But in the past, Swiss have already surprised us with picking the Hornet which was clearly the costlier option compared to Mirage 2000.. and IMHO, not necessarily the better suited one..
At the time, the 2K avionic suite was rather crude and that of the 18 was one of the most modern in the world. The two screen arrangement and HUD was spectacular for its time, as was the single button switching mode b/w A2A and A2G. So much that many “non-aligned” countries choose the heavier and slightly more costlier aircraft from Mc Donnell Douglas when F16 was the norm for NATO and Asia.
This is something that I have insisted on. In those countries, often, the choice of an aircraft have also something with what you get when looking for a new ride. New tech and pimped-up image have something to play. this is not written on a pejorative mode.
Regarding the focus on cost, don’t forget that switching from F5 to a new aircraft will induce a lot of extra cost (fully modern infrastructures are in place only to maintain the F18 – The Tiger being a much simplier plane to operate). Their AF will certainly have a look at the overall introduction costs as much as service life cost. This is why, as I have said earlier, a new evolutionary approach that find some synergy with the burden of peripheral constraint to maintain an AF in a modern small Eu country could alleviates the latter by resorting t STOVL /Hub and Spoke operations.
Additionally, the strong links b/w the AF and the USMC will be extended and revived helping to maintain a capability during the transition.
By proposing the most modern jet with a full suite of material (“automating” UAV/Maned switching capability on Helos – again as with the USMC), such a package could easily gain the battle of cost even in front of the Gripen E/F* (infra cost, manpower cost, integrated OP b/w reservist and professional, less nuisance for population, long term life cycle cost, Technology “transfer” and of course OP capabilities).
*Not the upgraded C/D
Sign In
