Why? In what scenario would the Swiss air force undertake strike missions?

As I said, to regain basic knowledge. So that in the event of a crisis, it doesn’t take x years to rebuild the air force, but x minus y years only. That’s the theory.
Scenario? The mission of the Swiss Army, of which the Swiss AF is part of, is to defend Switzerland. Any national defence scenario that requires air defence probably requires A/G too.

Surely all the contenders provide good enough basic A/G capabilites.
SH, Rafale and Gripen have the edge in recce capabilites thanks to their dedicated recce pods – but I don’t think the Swiss AF asks for more than RecceLite etc. can deliver.

Saab’s T-X parts will be built in a US factory. https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/saab-nears-decision-on-us-facility-for-t-x-work-455834/

If SweAF is allowed to grow back to 120 fighters, they can decide what to do with legacy Gripens once the order of 60 E models is nearing completion. By that time, they’ll probably know which next gen. project Sweden will be part of and when to expect the new jets. Can always order more E/F models if necessary.

”

They just don’t have the resources or even talent to keep up with the “West” anymore”

Showing your true colours again, nice.
GTFO.

Here’s the deal, its quite obvious from your posts that you are as nationalist as any Indian out there and will equally do everything to claim no F-16 was shot down etc. That’s fine, that’s your prerogative, but please lay off the spiel about 4x missiles (when 2 are clearly missing significant portions which would well indicate they are wreckage from an intercept), heck, the Pak side even has access to the PRC to get a handful of low cost R-73Es to play around with it as it sees fit. Lets even discount the amount of consistent evidence the Indian side has provided (AWACS footage, R/T calls, AMRAAM wreckage) while the Pakistani side has been making inconsistent remarks from day one and has provided NO evidence to point out that all its F-16s were safe. Now you want the Indian side to not even mention that. Whereas if it were a US Russian conflict or anything of the sort, you would be the first to constantly point out the obvious discrepancies.

That’s the kind of post I was thinking about when I wrote making yourself look like fools…

Missiles missing parts indicates an intercept how? Firing only parts of the missile? :stupid:
Evidence? What evidence? Show me any evidence.
Again, saying you have evidence is not evidence. Evidence is evidence.

I don’t think that was ever mentioned in any official RFI made public though I would have to go back and read the couple of solicitations that I did manage to save years ago.

I thought I read something about how the RAM turbine was supposed to be lower drag than the propellers but I can’t find anything about that now. So it’s probably nothing… Well maybe they just hoped the new design would reduce drag.
Anyway, my suspicion that the new pods are draggier is true: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/25180/the-navys-new-jamming-pods-for-its-ea-18g-growlers-cut-back-their-range

OK here goes.

Mirage IIIE have been a better choice than F104

No. The F-104 was first and foremost a nuclear bomber, delivering US special weapons. Not possible with Mirage III.

F-4E should have been adopted not the castrated F4F w/o bvr weapons

Due to the deletion of Sparrow black boxes and one fuselage tank, the F-4F was quite a bit lighter. Coupled with slats this meant having the best performing F-4 for WVR combat.
The role of German F-4s was to combat anything that got through the BVR interceptor screen (provided by other air forces) and SAM belt. BVR missiles were not deemed necessary for that role, esp. considering their poor performance at the time.

F16 or F18 should have been bought rather than investing so much in tornado IDS

Neither of which is a domestic product.
And of course they’re also completely outclassed by the Tornado in the low level (nuclear) strike role. No TFR for starters.

Well it’s because J-31 look closer to US approach. XD

Probably… though I’m not really sure if [USER=”1416″]Scooter[/USER]’s obsession with a Russian “J-31” is just his idea of a running gag…
Or maybe in his F-35-uber-alles world the F-35 is the bestest, cheapest super fighter for everyone. If your air force for whatever reason can’t be part of the illustrious F-35 circle, the only viable alternative is “J-31”. Because it looks similar to an F-35. :very_drunk:

J-31 in quotes because obviously no such thing actually exists.
Maybe – probably – one day China will have another VLO fighter besides the J-20. Russian AF will not have the same type.

And the ASRAAM will at least give them a decent self-defence capability. Putting a small AESA radar into the nose and changing the nose profile, as on the Jaguar DARIN III should have been explored as well, but the cost of the upgrade would have gone up significantly. But if the IAF wants that, it should be possible as well.

Interesting stuff, turning the Hawk into a viable light attack aircraft.

Integrating a radar would not be so simple though. There is no space in the nose for a radar let alone provisions for cooling and power supply. Look at the Hawk 200 – the added avionics basically occupy the front seat area.
Such a modification would not only be pretty expensive but also extensive, resulting in a different aircraft, and defeat the purpose of having combat-ready trainers for war-time emergencies.