Eagle

By parts

a) The 2008 report is almost useless, the proposed 2015 Typhoon was P1E… The only thing in common between what Eurofighter proposes today and a 2008 airframe or P1E is actually the engine and the airframe, exactly the things that impressed on that same report
b) The radar on the Typhoon is a vastly diferent beast to the one in the Gripen E
c) The EW suite on the Qatari, Kuwaiti aircrafts have nothing in common with the 2008 airframes and the same aplies to P1E, they are based on the upgrade path that the RAF and RSAF have been paying
d) Typhoon in 2019 vastly outstripes whatever ATG requirement the Swiss may have stuck in the RFI

“”Underkill” because the Typhoon is the least impressive regarding systems.
The questions about general Swiss needs are another matter.”

Eagle, in what particular way is the Typhoon the “least impressive regarding systems” by comparison with the Gripen E, the SH and the Rafale in a Swiss scenario?

“. No, the airframe hasn’t been designed by Dassault. Dassault was once roped in during the initial stages as a project consultant to help ADA with weight budgeting. Some wind tunnel work was carried out at ONERA facilities. This is all that the French have ever contributed to the Tejas. Now Eads Airbus is acting as a project consultant to help ADA is shedding off some kilos from the landing gear of the Naval LCA.”

No, the original Tejas design was indeed a Dassault one.
Dassault competed with BAE and MBB (and Dornier, but i´ve never seen anything from them) for the project around 1987. BAE presented the P106B, MBB design was something that looked like the airframe of the LCA with an ogival wing taken from the F-16XL and finaly Dassault presented the design that we now call the LCA Tejas.
Followed the entire story from the eighties through good old Air International (no internet then), at the time there were a few photographs of the three contenders side by side. Had BAE won and the LCA would look very, very “Gripenish”.

“Actually, my record is pretty good on such prediction. So, I’ll be here…”

Facepalm

Levsha

“The same could be said for Warsaw Pact airfields as well, surely?”

Yes, offcourse, but the Soviet high command believed that a) somehow it could fight a tatical nuclear battle in Europe without the thing escalating into a strategic Doom´s Day and b) “the Soviet Union could prevail in a war because of the West´s greater vulnerability to nuclear devastation” (Gen. Dmitrii Volkogonov “dixit”). There is one caveat in my comment about the Soviets using nukes across the board, in the late eighties, per the widely known “Seven Days to the Rhine” plan, France and GBritain would be spared the nuclear onslaught.

An interesting read here (from 1964)
https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/108642/warplan_dossier.pdf

“Interesting, does that mean we will see AESA equipped UK Typhoons primarily in ground attack roles as a Tornado replacement.”

Dont know if we can make that assumption, “Project Centurion” (the integration of Storm Shadow, Brimstone and Meteor) is being rolled into every T2 and T3, so the ATG missions are doable across the entire force (minus the T1´s).

“Expectations for radar upgrades of T2 aircraft or will the T3s be the likely limit?”

Suspect that one will be entirely dependent on available money. Unless good old Putin does something silly in the Baltics (something that i dont believe will happen) with Brexit and/while funding JCA (F-35B) and “Team Tempest” i wouldnt hold my breath waiting for AESA´s on the T2´s.
It seems that the RAF will end up with a three tier Phoon fleet… It will be interesting to see what will replace the T1´s.

And the UK PLC has just “IOCed” their “Dave B” AKA “JCA” AKA “F-35B “.

Congratulations

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/defence-secretary-sets-sights-on-next-century-of-british-air-power

Several misconceptions here.
Till 1990 the mig31 was a PVO asset only. The PVO mission was to fend off aerial attacks against the Soviet Union, for the Americans think of a (completely independent from the USAF) NORAD on steroids. By definition the PVO would have not faced NATO Awacs.
The job to square off with NATO over Europe (and dealing with AWACS) was for the VVS, by late eighties, that meant huge numbers of mig23’s, several hundred mig29’s, a few units of mig25’s and a handful of Su27 ‘s(a great big chunk of the first batches of Flankers were delivered to the PVO).
Of the several AAM’s described by several posters in this topic only the R33 was available and only for the PVO.
The only anti radiation missile available for tactical work by the Soviet forces was the KH31P, it had no ATA mode, is target were the massive numbers of Hawk, Patriots, Bloodhounds, etc, NATO units, it only entered in 1988, a few months before the Berlin wall came crashing down.
There were no SEAD aircrafts or units dedicated for use against the Awac fleet.
From what’s publicly available, for the most of the Cold War, the Soviet plan to deal with NATO air forces over central Europe (and the Awac force) seemed to be a variation of what DJCross described above, but instead of using mortars they would go directly to tactical nukes, what remained (if anything) would be swarmed and dealt by superior numbers.

Cheers