Which future fighter jet for Belgian Defence?

A place to discuss military aviation: airshows, stunning pictures, weapons, etc...

Moderator: Latest news team

Post Reply
Roser
Posts: 59
Joined: 19 Jan 2005, 00:00

Re: Which future fighter jet for Belgian Defence?

Post by Roser »

Put a warhead together ourselves. My point is that by negotiating a purchase of fighters and maybe a Tanker or a additional NH90 we can reduce the number of M400s.

User avatar
cathay belgium
Posts: 2359
Joined: 18 Aug 2008, 00:17
Location: Lommel-Belgium
Contact:

Re: Which future fighter jet for Belgian Defence?

Post by cathay belgium »

Hi,

What do you want to do with it at what cost?
We need to fly USA nukes so buy a F18 in some years and do first the next f16 update which was settles last week... so we have some money left for real treaths ;)
Use the dutch tankers 20 miles from the border in EIN and keep up with our already ordered a400... because we are good with these ;)
Everybody happy and maybe we can afford this :)

CXB
New types flown 2022.. A339

Flanker2
Posts: 1741
Joined: 05 Dec 2012, 23:15

Re: Which future fighter jet for Belgian Defence?

Post by Flanker2 »

A small country like Belgium doesn't need to have the option to drop nukes.
The future of carrying out wars is no longer about how much damage you can inflict but how much damage you can inflict without collateral damage.

Extending the life of existing F16's seems like a good plan, for as long as it doesn't end up costing more in maintenance and upgrades.

I still think that working together with Russia on the PAK FA is the most feasible plan. This way they can have sanctions lifted (that includes the SN/NH codeshare issues), work closer towards world peace in conflicts like Syria, global denuking and solving common energy and transportation problems. Obviously this is a very rosy plan, but again why should everything be so negative, serious and brutal on this little planet?
Of course this doesn't happen overnight, but over the course of years and decades. But talking about the PAK FA could be the trigger for something bigger and Belgium could play a major role.

Didymus
Posts: 190
Joined: 17 Jul 2010, 15:13
Location: Ghent, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Which future fighter jet for Belgian Defence?

Post by Didymus »

You're basically suggesting Belgium should step out of the NATO?

gumblebee
Posts: 46
Joined: 26 Apr 2006, 00:00
Location: Brussels

Re: Which future fighter jet for Belgian Defence?

Post by gumblebee »

Belgium has joined the Non-Proliferation Treaty, as a non-nuclear state. It shouldn't matter whether the fighters we buy are compatible with nuclear weapons of any kind. To wield such compatibility as a criterion in deciding on a weapons purchase would be a violation of the NPT, in spirit at the very least.

Any requirement for NATO members to have fighter jets suitable for dropping US nuclear weapons would be an obvious circumvention of the NPT.

That said, sooner or later Belgium will need new fighter jets, in sufficient number. We've been taking our NATO-obligations very lightly for more than a decade. We also need to be able to assist in protecting the many international institutions we're harboring in Brussels.

Flanker2
Posts: 1741
Joined: 05 Dec 2012, 23:15

Re: Which future fighter jet for Belgian Defence?

Post by Flanker2 »

You're basically suggesting Belgium should step out of the NATO?
As long as there is a NATO as it is now, we will be stepping in and out of cold wars. Isn't that what is happening right now?
NATO has been created to fight the Soviets. The Soviet Union is gone, yet NATO still exists.
I still fail to grasp what makes the Russians such bad guys that we can't be allies with them. Or have we forgotten that they have helped us defeat the Nazi's?
I see NATO as the major resistance to a more global world ideal. :idea:.

If we can merge the Russians with NATO, I think that we will be one step farther from the risk of self-destruction of the human race and can focus more on common goals and challenges.

Image

http://i2.wp.com/thisiswarblog.files.wo ... /elbe.jpeg

Desert Rat
Posts: 1137
Joined: 08 May 2007, 09:38

Re: Which future fighter jet for Belgian Defence?

Post by Desert Rat »

cathay belgium wrote: do first the next f16 update which was settles last week...

CXB
Yep CXB, what do you mean by this, I don't get it. ..
Thanks
DR

User avatar
cathay belgium
Posts: 2359
Joined: 18 Aug 2008, 00:17
Location: Lommel-Belgium
Contact:

Re: Which future fighter jet for Belgian Defence?

Post by cathay belgium »

Hi,
Last week in the USA they announced there will be another life expansion update for the F16 which will extend the F16 life with 8000 hours beyond their ending life cirkel of now!
Google it :)
So this means with this program we can buy more time and there is no direct need for new and expensive planes now...
Maybe by then the F35 can dogfight and can't fly without too many problems... :)

CXB
New types flown 2022.. A339

DIBO
Posts: 672
Joined: 28 Mar 2009, 14:54

Re: Which future fighter jet for Belgian Defence?

Post by DIBO »

This F16 life extension announcement applies to post Block40 airframes, which are structurally different from our Block 10/15/20.

If these figures are trustworthy, it's simple:
- F35: that's simple, we can't afford
- Rafale: costs less than the Gripen E, but bigger, 2 engines (so operational cost will probably be higher)
- Gripen E: not really cheap, still in development, technical capabilities equal or better than Rafale

User avatar
sn26567
Posts: 40828
Joined: 13 Feb 2003, 00:00
Location: Rosières/Rozieren, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Which future fighter jet for Belgian Defence?

Post by sn26567 »

But Sweden is not a member of NATO, hence their Gripen has absolutely zero chance to be selected...
André
ex Sabena #26567

User avatar
cathay belgium
Posts: 2359
Joined: 18 Aug 2008, 00:17
Location: Lommel-Belgium
Contact:

Re: Which future fighter jet for Belgian Defence?

Post by cathay belgium »

Hi,

Gripen has non nucleair capacity !
The main reason what we need the fighters for are nucleair reasons, believe it or not !
No USA fighter = closure of Kleine Brogel AFB !! FACT but no-one will tell you...
But all the USA-money that was used for the extra security of Kleine Brogel AFB in the last years ( look at the new fence !!! ) let me think that the choice has already been made a long time ago, just have to wait for the right moment to tell the people ...
Don't say we need the nucleair thing,but it just the fact that those nukes are sitting duck here a few miles away for years now, and if someone tell you the need to deliver them it won't be DHL or FedEx :p

CXB
New types flown 2022.. A339

DIBO
Posts: 672
Joined: 28 Mar 2009, 14:54

Re: Which future fighter jet for Belgian Defence?

Post by DIBO »

Both the Czech Republic & Hungary fly Gripen and are Nato members.
It's plain stupid that nucl.bombs are still in Belgium, as the borders with Russian controlled territory have moved more than 700km to the east. We just have to evaluate what's more costly, loosing Nato HQ & Shape or buying F35...

Desert Rat
Posts: 1137
Joined: 08 May 2007, 09:38

Re: Which future fighter jet for Belgian Defence?

Post by Desert Rat »

cathay belgium wrote:Hi,
Last week in the USA they announced there will be another life expansion update for the F16 which will extend the F16 life with 8000 hours beyond their ending life cirkel of now!
Google it :)


CXB
Understood now...I tought you were talking specifically about BAF signed something new on their F16 fleet.
And yes, I knew about the life extension of the block 50, I did post the link to f16.net...;-)...
Although I didn't know BAF F16 are not impacted by this new extension because they are from an older generation.

Flanker2
Posts: 1741
Joined: 05 Dec 2012, 23:15

Re: Which future fighter jet for Belgian Defence?

Post by Flanker2 »

It's plain stupid that nucl.bombs are still in Belgium, as the borders with Russian controlled territory have moved more than 700km to the east. We just have to evaluate what's more costly, loosing Nato HQ & Shape or buying F35...
I share this view. I want to add that buying is only part of the cost of operating the F-35's.
For domestic missions all they need is an interceptor that can do Mach 2.
For foreign missions... does little Belgium really need to express their power beyond using the same interceptors and the A400M's?

Belgium won't lose NATO HQ because NATO would have to think twice before pissing off a country that hosts most of the major European institutions. Besides, it's really convenient from a logistics point of view, just across Abelag.

Kleine Brogel can close for all I care, staff can be moved around to other bases. One less target to worry about.

If you think about it, isn't all this hatred towards Russia a form of xenophobia? Like Putin is jut going to drop a nuke on us just for fun...

Roser
Posts: 59
Joined: 19 Jan 2005, 00:00

Re: Which future fighter jet for Belgian Defence?

Post by Roser »

with Rafales Belgium can put France and airbus under pressure to renegociate the purchase of the A400Ms and the fourth NFH NH90. Instead changing two cargos for a tanker plane and the NFH for one TTH. Also can Belgium help in the construction of Rafales selled to ape-countries.

Desert Rat
Posts: 1137
Joined: 08 May 2007, 09:38

Re: Which future fighter jet for Belgian Defence?

Post by Desert Rat »

Looks like VDP wants to buy some Patriot's missile...what a genius that guy!

stijnzor
Posts: 2
Joined: 18 Feb 2016, 11:54

Re: Which future fighter jet for Belgian Defence?

Post by stijnzor »

Sorry but the F35 is a good choice,

If you think we don't need nuclear capabilities you are correct, but the Russians, North-Koreans don't need that either... so saying dat we don't have to look at that is incredibly naive.

The rafale? is to expencive in more ways than just operational costs and purchase. you have to realize that when the avionics or software of the rafale become obsolete, you will have to invest in a new version and upgrades, just like any other plane, with the big difference that because the rafale is by only 3 countries at the moment? the price tag on that will be huge...

The hornet is simply to old and the updates on it will be limited because it's a older generation of fighter.

A flanker is just stupid? sorry but what the hell? you really think the Russians will first of all allow you to make flankers? In second the adjustments that are needed to operate this plane with NATO allies will be to high. also, what engine will you put into it?

A new gen F16? production stops in 2020, and the F16 will be replaced by the F35 in the following years. and updates will be fewer so the lifespan wil be mush shorter... Isen't really an option to if you ask me. you are asking of the builder of the F35 to replace our F16 with the same plane, that they don't want to build anymore, and give us 40 years of support?

Saab? is cheap, only one engine so low operational costs, but yet again... Not many countries bought it so updates will probably be expencive, No nuclear capabilities and towards the end of its cycle the maintanance will be difficult and also expencive due to the limited possibilities of buying spares in group with our allies.

That leaves the eurofighter and JSF, the eurofighter is nice but not a real 5 gen fighter, is it good enough for Belgium? Yes it is. there are a couple of countries that bought it. And it will serve our needs for today, only, almost all countries that bought the eurofighter, are going to buy F35 to? Why would that be?

The JSF is not at its full potential today, but 40 years ago the F16 was nothing more than a toy... to demonstrate the possibilities in aviation, and there where a lot of things it could not do. Like night attacs. It has been improved and updated, and had therefor a long life span, The F35 will be the same i think... And you can say at this moment you don't need stealth, and its true... But are you damn sure you won't need it at all?

User avatar
KriVa
Posts: 1417
Joined: 31 Mar 2010, 20:15

Re: Which future fighter jet for Belgian Defence?

Post by KriVa »

The F35 would have been a good choice... If the promises made by Lockheed Martin would have been kept.
By now, the program has become unreasonably expensive, and the F35 still is nothing more than a flying toy. While the F-35B is "operational" with the US Marines, its operational status is almost laughable. The operational test was far from a succes. The sticker on the box may declare it to be operational, the content inside that box is far from it.
To give you an idea: the integrated cannon can not be fired due to software issues. Among them, the software which controls the door that sits in front of the cannon. Sure, a cannon may not exactly be used often in the 21st Century (except for CAS aircraft like the A10), but it paints a pretty grim picture.
This type of stuff is, and has been, a consistency throughout the entire program. Deadlines were postponed, and postponed again, reports have been written very optimistically (read: falsified), and taxpayers' money continues to be pumped into it. Many high ranking officials have claimed (even on record) that if the money hole wasn't as deep as it is now, the project would best of all be canceled.
The huge pile of money also points to one undeniable fact for the future: upgrades for the F-35 will come at a cost, and that cost will not be low.
The investment for the F-35 is something I don't see fit for Belgian Defence, and I sincerely hope they don't purchase it.

http://www.pogo.org/our-work/straus-mil ... q47smXsCvI

I know this discussion will lead to nowhere. After all, what kind of influence will a discussion on our little forum have? But still, I find it annoying to know that this amount of money is just being wasted.
My vote would be on the EuroFighter, or the F-18. Both of those are a proven design, with already quite a few upgrades under the hood. Both of them are relatively affordable.
Sure, they may not be the cutting edge of what is available today, or will be available tomorrow, but does our country really need that? On top of that, for the same amount of money, you can buy quite a few more Typhoons or F-18s than you could F-35s.
I like to compare this with the situation as it played out in WWII, where the Germans were building the best tanks on the battlefield, second to none. However, in the end, their expensive design, and long build times were simply no match for the amount of, much simpler, tanks used by the Allies.
Strength in numbers.
Thomas

User avatar
sn26567
Posts: 40828
Joined: 13 Feb 2003, 00:00
Location: Rosières/Rozieren, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Which future fighter jet for Belgian Defence?

Post by sn26567 »

stijnzor wrote:If you think we don't need nuclear capabilities you are correct, but the Russians, North-Koreans don't need that either... so saying dat we don't have to look at that is incredibly naive.
Even if we have nuclear capabilities, we will not be allowed to use them without the agreement of the US. Therefore, let the US carry their nuclear weapons themselves. In my view, that completely disqualifies the F-35.

Russians and North Koreans make their nuclear weapons themselves and need suitable aircraft to carry them. We Belgians don't.
André
ex Sabena #26567

User avatar
cathay belgium
Posts: 2359
Joined: 18 Aug 2008, 00:17
Location: Lommel-Belgium
Contact:

Re: Which future fighter jet for Belgian Defence?

Post by cathay belgium »

Hi,

Regarding TRUMP... the F35 saga..
Guess Belgium and Europe can rely only on themselves in the future..

Best solution guess RAFALE, proven best thing ... no need to be capable of carrying USA nukes ( send them back ).. better french ones ;)

What will be next on our government agenda... kiss Trump ass or stay strong on our own in our own european defense forces... ?

CXB
New types flown 2022.. A339

Post Reply