Tagarchief: JSFNieuws.nl

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.


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

DutchForce21 the modular and affordable approach

I now will post a series of blogs about the modular approach of  DutchForce21 concept. I take some examples of how things could be done. And sad but true, how we see Dutch government (+ industry and military) CHOOSE and DECIDE to do. Not in the interest of the common goal and the excistence of the Dutch Armed Forces. This is: Securing the interests of the Dutch people: The starting point should be that the less resources armed forces will use to fight/secure those same resources, the more the people benefit those resources. And that’s what the armed forces are for…to secure the peoples interests and safeguarding their lives and future.  

“The less resources armed forces will use to fight/secure those same resources, the more the people benefit those resources”.

Military concept
Based on my own research and military contacts I wrote a concept which I think would be best for the Dutch Armed forces. But this concept could be a proposition for all countries great and small. It would be the basis for a real available and exploitable expeditionary fighting force, which in my personal opinion is needed for future operations and conflicts, at great distance from Europe. The most important features of the concept are:

  • Breaking the cost curve; both in acquisition and Operation & Sustainment (O&S)
  • Durable development;  Energy efficiency e.g.; The starting point is that the less resources armed forces will use to fight/secure those same resources the more the people benefit those resources. And that’s what the armed forces are for…to secure the peoples interests and safeguarding their lives and future.
  • Quantity and quality; creating enough units with adequate numbers of (weapon) systems, military personnel and operational deployable munitions, spares and lubricants in sufficient numbers.

Modular Approach
For a long time now I’m convinced of the modular approach. In a time that it’s possible to build increasingly smaller (sub) systems which fit into larger systems. And could be exchanged when necessary. In a time where we can use apps on all brands of mobile phone’s and share and improve the software ourselves (If you have some understanding of this… which I don’t have) it surely must be possible to use this principle to safe both money, time and materials.



Interesting example of modular systems, STANFLEX from Danish navy. A containerized system with several options like the ESSM container.

The DutchForce21 concept of building a new defence organisation is fully based on these principles. In my opinion it only has advantages. The only problem is that this kind of concept has negative impact for industrial parties. Their problem is that they won’t stay sole source suppliers. Let me explain this: When the Netherlands government buys the JSF. They will stick to this aircraft for over 30 – 40 years (they hope it will stay suitable and sustainable during this period)

The problem is that the full support for this aircraft is in the hands of the US industry, and they decide which industry will be making replacement parts. If it’s already possible to develop Capability upgrades – The aircraft stealth characteristics won’t accept adding things on the outside, and on the inside.. well its full of shit, and the JSF already has no weight margins left for future upgrades – Even the software is a big problem, with both flight sensitive software and operational software mixed. While the Saab software has separated this. So its actually possible to put new apps in the cockpit without (negative) influence on flight performance.. which also means its more easy to upgrade and will cost less, because they won’t be needed to test the full flight characteristics. Why wont the Dutch DMO convirm this? Why do they stick to their “superior Buy American belief?

With this next blog I will take some thought on the philosophy of Saab and the implications for all branches of armed forces. I will take a look at the presentation of Lennart Sindahl deputy CEO of Saab which he gave during the Farnborough air show. Besides pointing out that the Gripen E is where it supposed to be – on track, within budget – he also shows us something about the future conceptual framework of military operations viewed by Saab and thus the Swedish Armed forces. The DutchForce21 operational concept is based on thoughts of Admiral Greenert, Chief of Naval operations. Greenert descibes his concept as Payloads over platforms.  He writes:

We need to move from ‘luxury-car’ platforms—with their built-in capabilities—toward dependable ‘trucks’ that can handle a changing payload selection.

Following articles will address information from these slides and the way the DutchForce21 concept would fit in. stay tuned.

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.

A big week for JSF (and their fanboys & girls)…. Or not?

From the previous intro I now want to go to the Farnborough International Air show (FIA) which took place last week in the United Kingdom.

Farnborough International Air show 
A lot of headlines and rumours, a lot of working hours for the Marketing gurus of Lockheed Martin, the Pentagon and other related companies worldwide. It promised to be the highlight of the year, and the moment everybody… well not exactly everybody… dreamed of the last 10 to 20 years. Year after year had gone by, but every year no show for the already (operational) flying JSF. But this year was different: The dream would come true. For LM a true victorious moment celebrated by media and printed promotion. They even taken care of hanging posters in London subway stations to showcase the first European flight demo of the promising JSF. All things where arranged to welcome the true fighter of all fighters to Europe…..

The JSF should have moved from Eglin Air Force base all the way to Europe to entertain the believers there on three occasions. The convoy – Yes you can speak of a convoy – with a pair of KC10 tankers, at least one KC130J tanker, and a C-17 to escort 4 fighters across the Atlantic. The 4 JSF need to refuel around 10-12 times each during their crossing, should have arrived on Fairford (a Big US airbase with all necessary security) in the first week of July. They Didn’t!


The JSF and her big Marketingteam did mis more than one show. First the launching ceremony of the too big, too fat and too badly equipped new British Super Landing Helicopter Dock ships.

QE-class Landing Helicopter Dock (LHD) ships
If they were Aircraft carriers they should have been equipped with Cat’s & traps like proper carriers (the French, Brazilian and US way) with enough budget to buy enough carrier capable fighters. Or the other way around, enough fighters for a reasonable price like the F/A  Super Hornet, the French Rafale or a new breed the Sea Gripen.  I say the other way around because yes Cats&Traps maybe more expensive to buy than the STOVL launching pad on the super LHD. But the other thing is. The aircraft to operate from such a Carrier can be more cheap than the current choice: the JSF F35B. Beside the over expensive aircraft, the UK also can count on much higher Operation & Sustainment costs, lower Sortie generation rates and last but surely not least: more and extensive higher costs to ship infrastructure because of the enormous heat on the deck. In short, the choice of the STOVL variant by the British MoD, was and still is a false one. Biased and the use of improper arguments. They didn’t include all the relevant costs, they compared the price of building the Carrier on a STOVL basis versus extra costs of fitting Cats&Traps without looking into the other relevant costs. They also neglected to look at the consequences for operational availability – and very important –cooperation with both the US Navy and the French navy with which the British Prime minister says it will have far reaching defence cooperation…. Without the possibility to cooperate on joint aircraft carrier operations…. How dumb.  For more info on these arguments I recommend a series of articles by my colleague of Safe the royal navy.

Fairford Air show
Besides the naming ceremony of the launching of the Queen Elizabeth vessel, the JSF also missed the Royal Air Tattoo at Fairford Airbase.. the place where the JSF Convoy would have landed and stayed during the trip because it currently is one of the largest US airbases in Great Britain… with all necessary security and facilities which are needed to support such a fine aircraft.

But to get back on the JSF appearance during this event. Couple of days before this great occasion to show the aircraft to the public, the JSF had a very interesting malfunction… no an accident to be honest.  Again the issue was on the F135 engine. Read this summary.

F-35A with extensive engine fire at Eglin – June 2014

On Monday June 23, 2014 at 9:15 p.m. a F-35A, assigned to the 33rd Fighter Wing, 58th Fighter Squadron at Eglin Air Force Base, caught fire as the instructor pilot, was taking off as part of a two-ship formation for a continuation training mission. First reports told the “significant fire” originated in the tail of the aircraft, mentioning it a Class-A (big) incident.

The pilot successfully shut down the plane and escaped unharmed and the fire was extinguished with foam by a ground crew. The aircraft involved is the AF-27, s/n 10-5015, a LRIP-4 series aircraft that made its first flight on April 22, 2013 and was delivered on May 29, 2013 to the US Air Force. The F-35A was towed to a hangar. Accident investigators have collected any related foreign object debris at the same hangar for review.

There is a company who finally did – what they should have done long time ago. Saab nailed the remaining parts of Lockheed Martin and here 5th generation fighter to the wall, and throwing daggers at it. Each dagger reached their target swiftly and decisively.

Just one picture to help you start thinking… if you didn’t do that already. Why the 5th Generation is nonsense.

FIA Saab slide 8

This article isn’t meant to make fun of the JSF…. No to the contrary. I am sad that the influence of marketeers in our society is so big… and influential, they even are able to change truth, change facts, and let the bad guys win even if they lose every war, They blow every chance to deliver what they promised. And always find something or someone to blame. And always they are right with their “concurrency” and High quality superior program management principles. They still sell us that same old story that, every big (weapons) program will have these kind of setbacks. Well they don’t … not with normal Program management and smart development methods. And with reasonable set Performance goals (KPI’s) But hey… If Lockheed Marketing sells us a straight banana than it’s straight right?

How can we still live in such a society? Where big words and promises are more worth than delivery of promises, on time, on schedule, within budget and according to preset Key Performance Indicators and quality standards?  A new blog of mine will point out how things where shown in the Netherlands by Dutch Broadcasting organization.

Stay tuned!

5th generation……. fighters? theory or practice?

Bill Sweetman wrote a very interesting article about the (future) capabilities of the Saab Gripen E sensor suite… the most important are three Selex-ES sensors. Please read his article thoroughly: “Gripen Sensors Claim Counter-Stealth Performance

First there is the Raven ES-05 active, electronically scanned array radar (AESA) mounted on a “repositioner,” a rotating mount that gives the radar a ±100-deg. field of view around the nose. The second sensor is a Skyward-G infrared search and track (IRST) system. The third sensor is a new identification friend-or-foe (IFF) system with three electronically steerable antenna arrays, which matches the radar’s range and field of view.


A lot of this information, which was available on the internet for some time now, should have found its way to e.g. the Dutch ministry of Defence which held an F16 Fighter Replacement program “update” based on Public domain info only. This document: “Report Actualisation Program F16 Replacement (rapport actualisatie Vervanging F16) was the basis for the government coalition of Labour(PvdA) and Liberals (VVD). In their coalition accord they did mention that they wanted to decide about the Fighter Replacement by the end of 2013… (while there is no practical reason for this… the RNLAF follows the same path like ” JSF partnercountry Denmark” which also will decide in 2015… thats the real decision point.. but hey, the discussions and rumors about this “Hot Iron” are from the polticial discussion table,,. verry handy if you consider the comming local council elections (tommorow 19th March) and the European Parliament Elections (22th of May). So this decission is “understandable”. But….. they based their decision on…. Poorly or selectively googled Open Source Intelligence (OSINT)… and their (overestimated) “factual” knowledge of the Joint Strike Fighter program….  I wrote about that several times before…

The strange thing is that there was no one in Dutch Parliament who asked the relevant questions and raised awareness about the “authority” of this document, namely rubbish!

How on earth is it possible that a Democratic elected government based its total future Defence policy (yes; total policy because with every defence cut and abolishment of defence capabilities the steadfast answer is: Airpower will fix that loss….)  completely on a document selectively or poorly googled… And nobody in or outside the coalition did question the “weight of this document…. Nobody asked how come the other contenders had there “conversation” with the MoD but didn’t get the possibility to deliver the latest official technical status reports of their respective fighter aircraft.


Lees verder