I worked in Advanced Projects at BAe Warton at the time the Piranha was proposed (early 1980s) and we assessed it but it was always going to be a very limited aircraft because of its small size and limited power (we looked at the Adour reheated version). Small size = limited fuel and range etc. Maybe OK for short range work in Switzerland but too small and limited for general use by others. In the end we opted for P106 with the RB199 which influenced the JAS39 Gripen (pronounced Griffon). Some of our designers went to Norköping to work with Saab on that. In parallel, HAL in India started working on the similar LCA (now the Tejas).
From what I've read, the RAF rejected the P.106 in favor of what would eventually evolve into the Eurofighter Typhoon as being "half the effectiveness of the two-engined aircraft at two-thirds of the cost". Though given comparisons of the Typhoon vs the Gripen, I think the RAF probably got that backwards. BTW, when it comes to lightweight fighters with an Adour turbofan...did BAE ever give any consideration of adding reheat to the Hawk 200? Or would have been pointless without also completely redesigning the wing for higher speed, thus giving up on the advantage of being a low-cost modification of the Hawk trainer?
I could see this prototype becoming a parasite fighter for something like the proposed F-777(or 767 I can't remember) airborne aircraft carrier, or light attack roles.
I have been in Switzetland during mobilization in the 1970s. Quite fascinating to see the barriers come down on a motorway tunnel, and then see F5s roll out of cover; tanks too.
There is an exersice again (first since the cold war ended) when they block a highway in sarganserland to land with fighter jets on it. Not sure about the date but its in 2023.
@@Slithermotion it used to be an annual thing it seemed. I remember seeing it year after year, always impressive. One year in particular it started when we were ascending into the Bernese Oberland, and then suddely, the traffic came to a halt, as jets emerged from the tunnel ahead, taxied on the opposite carriage way and then took off. Another time, we were sat having lunch in Interlaken, when the sirens sounded. It seemed within minutes, the square was full of armed troops, later followed by the rumble of tanks. All exciting stuff when you are a kid. The last time I saw it, I was on leave from the British Army, on holiday with my parents in the same area. That must have been 78 or 79. I went again in the early 80s with a girlfriend, but no mobilisation that time.
I did my service as a Swiss citizen on the Leopard 2A4. What a blast, pun intended. Today, when I'm out driving in my car, I'll occasionally drive roads and highways that I've driven on in a Tank and have a silent chuckle with the picture of young and fit me in a tank in my head.
@@tigersharkzh indeed, i'm the same. I found a video on RUclips purely by chance of me in Sarajevo in 95, acting as a NATO spokesman. I wasnt a spring chicken then, but i still had hair and was fit lol. I show grandchildren and they are shocked lol.
@@stop-the-greed Heh.... At possibly the last 'real' Arishow at Cranfield 💥 There was a privately owned Folland Gnat ..... *DAMN those things are close to the ground on 'stumpy legs'* The Pilot wanted to put on a good show and rotated hard way before he had airspeed. Consequently the jet nozle was a Gnat's whisker from the asphalt ..... *Blew a trench along an embarrassingly long bit of runway* To be fair, the surface was not 'pristine' before hand 'though, but the trench was a new feature. 💥Before the muppets entrusted to run an aeronautical University flogged off huge tracts of runway to Nissan's design team ! Years later they ordered all Flying Schools to vacate. Incredible really.
I occasionally see the Indian Ajeet, a Gnat derivative: at the air museum, where I do volunteer work. It Is small. And it's a concept that might come back. It apparently worked well. Currently, the US is developing 6 new AA missiles!! Most with ultra long ranges, or are smaller so more can be carried, internally. Ultra long range Hits are being done. (More then One hundred miles)
@Girder3 Yeah I remember that, and it variations from old magazines and a Jane's All the World's Aircraft book from the late 80s early 90s Fascinating little aircraft/project
Very interesting, I had never heard of this little plane before. Check out the drawings a little closer (5:43)...specifically the location and position of the nose gear strut with the gear down. The pilot could have an uncomfortable surprise if he has a very hard landing.
I believe they planned to buy Gripen but the purchase needed to be voted on by the general public in a referendum, leading to some rather peculiar general advertising. Unfortunately the people felt the value wasn’t proven so the referendum went against SAAB in 2014
Piranha has nothing to do with Grippen E decision. piranha was a paper airplane, without industry support. look-up FFA's P-16 for the last proper fighter airplane! (father of Lear-Jet)
cause by popolar referendum. we recently voted for purchasing new fighter jets (without knowing which aircraft we were going to buy, the choise was between: rafale, gripen, f-35, typhoon, super hornet). then the government choose the f-35, which we were all against to. so it was made a petition to reject it... but after the right number of signs was collected the government just ignored it
@@charlesmoss8119 The reason for the "no" at the ballot was imho that the swiss governemnt back then managed to make one hell of a mess of the eveluation process and gave the voters the impression that they themselfes didn't realy know what they wanted. So, the "no" was imo the voters simply telling the govt. "make up your bloody mind, THEN come ask for our aproval". The hair-tight "yes" in the vote for the F-35 was imo due to this aircraft being the least favourite in the public eye and the govt. not realy explaing - for whatever reason - their descision in a way the voters could understand.
i like the idea. if one takes size shape and application into todays perspective, this design would make a great autonomous wingman like planned for future projects.
Another interesting and obscure aircraft....now if only someone would do a video on the Swiss EKW C-36. Thanks for the information on something new to me.
It does my heart good to see an airplane so rare that a radio controlled model had to represent it for Ed's video! Hey Ed- if you'd ever like to do a video on the Budd RB-1 Conestoga or a Vought V-143 fighter, I have radio controlled models of BOTH! :D
Yeah the only time I've seen one of these or an f5 it's been in my own little hanger....an boy do they shift an on high rates they actually do roll like drill bits it's nuts
Wow never heard of this plane. As a point defence fighter, for the small size of their nation, this solution seems ideal. It would have great value intercepting and defending against big lumbering incoming bombers and transport aircraft to slow down any invasion. Even if it had limited capabilities against enemy fighter planes, it could at least provide some defence.
I had to pull out my copy of Future Fighters by Bill Gunston dated 1984. The Piranha is listed as a study that commenced in 1975 with a market size projected of 3,000-4,000 aircraft. It was “the first close-coupled canard agile fighter proposal to be drawn up” (in 1978). 🤔
@@konnorj6442 Hi Konnor, I don’t think we are allowed to post PDF’s on RUclips and I think email addresses are blocked. Otherwise if you can get your email address to me I’d be happy to send you a copy.
So Ed how about a video on that interesting looking Swiss fighter you mention at 2:20 the EKW-36 ? I'm not sure how good that was as a fighter but it sure looks different with that twin tail configuration. We don't see that on single seat fighters of that era. Or is that even a single seater because that cockpit looks like it can house a second guy !
C36 was a 2-seater. It's not so much a fighter as a general combat aircraft with light bombing capability and was later converted for target towing. The pure fighter role was filled by MS405/406 and Me109E3.
It very much reminds me of former Yugoslavia's "Novi Avion" project. It also proposed single and twin engine variants, canards, single and two seater, ... also never happend
Next thursday, the last ever flight of a Swiss Mirage III will take place, in the early afternoon. Takeoff from Payerne, and overflight of Buochs airport. If you're interested look online for more info.
Wow, I think that one would have been a great aircraft. Although it looks a lot like the Gripen, I think a more apt comparison would be with the Viggen.
Another great video Ed! Just my laymans analysis, the proposed later variants, the Type 4/5 (dual engines) and the Type 6 with Tornado engine. Given the size of the aircraft, I'd expect the range to be extremely limited. Sure, Switzerland you could go across supersonic in 5 minutes, but I'd be surprised that if it could maintain supersonic for anything more than a few seconds. I'd put in the same category as the Me-163, as far as combat effectiveness. It would have one chance. two if lucky!
An excellent video, as always, but I feel compelled to raise one important point; since the Piranha had a fixed, shoulder-mounted canard with trailing-edge flaps (which would seriously limit the pilot's rearward view in combat), it probably had more in common with the Viggen than the Gripen. Like other modern canard-equipped fighters (Rafale, Typhoon, J-10, J-20 etc) the SAAB Gripen features an all-moving canard for pitch control, which it can also use as a brake during landing.
Folland Gnat comes to mind, a light fighter and advanced trainer concept ahead of its time with similar dimensions to the Piranha but 20 years sooner, also with 449 built (including licenses) you could say it was a success.
Poland also had their go at this concept during the 80's and 90's. Look up PZL-230 Skorpion. Pretty nifty looking aircraft, if I can say so, but ultimately ended up the same as the Piranha.
Indeed. Only last week one of these new Asian fighters reminded me very much of the Piranha. Have a look at the HAL Tejas Mk.2 which is projected to get canards added. It’s almost as if the people at HAL took a very look back at this project!
Thank you so much for including this aspect of the fighter aircraft, as used by nations with vast fortunes to waste. It has been very clear since the advent of the F-5 and the F-16, that when deployed in regions such the European theatre, where often the boundaries of a nation are small, the kind of ranges and facilities of aerial refuelling used by the superpowers is completely redundant. The F-16 is certainly a big hit in Europe's NATO partners for this reason. The associated prestige of running a fleet of F-15s or Stealth aircraft, becomes but an attention seeking formula; as much as having a garage of supercars at one's disposal. Certainly nice work if you can get it, with a diminishing number of countries which are able, for reasons of practicality and cost, to get it. The more organised 3 tier nations which are prepared to employ the Russian supply chain of MIG's and Sukhoi aircraft at diminished cost but larger quantities, can presume an attritable air force, where the pilots are the core item of value rather than the hardware. A consideration held dear by the Russians going back as far as the days of the Soviet. How appropriate this strategy is, has never been tested in countries such as India or Indonesia, yet might still hold true? I would ask if a force of 350 aircraft of lessor provenance facing a force of 50 gold-plated wunderkind, would make a respectable showing of themselves in a full air combat environment? The high churn rate of fighters in inventory now represents the type of idle, once the domain of the super-maxi racing yachts, as toys for the super rich. Leaving some nations inevitably by the wayside and able to rely on ground to air defensive systems exclusively. Hardly the horror that the large manufacturers may make it out to be. For they are clearly self-serving, with a tremendous investment within the paradigm of their own devising.
Could you do one on the MBB Lampyridae? It is weird that none of the military history focused channels ever made a video about what would have been the first stealth fighter.
It just reminds me of how many aircraft, concepts, and strategies during the cold war were developed, built, rethought, and discarded. Either because technology rendered them useless or strategic necessities changed. The cold War was the ultimate 4-D chess game for a war that was never played but well thought out.
I know for a fact that there's a Russian project for a light fighter (even had a scale mock-up), but that one takes the cake! I also like the name given
ED- Can you please do an OV-1 Mohawk video? I'm building a large (8-foot) radio controlled model and I need something to watch while I build! :D Please :D
i think its a good concept for small countrys when cheap and easy to maintain , reminds me of Folland Gnat (production aircraft) and Helwan Ha-300 the Egyptian "Messerschmitt" ( only Prototyps)
its purpose would have been to defend Switzerland against incoming enemy bombers and transports. Switzerland geography would make an invasion of the country by land difficult. It would at least in part have to come by air transport and that's where this fighter could nail the enemy.
Ambrosini Sagittarius jet aircraft made of wood (i know it’s sort of off topic) think it’s italian but I could be wrong has a swept wing and the prototype at least was made of WOOD!
Engine with a cockpit and wings. As a design exercise it would be interesting to see how far this concept could go. All carbon fiber to limit weight? The Horton's plywood jet was limited by its glue. Now that we're building high rise buildings with engineered wood fiber could this be an option?
This wonderful plane is still worth building .... Kind of like a Folland Gnat on steroids ... Better , Lightweight , Modular Avionics and Construction ... New powerful Powerplant , BVR missiles Air-to-Air refuelling capacity , low cost would make this an extreamly potent platform .. Seriously worth buildeing .... +++
perhaps they should have used the wing and flight surfaces with a wide exec body as the lear jet had been developed on the FFA P-16 wing and flight surfaces, then the swiss aircraft industry might have been able to complete the project and defered costly delopment.
If it was being developed in the early 70s, then it had a good chance to actually be produced as there was basically a conflict that was being actively fought or heating up - by the 80s, well, shit has hit the fan but the writing was on the wall by then; then the Iron Curtain fell which nailed the fate for this aircraft.
The idea of the light fighter is still around and highly applicable even in the Navy as the High-Low mix of force composition. The F-15 and F-16, the F-22 and F-35, the upcoming 6th-generation fighters and their unmanned wingmen (which are far less high-performing and cheaper) for the near future.
Its development (or lack of) reminds me of NA project from former Yugoslavia. NA simply meant Novi Avion (New Aircraft). It was supposed to look a lot like Rafale, but with one French engine. Several air tunnel testings were taken on model, a cockpit was designed and then - Yugoslavia broke up, civil war... And it all went forgotten...
The CAC CA-31 went down the Trainer path but during development they realised its potential as a light fighter/striker. Too bad this suffered a similar fate
Neat looking jet. I don't think it would've been all that practical for any other country aside from Switzerland. Had it been just a bit bigger, then perhaps.
2:51 Motorway to Zurich, check. Rubber neckers on the bridge check. squaddie + stg 57 check. Hawker Hunter, check. Are they about to mud test the Hunter?
Beyond the technical viability of the piranha, Arms producing countries typically want arms products to be sellable to other nations. Given Switzerland’s curious contract requirements on their arms used by their customers (ala Gepard ammo), I don’t see another nation seeking buying this plane. Though Switzerland’s historic financial “flexibility” may make the country atypical in that it may do without foreign buyers.
Most arms producing countries include restrictions on the resale or transfer of their weaponry to third parties, that is not something that is peculiar to the Swiss. What sets the Swiss apart is the strict and rigid legal framework that guides their national policy of strict neutrality. Unlike for example Sweden there are no legal short cuts or tools available to the government which allows for a more flexible policy when needed. So you can buy Swiss weapons just fine as long as you only use them yourself, that is after all covered by the contract. Just don't expect to be allowed to export them elsewhere or for the Swiss to deliver more once you are at war.
The RC pusher prop jet was flown without modern day model gyros and jet engines. That makes flying them a real workout. Now if a real jet engine and gyros were installed it would fly entirely different, stability and power would be a lot better and not suffer from torque caused by the propeller. That was an old movie. Video?
Look, we had these Tunnels where we kept our planes. How hard do you think this would have been to enlarge these tunnels. We needed a low, narrow, short aircraft. In the 70's the Swiss Air Force evaluated the Corsair and the Tiger. The Corsair was rejected simply on the ground of being too high on the tail end. BTW, these tunnels were built in the years between the wars, so were in a size to fit the piston powered aircraft of those years. We were lucky that things like the Vampire, Venom and the Hunter and Tiger actually fit in there.
Actually after the WW2, the aircraft industry all over Europe was sabotaged financially (Switzerland possible is the most notable example) in order to keep the military development under check and balances in the geopolitical game. Two more aircrafts (delta configurations and subsonic) were also produced for research purposes but the cost issue never convinced the militia here about the abandonment of the projects.
@@KarloSiljeg-ci6wg Good day Karlo. Actually they allow the advancement of science. I know; I invented an aircraft engine and registered it under this name in patents in 2012. They don't allow production of such things in Europe unless are under their supervision. P.S. And they are officially not interested in such things. For reasons that are very obvious and I will not mention.
I expect we'll see drones--perhaps AI-controlled drones--like this in the near future. And that idea makes me think of the Peacemaker from _Deal of the Century_ and that didn't exactly go well.
I love light fighters like the Folland Gnat etc and I think they should still be used and would love to see modern cheap mass produced light fighters in Ukraine etc.
@@jonsouth1545 after what happened with Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria and Libya you're still looking to pump weapons into war zones?! Perhaps you still believe American military intelligence?!
Producing a fighter jet like this aint cheap! Switzerland, Sweden and Japan should done a joint venture for at new light fighter. small countries with a demand for small but many reliable fighters who bring a might punch to the air to air fighting!
Afterthought: If you saw these tunnels today, which you can, with me, you would not believe that we fit 24 Hawker Hunters in there, and switched them from front to back to front for servicing and refueling.
"The piranha could be smaller but retain comparable combat capability to existing aircraft". Not the first to try the impossible. If you measure combat capability by a single attribute such as speed or maneuverability it's possible to build a stripped down sports car of an aircraft, but it will not be a very useful fighter in large scale real world operations. One early jet-age lightweight fighter was the F-104. Kelly Johnson wanted to buck the trend to every heavier fighters and go Mach 2 with the smallest and simplest fighter possible. As a result it had tremendous performance and was awesome to fly. But even though it got stretched after the porotype flew it was never capable enough for U.S. Air Force needs. It was successful in the export market for the same reason light fighters usually are, which is that cost outweighs capability. In other words it is more important to show the world you have a somewhat capable high performance combat aircraft than to have a more capable one that you can’t afford. The successful F-16 and F-18 both grew out of a lightweight fighter prototypes, but the operative word is grew. They ended up being enlarged to make space for the fuel and systems needed for useful combat operations. The fact that these relatively small aircraft became so useful was made possible by continued miniaturization of the electronics needed to support operations other than visual combat. Size is relative, and miniaturization has made aircraft of this size the new standard for short range fighters.
I worked in Advanced Projects at BAe Warton at the time the Piranha was proposed (early 1980s) and we assessed it but it was always going to be a very limited aircraft because of its small size and limited power (we looked at the Adour reheated version). Small size = limited fuel and range etc. Maybe OK for short range work in Switzerland but too small and limited for general use by others. In the end we opted for P106 with the RB199 which influenced the JAS39 Gripen (pronounced Griffon). Some of our designers went to Norköping to work with Saab on that. In parallel, HAL in India started working on the similar LCA (now the Tejas).
From what I've read, the RAF rejected the P.106 in favor of what would eventually evolve into the Eurofighter Typhoon as being "half the effectiveness of the two-engined aircraft at two-thirds of the cost". Though given comparisons of the Typhoon vs the Gripen, I think the RAF probably got that backwards.
BTW, when it comes to lightweight fighters with an Adour turbofan...did BAE ever give any consideration of adding reheat to the Hawk 200? Or would have been pointless without also completely redesigning the wing for higher speed, thus giving up on the advantage of being a low-cost modification of the Hawk trainer?
I could see this prototype becoming a parasite fighter for something like the proposed F-777(or 767 I can't remember) airborne aircraft carrier, or light attack roles.
@@DIREWOLFx75 did you just correct an actual expert that worked on the aircraft
And now the Tejas Mk. 2 will get canards. Guess of what that reminded me only last week.
I own a copy of From Spitfire To Eurofighter by Roy Boot. Fascinating stuff. I assume you where colleagues?
I have been in Switzetland during mobilization in the 1970s. Quite fascinating to see the barriers come down on a motorway tunnel, and then see F5s roll out of cover; tanks too.
There is an exersice again (first since the cold war ended) when they block a highway in sarganserland to land with fighter jets on it.
Not sure about the date but its in 2023.
@@Slithermotion it used to be an annual thing it seemed. I remember seeing it year after year, always impressive. One year in particular it started when we were ascending into the Bernese Oberland, and then suddely, the traffic came to a halt, as jets emerged from the tunnel ahead, taxied on the opposite carriage way and then took off. Another time, we were sat having lunch in Interlaken, when the sirens sounded. It seemed within minutes, the square was full of armed troops, later followed by the rumble of tanks. All exciting stuff when you are a kid. The last time I saw it, I was on leave from the British Army, on holiday with my parents in the same area. That must have been 78 or 79. I went again in the early 80s with a girlfriend, but no mobilisation that time.
I did my service as a Swiss citizen on the Leopard 2A4. What a blast, pun intended. Today, when I'm out driving in my car, I'll occasionally drive roads and highways that I've driven on in a Tank and have a silent chuckle with the picture of young and fit me in a tank in my head.
@@tigersharkzh indeed, i'm the same. I found a video on RUclips purely by chance of me in Sarajevo in 95, acting as a NATO spokesman. I wasnt a spring chicken then, but i still had hair and was fit lol. I show grandchildren and they are shocked lol.
This is one of several channels I follow which takes the intriguing footnotes of history and fills in the missing information.
Good video. The ALR Piranha is about the same size as the Folland Gnat (1959-79).
the Gnat performed well in Idians Hands during conflict with Pakistan but take a look at Helwan Ha-300, sadly they built only few prototyps
The first red arrow team ...good Old gnats
@@stop-the-greed Heh.... At possibly the last 'real' Arishow at Cranfield 💥
There was a privately owned Folland Gnat ..... *DAMN those things are close to the ground on 'stumpy legs'*
The Pilot wanted to put on a good show and rotated hard way before he had airspeed.
Consequently the jet nozle was a Gnat's whisker from the asphalt .....
*Blew a trench along an embarrassingly long bit of runway*
To be fair, the surface was not 'pristine' before hand 'though, but the trench was a new feature.
💥Before the muppets entrusted to run an aeronautical University flogged off huge tracts of runway to Nissan's design team !
Years later they ordered all Flying Schools to vacate.
Incredible really.
I occasionally see the Indian Ajeet, a Gnat derivative: at the air museum, where I do volunteer work. It Is small. And it's a concept that might come back. It apparently worked well. Currently, the US is developing 6 new AA missiles!! Most with ultra long ranges, or are smaller so more can be carried, internally. Ultra long range Hits are being done. (More then One hundred miles)
I had the Airfix kit years ago when I was at school. I think the box top art featured the Red Arrows colour scheme.
This reminded me of the ill-fated Yugoslavian Novi Avion project. A similar delta canard that was like a single-engined Rafale.
One day this, the CAC CA-31, IAI Nammer and the Atlas Carver have their own episodes on this channel
@@Karyovin You might be interested in the PZL-230 Skorpion. Now there's a good-looking 'what if' plane.
@Girder3 Yeah I remember that, and it variations from old magazines and a Jane's All the World's Aircraft book from the late 80s early 90s
Fascinating little aircraft/project
Thank you for covering this aircraft.
Very interesting, I had never heard of this little plane before. Check out the drawings a little closer (5:43)...specifically the location and position of the nose gear strut with the gear down. The pilot could have an uncomfortable surprise if he has a very hard landing.
It would go in his corn hole
Fascinating, never heard of the Piranha before. I always wondered why Switzerland didn't buy Viggen and Gripen.
I believe they planned to buy Gripen but the purchase needed to be voted on by the general public in a referendum, leading to some rather peculiar general advertising. Unfortunately the people felt the value wasn’t proven so the referendum went against SAAB in 2014
Piranha has nothing to do with Grippen E decision.
piranha was a paper airplane, without industry support.
look-up FFA's P-16 for the last proper fighter airplane! (father of Lear-Jet)
cause by popolar referendum. we recently voted for purchasing new fighter jets (without knowing which aircraft we were going to buy, the choise was between: rafale, gripen, f-35, typhoon, super hornet). then the government choose the f-35, which we were all against to. so it was made a petition to reject it... but after the right number of signs was collected the government just ignored it
@@charlesmoss8119 The reason for the "no" at the ballot was imho that the swiss governemnt back then managed to make one hell of a mess of the eveluation process and gave the voters the impression that they themselfes didn't realy know what they wanted.
So, the "no" was imo the voters simply telling the govt. "make up your bloody mind, THEN come ask for our aproval".
The hair-tight "yes" in the vote for the F-35 was imo due to this aircraft being the least favourite in the public eye and the govt. not realy explaing - for whatever reason - their descision in a way the voters could understand.
i like the idea. if one takes size shape and application into todays perspective, this design would make a great autonomous wingman like planned for future projects.
Another interesting and obscure aircraft....now if only someone would do a video on the Swiss EKW C-36. Thanks for the information on something new to me.
It does my heart good to see an airplane so rare that a radio controlled model had to represent it for Ed's video! Hey Ed- if you'd ever like to do a video on the Budd RB-1 Conestoga or a Vought V-143 fighter, I have radio controlled models of BOTH! :D
I would assume that, similar to the A-10 warthog, that it was taken off the centreline to make way for the gun.
Yeah the only time I've seen one of these or an f5 it's been in my own little hanger....an boy do they shift an on high rates they actually do roll like drill bits it's nuts
Very interesting. Well done.
It makes me think of a 'Super Gnat'.
This channel has excellent content thanks , I should say this more , never heard of this aircraft ❤️✌️
Awhh so smol and cute :) Like the tiny Saab 210 (prototype for Draken)..
Great research again Ed. Thanks.
I’ve given up cross referencing aircraft via my plane bible with your channel PREACH bother Ed
9:51 - Jeez!!!
You weren't kidding that these things were small.
☮
never heard of this so cool
I remember the trade journal adds and thought it was a great idea for the Swiss. I would have loved to see them fly.
I am Swiss and I had never heard of this plane so thank you for this video!
Thanks Ed. Another new one for me .
Wow never heard of this plane.
As a point defence fighter, for the small size of their nation, this solution seems ideal.
It would have great value intercepting and defending against big lumbering incoming bombers and transport aircraft to slow down any invasion.
Even if it had limited capabilities against enemy fighter planes, it could at least provide some defence.
I had to pull out my copy of Future Fighters by Bill Gunston dated 1984. The Piranha is listed as a study that commenced in 1975 with a market size projected of 3,000-4,000 aircraft. It was “the first close-coupled canard agile fighter proposal to be drawn up” (in 1978). 🤔
Any chance you could scan that into a PDF and toss a copy online for me please? And I suspect we may find a very interesting chat in our future :)
@@konnorj6442 Hi Konnor, I don’t think we are allowed to post PDF’s on RUclips and I think email addresses are blocked. Otherwise if you can get your email address to me I’d be happy to send you a copy.
So Ed how about a video on that interesting looking Swiss fighter you mention at 2:20 the EKW-36 ? I'm not sure how good that was as a fighter but it sure looks different with that twin tail configuration. We don't see that on single seat fighters of that era. Or is that even a single seater because that cockpit looks like it can house a second guy !
C36 was a 2-seater. It's not so much a fighter as a general combat aircraft with light bombing capability and was later converted for target towing. The pure fighter role was filled by MS405/406 and Me109E3.
Already did :D
It very much reminds me of former Yugoslavia's "Novi Avion" project. It also proposed single and twin engine variants, canards, single and two seater, ... also never happend
In short, about the same size as a Colonial Mk II or Mk VII Viper…
Previously on Battlestar Galactica 🎶ding ding ding ding ding... 🎶
Next thursday, the last ever flight of a Swiss Mirage III will take place, in the early afternoon.
Takeoff from Payerne, and overflight of Buochs airport.
If you're interested look online for more info.
if you are interested in swiss jet fighter projects look into the FFA P16 Fighter/Bomber next. There is also an interesting connection with Learjet.
Wow, I think that one would have been a great aircraft.
Although it looks a lot like the Gripen, I think a more apt comparison would be with the Viggen.
At last, this tiny fighter got an episode on here.
well done, you mean that I am only number two !!
@Aqua Fyre I do remember that episode as well, it's just not many people know about the ALR since it never got past the scale model/mock up stage
Another great video Ed!
Just my laymans analysis, the proposed later variants, the Type 4/5 (dual engines) and the Type 6 with Tornado engine. Given the size of the aircraft, I'd expect the range to be extremely limited. Sure, Switzerland you could go across supersonic in 5 minutes, but I'd be surprised that if it could maintain supersonic for anything more than a few seconds.
I'd put in the same category as the Me-163, as far as combat effectiveness. It would have one chance. two if lucky!
Could it tow a fuel tank behind it?
An excellent video, as always, but I feel compelled to raise one important point; since the Piranha had a fixed, shoulder-mounted canard with trailing-edge flaps (which would seriously limit the pilot's rearward view in combat), it probably had more in common with the Viggen than the Gripen.
Like other modern canard-equipped fighters (Rafale, Typhoon, J-10, J-20 etc) the SAAB Gripen features an all-moving canard for pitch control, which it can also use as a brake during landing.
Interesting bird. Thanks Ed.
Folland Gnat comes to mind, a light fighter and advanced trainer concept ahead of its time with similar dimensions to the Piranha but 20 years sooner, also with 449 built (including licenses) you could say it was a success.
Would the Folland Gnat be similar? I think the RAF, India and Finns bought it for the same reasons
Funny thing is the wing design of the Swiss 1950s straight wing jet fighter later was used for the Learjet
Nice, can you do a presentation on the IAR 95?
If I can find enough material on it, certainly.
Poland also had their go at this concept during the 80's and 90's. Look up PZL-230 Skorpion. Pretty nifty looking aircraft, if I can say so, but ultimately ended up the same as the Piranha.
Indeed. Only last week one of these new Asian fighters reminded me very much of the Piranha. Have a look at the HAL Tejas Mk.2 which is projected to get canards added. It’s almost as if the people at HAL took a very look back at this project!
Can you imagine how good this would have been in close visual combat
Itd be a ball of flames long before that became a situation
A Folland Gnat F1 for the 90's!
Ajeet
Thank you so much for including this aspect of the fighter aircraft, as used by nations with vast fortunes to waste. It has been very clear since the advent of the F-5 and the F-16, that when deployed in regions such the European theatre, where often the boundaries of a nation are small, the kind of ranges and facilities of aerial refuelling used by the superpowers is completely redundant. The F-16 is certainly a big hit in Europe's NATO partners for this reason. The associated prestige of running a fleet of F-15s or Stealth aircraft, becomes but an attention seeking formula; as much as having a garage of supercars at one's disposal. Certainly nice work if you can get it, with a diminishing number of countries which are able, for reasons of practicality and cost, to get it. The more organised 3 tier nations which are prepared to employ the Russian supply chain of MIG's and Sukhoi aircraft at diminished cost but larger quantities, can presume an attritable air force, where the pilots are the core item of value rather than the hardware. A consideration held dear by the Russians going back as far as the days of the Soviet. How appropriate this strategy is, has never been tested in countries such as India or Indonesia, yet might still hold true?
I would ask if a force of 350 aircraft of lessor provenance facing a force of 50 gold-plated wunderkind, would make a respectable showing of themselves in a full air combat environment?
The high churn rate of fighters in inventory now represents the type of idle, once the domain of the super-maxi racing yachts, as toys for the super rich. Leaving some nations inevitably by the wayside and able to rely on ground to air defensive systems exclusively. Hardly the horror that the large manufacturers may make it out to be. For they are clearly self-serving, with a tremendous investment within the paradigm of their own devising.
Could you do one on the MBB Lampyridae?
It is weird that none of the military history focused channels ever made a video about what would have been the first stealth fighter.
TY 🙏🙏
It just reminds me of how many aircraft, concepts, and strategies during the cold war were developed, built, rethought, and discarded.
Either because technology rendered them useless or strategic necessities changed.
The cold War was the ultimate 4-D chess game for a war that was never played but well thought out.
I know for a fact that there's a Russian project for a light fighter (even had a scale mock-up), but that one takes the cake! I also like the name given
The Piranha was a brilliant concept that was overlooked. 👍👍
Cool thanks 👍
@EdNashsMilitaryMatters >>> 👍👍
I'm sure a Piranha (jet or RC DF model) was used in a film, possibly Airwolf, or of the similar late 80s & early 90s era ?!
ED- Can you please do an OV-1 Mohawk video? I'm building a large (8-foot) radio controlled model and I need something to watch while I build! :D Please :D
Apparently the development names assigned by ALR were ‘Doug’ for the single engined version and ‘Dinsdale’ for the twin engined version.
i think its a good concept for small countrys when cheap and easy to maintain , reminds me of Folland Gnat (production aircraft) and Helwan Ha-300 the Egyptian "Messerschmitt" ( only Prototyps)
3:50 Wow, that is a lot smaller. Smaller than the F-5 even. That's going to seriously cut into loiter time, among other things.
Yeah. No fuel. No munitions worth a damn. Engines not big enough to give it great performance. No radar etc.
Itd be eaten alive.
its purpose would have been to defend Switzerland against incoming enemy bombers and transports.
Switzerland geography would make an invasion of the country by land difficult. It would at least in part have to come by air transport and that's where this fighter could nail the enemy.
What wrong is the Mig 21 with ground support for combat data? In Witzerland small area its range is enough.
The Americans would never allow Switzerland to buy a Russian combat aircraft.
3:53 Oh My! Now that IS bloody tiny 😲
Ambrosini Sagittarius jet aircraft made of wood (i know it’s sort of off topic) think it’s italian but I could be wrong has a swept wing and the prototype at least was made of WOOD!
Engine with a cockpit and wings. As a design exercise it would be interesting to see how far this concept could go. All carbon fiber to limit weight? The Horton's plywood jet was limited by its glue. Now that we're building high rise buildings with engineered wood fiber could this be an option?
This wonderful plane is still worth building ....
Kind of like a Folland Gnat on steroids ...
Better , Lightweight , Modular Avionics and Construction ...
New powerful Powerplant , BVR missiles Air-to-Air refuelling capacity , low cost would make this an extreamly potent platform ..
Seriously worth buildeing .... +++
continuing to find unique aircraft I've never heard of before
perhaps they should have used the wing and flight surfaces with a wide exec body as the lear jet had been developed on the FFA P-16 wing and flight surfaces, then the swiss aircraft industry might have been able to complete the project and defered costly delopment.
If it was being developed in the early 70s, then it had a good chance to actually be produced as there was basically a conflict that was being actively fought or heating up - by the 80s, well, shit has hit the fan but the writing was on the wall by then; then the Iron Curtain fell which nailed the fate for this aircraft.
The idea of the light fighter is still around and highly applicable even in the Navy as the High-Low mix of force composition. The F-15 and F-16, the F-22 and F-35, the upcoming 6th-generation fighters and their unmanned wingmen (which are far less high-performing and cheaper) for the near future.
The Piranha configuration was apparently more like the Swedish Viggen than the later JSAS39 Gripen.
Its development (or lack of) reminds me of NA project from former Yugoslavia. NA simply meant Novi Avion (New Aircraft). It was supposed to look a lot like Rafale, but with one French engine. Several air tunnel testings were taken on model, a cockpit was designed and then - Yugoslavia broke up, civil war... And it all went forgotten...
02:33 what is that??? Somebody??? Thanks :))
EFW N-20. I'll get round to it one day.
@@EdNashsMilitaryMattersyou're the best, thank you !!
4:00 About the size of a Viper in Battlestar Galactica.
Regardless, the Swiss aircraft by Pilatus are terrific. I'm still a bit sad they've stopped building the Pilatus PC-6. Wonderful STOL aeroplane.
The CAC CA-31 went down the Trainer path but during development they realised its potential as a light fighter/striker. Too bad this suffered a similar fate
Couldn't stop thinking of the Folland Gnat through this video and that was 25 years earlier.
Neat looking jet. I don't think it would've been all that practical for any other country aside from Switzerland. Had it been just a bit bigger, then perhaps.
Future idea for a video: the proposed FFA P-16 built by Swiss aircraft maker Flug- und Fahrzeugwerke Altenrhein (FFA)
If you want to do a light fighter I don't know if anybody's done the XP-77
2:51 Motorway to Zurich, check. Rubber neckers on the bridge check. squaddie + stg 57 check. Hawker Hunter, check. Are they about to mud test the Hunter?
Can we cover IAI Arye?
Beyond the technical viability of the piranha, Arms producing countries typically want arms products to be sellable to other nations. Given Switzerland’s curious contract requirements on their arms used by their customers (ala Gepard ammo), I don’t see another nation seeking buying this plane. Though Switzerland’s historic financial “flexibility” may make the country atypical in that it may do without foreign buyers.
Most arms producing countries include restrictions on the resale or transfer of their weaponry to third parties, that is not something that is peculiar to the Swiss. What sets the Swiss apart is the strict and rigid legal framework that guides their national policy of strict neutrality. Unlike for example Sweden there are no legal short cuts or tools available to the government which allows for a more flexible policy when needed.
So you can buy Swiss weapons just fine as long as you only use them yourself, that is after all covered by the contract. Just don't expect to be allowed to export them elsewhere or for the Swiss to deliver more once you are at war.
@@Vonstab Thank you for clarifying. Thoughtful of you to reply.
2:20 that looks like an IL-2 with a twin tail and square wingtips
Did a video on it if you want to check it out:
ruclips.net/video/t82ZTyiZG2g/видео.html
I served in the Swiss army during the 80's and 90's. Never heard of this plane.
Do piranhas when do the great idea for a flying aircraft carrier😊 perfect for that
The RC pusher prop jet was flown without modern day model gyros and jet engines. That makes flying them a real workout. Now if a real jet engine and gyros were installed it would fly entirely different, stability and power would be a lot better and not suffer from torque caused by the propeller. That was an old movie. Video?
Look, we had these Tunnels where we kept our planes. How hard do you think this would have been to enlarge these tunnels. We needed a low, narrow, short aircraft. In the 70's the Swiss Air Force evaluated the Corsair and the Tiger. The Corsair was rejected simply on the ground of being too high on the tail end. BTW, these tunnels were built in the years between the wars, so were in a size to fit the piston powered aircraft of those years. We were lucky that things like the Vampire, Venom and the Hunter and Tiger actually fit in there.
Actually after the WW2, the aircraft industry all over Europe was sabotaged financially (Switzerland possible is the most notable example) in order to keep the military development under check and balances in the geopolitical game. Two more aircrafts (delta configurations and subsonic) were also produced for research purposes but the cost issue never convinced the militia here about the abandonment of the projects.
Plus American interests of not allowing other countries to advance in tech
@@KarloSiljeg-ci6wg Good day Karlo. Actually they allow the advancement of science. I know; I invented an aircraft engine and registered it under this name in patents in 2012. They don't allow production of such things in Europe unless are under their supervision. P.S. And they are officially not interested in such things. For reasons that are very obvious and I will not mention.
I expect we'll see drones--perhaps AI-controlled drones--like this in the near future.
And that idea makes me think of the Peacemaker from _Deal of the Century_ and that didn't exactly go well.
Can't make them too small. They'll become maintenance nightmares. Just look under the hood of just about any modern car to see my point.
That means the final version could take a typhoon engine
Looks like a supersonic version of lightweight Gnat fighter.
4:00 holy crap that is SMOL
What kind of design is this Swiss aircraft? Looks more like a missile with strapped wings.
This plane really does look like a Gripen and F-5 had a kid.
Who else thinks that the Blue Vixen would have made a good radar for this
I love light fighters like the Folland Gnat etc and I think they should still be used and would love to see modern cheap mass produced light fighters in Ukraine etc.
@@jonsouth1545 after what happened with Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria and Libya you're still looking to pump weapons into war zones?!
Perhaps you still believe American military intelligence?!
@@jonsouth1545 Honestly I'm not sure why BAE has never made a version of the Hawk 200 that uses an afterburning engine.
India just lifted the ALR concept and is probably using it in the design of the Tejas MK 2.
Look how large the missiles look on it
Made me think at the swiss prototype from the sixties, the Aiguillon…
An aircraft with He-162 range limits (ie, 30 minutes flight times.)
Producing a fighter jet like this aint cheap! Switzerland, Sweden and Japan should done a joint venture for at new light fighter. small countries with a demand for small but many reliable fighters who bring a might punch to the air to air fighting!
Sweden is building Gripen E. I don’t see the point with developing a new fighter.
"How are our pilots meant to shoot down bogeys if they can't even fit inside the plane? It needs to be at least... three times bigger than this!"
Afterthought: If you saw these tunnels today, which you can, with me, you would not believe that we fit 24 Hawker Hunters in there, and switched them from front to back to front for servicing and refueling.
Now that design can be turned into a drone
"The piranha could be smaller but retain comparable combat capability to existing aircraft".
Not the first to try the impossible. If you measure combat capability by a single attribute such as speed or maneuverability it's possible to build a stripped down sports car of an aircraft, but it will not be a very useful fighter in large scale real world operations.
One early jet-age lightweight fighter was the F-104. Kelly Johnson wanted to buck the trend to every heavier fighters and go Mach 2 with the smallest and simplest fighter possible. As a result it had tremendous performance and was awesome to fly. But even though it got stretched after the porotype flew it was never capable enough for U.S. Air Force needs. It was successful in the export market for the same reason light fighters usually are, which is that cost outweighs capability. In other words it is more important to show the world you have a somewhat capable high performance combat aircraft than to have a more capable one that you can’t afford.
The successful F-16 and F-18 both grew out of a lightweight fighter prototypes, but the operative word is grew. They ended up being enlarged to make space for the fuel and systems needed for useful combat operations. The fact that these relatively small aircraft became so useful was made possible by continued miniaturization of the electronics needed to support operations other than visual combat. Size is relative, and miniaturization has made aircraft of this size the new standard for short range fighters.