Register Free

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Future of Belgian Air Component

Collapse
X
Collapse
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #41
    Originally posted by halloweene View Post
    Used CNAMO simulating for scenarion N2 on Air-Defense.
    CNAMO? I googled it but could not finde anything that seemed relevant? What is it? A kind of simulator?

    Who did the simulation and what was the outcome?

    Comment


      #42
      Originally posted by Loke View Post
      CNAMO? I googled it but could not finde anything that seemed relevant? What is it? A kind of simulator?

      Who did the simulation and what was the outcome?
      sorry Cmano http://www.matrixgames.com/products/...e.Year.Edition

      Game. Very ood simulator (pro version exist), although not perfect. result was 1 rafale lost, (no refueling on way back)primary targets ok, not the bridge. (one of the two secondary targets). far from perfectly reflecting reality though... And would need a bunch of tests to assess anythin.

      Comment


        #43
        Originally posted by Sintra View Post
        Belgian is a partner in EPAF for three decades.
        so? it was between F-16 owners... since they have chose the F-16, they partnered on that commonality. That doesn't mean they have to keep buying the same products forever... what's more, the article says "neighboring countries".. un EPAF, only Netherlands are "neighbors with Belgium.. Denmark and Norway are a bit further away..

        if we want to go that way, one may say "they partner with France for their pilots training (belgian alphajets are permanently stationed in France for example, and that since 2005 if my memory serves well), they overfly regularly french airspace, train with the french... so it would be only logical to buy the same fighter as the french as well..."

        Comment


          #44
          Just get the F-35 and be done with it. Don't see no reason to host B61's if you don't have a believable way of delivering it.

          Comment


            #45
            Originally posted by TooCool_12f View Post
            so? it was between F-16 owners... since they have chose the F-16, they partnered on that commonality. That doesn't mean they have to keep buying the same products forever... what's more, the article says "neighboring countries".. un EPAF, only Netherlands are "neighbors with Belgium.. Denmark and Norway are a bit further away..

            if we want to go that way, one may say "they partner with France for their pilots training (belgian alphajets are permanently stationed in France for example, and that since 2005 if my memory serves well), they overfly regularly french airspace, train with the french... so it would be only logical to buy the same fighter as the french as well..."
            belgian training is ending up now, new contract with USA.

            Comment


              #46
              Originally posted by JakobS View Post
              Just get the F-35 and be done with it. Don't see no reason to host B61's if you don't have a believable way of delivering it.
              Interesting point. On the other hand (i) no B-61 mentioned in RFGP (although one may see an allusion inside growth part). (ii) If that was required one day, would Sweden accept a nuclear bomb to be induced on one of their product fighter?

              Comment


                #47
                Originally posted by Sintra View Post
                Belgian is a partner in EPAF for three decades.
                Yes, but also sharing air policing with Nederlands.

                Comment


                  #48
                  Originally posted by halloweene View Post
                  Interesting point. On the other hand (i) no B-61 mentioned in RFGP (although one may see an allusion inside growth part). (ii) If that was required one day, would Sweden accept a nuclear bomb to be induced on one of their product fighter?
                  I would be surprised if Gripen owners would not get enough information to qualify weapons on their own.
                  The new App based S/W architecture should allow this.

                  Comment


                    #49
                    Originally posted by APRichelieu View Post
                    I would be surprised if Gripen owners would not get enough information to qualify weapons on their own.
                    The new App based S/W architecture should allow this.
                    I'm not confident the US would allow B61 integration on the Gripen.

                    Comment


                      #50
                      Originally posted by Ozair View Post
                      I'm not confident the US would allow B61 integration on the Gripen.
                      The App based architecture would allow Belgian Air Force to have B61 integration,
                      without making it available to anyone else, so why not?

                      Comment


                        #51
                        Originally posted by APRichelieu View Post
                        The App based architecture would allow Belgian Air Force to have B61 integration,
                        without making it available to anyone else, so why not?
                        Other than resistance to integrating a nuclear weapon on an airframe manufactured by a non NATO member?

                        Required would be physical and electronic fail safe changes to certify the Gripen airframe for nuclear carriage. Would the Swedes even allow the airframe to be modified this way?

                        I would also suggest that the cost of these upgrades and certification program for such a small fleet would become expensive. It would likely be cheaper to order and operate an aircraft already certified for nuclear delivery (if this remains an enduring requirement...).

                        Comment


                          #52
                          strategic targets isnt going to be attacked with free fall nukes,
                          and i cant for the life of me see NL dropping free fall nukes on brigades either,
                          i think its a non issue.

                          the most challenging task is timely interception,
                          even the better interceptors will be hard pressed, trainers isnt going to cut it

                          Comment


                            #53
                            Originally posted by Ozair View Post
                            Other than resistance to integrating a nuclear weapon on an airframe manufactured by a non NATO member?

                            Required would be physical and electronic fail safe changes to certify the Gripen airframe for nuclear carriage. Would the Swedes even allow the airframe to be modified this way?

                            I would also suggest that the cost of these upgrades and certification program for such a small fleet would become expensive. It would likely be cheaper to order and operate an aircraft already certified for nuclear delivery (if this remains an enduring requirement...).
                            I understand that the Gripen is already hardened for EMP.

                            Click image for larger version

Name:	figure-3-600x390.png
Views:	1
Size:	132.7 KB
ID:	3673720
                            Last edited by TomcatViP; 29th March 2017, 02:21.

                            Comment


                              #54
                              Originally posted by TomcatViP View Post
                              I understand that the Gripen is already hardened for EMP.
                              More than just EMP hardening. Irrespective of that, it appears that Sweden has already made that decision.

                              Sweden had already said it wouldnt allow the Gripen to carry nuclear weapons
                              http://www.defense-aerospace.com/art...placement.html

                              Comment


                                #55
                                FWIW, my opinion is that Belgium will probably stick with its co-ordination with the Dutch & buy F-35, with Rafale being the second (& outside) option.

                                Scheduled to get tankers for the first time ever, though, albeit as part of a multi-national NATO consortium along with the Netherlands, Germany, Poland & Norway. 2 A330 MRTT on order so far for the NL, but 6 more are planned now that other countries have signed up.
                                Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
                                Justinian

                                Comment


                                  #56
                                  Originally posted by swerve View Post
                                  FWIW, my opinion is that Belgium will probably stick with its co-ordination with the Dutch & buy F-35, with Rafale being the second (& outside) option.

                                  Scheduled to get tankers for the first time ever, though, albeit as part of a multi-national NATO consortium along with the Netherlands, Germany, Poland & Norway. 2 A330 MRTT on order so far for the NL, but 6 more are planned now that other countries have signed up.
                                  Agree. Just wrote about RFGP btw

                                  Comment


                                    #57
                                    Originally posted by JakobS View Post
                                    Don't see no reason to host B61's if you don't have a believable way of delivering it.
                                    No reason to host B61s in the first place.

                                    Comment


                                      #58
                                      Concur that.. An obsolete and useless weapon..

                                      Comment


                                        #59
                                        Originally posted by Ozair View Post
                                        More than just EMP hardening. Irrespective of that, it appears that Sweden has already made that decision.


                                        http://www.defense-aerospace.com/art...placement.html
                                        I doubt Sweden has commented on this.
                                        This was highlighted during the Indian MMRCA process, and the sale was approved from the Swedish side.

                                        Comment


                                          #60
                                          Originally posted by Ozair View Post
                                          More than just EMP hardening. Irrespective of that, it appears that Sweden has already made that decision.


                                          http://www.defense-aerospace.com/art...placement.html
                                          Nice found but once the BAF has bought the Gripen, they are free to upgrade it as they wish. Especially with such sensitive topic that are not traditionally open to public debate. That could well be put into the future upgrade category. Sweden design bureau having normally no experience with nuclear weapon carriage, their help on this topic won't be determinant for the success of such integration.

                                          IMOHO, this declaration changes nothing to the Gripen prospective chances.

                                          Comment


                                           

                                          Working...
                                          X