The F-16 replacement of the Royal Netherlands Airforce.

Todjaeger

Todjaeger

Potstirrer
zeven said:
Im not a supporter of huge military projects if its not o great importance for Swedish domestic industry in a whole no. but heres the diffirence from other countries Swedish military industry are quite independent. i wouldnt support a huge military purchase from another country no. I support a domestic military that is small mobile and effective, i liked the idea to decrease the number of gripens from 204 to 104.
Dont missunderstand the military industry is very very important because of the spinoffs it gives bacause of the high R&D.
Click to expand...
This is getting a bit far afield from discussion on RNLAF fighter replacements but felt a bit of clarification was required.

The Swedish defence industry had been quite independent, however that is not quite true any longer. Sweden, just like the rest of the world, has observed the effect of globalization on the defence industry.

Taking the Gripen NG as an example, the engine IIRC is to be an F414 variant. The same American engine used on F/A-18E/F Super Hornets. Sweden, just like much of the rest of the world, is no longer able to develop an advanced combat aircraft completely on their own from cradle to grave. In order to produce an effective design, elements and/or components need to be sourced from other countries where the desired items are available.

-Cheers
 
J

justone

Banned Member
B3LA said:
Indeed !

Here are some nice information videos regarding its capabilities :

“The ground attack bomber of the future”

Unfortunately, the "F" in the designation did not make the F-117
or the F-111 exceptional air superiority fighters either ;)
Click to expand...
Nice video I didn't see that special on the discovery channel. I seen previews on another channels about problems they was having on VSOL The problem look like it fixed . Looking at that video make me said that the Dutch Air Force will be very proud of there decision. There find away to get the money
 
R

rossfrb_1

Member
Todjaeger said:
snip
Equipment purchases are rarely just about capability. However, while politics is (or can be) involved, it rarely would cause an inappropriate piece of equipment to be chosen. It might cause an item to be more expensive than it needs to be, but does not often cause a less capable than required item to be purchased.

-Cheers
Click to expand...
I am reminded of a somewhat apocryphal account where a series of Italian tank designs were supposedly laid out in front of Benito Mussolini (then holder of Italy's supreme military rank & minister of defense),
with him randomly choosing one design to go into production for the then Italian army. I think as they say, the rest is history.
Google doesn't seem to want to support this account.
But I digress.:rolleyes:

rb
 
B

B3LA

Banned Member
Todjaeger said:
This is getting a bit far afield from discussion on RNLAF fighter replacements but felt a bit of clarification was required.

The Swedish defence industry had been quite independent, however that is not quite true any longer. Sweden, just like the rest of the world, has observed the effect of globalization on the defence industry.

Taking the Gripen NG as an example, the engine IIRC is to be an F414 variant. The same American engine used on F/A-18E/F Super Hornets. Sweden, just like much of the rest of the world, is no longer able to develop an advanced combat aircraft completely on their own from cradle to grave. In order to produce an effective design, elements and/or components need to be sourced from other countries where the desired items are available.

-Cheers
Click to expand...
Yes, we are a bit off topic now....Regarding the Gripen jet engine, I believe that Sweden have never developed their own engines, instead Volvo Flygmotor license-built or modified existing engines with the original manufacturers approval.

Cheers,
 
S

swerve

Super Moderator
Todjaeger said:
The Swedish defence industry had been quite independent, however that is not quite true any longer. Sweden, just like the rest of the world, has observed the effect of globalization on the defence industry.

Taking the Gripen NG as an example, the engine IIRC is to be an F414 variant. The same American engine used on F/A-18E/F Super Hornets. Sweden, just like much of the rest of the world, is no longer able to develop an advanced combat aircraft completely on their own from cradle to grave. In order to produce an effective design, elements and/or components need to be sourced from other countries where the desired items are available.

-Cheers
Click to expand...
Swedish jet fighters & their engines -
J21R - de Havilland Goblin
J29 Tunnan - Volvo RM2B - licence-built de Havilland Ghost
J32 Lansen - Svenska Flygmotor RM5/RM6A - licence-built Rolls-Royce Avon
J35 Draken - Volvo RM6C - licence-built Rolls-Royce Avon
J37 Viggen - Volvo RM8B - licence-built & locally modified Pratt & Whitney JT8D with Swedish afterburner
JAS39 Gripen A-D - Volvo RM12 - licence-built & locally modified GE F404

Sweden's always used foreign jet engines.
 
Z

zeven

New Member
Todjaeger said:
This is getting a bit far afield from discussion on RNLAF fighter replacements but felt a bit of clarification was required.

The Swedish defence industry had been quite independent, however that is not quite true any longer. Sweden, just like the rest of the world, has observed the effect of globalization on the defence industry.

Taking the Gripen NG as an example, the engine IIRC is to be an F414 variant. The same American engine used on F/A-18E/F Super Hornets. Sweden, just like much of the rest of the world, is no longer able to develop an advanced combat aircraft completely on their own from cradle to grave. In order to produce an effective design, elements and/or components need to be sourced from other countries where the desired items are available.

-Cheers
Click to expand...
I was on deep water with this post! indeed, and i didnt even get my msg out on a proper way :)
excuse me.
 
Todjaeger

Todjaeger

Potstirrer
IPA35 said:
I wonder if my proposal if a bit credible;)
Click to expand...
I have to ask, which one?

Lowering the quantity of F-35s ordered, eliminating the order entirely, or doing a Hi-Lo split replacement order?

Come to think of it, there actually is another potential option which no has mentioned IIRC. That would be for the RNLAF to do an interim purchase or lease of aircraft, allowing more time for the F-35 to mature as well as (or perhaps more importantly) giving time for the economic costs to become known.

What I have in mind would be an arrangement similar to what the RAAF is doing with 24 F/A-18F Super Hornets replacing the retiring F-111 in service, and then themselves being replaced in a decades time.

If such a path were to be explored, then IMO the best interim fighter choice would likely be the F-16 Block 52, as this has the greatest similarity to and commonality with the RNLAF F-16 MLUs of current production aircraft.

Ultimately though, the question of just what capabilities the Netherlands requires, and for what timeframe, need to be asked. That capability requirement will be what primarily drives the aircraft selection.

-Cheers
 
I

IPA35

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #149
The latter.
For commonality we could buy the block 60, not only as stopgap but also as a full replacement.
(Although the NG might be a better choice.)

What we could do is buying two squadrons of NG/blk60 (, order a small initial F-35 batch) and than wait for more info before ordering more F-35's.
 
T

Toptob

Active Member
The latter.
For commonality we could buy the block 60, not only as stopgap but also as a full replacement.
(Although the NG might be a better choice.)
Click to expand...
How so? The block 60 has little in common with our current f-16's, if only because its systems are decades more modern than those in our MLU's adjustments have been made to the entire airframe. And why would the gripen be a better choice? I haven't read one good explanation from you about this.

What we could do is buying two squadrons of NG/blk60 (, order a small initial F-35 batch) and than wait for more info before ordering more F-35's.
Click to expand...
Todjaeger made a statement ( a very good one might I add) and you go repeat it, but make it stupid. Why would we BUY interim aircraft when we can lease them?

But I have to admit, I read up on the F-22/35 subject, and I've turned. I think we ( the NL) should do is go ahead with the F-35, but adjust our prospected agreement, we should take some more time before purchasing and see what our allies buy, or at least get a fixed price and re-asses how much we want to buy. And I think we should use the suggestion a couple of pages back and wait with retiring our F-16's a bit longer and be a 2 fighter force again.

It's like this: the F-16's are still very valuable assets, very capable of fulfilling commitments in Afghanistan and other possible deployments. Plus we still have weapon stocks we can use with them and that are already integrated in those planes. I think here especially of older weaponry like the Paveway2's and so forth.

It will also give the airforce a good long period to get used to its new equipment and let it mature. And when the time is right, and budget/ political climate permit we can buy some more.

But its clear to me that the F-35 has no equal on the market.
 
I

IPA35

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #159
I never said stopgap, but I said full replacement.
Our current F-16 are getting OLD, they cost alot of money to keep them airworthy. And it is only getting more and more. We could do an ELU but then? We would still need to replace them and since nobody is interested in the ELU we would have to pay alot for it.

Wether or not the NG or the Blk 60 is the better choice, we can't make this a VS thread, unfortunatly. Thing is is that the Gripen uses few fuel, and has low flight hour costs.
Although I'm not sure I expect the Blk 60 to cost more since older F-16's also cost more per flighthour. Please correct me if I am wrong.
And it has more weaponry options and the STOL capability.
And as you said, the Blk 60 is very different fron the Blk 20.

The F-35A does not convince me, but it would be a loss of 800 million to quit the programm, I just hope all the F-35 fans are right on it's capabilities;)

Since we need to equip 5 squadrons one type will have 2 and the other 3.
 
longbow

longbow

New Member
Grand Danois said:
Mr Secretary - Why Does the Pentagon Say the JSF is a 5th Generation Fighter . . Really?

Cheers & enjoy.
Click to expand...
Aaaah... Goon again, that nutjob!! :) The sentence that really made me crack up was this one:

(That the JSF Program needs fixing is not in doubt.) "How this may best be achieved is well understood by the international team of experts at Air Power Australia, whose advice has, to date, been ignored by most of those who advise you."

That he really expects anyone to listen to him, or read his cheap crappylooking early 90's looking webpage containing his ramblings is like me sitting at work, feeling quite overlooked and down because Einstein did not consult me about the theory of relativety - although I suck in maths!:rolleyes: He is not ignored, he is not seen as someone to listen to, let alone ignore!

Ah, well, enough, better stop now:p:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top