Will latest F-35 problems push Norway towards a European solution?

[zeven]

and not to forget.

third generation IR. from sofradir ( http://www.sofradir.com/sofradir/research.htm)

this is old information tho.

.4 IR-OTIS FOR SAAB GRIPEN FIGHTER
1997 -> . IR-OTIS(Gripen) is a complete IRST-system which is developed to suite in a Saab Gripen fighter. The
detector is mainly the same as IR-OTIS(Viggen) which is a 288*4 LWIR from Sofradir. Several improvements has
been made compared to IR-OTIS(Viggen) such as:
• The system works in 60 Hz.
• The sensor-unit has the capability to rotate 360 degrees in azimuth.
• The signal-processing unit has new microprocessors and electronics with much higher processing capacity.
• The connection between the sensor-unit and signal-processing-unit consists of two optical fibers.

dont ask me why i posted it. to much free time i guess

btw, 10 years ago, under trials they detected A/C at ranges of 127 km, how much have this improved over the last decade. regarding the fact increased processor capability increased the range from 80 km to 127 back then.

 

[Grand Danois]

and not to forget.

third generation IR. from sofradir ( http://www.sofradir.com/sofradir/research.htm)

this is old information tho.


dont ask me why i posted it. to much free time i guess

btw, 10 years ago, under trials they detected A/C at ranges of 127 km, how much have this improved over the last decade. regarding the fact increased processor capability increased the range from 80 km to 127 back then.

And you can take such a sensor just outside of the atmosphere and you can track something as small as a nuclear warhead at hundreds of kms as is done on various kinetic kill vehicles... It is of course cued.

Limitations of long range IR is vast volumes to scan at range, atmospheric conditions, depends on target aspect and that target signatures have changed. A Gripen would be *a lot* harder to detect at long range than a Viggen...

So expect that experiment to have been made under ideal conditions and physics hasn't changed since then.

But would be cool as it is not podded like the Sniper. Is it included in the offer for Norway and Denmark?

 

[zeven]

Range is one of them. High internal fuel fraction, clean and efficient airframe, optimized for subsonic cruise & with good acceleration. Oh, yes.

Advantages of podded IRST. Just curious, what do you have in mind?

Btw, nice video - point defence and netted sensors is part of the solution, of course.

we are not talking huge differences in range between these two. put on drop tank on Gripen NG and his up there.

about acc. Gripen C mach 0.5 - 1.1 in 30 sek

clean airframe true. but if you want to be very critical, you can say. F-35 ware his "extra drag" all the time

PODS are easier to repair take off/on if not needed. so intergration does not always have to be a good thing. (but hey thats the beauty for military platforms)

 

[zeven]

And you can take such a sensor just outside of the atmosphere and you can track something as small as a nuclear warhead a hundreds of kms as is done on various kinetic kill vehicles...

Limitations of long range IR is vast volumes to scan at range, atmospheric conditions, depend on target aspect and that target signatures have changed.

So expect that experiment to have been made under ideal conditions and physics hasn't changed since then.

true indeed.
and because of that, i looked up, how much of a skandinavian year that irst are working. and the answer is
80 per cent.

 

[zeven]

Grand Danois

cant you keep us updated about the ongoing competetion in Denmark. what media and other says?

because in Norway they have at least one new artikel every day.

dont know if you are following the norwegian competetion close up??

 

[Grand Danois]

PODS are easier to repair take off/on if not needed. so intergration does not always have to be a good thing. (but hey thats the beauty for military platforms)

And also easier to upgrade. Ease of maintenance and upgrades are reasons why many nations (including USAF) like podded EW systems.

Btw, I think that the range of the F-35 is a lot greater than publicly stated. Those numbers (the 628 nm) looks to be the threshold requirement, which IIRC has been exceeded to ORD satisfaction...

Not a lot being discussed publicly in Denmark wrt the fighter purchase... The most recent article was this in the Danish equiv of "Nyteknik.se" about Terma upgrading its production to mass production of precision manufactured aerostructures in anticipation of the JSF. In Danish:

http://ing.dk/artikel/92544?highlight=terma

Btw, Scandinavian weather and Swedish predictions of it in the North:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S._A._Andrée's_Arctic_balloon_expedition_of_1897

 

[zeven]

And also easier to upgrade. Ease of maintenance and upgrades are reasons why many nations (including USAF) like podded EW systems.

Btw, I think that the range of the F-35 is a lot greater than publicly stated. Those numbers (the 628 nm) looks to be the threshold requirement, which IIRC has been exceeded to ORD satisfaction...

Not a lot being discussed publicly in Denmark wrt the fighter purchase... The most recent article was this in the Danish equiv of "Nyteknik.se" about Terma upgrading its production to mass production of precision manufactured aerostructures in anticipation of the JSF. In Danish:

http://ing.dk/artikel/92544?highlight=terma

Btw, Scandinavian weather and Swedish predictions of it in the North:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S._A._Andrée's_Arctic_balloon_expedition_of_1897

you got me there..

funny that you mentioned your sceptical view of F-35s range. i heard on a swedish forum. that Sweden NEVER publish the true Range of Gripen, and that this is a well kept secret.
so who knows maybe Gripen always have had a longer range.. and then also Gripen NG

ps.
and when i read the requirements by FMV, Gripen As range exceeded that requirement with 45 per cent.
(shown in per cent like: Range 145% ) 100 = required range.

 

[stigmata]

Btw, nice video - point defence and netted sensors is part of the solution, of course.

I have an idea on this matter in 'F-35 twice as noisy as F-15 thread', and i would really like to hear your view of it GD.
Sorry for nontopic but i would like your comment

 

[zeven]

http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http://www.jsfnieuws.nl/?p=266&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&sl=nl&tl=en

 

[Dalregementet]

A wise statement from a good norwegian neighbour, former norwegian aircraft fighter pilot, in the paper Aftenposten.

http://www.aftenposten.no/meninger/kronikker/article2739648.ece

 

[zeven]

A wise statement from a good norwegian neighbour, former norwegian aircraft fighter pilot, in the paper Aftenposten.

http://www.aftenposten.no/meninger/kronikker/article2739648.ece

if you're refering to Björn Kjos, the Norwegian air line top boss, dagsavisen has the entire interview with him.

funny part is. that norwegians says, what does he know about 2008 modern weaponplatforms
and what hidden purpose does he have with his statement? more traffic to swedish airports ?

you have to love the norwegian newspapers debate forums

 

[Grand Danois]

A wise statement from a good norwegian neighbour, former norwegian aircraft fighter pilot, in the paper Aftenposten.

http://www.aftenposten.no/meninger/kronikker/article2739648.ece

But not very knowledgeable.

1032 posts on the debate?! LOL! In Denmark you wouldn't get 30.

 

[Dalregementet]

But not very knowledgeable.

1032 posts on the debate?! LOL! In Denmark you wouldn't get 30.

1030 posts means that people are mentally active and that there are many opinions... However - wise or not - I think it´s wide open which fighter aircraft Norway will buy - a few years ago, the obvious choice had been F35. Now, the situation is different with a public opinion for Gripen including unions and the bulk of Norways high tech companies. On the other side we have the Norvegian airforce?

It will be a exciting day the 19th of December - who is santa going to reward? :xmas

I hope it will be :norway and :sweden together

 

[stigmata]

It is as i suspected all along...

Use cost / cost per flying:
Estimate 2001: approximately 70% of the cost of flying an F-16
Auditors report on USA 2007: equal or higher than F-16 flying
Current situation in 2008, according to insiders USAF: 125-140% of F-16 flying

End Conclusion:
Status of the American Joint Strike Fighter project is now about 4 years late compared to 50% higher cost per unit and at least 50% higher cost per flying.
http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http://www.jsfnieuws.nl/?p=266&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&sl=nl&tl=en

Perhaps i should start work full time as an Oracle ? what say you ?

 

[Grand Danois]

It is as i suspected all along...

Use cost / cost per flying:
Estimate 2001: approximately 70% of the cost of flying an F-16
Auditors report on USA 2007: equal or higher than F-16 flying
Current situation in 2008, according to insiders USAF: 125-140% of F-16 flying

End Conclusion:
Status of the American Joint Strike Fighter project is now about 4 years late compared to 50% higher cost per unit and at least 50% higher cost per flying.
http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http://www.jsfnieuws.nl/?p=266&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&sl=nl&tl=en

Perhaps i should start work full time as an Oracle ? what say you ?

It's a whiteanting site.

 

[stigmata]

It will be a exciting day the 19th of December - who is santa going to reward? :xmas

I hope it will be :norway and :sweden together

LOL Don't know what to say but your passion is admirable
Do you got stocks in SAAB or what ?

 

[Dalregementet]

LOL Don't know what to say but your passion is admirable
Do you got stocks in SAAB or what ?

Ehhh - not me... yet..., but the company I work for gives them a hand regarding offset, so I would probably buy more shares in the company I work for instead.

 

[StevoJH]

It is as i suspected all along...

Use cost / cost per flying:
Estimate 2001: approximately 70% of the cost of flying an F-16
Auditors report on USA 2007: equal or higher than F-16 flying
Current situation in 2008, according to insiders USAF: 125-140% of F-16 flying

End Conclusion:
Status of the American Joint Strike Fighter project is now about 4 years late compared to 50% higher cost per unit and at least 50% higher cost per flying.
http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http://www.jsfnieuws.nl/?p=266&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&sl=nl&tl=en

Perhaps i should start work full time as an Oracle ? what say you ?

Its still probably going to be cheaper to operate then the F/A-18's, F-111's and Tornadoes they are replacing in other Airforces. F 16 was originally designed to be the lightweight "budget" aircraft, while the F35 is supposed to be cheap, the Gripen is probably going to be the better option for those that put price before capability.

 

[Dalregementet]

Why settle for F35 when there are more capable and expensive planes that you can buy?

Its still probably going to be cheaper to operate then the F/A-18's, F-111's and Tornadoes they are replacing in other Airforces. F 16 was originally designed to be the lightweight "budget" aircraft, while the F35 is supposed to be cheap, the Gripen is probably going to be the better option for those that put price before capability.

I think the issue is if the Norwegians need the additional capability F35 offers.
If not, then it´s just waste of money buying F35. Now, if extreme a2a capabilities are needed for Norway, then I would recommend Norway to start a dialogue with the US to buy F22, i.e. to get permission to buy so to say. If they need extreme a2g capabilities - then they can buy B2. I don´t think money is a problem for Norway but getting what they need - no more no less is the thing.

 

[Todjaeger]

I think the issue is if the Norwegians need the additional capability F35 offers.
If not, then it´s just waste of money buying F35. Now, if extreme a2a capabilities are needed for Norway, then I would recommend Norway to start a dialogue with the US to buy F22, i.e. to get permission to buy so to say. If they need extreme a2g capabilities - then they can buy B2. I don´t think money is a problem for Norway but getting what they need - no more no less is the thing.

Okay... Two ideas were put forward here which I see as problematical. If the title of the previous posts was

Why settle for F35 when there are more capable and expensive planes that you can buy?

Then aircraft which Norway could actually buy would need to be listed...

The F-22A Raptor, as has been mentioned repeatedly in various RAAF-related threads, is not available for sale to any foreign nation. It would take a change in US laws to allow the process to go forward where the US could then consider selling the F-22 to another nation.

The 2nd aircraft mentioned, the B-2 is currently not in production, and when it was in production cost something like US$2 billion (IIRC) per aircraft, if not higher. It was estimated circa 2001 that to re-open the B2 production line would cost between US$2-5 billion, before the actual start of aircraft production... And that a 40 aircraft order would have a per unit cost of US$735 mil. That is of course assuming that the US would allow Norway (or anyone else) to purchase the B-2. Given the B-2 mission profile and technology, I doubt that very much.

-Cheers