Royal Norwegian Air Force news and discussion

[Grand Danois]

In any case, F-35 has of course other advantages than ultra-low RCS; low IR signature, excellent EWS, and probably also the best sensors. But I do fear that it will cost much more than what the Norwegian DoD believes. Not to purchase, but to maintain and operate.

Yes, agree. This remains to be seen.

Fuel consumption is not reduced by producing 3000+ fighters, neither is VLO maintainance

V

The F-35 has a different training and mission profile from the Gripen which will mean that the F-35 won't spend as much fuel as SAAB says it will per flight hour. Fewer take-offs & landings pr flt hrs means less fuel pr flt hr.

F-35A is not flying Gripen profiles.

 

[Vivendi]

Competing with F-35 makes the Gripen NG a much more expensive and risky jet, than the standard product out of Saab.

I think that's an important observation. The LCC costs estimated for 48 Gripen NG is more than the total R&D costs for Gripen A/B/C/D...Which basically indicates that Norway expected the need to "re-invent" Gripen NG in an MLU to keep up with things. So, NG would be fine for, say, the period 2016 - 2026, but then you need an MLU that would probably be as comprehensive as the upgrade from C/D to NG, and after doing that you conclude that it does not really help since you lack VLO... which you would need if you base your analysis on facing an opponent having VLO tech. Thus we order F-35. And no doubt F-35 is the safest choice -- it does not hurt to have VLO even if Russia fails in developing PAK FA, although as mentioned earlier it may hurt financially.


V

 

[Dalregementet]

Talked with my friends at Saab and they are furious. Not over the Norvegian choice - they respect that even though they think that Eurofighter was right in their perception that it was not a fair competition. They are furious over the way Norway motivates the choice. This will, according to Saab sources, have a negative impact for Saab on other markets. Swedish/Norwegian defence cooperation is now practically dead, and that by the way the Norwegian defence minister formulated the reason to why Norway chose F35.

According to my sources, the norwegians performed simulations against "SU PAK FA", i.e. against a plane that doesn´t exist and maybe never will. Also, in these simulations, the Gripen EW-suit was not used... Of course, F35 came out best in the norvegian scenarios.

According to my sources, the Swedish prime minister is furious - this definately will hurt Norway - any support from Sweden regarding EU or anything else is gone unless it directly benefits Sweden... Too bad

 

[Grand Danois]

Talked with my friends at Saab and they are furious. Not over the Norvegian choice - they respect that even though they think that Eurofighter was right in their perception that it was not a fair competition. They are furious over the way Norway motivates the choice. This will, according to Saab sources, have a negative impact for Saab on other markets.

I can understand why they feel like that. I was surprised to see such material released and especially the commentary from the Norwegian politicians.

I noted the recommendation has now been pulled from the net.

This crude behaviour by the Norwegian Govt may have been an attempt to shift public perceptions which were heavily influenced by... lets say outside sources...

But that's just me speculating.

 

[RA1911]

I think the need to to justify the choice as clearly as was done was because of the socialst minority in the coalition government was originally openly in favour of Gripen. To release evidence that JSF was significantly better AND cheaper was important in order to stop any problems within the coalition government.

 

[Sea Toby]

Prototypes of the F-35A have been flying for over 5 years, preproduction models of the F-35A have been flying for over a year, yet, there are those who won't believe this aircraft is real or flying. Every indication says production models will and sooner than you think. Too much funds have been spent developing this aircraft from so many nations, how can the aircraft not fly.

 

[Grand Danois]

I think the need to to justify the choice as clearly as was done was because of the socialst minority in the coalition government was originally openly in favour of Gripen. To release evidence that JSF was significantly better AND cheaper was important in order to stop any problems within the coalition government.

Ahh. I think I get it. The socialist minority (SV) - an openly anti-American party - got caught flat-footed by the early release and clear-cut recommendation... I.e. they got steamrolled. This at the expense of SAAB.

 

[tphuang]

No it isn't. Explanation follows.
First of all, F-18 SH is a twin engined jet - add 7-10M dollars over a single-engined jet.

Second, F-18 SH and F-16 are currently build at handmade-prototype numbers - which makes them much more expensive. This is the same thing that killed the Gripen cost advantage. It's assumed low price was dependent on large build quantity - if they didn't sell significantly more Gripen NG beyond Norway, the Gripen would be much more expensive - a risk Norway was unwilling to take.

com'on, you are telling me you think super hornets will be more expensive than F-35?

THE REASON WHY GRIPEN IS MORE EXPENSIVE THAN THE F-35 IS THE SAME REASON WHY F-18 SH IS MORE EXPENSIVE! THE JSF IS GOING TO BE PRODUCED IN 3100+ NUMBERS AT RATES OF ABOVE 200 A YEAR - ECONOMIES OF SCALE. THE CURRENT PRODUCTION RATES AND TOTAL PRODUCTION NUMBERS OF RAFALE AND GRIPEN GIVES THEM A "HANDMADE PROTOTYPE USED AT SQUADRON LEVEL PRICE TAG!"

I can read, thank you.

I'll add to that the the jump in price from Gripen to GNG is due to poorly defined costs of the development from a 4 to a 4.5 gen platform, caused by the unknown quantity to be built.

have I questioned Gripen's cost anywhere here?

The F-18 SH and F-16 have large total production quantities, but are CURRENTLY produced in small numbers - high current unit cost.

Notice that in fact F-18 build rates are higher than Gripens and that capability-wise - this is the league Gripen NG would be in at full development - the F-18 SH/GNG prices are roughly compatible.

Sorry, but I'm fairly tired of explaining this over and over.

that's your opinion, let's see if they can actually do it. I remember M21Sniper from WAB a while back quoted F-35A to be around $80 million each and B and C to be more expensive. We will see whether these public released numbers before any deal ever got signed are any good. If you actually trust these things, a couple of Australian newspaper were saying F-35s they order would be $100 million each.

Numbers have been checked over and over and over by auditors, economists, etc. from many many countries!

The recommendation from Norway included risks analysis at high confidence levels, two private consultancies guaranteeing best practices and the national audit office!!!

The JSF is gonna kill the market on capability and cost - that's the reality. That's why it is under vehement attack from people trying to put the bombtruck label on it.

oh yeah, those economist, half of them still has no idea how much inflation is going on in this country. Do you see how many of these financial institutions are collapsing? If they actually know what they are talking about, why do you they are going under? Then again, that might actually work better for the Norwegians since NOK is gonna gain a lot of value vs USD. The kind of disaster this economy is heading for is going to cause untold affect on the military industrial complex, trust me on this.

But you know, the Norwegians chose on capability grounds - the Gripen NG was murdered by the PAK-FA in simulations - Gripen could do Afgh style ops and Cruise missile defence - but failed at offensive/defensive counter air!!!

I said F-35 is a better plane.

 

[roberto]

Also, it raises the question how Russia, with no experience with building stealth fighters, and a shaky economy, will succed in not just building but also maintaining a stealthy fighter jet.

In any case, F-35 has of course other advantages than ultra-low RCS; low IR signature, excellent EWS, and probably also the best sensors. But I do fear that it will cost much more than what the Norwegian DoD believes. Not to purchase, but to maintain and operate. Fuel consumption is not reduced by producing 3000+ fighters, neither is VLO maintainance
V

Russia has well developed scientific and industrial infrastructure and has brought alot of new technologies inot the world like Sputnik. Stealth should not be a big deal for them.
Maintianing and training on stealth fighter is problem for small countries that have to purcahse alot of parts and training. Stealth fighters are heavy so it needs alot of fuel.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/nov/15/economics-globaleconomy
The G20: Who is there and how desperate are they

 

[gf0012-aust]

Russia has well developed scientific and industrial infrastructure and has brought alot of new technologies inot the world like Sputnik. Stealth should not be a big deal for them.

They might have latent capability - but there is nothing demonstrated for LO tech in russian aircraft since 1958. The US meanwhile has gone through 4 discrete VLO manned generations. The curve has to start somewhere - it has to be demonstrated first.

Maintianing and training on stealth fighter is problem for small countries that have to purcahse alot of parts and training.

the evidence for this is where? the majority of training is done by simulation - and has been for years. there are a number of reasons for this. I'm curious as to where you've gleaned the info on maint and training anyway as none of this is in the public domain - and even the B2 has gone through maint changes in the last 18months which have halved the external VLO maint time.

the F-117 has been parked - not due to the expense of maint, but due to the fact that it was a hybrid of 6 other aircraft and some of those parts are no longer available - even in the boneyard. In addition, its VLO performance has been surpassed by the F-22 and JSF pole tests.

Stealth fighters are heavy so it needs alot of fuel.

the F-22 at MTO is lighter than the SU-30 at MTO. One is VLO the other is 4th gen.

fuel is relative to thrust to weight and nominal performance. nominal performance is relative to whether its a theatre event where all supporting assets are there (ir a real theatre battle) or if we travel the dubious path of sole platform autonomy (which ignores the reality of modern warfare).

If you're going to make claims then its useful to provide reference or context.

 

[gf0012-aust]

According to my sources, the norwegians performed simulations against "SU PAK FA", i.e. against a plane that doesn´t exist and maybe never will. Also, in these simulations, the Gripen EW-suit was not used... Of course, F35 came out best in the norvegian scenarios.
(

hmmmm, our area/"division" had a briefing on Friday re the issue of the media misrepresenting JSF etc...

one of the cute things that everyone gets wrong is that the OPFOR aircraft performance models are provided by USAF - not LM. In fact all the partner nations have been provided with the USAF models for loading up into each countries respective test scenarios. These are the same data models that the USAF uses to test it's own gear against "red forces".

so when you see bloggers or commentators arguing that LM are providing suspect OPFOR models to assists the JSF performance tests, then they are barking up the wrong tree. It's USAF data presented at a Govt to Govt level. LM aren't allowed to influence the data sets.

 

[roberto]

They might have latent capability - but there is nothing demonstrated for LO tech in russian aircraft since 1958. The US meanwhile has gone through 4 discrete VLO manned generations. The curve has to start somewhere - it has to be demonstrated first.

What aircrat Russian demonstrated 3D TVC before showing it in airshows wtih MIG-29/Su-35?. VLO is not some thing that any one can demonstrate. and even if some one can demonstrate they may not want to share. Ever thought about MIG-21Bison and nearly impossible for fire control radar of F-15/F-16 to lock on at BVR ranges and that is 1980s era downgrade export RAM. Russia will take its own scientific course just like it has 50% of world space launch market.

the evidence for this is where? the majority of training is done by simulation - and has been for years. there are a number of reasons for this. I'm curious as to where you've gleaned the info on maint and training anyway as none of this is in the public domain - and even the B2 has gone through maint changes in the last 18months which have halved the external VLO maint time.

maintianing Stealth fighter/bomber is alot expensive. thats why F-117 is retired and B-2 are so limited in number.

the F-117 has been parked - not due to the expense of maint, but due to the fact that it was a hybrid of 6 other aircraft and some of those parts are no longer available - even in the boneyard. In addition, its VLO performance has been surpassed by the F-22 and JSF pole tests.

JSF is not in service for next 10 years. and F-22 dont have the strike ability and numbers.

the F-22 at MTO is lighter than the SU-30 at MTO. One is VLO the other is 4th gen.

Su-30 is down graded export jet. whose technology Russia already sold to China/India. It is based on 1950s era Soviet manufacturing and 1970s era material technologies. It has nothing to do what Russia can produce for itself today. Su-30 has 9.7 tons fuel and 8 tons external load.

fuel is relative to thrust to weight and nominal performance. nominal performance is relative to whether its a theatre event where all supporting assets are there (ir a real theatre battle) or if we travel the dubious path of sole platform autonomy (which ignores the reality of modern warfare).

If you're going to make claims then its useful to provide reference or context.

Supporting assest will not be there in war against major power. So it does not matter if fighter is stealth or not.

 

[gf0012-aust]

What aircrat Russian demonstrated 3D TVC before showing it in airshows wtih MIG-29/Su-35?. VLO is not some thing that any one can demonstrate. and even if some one can demonstrate they may not want to share. Ever thought about MIG-21Bison and nearly impossible for fire control radar of F-15/F-16 to lock on at BVR ranges and that is 1980s era downgrade export RAM. Russia will take its own scientific course just like it has 50% of world space launch market.

Nice speech, but didn't address anything in my response. Where is there any demonstration of Russian VLO/LO design capability in a working or trials platform (that is still in play?). meanwhile, the US is on the 5th generation of its manned version - and all manned VLO/LO's have been different tech bases. Actual production capability against latent?? Sputnik has what relevance? I could argue that the russians never stuck a man on the moon and that would be just as irrelevant for this discussion.

maintianing Stealth fighter/bomber is alot expensive. thats why F-117 is retired and B-2 are so limited in number.

No - can't you read what was said before? F-117 was made up of 6 different aircraft - including the F-104. It's capability is no longer needed, and parts (like the F-104 are no longer easily available)

Stop making things up - this is just as specious as your response about the airframe being more important than the AWACs capability.

in addition, the B2 was made in limited numbers for a reason - maint was not the issue. Threat matrix and need determine what gets produced in what numbers.

JSF is not in service for next 10 years. and F-22 dont have the strike ability and numbers.

LOL there are over 100 F-22's already in service. The JSF is slated for 2014 - 2015 for RAAF - 2010-2011 for USAF. We had a briefing on Friday on JSF and there is still a high degree of confidence that we get the plane as per expected. The only concern is whether Obama will cut USAF numbers - and if thats the case, then we still have a contractual price in place. Worst case is 2016. Thats not 10 years. In fact for the USAF its less than 5 years.

Su-30 is down graded export jet. whose technology Russia already sold to China/India. It is based on 1950s era Soviet manufacturing and 1970s era material technologies. It has nothing to do what Russia can produce for itself today. Su-30 has 9.7 tons fuel and 8 tons external load.

MTO for an Su-27 or Su-30 is heavier than the F-22 MTO. either way, the VLO is lighter than the 4th gen.

Supporting assest will not be there in war against major power. So it does not matter if fighter is stealth or not.

Of course they will? do you think that Russia developed "Mays" for non state conflicts? Do you think that they developed AAR just for getting from Moscow to Siberia and not for sustainment.

Stop making things up - its getting tedious and my patience is running out rapidly.

 

[Grand Danois]

com'on, you are telling me you think super hornets will be more expensive than F-35?

Yes, they are also the most expensive bid in the Danish contest according to the press. But don't rely on the press for that kind of info. They don't understand it.

And as I explained, F-18 SH are high-end avionics, twin-enigned, carrier-capable, built in small quatity jets. So yeah, it is probably true.

I checked up the numbers on F-22A programme some time ago, the difference between a 60 jets/year MYP and a 20 jets/year MYP adds something like 25-30% to the cost of a stealth jet. And the F-35A will be built in average quantities of more than 100/year - including LRIPs.

Lastly, a lot of the huge amount of R&D money spent on the JSF has been on making it cheap to produce - development of efficient production technology and methods.

I can read, thank you.

What you wrote was used elsewhere.

have I questioned Gripen's cost anywhere here?

It was used as an example of platform cost. And how small numbers make for expensive jets.

that's your opinion, let's see if they can actually do it. I remember M21Sniper from WAB a while back quoted F-35A to be around $80 million each and B and C to be more expensive. We will see whether these public released numbers before any deal ever got signed are any good. If you actually trust these things, a couple of Australian newspaper were saying F-35s they order would be $100 million each.

You should ask M21Sniper from WAB where he got his number. I recognize it instantly as from the USAF budget estimates "to comp" or "total" - they're then year dollars, TY 2036. Go ahead ask him. Seriously. I mean it.

oh yeah, those economist, half of them still has no idea how much inflation is going on in this country. Do you see how many of these financial institutions are collapsing? If they actually know what they are talking about, why do you they are going under? Then again, that might actually work better for the Norwegians since NOK is gonna gain a lot of value vs USD. The kind of disaster this economy is heading for is going to cause untold affect on the military industrial complex, trust me on this.

I said F-35 is a better plane.

Oh yeah - those then year dollars. No one seem to grasp the concept.

 

[roberto]

Nice speech, but didn't address anything in my response. Where is there any demonstration of Russian VLO/LO design capability in a working or trials platform (that is still in play?). meanwhile, the US is on the 5th generation of its manned version - and all manned VLO/LO's have been different tech bases. Actual production capability against latent?? Sputnik has what relevance? I could argue that the russians never stuck a man on the moon and that would be just as irrelevant for this discussion.

Have u seen R-37M firing from MIG-31BM? Certainly not but they said they do have missile in active service. Certain things are not for public demonstration thats why u are not seeing PAK-FA pix nor any one new extent of RCS reduction on MIG-21Bison. Soviet and later Russian space program had different intentions. PAK-FA has only one intention to be the best in the world.

The Indian Air Force (IAF) is now adding stealth modifications to an existing $340m programme to upgrade 125 of its MiG-21bis fighters to MiG-21-93 standard. Sources for Jane's Defence Weekly have revealed these secret events in a report published in today's edition of the magazine.

Extensive tests to demonstrate Russia's ability to upgrade Indian fighter aircraft with stealth capabilities took place in front of Indian defence ministry officials at the Sokol aircraft plant in Nizhniy Novgorod on 29th May 2000. The demonstration was highly successful and is understood to have resulted in the Russian government and RSK MIG urging the IAF to adopt the stealth modifications across its MiG-21-93 fleet.

The core of the demonstration saw two MiG-21bis--one upgraded with stealth technology and one without--being tracked by what is believed to be a Mig-31 in a controlled test of radar-absorbent materials (RAM) and coatings developed at the Moscow Institute of Applied and Theoretical Electrodynamics.

During its flight the radar signature of the upgraded Mig-21bis was shown to be between 10 and 15 times weaker than the regular MiG-21bis

No - can't you read what was said before? F-117 was made up of 6 different aircraft - including the F-104. It's capability is no longer needed, and parts (like the F-104 are no longer easily available)

Stop making things up - this is just as specious as your response about the airframe being more important than the AWACs capability.

in addition, the B2 was made in limited numbers for a reason - maint was not the issue. Threat matrix and need determine what gets produced in what numbers.

B-2 is not needed but subonic 2018 bomber is needed. F-117 capability is not required after it shot down in 1999. Threat matrix hasnt changed but increased.

LOL there are over 100 F-22's already in service. The JSF is slated for 2014 - 2015 for RAAF - 2010-2011 for USAF. We had a briefing on Friday on JSF and there is still a high degree of confidence that we get the plane as per expected. The only concern is whether Obama will cut USAF numbers - and if thats the case, then we still have a contractual price in place. Worst case is 2016. Thats not 10 years. In fact for the USAF its less than 5 years.

100 operational does not mean that u can 100 operationally deploy to theatre. atmost 50 and they are with limited capability. surely u will get JSF in 2014-2015 just like wedgetail .

MTO for an Su-27 or Su-30 is heavier than the F-22 MTO. either way, the VLO is lighter than the 4th gen.

MTOW of MIG-35 is lighter than F-22. what does it say about internal fuel, external load structures, manufacturing.

Of course they will? do you think that Russia developed "Mays" for non state conflicts? Do you think that they developed AAR just for getting from Moscow to Siberia and not for sustainment.

Stop making things up - its getting tedious and my patience is running out rapidly.

When certain things does not turn out they way u see it. u always bring patience. There is reason that F-22 and B-2 numbers are cut in good times and still costs overblown. but u tent to think in 21st century Stealth is solution considering its cost and rapid advances in semi and nano technologies for radar and interlinking of satellites.

 

[Haavarla]

Admin. Post Deleteded Read the Rules. OFF TOPIC. Prev Warning issued applies

But F-22 isn't gonna be for export anyway?
So why mention this in this tread?

The Norwegian D-budget is currently bogged down by the Fregats"Nansen class", missile/torpedo"Skjold class" warships and the Afganistan war.

We have practical not a cent leftover for anything at present time.
Infact the D-budget did get a 600million NOK midyear raise ano 2008 to keep things going.
Our D-budget at 33(or was it 23?) billion NOK will not be enough for all the maint on the F-35 in the future i think.
They will have to increase it substancial in the next decade to come..

 

[gf0012-aust]

Have u seen R-37M firing from MIG-31BM? Certainly not but they said they do have missile in active service. Certain things are not for public demonstration thats why u are not seeing PAK-FA pix nor any one new extent of RCS reduction on MIG-21Bison. Soviet and later Russian space program had different intentions. PAK-FA has only one intention to be the best in the world.

have you seen anything fired from an F-22? F15E or even a Sopwith Camel? So what?

They may talk about it being the best - bit what actual evidence has ever been shown in this dimension to even support the wild claims that are thrown about as evidence of existence. Again - the US is on it's 5th different manned generation. ie visible iterative development.

None, nada, zilch, zedro, zip

B-2 is not needed but subonic 2018 bomber is needed. F-117 capability is not required after it shot down in 1999. Threat matrix hasnt changed but increased.

The US already has subsonic bombers - and the change is to hypersonic weapons solutions - thats why at least 5 countries are working on it. What has an intercontinental transonic bomber solution got to do with norway?

100 operational does not mean that u can 100 operationally deploy to theatre. atmost 50 and they are with limited capability. surely u will get JSF in 2014-2015 just like wedgetail .

They exist. Pak-FA exists where? This has what to do with Norway?
Wedgetail has what relevance to USAF or Norway? Over 1800 JSF's effecting 8+ partners does not equal the same issue as 4 x country specific AWACs

MTOW of MIG-35 is lighter than F-22. what does it say about internal fuel, external load structures, manufacturing.

Another spectacular deflection. Mig 35 is not the same role as Su-27, or Su-30 or even the mythical Pak-FA. BTW, Sopwith Camel is lighter than Mig-35 - just as relevant as your answer.

When certain things does not turn out they way u see it. u always bring patience. There is reason that F-22 and B-2 numbers are cut in good times and still costs overblown. but u tent to think in 21st century Stealth is solution considering its cost and rapid advances in semi and nano technologies for radar and interlinking of satellites.

No, what I am sick of is your inability to answer to the question and to autocue your response. You've been told not to do it by more than one Mod.

At no point have I indicated in any conversation that Stealth is the force changer. (if you read the history of my responses you'll know that I detest the term because it's invariably misunderstood by those who wax lyrical over it).

BTW, have another Warning. It may focus you to stay on topic. If you want to talk about everything else not related to the RNAF then start another thread topic.

All subsequent posts OT will be deleted. Feel free to PM me if you want to autocue on this. Do not do it here or start another thread. Either way, stay on topic.

 

[gf0012-aust]

FORUM NOTAM

This post is about the RNAF - it's not about the F-22, the Pak-FA or future strategic bombers. If people want to talk about anything but the actual thread topic then post another thread.

Any OFF TOPIC posts will be deleted.
This does not require a response within the body of the post but can be addressed by PM to Web or a Mod.

The reason why this post was started was because people polluted the prev discussion thread and triggered a lockdown. We're not going to go through a repeat exercise.
​

 

[roberto]

Admin: Text deleted

Did you bother to read any of my prev?

Post deleted as Off Topic.

If you want to have another chat about Russian aircraft or VLO aircraft then look at the history of prev posts on VLO/LO aircraft first.

If none of that covers your unique perspective on VLO/LO aircraft then start another post.

Mod advice is posted for a reason - not to be ignored.

2nd warning issued. 3rd will result in possible suspension from the Site

 

[Dalregementet]

The norvegian government stated that Gripen NG was not "usable" for the scenarios they had chosen. They also stated that JSF was cheaper than Gripen NG - something I personally don´t believe in.

I think the Norwegian government was scared over having a debate over their choice, it was decided a long time ago that the choice was going to be JSF but public opinion was in favour of Gripen NG - it's a public election within half a year so...

Well, I won´t dwell on that though - my question is: If Norway considers Gripen NG to be not adequate, is that then also applicable for Eurofighter, Rafale and Superhornet?