Categorie archief: Krijgsmacht anno nu

Over de Nederlandse krijgsmacht in de huidige situatie.

concurrency explained with a joke!

This isn’t about a train… this is about concurrency.. and in that sense it isn’t funny at all! because the “civilized” world called “the West” under command of the USG and all her Western vassal states promote this as the new way of developing things… with the JSF, LCS and many other great examples of how not to engineer things… but because they have the marketingtools and the US Congress on their side.. they keep on going… on the same track! so much for smart thinking and smart buying.

Watch this movie: Wonderful Engineering


“The overlap of development with production and operations results in the need to manage a concurrency program and conduct retrofits on jets with life-limited parts or impacts to capabilities. For the F-35 program, concurrency phases out with the completion of SDD. Block 3i DT&E full Certification is planned by 3rd Qtr FY15, and Block 3F DT&E full Certification is planned by 4th Qtr FY17.”

life-limited parts or impacts to capabilities: this means… a costly retrofit…. or downgrade the capabilities of the JSF aircraft.. Both have happened many times. still the RNLAF (and many other)  guys keep on promising mountains of improved capabilities versus 4th generation aircraft. Totally ridiculous isn’t it? but our politicians eat it like sweet cake.

(you can scroll down the list… and this isn’t all, since this report there have been new issues, and there will come a lot more…..and some of the issues are military secrets so aren’t counted in this list. All because of the amazing concurrency..trying to fix a bug in production!

Now look at what this leads to…. in the case of the JSF!

Total cost of corrections to upgrade Block 1, 2 to Block 3 standard US AIR FORCE only (F-35A): US$ 1.389.388 between FY2013 and FY2020

Total cost of corrections due to concurrency US AIR FORCE only (F-35A) : US$ 1.296.458  between FY2013 and FY2020

Source: US DOD, JSF Program Office.  (page 207-212)

One wouldn’t believe, when you couldn’t read it in an official document, 240 items highest priority only (so, what lower priority items there are????)


This effort (MN-F3516) funds retrofits due to concurrency changes to correct deficiencies discovered after DD-250 of the last aircraft in a given Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) lot. This includes modifications required to extend aircraft service life currently limited by low-life parts, and relieve capability limitations driven by concurrency of production with development. The concurrency funding line will procure the highest priority modifications from the Tri-Service Modification Prioritization List, as soon as they become supportable from an engineering, production, and installation standpoint. The list is vetted by the Services  and Partners every 6 months to ensure the list accurately reflects existing requirements as well as emerging issues. Per-kit costs will vary for each modification being implemented, and in some cases will also vary for aircraft from different LRIP lots to implement an individual modification. For FY16, the highest priority modifications will directly support USAF IOC, Block 3i, and tactics development. The following modifications will be the highest priorities for accomplishment throughout the F-35A CTOL fleet using funds from this Budget Activity.

Lees verder


a known troubled software program… F-35 Officials Cancel Cyber Test! ofcourse the JSF

Just a small addition from my part. the article on War is Boring blog from the hand of Dan Grazier says enough.


The military services and defense contractors have a long history of working and lobbying to avoid realistic operational testing of new weapons systems.

…The military services and defense contractors have a long history of working and lobbying to avoid realistic operational testing of new weapons systems. A common claim is that testing of this kind is too expensive and adds unnecessary delays to an already lengthy weapons acquisition process.
In fact, the most recent industry effort to avoid realistic testing resulted in a provision in the National Defense Authorization Act requiring DOT&E to “ensure that policies, procedures, and activities implemented by their offices and agencies in connection with defense acquisition program oversight do not result in unnecessary increases in program costs or cost estimates or delays in schedule or schedule estimates.”

However, these claims are false. The Government Accountability Office recently released an audit showing that operational testing does not cause significant cost increases or schedule delays in major weapons programs.

The Pentagon and defense contractors will continue to avoid independent, realistic testing out of their own self-interest. The GAO said it well in its recent report — “postponing difficult tests or limiting open communication about test results can help a program avoid unwanted scrutiny because tests against criteria can reveal shortfalls, which may call into question whether a program should proceed as planned.”

The JSF is tested on large scale… and it delivers many faults, issues and even some which are probably not possible to make it work. (the result is many times visible in decreasing KPI and technical performance measures). If they continue with a full open vulnerability test of the various software risks.. it could be so obvious the US has to stop the full JSF production… program. This area also touches the sovereignty question i raised time and time again about the JSF. Not only it’s the USG who decides if and when we operate the JSF (fleet consisting of a mere 35 + 2 test aircraft) we are depending on the World wide web to support the ALIS system and send and receive the always needed EW database.. without this the whole aircraft is useless and unable to operate… It probably still is able to fly… just like all “operational” aircraft are able to fly… but an operational aircraft should…. operate and execute missions…right? So besides the our sovereignty is “deliberately” risked and sold to the interests of USG, we also have the high risk of becoming targeted by international criminal, terrorist or foreign hackers. All because the Air Force and Industrial contractors don’t want to risk their program being scrapped (for not or under performing). They just want their money and deliver an seemingly incapable aircraft which will need upgrades from now on to forever.

FIA Saab slide 8

Concurrency increases software risks and vulnerabilities – 
Many (Dutch political parties at least: VVD, CDA, NIFARP, the Dutch Defence industries JSF promo -team (with Mat Herben and many other bobo’s bragging about the JSF’s performance if it was already for real…) and even our own (destructive) influence of experienced fighter pilots of the RNLAF are all claiming that concurrency is the way to go. Our minister from the VVD party will frame the faults, errors and misjudgment and increased costs and time as “normal” to these kind of projects… and her fellow politicians from many parties will accept this for a fact. The strange thing is, there are many programs working fine… according to preplanned timelines and budgets. There can be some cost overruns, and increases of projected O&S costs… that’s not my point. framing these huge… gigantic cost overruns, claims of 40% lower O&S costs, decreasing capabilities (while fighter pilots still claim enormous improvements vs 4th generation fighters…) is based on… thin air. It’s complete nonsense. This card blanche to the Military Industrial Complex is the same reflex we see towards the banking sector… give them all, protect their bad behaviour and performance (they don’t deliver what they promise now do they?) and protect their money grabing cultures. There are always alternatives, whatever our minister is claiming.

These are the facts about the alternatives.


….. In other words, acquisition decisions can be made based on performance achieved rather than capabilities hoped for.

This article supports my previous article:

European countries and their quest for sovereignty !

…. Clearly the design of ALIS and it’s vulnerabilities is seriously flawed… How can they use so much money and resources and deliberately risk hacks, and thus risking availability of JSF fighters for users concerned. Some countries have several different fighter aircraft. Others, like the Netherlands can only operate one type. the JSF. More on this, read my article: How can Air Force guys (and girls) be so ignorant? they use the OODA Loop… don’t they?

To the War is boring article, some quotes:

Realistic weapon testing has come under assault yet again. The troubled F-35 recently hit another snag when, as first reported by Politico, the Joint Program Office refused to proceed with the required cyber security tests of the F-35’s massive maintenance computer, tests needed to determine the computer system’s vulnerability to hackers.

The JPO argued that such realistic hacker tests could damage the critical maintenance and logistics software, thereby disrupting flights of the approximately 100 F-35s already in service. But that simply raises obvious and disturbing questions about what could happen in combat.


In theory, ALIS would identify a broken part, order a replacement through the logistics system, and tell the maintenance crews what to fix. Cyber tests are particularly important for the F-35, which is commonly referred to as a “flying computer.” The plane has approximately 30 million lines of software code controlling all of the plane’s functions, from moving flight surfaces to creating images in its infamous $600,000 helmet.

All this is tightly integrated with the ALIS program, which many consider to be the plane’s largest vulnerability. Should an enemy hack the ALIS system successfully, they could disable F-35 systems in combat, cause disastrous crashes, or ground the entire fleet.

Highly concurrent programs increase the risk that systems built early in the process will require expensive fixes or retrofits after problems are identified during subsequent testing. The Defense Department’s Undersecretary of Acquisition, Technology and Logistics reported to Congress that the costs of concurrency for the F-35 program last year were $1.65 billion. These costs include “recurring engineering efforts, production cut-in, and retrofit of existing aircraft.”

The report hardly painted a flattering picture of the practice.

Concurrent software development issues are hardly new. Frank Conahan, an assistant comptroller with the then-named General Accounting Office, warned against the practice in testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee in 1990. Even then, nearly a decade before the Joint Strike Fighter program began, Conahan correctly identified software development as the one of the biggest risks to success in highly concurrent programs.

“If the software doesn’t work, then the weapon system as a whole is not going to work the way it should,” he said.

But because the F-35 is already in multibillion-dollar production employing thousands of people in hundreds of congressional districts, the plane has a great deal of political support. At least, that is the image Lockheed Martin wishes to cultivate.

Parts of the aircraft are built in factories all across the country before eventually arriving in Fort Worth for final assembly. Lockheed Martin says the F-35 relies on suppliers from 46 states and provides an interactive map touting this fact.

The reality is the majority of the work is done in only two states, California and Texas. Several states counted in the 46 have twelve or fewer jobs tied to the F-35. Still, there are precious few politicians willing to cast a vote that will be portrayed as “killing jobs” when campaigning for reelection.

A much better way of doing business is known as “fly before you buy,” the almost universal buying practice in commercial, non-defense procurement. Former Director of Operational Test and Evaluation Tom Christie says when done properly it “will demand the demonstration, through actual field testing of new technologies, subsystems, concepts, etc. to certain success criteria before proceeding at each milestone, not just the production decision.”

In other words, acquisition decisions can be made based on performance achieved rather than capabilities hoped for.

Just read the whole article on the War is Boring blog.



European countries and their quest for sovereignty !

The news which I will discuss later in this blog is very exciting. To be honest, this is news which I was expecting. This should have political impact all over Europe. But first some thoughts about Europe and why some countries sabotage European cooperation by choosing the JSF. European countries are all holding on to their sovereignty regarding European cooperation. For example the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP)  isn’t working because each country has its own agenda, it’s own interests. This is a fact. and for us, the European people this is very hard, because our security and our welfare is at stake. I often use the phrase:

“But there is one single interest all European countries share… we live on the same continent which is under threat at the moment.”

threats to europe

This is the most important interest we, Europeans share… only with European countries. Not with the US, not with South Africa or Brazil, not with Australia or Indonesia. Our governments, including the Dutch Government, have two strange habits.. which strengthen each other.  first, they claim that European countries have their own agenda and interests.. so better cooperation isn’t an option. Then they (at least a lot of the European countries) chose for to prioritize NATO and thus the transatlantic connection. I am very in favor of good relations within NATO. I See European cooperation within the cadres of NATO… don’t get me wrong… But i see it as an equal partner. Not just being some little vassal state… like we are now.  The strange thing is, that these interests should be prioritized by European leaders. But they don’t. These same leaders are also in favour of the devastating TTIP and other big trade deals. Why? Are the interests of industrialists and their shareholders more important than the interests of the European peoples? Can we eat exponential growth? Can we drink debt? Can we fuel our cars on legal disputes? Why do some countries, like the Netherlands, choose to be a vassal state of the United States Government? I say specifically government because i believe in the American people and the land of the free. But I see the USG has changed all that. The things President Eisenhower was warning us for. (Here you can find the written speech of President Eisenhower.)

This is what President Eisenhower warned us about:

…we yet realize that America’s leadership and prestige depend, not merely upon our unmatched material progress, riches and military strength, but on how we use our power in the interests of world peace and human betterment.


Throughout America’s adventure in free government, our basic purposes have been to keep the peace; to foster progress in human achievement, and to enhance liberty, dignity and integrity among people and among nations. To strive for less would be unworthy of a free and religious people.

But here we are. Completely like a vassal state of the USG, just like the old days:

vassal state is any state that is subordinate to another. The vassal in these cases is the ruler, rather than the state itself. Being a vassal most commonly implies providing military assistance to the dominant state when requested to do so; it sometimes implies paying tribute, but a state which does so is better described as a tributary state. In simpler terms the vassal state would have to provide military power to the dominant state. Today, more common terms are puppet stateprotectorate or associated state.

We give assistance to wars of the USG, didn’t we? Yes we did some good things in Afghanistan, and also in Iraq. But was it really necessary? We had to support the USG, why? because they defend us from Russia? Otherwise we would have spoken Russian today? You think I’m kidding/ This is exactly what many “transatlantic” thinkers are saying to me.. when i ask them why? Shouldn’t we think ourselves where and when, and whom we would fight? What are our interests (except the always important economic interests… of the high society rulers?

Then I read the following article of Giovanni de Briganti @

The F-35 is entirely dependent on the ALIS system for its maintenance, and on US-based software laboratories for its mission data loads, so that its operation requires secure and high-speed Internet links between its operating bases and the US. 

It is written in the following article see the first paragraphs here:

                US Software Stranglehold Threatens F-35 Foreign Operations

The unilateral decision by the United States to locate all F-35 software laboratories on its territory, and to manage the operation and sustainment of the global F-35 fleet from its territory, has introduced vulnerabilities that are only beginning to emerge. 

The biggest risk is that, since the F-35 cannot operate effectively without permanent data exchanges with its software labs and logistic support computers in the United States, any disruption in the two-way flow of information would compromise its effectiveness.

All F-35 aircraft operating across the world will have to update their mission data files and their Autonomic Logistic Information System (ALIS) profiles before and after every sortie, to ensure that on-board systems are programmed with the latest available operational data and that ALIS is kept permanently informed of each aircraft’s technical status and maintenance requirements. ALIS can, and has, prevented aircraft taking off because of an incomplete data file.

Short summary article:

  • USG decided unilateral that all software laboratories should be on US territory, also Operation & Sustainment (O&S) also managed from US territory.
  • The JSF needs permanent data exchanges, before and after every sortie
  • ALIS can, and has, prevented aircraft taking off because of an incomplete data file.
  • the volume of data that must travel to and from the United States is gigantic, and any disruption in Internet traffic could cripple air forces as the F-35 cannot operate unless it is logged into, and cleared by, ALIS.
  • “undersea Internet cables are surprisingly vulnerable.”
  • “Russian submarines and spy ships are aggressively operating near the vital undersea cables that carry almost all global Internet communications, raising concerns among some American military and intelligence officials that the Russians might be planning to attack those lines in times of tension or conflict.”
  • “ultimate Russian hack on the United States could involve severing the fiber-optic cables at some of their hardest-to-access locations to halt the instant communications on which the West’s governments, economies and citizens have grown dependent,”
  • If the F-35 performs as advertised, it should gather very argue amounts of tactical data during each mission – data that it will have to transmit to the software labs in the US so they can be used to update the mission data files, adding another large volume data flow in both directions.
  • The OT&E report mentions that “Maintenance downloads using the ground data receptacle … usually takes an hour, delaying access to maintenance information.” This is an indication of the data volume involved, especially as the upgraded ALIS runs on a standard Windows 7 operating system.
  • “Currently, the pilot debrief timeline is too long as it takes approximately 1.5 hours to download a 1.5 hour flight. This is unacceptable and [we] are in the process of fielding an improved system [which] will decrease the timeline to download mission data by a factor of 8, meaning a 1.5 hour flight will be downloaded in about fifteen minutes,” he told the Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces of the House Armed Services Committee on Oct 21.


For some people this still isn’t clear what the implications are.

  • The USG will manage the entire global fleet, and we are bound to their rules. And we will be able to operate only when and where the USG wants us to operate.
  • What we read here should have impact on decision making in Europe within each JSF partner country.
  • The non-U.S. operator will not be able to use its own intelligence data to update the EW system, or the “fusion engine” used to identify targets, or modify the system to defeat cyber threats, without the active cooperation of U.S. personnel in the Reprogramming Labs.
  • Our Aircraft can fly…. but they can’t operate!

Do we really want to be tight (forced) to this way of operation? With this system every European country, like the Netherlands, which is claiming they want sovereignty concerning EU foreign policy for example are willing to give away full sovereignty over our Air Force… and as we don’t have much more than an Air Force we have no other means.

Taking so much risk with the internet use for ALIS and the reprogramming labs and enormous data flows is incredible because we all know that hackers can… and will attack such systems.

What amazes me is the enormous arrogance of the Transatlantic proponents. Why do they think they are superior. Taking so much risk with the internet use for ALIS and the reprogramming labs and enormous data flows is incredible because we all know that hackers can… and will attack such systems. as the Chinese already have done. A different aspect (and risk) of using a public network infrastructure we know as ‘the internet’ is known in information security communities as “CIA”: confidentiality, integrity & availability. As the widespread and frequent problems of ‘man-in-the-middle’ attacks and ‘distributed denial of service’ attacks demonstrate, there are some risks associated with using the internet, despite security measures such as vpn tunneling, encryption, etc.


Clearly the design of ALIS and it’s vulnerabilities is seriously flawed… How can they use so much money and resources and deliberately risk hacks, and thus risking availability of JSF fighters for users concerned. Some countries have several different fighter aircraft. Others, like the Netherlands can only operate one type. the JSF. More on this, read my article: How can Air Force guys (and girls) be so ignorant? they use the OODA Loop… don’t they?

Breaking news from Norway… sssst keep it a secret! Decrease in JSF numbers!

A couple of days ago I wrote a short introduction on my Facebook page It’s about the increase of the Norwegian Defence Budget. Very good! Could/would/should your first reaction be… an example for more European countries right?

Well I fully agree until we read into details. That’s it, it’s always in the nasty details!

There we go…

The Norwegian Government proposed a 9.8% real terms defence budget increase for 2016, including a near doubling of funding for the F-35,….


The majority of the increase comes from a near doubling of the funding related to the Norwegian acquisition of the F-35, which ensures that the Norwegian procurement of the F-35 will proceed as planned.

And this doubling doesn’t mean they will order MORE aircraft… no the proposed aircraft buy will be even more expensive than they initially figured…. And that’s the funny part, the Norwegian MoD already had a larger budget for their acquisition then for example the Netherlands did… So if the Norwegian budget was unrealistic.. how ill the current Dutch budget be? the same tactic here.. Just order the planes and explain later they where more expensive than anticipated…. the hook is in!


So what we read here is:

  • There will be a 9,8% real time defence budget increase for 2016 and beyond.
  • A near doubling of funding for JSF (as I keep calling it (as long as it’s not an operational fighter aircraft in the meaning of the word operational)
  • As I was pointing out with my comment: the near doubling of the JSF budget doesn’t mean the Norwegian Airforce is planning to order MORE Aircraft.. nope… it’s stillt the proposed buy of 52 JSF.

OK so we read the article again on

But thanks to my network I can improve the factual quality of this analysis a little bit further. And it’s astonishing. But take note, this is an advice!


The Strategic Military Review is only a recommendation, but it will serve as a key input in the Government’s work with a new long-term plan for the Norwegian defence sector. The Government is expecte​d to present its proposal to Parliament in early 2016.

They made a good quality read if you can read Norwegian ofcourse, but it’s 95 pages. They even made a special English website about this. In chapter 4 they give a desired Defense plan where there still is talks about 52 JSF, but in Chapter 5 they share a Defense plan what would be the case if they don’t increase the budget.

Let’s start the analysis now:

If you read Page 84 (pdf) it says:


Original text:

Ildkraften forbedres gjennom innfasingen av F-35 kampfly med avanserte våpen, inkludert angtrekkende presisjonsvåpen. Samtidig reduseres antallet kampfly i forhold til dagens plan for å balansere kostnadene i strukturen.


Google translation:

… Firepower improved through the phasing out (should be inJ)  of the F-35 fighter aircraft, advanced weapons, including long-range precision weapons. At the same time reduces the number of combat aircraft in relation to current plan to balance the cost of the structure.


Shocking isn’t it? A reduction in the number of aircraft, while proposing an increase (a near doubling) of the budget allocated for the JSF program.


On the next page(Page 85) of the report we read what kind of reduction..

Norwegian airforce future plans

The graphic in Norwegian says enough.

Just for those of you who don’t understand (or don’t want to understand like politicians from CDA, VVD, Lobbyists from the Dutch MoD, (RNLAF) NIDV, Ministry of Economic Affairs, This is what it says!


From 2017 – 2020 they plan to receive 28 of the 42 JSF. In 2028 42 JSF delivered and F16 fighters will be phased out!


Just checking the English language website…. What does it say about the JSF?

From a military point of view, it is preferable to execute the recommended changes quickly in order to achieve the desired operational effects and cost-effective operation of the Norwegian Armed Forces.

Despite speculation that the Chief of Defence would recommend cutbacks in the Norwegian F-35 acquisition, Admiral Bruun-Hanssen stressed that he is required to keep the minimum of F-35s, due to the importance as the future backbone of the Norwegian Armed Forces.

“We remain dependent on the timely introduction of new capabilities into our Armed Forces, such as the F-35. Only by completing the acquisition of 52 combat aircraft with the Joint Strike Missile, will we be able to provide the full spectrum capabilities that we need to address our future security challenges,” the Admiral underlined.

So what is going on here? I think we need some answers.

This can only mean two things:

  1. They say they can now buy only 42 and still promote it to the outside world that they stick to 52..
  2. Or they have enough money now for 42 (if they are lucky) and will push for 52 (or more) later on…. (if there is enough tension build up with Russia for example…)

How could any parliament agree on this?

An increase in the budget for the JSF (based on 52) they are speaking of a near doubling, but we now read it will be for less aircraft instead of buying 52 they will be buying 42. (keep in mind that Norway already used a relative high acquisition budget for this project compared to the Dutch and others (as total project cost and the used cost per aircraft.)

Just to finish this, have a look at the current estimates of this so big to fail program where they promised a production between 4.500 – 5.000 JSF.  This is the current estimate of Johan Boeder from

Yes dear Air Force people, Mr. Boeder isn’t a professional AirForce guru like you… but in fact he is right with almost all his estimates while You (and your JSF lobby gangs) are false every single time. So when does this come known by the bigger public?  Just have a look at the estimation:

ITALY: from 130 to 90 and pressure for more cuts

HOLLAND: from 85 to 37 and new evidence (last defence budget FY2016) for need to cut again 4 aircraft

UK: 138 to 90 or even 48 (with Typhoon A2G capabilties development clear sign that Tornado fleet partially will be replaced by Typhoon, and not by F35B as planned)

CANADA: wait for elections, and 65 impossible within budget

DENMARK: delayed decision, when?  And max 25 F35As possible

NORWAY: 52/56 reduced to 42

TURKEY: waiting and delaying firm orders

ISRAEL: initially planned a 100 F35A acquisition to replace more than 300 F16 of it’s F16 fleet. But the need for an adequate Air Superiority fighter and the high cost for it decreased this order. There are orders now for 13 and expected order up to 17 in 2017 total 31 JSF.  Israel is planning to incorporate their own sensors and equipment. To have some form of sovereignty

JAPAN: only a couple firm orders, no signs of new orders (so, the qnt is “in option” only)

S-KOREA: investigation due to signalled contractual ireggularities/tech-transfer problems;  after reduced by (from 60 to 40);

US: growing rumours and evidence that the 2400 total buy will vaporize  (in fact already about 900 planned F35, to be purchased between 2008-2016 are delayed already)


Where to sell those 4500-5000 promised F35s??????


What will we do when they come for us?

(Editors note: After some more research I found that the plan suggested is the case if the Norwegian government find adequate means to cope with the cost increase. In that case the numbers will be down from 52 – 42. These discussions will take place at the end of the year. ) 

Humanity in warfare

This is an historic article.

Could it be that we need that knowledge for our Future defence? Because that’s why I write the DutchForce21 blog now isn’t it?
I think we need it now, more than ever. Because with the tools (ahum … weapons) we now have at our disposal the killing.. from large distances, without any feeling and empathy in the real battle takes us into a new dimension of warfare.

Also why we fight wars… With other things at stake than defending our homeland and our people (no instead we sometimes fight for financial gains of certain rich people, we build a JSF superior like “force (if you can call that as such..)  costing  billions this concept is the “high-tech low boots on the ground“ or just  “first strike force”. In my opinion this is no more than nice marketing talk, just meant to to sell the damn planes and sell an enormous support package and earn money for flying the aircraft which costs about € 30.000 per flying hour… And then we have very expensive smart weaponry… now used to fight IS in Syria and Iraq. Some quote that it costs (the US and Allies) about $ 300.000,00 an hour to bomb IS targets….


for more info about the cost read this article from the Atlantic: $300,000 an Hour_ The Cost of Fighting ISIS – Global – The Atlantic

Now to the interesting historical article:

German pilot in WWII spared an American B-17 pilot over Germany only to reunite 40 years later and become fishing buddies

Stigler pressed his hand over the rosary he kept in his flight jacket. He eased his index finger off the trigger. He couldn’t shoot. It would be murder.

Stigler wasn’t just motivated by vengeance that day. He also lived by a code. He could trace his family’s ancestry to knights in 16th century Europe. He had once studied to be a priest.

A German pilot who spared the enemy, though, risked death in Nazi Germany. If someone reported him, he would be executed.

Yet Stigler could also hear the voice of his commanding officer, who once told him:

“You follow the rules of war for you — not your enemy. You fight by rules to keep your humanity.”

Alone with the crippled bomber, Stigler changed his mission. He nodded at the American pilot and began flying in formation so German anti-aircraft gunners on the ground wouldn’t shoot down the slow-moving bomber. (The Luftwaffe had B-17s of its own, shot down and rebuilt for secret missions and training.) Stigler escorted the bomber over the North Sea and took one last look at the American pilot. Then he saluted him, peeled his fighter away and returned to Germany.

“Good luck,” Stigler said to himself. “You’re in God’s hands.”

Just a short fragment from the article explaining the code.

The code is designed to protect the victor, as well as the vanquished, French says.

“People think of the rules of war primarily as a way to protect innocent civilians from being victims of atrocities,” she says. “In a much more profound sense, the rules are there to protect the people doing the actual fighting.”

The code is designed to prevent soldiers from becoming monsters. Butchering civilians, torturing prisoners, desecrating the enemies’ bodies — are all battlefield behaviors that erode a soldier’s humanity, French says.

The code is ancient as civilization itself. In Homer’s epic poem, “The Iliad,” the Greek hero Achilles breaks the code when his thirst for vengeance leads him to desecrate the body of his slain foe, the Trojan hero Hector.

“There is something worse than death, and one of those things is to completely lose your humanity.”

Could this be what makes “us” different from monsters like IS? We all see the youtube clips about people set to fire, or peoples in a mass grave.

We as westerners don’t do such things now do we? We don’t build isolation sells, we don’t humiliate people by letting them be naked all day or what other things you could think of to humiliate your enemy…  No we as westerners don’t do that. We have the Geneva code of conduct.

But then again, what about drone killings? Could it be that we as the West loose our moral standards as well? Maybe even when we loose our Christianity?

In “peace” we loose our principles of the worth of Life, we take life’s from unborn children if we like. we take the life’s of people who are old,  or just not willing to live anymore. Could it be we (as westerners) loose our humanity by loosing our Christianity?

“There is something worse than death, and one of those things is to completely lose your humanity.”

What’s this warrior code about? In my opinion it’s about doing to others how you would like others do towards you.

Luke 6 vs 31

And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them. 

taken from the Holy bible. this chapter has a very interesting title:

Love Your Enemies

27 “But I say to you who hear, Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you,
28 bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you.
29 To one who strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also, and from one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either.
30 Give to everyone who begs from you, and from one who takes away your goods do not demand them back.
31 And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them.
32 “If you love those who love you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them.
33 And if you do good to those who do good to you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners do the same.
34 And if you lend to those from whom you expect to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to get back the same amount.
35 But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return, and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, for he is kind to the ungrateful and the evil.
36 Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful.
need I say more? Maybe a little bit more than. Some verses are/where used by people not to fight as Christians, they want to sit idly by and watch. But what about the responsibility God gave us to protect the innocent, the poor and widows and orphan’s ?  What about the comands God gave the people of Israel when they entered the holy land? What about the task we have to fight evil like ISIS represents in the most clear form. (They could be compared to SS and Orcs, no humanity at all) I think we (as Christians especially) do!

OODA loop or (OO)DA loop?

These weeks in the Netherlands the Dutch Fighter replacement program will be speeded up for decision in parliament.  the D-brief will be talked about in the parliamentary defence commission and in a couple of weeks there will be another debate. But then the road will be open for the government to decide. eventhough no fixed price has been give and the used numbers and dollar exchange rate (US$ 0,7630 currently 0,88) has been one of a kind. In fact the 5 hard questions which should be answered before the PvdA (Labour) will give its go ahead hasn’t been mentioned anymore.

ALSO € 270 milion a year…. but then for just only 37 airframes. Oh now, we won’t make it.. the Dutch Minister of Defence raised the O&S cost to about 285 a year. OOOPS, this PvdA demand won\t make it. But what about the following: These 285 a year are the starting point of the Lifespan of the JSF whereas the F16’s are on the end of their life.  Is their anybody accounting this in parliament? No veto mr. Samsom?

Five requirements of the Labour Party

The road seems pretty for the government to purchase the JSF or the F-35. It should be there just met five requirements of the Labour Party. It is for Samson the “crucial question” whether you have 37 devices can perform the international missions you want to do.

Furthermore, the fighters may not be more expensive and “they must continue to meet the expectations that we have been held up.” If it is different, “the party does not go through.”Furthermore, the noise should be limited and the project needs more work for our country, preferably double what is currently expected.

None of them could be answered with a possitive answer though.

  1. It is clear that with just 35+2 test JSF you can;t properly operate an air force with all the required tasks. They now depend on cooperation with Belgium in order to succeed. They can operate a minimum number of aircraft and a very minimal number of pilots.
  2. The fighters are more expensive and the MoD counts with a unrealistic dollar exchange rate as shown above. There are many uncertainties which shouldn’t be uncertain after more than 10 years of planning, testing and production. This issue is specificaly interesting because not only is the aquisistion price unclear and falsely give to the parliament (on the one hand they say it will cost a certain ammount, on the other hand they say they don’t know. Strange thing is the prices are much lower even the USAF itself will pay for not to mention other partnercountries like Denmark Australia, and Canada e.g.) Beside the aquisition there is a strange thing going on with the exploitation costs (= Operation and Systainment=O&S) The RNLAF, not so long ago, complaint about the current F16 fighters they where becomming obsolete, and to expensive to operate. Why, They where / are at the end of their lifespan and the costs for keeing them up and running are much higher than it used to be… The current level is estimated at about € 270 a year for 68 fighters operating from 2 MOB’s Main operating bases Leeuwarden and Volkel estimated at about180 flight hrs a year each. The funny thing is that the proposed 35 + 2 JSf will cost the Dutch taxpayers ALSO € 270 milion a year…. but then for just only 37 airframes. Oh now, we won’t make it.. the Dutch Minister of Defence raised the O&S cost to about 285 a year. OOOPS, this PvdA demand won\t make it. But what about the following: These 285 a year are the starting point of the Lifespan of the JSF whereas the F16’s are on the end of their life.  Is their anybody accounting this in parliament? No veto mr. Samsom?
  3. The expectations of the PvdA where low, Ms. Eijsink has always been critical and she has stated more then once that she new of the fact that the technical requirements of the JSF had been downgraded time and time again. so what technical expectations is the PvdA thinking of?
  4. Noise is still not clear, there are some tests promised though, but that would be wll after the decision is taken, during 2016….
  5. More work for our countries industries?  well that is funny, they can’t promise us that, our industry has to fish to get the orders for the best price deals. (lowest possible.) As stated earlier Fokker has some orders ongoing but they all are follow-on orders, and a lot of that work will be done in the Fokker in Turkey. right. The same for engine overhaul and maintenance which will also be done in Turkey and Italy. later on maybe in the Netherlands.

There where asked many questions, but the minister and ministry don’t even have to answer them correctly. In the end they can do whatever they want…. there is a majority who will give the JSF the go ahead. That doesn’t depend on truth and honesty, that doesn’t depend on the need to buy the military (all military) the right equipment in enough numbers and affordable enough the USE it in real live. No the great benefit of democracy is that the only thing important is a majority in parliament. That’s the real painful truth. and those parliamentarians doesn’t need to have one key goal; serving the Dutch people. no, some are serving their own interest, or the interests of certain shareholders. Not you and me, nut some shareholders of big (US companies. (remember Fokker is in the hands of an American corporation not Dutch owned)

“The hook is in”

Lees verder

Submarine Ahoy: Good news for both Sweden and the Netherlands!

This morning the press releases from both Damen Schelde Naval Shipbuilding and Saabgroup (through its subsidiary Kockums Saab Naval systems) revealed a teaming agreement:

Swedish defence and security company Saab is teaming with Dutch shipbuilder Damen Shipyards Group to explore future opportunities in the international submarine market. The companies have signed an exclusive teaming agreement to work together in pursuit of the potential Walrus-class submarine replacement programme for the Netherlands. In addition to this project, Saab and Damen will also explore ways in which they might bid jointly on other submarine procurement programmes.

Read the full Press releases @ Saabgroup and @ Damen Naval.


On July 30th 2014 I wrote the following:

Business case JFS: part 1

You think I misspelled that? Well your wrong. It stands for a new project called: Joint Future Submarine (JFS). No not again…. You could think! First let me explain the used terms:

Joint – A submarine is a strategic asset important for the whole defence force. It will gather intelligence over sea, and over land, it will insert and extract Special Forces, it will influence warfare on land with land-attack missiles and act as a (satellite) communication relay, between forward / expeditionary positioned land and air forces, if necessary.

Future – this one should be clear, a submarine design must be compatible for future uses. Just like the Walrus class we may expect them to operate for long lifetime. They must be built in a modular way to insert future technology at the moment not even available.

Submarine – yes ofcourse, the vessel is a submarine. They will be of the non-nuclear type. But must be fitted with Air Independent Propulsion systems. The type, just as the Walrus class should be able to operate independently on long ranges and without any direct support vessels.

Well we can learn from past mistakes now do we? So if some projects failed in the past because they had the program management wrong, they put new demands into the program in between, and they produced aircraft while testing had not been finished… yes than such a project is bound to fail…. Again. But if we get this the right way… well than such a project can be very promising.

This wasn’t the first time I mentioned this option though, I already had this in mind years ago when I was still developing the DutchForce21 concept for the reorganization and reequipping the Dutch Armed forces.  Read some of the other posts on my blog, about the future Submarine need and about (future) Anti Submarine Warfare (ASW) needs for the Netherlands and Europe.

  1. Business case JFS: part 1
  2. Joint Future Submarine: part 2
  3. Future need for Anti-Submarine Warfare capabilies in European context – Part 1
  4. ASW capabilities: the European context – Part 2
  5. Business case JFS: short addition


How things can change over a year isn’t it? I remember it was December 2013 when the news arose about problems at Kockums with their greedy mother company TKMS / HDW. I received some information and found others through my network of defense experts worldwide.

Maybe that the naval domain can show the “air domain” how a cooperative project must be done. Both Damen and Saab know how to build vessels on a modular way. within budget, within technical scope so the products they build can be used what they were meant for.  No paper planes … eh… submarines i mean, but real ones, operational available and enough of them to operate properly.

I will keep an eye on this Joint Future Submarine project.