Tagarchief: Project Vervanging F16

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


Short and sharp: Australian MP Dennis Jensen about JSF and Military Industrial Complex

Sometimes if I follow the Parliamentary discussions, and monologues in the Dutch Parliament about defense matters, especially the JSF question, i recognize some things… they all start with “a lack of”:

  • interest,
  • responsibility,
  • knowledge.
  • urgency

Up to a couple of years, there was only one person in Dutch parliament who was fully aware of the problems, the technical issues and was reading through all the “BS” arguments used by the Defense ministry JSF lobbyists. It was Ms. Eijsink. She still is fully into this air vehicle, but I personally I think that party politics within the PvdA / Labour party has stopped her from doing what she is supposed to do. There have been numerous changes to tackle the JSF and there lobbyists from within the Parliament (CDA, VVD, SGP) the Government: Ministry of Defence, Economical affairs, and from within the Dutch Military complex. I understand Ms. Eijsinks position, she was the only one in the Labour group (as far as I can see it, who was willing to go for the truth!) The leader of the Labour group, Diedederik Samsom looks like the real bad Genius here. personal / party political goals are more important than the truth and the fate of the whole country.. The total defence capability will diminish.

Move on too this particular Australian MP: Dr. Dennis Jensen. This was the man who came out in the open with the RAND report.. A report about the performance of US Air Forces consisting of F22, JSF, Super Hornets, many  tankers and some other high value targets like AWACS. vs the Chinese Air Forces who had (in the game simulation!) attacked Taiwan. and the US went to the…… rescue…!

In the mock battle, the JSF, F22 and Super Hornets were dubbed the blue team and had to defend an attack by a red team, made up of Russian built Sukhoi fighters.

The results are classified, but Lateline has obtained an email from a former RAAF flight test engineer who says he has been briefed on the exercise.

Look at the presentation of the results here: 2008 RAND Pacific View Air Combat Briefing

  • assessment of the RAND simulation page 40 – 52,
  • conclusions page 53/64
  • Also interesting back-up slides:
    • Stealth and radar + alternative measures too catch the “bird” page 62 – 65,
    • Air base distribution (in the Pacific. capable of operating the JSF/F22 because high tech infrastructure is needed) page 66/67
    • big What iF 1?: what if the Chinese decide to launch a preemptive strike on US airbases in Japan…. page  70 – 74
    • big What iF 2?: What if the Chinese (thanks to the small number of US AAM missiles on-board JSF and F22 will get in close range of the surviving US aircraft, including tankers, AWACS and very expensive JSF and F22 aircraft? (who have lost all their AMRAAM missiles in the first waves? page 75 – 81
    • Fuel consumption of missions from Kadena in Japan to Taiwan / China: Slide 88 – 90

PETER GOON (except from email to Dr Steve Gumley, August 28, 2008): Red Force dominated the exercise going up against two versions of Blue Force, both of which were roundly defeated. One way the Red Force summation of events has been described is that ‘… it was like clubbing baby seals’.

“In addition to this rather blunt Red Force summation, the war gaming exercise demonstrated the JSF aircraft were next to useless while the Super Hornets of both Blue forces were seriously and significantly overmatched (a.k.a. ‘useless’).

“Hundreds of Blue Force aircraft were lost in the first twenty minutes.”

Well this is the same Australian MP who warned about this report, which was kept secret by all governments including the Dutch. When it came out, they denied it was an “official” study. But one of the Australian Air Force members who participated in this study has been sacked.

Well lets have a look what this very well informed MP has to say: Youtube: The JSF Program and its Failures

Lets finish with a good description of Ms. Eijsink herself about the un democratic way the Dutch people are informed about the JSF and husled into a project which will definitely destroy all (independent) fighting capability of the whole Dutch Armed forces:

The hook is inn!

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.

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

Does JSF has serious consequences for capabilities of all Defense branches?

Taken over from the JSFNieuws.nl website with approval. JSF NIEUWS is a Dutch Website with independent information about the Joint Strike Fighter Program.

Opinion: All countries who are opting for the JSF are using the same arguments. Lets see the following examples.

Lets start with the Dutch MoD statement:

“The replacement will be carried out entirely within the previously reserved investment budget of €4.5 billion [$6 billion] and the current operating budget for the F-16, which amounts to €270 million per year,” the government says. “Based on the current insights, the available financial room is sufficient for the purchase of 37 aircraft.

They previously called it “displacement effect”(verdringingseffect in Dutch) – with this they mean the effects of choosing the JSF with no financial and operational harm to other capabilities of the Armed Forces as a whole. Eventually they say it won’t have an effect on the BUDGET, but what’s more important is the effect on the capability. 

The Dutch Ministers of Defense have al said: there are no problems, choosing the JSF has no effect on other capabilities because it has its own Operational & Sustainment (O&S) budget. How then, could it be possible that in all countries the numbers of frigate’s, helicopters, Maritime Patrol Aircraft infantry units, tanks, artillery and other relevant capabilities are shrinking? While they always use the same argument: we will fix that with Airpower. OK then, which airpower? At what cost? And with what kind of guarantee for 24/7 availability at the right place and time?

I would also like to quote the Dutch Government Accountability Office on her Validation of the policy document ‘In the Interests of the Netherlands’ This Dutch GAO isn’t always sharpe on defense matters, It seems sometimes they are used by some sort of political powers, but, I must say, sometimes they do:

  • If fewer than 37 aircraft can be procured, the minister writes, the entire project will be reconsidered. In our opinion, favorable cost developments should also lead to a reconsideration of the project, and not automatically to the procurement of more aircraft.
  • To make the armed forces financially and operationally sustainable, the Minister of Defence has lowered the deployment objectives and taken measures for each branch of the armed forces so that they can achieve their deployment objectives.
  • At the beginning of the JSF project, the ministry assumed that the squadrons it deployed would count more than 50 aircraft. In the policy document, it assumes that the procurement of 37 JSFs – there are currently 68 F-16s in service – will enable it to deploy four aircraft permanently on international missions. Its deployment calculations, however, are not complete. Not all training hours have been taken into account and the calculations are optimistic in other areas. It is therefore doubtful whether four fighter aircraft could be deployed without compromising training or other tasks. (Editorial note: In the beginning the RNLAF until very recently stated the intend to eventually acquire 114 JSF (see chapter 5.3 “The Netherlands’ ambitions and needs”)  to perform all the necessary tasks. The number of 85 was only a “moderate” number because of the economic Business Case for our defense related industry.)
  • The choices made in the policy document also restrict the deployability of other branches of the armed forces:
    • a reduction in the training of Chinook helicopter crews will reduce deployment of the army’s Air Manoeuvre Brigade,
    • the minister’s decision not to take the Joint Support Ship into service lowers the ambitions for the navy and cuts operational costs,

Before these new issues, the Dutch Armed Forces have lost a lot of capabilities

    • frigate’s,
    • helicopters,
    • Maritime Patrol Aircraft
    • infantry units,
    • tanks,
    • artillery
    • Long Range guided weapons against land based targets (TOW like)

With no replacement: except the promise of increased Airpower!


An example: from SNAFU! A US Marine Corps centric blog, with a view on all things military…

You bastards better be right or we’re screwed for a generation

We’re about to see the full ramifications of the SUPER EXPENSIVE F-35 on the defense budget soon.

It occurs to me that one airplane will determine the success of our armed forces and our place in the world for the foreseeable future.

Consider this: *  The US Army is having to cut Brigades, reorganize its aviation and shed personnel to a rate that their Chief is now stating publicly that its dangerous. *  The USMC is cutting Battalions, shedding squadrons and having to make adhoc units just to justify this airplane while at the same time delaying the production of a much needed replacement for the AAV. *  The US Navy is considering cutting aircraft carriers, is definitely cutting squadrons and is in ship building pain because this plane is being forced on them. *  The USAF is cutting squadrons, canceling upgrades to legacy fighters, tossing away its premier air support airplane and essentially betting its future on an airplane that is not a good fighter, is a mediocre (at best) close air support platform, is insanely expensive all in the belief that its poor stealth and information dominance will carry the day against airplanes that are faster, fly higher, have bigger AESA arrays, fly farther and essentially get the same information just through different means.….

Or the British UK NATIONAL DEFENCE ASSOCIATION Which stated the following:

Diminished capabilities and increased responsibilities: Time for an objective defense review!

Since the Strategic defense and Security Review (SDSR) 2010 this has been done:

  • Army numbers were cut from 102,000 to 82,000,
  • The RAF are now left with nine squadrons of operational fast jets
  • the RAF lost its entire capability for maritime patrol
  • The Joint Harrier Force, which comprised the upgraded Harrier GR9s
  • the Joint Strike Fighter order was reduced from 138 to 48.
  • both the new aircraft carriers are to be completed
    • allowing one carrier to be operational at all times provided adequate trained manpower is available
    • the reduction in the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) purchase will allow only one air group, half the size originally planned.
  • The surface combat fleet has been reduced to 19 frigates and destroyers, two thirds of them ageing ships,
  • Instead of the thirty two that the 1998 Strategic defense Review considered the minimum for meeting the Navy’s commitments.
  • Even the new Astute class of nuclear-powered hunter killer submarines has been reduced from ten to seven.

Lets finish with an interesting statement of the 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.

Kerstgroet in (JSF)juichstemming

Gisteren heeft de Minister van Defensie haar kerstgroet aan alle medewerkers en hun familie via haar blog verzonden. Dit zinnetje viel me op:

“Maar na vele jaren van debat en onzekerheid kunnen we nu gaan werken aan de transitie naar de F-35.”

Voor de minister en de hare, is dit wellicht een geweldige overwinning. Haar triomftocht over Eglin Air Force Base, om een bezoek te brengen aan het Klu detachement aldaar is voor eeuwig vastgelegd. Dat deze triomftocht het resultaat is van het verdraaien van feiten, selectief gegoogle, manipulatie van een hoog College van Staat en het schandelijk behandelen van alternatieve vliegtuigfabrikaten en een onwetende, ongeïnteresseerde Tweede Kamer moge duidelijk zijn. Basis voor dit alles was het selectief bij elkaar gegoogled rapportje| Actualisatie Vervanging F-16. Dit weet de minister, de minister van Financiën en als het goed is de rest van de coalitie heel goed! Ook de Algemene Rekenkamer is hier heel goed van op de hoogte zoals ze dat in haar rapport heeft opgeschreven.

Ook heeft de Rekenkamer op (bevel/aanwijzing) van de beide betrokken ministers de conclussies betreffende de JSF inhoudelijk gewijzigd.

Wijzigingen zichtbaar-versie samenvatting en § 3.2 (zie kolom rechts en open het PDF document)

Hoe dubieus deze handelingen van ook het ARK zijn is nog duidelijker als we kijken naar de positie van dit Hoge college van Staat!

“De Algemene Rekenkamer is als Hoog College van Staat onderdeel van de rijksoverheid. Hoge Colleges van Staat zorgen ervoor dat de democratische rechtsstaat goed functioneert. Ze zijn niet afhankelijk van de regering.”


We zijn een onafhankelijk instituut. Dat betekent dat we zelf bepalen wat we onderzoeken. We krijgen ook verzoeken om onderzoek te doen. Die verzoeken zijn vaak afkomstig van Kamerleden, ministers en staatssecretarissen. Meestal gebeurt dat als ze behoefte hebben aan een onafhankelijk, deskundig oordeel over een bepaald onderwerp. Maar ze kunnen geen opdracht geven, juist omdat de Algemene Rekenkamer onafhankelijk is. In de praktijk honoreren we verzoeken van Kamerleden of bewindspersonen vaak als wij met onze bevoegdheden een toegevoegde waarde hebben. Signalen en reacties uit de samenleving, van burgers, bedrijven of organisaties behandelen we zorgvuldig. We kunnen bijvoorbeeld besluiten om ze te betrekken bij lopende onderzoeken.””

enkele opmerkingen hierover:

  • signalen door mij en anderen aan ARK verstuurd zijn niet opgepakt.
  • Signalen dat gegevens gebruikt voor Actualisatie onvolledig waren zijn wel opgemerkt, maar niet afgekeurd. (Defensie had een rode kaart moeten krijgen voor het rapport actualisatie!
  • Het ARK heeft alleen gegevens gebruikt die via Defensie naar voren zijn geschoven. Men heeft geen buitenlandse intel willen gebruiken.
  • Blijkbaar kunnen de ministers van Financiën (PvdA) en Defensie (VVD) het onafhankelijke instituut sommeren om conclussies betreffende de JSF te veranderen, af te zwakken of te schrappen.. Dit is duidelijk geen kwestie van Hoor- en wederhoor! Wat de positie van de (politiek gekleurde) leden van het College hiermee van doen heeft laat zich alleen maar raden. Zeggen onafhankelijk te zijn terwijl men bovenstaande wanpraktijken door de vingers ziet…. Duidelijk?

Dit is typisch een geval van de wil van enkelen (militairen, ambtenaren, politici en last but not least Groot Industriëlen die hun eigen belangen laten prevaleren boven de belangen van het volk! Het volk heeft namelijk een krijgsmacht nodig die er op gericht is om ons volk te beschermen. En daar voldoende capaciteit voor beschikbaar heeft. U weet wel, het beschermen van de zwakken, van de mensen die daartoe zelf niet in staat zijn. Dat is het werkelijke doel en bestaansrecht van Defensie. (niet het instrument om politieke invloed te vergroten, eigenbelangen te dienen etc. )

Ik moet denken aan Jesaja 9 (NBVertaling):

1 Het volk dat in duisternis ronddoolt
ziet een schitterend licht. Zij die in het donker wonen
worden door een helder licht beschenen.
2 U hebt het volk weer groot gemaakt,
diepe vreugde gaf u het, blijdschap als de vreugde bij de oogst,
zij jubelen als bij het verdelen van de buit.
3 Het juk dat op hen drukte, de stok op hun schouder,
de zweep van de drijver, u hebt ze verbrijzeld, zoals Midjan destijds.
4 Iedere laars die dreunend stampte en elke mantel waar bloed aan kleeft,
ze worden verbrand, een prooi van het vuur.
5 Een kind is ons geboren,
een zoon is ons gegeven;
de heerschappij rust op zijn schouders.
Deze namen zal hij dragen: Wonderbare raadsman,
Goddelijke held, Eeuwige vader, Vredevorst.
6 Groot is zijn heerschappij,
aan de vrede zal geen einde komen.
Davids troon en rijk zijn erop gebouwd,
ze staan vast, in recht en gerechtigheid,
van nu tot in eeuwigheid. Daarvoor zal hij zich beijveren,
de HEER van de hemelse machten.

Ziet u de paralellen met de huidige situatie? En hoe het zou moeten zijn? (verschil vet en cursief?) Het zijn mensen die keuzes maken, mensen die er voor kiezen om eigen belangen te laten prevaleren boven dat van anderen, het zijn mensen die er voor kiezen om de waarheid niet te zoeken maar onwaarheid op te schrijven. Het zijn mensen die dit doen!

Bestaansrecht Defensie
Defensie zou zo veel meer haar enige bestaansrecht moeten dienen, namelijk het beschermen van ons volk, de rest is bijzaak. Posities van industriëlen (schermend met werkgelegenheid) Generaals (schermend met KMD tradities, werkgelegenheid en noodzaak) Politici (schermend met veiligheid, nationale belangen, internationaal aanzien etc.) zijn ondergeschikt aan de belangen van het volk. (In feite komt dat neer op de verklaring van de rechten van de mens:  Voedsel , Dak boven het hoofd, en veiligheid.

Mensen hebben het recht om te leven! Dat is het voornaamste belang dat de overheid moet dienen, Al het andere is bedoeld om dit te realiseren! 

Defensie moet in staat zijn om deze taak uit te voeren! Als extratje kan Defensie ook ingezet worden voor het bevorderen van vrede, het uitvoeren van stabilisatiemissies etc. Maar vermeng die doelstellingen niet met onderliggende economische belangen van enkele industrieëlen.

Krijgsmacht die inzetbaar is
In plaats van een uitgemergelde krijgsmacht die enkele Hi-tech speeltjes heeft die niet of nauwelijks inzetbaar zullen zijn door slechte logistiek, te hoge exploitatiekosten en een zeer waarschijnlijke negatieve conclusie als het gaat om Kosten – Baten* in geval van operationele inzet. Is het straks nog wel waard om een toestel van meer dan 100 miljoen waarvan je er ook nog maar eens 37 hebt, te riskeren voor een “simpele” CAS missie? (wat is goedkoper, het inzetten van een tank € 4 milj?)  met 20 Granaten (á € 10.000?) om vuursteun te geven of een JSF ter waarde van + € 100 miljoen ;plus enkele Hightech Lucht-grond wapens met ieder een waarde van € 60.000

Ik wens een ieder binnen en buiten de Nederlandse Defensie, de defensieindustrie, de politiek lobbyisten en ons hele volk toe dat men zich bezint op zijn of haar eigen rol. Wat zijn de keuzes en waarom heb je die gemaakt? Wat was het belang dat je diende? En wie zijn daarvan de slachtoffers? Bovenal wens ik u/jullie toe dat u het komende jaar dat Schitterende licht zult zien en ervaren. Vrede zij met u!

Gezegende kerstdagen en een voorspoedig nieuwjaar gewenst!

* In het kader van bovenstaande is met name de alinea: Cost and Risk interessant! Lees alle artikelen van het blog: Safe te Royal Navy.org

  1. F35B in Focus (PART 1) Background and cost
  2. F35B in focus (PART 2) The multi-role marvel
  3. F35B in Focus (PART 3) Ownership and operation