How many airbases does Finland currently operate? Are there plans to reduce the number of airbases when the new planes are being bought?
Norway will close the airbase in Bodø, and operate all F-35 from Ørlandet, in addition a small number (3-4?) of F-35 will be based at Evenes, for QRA duty.
The problem Norway was facing was that due to the high costs of the F-35 we could not afford two full airbases. I would not be surprised if Finland ends up in the same situation. The danger is that if an enemy launches a surprise attack against that airbase, he can knock out a very significant part of the air force with one strike. Having two bases (or more) makes it much more difficult to successfully launch a surprise attack.
This part of F-35 demand to make bases upgrade. RAAF costs are over $1b.
http://aviationweek.com/defense/security-needs-drive-australian-f-35-base-program
BEIJING – Australia has begun building the infrastructure it will need to support its planned force of at least 72 Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightnings, with much of the work driven by U.S. demands for tightened security of the aircraft and their systems
We are discussing Su30 v Typhoon here. However there are legacy Western fighters (F-15 SA, F-15 K) which have been “souped up” (AESA, AIM9X, AIM-120 C7 etc) and would prove to be more than a match for Su35.
These are not match unless you can show this big jamming pods. every missile is practically useless. Su-34 even a third one uner. Russia heavily invested in in electronic warfare.
http://sputniknews.com/us/20150806/1025451861.html

IAF looking replacement since November 2005 means they bought earlier batches. They simply have no replacement for R-77 10 years later.
These R27 are old missiles with expired life. R-77 mass production started after 2000 and is much bigger quantity
The Su-30MKI’s standard long range BVR weapon is now the R-27AE. (IIRC they weren’t too happy with their R-77s. Edit: Link)
Artem delivers first batch of R-27 missiles to Indian Air Force
Su-30mk fleet is much bigger than $250m worth of missiles needed with questionable quality and life span. It cant be standard missile. Iraq rejected low quality Ukrainian products. Only dysfunctional procurement will buy this product.
Have you read the sentence where i said “Comparable” fighter.
Majority of the times when Soviet and Western fighters have come face to face Soviets have lost, even when Western fighters were without any additional support. Thats a simple fact.
Russians have improved but west have improved on a faster rate.
Comparable fighter or comparable force.? As force can include several thousand rounds of cruise and anti radiation missile . destroying and jamming command and control center. and all the electricity supplies to it. It’s very easy to do it in flat desert middleast wars.
Former defence chief Sverre Diesen wrote an oped back in May of this year, this is what he says about the F-35 investment:
Translated from: http://www.aftenposten.no/meninger/kronikker/Norsk-forsvarsevne–en-varslet-avvikling-8011022.html
Quite interesting; in particular since Mr. Diesen was military chief when the F-35 was chosen. At that time he was extremely optimistic and very happy with the F-35. He probably still is happy with it, but for one thing: the high cost. Of course this is not unique to the F-35, all brand-new military equipment tends to be expensive, due to the “military equipment inflation” which tends to be much higher than the inflation of, say, cars, or other consumer goods.
What is a bit surprising is that he did not predict this back in 2008 when he was heading the Norwegian military… or if he did, he kept his mouth shut about it…
high production rates suppose to make F-35 cheaper but i guess depreciation currency and evaporating domesitc oil industry makes it expensive.
https://www.adn.com/article/20150805/norways-statoil-seeks-broader-ties-russian-oil-producer-despite-sanctions
Norway’s Statoil seeks broader ties with Russian oil producer despite sanctions
“In terms of volume, growth comes from abroad,” he said. “In the really long perspective, the Norwegian shelf may one day close, while the rest of world will have more oil and gas.”
No it isn’t. It is claimed to have 80% new components vs Al-31F. As we have established, 117 and 117S are basically the same engines, bar FADEC and matherial improvements giving the 500kgf boost. As to T:W, for the love of god don’t throw around “150kg lighter than Al-31F”, simply because it isnt true. It is heavier than Al-31F, atleast 117S, and 117 is probably like 100kg at the very best lighter than 117S. And EJ200 is marginally better T:W wise than 117S, but marginally worse than 117.
it is 150kg less weight. according to manufacturer. so your probably comes from where?
Only if one believes that 35k lbs class means 35k exactly. I happen to think it is significantly more powerful than that.
based on your thinking?. at airshow performance F-22 does not look it has surplus power.
Hence the interim Mk1P variant upgraded with the Elta AESA.
is there engine ordred for mk1p otherwise its a paper project.
Can this thing even enter service considering its import based content and local currency sales. my predictions were right.
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/embraer-announces-two-year-delay-for-kc-390-415195/
Embraer announces two-year delay for KC-390
Su-35 has 16% more thrust, 20% less weight and 20% less drag. Overall it’s 56% aerodynamically better Su-30mki
Even if airframe is beefed up than it still weighs less than twin seat and canards weight. max MTOW is 34.5 tons.
– The Su-30 is draggier because it’s a twin-seater. Just like Su-27UB is draggier than Su-27S.
– The Su-35S is not lighter than Su-30MK, in fact it is ~700kg heavier (as heavy as Su-30MKI).
– The real improvements of the airframe of the Su-35S are increased lifetime, higher max. take-off weight and 20% higher internal fuel capacity which increases range from 3,000 to 3,600km…. as swell as the ability to embrace the 117S engines which are supercruise capable.
It has that extra canards, older heavier bars antenna, tvc that make it heavier than su-30mk. Lacks titanium. Su-35 range is calculated with 4AAM.
Su-30 is draggier, heavier and shorter range platform compared to Su-35. With underpowered engines and lesser titanium in airframe it has less performance and electronic power.
Even if it didn’t pan out, I’m still curious, which of the four options was your original post alluding to?
is there any thing right that he spelled out. it was more try to get attention.