Hi Thomas, I agree on that Denmark should not opt for the Gripen but the JSF. And we are in step on the use of Gripen. The only argument that puzzles me is this one: '2. Experience with Draken showed swedish products to very, VERY expensive to maintain.' As far as I remember Draken was procured in the sixties with first delivery. in 1970. My guess would be that the various Material Commands are more savvy today. What in particular made the Drakens expensive. Spares? upgrades? additional weaponry? The swedish 'blackmail option' could be handled through the tender... TAC

Who do you blokes see as a potential aggressor that warrants an expensive kit like the F-35 JSF? Excuse my ignorance, but how often does your air force deploy for combat ops? Regards, DB.

Hi DB, Are you suggesting the Denmark Board lacks a DK vs US thread ? ;) The RDAF do fly combat missions now and then. The F-16s usually deploys with the norwegians or dutch. This because of the joint procurement, upgrade programme, training etc... One sqn 12+2 a/c is attached for expeditionary purposes. Kosovo/Allied Force: CAP/Recce/dropped a few laserguided bombs (50 or so?). Afghanistan : 1 yr deployment. 4300 flt hours. Air support for convoys and patrols. Particulars really not known. Except bombing and strafing the Taliban (19 laserguided bombs, 2 strafings. Unofficial estimates approx. 200 Talib casualties) Some gun fotage were released, but it's not on the net anymore. Baltic 2004: Patrolling the Baltic (NATO) airspace. I know it doesn't seem of much. I know too little of RAAF activities to compare... So although we don't have an immedate enemy, the F-16s are not just falling apart on our runways. A lot of smaller European countries bought the F-16 as part of the same programme and it looks as if the same will happen with the JSF. On top of that is the low-level partnership in the JSF-programme. The plans are that the 60+ danish F-16s would be replaced by 48 JSF. Do you think this is unrealistic?? TAC

Cheers, Not unrealistic at all if that is what you need in a platform. I was just wondering at why you would replace an F-16 with the stealthy JSF if you didn't really need it. Didn't know about your role in Afghanistan as most articles just talk about USA/UK etc (they often don't even mention Oz). Good to see your blokes are smacking some bad boy raggies around in the Afghan mountains. Can't say I am as excited about seeing our HUG Hornets and Pig-111 being replaced by the F-35A. How can any sane aviation fan compare an F-111 to a smaller, less ranging, less bomb dropping, single-engined jet like the JSF? I think I shall go away and cry... Regards, DB :)

It was mainly the spare parts that were expensive - all spare parts are; but these prices were exorbitant plus we had to keep a large stock of them, because delivery in case of war could not be guaranteed.

To supplement my freind: The basic threat possibility in a Danish scenario is Russia, as being the only place where sufficient reasonably modern weapons, trained personel and intact command structure to actually threatned Danish existence. After cold war the situation has improved, so the forward defence (we were the forward defence) has been pushed into the Baltic states. The defece capability of these states is limited (we've actually donated quite a lot of our old stuff to them: AAA, jeeps, an inspection frigate functioning as a command ship, howitzers and so on). Thus the defence of Denmark will be done in The Baltic states. Please notem the new command vessels of the Absalon-class (2 ships), the largest vessels in the Danish Navy ever. On SP I read - haven't got it confirmed - that 3 vessel beyond those, but based on that hull (haven't seen it confirmed yet) will be equipped with rather massive air to air missiles. In this context please note that the Hawk batteries of the Danish Air Force has been disbanded (recently updated. Could they be donated to the Baltic states????): Denmark is to be defended to the last Estonian! And they are greatfull for any help they can get! Furthermore these command ship/frigates will be able to land reinforcements. The Danish F-16A have been updated to use AMRAAM. Actually Denmark has a rather large role in the buildup of the Baltic nations defence as the americans has caused some resentment in those nations, because they approached the problem will all the tact and "can do" attitude of a ticked off Marine - not the way to treat the sensitivities of a 3 peoples that have finally after 75 years oppression regained their independence! One of our more important roles in NATO: Try an tell especially the Yanks how not to do things! Usually they only listen when they have made a dogs dinner out of it.

Interesting times ahead for your lot. As for your last point. Couldn't agree more. They are helpful when it suits them. ;)

Actually the sale - I don't know at what price - to Finland of the 4 Flyvefisken-class is interesting, as those vessel will probably be very good in the Finnish Bey. At the moment (well they've allways been a pain in the neck) the Russians are behaving in a manner that pressures Finland towards Nato. I was sort of hoping for an update from one of our Finnish contributers.

I wouldn't hope that the Baltic States are the forward defense of denmark, as it would take the Russians less than a day to overrun them. Btw #1 The Flyvefisken were stripped for containerized weapons and combat management systems. I don't know what the finnes are going to do with these ships. Btw #2 Two of the Hawk 3D radars are now doing air traffic control in Kabul, so they are still in use. Btw #3 The frigates are definetely going ahead. From Naval Spyglass: Danes to go all-diesel for Patrol Ships. An all-diesel propulsion has been selected for the three Danish 4,200-5,500 ton Patrol Ships (frigates) authorized in the 2005-2009 Defence Plan. A Combined Diesel and Gas Turbine (CODAG) system had been originally proposed but instead the twin-shaft vessels will each have four MTU 20V Series 8000, an arrangement that is regarded as less complex while still providing the required 28 knots sustained speed. An outstanding and important feature of the Odense Steel Ship Yard and Naval Materiel Command (NMC) design is the selection of the missile vertical launch system. This is to accommodate both area defence and land attack missiles, both of which will be new to the Royal Danish Navy inventory. There are two candidates - the United Defense Mk 41 and the DCN Sylver. (Mk41 selected according to Janes:7seas) The missile options are Raytheon Standard Missile 2 and Tomahawk from the US or Euromissile Aster and MBDA Scalp Naval with a decision anticipated later this year.(SM-2 selected according to Janes:7seas) Naval Spyglass reports that a contract for the three ships will also to be signed later this year. The programme calls for two vessels to be commissioned in 2011 and the third in 2012. No names have yet been selected for the new ships. TAC

Here we go again: Bornholm cannot be defended, Berlin cannot be defended. The trick is: 1. If a Danish battaillon is engaged, Russia cannot use the "help requested" ploy - germany tried that in 1940, It nearly succeeded. 2. If a Dansih Battaillon is involved an attack on these countries is a totally different ballgame, then it will definately be an attack on Nato. The older ones among us will recall the Nato Firebrigade, that served excatly that purpose. 3. An isolated attack on The Baltic states is thus much less likely. An attack on Nato will involve an attack on Poland the traditional way. In that case the mere possibility of reinforcements to the Baltic States will divert considerable Russian capacity from the main front. You could see the failed German attempt of an invasion in the Riga Bay during WW1. One thing that struck me when I saw the drawing of the patrolship: It is build like a ferry. It is interesting as a ferry has to be manoevrable both laden and unladen, as well as stable under both conditions. They quote to draughts: one for light and one for fully loaded condition. Goes to applicability in both the Atlantic and the Baltic. M'Lud.