ELITE-UK wrote:
How many?
Last edited by SEREVENT (2008-11-20 08:52:00)
Not sure yet, the article didn't say ... but the Norwegian airforce consists of 57 fighters pr date ...ELITE-UK wrote:
How many?
pfff, Germany is still using a bunch of F4s. That's right, that's almost as old as the plane of the Wrights...Varegg wrote:
to replace a highly modified and aged F16
I know but why..lol. I fear you miss my point.mr.hrundi wrote:
Varegg wrote:
to replace a highly modified and aged F16
Every country needs decent air power. Be it a big world player with many enemies or a neutral country everyone tolerates...Kmarion wrote:
I know but why..lol. I fear you miss my point.mr.hrundi wrote:
Varegg wrote:
to replace a highly modified and aged F16
Give me a scenario. .. because all I ever hear is this same ambiguous rhetoric. Is Norway going to be ghost fighting the Russians over the Baltic sea? I'm just curios. Seriously.jord wrote:
Every country needs decent air power. Be it a big world player with many enemies or a neutral country everyone tolerates...Kmarion wrote:
I know but why..lol. I fear you miss my point.mr.hrundi wrote:
it's just in case of the what if scenario, besides the jsf is very suitable for air to ground missions too, so should be rather useful in almost every scenario. IF the russians / a heavily russian backed ally somehow manage to declare war you'd need a decent airforce yeah.Kmarion wrote:
Give me a scenario. .. because all I ever hear is this same ambiguous rhetoric. Is Norway going to be ghost fighting the Russians over the Baltic sea? I'm just curios. Seriously.
Last edited by dayarath (2008-11-20 10:25:29)
You have a point.Kmarion wrote:
Give me a scenario. .. because all I ever hear is this same ambiguous rhetoric. Is Norway going to be ghost fighting the Russians over the Baltic sea? I'm just curios. Seriously.jord wrote:
Every country needs decent air power. Be it a big world player with many enemies or a neutral country everyone tolerates...Kmarion wrote:
I know but why..lol. I fear you miss my point.
Civil war/Eastern Europe invasion/Significant terrorist threat/contributing to treaties signed. There's a lot more but I don't know enough about Norway to know them all.Kmarion wrote:
Give me a scenario. .. because all I ever hear is this same ambiguous rhetoric. Is Norway going to be ghost fighting the Russians over the Baltic sea? I'm just curios. Seriously.jord wrote:
Every country needs decent air power. Be it a big world player with many enemies or a neutral country everyone tolerates...Kmarion wrote:
I know but why..lol. I fear you miss my point.
Because Germany and Russia existKmarion wrote:
Why?
You imagine a world that involves Nato vs Russian fighters? Doesn't seem realistic to me. If Norway really wanted to join the ranks of modern warfare and protect themselves from likely threats they'd be looking at a really defending themselves against the likely scenarios. We aren't allowed to talk about that though.dayarath wrote:
it's just in case of the what if scenario, besides the jsf is very suitable for air to ground missions too, so should be rather useful in almost every scenario. IF the russians / a heavily russian backed ally somehow manage to declare war you'd need a decent airforce yeah.Kmarion wrote:
Give me a scenario. .. because all I ever hear is this same ambiguous rhetoric. Is Norway going to be ghost fighting the Russians over the Baltic sea? I'm just curios. Seriously.
not to mention that if war is declared on any NATO ally It'd be rather useful to actually be able to contribute to ending that war quickly
Always good to have an airforce protecting our expensive seasKmarion wrote:
Give me a scenario. .. because all I ever hear is this same ambiguous rhetoric. Is Norway going to be ghost fighting the Russians over the Baltic sea? I'm just curios. Seriously.jord wrote:
Every country needs decent air power. Be it a big world player with many enemies or a neutral country everyone tolerates...Kmarion wrote:
I know but why..lol. I fear you miss my point.
I'm not saying don't be safe.. just be smart when it comes to where you spend your money. Your examples are pretty far out there. Laughable even. Terrorist? Civil war? r-u-4-real?jord wrote:
Civil war/Eastern Europe invasion/Significant terrorist threat/contributing to treaties signed. There's a lot more but I don't know enough about Norway to know them all.Kmarion wrote:
Give me a scenario. .. because all I ever hear is this same ambiguous rhetoric. Is Norway going to be ghost fighting the Russians over the Baltic sea? I'm just curios. Seriously.jord wrote:
Every country needs decent air power. Be it a big world player with many enemies or a neutral country everyone tolerates...
Better to be safe than economically crippled, dead or invaded.
The enemy that would require the use of a jsf rather than an f-16 is?Jenspm wrote:
Always good to have an airforce protecting our expensive seasKmarion wrote:
Give me a scenario. .. because all I ever hear is this same ambiguous rhetoric. Is Norway going to be ghost fighting the Russians over the Baltic sea? I'm just curios. Seriously.jord wrote:
Every country needs decent air power. Be it a big world player with many enemies or a neutral country everyone tolerates...
Those were just half assed examples. I'm sure you can come up with a politically and geographically coorect scenario that is realistic...Kmarion wrote:
I'm not saying don't be safe.. just be smart when it comes to where you spend your money. Your examples are pretty far out there. Laughable even. Terrorist? Civil war? r-u-4-real?jord wrote:
Civil war/Eastern Europe invasion/Significant terrorist threat/contributing to treaties signed. There's a lot more but I don't know enough about Norway to know them all.Kmarion wrote:
Give me a scenario. .. because all I ever hear is this same ambiguous rhetoric. Is Norway going to be ghost fighting the Russians over the Baltic sea? I'm just curios. Seriously.
Better to be safe than economically crippled, dead or invaded.
Of course they do. But the modern role of the air force is to provide air support to ground forces. That is something that the current inventory does very nice. It is what we should be building around. It's not nearly as glamorous, but it's the reality of how wars are fought now. We are like middle aged men buying Ferrari's when the family really needs minivans. We are getting less use out of our money. It's not practical, but it sure does $ell.jord wrote:
Those were just half assed examples. I'm sure you can come up with a politically and geographically coorect scenario that is realistic...Kmarion wrote:
I'm not saying don't be safe.. just be smart when it comes to where you spend your money. Your examples are pretty far out there. Laughable even. Terrorist? Civil war? r-u-4-real?jord wrote:
Civil war/Eastern Europe invasion/Significant terrorist threat/contributing to treaties signed. There's a lot more but I don't know enough about Norway to know them all.
Better to be safe than economically crippled, dead or invaded.
Unless you believe countries that aren't in a war don't need a air force...?
Well someone more qualified at judging air threats than me or you made the call, so there's some reason they spent/wasted lots of cash on JSF's...Kmarion wrote:
Of course they do. But the modern role of the air force is to provide air support to ground forces. That is something that the current inventory does very nice. It is what we should be building around. It's not nearly as glamorous, but it's the reality of how wars are fought now. We are like middle aged men buying Ferrari's when the family really needs minivans. We are getting less use out of our money. It's not practical, but it sure does $ell.jord wrote:
Those were just half assed examples. I'm sure you can come up with a politically and geographically coorect scenario that is realistic...Kmarion wrote:
I'm not saying don't be safe.. just be smart when it comes to where you spend your money. Your examples are pretty far out there. Laughable even. Terrorist? Civil war? r-u-4-real?
Unless you believe countries that aren't in a war don't need a air force...?
Right, so we should just assume our governments spend money based solely on threats posed. Not selling multi billion dollar contracts to the ill informed while lining the pockets of the most influential people in the world. I've heard agreement in my position from many knowledgeable people. Reading articles online and IRL.jord wrote:
Well someone more qualified at judging air threats than me or you made the call, so there's some reason they spent/wasted lots of cash on JSF's...Kmarion wrote:
Of course they do. But the modern role of the air force is to provide air support to ground forces. That is something that the current inventory does very nice. It is what we should be building around. It's not nearly as glamorous, but it's the reality of how wars are fought now. We are like middle aged men buying Ferrari's when the family really needs minivans. We are getting less use out of our money. It's not practical, but it sure does $ell.jord wrote:
Those were just half assed examples. I'm sure you can come up with a politically and geographically coorect scenario that is realistic...
Unless you believe countries that aren't in a war don't need a air force...?