The F-4 was designed with a main role in life… fleet interceptor.

It was later adapted for other roles.

The F-35 is designed with… who knows what as its main role. Striking? Fighting? Fleet defense? Intelligence gathering? Money laundering?

Just the latter. Gotta keep the nation in debt 😉

Now I have read the 2 last post a couple of times, and I am still laughing 😀 And I really should not, since we have ordered that (damn) thing 🙁

no it is design originally to be very flat but they had some problem so it is imperfect flat

big difference than pakfa where it is intentionally design to not have flat underside

Yes, off course it is a big difference! Pakfa was designed to not have flat underside, while F-35’s design is patched up with quick fixes to the design.
And so much patching/fixes has maybe a little to do with a flawn design.

I think USA will go to war over Norway, it’s too easy to strike Iceland from Norway

USA don’t need to go to war to get Norway! Because over uber stubbern government will buy JSF without knowing the price (or specs) and when they are delivered, US will tell the price in fantasy milliards, so we will owe them all of Norway 😉

The source was the swedish military webside, and it was officers on the swedish sub that said it. They also said that they sinked the carrier 5 times, and all times got away with it, and most times got away unspotted!
Off course you can not lurk around in real world on battery only, and then get a carrier group lined up in front off you ready to be blown up. But if you are so lucky, then the carrier group have a very big problem.

The best thing with an SSK is the potential treat of if its nearby. A carriergroup reach coast of Norway, and knows 3 subs are out on patrols, they have no idea where those 3 subs are, and have to plan theire operations accordingly.
They have to be farther away from land, conduct much more sub patrolling etc.
In essence, they cant operate in a manner that is the most effective for operation over land.

Smaller ir signature? When LM chief was in Norway, he had to admit that the f-35 had considerable hotter signature than most 4 gen planes. And that is not even an priority thing to fix on the must/should be fixed.

Can’t give you an link on that, cause LM chief answered questions from the readers of one Norways biggest newspapers. From what I remember, question was if the f-35 had hotter ir-signature than the gripen, and ansver was that it proberly had significant hotter ir -signature.

[QUOTE=Obi Wan Russell;1980954][QUOTE=hjelpekokk;1980721] Please retire all your seakings as soon as posible and send them all as spare part to our (Norwegian) SAR seakings! New sar helicopter still not choosen :'(
Best helicopter we have ever had, but its old, and difficult to get spares.

We have half of our retired about half of our Sea King Fleet, the HAS6 models which were replaced in the fleet ASW role by Merlin HM1s over a decade ago. Most have been reduced to spare parts now to keep the rest (RAF HAR3s, RN HC4s, HU5s and ASaC7s) flying. Put in a bid now to cannibalise what’s left when they leave service!

On behalf of my goverment, I shal do that, cause they will never get the finger out to do it!

“Stealth ship vs stealth fighter” comparison is way too generalised. If you take Fridjof Nansen for example, the ship has no point defense, only 8 surface to air missiles and two fire control radars to guide them.

Theoratically, a pair of (non-stealthy) F-18Es, both carrying 4x harpoons and a jammer pod, can sink it without much difficulty, and live to tell about it.

Hmm, and here I though that it got 1 × 8-cell Mk41 VLS w/ 32 × RIM-162 ESSM!
And that this means it got 32 surface to air missiles.
You do know that each cell have 4 missils, so total 32 missils 😉