Norway as operator of a small fleet would profit from other nations in the area operating similar aircraft. That would basically mean Euofighter (Germany, UK) or JSF (Denmark, UK, Netherlands) as primary candidates. In terms of multi-role and anti-ship capabilities the Eurofighter should be capable. It lacks the stealth, while I doubt that the JSF can swallow a fully grown anti-ship missile in its belly.

P.S.: The only missiles that fits into the F-35 are AMRAAM, Sidewinder and Brimstone. None of them really useful for anti-ship attacks. Of course, being super-stealthy it can fly directly over the ship and drop a pair of good old SnakeEyes.

Actually there are several diagrams caming from Lock Mart of a F-35A with a “fully grown anti-ship missile in its belly”, or to be more precise with a Konsberg NSM (and that´s a very fine anti ship missile) in each of the “Bomb bay´s”.

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/lockheed-kongsberg-partner-to-bring-nsm-to-jsf-03015/

Cheers

Clearly, Super Carriers and able to carry more than 40 Aircraft. With a flight deck nearly the size of the USN Nimtz Class. Also, consider the footprint of the F-35B and Merlin. Only forty aircraft is laughable……….;)

Frosty, just beat me to it…
There are several designs/diagrams caming directly from THALES/Aircraft Carrier Alliance with the full complement of F-35B´s and MASC´s, and, has expected, the old “1000 ton´s for plane” rule still aplies with the CVF. We are talking about around 60 planes in a full “combat configuration” (how much time the CVF will be capable of operating with efficiency with THAT configuration, that´s another story).
The main limiting factor will be the number of active F-35B´s fighters and their pilots. With the army fighting in two fronts (cutting their programs it´s not a very sensible action), with the main RAF program (Tiffie) protected by a draconian contract in case of cuts, and the JSF program cost exploding in the last two years (and if someone think´s that I´m over reacting in this last sentence, the USAF and US Navy Budget´s are available, compare the “Fly away costs” for the F-35A/B/C that were predicted in the 2007 budget and compare them with the new 2009 budget, it´s educative), the RN and the RAF are going to wait a LOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNGGGGGGGGG time before receiving the entire complement of 138 Lightning´s II (if ever).

L’Eurofighter est actuellement le meilleur avion de combat multirôles à hautes performances de prochaine génération.:diablo:

Partnaire de l’armées de l’aire 😀

Just got my copy, dam good…
Well worth eight Euros.

[QUOTE=tiddles;1223783]

Yeah… like I know what this says…. but it looks like the sales pitch for the Super Hornet is being tossed at Norway. OK ….where’s the drag chute?:diablo:

Hi Eric, I know that you are not a big fan of the SH, but realistically,anything would be better than the Gripen for Norway. I believe that they will still go with the JSF & so does the EF Consortium, but still IMHO the SH is the CURRENT next best thing to the JSF as a multi-role fighter, this excludes the F22 which is not available anyhow.
Tiddles

If there´s one thing that the RAPTOR isn´t his “multi-role”. A superb air- defence fighter with a limited JDAM/SDB capability it´s not my definition of “multi role”.

There´s absolutely NOTHING HILAROUS in a shooting war. People get killed.

If the F-22 will maintain a clear edge for only the next decade, then other current fighters will soon be in big trouble! 😮 In that case, other air forces had better get their Raptors while the production line is still open. 😉

😀

I´m a conservative guy…
But that decade has a reason, somewhere around that date the Sukhoi T-50 will enter service, and not being a “medium” i can´t really tell how they will compare. And we really dont know how the technology will evolve in a decade, decade and a half. If (a big IF, granted) the “furtive” capabilities of the RAPTOR are seriously degraded in that time frame, then it´s actual edge will get a serious blow.

Cheers 🙂

I could ask why Germany needs an air force to protect itself from those pesky Danes, or why the UK needs one to protect itself from those aggressive Icelandic people.

It may be time to acquaint yourself with the realities and history of the Asia Pacific region.

Yes the Brits and the Germans just bought several dozens (Hundreds) of Raptor´s… :rolleyes:
No, wait, they didn´t…
They are equiping themselves with an aircraft who costs half a RAPTOR and actually has some decent ATA AND ATG capabilities, like AN LDP, could you believe it?
And they actually build the dam things at home.
Strange folks those Europeans.

I wasn´t atacking the RAAF (who have proved, time after time, year after year, decade after decade, having a very fine understanding of operational needs, and a dam good “kit” selection process), but the idea that throwing away a signed contract with Boeing, with the financial penalties involved, trying to buy an aircraft that the American Congress dont want to sell, who costs the double of a SH, with a way greater logistical foot print, and being limited to JDAM´s and SDB´s in the ATG role, his a great deal, “better for the Buck” and that “covers the True Needs of Australia”, when the aircraft to be replaced his a LONG RANGE “BOMB TRUCK”…
The F-22 it´s a superlative ATA aircraft, the best in that role, and it will maintain a clear edge for the next decade, but it´s not a Striker. Yes, it has a JDAM/SBD capability, the AN/APG-77 has ATG modes, but no one in his right mind would buy the RAPTOR for that kind of job. If you want an ATG plane, you buy the F-35, or if you are in a hurry, you get the Strike Eagle, or the SH… Not the Bloody wonderful RAPTOR that, granted, every Air force would love to see in it´s inventory.
So if the “True Needs of Australia” are covered by a super-duper-hiper-topotthepop´s Air Defence Fighter, the F-22 RAPTOR, that means that the RAAF his under a HUGE ATA threat, right?
Wrong, unless someone has had a Carlo Koop intoxication; your next door neighbors (Indonesia) wont have fighter force capable of challenging half of the actual RAAF in the next two decades…
China doesn´t have the ability to project force to Australia and Japan, South Korea and India, besides of having the same logistical problems that somehow, the “China his evil club” always forgets to mention when discussing Australia ATA scenarios, are your prospective allies.
So, am i advocating the “slash” of the RAAF force?
No!
Not in my wildest dreams, actually, Australia need´s to be able to cover it´s air space, a huge one, to protect it´s northern frontier, and be able to send a decent sized force in the “out of area operations” that so frequently undertakes. That force must be capable of joint operations with your friends, AKA USAF, US Navy, Marines, RAF, RN, and sometimes, other NATO “Strange European Folk” or ASEAN combat units.
This last sentence means that you have to develop your own kit, or buy from North America (AKA Lock Mart or Boeing), and sometimes you can go shopping in “Old Europe”.
Looking at those three operational needs (air space, northern frontier and “out of area ops”) the RAAF needs a decent size force, something like six FJets Sqn´s (minimum). And guess what buying 24 Raptor´s would do to RAAF budget? And to the number of FJ sqn´s?

And actually, I do agree with the RAAF plans (well, sort of). And I do believe that somehow, someone in the RAAF, do indeed has a fine understanding of the “realities and history of the Asia Pacific region” 😀

But i do admit that being one of those “Strange Europeans” something might have pass by me and maybe i can be waaayyy off the mark… Well, you´re on the other side of the world.
Wait, i´ve just remembered something dreadfully important, the distance between St Petersburg and Lisbon his way smaller than the one between South of China and Canberra!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

RAPTOR´S FOR THE PORTUGUESE AIR FORCE NOW 😀

Cheers 🙂