1. The 12 Mirage-2000BRs are needed to be replaced after 2013, which is mission impossible for F-35.

2. The BAF wishs to introduce 36 FX2 at the time of 2015~2016, which is mission impossible for F-35, either.

3. Brazil wants full techonology transfer of FX2, which has already been a main problem for selling F/A-18E/F, not to mention F-35.

4. The new Brazilian government is preparing to slash the national defense budget deeply, which has already enforced BAF to consider the choice of abandoning FX2 project and introducing the 2nd-handed Mirage 2000-9 from UAE instead…..And since it is simply impossible for F-35 to be cheaper than Gripen NG, F/A-18E/F, and even Rafale, I don’t think the BAF can accept its price right now.

Nope, show-offability is the deterrence (as snafu352 pointed the right term) made visible. It does not imply real employment (yet).

As said above:

Quoting a General from the Forces Aériennes Stratégiques:
“Un convoi nucléaire bien en vue lorsque tel satellite de tel pays passe au dessus d’Istres, ça fait toujours son petit effet.”
“A prominent nuclear convoy when a satellite of that country passes over Istres, that always impress your guests!”

——-

Re: National pride?
Why not. But that’s (by far) not the main reason. Only a bonus.
The air component:
1/ provides a more flexible deterrent
2/ maintains high level of skills in the industry
3/ maintains high level of skills in the forces
4/ participates in political weight in international relationships
5/ adds a bit to national pride.

——-

Mildave: Agreed on flexibility. 🙂

AZ

And a much cheaper choice for low grade nuclear revenge ~ The unit cost of a M-51 SLBM should be several ten times higher than the unit cost of a ASMP-A. If the French government wants to give a limited nuclear revenge to a rogue country with outdated air-defense capability, an ASMP-A from a Rafale B with two pilots should be much more economic than a M-51 SLBM from a SNLE with 111 officers and sailors……:D

And considering what a Great Big Terrible Mess it will be, if the 2040 successor of Typhoon / Rafale / Gripen has to be co-developed by the six or even more european countries……

Simulation is simulation, not reality.

Simulation gives you the result of the datas and parameters that you input. So if the datas and parameters that you put in are far from fact, then no matter how good the tool for simulation is, the result it gives will be anything but truth.

F/A-18E:
1. Empty weight: 14,552 kg, which is around 40% heavier than F/A-18C/D (10,400 kg).
2. F414 Engine: 22,000 Ib*2, around 24% more thrust than the late F/A-18C/D (17,750 Ib*2).
3. Wing area: 46.5 m2, around 22% larger than F/A-18C/D (38.0 m2).
4. The toe-out of the pylons with extra-drag.

Results:

A. Lower T/W ratio & SEP –> worse overall A/C performance.

B. Heavier wing load –> worse turning performance.

C. Lower T/W ratio & SEP + extra-drag –> poorer acceleration and climbing performance –> Bad news for QRA mission.

The SH block II is a substantial improvement of the Hornet, that was used as the benchmark in the Swiss evaluation. It has longer range and endurance, improved MMI, improved sensors, etc, etc. Therefore one should expect the SH block II to score significantly higher than the Hornet in each category.

I really don’t think so.

1. Longer Endurance and better Loiter time: Not necessary according to SwAF’s way for evaluation. SH can have significant longer endurance and better loiter time than Hornet, if it is allowed to carry the maximal external fuel load it can, but if it is not allowed to do so, then the evaluating result of Rafale in this evaluating item can be also happened to SH.

2. A/C Performance and Performance in QRA Mission: SH has worse T/W ratio, lower acceleration, and higher wing-load than Hornet. I think it is very possible for SH to get the lower scores than Hornet in these two evaluating items…..

3. Data Dissemination: Just like any other F-X competitors, SH won’t be able to get a reasonable scores until it is fully integrated with Switzerland Air-Defense system and C4ISR.

Rafale no doubt is a very good a/c however I think it was probably good for Rafale (and Typhoon and Gripen) fanboys that the SH did not participate in Switzerland, that could easily have been an embarrising experience for Europeans…. considering that the SH is considered a vast improvement over the Hornets that were the comparison in Switzerland.

SH is the first fighter that was kicked out of the Switzerland F-X fighter competition during 2008…..

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/boeing-withdraws-super-hornet-from-swiss-contract-race-223401/

How nice of Boeing and Switzerland AF…..they knew that the mighty SH will embarrass the poor Rafale / Typhoon / Gripen too much, so they decided to let the formidable SH leave the competition in order to save the faces of the poor little Dassault, Eurofighter Gmbh, and SAAB, right ??:D

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/article-view/feature/133433/f_35-unit-cost-tops-%24200m.html

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/dae/articles/communiques/tab12-03-12_1.gif

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/dae/articles/communiques/tab12-03-12_2.gif