| Author |
Message |
|
lamoey
|
Posted: Nov 30, 2011 - 04:08 PM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran

Joined: Apr 25, 2004 - 06:44 PM
Posts: 699
Location: 77006
Status: Offline
|
| The head of the Norwegian armed forces have recommended that all the F-35 acquired by Norway will be located at a base in southern Norway; hence the cost of integrating the drag chute, used while operating in winter or arctic conditions, may not be needed. The main reasoning is financial, need to defend oil fields in the North Sea and availability for NATO operations elsewhere in the world. The signal he is sending is that northern Norway is not worth defending. What he fails to mention, or realize, is that the majority of the North Sea oil fields are maturing fast, while all the new, worthwhile fields are found in mid to northern waters, and not to mention a common border with Russia in the north. And then there is the increased discussion between Russia, Canada, USA, Denmark and Norway about who will rule in the arctic waters. |
_________________ Former Flight Control Technican - We keep'em flying
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Sponsor
|
Posted: May 20, 2013 - 7:19 AM
|
|
|
F-16.net Sponsor
|
|
|
|
 |
|
strykerxo
|
Posted: Nov 30, 2011 - 09:25 PM
|
|
|
Senior member

Joined: Mar 21, 2008 - 04:40 AM
Posts: 301
Status: Offline
|
|
lamoey wrote:
The head of the Norwegian armed forces have recommended that all the F-35 acquired by Norway will be located at a base in southern Norway; hence the cost of integrating the drag chute, used while operating in winter or arctic conditions, may not be needed. The main reasoning is financial, need to defend oil fields in the North Sea and availability for NATO operations elsewhere in the world. The signal he is sending is that northern Norway is not worth defending. What he fails to mention, or realize, is that the majority of the North Sea oil fields are maturing fast, while all the new, worthwhile fields are found in mid to northern waters, and not to mention a common border with Russia in the north. And then there is the increased discussion between Russia, Canada, USA, Denmark and Norway about who will rule in the arctic waters.
From what I've heard trolls patrol northern Norway.  |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
1st503rdsgt
|
Posted: Nov 30, 2011 - 11:42 PM
|
|
|
Banned
Joined: Jan 23, 2011 - 01:23 AM
Posts: 1549
Status: Offline
|
|
strykerxo wrote:
lamoey wrote:
The head of the Norwegian armed forces have recommended that all the F-35 acquired by Norway will be located at a base in southern Norway; hence the cost of integrating the drag chute, used while operating in winter or arctic conditions, may not be needed. The main reasoning is financial, need to defend oil fields in the North Sea and availability for NATO operations elsewhere in the world. The signal he is sending is that northern Norway is not worth defending. What he fails to mention, or realize, is that the majority of the North Sea oil fields are maturing fast, while all the new, worthwhile fields are found in mid to northern waters, and not to mention a common border with Russia in the north. And then there is the increased discussion between Russia, Canada, USA, Denmark and Norway about who will rule in the arctic waters.
From what I've heard trolls patrol northern Norway.
But they can only operate half the year without turning into stone.  |
_________________ The sky is blue because God loves the Infantry.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
madrat
|
Posted: Dec 01, 2011 - 06:29 AM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran

Joined: Mar 03, 2010 - 03:12 AM
Posts: 986
Status: Offline
|
That's only if they get exposed to flash bulbs. Some skip the whole turning to stone and simply explode when they get injected with a shot of vitamin D.
No worries about trolls up north, that's why they have all those power lines.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1740707/ |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
haavarla
|
Posted: Dec 01, 2011 - 08:47 AM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran

Joined: Jul 28, 2009 - 08:36 PM
Posts: 573
Status: Offline
|
|
Quote:
The head of the Norwegian armed forces have recommended that all the F-35 acquired by Norway will be located at a base in southern Norway; hence the cost of integrating the drag chute, used while operating in winter or arctic conditions, may not be needed. The main reasoning is financial, need to defend oil fields in the North Sea and availability for NATO operations elsewhere in the world. The signal he is sending is that northern Norway is not worth defending. What he fails to mention, or realize, is that the majority of the North Sea oil fields are maturing fast, while all the new, worthwhile fields are found in mid to northern waters, and not to mention a common border with Russia in the north. And then there is the increased discussion between Russia, Canada, USA, Denmark and Norway about who will rule in the arctic waters.
It doesn't matter where in Norway you land an F-35A.
You will still need Parachute for snow and ice condition. Even if it will be only one Air base for F-35, they will have to use other airfields at exercises further north.
Hense, Parashute is still a requirement. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Gums
|
Posted: Dec 01, 2011 - 07:07 PM
|
|
|
Elite 1K

Joined: Dec 16, 2003 - 05:26 PM
Posts: 1439
Status: Offline
|
Salute!
You are correct about the ice and slick runways, haav. On the other hand....
Our Norwegian friends were surprised about the drag chute once home from our cadre training.
Trouble was a crosswind. Let's face it, the jet didn't want to quit flying until below 90 knots or so. The thing would weathervane into the wind and it took lottsa rudder until down to 60 knots or so, then nosewheel steering. And even then a low coefficient of friction on the ice was a problem.
The F-35 is heavier, and prolly has better braking effectiveness due to basic physics because of that weight. The Viper was too light.
Could be that RCS and system complexity has more to do with getting rid of the chute.
respectfully,
Gums sends... |
_________________ Gums
Viper pilot '79
"God in your guts, good men at your back, wings that stay on - and Tally Ho!"
|
|
|
|
 |
|
spazsinbad
|
Posted: Jan 14, 2012 - 06:39 PM
|
|
|
Elite 3K

Joined: May 05, 2009 - 10:31 PM
Posts: 7832
Location: OZ
|
Fight over fighter jet location 2012-Jan-13
http://www.barentsobserver.com/fight-ov ... 58932.html
"Norway will invest €7 billion on 56 new F35 fighter jets. With new planes, the head of the armed forces recommends to move the mainbase from Bodø above the Arctic Circle to a more southern location. That triggers intense political debate about Norway's High North security policy.
In the future Norway might have no fighter jets stationed in the northern part of the country, if the recommendations from chief of Norwegian defence, General Harald Sunde, are heard.
The Norwegian F16 fighter jet base is today located in Bodø in northern Norway and in Ørlandet in southern Norway. When the €7 billion F35 fighter jets investment is in operation around 2020, General Sunde recommends locating all of them at Ørlandet outside Trondheim in mid Norway....
...A third location
However, the disagreements does not stop here, because a second location in northern Norway has been launched. Evenes airfield outside Harstad in Troms County is suggested as a third possibility and the county board of Troms supports this location.This has triggered a debate between the two North Norway counties of Nordland and Troms...."
Photo is manipulated + Ump at the More...
http://img3.custompublish.com/getfile.p ... 035458.jpg |
_________________ RAN FAA A4G: http://tinyurl.com/ctfwb3t http://tinyurl.com/ccmlenr http://www.youtube.com/user/bengello/videos
|
|
|
|
 |
|
hcobb
|
Posted: Jan 14, 2012 - 10:24 PM
|
|
|
Banned
Joined: Jul 27, 2009 - 04:31 PM
Posts: 222
Location: North California
Status: Offline
|
| Go F-35C and use portable traps to land them. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
handyman
|
Posted: Jan 14, 2012 - 11:32 PM
|
|
|
Active Member

Joined: Mar 04, 2011 - 05:41 AM
Posts: 104
Location: SFO
Status: Offline
|
| Or go F35C and use the lower landing speed. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
battleshipagincourt
|
Posted: Jan 15, 2012 - 12:45 AM
|
|
|
Senior member

Joined: Jan 04, 2011 - 12:30 AM
Posts: 331
Status: Offline
|
| Or go with the F-35A and use traps to land them. Given as it's not going to be at tremendous speeds and constantly, the A's arrestor hook should work well enough. The C would be overkill. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
That_Engine_Guy
|
Posted: Jan 15, 2012 - 01:02 AM
|
|
|
Elite 2K

Joined: Dec 14, 2005 - 05:03 AM
Posts: 2198
Location: Under the engine somewhere.
Status: Offline
|
|
haavarla wrote:
You will still need Parachute for snow and ice condition.... Hense, Parashute is still a requirement.
Yeah we all know you need chutes to use jet fighters when there is snow and ice.
Look at all the F-22 Raptors and F-16 Vipers used by the USAF in Alaska......
they...
well, bad example, that's only one snow/ice location.
Canada has lots of 'cold' bases and winter operations,and their CF-118 Hornets have
well, speed-brakes like everyone else.
Okay so maybe chutes aren't that important?
TEG |
_________________ [Airplanes are] near perfect, all they lack is the ability to forgive.
— Richard Collins
|
|
|
|
 |
|
popcorn
|
Posted: Jan 15, 2012 - 01:05 AM
|
|
|
Elite 2K

Joined: Sep 24, 2008 - 09:55 AM
Posts: 2029
Status: Offline
|
| No problem if they go STOVL hehe. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
spazsinbad
|
Posted: Jan 15, 2012 - 01:17 AM
|
|
|
Elite 3K

Joined: May 05, 2009 - 10:31 PM
Posts: 7832
Location: OZ
|
|
|
|
 |
|
That_Engine_Guy
|
Posted: Jan 15, 2012 - 03:29 AM
|
|
|
Elite 2K

Joined: Dec 14, 2005 - 05:03 AM
Posts: 2198
Location: Under the engine somewhere.
Status: Offline
|
Maybe the F135-PW-600 would be beneficial in a cold environment?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAes7fFpgeY
TEG |
_________________ [Airplanes are] near perfect, all they lack is the ability to forgive.
— Richard Collins
|
|
|
|
 |
|
spazsinbad
|
Posted: Jan 15, 2012 - 03:39 AM
|
|
|
Elite 3K

Joined: May 05, 2009 - 10:31 PM
Posts: 7832
Location: OZ
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|