Norway to reduce F-35 order?

Program progress, politics, orders, and speculation
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

treebeard

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 49
  • Joined: 24 May 2010, 11:47
  • Location: NL

Unread post13 Sep 2015, 16:49

lamoey wrote:
treebeard wrote:I'd like to think the Gripen NG has at least some merits. Saab and Brazil have just finalised a contract that is likely to ensure the development and the production of the program. Brazil may also end up ordering more than the 36 now envisioned. In the end it might just become the favoured F-16-like platform for European states that do not require/cannot afford more capable alternatives like the F-35/Rafale/Eurofighter.


Don't they show news about Brazil in the Nederlands? Brazils economy is in the tank, their bonds downgraded to close to junk. So the argument is that one of the worlds richest countries, on a slight decline, can't afford what they have planned, while a country close to bankruptcy may decide to spend even more than planned?

Under the current economical environment SAAB will be very lucky if any money comes out of Brazil.

Actually, the order for 36 fighters while more were originally envisioned reminds me of the situation of some F-35 purchasers. Even if Brazil won't commit to higher numbers, the initial purchase is enough to replace the now-failed Swiss contract that was meant to secure the development of the Gripen NG program in Sweden. If I remember correctly, the Swedish plan to buy 60 to 80 aircraft was contingent on a foreign partner with whom the Swedish government could share the development and production costs. Without a foreign backer, the program could even be cancelled. Since the Swedes have not yet rescinded on their deal, I think it is too early to label the Gripen NG a joke.

As for the Brazilian economic downturn, what I got from the news is less alarming than what you purport. The Standard & Poor's downgraded rating came as a surprise because it came earlier as expected, especially because Moody's moved to a stable outlook for Brazil only a month ago (-on the brink of a junk rating, mind you). I don't expect a monstrous capital drain just yet, especially when other rating agencies consider the proposed saving measures that will have to bring about a primary budget surplus in 2016. Perhaps it may motivate a reform drive after all...

As for Norway, I only hope that they will end up with the 52 aircraft they plan to buy. I've never taken Bill Sweetman truly serious after reading years of his one-sided analysis and reports.
"Do not be hasty."
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5485
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post14 Sep 2015, 04:22

XanderCrews wrote:
lamoey wrote:
Of course BS can't write anything about the F-35 without mentioning his "6 generation" Gripen.


The gripen ng is a joke. Not one European sale, voted out in Switzerland, after a leaked evaluation showed it was inferior to the legacy F-18.

Poverty airplane for nations that can't afford anything else, and classic underdog of discredited bill sweetman and Gripen fanboys who's love comes from very publicly massaged numbers and PR campaigns.

It lost in Norway because it's inferior to the F-16s they have now. We are supposed to be shocked they picked the F-35?? Not to mention the fact that the Gripen E still hasn't made its first flight and has been rejected by a series of air forces.

In 2008, the Gripen NG was a very immature concept. The demo hadn't even flown. There was a lot of skepticism about its ability to sell (good call eh?) And its numbers (the weight goal for NG was missed by a full 1000 KG)

Norway isn't stupid. Only swedens desire to keep saab going is why it exists at all. You didn't need wiki leaks to figure out the Gripen NG is a Piece of sh*t based on flawed assumptions.



62104174.jpg
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5905
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post16 Sep 2015, 14:01

treebeard wrote:
lamoey wrote:
treebeard wrote:I'd like to think the Gripen NG has at least some merits. Saab and Brazil have just finalised a contract that is likely to ensure the development and the production of the program. Brazil may also end up ordering more than the 36 now envisioned. In the end it might just become the favoured F-16-like platform for European states that do not require/cannot afford more capable alternatives like the F-35/Rafale/Eurofighter.


Don't they show news about Brazil in the Nederlands? Brazils economy is in the tank, their bonds downgraded to close to junk. So the argument is that one of the worlds richest countries, on a slight decline, can't afford what they have planned, while a country close to bankruptcy may decide to spend even more than planned?

Under the current economical environment SAAB will be very lucky if any money comes out of Brazil.

Actually, the order for 36 fighters while more were originally envisioned reminds me of the situation of some F-35 purchasers. Even if Brazil won't commit to higher numbers, the initial purchase is enough to replace the now-failed Swiss contract that was meant to secure the development of the Gripen NG program in Sweden. If I remember correctly, the Swedish plan to buy 60 to 80 aircraft was contingent on a foreign partner with whom the Swedish government could share the development and production costs. Without a foreign backer, the program could even be cancelled. Since the Swedes have not yet rescinded on their deal, I think it is too early to label the Gripen NG a joke.

As for the Brazilian economic downturn, what I got from the news is less alarming than what you purport. The Standard & Poor's downgraded rating came as a surprise because it came earlier as expected, especially because Moody's moved to a stable outlook for Brazil only a month ago (-on the brink of a junk rating, mind you). I don't expect a monstrous capital drain just yet, especially when other rating agencies consider the proposed saving measures that will have to bring about a primary budget surplus in 2016. Perhaps it may motivate a reform drive after all...

As for Norway, I only hope that they will end up with the 52 aircraft they plan to buy. I've never taken Bill Sweetman truly serious after reading years of his one-sided analysis and reports.



A part of my opinion comes from being Jaded about the over hype, largely thanks to people like Bill Sweetman. Some of it is Saab Themselves though, who are wildly inflating the numbers on this aircraft. Those numbers are now being taken as the gospel since "saab never lies" which is ridiculous, Saab lies constantly and publish unrealistic numbers online. Then folks wonder why they don't win tenders or competitions, thus inflating their "under dog" status. :roll: Their are accusations of Bribery in Cz Republic, Brazil, and their largest export South Africa was a confirmed bribery scandal.


the F-35 is under a microscope, some of that is for very good reason, some of it not so much. But the fact that Sweetman goes out of his way to promote the Gripen and slam the F-35, basically puts him into "unofficial spokesman" at best, and "propagandist" at worst.

No one is asking why it took Saab so long to get the Gripen NG sold anywhere, why the Swiss found it "3rd best", how it gained 1,000 KG over the goal weight--It weighs as much as an F-16C, with a much smaller engine.
(the "goal weight" is what they based all their brochure numbers on) And there is some cost controversy. And this is before we get into the "Super Cruise" that Saab is marketing-- which is complete and utter Bull$hit but Saab fans believe its the second coming.

I am also curious how they are going to keep the costs low by creating redundant assembly lines that likely won't top 100 aircraft produced each. Its a total fleet that probably won't exceed 250 aircraft produced total. Saab "exported" less than 60 of the legacy gripen total. We also have factors like lots of 2nd hand F-16s coming onto the market. Romania for example opted for some.

People are trying to sell this on par with an F-35, when its basically a 21st century F-5. Treebeard, you are a good poster, and an honest contributor which is why I am willing to outline my theory on the NG.
Choose Crews
Offline

magitsu

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 399
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2015, 22:12

Unread post16 Sep 2015, 18:55

In my opinion Gripen's leading edge has been their willingness for technology transfer.
That might have been bigger reason than publicly speculated political considerations. Convenient excuse to forego the US products just this once?

India would be interested in something similar, but unfortunately they are also building carriers. Can they afford not to buy american when they so badly desire tech transfer/licensed CATOBAR tech in form of EMALS?
Interestingly enough France also operates CATOBAR carriers, so maybe they could also be useful to Indian aims. But the failed Rafale bid forces to make some deduction in this regard.
Offline

h-bomb

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 302
  • Joined: 26 Apr 2009, 20:07
  • Location: South Central USA

Unread post16 Sep 2015, 19:59

magitsu wrote: Interestingly enough France also operates CATOBAR carriers, so maybe they could also be useful to Indian aims. But the failed Rafale bid forces to make some deduction in this regard.


FYI They French have modified Nimitz gear for CATOBAR, so India would have to get US tech either way.
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5905
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post17 Sep 2015, 04:46

magitsu wrote:In my opinion Gripen's leading edge has been their willingness for technology transfer.
That might have been bigger reason than publicly speculated political considerations. Convenient excuse to forego the US products just this once?



I agree, it's about the industry first and the plane second. As for being mad at the USA, Dassault was fast to point out that there are many US parts in Th3 Gripen NG-- not least of which would be the engine.

Its honestly really tough to know the whole scoop. South American military doesn't really have much defense press coverage, not a lot of insiders etc. So there is the political excuse but IMHO it was just an excuse to pick what they wanted anyway
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

lamoey

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1061
  • Joined: 25 Apr 2004, 17:44
  • Location: 77550

Unread post17 Sep 2015, 14:05

XanderCrews wrote:
magitsu wrote:In my opinion Gripen's leading edge has been their willingness for technology transfer.
That might have been bigger reason than publicly speculated political considerations. Convenient excuse to forego the US products just this once?



I agree, it's about the industry first and the plane second. As for being mad at the USA, Dassault was fast to point out that there are many US parts in Th3 Gripen NG-- not least of which would be the engine.

Its honestly really tough to know the whole scoop. South American military doesn't really have much defense press coverage, not a lot of insiders etc. So there is the political excuse but IMHO it was just an excuse to pick what they wanted anyway


We will probably never know exactly why Brazil chose Swedish, but I believe Boeing was sent packing when it became public that NSA had been listening in on the Brazilian presidents phone and who knows where else.
Former Flight Control Technican - We keep'em flying
Offline

treebeard

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 49
  • Joined: 24 May 2010, 11:47
  • Location: NL

Unread post17 Sep 2015, 21:51

XanderCrews wrote:A part of my opinion comes from being Jaded about the over hype, largely thanks to people like Bill Sweetman. Some of it is Saab Themselves though, who are wildly inflating the numbers on this aircraft. Those numbers are now being taken as the gospel since "saab never lies" which is ridiculous, Saab lies constantly and publish unrealistic numbers online. Then folks wonder why they don't win tenders or competitions, thus inflating their "under dog" status. :roll: Their are accusations of Bribery in Cz Republic, Brazil, and their largest export South Africa was a confirmed bribery scandal.


the F-35 is under a microscope, some of that is for very good reason, some of it not so much. But the fact that Sweetman goes out of his way to promote the Gripen and slam the F-35, basically puts him into "unofficial spokesman" at best, and "propagandist" at worst.

No one is asking why it took Saab so long to get the Gripen NG sold anywhere, why the Swiss found it "3rd best", how it gained 1,000 KG over the goal weight--It weighs as much as an F-16C, with a much smaller engine.
(the "goal weight" is what they based all their brochure numbers on) And there is some cost controversy. And this is before we get into the "Super Cruise" that Saab is marketing-- which is complete and utter Bull$hit but Saab fans believe its the second coming.

I am also curious how they are going to keep the costs low by creating redundant assembly lines that likely won't top 100 aircraft produced each. Its a total fleet that probably won't exceed 250 aircraft produced total. Saab "exported" less than 60 of the legacy gripen total. We also have factors like lots of 2nd hand F-16s coming onto the market. Romania for example opted for some.

People are trying to sell this on par with an F-35, when its basically a 21st century F-5. Treebeard, you are a good poster, and an honest contributor which is why I am willing to outline my theory on the NG.

I wholeheartedly concur with you. The Gripen E is no suitable alternative to those now looking to acquire the F-35.

I remember SAAB claiming that they could sell the Dutch government 85 Gripen NGs for a fixed price of 4,8 billion euro, with guaranteed industrial compensation orders worth at least 100% of the total Dutch investment costs. The delivery of all 85 aircraft was guaranteed to take place between 2018 and 2023 and the maintenance costs were fixed at 10 billion euro for 30 years. The aircraft, which was yet to be developed, would meet all technical and operational requirements and would serve the RNLAF well into 2050. I believe that offer was first made in 2006, and SAAB repeatedly and publicly (re)proposed in 2008 and/or 2009.

In hindsight, I can't help but grin whenever I think back to that episode. It has become abundantly clear that this offer was 'far from realistic', which is the exact wording the Royal Dutch Air Force used to describe it back in 2006. (I believe the Danish and Norwegian Ministries responded in a similar manner.) Regardless of the doubt expressed by the MoD, the media kept repeating these numbers whenever the JSF program was negatively featured in the news because the words 'fixed contract' managed to create an illusion of a financially secure alternative to the F-35A. In my personal opinion, this media bias was bolstered by the anti-JSF, pro-Gripen cheer-leading by the likes of Bill Sweetman, some of whom were in direct contact with Dutch politicians seated in the House of Representatives. In the end, I think the flawed media reporting put a strain on the complete Dutch F-16 replacement program and is partly to be blamed for the political muddle the whole program turned out to be.

SAAB carries a certain responsibility also, even though their conduct may easily be described as a very effective yet dubious media strategy. I think the Gripen NG may become a suitable platform for the states (e.g. Croatia, Bulgaria, Slovakia) which would be quite happy with a modernised 'F-5'. From their standpoint, I think a procurement of Gripen second-hand C/Ds or new Gripen Es makes more financial sense than second-hand F-16MLUs (given the flight hours these airframes have amassed over time). Whether SAAB will meet their export estimations for their Gripen E remains to be seen, but I do wish them all the best. I do the same for Norway, which I hope will be able to afford more than 22 F-35As. Surely, I have similar feelings for my own country. :wink:
"Do not be hasty."
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 22981
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post23 Sep 2015, 02:27

Norway's F-35 Commitment Reportedly Still Firm [I want to know when it was in doubt given all reporting]
22 Sep 2015 Guy Norris | Aviation Week & Space Technology

"FORT WORTH – Leaked details of a Norwegian defense planning document intended to guide government spending in 2016 appear to support continued procurement of the planned full complement of Lockheed Martin F-35s, the first of which was formally rolled out at the manufacturer’s facility here on Sept. 21.

The Royal Norway Air Force is currently slated to take 52 F-35s to replace its aging F-16s, but has so far received government authorization for only the first 22 aircraft. The question of whether Norway will slow down or even cut acquisition of part of the remaining 30 is expected to be debated by the country’s parliament in early 2016. However, leaked details of recommendations that will form part of a defense spending White Paper on the issue indicate the F-35 remains fully supported.

Details published by the Norwegian defense and security website “Never Again” show senior defense officials recommend staying with current plans to make the F-35 fully operational by 2025, and for the aircraft to be “fully integrated” with the Kongsberg Defense Systems-developed Joint Strike Missile (JSM) anti-ship weapon. However, according to the website, the recommendations which will be submitted to the Norwegian defense ministry on Oct. 1, include the cautionary warning that the “phasing in of new combat aircraft will involve a planned reduced operational capability in the transition phase.”

“During this period,” the document says, “the F-16 still accounts for the bulk of the combat aircraft structure. To ensure a minimum level of operational capability in the most critical period (2018 - 2020) the emphasis (will be) on applying enough resources to operate the F-16 while the F-35 is phased in.” The F-16 will continue to provide quick-reaction alert capability up to 2022, even though the F-35 is intended to achieve initial operational capability in 2019. “F-35 system support will be strengthened in order to realize a higher number of flight hours earlier than planned, when needed,” it adds....

...Commenting on the central position of the F-35 in the future force structure, Major Gen. Per Egil Rygg, chief of the Norwegian Air Force, tells Aviation Week the Joint Strike Fighter is “the most important part of that. The aircraft constitutes the change of the entire armed forces of Norway. It impacts how we do business and how we develop concepts of operations.” The recommendations to the defense ministry include retention of the final six aircraft in the planned procurement to take the Norwegian tally to 52.

“When the decision was made [in 2012] there was wide agreement on the number 52 with the reservation that the final six would be dependent on the world situation. I’d say the world situation shows us we need all 52, especially with [the way] things are with our neighbors, some of whom are good and some of whom are not so good.”...

...Norway’s full complement will comprise two full squadrons of 24 F-35As each, in addition to training and development aircraft. The F-35As will be delivered from 2017 to 2024 at the rate of six per year with initial operational capability planned for 2019 and full operational capability scheduled for 2025."

Source: http://aviationweek.com/defense/norways ... still-firm
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

lamoey

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1061
  • Joined: 25 Apr 2004, 17:44
  • Location: 77550

Unread post30 Sep 2015, 17:55

The newspaper VG is reporting leaked information about what the Chief of Defense will recommend to the government tomorrow. The list includes the full order of the 52 F-35 previously reported. This assumes that the defense budget does increase according to NATO guidelines. However, should the spending limits stay at todays level, which the Admiral strongly discourages, then a reduction to 42 aircraft may be necessary, as well as cutting the army by 1/4 and removing several navy surface vessels and all submarines.
Former Flight Control Technican - We keep'em flying
Offline

oldiaf

Banned

  • Posts: 1434
  • Joined: 05 Aug 2015, 23:28

Unread post30 Sep 2015, 18:45

lamoey wrote:The newspaper VG is reporting leaked information about what the Chief of Defense will recommend to the government tomorrow. The list includes the full order of the 52 F-35 previously reported. This assumes that the defense budget does increase according to NATO guidelines. However, should the spending limits stay at todays level, which the Admiral strongly discourages, then a reduction to 42 aircraft may be necessary, as well as cutting the army by 1/4 and removing several navy surface vessels and all submarines.

Even if reduced by 10 .. Will not lead to death Spiral ... USAF already reduced the numbers previously by 14 ... Waiting for Norway and Canada decisions next month .
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 22981
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post06 Oct 2015, 08:08

Norway's Defence Review Underscores F-35 Commitment
05 Oct 2015 Lara Seligman

"Norway's ministry of defence is using a strategic defence review to push for significant funding increases for the country's armed forces, as well as underscore the importance of the F-35 joint strike fighter to the Norwegian Air Force.

Presenting the review last week, Norwegian Chief of Defence Adm. Haakon Bruun-Hanssen reconfirmed Norway's support for the F-35 program, saying he intends to stick to the full 52-aircraft buy. The F-35 provides a number of unique capabilities that no other platform can offer, Bruun-Hanssen said, according to an Oct. 2 statement from the Norwegian F-35 program office.

"We remain dependent on the timely introduction of new capabilities into our armed forces, such as the F-35. Only by completing the acquisition of 52 combat aircraft with the Joint Strike Missile, will we be able to provide the full spectrum capabilities that we need to address our future security challenges," Bruun-Hanssen said.

The review will help inform a new long-term plan for the Norwegian armed forces, which will be introduced to parliament in 2016.

If the funding hike is not approved, Bruun-Hanssen warned of "severe cutbacks" across Norway's military.

F-35 cuts may be considered as part of a "worst case scenario," he said, according to the statement...."

Source: http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /73410856/
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

arrow-nautics

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 636
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2012, 23:42
  • Location: Halifax

Unread post06 Oct 2015, 13:20

spazsinbad wrote:
Norway's Defence Review Underscores F-35 Commitment


Does this mean Maus92 is the Negative F-35 Result Jinxer? :lol:
There's an old rule among many in the fighter procurement business: "Too Early to Tell, Too Late to Stop".
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 22981
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post13 Oct 2015, 20:49

Yep the NorskWhisperer has done it again.
Norway proposes F-35 funding increase for 2016
13 Oct 2015 Beth Stevenson

"Building on its release of a Strategic Defence Review publication on 1 October, Norway has proposed a 9.8% real-term defence budget increase for 2016. This would see a near doubling of funding for the Lockheed Martin F-35, plus an authorisation request for six more.

Presented by the government on 7 October, the proposed budget will see the F-35 financially bolstered following the Norwegian chief of defence’s commitment to acquiring a planned 52 conventional take-off and landing F-35As.

The 2016 budget proposal includes a request to authorise procurement of an additional six aircraft, for delivery in 2020. The Norwegian parliament has already authorised the procurement of 22 of the 52 F-35s that Norway plans to procure, covering deliveries up to and including 2019.

“The majority of the increase comes from a near doubling of the funding related to the Norwegian acquisition of the F-35, which ensures that the Norwegian procurement of the F-35 will proceed as planned,” the government says.

“The overall priorities in the government’s budget proposal are in line with the recommendations presented by the chief of defence on 1 October in his strategic military review, and helps increase the defence budget’s share of Norway’s GNP to a projected 1.54%.”

The F-35 aircraft acquisition, alongside associated infrastructure – namely the development of its new base at Ørland Main Air Station – has been offered an allocation of NKr8.6 billion ($1.05 billion), from the total NKr49 billion (a rise of NKr4.29 billion from 2015 in real terms) proposal for 2016...."

Source: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... 16-417698/
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5905
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post13 Oct 2015, 21:45

spazsinbad wrote:Yep the NorskWhisperer has done it again.
Norway proposes F-35 funding increase for 2016
13 Oct 2015 Beth Stevenson

"Building on its release of a Strategic Defence Review publication on 1 October, Norway has proposed a 9.8% real-term defence budget increase for 2016. This would see a near doubling of funding for the Lockheed Martin F-35, plus an authorisation request for six more.

Presented by the government on 7 October, the proposed budget will see the F-35 financially bolstered following the Norwegian chief of defence’s commitment to acquiring a planned 52 conventional take-off and landing F-35As.

The 2016 budget proposal includes a request to authorise procurement of an additional six aircraft, for delivery in 2020. The Norwegian parliament has already authorised the procurement of 22 of the 52 F-35s that Norway plans to procure, covering deliveries up to and including 2019.

“The majority of the increase comes from a near doubling of the funding related to the Norwegian acquisition of the F-35, which ensures that the Norwegian procurement of the F-35 will proceed as planned,” the government says.

“The overall priorities in the government’s budget proposal are in line with the recommendations presented by the chief of defence on 1 October in his strategic military review, and helps increase the defence budget’s share of Norway’s GNP to a projected 1.54%.”

The F-35 aircraft acquisition, alongside associated infrastructure – namely the development of its new base at Ørland Main Air Station – has been offered an allocation of NKr8.6 billion ($1.05 billion), from the total NKr49 billion (a rise of NKr4.29 billion from 2015 in real terms) proposal for 2016...."

Source: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... 16-417698/


Death spiral
Choose Crews
PreviousNext

Return to Program and politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: rheonomic and 16 guests