Norway may no longer require drag chute

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.

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.

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.

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/

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.

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...

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

Go F-35C and use portable traps to land them.

Or go F35C and use the lower landing speed.

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.

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

No problem if they go STOVL hehe.

PoPcoRn but you know the slush problem with F-35Bs will be tremendous - even if the concrete don't melt!

Maybe the F135-PW-600 would be beneficial in a cold environment?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAes7fFpgeY

TEG

While the F-35B can be flown to any (reasonable) location for a bit of SnowClearing - but can the F-35B make SNOW ANGELS!

http://thepilver.files.wordpress.com/20 ... -angel.jpg