How long do you imagine it would take after a hypothetical Russian invasion (silly an idea as that seems at the moment) before airbases in the area wold be swelling with EF Typhoons, F-22s, Apaches and EC Tiger assault helicopters and a couple of US carrier groups would be cruising off the coast ringed by a NATO naval task force and several squadrons of subs?

A key question. However, Norway must be prepared to endure without heavy NATO support for at least a while. A Russian attack on Eastern Europe as well as Russian naval activity in the North Atlantic could affect NATO’s ability to respond quickly to an attack on Norway, don’t you think?

On the other hand, Swedish officials have already said that Sweden will intervene in case of an attack on Norway, and vice versa.

The F-35 is not in need for air-policing, where something like a F-5 is enough.

The RNoAF will continue to operate a single type which must meet all requirements. Air-policing is one among several missions.

In the Norwegian case it has to be a deterence force against a high tech foe or say Russia.

Norway does not consider Russia as a threat today, but I think it’s wise to be prepared for a future which is hard to predict.

In case of a row with Russia Norway can’t count on Article 5. Or else Germany will freeze next winter.

While you’re at it, could you reveal the winning numbers for next week’s lottery to me? I seem to have forgotten where my crystal orb is..

Back on topic:

Some people speculate about the politics involved in the choice of a new combat aircraft for the RNoAF. It is a well-established fact that Norway wishes to pursue and maintain close relationships with NATO and the US. This has been a fundamental part of Norway’s policies (foreign and defence) for about 60 years. Does this mean that the choice of a new jet has been purely political as some people seem to think? I for one don’t think so. I can’t prove or deny anything, of course, as I have very little to do with this. AFAIK, this goes for many other people on this board as well.

According to an official statement, the F-35 meets the requirements for four out of four potential threat scenarios (three national scenarios and one international), whereas the JAS-39 is considered to be sufficient for the international setting only.

The different scenarios include national defence (land areas, population centres and air policing) as well as one international scenario answering to a NATO PSO.

RNoAF fighter pilots are reportedly quite satisfied with the choice.

The Norwegian Parliament will make the final decision during the spring session.

Apparently some people think it’s cool to use fog lights whether it’s foggy or not. I don’t.

I haven’t been paying much attention to Iraq lately. I’ve read reports saying that the increase in coalition ground forces has been successful in terms of reduced violence. Is the transition of responsibility from the coalition to Iraqi forces going well?

Excellent photos.

First post, photo no. 10: What glider is it? Were they performing aerobatics? Was G-TWST (?) flying behind the glider?

Best wishes, Steve. 🙂