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

[zeven]

I'm losing patience with kids who think that they know about military technology and this industry in particular.

Show me anything comprehensive about PAK-FA apart from the continuing drivel that it will be here next year, in two years , in five years, in 10 years etc...

One credible persistent and verifiable resource (not some idiot kids fan club site either)

The Gripen is a glorified legacied F-16.

Count the number of american components in it (or more to the point, the number of technologies that aren't swedish.)

or why not say. Gripen has the best from both Europe and USA.
Gripen is obvously a good platform for small countries with limited manpower and Budgets. you get alot of bang for the bucks
is not need to disrespect a platform because it didnt have the funds like F-35 have or F-22 for that instance.

is not like Gripen cant handle todays threats and future threats the same goes for all the Euro canards

like i said previously, F-35 might be the top dog. but that does not make it the best choice for ALL countries.

and Gripen NG have solved the main disadvantages from earlier versions.

and the most important from a technology aspect is swedish like software primary sensors
avionics
EWs.
COM.
Design

 

[Haavarla]

or why not say. Gripen has the best from both Europe and USA.
Gripen is obvously a good platform for small countries with limited manpower and Budgets. you get alot of bang for the bucks
is not need to disrespect a platform because it didnt have the funds like F-35 have or F-22 for that instance.

is not like Gripen cant handle todays threats and future threats the same goes for all the Euro canards

like i said previously, F-35 might be the top dog. but that does not make it the best choice for ALL countries.

and Gripen NG have solved the main disadvantages from earlier versions.

That's a very good point Zeven!
Not just regarding the F-35 develoment on Norways needs..

But the same thing is on the Russian side, i beleves that's why the Indian is involved in the PAK-FA and procure Su-30MKI for less bucks, but for more bang!

The UASF has on several occasion(RED FLAG) shared their official suprise for the Su-30MKI platform, witch by the way is a 4'th generation aircraft.
This platform is equivalent to many of the western 4'th generation fighters, yes the avionics is a barstard of Russian, Israelis and France tec.

But develoment and production was at the same period of time give or take as the F-18, F-15, Thyphoon and rafaele's later versions entered productions..

Which is my point why the most expesive and egnimatic projects does not allways come out as a sure candidate for variety countries..

 

[Aussie Digger]

i was refering to 2 Norwegian artikels. not what LM say in general.

why make so much Drama about it.? let the platform speak for itself.
i know you 200 per cent love for this platform. and no one doubt the capabilities, in the end. with that amount of money spent. it have to be good.

but the world is not this or nothing. its a reason why different platforms has different capabilities.

and because of all fancy gadgets, does not always make the platform best suited for ALL countries.

ps.
and because you just mention something even close to critcal attitude or put a question mark to LM or F-35 doesnt mean you don admire the platform. or that you are anti the platform.

Back pedaling won't do you any good whatsoever when you make original statements such as this:

second.
LM always points out the stealth feature nothing els. and seems to forget, other capabilities where gripne has an advantage might suit Norways needs better than you beloved stealth!!

The reason I make drama about it, is because I'm sick of ignorant comments being bandied about, like the one you made.

If you can't be bothered to read and understand what L-M says as opposed to Broadsheet media which in general couldn't tell the difference between an F-35 and a Gripen anyway, then why do you even bother making such comments in the first place?

I can provide links to every single thing I said earlier about F-35 capability. These are ALL released by L-M.

I have no doubt at all that the platform will prove itself over time and any Country that is looking for capability as it's most important priority will choose the F-35 ahead of any other current fighter.

Of course in saying that I do NOT disparage other fighters. There are reasons why they differ in design, many of which have to do with the fact that they ARE older designs than the F-35. The Typhoon, Gripen and Rafale will all provide excellent capability for their respective users. I don't doubt that.

Please show the same kind of open minded thinking in relation to other platforms.

 

[Feanor]

Actually for various reasons we do follow russian developments.

So the question is, in all their procurement development in the last 4 years - at a maritime , air defence and air development level - what HAS physically been rolled out and been seen for review?

How and why is PAK-FA a program to be reckoned with when there is less known about than the J-10? (let alone real VLO aircraft)

gf0012 I'm going to reply to your post, because you're probably the most experienced one of the posters discussing the PAK-FA in this thread. There is absolutely no judgement call to be made on the PAK-FA. None whatsoever. We don't know anything about it, other then general statements about how it will be comparable to the F-22 coming from dubious sources. So there is no way you or anybody else (me for that matter) that can make a judgement call as to what it's capabilities will be. Until we see the aircraft hit serial production stage, and some information becomes available, all the discussion about it comes down to an argument based on faith and guesstimates. You guys are honestly making my brain hurt from reading this.

 

[Aussie Digger]

Jesus...
U right about it's internal drags and stuff like that, but all the rest is just your own opinion and nothing to do with fact's of these terms..

Fine. Show me a supersonic tactical fighter that has 18000lbs of internal fuel and weighs 12.7 tons.

You will only be able to show me one.

"VLO design. This does not simply mean "stealth". It means a reduced radar cross section. It means reduced IR signature. It means tightly controlled electronic emissions and low probability of intercept modes for active electronic emissions."

And who are you to state that the PAK-FA is someting less than the VLO design fighter in the years to come.
All thing considering, the Russian PAK-FA program didn't start this decade..

Hmm, the "Russia strong" crowd has turned up has it?

Well please outline how you think a 5th Generation VLO fighter can be designed, tested and procured for less than US$10b please. Because that's what Rosboronexport has claimed about PAK-FA.

Oh, all this is going to be achieved by 2015 too. nfloorl:

In any case, who said anything ABOUT PAK-FA?

I mean this is below this treads topic's to even mention the PAK-FA features in the 2-3 years to come. It has nothing at all to do with the circle of facts existing today.
And is just hearsay and make beleves..

What?

It's just pointless statement from pepl that dont recognize the the advancement made by the Russsian R&D in reecent years, and that the PAK-FA is an program to be recon with..

If anyone folow this path, it's only gonna decrease the hard earned credibility
apprehended by this forum.

Tell you what. If Russia/India even has a SINGLE PAK-FA flying only public display (ala F-35A - AA-1 variant) before 2010 I'll say you were right...

 

[Aussie Digger]

That's a very good point Zeven!
Not just regarding the F-35 develoment on Norways needs..

But the same thing is on the Russian side, i beleves that's why the Indian is involved in the PAK-FA and procure Su-30MKI for less bucks, but for more bang!

The UASF has on several occasion(RED FLAG) shared their official suprise for the Su-30MKI platform, witch by the way is a 4'th generation aircraft.
This platform is equivalent to many of the western 4'th generation fighters, yes the avionics is a barstard of Russian, Israelis and France tec.

But develoment and production was at the same period of time give or take as the F-18, F-15, Thyphoon and rafaele's later versions entered productions..

Which is my point why the most expesive and egnimatic projects does not allways come out as a sure candidate for variety countries..

The only surprise the USAF would have about the SU-30MKI at Red Flag would be if the thing never even left the ground. The SU-30's only ever used the radar systems in training modes. They won't reveal the full capability. I can think of several reasons why, but I promised others I wouldn't get too nasty...

As to why the USAF would not be particularly surprised about the SU-30MKI, perhaps you might recall that the USAF observed the SU-30MKI in England LONG before the SU-30's ever went to Red Flag. When the SU-30's "played" against some Typhoons. Again only using training modes for their radar capability.

On top of this, are you aware India had to conduct a rapid acquisition of and integration of several Litening AT pods onto their SU-30MKI's so that the 6x SU-30's deployed even had a viable self-generated A2G capability?

That ain't exactly an "eye watering" capability level there and speaks volumes about the remainder of the SU-30MKI fleet. An ability to provide self-generated aim points for the employment of precision A2G munitions had to be rapidly installed, so the aircraft could compete in modern Western based exercises.

I saw a while back even Russia has opted for the French Damocles pod...

Yeah, the West has a lot to worry about how far "behind" it is alright...

 

[gf0012-aust]

gf0012 I'm going to reply to your post, because you're probably the most experienced one of the posters discussing the PAK-FA in this thread. There is absolutely no judgement call to be made on the PAK-FA. None whatsoever. We don't know anything about it, other then general statements about how it will be comparable to the F-22 coming from dubious sources. So there is no way you or anybody else (me for that matter) that can make a judgement call as to what it's capabilities will be. Until we see the aircraft hit serial production stage, and some information becomes available, all the discussion about it comes down to an argument based on faith and guesstimates. You guys are honestly making my brain hurt from reading this.

Feanor, in actual fact you and I are in agreement - we're making the same point but coming at it from different angles.

My answer was meant to be a subtle gunshot as to what gets bandied around here as fact when there is nothing of substance that has been provided in the public domain.

eg using a different example. JSF was simmed against the Mig35 on modelling provided to us by the americans. The modeling is based on what they know of Mig 29 (via the 35+ that they have collected since 1989), feedback from Mig29 qualified pilots (including a swag of them that we interviewed when they emigrated in the early 90's and ended up at Boeing, Lockheed and BAE) and by TVC modelling done or gathered by various other US agencies. Now that data may not be 100% (and I expect it would not be) - but it's a damned sight more reliable for those at our end who use it than some of the fanboy comments that get thrown about in absurdium as fact.

so, no disrespect intended to Russians - as you especially are one of the more balanced ones when it comes to debating "host nation" gear.

 

[Todjaeger]

Dude, i agree with you on various points, but still not anyone on this forum is able to procure any info about the PAK-FA project.
So what's with the sudden rush of time/knowledge in this forum?
Remind me again how long it took the F-117 and F-22 to complete the program?

I suspect there are a few reasons why the PAK-FA is being "disregarded" so much at present. These are...
1. The Russia (and the then Soviet Union) has not demonstrated a stealth design capability, certainly not to the same degree the US has.
2. There is so little information available regarding the PAK-FA aside from it is supposed to be in the works and 5th generation.

With regards to the 1st point, it can be argued that the US first demonstrated a stealth/LO capability with early aircraft like the U-2 in the mid-50's or the A-12/SR-71 Blackbird family in the early 1960's. The US then went on to design the F-117 Nighthawk and the B-2 Spirit. Russia/Soviet Union has not demostrated a similar competency. Therefore, while they likely will be able to create a "stealth" or LO design, there is a good chance that it will not be as overall capable as US or Western designs due to less overall background and resources available.

The 2nd point I feel is quite relevant to not attempting to "counter" the PAK-FA at present. IMV the design itself is largely a "paper airplane". There has been no mention of any initial/test flight of a prototype. This likely means that any PAK-FA that exists at present is at best a mockup. This in turn would mean that there is some way to go yet in the design, testing and development phase before the aircraft would hit production, never mind reaching IOC. As mentioned before with regards to the F-22 having a long development cycle. The first flight of a prototype was in Sept. 1990, IOC was not reached until 2006. Even if the PAK-FA were to be test flown tomorrow, and then the development curve take half as long as it did for the F-22, the PAK-FA would not reach IOC until towards the end of 2016. AFAIK the F-35 is to have entered regular production by then.

-Cheers

PS wow, I take too long to type. AD, Feanor & GF were able to make several posts by the time I got my reply in...

 

[stigmata]

Well, on the topic of guessing PAK-FA, it is built from the outset to be exported, so i think low maintenance will have priority over ultra LO.
They have also stated PAK-FA will have more emphasis on fighter then bomber, so i think supercruise will again take priority over LO angles that inevitably have ineffective aerodynamics.
Sukhoi also concider supercrise to be F-22 main advantage in air superiority.

This all lead me to suspect PAK-Fa will have a speed in the league of F-22, and "stealth" less then JSF.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Sukhoi also concider supercrise to be F-22 main advantage in air superiority.

Where are these citations? If they are true then I suspect that for the first time in modern jet fighter development the russians have misunderstood the fundamental design requirements for the principle american air superiority asset. (and the russians aren't silly when it comes to issues of developing doctrine)

Supercruise is not the primary tactical priority for the F-22. Again, I'd love to see the citation, because its a massive misunderstanding of the platforms role and capabilities geared to that role

This all lead me to suspect PAK-Fa will have a speed in the league of F-22, and "stealth" less then JSF.

The F-22 is not optimised for speed... look at its design requirement, look at its tactical mission.

The JSF in a USAF environment is not designed to fulfill that requirement.

again we are seeing threads that focus on platforms and ignore the lessons of 1989 (and which the russians and chinese do understand as they both undertook massive RMA's to deal with it).

lethal combat, area dominance, theatre denial and peripheral deterrance is about systems.

 

[Feanor]

So to respond in general. We do know that according to a quote dug up by nevidimka earlier in iirc another thread, the Tu-160 has a 1/6 RCS of a conventional jet-bomber, due to RCS-reduction techniques, and teh Su-47, has 1/10 the RCS of a conventional jet fighter. So it's very very very likely that the PAK-FA will feature RCS reduction in excess that of the Su-47. Yes I know I'm contradicting myself and making a complete guesstimate, but if we're going to discuss this might as well at least rely on the facts that we do have.

Aussie Digger, you said that if the PAK-FA is flying public display by 2010 you'll admit you're wrong? First flight is scheduled for next year I might have the satisfaction of reading you admitting it.

Todjaeger production for the PAK-FA is optimistically slated for 2015, but many (myself included) think that major serial production rather then a limited pre-production batch, is unlikely before 2020. Then again KnAAPO is probably the most successful aircraft factory in Russia. Time will tell. But yes the F-35 will definitely be in production by then.

 

[Heretic]

The Gripen is a glorified legacied F-16.

Count the number of american components in it (or more to the point, the number of technologies that aren't swedish.)

This is because the gripen use an unusual amount of off-the-shelf products. Which is a very good design-choice, imho. You get more bang for your buck if you buy components that are already developed, deployed and tested than if you develop every little thing on the platform from scratch. And productionlines of said components are much much bigger, keeping maintenancecosts down. You seem to consider yourself rather knowledgable, im surprised you didnt know this.

And what has the nationality of the company that makes a certain component got to do with anything? What you on about? You discussing a platform? Or nationalism?

 

[gf0012-aust]

You seem to consider yourself rather knowledgable, im surprised you didnt know this.

And what has the nationality of the company that makes a certain component got to do with anything? What you on about? You discussing a platform? Or nationalism?

yes I do know this. Read through the history of my posts and you'll find that I've worked in the industry as well as in procurement itself doing technology evaluations.

What am I responding to? The illogical moronic nationalistic drivel that gets dumped on these forums every now and then as the basis of a technical assessment.

Any other further comments you can PM me. Keep it off here or I'll assume that you're trolling as you don't appear to have understood the whole thrust of the last multiple pages of responses from the Moderators and Senior Members.

 

[Haavarla]

Fine. Show me a supersonic tactical fighter that has 18000lbs of internal fuel and weighs 12.7 tons.

You will only be able to show me one.

Hmm, the "Russia strong" crowd has turned up has it?

That's not the most refined way to add to this tread..
Is the next thing that you will make fun of my writing?

Well please outline how you think a 5th Generation VLO fighter can be designed, tested and procured for less than US$10b please. Because that's what Rosboronexport has claimed about PAK-FA.

Oh, all this is going to be achieved by 2015 too. nfloorl:

I think we will see more hard facts of this PAK-FA before 2015.
Did you know that the Sukhoi is the 4'th biggest airplane manufactor in the world, that suggest they are doing something right..
They have upgraded their production lines to a very competative standard.
Sukhoi have many partners(Thales, Airbus etc) across the aviation industri world wide.

Why are you so negative against "Russian" aviation?

 

[stigmata]

Supercruise is not the primary tactical priority for the F-22. Again, I'd love to see the citation, because its a massive misunderstanding of the platforms role and capabilities geared to that role

I did'nt find that phrase despite my sincerest effort.

The F-22 is not optimised for speed... look at its design requirement, look at its tactical mission.

I did find this tho...

Background

The ATF'S primary mission is air superiority. The Air Force believes air
superiority must be gained and maintained to the extent that friendly
forces can conduct operations without prohibitive interference from the
enemy air forces.
The Air Force expects to incorporate many new technologies and capabilities
in the ATF. The Air Force’s goals for the aircraft require substantial
increases in maneuverability; decreases in detectability, take-off and
landing distances, and maintainability; and new capabilities such as ability
to cruise at supersonic speeds for long distances. The ATF program
has elevated supportability and affordability to a co-equal status with
performance.

Performance Goals
~-___
The Air Force is striving to incorporate technologies and capabilirles
into the ATF that have never been incorporated before on an air superiority
fighter. For example, the expected highly integrated avionics and the
supersonic cruise and short take-off and landing capabilities arc nttw for
a high performance air superiority fighter.

http://archive.gao.gov/d30t5/135023.pdf

It costed me 3 hour search and a headache...

 

[Aussie Digger]

Fine. Show me a supersonic tactical fighter that has 18000lbs of internal fuel and weighs 12.7 tons.

You will only be able to show me one.

That's not the most refined way to add to this tread..
Is the next thing that you will make fun of my writing?

People in this thread have asked for facts. I have presented them. Please try and counter them if you can. That's how debate works.

People make a position, support it and allow others to try and counter it. In the case of, " LM always points out the stealth feature nothing els", it's a pretty easy claim to dispute, which is what I did.

My point about L-M was obviously lost on you. I mentioned Sukhoi only because "fans" of their aircraft, much like the fans of Gripen and other Euro-Canards on the web, either don't understand or choose to conveniently ignore the FACT that external stores create an increased drag effect. Their physical performance is therefore compromised by reality.

External stores minimise the G forces that an aircraft can pull and weapons on ANY aircraft limit the G forces an aircraft can pull, if they wish to actually launch those weapons.

Therefore: attempting to claim what an aircraft CAN or CANNOT do performance -wise based on manufacturers claims is an exercise in futility. For one thing, they NEVER give the exact data. This information is described as "classified". For another, they almost never give information on an aircrafts performance when loaded, because it is not flattering.

People on discussion websites however ignore this. They read that an F-15 can fly at Mach 2.5 according to Boeing, whereas an F/A-18 Hornet can only fly at Mach 1.8.

Ergo the F-15 is OBVIOUSLY the superior aircraft right?

Wrong! Try reading a few anecdotes from F-15 pilots. You'll find they rarely ever exceed about M1.6, which a Hornet can also comfortably make.

People have used similar arguments against the Gripen and F-35. According to L-M, the F-35 is not intended to "supercruise".

Fanboys point out that SAAB has announced the Gripen CAN supercruise. Ergo the Gripen has an advantage right? What is supercruise? The ability to fly at supersonic speeds on dry thrust? The F-104 Starfighter and English Electric Lightning could do that. So if fighters 40 years ago could do it, why are current fighters not being designed with it? Does supercruise count if you have to use your afterburner to get through the transonic hump?

Perhaps it's what L-M claims it means. The ability to fly at sustained supersonic speeds at M1.7 or above, on dry thrust. SAAB disagrees with that definition. Of course it does. It's fighter can barely make that speed on full mil power.

You then decided to start talking about the PAK-FA, when in fact Zeven and I were at least discussing the topic thread, F-35's and Gripens.

I think we will see more hard facts of this PAK-FA before 2015.
Did you know that the Sukhoi is the 4'th biggest airplane manufactor in the world, that suggest they are doing something right..
They have upgraded their production lines to a very competative standard.
Sukhoi have many partners(Thales, Airbus etc) across the aviation industri world wide.

People like you are very quick to dismiss Boeing and L-M. Boeing is the BIGGEST aircraft manufacturer in the world. Perhaps THEY are doing something right, no?

Why are you so negative against "Russian" aviation?

Because it doesn't live up to the marketing hype that people like to use to try and "prove" some sort of superiority.


To be fair to Russian Aviation, nothing ever could. Therefore my ire is really directed at persons making claims without even Rosboronexport reports to support them.

And no, I won't be criticising your writing. Please review the 4000 plus posts I've made on this site in the 5 years I've been posting here and try and find where I've personally attacked someone for their knowledge of English.

Formatting on the other hand... Try and fix up your quoting somewhat. It makes it easier to reply...

 

[Aussie Digger]

I did'nt find that phrase despite my sincerest effort.
I did find this tho...


http://archive.gao.gov/d30t5/135023.pdf

It costed me 3 hour search and a headache...

Yep supersonic cruise and performance. Still nothing about the top speed of the aircraft.

The F-22 is optimised for mach speeds in the vicinity of M1.6 - M1.7 using dry thrust (ie: no afterburner). It is not intended to be the fastest aircraft in the world.

 

[Heretic]

yes I do know this. Read through the history of my posts and you'll find that I've worked in the industry as well as in procurement itself doing technology evaluations.

What am I responding to? The illogical moronic nationalistic drivel that gets dumped on these forums every now and then as the basis of a technical assessment.

Any other further comments you can PM me. Keep it off here or I'll assume that you're trolling as you don't appear to have understood the whole thrust of the last multiple pages of responses from the Moderators and Senior Members.

No worries, no chance of missing that, you keep repeating it in every other post. Anyway, from your post above I still dont understand what the nationality of the componentmakers have to do with anything? American components would hardly pose a problem for Norway, would they?

 

[Todjaeger]

No worries, no chance of missing that, you keep repeating it in every other post. Anyway, from your post above I still dont understand what the nationality of the componentmakers have to do with anything? American components would hardly pose a problem for Norway, would they?

I could be mistaken here, but I think what GF was referring to was what appeared to be a claim of content in the Gripen (or perhaps Gripen NG) that was not available in the F-35.

Another possibility was the suggestion that the Gripen would be a preferred design as the aircraft comes from a neighbor of Norway as opposed to across the Atlantic. Given the high content of US products within the Gripen, at some point any US supply problems would impact the Gripen, just like it would the F-35.

As for using MOTS components as opposed to newly developed components, yes there is a lower risk and cost factor. There is also a lower capability factor as well. That is something which Norway needs to decide upon. Capability vs. Price.

-Cheers

 

[gf0012-aust]

No worries, no chance of missing that, you keep repeating it in every other post.

It apparently needed to be mentioned because either your pithy response meant that you were unaware that I actually did work in the environment - or you were baiting? Now that its sorted we don't need to clarify it anymore do we? So how about staying on topic?. The reason why we will reinforce our backgrounds - or why we hilight in peoples profile blocks that they are Defence Professionals (or why people should bother to look at some of the Senior Members histories) is because there is a serious attempt to reinforce that our backgrounds may well have relevance and that considered thought is in play.

Actual experience beyond a book and web page is a whole lot more important when having debate. It provides actual insight into issues. I can point to any number of reputable publications where cited material was blatantly wrong (Janes has long been a victim of this starting from 1911 and made worse by its recent decline as a publication authority)

Anyway, from your post above I still dont understand what the nationality of the componentmakers have to do with anything? American components would hardly pose a problem for Norway, would they?

You've missed the point. Read Todjaegers response.