F18 being a navy fighter it has enforced structure. It's also a very agile plane. But to be honest I don't really know. I know why the F16 wasn't chosen but I don't why the M2000 lost to the F18. Maybe that's because at that time the f18 had the best radar but I'm not sure.
Sur le plan opérationnel, la synthèse des listes de rang des 7 critères principaux d'évaluation donne en tête, après pondération, le F/-18 C/D EPE, suivi de très près par le F-16 C puis par le F/A-18 C/D. On notera que les résultats de l’avion F/A-18 C/D EPE (qui n'existe pas encore) sont extrapolés de ceux du F/A-18 C/D. Le F-16 C n'est en tête que dans le critère numéro 1 (capacité de police du ciel), grâce à ses performances de vol imbattables. Viennent ensuite le JAS-39 Gripen et loin derrière, le Mirage 2000 S. Le Gripen n'a pu être évalué que sur des bases théoriques puisqu'il ne vole pas encore. Malgré son système de commandes de vol exceptionnel, le Mirage 2000 s'avère être un avion en fin de génération. Son potentiel de développement est jugé médiocre et ses performances de vol sont largement inférieures à celles des avions américains, en raison d'un excédent de puissance insuffisant. A la demande du commandant des Troupes d'aviation et de DCA, le commandant de corps Walter Dürig, le Mirage III S (dans sa configuration C 70) et le F-5 E Tiger II sont soumis à la même analyse. Les résultats sont éloquents: le Mirage s'avère de 306 % inférieur au F/A-18 C/D EPE et le Tiger de 292 %! C'est un saut de deux générations qui est fait entre ces avions et ceux qui font l'objet de l'évaluation. 8 L’objectif de l’évaluation préalable est de réduire la palette des candidats à deux appareils. En conséquence le directeur de projet Opérations propose de soumettre à une évaluation finale les avions F-16 C/D et F/A-18 C/D EPE. Si ce dernier devait ne pas être disponible en temps opportun, il faudrait le remplacer par sa version de base F/A-18 C/D. Afin de s'assurer que les caractéristiques appréciées en vol, en particulier au niveau des radars (sensibilité aux échos terrestres) ne soient pas altérées par la topographie de notre pays, il est jugé indispensable que l'évaluation finale ait lieu en Suisse. Ce qui représentera un fait historique, car ce sera la première fois que deux avions américains seront mis en concurrence l'un contre l'autre en-dehors de leur territoire national. Il est primordial de noter que le F-16 C/D et le F/A-18 C/D (respectivement le F/A-18 C/D EPE) sortent également vainqueurs de l'évaluation préalable des quatre autres Directions (technique, logistique, commerce et Etat-major général), sur la base de critères d'appréciation totalement différents.
On the operational level, the synthesis of the rank lists of the 7 main evaluation criteria gives first, after weighting, the F/-18 C/D EPE, followed very closely by the F-16 C then by the F/ A-18 C/D. It should be noted that the results of the F/A-18 C/D EPE aircraft (which does not yet exist) are extrapolated from those of the F/A-18 C/D. The F-16C only leads in criterion number 1 (sky policing capability), thanks to its unbeatable flight performance. Then comes the JAS-39 Gripen and far behind, the Mirage 2000 S. The Gripen could only be evaluated on theoretical bases since it is not yet flying. Despite its exceptional flight control system, the Mirage 2000 proves to be an end-of-generation aircraft. Its development potential is considered mediocre and its flight performance is much lower than that of American aircraft, due to insufficient excess power. At the request of the commander of the Air Force and DCA troops, the corps commander Walter Dürig, the Mirage III S (in its C 70 configuration) and the F-5 E Tiger II are subjected to the same analysis. The results speak for themselves: the Mirage is 306% inferior to the F/A-18 C/D EPE and the Tiger 292%! It is a leap of two generations which is made between these planes and those which are the subject of the evaluation. 8 The objective of the preliminary evaluation is to narrow the palette of candidates to two devices. Consequently, the Operations Project Manager proposes to submit the F-16 C/D and F/A-18 C/D EPE aircraft to a final evaluation. If the latter were not to be available in a timely manner, it would have to be replaced by its basic version F/A-18 C/D. In order to ensure that the characteristics appreciated in flight, in particular at the level of the radars (sensitivity to terrestrial echoes) are not altered by the topography of our country, it is considered essential that the final evaluation takes place in Switzerland. This will represent a historical fact, because it will be the first time that two American planes will be put in competition against each other outside their national territory. It is essential to note that the F-16 C/D and the F/A-18 C/D (respectively the F/A-18 C/D EPE) also emerge victorious from the preliminary evaluation of the four other Directorates (technical , logistics, trade and General Staff), on the basis of totally different assessment criteria.
@@KATAERO1 Boeing F/A-18 Hornet C/D Combat aircraft Manufacturer: McDonnell Douglas Corporation (Boeing) Cooperation: Northrop Corporation Commenced service: 1997 Number of aircraft procured: 34 Number of aircraft still in service: 30 (as per September 2016) Registration: Boeing F/A-18C Hornet: J-5001 till J-5026 (26 aircraft) Boeing F/A-18D Hornet: J-5231 till J-5238 (8 aircraft) The main reason the Swiss Air Force choose the F/A-18 Hornet after a thorough evaluation was the top performance of this aircraft. The Hornet has a very short reaction time from its alert position, very good aeroplane performance and flying characteristics and is able to accelerate extremely fast, reaching sonic speed within seconds. Its extremely good manoeuvrability in curvilinear flight is important in aerial combat in visual flight conditions and is proven to be of the best worldwide. Its high performance radar allows the F/A-18 to detect and simultaneously engage multiple low flying targets with its long-range guided missiles, by day and night and under bad weather conditions. The Hornet is also well tested in electronic warfare. This aircraft, developed to operate from aircraft carriers, is very well suited for our mountainous regions and narrow valleys as well as our short runways. From October 1996 on, the hornets left the assembly bays at Emmen. Delivery was completed by the end of 1999. Squadron 17 was the first front squadron to retrain to the Hornet from June 1997 on, followed in the spring of 1998 by Squadron 18. Last but not least, retraining was concluded by Dübendorf based Squadron 11, in 1999. These three squadrons are part of the Surveillance Wing (Ueberwachungsgeschwader).
Danke für die unvergessliche Nostalgie welche uns alle in jungen Jahre immer wieder in Staunen versesetzt hat.
MEGA super gemacht. WOW. Wir haben die Besten Piloten der Welt.
I remember those very well
Excelentíssimo muy bom
Amo meu pais
Wunderschön....ich Vermisse Sie....
sublime, forcemment sublime !!
How come the Swiss Air Force did not replace its beloved Mirage III with Mirage 2000, but with F-18 C/D?
F18 being a navy fighter it has enforced structure. It's also a very agile plane. But to be honest I don't really know. I know why the F16 wasn't chosen but I don't why the M2000 lost to the F18. Maybe that's because at that time the f18 had the best radar but I'm not sure.
Sur le plan opérationnel, la synthèse des listes de rang des 7 critères principaux d'évaluation donne en tête, après pondération, le F/-18 C/D EPE, suivi de très près par le F-16 C puis par le F/A-18 C/D. On notera que les résultats de l’avion F/A-18 C/D EPE (qui n'existe pas encore) sont extrapolés de ceux du F/A-18 C/D. Le F-16 C n'est en tête que dans le critère numéro 1 (capacité de police du ciel), grâce à ses performances de vol imbattables. Viennent ensuite le JAS-39 Gripen et loin derrière, le Mirage 2000 S. Le Gripen n'a pu être évalué que sur des bases théoriques puisqu'il ne vole pas encore. Malgré son système de commandes de vol exceptionnel, le Mirage 2000 s'avère être un avion en fin de génération. Son potentiel de développement est jugé médiocre et ses performances de vol sont largement inférieures à celles des avions américains, en raison d'un excédent de puissance insuffisant.
A la demande du commandant des Troupes d'aviation et de DCA, le commandant de corps Walter Dürig, le Mirage III S (dans sa configuration C 70) et le F-5 E Tiger II sont soumis à la même analyse. Les résultats sont éloquents: le Mirage s'avère de 306 % inférieur au F/A-18 C/D EPE et le Tiger de 292 %! C'est un saut de deux générations qui est fait entre ces avions et ceux qui font l'objet de l'évaluation.
8
L’objectif de l’évaluation préalable est de réduire la palette des candidats à deux appareils. En conséquence le directeur de projet Opérations propose de soumettre à une évaluation finale les avions F-16 C/D et F/A-18 C/D EPE. Si ce dernier devait ne pas être disponible en temps opportun, il faudrait le remplacer par sa version de base F/A-18 C/D. Afin de s'assurer que les caractéristiques appréciées en vol, en particulier au niveau des radars (sensibilité aux échos terrestres) ne soient pas altérées par la topographie de notre pays, il est jugé indispensable que l'évaluation finale ait lieu en Suisse. Ce qui représentera un fait historique, car ce sera la première fois que deux avions américains seront mis en concurrence l'un contre l'autre en-dehors de leur territoire national.
Il est primordial de noter que le F-16 C/D et le F/A-18 C/D (respectivement le F/A-18 C/D EPE) sortent également vainqueurs de l'évaluation préalable des quatre autres Directions (technique, logistique, commerce et Etat-major général), sur la base de critères d'appréciation totalement différents.
On the operational level, the synthesis of the rank lists of the 7 main evaluation criteria gives first, after weighting, the F/-18 C/D EPE, followed very closely by the F-16 C then by the F/ A-18 C/D. It should be noted that the results of the F/A-18 C/D EPE aircraft (which does not yet exist) are extrapolated from those of the F/A-18 C/D. The F-16C only leads in criterion number 1 (sky policing capability), thanks to its unbeatable flight performance. Then comes the JAS-39 Gripen and far behind, the Mirage 2000 S. The Gripen could only be evaluated on theoretical bases since it is not yet flying. Despite its exceptional flight control system, the Mirage 2000 proves to be an end-of-generation aircraft. Its development potential is considered mediocre and its flight performance is much lower than that of American aircraft, due to insufficient excess power.
At the request of the commander of the Air Force and DCA troops, the corps commander Walter Dürig, the Mirage III S (in its C 70 configuration) and the F-5 E Tiger II are subjected to the same analysis. The results speak for themselves: the Mirage is 306% inferior to the F/A-18 C/D EPE and the Tiger 292%! It is a leap of two generations which is made between these planes and those which are the subject of the evaluation.
8
The objective of the preliminary evaluation is to narrow the palette of candidates to two devices. Consequently, the Operations Project Manager proposes to submit the F-16 C/D and F/A-18 C/D EPE aircraft to a final evaluation. If the latter were not to be available in a timely manner, it would have to be replaced by its basic version F/A-18 C/D. In order to ensure that the characteristics appreciated in flight, in particular at the level of the radars (sensitivity to terrestrial echoes) are not altered by the topography of our country, it is considered essential that the final evaluation takes place in Switzerland. This will represent a historical fact, because it will be the first time that two American planes will be put in competition against each other outside their national territory.
It is essential to note that the F-16 C/D and the F/A-18 C/D (respectively the F/A-18 C/D EPE) also emerge victorious from the preliminary evaluation of the four other Directorates (technical , logistics, trade and General Staff), on the basis of totally different assessment criteria.
@@philippezbinden8676 Wow, thank you for your thoughtful analysis!
@@KATAERO1
Boeing F/A-18 Hornet C/D
Combat aircraft
Manufacturer: McDonnell Douglas Corporation (Boeing)
Cooperation: Northrop Corporation
Commenced service: 1997
Number of aircraft procured: 34
Number of aircraft still in service: 30 (as per September 2016)
Registration:
Boeing F/A-18C Hornet: J-5001 till J-5026 (26 aircraft)
Boeing F/A-18D Hornet: J-5231 till J-5238 (8 aircraft)
The main reason the Swiss Air Force choose the F/A-18 Hornet after a thorough evaluation was the top performance of this aircraft. The Hornet has a very short reaction time from its alert position, very good aeroplane performance and flying characteristics and is able to accelerate extremely fast, reaching sonic speed within seconds. Its extremely good manoeuvrability in curvilinear flight is important in aerial combat in visual flight conditions and is proven to be of the best worldwide.
Its high performance radar allows the F/A-18 to detect and simultaneously engage multiple low flying targets with its long-range guided missiles, by day and night and under bad weather conditions. The Hornet is also well tested in electronic warfare. This aircraft, developed to operate from aircraft carriers, is very well suited for our mountainous regions and narrow valleys as well as our short runways.
From October 1996 on, the hornets left the assembly bays at Emmen. Delivery was completed by the end of 1999. Squadron 17 was the first front squadron to retrain to the Hornet from June 1997 on, followed in the spring of 1998 by Squadron 18. Last but not least, retraining was concluded by Dübendorf based Squadron 11, in 1999. These three squadrons are part of the Surveillance Wing (Ueberwachungsgeschwader).
5:37 ..und täglich grüsst das Murmeltier :-)
Danke villmaal für dä superfilm schad sind die ziite verbii😫
Gut das der Mirage Verein in Buochs eine RS und S erhällt.
Wow
Amo meu pais