a 120 mm (12 cm) RUAG MRO Cobra mortar system. In addition, twelve trucks, an undifferentiated ammunition package and logistics material are to be procured and 16 existing command vehicles adapted. " 12+16 = 28, 4 spare and for testing would make sense
... on the other hand the trucks could be for resupply?

Zero, 16 or 32 Piranhas will make for quite a price difference.
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

jonas
Senior Member
Posts: 1110
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:20
United Kingdom

Switzerland chooses the F35A

Post by jonas »

Oh dear the Frogs won't like this :-

https://www.defenceonline.co.uk/2021/07 ... uirements/

RunningStrong
Senior Member
Posts: 1304
Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52

Re: Switzerland chooses the F35A

Post by RunningStrong »

jonas wrote:Oh dear the Frogs won't like this :-

https://www.defenceonline.co.uk/2021/07 ... uirements/
Not quite yet, it's the recommendation, and still needs to go through their parliament and possibly through a referendum. Lockheed Martin haven't even been approached for contract yet!

But if so, it's positive news for F35 fleet, but raises questions why a wholly defensive nation needs such an aircraft.

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2900
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
United Kingdom

Re: Switzerland chooses the F35A

Post by abc123 »

I would have bought Super Hornet. :think:
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1779
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Australia

Re: Switzerland chooses the F35A

Post by seaspear »

France may also not like the selection of the Patriot system over the SAMP/T
https://www.defensenews.com/air/2021/06 ... r-contest/
the article suggests that the f35a was the cheapest over the life span of 25 years
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/sw ... 021-06-30/
this also provides more context

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Switzerland

Post by Lord Jim »

Maybe we could get a good deal on SAMP/T on the bounce? :D

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Switzerland

Post by Lord Jim »

Just found this. Besides looking spectacular, I started wondering if the MoD would do something similar and have the public given access to a live fire practice teamed with an air show? Somehow I doubt it.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Switzerland

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Lord Jim wrote: if the MoD would do something similar and have the public given access to a live fire practice
The 4-pack Aden version of Hunter (for ground attack) was tested there... doubt the public was invited, though
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
Ian Hall
Member
Posts: 490
Joined: 18 Jun 2023, 14:55
United Kingdom

Re: Switzerland

Post by Ian Hall »

Swiss weapons exports plunge as neutral stance hurts trade
By John Revill

March 5, 20248:32 AM GMT


https://www.reuters.com/business/aerosp ... 024-03-05/

Post Reply