IF the Swiss chart somehow reflects reality (ie. that the Rafale really is very good in a2a and the Typhoon less good than most seem to believe) then I am surprised Dassault did not offer it to Japan. If F-35 is delayed further they will have to chose another a/c for their current competition.

And Japan will unlike Switzerland go for the more expensive and more capable solution. It would be hilarious if Typhoon is chosen by Japan, and Dassault did not even try…

E/F has redesigned intakes to ensure higher airflow but they look very similar, see pic. Not sure if the upgrade includes any mods to reduce RCS?

Those intakes are from the Gripen Demo, which is a rebuilt Gripen D.

The intakes for the NG may look different than the intakes on the Demo.

Gripen and Tiffy might have come out with a disadvantage vs. Swiss Hornets for the foll reasons:

Less emphasis on BVR and more on WVR. The SwAF Hornets are equipped with the JHMCS/Aim 9X combo and can carry the ATFLIR as well. The hornet’s low-slo w ability is supposedly v.v.good. Ditto with the Rafale.

As a result F-18> Gripen (even NG) is not hard to fathom.

Or maybe the Tiffy beat the Hornet in BVR easily enough, however, only equalled it in WVR, this would explain its marginal gain vs. the Hornet in the published chart. And perhaps the Gripen equalled it in BVR but lost out comprehensively in WVR?

Otoh, the Rafale is supposedly a demon low-slow and with the RBE 2 should be v.competitive BVR as well. Might’ve beaten the F-18 comprehensively in all scenarios?

Just some thoughts.

USS.

Interesting — however what’s also interesting is that the Rafale did not just beat the Hornet and the Gripen but also the Typhoon in the Swiss a2a scenarios.

The French always claimed they did not see the great need for HMD — perhaps their system actually works surprisingly well without? Or is it something else that makes the Rafale perform so surprisingly well?

The chart talks about defensive and offensive a2a — what could they mean by that?

From what I understand it seems that the first one represent air defence score, while the second represent ground attack capabilities.

The Rafale is ranked first with 7.28 and 7.41 points,
The Eurofighter second with 6.49 and 6.54 points,
The Gripen is third with 5.68 and 5.62 points.

With 6.0 been the score of the Hornet and as such the minimum requirement.

Rafale isn’t doing that bad at all !

Sources:
Basler Zeitung
Bazonline.ch
rafalenews.blogspot.com

IF this graph is authentic then yes it seems to show that Rafale is technically very good.

However there are some strange things about this graph. If 6 really is the score of the Hornet, how do people explain that in a2a the mighty Typhoon is scoring basically the same as the Hornet!?

Of course the score is calculated according to what the Swiss needs are, but still I find that rather surprising to say the least. Even in their improved offer, the Typhoon score just marginally better than the Hornet in a2a. Very peculiar.

Jackonicko, where are you?

The most recent information available is that the gripen purchased by the swiss will be the C/D variant but it will be latter upgraded by RUAG to the NG standard.

We don’t know if the upgrade will encompass engine and airframe modifications. We’ll soon have more infos.

Seems it will encompass engine and airframe mods.

http://www.saabgroup.com/en/Air/Gripen-Fighter-System/Gripen-for-Switzerland/The-Gripen-Fighter/

From the images it looks like also the wheels have been shifted just like in the NG Demo; hopefully this implies also a dramatic increase in internal fuel.

I struggle to see how this fighter can be “less performing than F18”?

Eagle1,

thanks, that makes sense. If the Swiss Gripen keeps the C/D airframe and engine then it will presumably not get the kinematic advantage of the true NG.

The “true NG” I believe has several advantages over the C/D:

1. 20% more thrust
2. much more internal fuel
3. slightly larger wings
4. Reduced RCS

With 20% more thrust and only minor increase in weight I suspect it should be a quite decent performing a/c; also the increase in internal fuel will increase loiter time.

@eagle1
As for the comparison, it would be more realistic to compare the RBE2-AA and Captor-E ranges.

I did not see the video however if this was in relation to the Swiss evaluation then the radars that are offered would make the most sense to compare.

Did Eurofighter offer the AESA to Switzerland?

I understand the Swiss air force prefers the Rafale to Gripen C/D… However if Gripen meets the requirements then it’s a bit late to complain about it. So that should become the main question IMHO.

Let’s see what happens.

My money’s still on Rafale for this one, I have to say.

Indeed, what can possibly go wrong?

…

:diablo: