Switzerland has cemented a deal with the United States for the procurement of Lockheed Martin’s advanced PAC-3 Missile Segment Enhancement (MSE) missiles.
This agreement positions Switzerland as the fifteenth nation to integrate the PAC-3 system.
Brenda Davidson, Lockheed Martin’s vice president of PAC-3 Programmes, highlighted the collaborative nature of the agreement in a press release:
“We’re honoured to partner with Switzerland to equip the Swiss Armed Forces with the latest in air and missile defence technology to protect and defend Swiss airspace from incoming threats.”
Davidson’s statement underscored the commitment, adding, “Switzerland joins 14 other nations in strengthening their homeland defence against evolving threats.”
This decision is part of Switzerland’s comprehensive Air2030 programme, designed to fortify its Patriot ground-based air defence system. The PAC-3 MSE promises, say Lockheed, to broaden the nation’s defensive horizons by incorporating a dual-pulse solid rocket motor that enhances both the range and altitude of interception capabilities.
The press release delineates the capabilities of the PAC-3 MSE, describing it as “a high-velocity interceptor that defends against incoming threats, including tactical ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, advanced threats and aircraft.”
USA and Switzerland?
Ummmm I think auto correct has struck – or maybe it is an article about A30!!
The fact that Switzerland wants the 3 system says a lot about how they see threat level evolving.
Hmmm…when even the officially neutral Swiss, surrounded by NATO countries, are beginning to be become serious re GBAD, perhaps HMG should revisit the issue…😉
Switzerland has always operated on the approach of being heavy armed is the best way to stay neutral and prevent people messing with them. So this is aligned with that. They don’t want to be reliant on anyone else for their defence.
Good on them 🇩🇰
So who will they be able to defend against relying totally on themselves I wonder.
It’s not so much about defending, it’s about making them not a target anyone wants to mess with, basically offensive deterence.
Well you mentioned ‘defence’ but I get the concept of the porcupine and it has validity. That said if anyone wanted to take them out they will without surrounding Countries support so it’s a matter of whether an invading Country finds them important enough to make it worth while. The alternative solution for a strategic invader would be to take out those Countries around them knowing that Switzerland at best becomes a totally compliant State if it wishes to remain un-invaded and wants to still do business. Considering its present duplicitous approach to commerce and governance I suspect it would find that acceptable. So it’s be a porcupine, let others do the fighting and if they lose become compliant to the aggressors needs knowing they can become very useful certainly in finance to them and it will be made clear the Dictators themselves personal needs. After all much of their wealth is held there or manipulated from there effectively in a money laundering exercise.
That was inherently the more cynical tone of my previous answer and the fact that on their own they couldn’t actually defend against any serious invader, but that’s not the point here for in reality it shows their thinking is somewhat more lateral in nature that it effectively says doing business with and being useful to an aggressor is a better bet for the latter than that aggressor wasting resources to control them physically and might destroy the very golden goose that they can exploit thereafter.
HMG wont revisit anything, this is the Tory government of Sunak and Hunt, they wont do anything that involves making a sensible decision or investing in UK defences. Instead they much prefer to stick their heads in the sand and make sound bites, if the missile was manufactured by one of Sunak’s or his wife’s companies or investments or friends company you can guarantee that company would receive massive orders. Whether the missile defence system is any good or not is irrelevant.
Intriguing argument and possibly/probably both truthful and merited, but have never understood a rational basis for any intelligent person/politician to embrace that philosophy. If RU/UKR and Israel/Hamas conflicts demonstrate anything, it is that one can either be a pauper or a billionaire and yet be equally dead, if the incoming ordnance lands on one’s coordinates.
In reality, only a secondary issue for Americans (by treaty obligation), but sincerely believe someone should convince HMG to contemplate GBAD somewhat seriously. Surely, there have to be a few ministers who have taken a history course which covered WW II timeframe, and are intelligent enough to draw potential parallels in terms of conceivable strategic bombing campaigns? Certainly a puzzling policy to some non-residents…🤔
👍
I agree, unfortunately theatre level air defence has always been left to the USA and Germany. It’s the main capability gap UK land forces have.
We are participating in the German lead program for missile defence that’s acquiring arrow 3 which should provide some protection to UK mainland. However I doubt we will acquire any missiles directly. Instead probably providing radar coverage.
We always had excellent point defences with rapier and now CAMM.
Agreed though did I not read recently that Rapier fired off 40 odd missiles in the Falklands and hit very little leading to a considerable rethink post that campaign. May have dreamt it but certainly in my mind somewhere.
insufficient numbers though
Sunaks head in the sand 🏖
Indeed I wonder who is going to take out incoming missiles from the high North I fear our brains work only in an East West axis which is naive.
Second that 🤔
Do you mean ‘US’ rather than ‘UK’ in article title?
I think you meant US, not UK!
I guess this is US and Switzerland rather than UK – Potential Typo?
I wish the UK would start taking air defence more seriously. A few QRA Typhoon’s doesn’t cut the mustard any more.
Just been talking about this in another post ,agree another 2 Squadrons of Typhoons would be good and for back up more Sky sabre platforms .I’ve been saying for sometime our Sky Sabre Batteries in Poland should be brought back to the UK now that Poland have Beef up there Defences.However it will be 0 Squadrons of Typhoons coming ,Sky Sabre Batteries coming home or more Batteries maybe. But even if we had platforms available it would be a manpower problem sadly 🙄 🇬🇧
India initially built their Su30MKIs from kits supplied by Sukhoi. However as part of the trade, India insisted on technology transfer. So India now makes parts for their Su30s. Not sure on the percentage. But if India can produce these parts for export, I’m sure Russia will be willing to buy them. Similar with China, with their unlicensed copies of the Su-27, the J11. China have claimed that their latest version the J-16 is better than Russia’s newest Su-35. It must be a massive kick in the face, to go begging to China for spares?
Interesting to know , do like them SU35s mind .😏
🍺
What air defence does the Uk currently have?
Is it just the one battery of Sky sabre?
I am puzzled why we have never invested in a solid air defencev system like most other countries
To be honest it’s not really well knowing how many Sky Sabre Batteries the UK have .But I think it’s a case of been able to count on one hand.Some are in Poland ,at least one in the Falklands island’s.There was a plan to invest in a new Missile defence system when Blood Hound was been with drawer from service .But the wall came down in Germany and money took away from defence spending so we were left with the short range Ripper for many years .But it’s been a bad decision to be left with with nothing for AD till now one thing I am sure of now Ripper has gone we won’t have Sky Sabre Batteries in the numbers we had Ripper. 👍
We have no UK based and dedicated GBAD whatsoever.
We do, however, have a comprehensive wider AD system covering the UKADR, and it is being expanded and improved as we speak, comprising aircraft, ground based radar sites ( known as RRH’s Remote Radar Heads ), linked to other sensors, ships, and C3 systems linking it all together.
Our forces have been expeditionary in nature since the Cold Wars end, so it was not seen as an area of concern or priority.
The MoD’s own DIS ( now renamed DI ) has threats and assessments orgs who monitor this and advice ministers accordingly.
I for one, having understood this position for many years, now have changed my view, that a UK based GBAD system is indeed desirable given the wide use of Russian missiles.
On Sky Sabre, we have more than one Battery. We have 4 Batteries, grouped in 16 Regiment RA. They, like the other regular AD Reg of the British Army, 12 RA, which has SHORAD systems, are tasked with AD of the “Field Army” that being the British Army deployed in the field on operations, primarily 3 Division.
So the direct defence of the UK is not their main task. They could do it if necessary. For example, AD elements deployed for both the 2012 Olympics and the G7 meeting in Cornwall.
But if they did that on a wider basis it leaves the army bare.
Hope this helps.
With out a doubt our Artillery really needs to grow not just with Gun platforms but also AD however I am a little on the fence by all means give the Army AD for the Battlefield ,but when it comes to UKADR should this not go over to RAF maybe DM 🤔
Yes, it should. That’s the thing. It’s needed. Who pays? What budget? Which people? What goes to pay for it?
It’s always priorities and robbing Peter pay Paul.
Airborne’s RAF Reg idea seems most likely as they did it fairly recently with the Rapier Sqns in the Cold War.
🍺 DM
16 Regt is essentially entirely tasked with the defence of the Falkland islands with whatever is left over (from a total of four batteries each of two troops each with three launch vehicles with limited autonomy, plus a Giraffe radar and fire control vehicle) available for contingencies. Only Starstreak is tasked with supporting the field army.
https://www.raf.mod.uk/our-organisation/units/air-historical-branch/second-world-war-thematic-studies/ground-based-air-defences/
Morning.
Yes, those troops are called Fire Groups apparently. 3 launchers, 1 FC, 1 radar per FG.
I have read one Battery of the 4 is rouled to the Falklands/ Poland deployment, 1 FG each.
Interesting link, I’ll study it when i can get on a PC.
It looks like the individual TELs have the EO tracker balls on masts. It would be interesting to know to what extent they can engage autonomously. Giving each one an ADAD would have helped as whilst the mast mounted sight is great for engagement it is less than optimal for search. I’d also like to know to what extent the networking of what was meant to be a “sensor agnostic weapon” has progressed.
All questions beyond my knowledge.
Do 12 RA still have ADADs?
And how does LEAPP with 49 Battery feed into this?
Good questions!
Not never. The UK used to have quite a lot of Bloodhound & Thunderbird area defence SAMs. Bloodhound was in service 1958-1991, & Thunderbird 1959-77. Bloodhound was exported to a few countries.
Not sure what the problem is? Put a few Rock Ape gunners around the perimeter fence at Lossie with SA80s and GPMGs
Lol. They are already up there.
I wonder if the US expect to require permission before any of these are actually used in a conflict.