Tagarchief: 5th generation

Saab Gripen E/F/G: the true modular force (soon available in Sea Gripen taste)

Everybody who reads DutchForce21 regularly knows that i am very positive about the Saab Gripen E/F proposal. This is based on my comparison (as far as possible based on public intel) but also on the logical assumptions / goals i have for the DutchForce21 concept.


  • As i stated such a force should be expeditionary in nature.
  • Be cost effective
  • consist of enough units and (weapon) systems to operate effectively.
  • And most importantly, I imagine a future where the fighting will be about… oil and rare earth materials.. Our current western societies can’t live without them.


(We therefore need a force which can deploy fast (but short) to support especially maritime domain to escort and secure (Dutch / European) Merchant vessels on their way back from the world to our port’s of … Rotterdam or vice versa. We need a maritime focused defence force but not only the vessels. We also need maritime patrol aircraft, good and enough helicopters or other rotorcraft and… yes.. a Expeditionary capable fighter.. which doesn’t need a luxurious Main Operating base with all the acclimatized hangars (to protect the aircraft as in the case of the JSF)  As this must / should be done in the most “green” way… Why should a country invest in a military to secure fuel and raw materials…. if that same military would “eat” (consume) all these things which are also needed by society?

“Why should a country invest in a military to secure fuel and raw materials…. if that same military would “eat” (consume) all these things which are also needed by society?”

LM is good in Public relations
Many JSF fans and parrots who just are repeating what they heard from Lockheed Martin’s Public Relations division (a muli billion company i can imagine because all the faults, all the problems and all future  scams… need a lot of talking (like Brugman) to convince politicians, and our interested civilians that the only alternative is the JSF. Only the JSF can do…… blabla. And the 5th generation…. (nonsense)


The JSF isn’t multi-role, Result: Ill equipped Dutch Armed forces
But we now know that the JSF, can’t fight a dog  (as in dogfight) they aren’t that good in supporting our ground forces (Combat Air Support) the JSF F35A is armed with 182 25mm bullets. For a 4 barrel canon firing 3000 rounds a minute.. this is only enough ammo for 3,64 seconds.

Besides this I really would be honest to raise the claim that in a cost/benefit analysis (I know… purely hypothetical and without any emotions…. Just like some politicians right?) could it be possible that it would be too expensive to risk the loss of one (of the 35 + 2 testaircraft) JSF vs a (let’s say a platoon which where deprived of their integrated heavy weapons (LR Guided Weapons like TOW, heavy Mortars, used to be a Bataljon asset now it’s heavy artillery) to give a few examples. All these measures were taken because of the promise that there always will be Combat Air Support available.. what if? (+ almost 200 – 300 million Euro’s a piece vs. the (financial) cost to cope with some casualties? Not an option? Why do you think politics is called dirty?

Back to the JSF
The only things they are good for, from a Dutch point of view are… Intelligence gathering, strategic bombing (if enemy radar/IRST are outdated) and buying US soldiers to die for our needs. (because that’s what the JSF is ultimately about. We buy ourselves: the Support and protection by our US Allies – as promised. Unfortunately the US government and their “bread masters” (the same as with TTIP) the US Global Internationals don’t always serve our interests. Of course this is the same with our European allies…. but there is one single interest all European countries share… we live on the same continent which is under threat at the moment.

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

The best option available
I propose the Saab Gripen fighter which would become available with many different future options. and to certain extend the Netherlands would/could/should become a big partner in this program.

We would have the standard E and F versions. But as we know now the Brazilians are also looking for an Aircraft Carrier capable fighter: the Sea Gripen. (based on E/F developments).

11154682_962092630498104_5340932650307871751_o BscF64BIEAApLnK


They say…. steel is cheap
To be really honest, an aircraft carrier for the Netherlands in first sight looks like a step too far. But Personally I think there are certain things about Carrier development which look like they are that expensive on purpose… to earn money for the developers. Not to deliver as much capability as possible for the best price. I’m really interested how the Brazilian military will develop their new carrier.  I know of certain technologies which could be implied for example instead of the New US Catapult system (EMALS) there is a improved version of the current system possible. if they only would invest (a relative) small amount in that development. Besides operating our own carrier I suppose we could also opt for operating carrier capable aircraft in cooperation with our French, Brazilian and US allies. Being a true trustworthy partner with that.


The Gripen E/F already has a promising EW/INTEL gathering capability proposed. As I quoted before the option to combine the AESA radar with the IRST and IFF sensor systems make it an incredible system also claimed capable of tracking (enemy) Stealth targets.  Also the weapons currently integrated on the C/D and future E/F are interesting and capable. Like Meteor and RBS15 MKIII. Some future systems proposed (like a Meteor Anti-Radiation variant) or a RBS15 MK IV a missile with possible 1000km range)  are very interesting future developments.

And now there is this new development I would like to share…..

Meanwhile, long-term commercial plans are assessing the viability of converting a variant of Gripen into an electronic warfare (EW) variant similar to how Boeing has adapted the F/A-18F Super Hornet into the EA-18G Growler.

“If you look into future combat scenarios, if you have a high-end air force with a broad threat situation, something like a ‘Growler Gripen’ would make a real difference,” Sindahl said.

“That‘s what we’re looking into, and that’s why it’s so good to have Brazil on board with the F-model.”

GripenFARP imagesCA3MIC9T

So we have an expeditionary, cost effective modular fighter, which makes it possible to buy enough of them, to operate them well within O&S budget which will also address the SEAD/DEAD needs of our Defence force?    Oh boy, Will those Air Force guys ever learn what they did to our Armed Forces and to greater extend our ability as a nation to act sovereign?  The political leadership destroyed the whole Armed forces (which used to be equipped in a multi-role way, A toolbox with overlapping capabilities) in favor of an aircraft which promised a lot, but in the end will damage our own interests. Why, tell me why the US would always keep our interests in mind and weight them evenly important as they do with their own (national) interests? Why? NOT.

I propose a new future look into what the Dutch military really needs. What kind of force structure is needed? What kind of weapons are needed to create a protected force capable and effective. I think a sustainable “green” fighting force which uses less (natural) resources will be best. I think Gripen E/F/G and Sea Gripen (also in E/F/G options) would be key in such a future force!

And A Dutch Aircraft carrier (or two) is a dream as long as it’s a dream! It could become reality if the politicians and force planners would decide to do so.. without selling increasing the price and wanting to develop the wheel themselves. And most importantly the Military industry has a supportive and facilitating role.. they should earn their fair amount of money doing so, but in the end, the interests of the (Dutch) people is key!  In the mean time I will try to develop the DutchForce alternative force plan. with a financial chapter. (if i have time)


De defensiebegroting 2016: enkele korte conclusies en commentaren

JSF en de rest
Het mag duidelijk zijn. De JSF drukt wel degelijk op andere projecten. (met dank aan Marineschepen.nl) Ook is duidelijk dat de kosten voor het JSF programma hoger gaat uitvallen. Dit is te wijten aan de dollar koers beweert de minister. Dat is niet zo gek want men gebruikte bij de plannen van vorig jaar een zeer onrealistische koers. Weer een voorbeeld van hoe Nederland in de JSF gerommeld wordt. Maart dit jaar schreef ik er al over:

Zie waar een tunnelvisie en politiek gedreven MICC projecten toe leiden. En dat tegen een prachtige dollarkoers van 0,763 nietwaar? Nou eerder €1 = $1 oeps! Maar laat u niet weerhouden deze waarschuwing te lezen. Ja Jack en Mat… ook jij/jullie… want wie draagt er meer verantwoordelijkheid voor dit debacle dan de lobbyende geld verslindende en belastinggeld verkwanselende CDA, VVD en LPF (voormalig) politici die nu hun kost verdienen met de JSF aanschaf?


Dit soort stiekeme slimmigheidjes is aan de orde van de dag:

  • 85 JSF was eerst het plan (Klu had behoefte aan 114 toestellen claimde men toen (we spreken over t/m 2013/2014), men rekende ons altijd mooie prijzen voor… toen werden het er ineens 35 (plus 2 testtoestellen) voor het zelfde bedrag….
  • De Exploitatie ging van € 275 miljoen per jaar voor 68 F-16 (vanaf 2 vliegbasis plus detachement in de VS) naar € 270 miljoen voor 35 + 2 testtoestellen als het gaat om de JSF…. (let wel de JSF zou staan aan het begin van zijn levenscyclus, de F16 aan het einde… de praktijk leert ons dat de jaarlijkse kosten incrementeel  (tenzij de aantallen toestellen afnemen of er minder vluchten plaats vinden…. Maar dat lijkt me met 37 toestellen niet de bedoeling.
  • Vorig jaar nadat dit door de kamer was goedgekeurd en de eerste bestelling voor 8 JSF was doorgedrukt kwam ineens naar buiten dat dit bedrag zou stijgen naar € 285 per jaar.
  • De begroting voor aanschaf van 37 JSF zou zo’n beetje gelijk blijven (die steeg toen een klein beetje) Maar dus met een zeer onrealistische dollarkoers. En wat zien we nu..?
  • Juistem, een flinke stijging van zo’n € 550 miljoen euro (wat kan oplopen omdat de dollar koers niet vastligt. Vandaar ook dat de minister het prijspeil niet aanpast (wat op zich logisch is) maar wat kan betekenen dat men dit pas bij de laatste bestelling zal doen… met vele honderden miljoenen extra tot gevolg.
  • Wat verder opvalt is dat vrijwel alle materieel projecten worden uitgesteld…. behalve de bestelling voor de JSF>… wie zegt dat de vervanging van de JSF belangrijker is dan die van de andere krijgsmachtdelen?>
  • Wie zegt dat de JSF op het moment van invoeren dan ook niet weer een dure aanvullende capaciteitsuitbreiding nodig heeft… zoals de huidige plannen (in de VS) voorzien in nieuwe sensorapparatuur ?)
  • Nog een leuk gevalletje van onjuist handelen van de JSF kliek (luchtmachtmilitairen, ambtenaren, VVD/CDA politici en industriëlen. Het presenten van de JSF als de enige echte multirole fighter… De Amerikanen zien de JSF zelf echter als een Strategische bommenwerper die de luchtverdediging/bescherming van de F22 nodig heeft, aldus voormalig U.S. Air Force Air Command chief, General Michael Hostage:

“If I do not keep that F-22 fleet viable, the F-35 fleet frankly will be irrelevant. The F-35 is not built as an air superiority platform. It needs the F-22,” says Hostage to Air Force Times.

  • Zo kan ik nog wel even doorgaan….

Fundamenteel probleem
Kortom de hele krijgsmacht gaat gebukt onder de JSF last.. dit is niet slechts een kwestie van meer geld voor defensie. dit is een fundamenteel probleem binnen defensie (dus niet alleen bij de luchtmacht). Iets anders dat opvalt is het feit dat de landmacht nog altijd veel meer te besteden krijgt in operationele zin. vreemd omdat alle dure exploitatie bij de landmacht inmiddels zijn wegbezuinigd (ten gunste dus van de JSF en gevechtshelikopters- dit is terecht als je kijkt waar met name de offensieve capaciteiten zich bevinden. dit is niet meer binnen de landstrijdkrachten!) Dit betekend dat de landmacht slechts een vulling van militairen is, infanterie en logistieke ondersteuning.. allemaal bedoeld als vulling van vredesmissies… De offensieve capaciteit Artillerie en Special Forces resteren. Precies zoals de nitwits van de Luchtmacht het willen ,. High on tech, low boots on the ground. kortom Special Forces en JSF zullen het appeltje wel schillen in de toekomst…. juist?

Mijn conclusie: de Tweede Kamer laat het gewoon gebeuren dat de krijgsmacht nog verder wegzakt. We gaan gewoon door op de weg die al jaren geleden ingeslagen is. Defensie is een verkapte subsidieverstrekking voor de industrie, een manier om de VS te pleasen en een manier om internationaal wat aanzien en goodwill te verwerven. De Luchtmacht levert de facto 1 á 2 squadrons JSF volledig ingebed in de USAF al ware het de tweede Wereldoorlog. Keuze voor de JSF impliceert dat we volledig afhankelijk zijn van de Amerikanen op het gebied van training, EW database, inlichtingen, bewapening en updates. Autonomie en soevereiniteit zijn er in naam wellicht wel, in de praktijk zal dat niet meer zo kunnen zijn. Gewoonweg omdat de Amerikanen dat niet toestaan… Vreemd dat veel partijen dit aan Europa niet toevertrouwen (terecht) maar dit dus blijkbaar aan de Amerikanen wel durven in te leveren?

Flow of goods Europe

De hoofdtaak – verdediging van de Nationale (burger) belangen en het gemeenschappelijke grondgebied (is dus het continent Europa) lijkt hiermee niet langer een hoofdtaak te zijn. Ook de partijen die zeggen meer geld voor Defensie te willen laten dit gewoon gebeuren, ze halen hun politieke punten (tijdens de nabeschouwingen) binnen en daarmee is het afgedaan. Totdat er een grote crisis ontstaat waaruit zal blijken dat de huidige capaciteiten niet toereikend. Zijn. Den Haag zal moord en brand schreeuwen… wie is verantwoordelijk? Wel er zal zullen wel wat mensen verantwoordelijk worden gehouden… de laagste rangen van de hogere rangen zullen wel het haasje zijn… de politiek verantwoordelijken zijn er dan niet meer… en de industriëlen… ach… die hebben de zakken gevuld. De focus op “Airpower’ is in mijn optiek een verkeerde aanname… (de aanname is dat het luchtwapen alle dimensies kan bestrijden… ) de aanname gaat echter mank op een aantal punten:

  • Airpower is niet 24/7 en/of onder alle omstandigheden beschikbaar! Zeker niet met de kleine aantallen JSF en Apache. Wie geeft grondtroepen direct vuursteun op het moment dat het nodig is? In storm of regen, sneeuw of hitte…. Of tijdens een onweersbui? De tank is er niet meer! De landmacht beschikt niet meer over geleide wapens die vanonder pantser kunnen worden afgevuurd alleen de Fennek MRAT, waarbij men eerst het voertuig moet verlaten… wil men het wapen gebruiken.. dit kost tijd.. logisch toch? De gewone infanterie bataljons beschikken niet langer over de 120mm mortieren, dat is verheven tot …. Artillerie. De 155mm zware houwitsers zijn te groot en te zwaar en zullen dus niet altijd ingezet (kunnen) worden… en daarbij we gebruiken er nog maar 18 (ipv 60)
  • Inzet van infanterie tijden buitenlandse missies precies zoals Srebrenica waarbij men er vanuitgaat dat het te allen tijde rendabel is om JSF te gebruiken danwel deze te riskeren: In het kader van bovenstaande is met name de alinea: Cost and Riskinteressant! Lees alle artikelen van het blog: Safe te Royal Navy.org
  • Verkeerd concept gekozen: high tech – low boots on the ground: versus het Payloads over platforms concept. Waarbij voldoende zeer goed platforms zijn die modulair kunnen worden uitgerust met benodigde sensoren en wapens. (voordeel van dit concept is dat men over voldoende voortzettingsvermogen kan beschikken. Dit concept gaat uit van modulariteit en kwantiteit.. het andere concept gaat uit van superioriteit. (het jammere hieraan is dat superioriteit nooit lang of volledig bestaat) neem Stealth – ooit het summum van techniek.. inmiddels is duidelijk dat er diverse methodes zijn om stealth waar te nemen en uit te schakelen. De JSF is stealth maar heeft daarvoor concessies gedaan aan prestaties…. De Saab GripenE is een voorbeeld van zo’n modulair platform van hardware tot software is dit toestel ontwikkeld voor toekomstige uitbreiding. De computer is dezelfde als de JSF… maar de software zal slechts 40% van de computer vullen. De vele miljoen regels code bij de JSF zullen er echter voor zorgen dat de JSF binnen enkele jaren een nieuwere, grotere, wellicht zwaardere computer nodig zal hebben…..

FIA Saab slide 8 FIA Saab slide 9

  • De dreiging rondom Europa, en rekening houdend met de economische belangen en de levensbehoefte van de Europese bevolking is met name tegen te gaan door maritieme dominantie – op lange (lees Atlantische oceaan) en middellange (lees Noordzee en Middellandse zee) afstand van Europa. Hier komt 95% van onze handel vandaan via o.a. Rotterdam. De JSF ontbreekt het aan bereik, en altijd maar dure lucht tanker ondersteuning is niet rendabel.

threats to europeinternational-maritime-route

  • De JSF kan wellicht in alle dimensies invloed uitoefenen mits men over de juiste wapens beschikt.. en dit zegt men er niet bij… die wapens zijn er niet en zullen er niet gauw komen (Waarom?  €€€€€€€€€€€€= daarom!).

pujspar6aax3vdft8iz3 DATA_F-35_Weapon_Blocks

  • De JSF is juist een toestel waarbij juist diverse huidige wapens niet langer gebruikt kunnen worden… omdat de integratie van die wapens door de VS ver voor zich uit zijn geschoven. En sommige wapens niet zullen worden geïntegreerd. De huidige wapens die geïntegreerd worden zijn: GBU-31, GBU-12, nog niet zover maar ook de SDB zal er in passen.
  • Alleen de AMRAAM kan straks nog passen in de JSF. (initieel niet omdat we nu de 120B gebruiken JSF beoogt 120C)
  • Voor zover mij bekend passen alle Nederlandse wapens incl de in aanschaf zijnde SDB onder de Gripen.
  • Zowel de Reccelite als de Litening II targeting pods zijn nu al geïntegreerd op de Gripen C/D en dus met vrij weinig moeite ook op de GripenE. beide systemen zijn operationeel in Nederlandse dienst.
  • Voor Rafale en EF ligt dat idd wel iets anders.
  • Voor de JSF zijn ook infrastructurele aanpassingen nodig, dit is niet het geval bij F-16, Gripen E en Rafale. Dus dit “verwijt” aan het adres van de F/A-18 Super Hornet is een beetje grappig. Bekijk bijvoorbeeld het rapport Uitstapkosten JSF van het ARK maar eens, tabel 7 en tabel 8 staan diverse infrastructurele kosten benoemt: VOOR DE JSF!

air_jas-39_weapons_options_eskil_nyholm_lg gripenngload1ok

How can Air Force guys (and girls) be so ignorant? they use the OODA Loop… don’t they?

This article follows up to one i wrote before.. The document a USAF test pilot wrote after some dog-fight tests against a 20 year old F-16 D with full drop tanks under-wing against a totally clean JSF. First a short introduction and then some links to articles about this test document.

Ofcourse as usual the explanations and denials came promptly. The JPO said not to worry, it was an “old” AF-2 airframe “designed” for testing. besides that a lot of bullshit.. like this testaricraft didn’t have stealth coating, not the right sensors e.g.

Aircraft AF-2 did not have the mission systems software to use the sensors that allow the F-35 to see its enemy long before it knows the F-35 is in the area. Second, AF-2 does not have the special stealth coating that operational F-35s have that make them virtually invisible to radar. And third, it is not equipped with the weapons or software that allow the F-35 pilot to turn, aim a weapon with the helmet, and fire at an enemy without having to point the airplane at its target.

The whole JSF lobby looks like acting more and more like  someone with borderline.

Borderline personality disorder (BPD), also known as emotionally unstable personality disorder – impulsive or borderline type or emotional intensity disorder, is a cluster-B personality disorder. The essential features include a pattern of impulsivity and instability of behaviors, interpersonal relationships, and self-image. The pattern is present by early adulthood and occurs across a variety of situations and contexts.[1]

Other symptoms usually include intense fears of abandonment, intense anger, and irritability, the reason for which others have difficulty understanding.[1][2] People with BPD often engage in idealization and devaluation of others, alternating between high positive regard and great disappointment. [3]Self-harm, suicidal behavior, and substance abuse are common.[4]


Let’s be honest… most of the things above (made bold) we have seen and heared in all participating countries. the fighter pilots and other (mosty) Airforce officers i communicated with (verbal, e-mail, LinkedIn forum, Twitter discussions) are all related back to this kind of thinking…


short explanation is required i think:

self-image: They (the JSF lobbyists) see that they know best, they are the ones knowing what will come in a future battlefield. They know that there will be no radar or any other system which will see and track the JSF. They also know that a JSF doesn’t need to be used for Dog fights. And ofcourse the gun with only 182 rounds is good enough for CAS….. And ofcourse they are superior:)

idealization and devaluation of others: They lie, and tell halve truth’s about the JSF and about alternative aircraft. They claimed for example that there where flying 100dreds of JSF already… but all are in a devastating state… they all need upgrades to become sort of operational available. None of those 100+ JSF are operational and let’s not forget expeditionary available. At the same time they said the Gripen E was a paper plane… and in the same letter to Dutch Parliament (for example) that the Gripen E was an old aircraft (they actually suggested that the age of an airplane depends on the period of designing it.. instead of the age of the air-frame. At the same time we can state that in that case the Gripen C/D is of a younger generation than the JSF. they are working on that one for many, many years now. and a lot to coe.

Another aspect of this behavior is that they devaluate people with other opinions.. or questions they don’t want or can’t answer. Look here, second part of the article about OODA loop.They are the specialists, they know best. they suggest I’m anti America and communist, they suggest I earn money from Saab as i seem to know a lot about that. I once even was threatened by someone living near my home that he knew where to find me…. (And we aren’t talking about some hobbyists like myself. no, they are trained fighter pilots, military officers (officer = gentlemen?) politicians industrialists and lobyists of the JSF lobby-group NIDV in the Netherlands.

Self-harm, suicidal behavior, and substance abuse are common: I take these three together because they belong together. What they underestimate is that they in my opinion act like traitors to the Dutch people (not only the pilots / RNLAF people like this) but also some industrialists who lurk money $$$$, some politicians who want new positions in their old boys network. They sell our interests for 37 JSF. our whole defense needed to lose money because politicians saw it for free. but yet the JSF stayed alive. Failure after failure, delay after delay (they event blamed parliament for these delays … because they didn’t decide yet.. but the real delays are with the US producers and testers isn’t it? from the Wikileaks we learned that the US was better informed by Dutch (pro JSF) politicians and military/civilian government personnel than the Dutch parliament was informed. They even asked the US to pressure minister Wouter Bos (Labour party) to buy the aircraft.. he didn’t.

They don’t care how much the JSF will cost on buying, and operation and sustainment. as long as they can play with it. fully integrated in US support, training and operations. I claim that we can only operate our air force as long as the US wants us to do so. they own “our” JSF EW database, the source code for software and ALIS. they share on a need to know basis. They even will make a US only and a “outsiders” manual. why? And still the JSF is the best? They not only harm themselves.. when it comes to a fight and the US backs off (Srebrenica, West-Papua, or what about when we must fight for the Americans while we don’t think it’s a just war (Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan.. future)? what repercussions will follow?  All this while our most important interests lie at home. In the Netherlands… in Europe… right that old continent. The abuse is clear, they abuse fear, money peoples interests, least of all they abuse the total defense budget. as stated earlier. budget for JSF will be topped up, and the future operational and sustainment (O&S) costs will increase from 275 to 285.. at the beginning of it’s service live! Abusive. the rest of the branches will run out of blood.

Now the articles:

David Axe – War is Boring:  Read for Yourself — The F-35’s Damning Dogfighting Report Test pilot reveals stealth fighter’s vulnerability

Joseph Trevithick – War is Boring:  When Is the F-35 Not a Dogfighter? When It’s Convenient: Lockheed and the Pentagon keep moving the goalposts

David Axe – War is Boring:  The U.S. Air Force Promised the F-4 Would Never Dogfight: Now it’s saying the same thing about the F-35

Bill Sweetman – Aviation Week: Behind That F-35 Air Combat Report

As always this article of Bill Sweetman is very clear and shows the truth.

The JSF.. wow it survived Green Flag:)

The first messages of the awesome abilities of the JSF in CAS missions are popping up on the net. The USAF used this impressive machine during Green Flag…. They say in the same way as they use A-10 and F-16 fighters.. but with the difference there has been no JSF shot down… and unfortunately there have been some blue force A-10 and F-16 killed…. Oh my..


This was according to a paid Aviation week article..

“Not a single F-35 was “shot down” during the joint-force Green Flag exercises testing the jet and its pilots’ prowess operating it in a contested air-support role in the Western U.S. this month, according to U.S. Air Force Lt. Col. Cameron Dadgar, head of the exercise and leader of the 549th Combat Training Sqdn. at Nellis AFB, Nevada.

“This is notable because A-10s and F-16s were defeated in the same conditions, operating in an environment with hostile aircraft and surface-to-air missiles, he said. USAF officials suggest this validates the theory of Air Force leaders that sacrificing weapons load for stealth in the F-35’s design proved solid, at least for these mission sets. Skeptics, however, say the exercise was a public relations stunt designed to sell the jet as the service continues its uphill battle to convince Congress and others that the aircraft will be a sufficient replacement for the F-15E, F-16 and A-10 for future close air support (CAS) missions.”

We get more insight from the abovetopsecret forum website.

But If we dig deeper into these events: Breakingdefense.com interviews Nellis Air Force Base commander (and F-35 pilot) Maj. Gen Jay Silveria.

The planes aren’t using ordnance but are using their sensors to find and target the enemies — based on the sort of capabilities Russia and China boast — and then are sharing data with the older airplanes who kill them.

“We are continuing to expand our integration with other players,” Silveria said. And he was supposed to fly an F-35 with F-22s last Saturday. Also, he said the F-35s will be executing Close Air Support sorties this week to work out tactics, techniques and procedures.

So the JSF isn’t using ordnance but is just used to search ground targets, not totally the same way as the A-10’s and F-16’s are used.

IMO this whole exercise was nothing more to show that the JSF isn’t that bat. It will be a great replacement of the A-10 and all other aircraft… But then again. What about the survivability? Can it hit and run? Can it outperform opponents flying in to the after they.. (JSF) fired all their defensive Air-to-Air missiles? (If the JSF is in it’s stealth mode there isn’t much room for missiles and air-to-ground ordnance..) Lets just read what one of the JSF test pilots think of it?

The two jets would be playing the roles of opposing fighters in a pretend air battle, which the Air Force organized specifically to test out the F-35’s prowess as a close-range dogfighter in an air-to-air tangle involving high “angles of attack,” or AoA, and “aggressive stick/pedal inputs.”

In other words, the F-35 pilot would fly his jet hard, turning and maneuvering in order to “shoot down” the F-16, whose pilot would be doing his own best to evade and kill the F-35.

 “The evaluation focused on the overall effectiveness of the aircraft in performing various specified maneuvers in a dynamic environment,” the F-35 tester wrote. “This consisted of traditional Basic Fighter Maneuvers in offensive, defensive and neutral setups at altitudes ranging from 10,000 to 30,000 feet.”

The F-35 was flying “clean,” with no weapons in its bomb bay or under its wings and fuselage. The F-16, by contrast, was hauling two bulky underwing drop tanks, putting the older jet at an aerodynamic disadvantage.

But the JSF’s advantage didn’t actually help in the end. The stealth fighter proved too sluggish to reliably defeat the F-16, even with the F-16 lugging extra fuel tanks. “Even with the limited F-16 target configuration, the F-35A remained at a distinct energy disadvantage for every engagement,” the pilot reported.


The F-35 pilot came right out and said it — if you’re flying a JSF, there’s no point in trying to get into a sustained, close turning battle with another fighter. “There were not compelling reasons to fight in this region.” God help you if the enemy surprises you and you have no choice but to turn.

The JSF tester found just one way to win a short-range air-to-air engagement — by performing a very specific maneuver. “Once established at high AoA, a prolonged full rudder input generated a fast enough yaw rate to create excessive heading crossing angles with opportunities to point for missile shots.”

And to add insult to injury, the JSF flier discovered he couldn’t even comfortably move his head inside the radar-evading jet’s cramped cockpit. “The helmet was too large for the space inside the canopy to adequately see behind the aircraft.” That allowed the F-16 to sneak up on him.

David Axe from War is Boring wrote this article based on a report from this distinctive test pilot “for official use only.” Well I use it now officially. A short round up:

  • The JSF was flying clean, no things attached to his belly, to keep it as stealth as possible. The USAF and RNLAF ofcourse assume such an encounter will never happen because the JSF is “invisible” for radar and would have taken down a enemy fighter before it ever new what happened.. (well this can only be done two to four times because after that it wil be out of missiles…) And when the JSF will open up it’s belly to fire the missiles… it will be seen! Not to mention the IRST equipped fighters ( Russian and Chinese MIG like aircraft, but also Rafale, Super Hornet, Gripen E/F, Sea Gripen and many other possible opponents)
  • The F-16 had two extra underwing fuel tanks, the JSF should be in an advantage position here.
  • The configuration advantage wasn’t helpful for the JSF: the F-35A remained at a distinct energy disadvantage for every engagement
  • The JSF was to slow and the trim rate was also to slow, to use the 25mm gun. The F-16 was long gone before the JSF pilot could use it effectively (also the munitions load for the gun is very thrifty. Only 182 25mm bullets. For a 4 barrel canon firing 3000 rounds a minute.. this is only enough ammo for 3,64 secondsJ .


  • The JSF had only one change, a high angle of attack approach to gain speed. This however is a one time opportunity to fire close range missiles (like the Sidewinder). One time opportunity because this maneuver costs a lot of fuel. In other words, having tried the trick once, an F-35 pilot is out of options and needs to get away quick.
  • As I stated on a long time ago, also the cockpit and the Helmet have a problem in such a dogfight scenario. The helmet will bump to very side and the pilot will be hindered to fast look around him to search for the opposing fighter visually. “The helmet was too large for the space inside the canopy to adequately see behind the aircraft.” That allowed the F-16 to sneak up on him.

FIA Saab slide 8

Conceptual problem
These examples point to the main JSF problem. This problem is conceptual (as I pointed out many, many times before) In theory this plane looks promising and high-tech solution for every problem are available, or will be available if we pay loads and loads of dollars for it. But sometimes the old fashioned dogfight will be needed. The opposing fighter must be searched visually not with high-tech instruments or Virtual reality imagination..


This conceptual problem is wrong and the USAF and allies must stop ignoring all developments worldwide which proof this is true. Counter stealth radar, the use of passive radar, the use of IRST combined with AESA radar, the ability of fighter aircraft to out perform and out maneuver the JSF, the ability to perform more sustained sorties with lower cost and lower fuel use will set the JSF on a side trail, if real battle will come forward.

FIA Saab detailF22

The JSF needs the F22 for air cover so it won’t need to try to dogfight. But the USAF can’t do this al the time, the USMC and US Navy neither. Several partner countries don’t have this luxury of a second Air Defense fighter to defend the stealthy JSF. What about those countries?

Well the USAF doesn’t seem to care, one reason could be these countries will never be able to use the JSF without the help and support (training, logistic and software / EW code) without the permission of the USAF. Besides that these Air Forces won’t get the full developed JSF or it’s doctrine. No all US-only materials will be cleaned out and also the threat library won’t be shared freely with all partner countries/ users. There has been set-up a separate organization to accommodate that, what would be the reason for that if all partner nations would receive the same information data for which they paid a lot of money btw?

And it won’t only be for the US services. Once the US publication is written and approved, Silveria said the US-only sections will be cleaned out and the partner countries and others who buy the F-35 will receive the publication.

Also, the threat files — the “mission data files” detailing possible threats the F-35 will face in its different theaters — are being compiled and shared jointly.

“The mission data file is also driving us closer. That will force that continued collaboration,” Silveria said. So the CONOPs will be joint for US forces and all those other countries will know how to fight with the US. That’s an impressive air package for any enemy to face.


Im not anti- American, I believe the US has done a great deal for humanity and for the good of all. But I also believe the current state of the US is evil. The greed from the USG and Military industry (MIC) is covered with a sauce of patriotism, justice and human rights devotion.  But underneath we see the congressmembers are giving a way billions of dollars to support the MIC in their state building unwanted tanks, building to expensive JSF fighter planes to effectively perform tasks. Building and developing naval vessels which are so expensive and still not perform as promised. The public doesn’t know, and the politicians.. well the politicians… as stated above are deeply in it. They look the other way, to make a political deal (like they did in the Netherlands where the Labour party (PvdA) long time opposed the JSF and wanted to exit the participation, and now is the party who, togerher with the Liberal party (VVD) ordered the first 8 ‘production” JSF. They know what they are doing, they read the GOA and technical reports with (public known JSF problems) They know it wil be to expensive to operate and to use it in “cheap” QRA situations, but they don’t care.

Ach ja wat meer geld bij Defensie en het is opgelost he?

Even een korte post: Het Amerikaanse “Straus Military Reform Project” heeft een uitgebreide analyse geschreven aan de hand van het DOT&E Report: over de JSF. Eerst wat info over het Straus Military Reform Project:

The goal of the Straus Military Reform Project is to secure far more effective military forces and much more ethical and professional military and civilian leadership at significantly lower cost.

Naar het artikel op de POGO website: (POGO staat voor Project on Government Oversight)

DOT&E Report: The F-35 Is Not Ready for IOC and Won’t Be Any Time Soon


Conclusion: Exquisitely Limited Capability

Overall, DOT&E’s report reveals:

  • The Joint Program Office, led by Lt. Gen. Bogdan, is re-categorizing or failing to count aircraft failures to try to boost maintainability and reliability statistics;
  • Testing is continuing to reveal the need for more tests, but the majority of the fixes and for capability deficiencies being discovered are being deferred to later blocks rather than being resolved;
  • The F-35 has a significant risk of fire due to extensive fuel tank vulnerability, lightning vulnerability and an OBIGGS system unable to sufficiently reduce fire-sustaining oxygen, despite redesigns;
  • Wing drop concerns are still not resolved after six years, and may only be mitigated or solved at the expense of combat maneuverability and stealth;
  • The June engine problems are seriously impeding or preventing the completion of key test points, including ensuring that the F-35B delivered to the Marine Corps for IOC meets critical safety requirements; no redesign, schedule, or cost estimate for a long-term fix has been defined yet, thereby further impeding g testing;
  • Even in its third iteration, the F-35’s helmet continues to show high false-alarm rates and computer stability concerns, seriously reducing pilots’ situational awareness and endangering their lives in combat;
  • The number of Block 2B’s already limited combat capabilities being deferred to later blocks means that the Marine Corps’ FY2015 IOC squadron will be even less combat capable than originally planned;
  • ALIS software failures continue to impede operation, mission planning, and maintenance of the F-35, forcing the Services to be overly reliant on contractors and “unacceptable workarounds”;
  • Deficiencies in Block 2B software, and deferring those capabilities to later blocks, is undermining combat suitability for all three variants of the F-35;
  • The program’s attempts to save money now by reducing test points and deferring crucial combat capabilities will result in costly retrofits and fixes later down the line, creating a future unaffordable bow wave that, based on F-22 experience, will add at least an additional $67 billion in acquisition costs; and
  • Low availability and reliability of the F-35 is driven by inherent design problems that are only becoming more obvious and difficult to fix.

FIA Saab slide 9

The F-35 is years away from being ready for initial operational capability. To send this airplane on a combat deployment, or to declare it ready to be sent, as early as the Marines’ 2015 or the Air Force’s 2016 IOC dates, is a politically driven and irresponsible mistake. DOT&E’s report shows that the current IOC plans for the F-35A and B should be rejected as unrealistic. Without meaningful oversight from the Department of Defense or Congress, however, these IOC declarations will go unchallenged.

The F-35 program is designed so that there is no requirement to prove its combat capability before approving an annual production rate of 57 aircraft, a rate unprecedented for any fighter with so little operational testing accomplished and so many unresolved problems. Further production of the F-35 at this point, let alone an increase in already high and unwarranted production rates, is unsupported by the DOT&E data. But that data is being ignored to continue funding a politically driven acquisition program.

The F-35’s unrealistic production and IOC schedule is divorcing the declaration of initial operating capability from operational reality. Deferring combat capabilities, increasing future costs, and increasing the risk of delivering seriously deficient combat effectiveness mandates revising the current schedules for IOC and for production ramp-up. Further accelerating a program with this many major design, safety, and reliability problems is a disservice to our people in uniform who have to fly, maintain, and go to war with this weapons system.

Despite Congress’s rhetoric regarding reform and accountability, they are rewarding the cooking of data, reckless program concurrency, and disasterous acquisition management by aproving and funding the F-35’s current path. Their accession and approval will ensure that future acquisition programs have even worse outcomes.

Zie waar een tunnelvisie en politiek gedreven MICC projecten toe leiden. En dat tegen een prachtige dollarkoers van 0,763 nietwaar? Nou eerder €1 = $1 oeps! Maar laat u niet weerhouden deze waarschuwing te lezen. Ja Jack en Mat… ook jij/jullie… want wie draagt er meer verantwoordelijkheid voor dit debacle dan de lobbyende geld verslindende en belastinggeld verkwanselende CDA, VVD en LPF (voormalig) politici die nu hun kost verdienen met de JSF aanschaf?

Wat mij betreft is iedereen die aan de JSF heeft meegewerkt hoofdelijk aansprakelijk en dus verantwoordelijk voor het bijeenbrengen van het verloren geld.. mocht dat nodig zijn. Geheel kaal plukken want als uit een parlementaire enquête blijkt dat u de kamer en ons volk hebt voorgelogen.. (en daar is aantoonbaar bewijs van voorhanden… de JSF komt er ook alleen maar op basis van een Kamermeerderheid en niet op basis van bewezen KPI, bewezen de beste en enige optie te zijn…) U weet dit:) Dan zult u moeten boeten. U heeft vast een mooie grijns en zal uw handen in onschuld wassen…


Maar zo’n enquête mag deze keer niet zonder gevolgen blijven. Er zit bij Defensie een hele top, de politiek is volledig geïnfecteerd door MICC personen (NIDV + VNO-OCW – de grote graaiers- want de belangen van de gewone Nederlander nog de belangen van de Nederlandse werkgelegenheid heeft u niet (nooit) gediend. Want hoeveel banen zijn er nu? En hoeveel werk laat Stork in Turkije uitvoeren? Waar komt de onderhoudsvalley? Waar worden motoren gemaakt zogezegd? Lees dit ook nog maar eens: met name Deel 8 en 9 zijn interessant:

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

The same old story over and over again

The NOS (Dutch Broadcasting Organisation) has the following story. On television they show a big smiling Maxime Verhagen, former minister of Foreign Affairs (CDA) now appointed as special representative to get as many orders on the JSF program as possible for Dutch industry. Of course he is very positive but he also exaggerates enormously about the possible values.  Some of the “facts” of this broadcast:

  • 27 Dutch companies have made it to generate work from the JSF program (0:22)
  • Fokker: for 40 JSF per year they build parts (0:26)
  • Aeronamic has an order ( worth € 220 milj) work for at least 50 people (0:32)
  • There will be more work, € 8 to € 9 billion with hundreds of jobs. (0:36)
  • Maxime Verhagen: After building there also will come future contracts for the maintenance work also worth € 10 to € 20 billion

I would like to ask Mr. Verhagen some key questions: On what grounds where those prognoses based? These where the figures based on the business case of the Dutch Air Force buying 85 JSF not 37. But are those still appropriate?

Another quote of mr Verhagen: If you don’t invest.. you won’t receive anything. (0:45)

Can we expect the US to give us the same amount of orders? What about some non-partner-nations willing to acquire the JSF with demands of large production participation? Like Japan, South-Korea and Israel? Howe come they didn’t invest a billion euro’s in this program and still receive orders far more wort than ours? While they even order in the same amount of aircraft (around 40 each?) And what about those figures and orders we see sometimes in the Dutch News. Stories about new orders, signature signing of orders. All celebrated but not always clear if it’s a new one… or one already arranged long time ago… but celebrated as a new victory (for marketing purposes of course),

Repeating old contracts and framework agreements with each small successor agreement, if re-extracted billions turnover ……….

The annual PV F16 allow hitherto SALES tens of millions to the recognition of the “JSF Business Case” (which is not MARGIN = value) show per year.

Super nice of course …….

But Aeronamic works for Airbus; and work would have been if we DO NOT buy the JSF; simply because they are innovative.

Fokker / STORK  

October 2009
THE HAGUE – Stork Fokker’s flaperons, movable flaps on the wings, producing for American combat unit JSF. For this purpose, Tuesday (October 6) signed a contract with aircraft manufacturer Lockheed Martin.

(and even at least 4 times, and so on)

Aeronamic (part of the work is outsourced to Romanian branch)

November 17, 2010
Aeronamic has a contract for the supply of the so-called Air Management System for Turbomachinery energy on board the aircraft.

May 2013
Honeywell, a company that for years Aeronamic Siezen recent works, signed an agreement for the construction of Terminal Power Management Systems (PTMs) for half of the total number of building F-35’s. “The system regulates the energy system aboard the new American fighter. It is an order of 500 to 600 million and provides 50 to 60 of our people for thirty years working on “The deal goes through, but under one condition., The Dutch government should proceed to purchase the F-35. “How many devices they buy does not matter. If only they buy. “

July 2014
Production of 220 million and 50 men work.

How often do we have to repeat this??

I would like to recommend an article by Krijn Schramada of the revealing Follow The Money website: JSF industry consider themselves rich with turnover.