eagle1Bern investigating the disclosure of secret reports on the Gripen
02. December 2011 11:53
LeMatin.ch & agencies
Two intelligence reports highlighting the weaknesses of the Swedish Gripen landed in the drafting of the “Basler Zeitung”, which published them. The Ministry of the Attorney General opened an investigation for violation of official secrecy.
[picture] Air Force Commander Markus Gygax signed both reports. It specifically recommends the purchase of the French Rafale. © KEYSTONE
The acquisition of new fighter aircraft is also the matter of the Ministry of the Attorney General (MPC). The MPC wants to know who was able to provide the daily Basler Zeitung in Basel two classified reports on the evaluation of the future combat aircraft of the Swiss army.
The MPC has confirmed the Tages-Anzeiger have opened an investigation. This is not directed against a specific individual. The prosecutor will look first on those who had access to both reports, signed by the hand of the Swiss Air Force Commander Markus Gygax.
For the purchase of French Rafale
In both reports, the corps commander Gygax specifically recommends the purchase of the French Rafale. “The Rafale by Dassault product is recommended as a new fighter aircraft of the Swiss Air Force,” is it in black and white.
Leaks could therefore have been intended to torpedo the Swedish Gripen candidate finally chosen Wednesday by the Federal Council, and the two reports mentioned weaknesses.
So many people have been able to have an interest in the dissemination of two evaluation reports. Department of Defence (DDPS), an internal process of clarification is in progress, according to his spokeswoman Sylvia Steidle, quoted by the daily Zurich.
Not a trivial
The parliamentary sub-committee that accompanied the process of acquiring the new jet was never aware of these reports, reports for its part the National Socialist Council Evi Allemann.
Several sources exclude the leak could be the fact competitors Dassault and EADS. It is unlikely that they have received the evaluation reports of the Swiss Air Force.
The fact that the maneuver to discredit the Gripen has failed does not diminish the seriousness of the offense, according to the MPC. This is to be linked with the magnitude of the contract, which covers more than 3 billion francs.
This is not a peccadillo, the eyes of the MPC. This, even though Federal Councillor Ueli Maurer Wednesday played down the scope of the release of two reports.
If they decide to open an inquiry it must say that those leaks are really serious ! Personnaly I can’t see someone else than from the swiss airforce as it is hardly imanigeable that all three manufacturers would have a copy of the evaluation.
eagle1There is some possible explanations about the “6” mark as a reference :
-It was not representative of the F18 conversely to what it has been said in some forum, posts, thread. It was perhaps a wrong interpretation that spread quickly.
-If it is indeed the F18 who knowns if its nominal capability was not increased to represent a more modern and realistic threat ? (radar performance missiles etc)
-If it is the F18 it could well be an “indirect” comparison. I.E : marks attributed in some specific scenarios vs the hornet like intercepting a Mach 1,5 hornet as it was done in one of the tests.
eagle1Inquiry open about the leaks from the confidential report :
The choice of Swedish Gripen by the Federal Council does not please everyone.
The choice of the Gripen fighter aircraft as the future of the Swiss Army continues to make waves. Following the disclosure of confidential reports rather severe with the aircraft Swedish Ministry of the Attorney General has decided to open an investigation. These leaks have been intended to discredit the Gripen, Dassault Rafale preferred to the Eurofighter and EADS.
Two evaluation reports confidential published in 2008 and 2009 ended with the drafting of the Basler Zeitung, while the Federal Council was about to disclose his preference for the thorny issue in the Gripen combat aircraft of the Swiss army. A violation of official secrecy that plays poorly in the Ministry of the Attorney General. This has opened an investigation, according to the Tages-Anzeiger.
We do not know against whom the investigation is conducted. But what is certain is that these leaks were intended to discredit the Swedish aircraft, with which the two reports do not show high praise. According to the Basler Zeitung, the Air Force Commander Markus Gygax concluded even one of the two reports as follows: “The Rafale by Dassault product will be proposed as new fighter aircraft for the Swiss aviation.” Therefore, there are several “deep throats” potential that the choice of the Federal Council does not forward: the competing manufacturers of Saab, including Dassault and EADS with its Rafale with the Eurofighter, or the drivers – the spokesman for the forces however, categorically denies airline.
As a reminder, the Federal Council announced Wednesday it would buy 22 Gripen. He did not hide that this choice was dictated by financial issues: the purchase of Swedish aircraft will cost 30% less than competitors (3.1 billion against four).
http://www.tsr.ch/info/suisse/3623150-avions-de-combat-la-justice-ouvre-une-enquete.html
eagle1A quick overview of the reaction of the swiss press to take the “temperature” :
Turbulences are starting for the gripen
Even considered “sober and modest,” the Swedish fighter aircraft that the government wants to buy just to convince the media commentators Helvetic. While Romands ironically on the “plane ikea”, some downright Alemanni consider the Gripen Swiss would never get off.
“The Gripen does catch the flu from the people,” as the Blick with his usual sense of the formula. For the tabloid speaking, it is clear that in this case, the people will have the last word. Conviction more or less shared by all commentators.
By choosing to spend three billion for 22 Gripen, the Swedish group Saab, the government finally dropped Thursday offers of French Dassault (Rafale) and the European consortium EADS (Eurofighter), which would have cost over one billion globally.
Victory for peace
The Bund, now is the Group for a Switzerland without an Army (GSSA), opposed to any purchase of combat aircraft, “which can gloat.” This choice “makes less and less likely future purchase of an aircraft” to replace the old Tiger.
Indeed, the paper argues Oberland, supporters of a new aircraft “did not want the cheapest, but the most modern, the most brilliant. It will be difficult to find a parliamentary majority for the Gripen. ” And secondly, the savings required for this purchase, in areas such as transportation or education, will find it difficult to pass a referendum.
Whether the defense minister Ueli Maurer, “which it is increasingly doubtful whether he really wants new planes,” wanted it, the Bund leaves the question open …
Grounding
More radical, the Tages Anzeiger promises Ueli Maurer “planted a programmed”. The Swedish aircraft is already “threatened grounding in parliament, even before it took off from Switzerland.” The daily Zurich even wonder if the minister of defense has not made this choice “to reduce his chances before the parliament, and thus have more money to other sectors of the army.”
“Sometimes the debate on the army in Switzerland passes the bounds of absurdity, written on its side the Aargauer Zeitung. The government is provisional order of 22 Gripen and the partisans of a well-equipped army does not even look forward to the stage victory. “
The daily Aargau, “it is certain that the left GSoA and get a popular vote on the issue. And then, even the cheap Gripen could fall in the polls. The air force would thus be returned to square one. “
Cultural Revolution
More positively, the press Romande is nonetheless skeptical too. For Time, “the choice of the Gripen aircraft the cheapest, but least efficient, marks a cultural revolution and mental health. The army can not claim only what is most efficient, but it will have to admit that is sufficient to fulfill its mission. “
“In presenting a modest and reasonable choice, Ueli Maurer is the maximum strength in his game so far nothing is gained. It will convince the new parliament and the people, that this purchase will justify the sacrifices imposed on transportation, research or agriculture, “cautions the newspaper.
In a joint editorial, L’Express and L’Impartial (Neuchâtel – La Chaux-de-Fonds) and Liberty (Fribourg) are in the Swedish air “without a break options rather than a shiny sedan. No offense to drivers who dreamed of advanced technology and panache, the Gripen is a choice marked by modesty Helvetic all. “
But the three daily newspapers do not see the game won. “We already hear the left and the cantons complain about the sacrifices demanded in transportation, social insurance, research or training. The government and parliament must make choices. The really good news is that the people most likely will be associated. “
Ikea plane
Remains for the time, “to legitimate doubts about the ability of Switzerland to master a complex project, as the final assembly and part of the development of the Gripen should be performed by the undertaking of the Confederation RUAG. It should not be that the Parliament has the feeling of an airplane Swedish self-assembly, a kind of combat aircraft Ikea. “
The merger hit the cartoonists. As the freedom Time boxes are marked with the name of the house of furniture, one with a puzzled Ueli Maurer, the other with an officer who cries in front of it too little shiny Christmas gift, like a capricious child. About 24 hours, if he did not dare to reproduce the name on the boxes, the allusion is clear enough for everyone to read “Ikea” instead of “Saab” in the blue and yellow logo.
Consolation prize
24 Hours in fact, that with La Tribune de Genève, sees the Gripen “the choice that satisfies no one.” “The Gripen purchase will be a development of the aircraft that ended last in technical assessments. What then was used this procedure, which cost between 50 and 100 million, if at the end, the Swiss Army takes the gamble of a model ‘is still only on paper’, according to Maurer? ” , interview two daily newspapers.
“And finally, why should we buy these planes? No one has yet demonstrated the need to secure the purchase. The Government, in opting for the cheapest because it is the cheapest, sends the message that it is no more assured of their choice. A three billion, it’s still expensive paid the consolation prize, “conclude the two newspapers Lake Geneva.
Marc-André Miserez, swissinfo.ch
eagle1It is not about downplaying gripen victory. Most if not all have congratulated the swedish camp for this victory.
But in the other hand it is interesting to have a feedback from the technical evaluation. As an aitcraft enthusiat this aspect of thing is more appealing to me than “costs” altough it is of course an important part of the decision process no question about it.
eagle1I don’t think one can really blame Dassault for switzerland as when the swiss decided to go for the cheapest option instead than following Swiss air force recommendation there is nothing they can do about it.
But that is not the case in Morroco and UAE.
It will be even worst if they lose India. Normally Dassault “must” win as it should be the natural L1 over a 40 year period.
If ever it appears that they lost india because they were not enough aggressive in their commercial offer like I fear then some head should roll this time…No questions about it. It is clear that EADS understood that as Europe is struck by a crisis and they need to find some new “partners” who are investing in their defense to remain as a player.
I am less certain with Dassault which seems to more conservative in its approach and that will perhaps make the difference. At a personal level knowing a little bit the corporate culture from “the inside” from Dassault this picture is regrettably quite true especially for the older “historic” generation.
Over confidence, pre-conceived visions : a deal is about politics no matter the price etc or you can’t sell a paper plane like the gripen NG and lack of the true outsider/challenger mindset. Too monolithic too conservative …
eagle1Dutch evaluation was more than that with 700 criteria. As said in the article it was performed in close cooperation with the air force and with the assistance of other scientific state bodies. The goal was to determine the performance of various aircrafts circa 2010. This evaluation is often brought by Dassault CEO to advertise the rafale during public intervention.
It is still striking that the hierarchy has not changed a decade latter with the swiss evaluation. That speaks a lot of the quality of this dutch evaluation.
eagle1
eagle1@Mildave here is an insight of the dutch evaluation :
The multi-criteria analysis, in cooperation with TNO and Dutch Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space (NLR) was performed, was a time consuming exercise. First were 700 criteria that the new fighter had to comply. Then experts gave a figure for each criterion. The weighted average of the scores was an indication of the system effectiveness of any device – in plain English: how well the aircraft was.
In the Court Brief on the JSF decision of February 11, 2002 was the multi-criteria analysis in detail. The government stressed in the letter detailed the purity of the process. The operation of the Air Force was rated by an independent working group of the Ministry of Defense, wrote the government. It had ruled that “the candidates thoroughly and carefully review”was conducted.
The evaluation itself was not the House. The same was true for the so-called B / C paper, the results were described. Both documents contain confidential commercial information from aircraft manufacturers and are therefore confidential.
According to the Air Force, the uncertainties involved. In the multi-criteria analysis, as wrote the Air Force in the B / C paper, the uncertainties “adequately addressed”.
In this analysis, some criteria are not one, but three scores out. The median score, the “expected performance” again. In addition, experts also had a top and a given value. After all values were added together, the multi-criteria analysis yielded three final scores on the system effectiveness.
The median score gave the Air Force how well the aircraft would be in 2010. The top score was the most optimistic expectations of the performance, the score was the worst case scenario. “This leads to more complete picture of system effectiveness with uncertainties, risks but also potential”, wrote the Air Force.
funny to see that they had to measure how good the aircrafts would be in 2010 and see that the swiss eval gives the same hierarchy ! It seems rather consistent…
eagle1das artikel :
eagle1
Kandahar lost 3 fighters
Le mamouth, Dec 1We’ll have to get used with this continual coming and going in Afghanistan […] 3 Rafale fighters from Kandahar detachment returned yesterday to Saint-Dizier airbase with 60 airmen, after only four months of attendance.
Kandahar has now only 3 Mirage 2000D and 120 airmen.
Since 2007, the Rafale conducted 802 air missions, 262 interventions in favor of ground forces, delivering fire on 52 occasions.
eagle1
The swiss evaluation echoes to the dutch evaluation who evaluated competing fighter jets earlier last decade on more than 700 criteria.
10 years latter the hierarchy is still maintained !
Note that the gripen was already deemed inferior than the f18 !!! (probably the SH)
eagle1From DSI
Rafale in Switzerland, why it gets stuck
DSI , dec 1The failure of the Rafale in Switzerland raises many questions. I talked to Joseph Henrotin, revered editor of DSI and expert on air strategy and, more generally, the relationship between technology and strategy.Rafale crashed in Switzerland. Clearly, Rafale beat its competitors in the evaluation, but was not cheap . The price determines everything ?
[…] Indeed, technically speaking, the aircraft was ahead of its competitors and in general, the Rafale is an excellent fighter. […] But the technical merit is not all. The price factor is also involved, especially when the Western states, including Switzerland, are through an unprecedented crisis.
In a context where Switzerland has no enemies on its borders, It could be difficult to politically legitimate and justify considerable costs in the eyes of the population, even certainly committed to the spirit of defense (probably more than anywhere else in Western Europe) . Moreover, the structure of these costs is not yet known: certainly, there is the one of the purchase. But there are the rest (MCO, ammunition, packages offered, the implications of local industries, etc..) And, at present we do not know much about the offer and its overall costs. But perhaps the Swedes are very strong in this game.
Other factors also come into play. The Rafale would replace the F-5. In the Swiss doctrine, the Tiger must be “dispersible” and able to operate from RHA (road sections used as emergency airfields). The aircraft [Gripen] is versatile and lightweight – it meets the spirit of technological and strategic cultures in Switzerland. Comparatively, the Rafale is certainly versatile, but is neither heavy nor light . Also some members of the Swiss Army saw the aircraft as belonging to an “overkill” for too many missions to complete.
There remains the question of marking policy, too. The Rafale is the aircraft of the war in Libya. From what I know of some Swiss “decisionmakers” sees the aircraft as very “offensive”. I do not think, given the discussions I had with the Swiss military, that this feeling has been shared by them. By cons, it could be the case with some decisionmakers … At this stage it is in any case too early to draw any lessons from this case.
In fact. Rafale has difficultiles like the French industry, in general, with the sentence: we are of course the fourth exporter in the world, but far from the first three and a fifth on our heels. Do we have a problem?
From a technical point of view, no, our equipment is good – although sometimes they are so good and they are too expensive. However, this remark does not apply in the field of combat aircraft, rather in the field of ammunition.
Ok. Why it gets stuck then?
[…]the issue is very complex. That said, I will give some tips to a hypothetical graduate student.
– First, we consider our exports with the eye of the engineer: for us the case is first technical, while technic has only a minor role in purchase decisions of equipment. We are not on the same level as the customer.
– Two, exporting is a trade issue. You have to be agile, lightweight, fast, imaginative and lethal to competitors. Whatever the field, it is the only business formula that works. But I feel that we’re not.
Just an anecdote, but it seems to me very indicative. At DSI, from time to time , we interview industrialists. It can be important because it could allow a military or political customer, to understand the motivations, the foundations, the possibilities of a project outside of direct channels of communication specific to negotiations. But this year I had eight refusals from French companies [..] . I do not give names, I accuse no one, I’m just trying to understand. But in six years of publications, I have never had a refusal or delay by a foreign manufacturer …– Three, exporting armament is a military matter and strategic studies are not an intellectual luxury. How do you sell something to someone if you do not know his intellectual references, its strategic culture or, more basically still, his habits of negotiation? Yet it is the royal road to “customer oriented”.
eagle1“For that, no need of an evaluation of 8 millions francs”
Basler Zeitung, Nov 30
SVP National Counsellor and Military Pilot Thomas Hurter is not happy about the decision for the Gripen. For him it is not clear why the Federal Council has decided for this fighter.
With the justification provided by Federal Councillor Ueli Maurer , SVP National Counsellor and Military Pilot Thomas Hurter said he would not approve the purchase. This was the price, the cooperation and effectiveness of the aircraft mentioned as criteria. The last two items fulfill all types. “I assume the fact the principal reason for the decision is the price”, said Hurter. “There would have needed no evaluation for 8 million francs, “which one could look in the catalog.”
In addition, the Gripen exist only on paper. That meant that Switzerland also participate in the development costs. “That’s what we didn’t want to avoid the future risk,” said Hurter.
[…]
Also Hurter does not exclude the fact that no matter the Federal Council has decided for Gripen, the new jet could be shoot in the parliament. The government decides for an aircraft, which exists only on the paper. Besides it considers the results of the evaluation only insufficiently. “”You have to ask yourself how serious this is.”
eagle1Yes true mr Lightening 🙂
But probably not with the same intensity and with such detailed tech eval and other stuff like offsets etc…
At least for the rafale side things will be probably less exiting ! I will then be able to relax and look at other competitions peacefully !
Rafale will perhaps not have a single export but it got the “blessing” from tech evals so I will still be able to talk !
Sign In
