You’ll have to wait and read the report.

But suffice it to say that neither the Typhoon’s missed flight (for 16 hours…) nor “aircraft B’s” extra sorties are significant, and neither will have any bearing on the decision.

However much people may hope otherwise.

It’s long moment arm, dimwit!

If you can’t even get that right (a simple technical term), then who can be bothered with anything else that you write?

It’s all just empty nationalistic bluster, and it’s boring and usually badly wrong.

It’s certainly not worth my time responding to.

M le Spitfire Neuf,

Les absurdités doit être prévu seulement en ayant affaire avec M. Fonk. Il regarderait sans doute des chasseurs comme le Hunter et le Spitfire en tant que déchets du deuxième taux en raison de leur pays d’origine.

:rolleyes:

“We all know Typhoon airframe have to be strengthened to be capable of (limited) A2G capabilties; in short we can see why they insist into trying to make up Rafale have to put on weight as well, await bad news from the Typhoon community soon… “

1) Typhoon has not been strengthened for A-G. This is an outright invention and in pressing this point you are, I’m sorry to say, lying. The Tranche 1 aircraft weigh less than the Development Aircraft, as has always been the plan. Typhoon’s thrust to weight ratio is such that weight really isn’t a big issue for the Eurofighter, and there’s no need to scratch around trying to find the lightest published weight (however unreliable) and then hysterically demand that it is taken as the accurate figure.

2) No-one is making up weights for Rafale, we are merely quoting the most recent figure issued by Dassault for the Swiss campaign.

That’s an interesting article you link to:

A VERY rough translation

Philippe Miauton, Bern
Tuesday November 25, 2008

“It is not for the WEF that we need new planes”

SAFETY.

For divisionnaire Markus Gygax, interim commander of the army and likely next CO of the air force, the purchase of aircraft is necessary because of the size of Switzerland. But co-operation with foreign nations have been limited.

This Tuesday, at Emmen, Armasuisse is presenting the Eurofighter, the third and last candidate aircraft to replace the obsolete fleet of Tigers. Markus Gygax, interim chief of the forces (?) since the resignation of the previous commander Walter Knutti, is following the procedure with interest. This purchase, totalling 2,2 billion, a d’ores et déjà du plomb dans l’aile. Part of the Parliament is sceptical. And the population will certainly be consulted since an initiative of GSsA is about to succeed. Markus Gygax, himself a pilot, explained to Temps the need for Switzerland to acquire a new aircraft.

Temps: Why is it necessary to replace the Tiger at all costs?

Markus Gygax: Contrary to the territory on which safety is guaranteed, in times of peace, by the police force, the sovereignty of the Swiss airspace, as for it, is ensured by the Air forces, that is to say the army. We have the role of guaranteeing the safety of the sky, of controlling the traffic, and of intervening if necessary as well in period of peace as in military crisis period. In both cases, we use the same instrument: fighters. The question of knowing how much planes are necessary is closely related to this mission. The size of our country and the speed with which it is possible to cross it, oblige us to have continuously planes engaged in the sky from where need for having a new fleet.

– How many aircraft are necessary to ensure defence 24 hours a day?

– In period of prolonged peace, or at the time of specific events like the WEF or the Euro 2008, during which one knows when the action starts and when it finishes, the 33 F/A-18s are enough. Because the potential enemy is not a fighter aircraft. But once there is a crisis of which one does not know the duration, to ensure safety 24 hours a day requires a larger fleet. The majority of the small States in Europe try to maintain a fleet from 60 to 70 fighters.

– It would seem that there are moves towards the purchase of 22 planes rather than 33. Do you confirm this information?

– The needs of the army are evaluated with 33 planes. But the tests of the three candidates must enable us to judge which can remain longest on mission in the sky for example. These data will clearly have an influence to define the number of planes necessary. From the point of view of the soldiers, we must on the whole reach a quota of an about sixty planes. The politicians allocate us a sum of 2,2 billion. We must make as effective as possible use of this sum.

– GSsA criticizes the fact that Switzerland has more planes per square meter than Austria, for example. Why is that?

– This way of calculating is not serious. The smaller one country is, the less time it takes to cross its airspace. Our aircraft must thus be continuously in the sky. We thus need proportionally more aircraft than bigger countries where aircraft can be stationed on the ground waiting for an intervention.

– What co-operation is envisaged with the neighbors of Switzerland as regards air defense?

– For a few years, we have had agreements with France, Italy, Germany and, since April 2008, with Austria. The spectrum of the interventions for which we will co-operate is broad. This co-operation is limited however to missions which are not military. As soon as a crisis appears, it is with the politicians to decide if we must defend our sovereignty or if the co-operation can be prolonged. This aspect of the co-operation is currently not regulated, because each country wishes to preserve its sovereignty as regards airspace and its independence at the time of conflicts.

– Air defence is expensive. Wouldn’t the European countries find it beneficial to extend this co-operation?

– We already managed to apply agreements to the civil air security. It would be perhaps necessary to extend them to a military aspect. However, such agreements would imply also costs for the services rendered by neighbouring air forces and would rise from a political decision.

– Rumours imply that you are lacking pilots. How do you hope to cure this if Switzerland acquires a new plane?

– They are false! We have enough pilots to ensure our missions. But it is true that we wish to increase our manpower. Their training is very expensive. As long as a decision relating to the partial replacement of the Tiger fleet has not been made, one cannot train too many pilots. To have a higher number in the future we can modify, during their training, the proportion of fighter and helicopter pilots. Finally in the conditions of purchase of the new fighter, there will be the possibility for our pilots to be trained within the air forces of the countries supplying the new aircraft. We thus have the means of correcting the current situation.

– Does the possibility of the Swiss aircraft training on the territories of these countries also form part of the package?

– Completely! On the one hand, we want to be able to train with our own aircraft on their territory. On the other, we also wish to use those bases to relieve Switzerland, relative to noise in particular.

– You are temporarily with the head of the army. Do you always wish to become military attache to Washington?

– I officially stood as a candidate to take command of the Air forces again. I feel now ready. I imagine that the situation will be clarified as soon as the new chief of the army is named.

I was talking to one of the structural design engineering heads on the A400M on Sunday, and from that conversation, I would say that Old Shape’s contention that: “Apart from the engines, there are lots of other problems….structural, electrical, electronic, weight….you name it, it’s gone awry on that aeroplane” undermine the credibility of anything else that he says. Such problems that there have been have been over-stated and over-exaggerated, and aside from those that are now delaying the programme, all have been solved.

Structurally, for example, most elements have now passed their final ultimate load tests – and all of the components and sub assemblies my source had direct knowledge of had exceeded requirements (his bit won’t break, and has gone way beyond the ultimate load factor) – they’ve built the structure stronger than it needed to be. No-one has any doubt that certification ON TIME would be a walk in the park from here, apart from the flight test programme delays.

There are horrifying problems remaining with the engine controls (both software and hardware, I believe), and on the C-130 engine testbed one hears about flutter problems, heat and acoustic fatigue worries for the flaps and goodness knows what else.

But to paint the A400M as an aircraft in trouble because of a plethora of problems is misleading (and I suspect mischievous). There is one big fundamental problem (FADEC) and though this will cause a massive further delay (I see little or no realistic chance of the aircraft flying before next July) it is one problem, and once sorted, progress should be rapid.

I’m not a big fan of A400M (though it’s a better size and x-section than any Herc) and would have favoured biting the bullet and buying shedloads of C-17s. But I do deplore false accusations – especially those that are based on Lockmart misinformation and propaganda.

and except that we know their previous identities!

ZB697 Mil Mi-17 Mk.1V (manufacturer’s serial number 103M02) – Ex Bulgarian Air Force serial 402
ZB698 Mil Mi-17 Mk.1V (manufacturer’s serial number 103M03) – Ex Bulgarian Air Force serial 403