US to Buy Back Swiss F-5s [Archive]

ORAC

16th Dec 2019, 07:03

Aggressor aircraft or as incentive/part eco change for new aircraft? Can’t think it anything to do with technology.....

https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/bloomberg/switzerland-plans-to-send-its-old-fighter-jets-back-to-the-u-s-/45437142

Switzerland Plans to Send Its Old Fighter Jets Back to the U.S. (https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/bloomberg/switzerland-plans-to-send-its-old-fighter-jets-back-to-the-u-s-/45437142)

Bloomberg) -- The U.S. is expected to buy 22 aging fighter jets from Switzerland, a country that’s struggling to modernize its own air force.

U.S. Navy representatives and the Swiss defense procurement agency, known as Armasuisse, discussed the deal in July, an agency spokesman said by email on Sunday. The contract is expected to be signed once U.S. lawmakers approve the fiscal 2020 defense budget, he said.

President Donald Trump is seeking $718 billion in Pentagon funding for 2020, including $39.7 million for the F-5s, an aircraft first delivered to Switzerland in 1978. Nowadays, the U.S. uses the F-5 to simulate enemy planes in aerial combat training.

Switzerland has been trying to buy new warplanes for years. Voters in 2014 rejected a 3.1 billion-franc ($3.2 billion) order for Saab AB Gripen fighter jets. Switzerland now plans to spend about 6 billion francs on new fighter jets, according to SonntagsZeitung newspaper and previous Swiss media reports.

“If the Americans want to take over the scrap iron, they should do it,” Beat Flach, a Green Liberal lawmaker, told SonntagsZeitung, which reported on the planned sale on Sunday. “It’s better than having the Tigers rot in a parking lot.”

Willard Whyte

16th Dec 2019, 08:33

Probably an(other), or renewed, attempt to sell the Swiss F/A-18 E/Fs.

Asturias56

16th Dec 2019, 08:40

The Swiss are nearly as bad as India as a country that can never come to a decision on military aircraft

hoss183

16th Dec 2019, 08:51

Its what you get if you leave democracy to the uneducated public...

57mm

16th Dec 2019, 09:01

Probably in good condition. Might make a useful addition to either a Mil or commercial aggressor outfit......

Mil-26Man

16th Dec 2019, 09:25

Probably in good condition. Might make a useful addition to either a Mil or commercial aggressor outfit......

They are in very poor condition, which is why the Swiss are getting rid of them. Will likely be used for spares to support Taiwan's fleet and also the US Aggressor fleet.

Jet Jockey A4

16th Dec 2019, 10:54

The Swiss are nearly as bad as India as a country that can never come to a decision on military aircraft

LOL... You can add Canada to that list.

ehwatezedoing

16th Dec 2019, 10:57

The Swiss are nearly as bad as India as a country that can never come to a decision on military aircraft
And Canada as well.
Not sure why Swiss and Canada (try to) keep a front line jet fighters, they should ditch that the way New Zealand did.

4runner

16th Dec 2019, 12:33

They are in very poor condition, which is why the Swiss are getting rid of them. Will likely be used for spares to support Taiwan's fleet and also the US Aggressor fleet.

they are most certainly not in poor condition. Even the Jordanian ones were pretty good. I see them almost daily coming back from sorties, landing at NAS Boca Chica. They’ll get avionics upgrades and standardized. The ROC can produce their own spares, they built most of theirs.

Mil-26Man

16th Dec 2019, 13:42

they are most certainly not in poor condition. Even the Jordanian ones were pretty good. I see them almost daily coming back from sorties, landing at NAS Boca Chica. They’ll get avionics upgrades and standardized. The ROC can produce their own spares, they built most of theirs.

They are in a terrible condition. Just Google 'Swiss F-5 cracks' and/or 'Swiss F-5s grounded' - it's all there for you.

The ROC cannot build their own spares, which is why the US is trying to source them itself - https://www.janes.com/article/88184/us-seeks-to-restart-parts-manufacture-for-taiwan-f-5s

Now don't come back to me until you've done some research...

dead_pan

16th Dec 2019, 17:35

The Swiss are nearly as bad as India as a country that can never come to a decision on military aircraft

Nowt wrong with a capability gap to save the tax paying public some moolah. I mean, we've done alright in the UK without an aircraft carrier and maritime patrol capability for going on a decade. Makes one wonder what all the fuss is about.

Mil-26Man

16th Dec 2019, 18:04

Nowt wrong with a capability gap to save the tax paying public some moolah. I mean, we've done alright in the UK without an aircraft carrier and maritime patrol capability for going on a decade. Makes one wonder what all the fuss is about.

I'm minded to agree, though not sure how long the patience of our NATO allies who covered the MPA gap in particular would have lasted had a replacement not been on the horizon.

ORAC

16th Dec 2019, 18:08

It’s the same argument as for paying for safety.

If you think paying for a military capability is expensive - just wait till so see the cost of not having it when you need it.....

RAFEngO74to09

16th Dec 2019, 19:15

The buyback of 22 F-5E/F aircraft is in 2020 DoD Budget for USN / USMC aggressor units.

"Moving on to the Navy, one unique item in today's budget materials was the inclusion of acquiring 22 F-5E/Fs Tiger IIs from the Swiss Air Force to fulfill fleet adversary support duties. The 44 F-5N/Fs that are currently flying with two US Navy and one Marine adversary squadrons came from surplus Swiss Air Force stocks. The delivery and refurbishment of those jets wrapped up roughly a decade ago (https://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=40116) and the fleet continues to age while demand for its services continue to rise."

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/26916/8-f-15xs-for-usaf-and-22-f-5s-for-navy-in-2020-budget-request

I expect that some / all will get modified to the current F-5N/F standard with updated avionics and other improved systems that the other ex-Swiss AF aircraft bought in 2006 got.

Mil-26Man

16th Dec 2019, 19:43

blimey

17th Dec 2019, 00:11

I once flew a Swiss big cheese in the back of a jet they were thinking about buying. He gave me a watch as he got out as a thank you. They're still in the market I think.

physicus

17th Dec 2019, 00:45

hoss183 Switzerland is the only truly democratic country in the world, and to rag their decision not to spend money on fighter jets because it contravenes your opinion is, well, undemocratic. The wisdom of the masses more often than not supersedes an individual's or small group's wisdom (or lack thereof). It also leads to economic stability. Just look at how strong the Swiss Franc remains, despite the absence of any natural resources in that country. They're doing something right. There are more important things to spend money on than fighter jets in a country whose borders are 60 seconds of afterburner time across, and whose air force only works office hours (c.f. Ethiopian hijack intercept a couple of years or so ago).

itsnotthatbloodyhard

17th Dec 2019, 00:57

I once flew a Swiss big cheese in the back of a jet they were thinking about buying.

Was it damaged when they strapped it in?

4runner

17th Dec 2019, 03:32

They are in a terrible condition. Just Google 'Swiss F-5 cracks' and/or 'Swiss F-5s grounded' - it's all there for you.

The ROC cannot build their own spares, which is why the US is trying to source them itself - https://www.janes.com/article/88184/us-seeks-to-restart-parts-manufacture-for-taiwan-f-5s

Now don't come back to me until you've done some research...

any fighter will need structural repair/inspection over its lifetime. Just because they are due for parts replacement, isn’t a function of poor mx. It is a function of use. The contractor will overhaul the aircraft. The Swiss don’t want to overhaul theirs. Like our A-10’s. Our B-1’s and EA-6B’s also have g load limits and/or altitude limits imposed due to longer than anticipated use. It doesn’t mean they’re junk, it’s use.

Mil-26Man

17th Dec 2019, 08:21

any fighter will need structural repair/inspection over its lifetime. Just because they are due for parts replacement, isn’t a function of poor mx. It is a function of use. The contractor will overhaul the aircraft. The Swiss don’t want to overhaul theirs. Like our A-10’s. Our B-1’s and EA-6B’s also have g load limits and/or altitude limits imposed due to longer than anticipated use. It doesn’t mean they’re junk, it’s use.

I don't think a metric exists by which you can claim that aircraft being grounded due to cracks are "most certainly not in poor condition".

Vendee

17th Dec 2019, 08:48

Was it damaged when they strapped it in?

It should have been fine as long as the holes didn't line up.

chopper2004

17th Dec 2019, 11:37

This does or does not affect the Patrouille Suisse? I know the teams future is in the wind so to speak because of the airframes future. I was not aware the Swiss still had the F-5E as thought they retired from the front line with more advent of the F/A-18C..

Also thought 2 decades ago the Swiss sold. Inch of F-5 which ended up with Navy aggressors?

It was nice to see the Patrouille Suisse perform few back in September at AirPower ..(my photos below)

cheers

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x640/67debb6d_0be2_4997_8f14_2ff747442764_0a47c81b679ed8a56bcf70f 3bc92489643a43498.jpeg
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x640/3932135f_87c6_45c0_b05f_73334f3ad1ed_e245f4b45eecb99989f32d6 943af7ddeb7770884.jpeg
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x640/68d5c4ce_8ad2_4a12_8754_e79d70565603_3b9fbbe2e35645f8fe40728 006f890d902c5c214.jpeg
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x640/d93e8dc4_3c34_4f9d_96e8_ba2b19456f34_597126ec91aa0623ab3a310 da55324d2f063fd6c.jpeg
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x640/e88603ac_504c_4c18_90bd_e8e16b2de40e_910124dae7189ea7798aee5 001dcf687f2015268.jpeg

TEEEJ

17th Dec 2019, 11:46

There are more important things to spend money on than fighter jets in a country whose borders are 60 seconds of afterburner time across, and whose air force only works office hours (c.f. Ethiopian hijack intercept a couple of years or so ago).

The Swiss are slowly working up to have QRA 24/7 365 by end of 2020. 2016 0800-1800, 2019 0600-2200.

A new step in the Air Police Service 24 project
Bern, December 27, 2018 - From January 1, 2019, the air police service will take another step by extending readiness to 365 days - including weekends and public holidays - from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. The continuous availability of the air police will be achieved by the end of 2020. From then on, two armed aircraft will be operational around the clock for 365 days. The new step as of January 1, 2019 makes it possible to cover far more than 90% of air traffic over Switzerland.

The first step took place at the beginning of 2016: two armed aircraft were then available on weekdays from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. Since January 2017, readiness has been expanded to 365 days - including weekends and public holidays. From 2019, the jets will be available from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. During these times, well over 90% of air traffic takes place over Switzerland. At the end of 2020, the expansion will take place to 24 hours over 365 days.

Google English translation from

https://www.admin.ch/gov/de/start/dokumentation/medienmitteilungen.msg-id-73559.html

Mil-26Man

17th Dec 2019, 12:59

Seight

17th Dec 2019, 13:37

The Swiss are slowly working up to have QRA 24/7 365 by end of 2020. 2016 0800-1800, 2019 0600-2200.

So the Swiss go to the vast expense of operating a part time QRA so their airspace is protected from incursion at least some of the time - but publish the details of when their airspace will be unprotected on the Internet.

Anyone see any potential problems here ?

cxorcist

17th Dec 2019, 14:46

I still find it odd that the Swiss RFP for the F-5 and now F/A-18 replacement also state that the selected platform must be able to go toe-to-toe with a 'Flanker'-series fighter. If a Flanker has crossed half of Europe and at least three NATO nations to find itself in Swiss airspace, then Switzerland has much bigger problems than a Gripen/Super Hornet/F-35 can fix.
What a dumb comment! How about the Swiss contribute to the defense of the continent like other Western European nations do? Y’all Euros enjoy the American umbrella over your heads, maybe you could pitch in just a little bit... Or do all those mountains and being a “neutral country” keep you safe? FFS!

Mil-26Man

17th Dec 2019, 15:47

What a dumb comment! How about the Swiss contribute to the defense of the continent like other Western European nations do? Y’all Euros enjoy the American umbrella over your heads, maybe you could pitch in just a little bit... Or do all those mountains and being a “neutral country” keep you safe? FFS!

Switzerland is neutral and does not "contribute to the defence of the continent". It is solely concerned with its national defence.

Dumb comment indeed.

cxorcist

17th Dec 2019, 18:36

Switzerland is neutral and does not "contribute to the defence of the continent". It is solely concerned with its national defence.

Dumb comment indeed.
Little more than a speed bump then. Quite dumb!

Mil-26Man

17th Dec 2019, 18:41

Switzerland hasn't been invaded since 1815. They're not dumb.

cxorcist

17th Dec 2019, 18:49

Switzerland hasn't been invaded since 1815. They're not dumb.
No time like the present...

Mil-26Man

17th Dec 2019, 19:06

They had Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy and Vichy France on their doorstep. I don't think they're all that worried right now, but thanks for the conversation.

Just This Once...

17th Dec 2019, 19:08

Switzerland is neutral and does not "contribute to the defence of the continent". It is solely concerned with its national defence.

Dumb comment indeed.

Self-proclaiming comment there, with the dumb quote.

The Swiss do of course contribute to the continent's QRA cover with cooperative nations flying missions over each-others airspace with coordinated hand-overs when required. The only unusual part of the Swiss QRA mission is that, at times, it does not provide any of its own aircraft to the mix and is reliant on others for the air segment. The ground environment is 24/7 and provides picture to other nations as well as the legal RoE stuff for cross-boarder missions. Due to geography and coverage most live QRA intercepts undertaken by the Swiss AF tend to take place over surrounding countries and vice versa.

The Swiss do train and deploy outside of their boarders, including the army. They provided support to the KFOR NATO mission in Kosovo from the get-go and last time I had any dealings with them they still had a reinforced company in Kosovo.

Regarding their selection of potential threat aircraft, well it would be rather odd if they decided that the most likely threat to model against was EF/Typhoon, F-16 or indeed any of the types they coordinate their QRA missions with, rather than a type that was an actual adversary in the original KFOR mission.

Mil-26Man

17th Dec 2019, 19:19

Self-proclaiming comment there, with the dumb quote.

The Swiss do of course contribute to the continent's QRA cover with cooperative nations flying missions over each-others airspace with coordinated hand-overs when required. The only unusual part of the Swiss QRA mission is that, at times, it does not provide any of its own aircraft to the mix and is reliant on others for the air segment. The ground environment is 24/7 and provides picture to other nations as well as the legal RoE stuff for cross-boarder missions. Due to geography and coverage most live QRA intercepts undertaken by the Swiss AF tend to take place over surrounding countries and vice versa.

The Swiss do train and deploy outside of their boarders, including the army. They provided support to the KFOR NATO mission in Kosovo from the get-go and last time I had any dealings with them they still had a reinforced company in Kosovo.

Regarding their selection of potential threat aircraft, well it would be rather odd if they decided that the most likely threat to model against was EF/Typhoon, F-16 or indeed any of the types they coordinate their QRA missions with, rather than a type that was an actual adversary in the original KFOR mission.

So not providing its own aircraft to the international QRA effort then? That's some contribution. And cooperation with its immediate neighbours is about national security, not "defending the continent".

Not concerned with ground cooperation, that's not the issue being discussed.

NATO KFOR and other such missions are not "defending the continent", and they do not include an air component as is bring discussed.

As I stated before, if the threat the Swiss have to defend against is a Flanker then things have gone very wrong for them and everyone else, and no fighter type is going to be of much realistic use to them.

Dumb indeed.

cxorcist

17th Dec 2019, 21:49

So not providing its own aircraft to the international QRA effort then? That's some contribution. And cooperation with its immediate neighbours is about national security, not "defending the continent".

Not concerned with ground cooperation, that's not the issue being discussed.

NATO KFOR and other such missions are not "defending the continent", and they do not include an air component as is bring discussed.

As I stated before, if the threat the Swiss have to defend against is a Flanker then things have gone very wrong for them and everyone else, and no fighter type is going to be of much realistic use to them.

Dumb indeed.
Isn’t nice for the Swiss and other freeloaders that very generous nations developed and deploy technologies like F-22, JSF, AMRAAM, and the like. No need to worry about Flankers, Bears, or other threats while others do your bidding.

Switzerland is a wealthy country and can afford to contribute. They should. Tell me... what happens when the US finally hits that debt level at which creditors decide it’s no longer worth buying? Maybe then those countries will take a bit more interest in guaranteeing their own security. In the meantime, they can laugh at the angry, orange president for complaining about it.

Less Hair

17th Dec 2019, 23:02

Freeloader? Better check your sources. The Swiss must contribute more than most other nations to their national defense. They are quite serious about it. Most of the male population has reservist status and is armed. Any invader would face some trained and prepared guerrilla warfare nation.

yarpos

18th Dec 2019, 01:10

Had a holiday in Switzerland in the early 2000s mainly to familarise the family for an later assignment when we spent 5 years there. For a couple of weeks we stayed in Nax at about 2000mtrs in the valley that runs along with the Rhone in Valais. One afternoon we were sitting on the deck drinking too much wine again and enjoying the amazing views. There is a deafening roar and out of the valley rises an F18 with 3 jet trainers in formation trail. Right in front of us they level out, then an even bigger deafening roar and the F18 disappears down the valley, the three trainers do a tight U turn in the valley and blast off in the other direction. Best personal airshow ever :)

cxorcist

18th Dec 2019, 03:04

It’s a fact that Swiss defense spending as a proportion of the GDP is much more robust than most of its European neighbors, and I admire the country’s high gun ownership rate. 30 F/A-18C is not bad for a small country, assuming proper avionics upgrades and training. The bankers’ hours on alert response is embarrassing, but I understand the budget arguments given the logistics and geography. That said, those are pretty tired Hornets, and the Swiss really do need a modernization plan imo. I would probably buy 12-18 F-35 and transition some Hornets to non-flying spares and/or adversary aircraft. Not cheap, but it’s a force multiplier with stealth technologies and self-escort/strike capabilities. It’s biggest weaknesses are speed and range which isn’t really a problem in Switzerland.

Less Hair

18th Dec 2019, 09:01

The F-35 might be a bit of overkill for just some armed air-to-air surveillance role. Plus they don't want to network with everybody else. Something less fancy will do. They have to ask their voters about budgeting the next fighter and swiss people have said no before even to the "cheap" Gripen.

Mil-26Man

18th Dec 2019, 09:08

They have to ask their voters about budgeting the next fighter and swiss people have said no before even to the "cheap" Gripen.

Last time, the Gripen was subject to something of a smear campaign by its competitors, dubbed the IKEA Fighter among other things. So while the referendum was on the financing of the procurement, it became a de facto vote on the Gripen itself. Next time, the government has changed the rules slightly in that the referendum will be held before a platform selection, and this should remove the incentive for any of the bidders to undermine their competitors (and by extension, the requirement itself).

As has already been said, the Swiss traditionally are very pro-defence and so I would imagine any future plan to buy new fighters would pass.

Pera

18th Dec 2019, 14:01

What a dumb comment! How about the Swiss contribute to the defense of the continent like other Western European nations do? Y’all Euros enjoy the American umbrella over your heads, maybe you could pitch in just a little bit... Or do all those mountains and being a “neutral country” keep you safe? FFS!
Sleep it off mate. Your comment is perhaps the dumbest I've seen on PPRUNE. The USA is buying the OLD swiss jets so they must be OK and the swiss are buying NEW jets.... FFS.

TEEEJ

18th Dec 2019, 15:24

I would probably buy 12-18 F-35 and transition some Hornets to non-flying spares and/or adversary aircraft. Not cheap, but it’s a force multiplier with stealth technologies and self-escort/strike capabilities. It’s biggest weaknesses are speed and range which isn’t really a problem in Switzerland.
The new fighter evaluation process commenced this year. 4 F-35As were deployed to Switzerland.

77tDTPz4Rkc

cInJBx0ugVg

https://dsm.forecastinternational.com/wordpress/2019/04/12/switzerland-begins-evaluation-phase-of-combat-aircraft-competition/

Less Hair

18th Dec 2019, 16:06

Mil-26Man

19th Dec 2019, 05:19

Why didn't the Swiss test the F-35C USN carrier variant but the F-35A Air Force version? They have very high and short fields and limited hangar space inside their tunnel hangars. So a heavy duty gear and foldable wings might come in handy? And the F-35C got reworked and updated.

The F-35C hasn't had any mods that the other variants haven't (none that are applicable to land-based operations at least).

It might be more suitable for some of the reasons you give, but it is more expensive.

Whenurhappy

19th Dec 2019, 06:47

Isn't the buy-back due to FMS and ITAR regulations ie stopping the user from selling the technology to a third party?

Mil-26Man

19th Dec 2019, 07:06

Isn't the buy-back due to FMS and ITAR regulations ie stopping the user from selling the technology to a third party?

The Swiss could sell the F-5s on, but would need US permission. The US doesn't need to buy them back if it has no use for them.

Downwind.Maddl-Land

20th Dec 2019, 14:43

Wouldn't some pre-owned but well looked after AD capable (only) Typhoons fit the bill? Provide some cost recovery for the Home nation to fund some latest-spec Typhoons to replace them......

cxorcist

20th Dec 2019, 21:41

Wouldn't some pre-owned but well looked after AD capable (only) Typhoons fit the bill? Provide some cost recovery for the Home nation to fund some latest-spec Typhoons to replace them......With respect to the Typhoon, which I understand do very well at Red Flag and other exercises, why not get new build F-16s with aesa radar, APG-83, and 30K+ thrust. Other than being twin engine, I’m not aware of much advantage coming from the Typhoon. I’m not saying anything bad about the Typhoon, but why buy used when there is an option to buy new very, very economically?

Less Hair

21st Dec 2019, 11:19

If Norway could operate it's F-16 over mountains and very hostile terrain it might in fact work for the Swiss as well. Plus the Swiss have a history of buying maxed out and perfected end of the line aircraft for some good price. For pure air superiority missions the agile Falcon might still be good enough. However it seems to not be included in their final selection.

Contingency

21st Dec 2019, 15:44

they are most certainly not in poor condition.
I don't know anything about these F-5s but knowing that they were operated and maintained by the Swiss, I could agree with your comment. I worked with an operator in the US for awhile at a time when the company was purchasing several retired DC-9s from the now defunct Swissair. The Swiss aircraft had been so well maintained and in such good shape that the company couldn't understand why the Swiss had disposed of them. We quickly realized that it was the Swiss-quality/culture in action. The guys in Flight Dispatch boasted that the used Swiss aircraft were the most reliable in their fleet.

blind pew

26th Dec 2019, 07:57

Flew them and was shocked at no carry forwards in the tech logs after coming from a flag carrier where the captain spent the best part of ten minutes reading through the tech log in first class with pages of carry forward defects often with no spares available.
Nothing but praise for the Swiss engineers but a pity they were overruled with the entertainment system for the MD11 and outside contractors were used. Their winching the system cables through was the reason for the loss of SR111.