Denmark reconsidering JSF?

popcorn · by **popcorn** » 19 Nov 2015, 00:34

krorvik wrote:
SpudmanWP wrote:
selvagor wrote:They can in fact do a fair comparaison with some imaginary number for the F-35. As the F-35 square cost is less than zero, it will be less than any other plane cost !

If we used your logic then no plane would ever be improved, developed, etc.

Can't fault his imagination though...

He can't accept that the French apple-of-his-eye doesn't even get to go to the ball. Surely Dassault can offer a Denmarkized Rafale that will be cheaper and better solution?

cosmicdwarf · by **cosmicdwarf** » 19 Nov 2015, 01:04

popcorn wrote:He can't accept that the French apple-of-his-eye doesn't even get to go to the ball. Surely Dassault can offer a Denmarkized Rafale that will be cheaper and better solution?

Does it come with an engine?

cantaz · by **cantaz** » 19 Nov 2015, 02:42

cosmicdwarf wrote:Does it come with an engine?

Just ONE.

geforcerfx · by **geforcerfx** » 19 Nov 2015, 09:52

cantaz wrote:
cosmicdwarf wrote:Does it come with an engine?

Just ONE.

Think of the cost savings, half the fuel burn, and only half the engine maintenance, not to mention a nice reduction in empty weight to pad the paper stats.

popcorn · by **popcorn** » 20 Nov 2015, 00:46

selvagor wrote:
popcorn wrote:He can't accept that the French apple-of-his-eye doesn't even get to go to the ball. Surely Dassault can offer a Denmarkized Rafale that will be cheaper and better solution?
You're right and a sweded F-35 will be even cheaper.

The Swedish Princess isn't going to the dance either, just like your French darling. :doh:

XanderCrews · by **XanderCrews** » 20 Nov 2015, 05:40

selvagor wrote:
popcorn wrote:He can't accept that the French apple-of-his-eye doesn't even get to go to the ball. Surely Dassault can offer a Denmarkized Rafale that will be cheaper and better solution?
You're right and a sweded F-35 will be even cheaper.

The majority of swedish equipment is imported. They are not magic and even they know this.

The gripen is cheap because its basically a trainer class aircraft built to fight. F-5 like basically.

If gripen was as amazing as the internet thinks their sales would be through the roof, and the Swedish economy would hinge around revolutionizing avaition, especially the civil side

zerion · by **zerion** » 06 Dec 2015, 00:49

Denmark Further Postpones Fighter Selection Until 2016

Christensen has told the Parliamentary Defense Committee (PDC) there will be no announcement on aircraft selection until all funding issues have been resolved and the government finalizes a finance plan.

This Danish government is set to announce a selection in the first quarter of 2016...

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /76729290/

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 23 Jan 2016, 00:22

Long convoluted article best read at source:

Replacing Denmark's Aging F-16s Could Place Strain on Defense Budget
22 Jan 2016 Gerard O'Dwyer

"HELSINKI — The significant investment planned by Denmark to replace the Danish Air Force’s (DAF) ageing F-16s is raising concerns both domestically and within NATO that the capital-heavy program may place a major drain on the military’s future core budgets.

Based on current estimates, the fighter replacement program is likely to cost Denmark between US $3 billion and US $4.5 billion, depending on the number of aircraft eventually purchased.

Moreover, the Danish government will need to budget for additional associated expenditures of between $10 billion to $13 billion to cover operational and maintenance costs over the aircraft’s intended 30-40 year lifespan.

Denmark sought bids on 24, 30 and 36 aircraft. These numbers are substantially lower than Denmark’s initial ambition to acquire up to 48 aircraft at the outset of the acquisition program in 2005. The DAF’s front-line fighter fleet currently has 30 operational F-16s....

...Denmark’s New Fighter Program Office (NFPO), which operates under the MoD, is expected to complete all components in its final evaluation of candidate aircraft by the end of January 2016.

The MoD is set to present a recommendation, based on the NFPO’s candidate aircraft evaluation report, to the Cabinet by the end of the first half of 2016. This could potentially happen as soon as March or April.

The aircraft recommendation stage will be followed by a public debate, which will also trigger political cross-party discussions around the aircraft selection and the government’s project financing plan.

The FRP has experienced five separate delays under five difference defense ministers since the project was launched in August 2005. The short list of candidate aircraft in the competition includes the Eurofighter Typhoon, the Boeing F-18F Super Hornet and the F-35A Lightning II (Joint Strike Fighter)."

Source: http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /79169716/

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 18 Mar 2016, 07:42

Lots of political argybargy in this report that I cannot possibly understand - however it may mean something to some one.

Possible Delays Loom for Danish Fighter Buy
17 Mar 2016 Gerard O’Dwyer

BEST READ AT SOURCE

Source: http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /81939168/

XanderCrews · by **XanderCrews** » 18 Mar 2016, 11:43

spazsinbad wrote:Lots of political argybargy in this report that I cannot possibly understand - however it may mean something to some one.
Possible Delays Loom for Danish Fighter Buy
17 Mar 2016 Gerard O’Dwyer

BEST READ AT SOURCE

Source: http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /81939168/

Lol once again boeing is on the wrong end of a government deciding to play games. If the other option is the typhoon, it's pretty academic what's going to happen

krorvik · by **krorvik** » 29 Apr 2016, 18:11

Norwegian klassekampen today has an article claiming that the danes are indeed going for the F-35 - a report handed to the defense minister says the F-35 is better in combat, and has lower maintenance and life cycle costs. Allied cooperation is also mentioned as a driving factor.

Source in norwegian: http://www.klassekampen.no/article/2016 ... /160429898

The article is also full of factual errors, but anyway, giggle translation:

https://translate.google.com/translate? ... F160429898

XanderCrews · by **XanderCrews** » 29 Apr 2016, 21:08

Wow thank you for the post.

Got some laughs out of the translation

popcorn · by **popcorn** » 29 Apr 2016, 23:36

Maybe Trudeau will get a clue?

cosmicdwarf · by **cosmicdwarf** » 30 Apr 2016, 04:44

popcorn wrote:Maybe Trudeau will get a clue?

I think he already has. It's the money and political will to go more into debt for military spending he's missing.

magitsu · by **magitsu** » 30 Apr 2016, 17:12

The Danish radio that broke the news has some interesting data. Supposedly 30 year lifetime cost for 28 is 80 to 100 billion kronor (13-15 Bn USD).

Unusually, parties will decide not only the number of aircraft to be purchased and what they should cost, but also the choice of type and, most importantly, the financing of the new fighter, which is expected to cost between 80 and 100 billion over 30 years. It can not be excluded that politicians end up choosing a different fighter and especially F18 aircraft still have a chance.

http://www.radio24syv.dk/udvalgte-nyhed ... pfly-test/

Sounds rather affordable compared to the old Norwegian estimate for 51 from 2011. Which didn't include 10 Bn purchase price.

RAdm Arne Røksund: The life cycle costs will be, I think, about—this is not public yet, so I have to be careful—$40 billion U.S. over 30 years. So that's life cycle costs over 30 years, all included

http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications ... Id=5272974