Now we do agree, except that it looks more and more probable that the whole thing will get cancelled as it is the Swiss politicans (beyond what the anonymous people who may have to vote on it may think) who are after Maurer and asking him to explain what on earth (to stay polite) he was thinking…. 😉

Performance is not SO important? Switzerland is a small, neutral country. Its air force is not going to get involved in adventures outside its borders (does not need a strike capability). It needs an aircraft to police its very limited air space. If Tiger is able to do that, so is Gripen.

Through life costs of a single-engined jet reported to cost Swedish air force $3,000 per flying hour (although not the M21 version) would be much lower than a twin costing $10,000+(?) per flying hour to operate?

MLU would likely be a much cheaper exercise with SAAB than with Dassault?

When the time comes to retire F-18, Gripen would be a much cheaper replacement than Rafale?

As he should; as a politician he should make decisions based on a number of factors: Technical, financial, industrial, political, etc. It’s a balancing act, and he cannot let just one single factor determine everything.

Agreed.

I’d like to know how the whole report reads, but don’t, as we only have access to 17 pages of it.

Indeed. Did the newspaper receive the entire report? If it did, why not leak the entire report?

in the rafales made for french forces by a french company with french instruments, everything is written in english… maybe a fake aircraft? :p

Switzerland has 4 spoken languages. in which will you write the report? Or do you write four reports in four different languages?

Belgium has 3 official languages. I don’t think its parliament creates law in a foreign language. I would be astonished if Switzerland does. I don’t think that Dassault write their Rafale manuals in English non plus. After recent events in India I can see they will be soon…

If Eurofighter didn’t bother to make a good offer in the first place, then I don’t think they deserve being allowed to reconsider their offer, especially when it was so clear that being L1 was the sole selection critera.

Agreed. Both parties were told quite clearly that if they got the lower L1, they would be selected for further negotiation. Simple as that.

Not only it shows that they tried to milk the indians instead of making a good offer,

Bit of a lose/lose position for Eurofighter: (a) if they could have offered a price 20% or so lower, why didn’t they (b) if they could not have offered a price 20% or so lower, Typhoon is too expensive to win against Rafale

Eurofighter should STFU

Agreed where MMRCA is concerned.

The Typhoon’s most impressive characteristic, to those not familiar with its potent performance, was the ease with which it carried large weapon payloads over significant distances in the changeable air environment. On several occasions, en route to the operating area, Typhoon pilots were able to climb over thunderstorms that required other aircraft, with less performance, to re-route around them. This characteristic stood Typhoon apart from its contemporaries.

Carrying up to 4x air-to-air missiles, 4x 1,000 lb bombs, a targeting pod and two under-wing fuel tanks, Typhoon can fly at 40,000 feet and at speeds of over 500 knots while using relatively little fuel. This low fuel consumption had obvious benefits in terms of endurance; it allowed Typhoon to loiter over significant periods providing airborne cover with its complement of air-to-air weapons. Moreover, it also ensured that the Typhoon was less of an air-to-air refuelling burden in the busy airspace.

Typhoon’s performance on Operation ELLAMY was a result of more than just its manoeuvrability and power. The combination of Typhoon’s long-range radar picture and Link-16 data link provides the pilot with exceptional and unrivalled situational awareness of the operating area.

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/release/3/132546/mod-report-on-typhoon-operations-in-libya.html

The article is quite glowing in its praise of Typhoon. How objective are these MOD debriefs normally? If they are always glowing in their praise of the hardware used in operations, they can’t be taken too seriously. It would be interesting to see a similar debrief on Tornado performance.

To those who do not know the English newspapers: the Daily Mail is a jingoistic, chauvinistic, highly socially conservative newspaper (and right wing, too) that likes to pander to its comparatively ignorant readership’s prejudices. It prints a lot of opinionated rubbish. Not a serious newspaper.

Among the serious daily newspapers (those whose publishers see the primary function of their paper as informing their readership about events that took place the previous day) are:

The Times
The Independant
The Guardian
The Daily Telegraph

Inevitably readers of the above are better informed than readers of The Daily Mail.