EmgyHere you go:
Thanks – saw the link earlier on but didn’t click it since I assumed patrol ship meant… patrol ship and not a full-spec frigate.
Yes, the centre-left government that has increased defence spending compared to the previous centre-right government.
I did vote for the current government. But it’s the prerogative of us plebs to be able to gripe.
The money that has already been invested in the development?
I had the impression that the NOK 5b was the cancellation fee alone? I would be surprised if there wasn’t a cancellation fee, what with the previous def.minister signing that MoU without passing it through parliament…
Yes, that is a point that has to be taken into consideration. I know Australia has shown interest. Any others?
Is there any other AShM that can hit land targets as well and fit in the internal bay? Of course, capability doesn’t necessarily lead to sales. But my understanding is that Tenix of Australia is pretty heavily involved in integrating it with the JSF, and Aus+Nor making a sales pitch together might just have enough combined clout to make some worldwide sales possible.
Emgyand now they’re going for a high capability destroyer/frigate.
Do you have any more on this?
We shouldn’t forget though that it is not primarily an air defence asset, but ASW.
Should have bought 3-4 Karel Doorman class in 1996. 😉
The argument for getting five frigates was to enable a permanent presence in a standing NATO frigate group, and the argument for AEGIS was so they could “plug” into a US CVBG. Both of them incredibly pointless requirements, if they want to increase the NATO INTOPS effort then they should fund forces that are already existing, actually competent and needed by NATO (specfor and the mech units). It’s rubbish to try to mold a competent littoral defence force into a Frigate arm tasked with sailing back and forth between Haakonsvern and the Med.
You should never take the worst for granted. Any reduction in the order is just speculation and Norway might not even buy the JSF.
Are we talking about the same government? 😀
It’s going to cost $800m to pull out of the JSF deal and doing so would jeopardise any hopes to sell NSM to every JSF user out there. It’s actually a real hope since it fits in the bay (at least of the A and C models).
EmgyI agree on the Absalons, the 2007 fit will add two of Oerlikon’s 35mm CIWS, Seagnat and torpedo tubes. Along with the previous 5in, 12 Sea Sparrow, 8 Harpoon, ro/ro capability and hangar for two Merlins, it’ll be an impressive ship for something that’s registered with a L and weighs in at 6.3kt.
EmgyWanshan, apropo the disputes, take a look into the “fishing wars” aka “cod wars” etc, the North Sea has been a complete wild west as fishing goes. RN warships colliding with the Icelandic CG, Norwegian CG firing warning shots at Icelandic trawlers, trawlewire cutters… the Icelandic CG pioneered trawlewire cutters and cut 82 British trawl nets during the year-long CWII.
There were no less than 54 collisions between RN warships and the smaller Icelandic CG vessels during CWIII in the winter of 1975-76.
EmgySomething like that, yes. I’m looking through online newspaper archives now and finding articles from the signing in 2000 with official government sources stating the Frigate project cost would total NOK 10b. Today the official number is NOK 21b.
The deal back then was also touted by the centrist government as being an excellent industrial deal. These days it’s described as “a masterpiece of omissions” and the funny thing is that the same mistakes are being made with the JSF.
Edit: Found an article where a MoD representative is talking about negotiating a triparty deal with the US and Iceland which would involve a JSF buy and stationing fighters at Keflavik. I guess they’re trying to get a better JSF deal, “cut the price so we can buy three squadrons, and we’ll maintain fighter cover for GIUK.”
SAR assets at Keflavik would then be purchased and operated by Iceland, which is currently leasing helicopters from Norway to cover SAR needs for the fishing fleet. http://www.nordlys.no/debatt/leder/article2388813.ece
EmgyReductions in force numbers is just a sad reality for most European (and indeed non European) defence forces, I’m guessing quite a few of the countries onboard for the F35 will end up with less than they announced in their initial plans.
I hear you. But defence cuts aside, my gripe is mainly with how the RNoN funds are being allocated. We’re buying five expensive ASW frigates with a downsized SPY-1 and AEGIS systems for that lonely little self-defence length Mk41 with its 32 ESSM, just so the brass can flaunt a new toy in the NATO frigate groups and join a CVBG. I’d rather that we bought Halifaxes, M-class, or Type 23 to replace the tired Oslos a decade ago, and used the saved money to maintain what we actually can do in this country, namely FAC and SSK ops.
As it looks now, we’re nearly decimating the 80’s era FAC force by 2010 unless they order more Skjolds, and have already more than halved the 80’s era SSK fleet, in order to pay for the Frigate arm’s new toys. I’m not sure that’s worth it.
EmgyI hope they aren’t expecting any sizable air component to replace the now departed Keflavik Eagles. The rising JSF costs are now used by Norwegian official gov’t sources as an excuse to order less than 48 aircraft and the already strained Orion fleet is overextended with current deployments in the Med.
(Furthermore the FAC fleet is severely reduced to 14 Hauks, and possibly only 6 Skjolds in the next decade, from the 70’s/80’s levels of 40 craft while the SSK fleet is down to 6 boats.)
EmgyOther RR assets in Norway IIRC also include Frydenboe (making steering gear of some sort) and RR tech centres at Longva and Aalesund, all in total employing around 2500 people.
Indeed agreed on the above of course, Chantiers de l’Atlantique is now owned by Aker, and although it would be fun I don’t think one could use that as grounds for saying the PA2 is going to be Norwegian-built :). That the French gov’t didn’t step in on the sale of an important naval yard says a little. (I recall a French poster saying the reason CdG is cramped is because the unions wanted Brest to get the work. Compare the length of the Brest-built CdG with the St.Nazaire-built Foch.) Obviously in case of war, commercial ownership wouldn’t matter.
(Will be interesting to see what will happen to Alstom Marine and if the promises of no layoffs will be kept, considering their numbers were in the red. Workers in St.Nazaire should be warned that the owner of Aker is known for making his early fortunes by buying old trawlers, sinking them and then collecting the insurance – and some say he sunk them with the crew on board :D.)
EmgyThat’s what I thought as well, especially considering Kitty Hawk displaces 72k metric tons full load according to fas.org. Take a look at this page though
You can’t just randomly choose metric or english units as it distorts things. CVF is not going to be a Kitty Hawk sized carrier.
Wasn’t suggesting that at all, take a look at the link I put in after the “take a look at this page” and it’ll show CVF proposal dimensions quite smaller than the Kitty Hawk, as well as deck plan and hangar drawings packed with JSF. http://navy-matters.beedall.com/cvf1-02.htm
The weight thing was just an unimportant comment from surfing on FAS, was not meant to suggest something as the link spells out the hard facts on dimensions.
EmgyWell, with a full load displacement of 74,000tons clearly both UK and French CVF’s could carry much larger AIRWINGS! Man they appear to be much closer to American CVN’s in size than first projected? 😀
That’s what I thought as well, especially considering Kitty Hawk displaces 72k metric tons full load according to fas.org. Take a look at this page though,
http://navy-matters.beedall.com/cvf1-02.htm
Scrool to the bottow of this page to see the hangar and deck layout of the 65-70kt variant packed with JSF: http://navy-matters.beedall.com/cvf1-24.htm
This passage suggests they’ve emphasized airgroup sustainment in the design;
Thales have built up specialist aviation teams, drawing on US, UK and French experience, to optimise the interface between the carrier and its air group. Sortie generation is the all-important metric: as firm and achievable figures became available the URD was changed by late 2002 from the original 1998 Staff Target (Sea) 7068 objective of 150 sorties per day with 50 aircraft, to a peak of 130 sorties per day with 48 aircraft (including up to 110 by JCA). Specifically, an early 2003 issue of the URD stated that the requirements for aircraft operations were:
*
Generate up to 510 JCA sorties over 5 days^
*Generate up to 110 JCA sorties in a 24 hour period^
*Launch 24 aircraft* in 15 minutes
*Recover 24 aircraft* in 24 minutes
*Simultaneous launch and recovery (4 launches/4 recoveries)
*Be able to de-conflict fixed wing and rotary wing aircraft
*Able to reconfigure designated spaces
^ It is unclear how many JSF F-35B’s (selected for JCA) this number is associated with, although 40 or 42 F-35B’s were being mentioned in other sources at the time. The UK requires that its F-35B’s are able to sustain 2 sorties per day, and surge to 3.
* Standard airgroup aircraft only, i.e. JCA, EH-101 Merlin and MASC.
EmgyWhy only two catapults? Even the Forrestals had four.
I suppose it has to do with having a smaller number of aircraft to launch, IIRC the nominal capacity is supposed to be 36 JSF/Rafale, 4 E-2, 2 SAR Helos,.
EmgyYes but who watches the watchmen?
EmgyVolvo Aero Norway To Be Supplier to the General Electric Engine for the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)
Makes sense, Volvo Aero has a long-standing relationship with both GE and PW and makes components for the F404, F414, F100, F110 and F135.
(http://www.volvo.com/volvoaero/global/en-gb/businesssolutions/OEM/component+partner+-+military/)
Emgyhttp://www.navyleague.org/sea_power/july_02_32.php
DCN Ruelle also is working on an A70 Sylver module, which is intended to be a versatile multiple missile-launcher. The weapons with which it is intended to be compatible include the ship-launched variant of MBDA’s Scalp naval land-attack missile, the Aster Block 3 theater missile-defense system, Raytheon’s Tactical Tomahawk, and/or a vertically launched anti-submarine missile round.
Granted, the article is over four years old but at least it seems DCN have offered that option for the UK and Italy if they want the capability.
Btw, isn’t the Aster essentally a larger Mica on a booster, plus those midships rockets? Would it seem feasable that MBDA would do a similar job with the Meteor?
EmgySweden, the Cold War and its relationship to NATO.
I saw a documentary once about the early years of SAAB. An old aerospace engineer said something to the effect that “when the CIA showed us specs of new Soviet bombers that were too fast for our current interceptors, we built new ones that could do the job.” Been years seen I saw it, not sure if he specifically mentioned the CIA or not but that’s the gist of it.
Also read an interview with an A 32 pilot and how their procedures changed when new Soviet fighters had enough range to be able to threaten Swedish anti-shipping squadrons.
Both Finland and Sweden have pretty well documented connections with US, BRD and UK intelligence. That there was intelligence cooperation with the Swedes was pretty much public knowledge at the time, (but not to which extent) but the situation with Finland was more sensitive so a lower profile on the cooperation had to be kept. Finnish agents trained by CIA proxies (ie Norwegians) for infiltrating the SU is one example that has become known after the Cold War ended.
Remember that the old Scandinavian neutrality policies stemmed from experiences with being drawn in to wars like the Napoleonic Wars, and they were sensible in trying to distance themselves from having to be drawn into more old family feuds and land grab wars that was the business of the continent and the British isles.
Those policies made sense before WWII, but that wake-up call as well as the much larger scope and implications of the Cold War compared to previous situations effectively made these policies obsolete, if not on paper. Having previously lived in Sweden for 11 years I believe they had no illusions at all regarding this.
Sign In
