NATO

Vivendi said:

The GlobalEye that exist today is probably too small to meet all NATO needs (modified Bombardier 6000 business jet). Of course Saab can offer their system integrated on a larger airframe, however it will take some time to do that integration & testing, and it will increase cost. Also big NATO countries that already picked the E-7 (US, UK, Turkey) will probably push hard for E-7. Tiny Sweden has not even been accepted as NATO member yet , so I think this will be a hard sell for Saab.

Click to expand...

SAAB has demonstrated the ability to integrate Erieye on multiple platforms with remarkable ease & at relatively low cost. It was developed on a Fairchild Metroliner, IIRC (because the Swedish air force could lend one to SAAB), made operational on SAAB 340, then Embraer 145, Saab 2000, & now, in the upgraded Erieye ER model, on the Bombardier Global 6000.

The Bombardier 6000 is a pretty big bizjet (max TO 45,000 kg - E-7's 77,000 or so). Different league from the turboprops Erieye has been fitted to. And given SAAB's performance to date I expect that fitting it to, e.g., an A320neo could be done rather easily.

swerve said:

SAAB has demonstrated the ability to integrate Erieye on multiple platforms with remarkable ease & at relatively low cost. It was developed on a Fairchild Metroliner, IIRC (because the Swedish air force could lend one to SAAB), made operational on SAAB 340, then Embraer 145, Saab 2000, & now, in the upgraded Erieye ER model, on the Bombardier Global 6000.

The Bombardier 6000 is a pretty big bizjet (max TO 45,000 kg - E-7's 77,000 or so). Different league from the turboprops Erieye has been fitted to. And given SAAB's performance to date I expect that fitting it to, e.g., an A320neo could be done rather easily.

Click to expand...

Unfortunate the Canadian government didn’t fund military applications based on the C-Series. Then again Bombardier seems to disappoint at every opportunity despite cash flow from taxpayers. The now rebranded A-220 could have been an enhanced Globaleye platform:

swerve said:

SAAB has demonstrated the ability to integrate Erieye on multiple platforms with remarkable ease & at relatively low cost. It was developed on a Fairchild Metroliner, IIRC (because the Swedish air force could lend one to SAAB), made operational on SAAB 340, then Embraer 145, Saab 2000, & now, in the upgraded Erieye ER model, on the Bombardier Global 6000.

The Bombardier 6000 is a pretty big bizjet (max TO 45,000 kg - E-7's 77,000 or so). Different league from the turboprops Erieye has been fitted to. And given SAAB's performance to date I expect that fitting it to, e.g., an A320neo could be done rather easily.

Click to expand...

What I would be more concerned about is the area coverage of Erieye, IIRC there are arcs immediately fore and aft of the array which cannot be scanned due to the facing of the T/R modules. Again, IIRC the mounted aircraft has to fly a looping figure-eight in order to provide all around coverage.

The L-band MESA fitted to the E-7 resolves this by having T/R modules fitted to the fore and aft portions of the radar array to provide 360 degree coverage, albeit with less T/R power available fore & aft. TBH I am uncertain why Saab or Ericsson never added modules or additional arrays to cover the fore and aft aircraft arcs.

swerve said:

The UK had E-3, but wasn't part of the NATO E-3 pool. Like France, it had its own E-3 fleet. They cooperated with the NATO E-3 pool, but weren't in it. And the UK has now bought E-7, though only 3 for now.

Click to expand...

Unlike France, the UK is listed as a member nation: NATO AWACS E-3A | Participating nations

There is also this:

AEW&CF has two units with operational capability: The NATO E-3A Component in Geilenkirchen, Germany, with 14 E-3A aircraft, and the E-3D Component of the Royal Air Force (RAF) in Waddington, UK, with six E-3D aircraft crewed solely by RAF personnel.

Click to expand...

NATO AWACS E-3A | HQ NAEW&C FORCE

Clearly this web page is not up-to-date, it's been a while since the UK operated six E-3!

I wonder how this will work in the future? Will the UK leave this NATO structure? Or stay in it but operate their (very few) E-7 as a separate unit? Or something else?

Todjaeger said:

What I would be more concerned about is the area coverage of Erieye, IIRC there are arcs immediately fore and aft of the array which cannot be scanned due to the facing of the T/R modules. Again, IIRC the mounted aircraft has to fly a looping figure-eight in order to provide all around coverage.

The L-band MESA fitted to the E-7 resolves this by having T/R modules fitted to the fore and aft portions of the radar array to provide 360 degree coverage, albeit with less T/R power available fore & aft. TBH I am uncertain why Saab or Ericsson never added modules or additional arrays to cover the fore and aft aircraft arcs.

Click to expand...

Saab said they considered adding radars fore and aft, however decided it was not worth the extra cost . Saab's GlobalEye Surveillance System Takes Shape on Global 6000 | Defense News: Aviation International News (ainonline.com)
Not sure how much of an issue it is -- the predecessor Erieye was sold to a number of customers that seem to be happy with the system.

The Globaleye has other advantages, e.g., the EO system and the Leonardo Seaspray 7500E maritime radar. Saab also claims that the S-band used by GlobalEye is harder to jam than the L-band, due to "small beam and ultra-small sidelobes". Saab’s GlobalEye AEW&C: A Powerful GaN Technology In The Sky – Global Defense Corp

The GaN technology also has some benefits over the GaS found in the E-7, however, perhaps that is about to change? Will the E-7 also get GaN ?

John Fedup said:

... The now rebranded A-220 could have been an enhanced Globaleye platform:

Click to expand...

Could still be. It's in production & the -300 is selling well, with a backlog of over 500 orders last I heard.

Something is rotten in the state of Denmark

Internal NATO documents show that Denmark meet only 3 out of 17 NATO capability targets.

The targets met (or about to be met):

• Two long-range drones for the North Atlantic and Arctic on high alert from 2032 - the purchase process is underway.
• Three Hercules transport aircraft. Denmark has four of these at its disposal.
• Three Thetis expedition ships to the North Atlantic and the Arctic. Denmark has four at its disposal.

The 14 targets not being met:

• Heavy infantry brigade on 90-day readiness
• Short-range air defense for the Army and for the Air Force
• Radar and missile system to combat missile attacks against the Army
• A frigate equipped to fight submarines
• Two frigates on high alert and one on low readiness armed with 183 missiles
• Maritime helicopters for the four frigates
• Long-range air defense, e.g., Patriot
• Capacity to lay 100 sea mines
• 30 fighter jets on up to 90 days of readiness
• 48 missiles for F-35 fighter jets to combat enemy air defense radars
• Reconnaissance and intelligence unit for the Army's 1st Division. Brigade
• Special Forces Operation Headquarters
• Logistics and transport for deployment of Danish and allied forces
• Five EH-101 helicopters for troop transport

Interne dokumenter afslører: Danmark lever ikke op til lang række NATO-krav - TV 2

I wonder how Norway is doing in terms of meeting NATO -- my gut feeling says "not very well".

"A frigate equipped to fight submarines"
I recently read that Absalon & Esbern Snare were reclassified as frigates in 2020 & are being equipped with towed sonars in addition to their hull-mounted sonars, & helicopters with dipping sonars, sonobuoys & torpedoes. So, not there yet but on the way.

There are enough H-60 naval & EH-101 helicopters to meet the requirement, so I presume it's a question of equipment & availability.
Provision of GBAD for the army & air force is underway. Terma has signed an outline agreeent to do system integration - eventually.

Navy Lookout has posted a link to an article from T-Online (German news). According to the Times, the report states that a convoy of six Russian naval vessels was detected around the area five days before it occurred, according to T-Online (German news), but that they disappeared from tracking systems on 21 September (likely due to turning off transponders).

There was a separate article posted back in February debunking the theory that the Nordstream pipeline was a false flag operation.

As many of you probably know already, both Hungary and Turkey has ratified Finland's NATO membership, and Finland will become NATO member number 31 Tuesday April 4 -- there are some formalities that need to be executed.
NATO ACT on Twitter: "Finland will become a Member of #NATO on Tuesday, 4 April 2023. NATO’s Secretary General @jensstoltenberg said, this “will be a good day for security, for Nordic security, and for @NATO as a whole”. #WeAreNATO https://t.co/5ckkDKBv0A" / Twitter

That leaves Sweden -- neither Hungary nor Turkey has approved Swedish NATO membership. Most likely nothing will happen until after Turkish elections in May.

NATO - Opinion: Statement by the Secretary General on Finland’s membership in NATO, 31-Mar.-2023

In other news, NATO country Norway (currently a disgrace to me and many other Norwegians since we do not meet the minimum target of spending at least 2% of GDP on defence), is slowly starting to pick up speed. Last week new defence projects totalling 17 billion NOK (USD 1.65 billion) were announced, in addition, some existing projects will receive additional 6.3 billion NOK of funding (USD 610 million).
Store investeringer i Forsvaret - regjeringen.no

Some of the additional funding is additional NOK 1.65 billion for 155mm ammo, funding for Sehawk helicopters, infrastructure work at Ørlandet air base, some more equipment for the army, and additional funding to support a communication project with the submarines. Milliardinvestering i kommunikasjon med ubåter - regjeringen.no

Finland's NATO membership doubles alliance's border with Russia in major blow to Vladimir Putin - ABC News
Now official, Finland is NATO's 31st member, actually doubling the size of NATO's land border with Russia and making it virtually impossible for the Russian Navy to operate in the Baltic Sea.

Proving the folly of invading Ukraine to keep NATO further from Russia.

swerve said:

Proving the folly of invading Ukraine to keep NATO further from Russia.

Click to expand...

Yup - that really backfired on Russia. I understand Sweden is a bit closer to sign-off as well after talks with Turkey.

Albanese was invited but will be a "no show" at a NATO meeting in July: Anthony Albanese to be a ‘no show’ at NATO in ‘disappointment’ for Brussels

In addition Penny Wong sent a junior bureaucrat to last week’s foreign ministers’ meeting in Brussel.

Not sure if this is significant?

Vivendi said:

Albanese was invited but will be a "no show" at a NATO meeting in July: Anthony Albanese to be a ‘no show’ at NATO in ‘disappointment’ for Brussels

In addition Penny Wong sent a junior bureaucrat to last week’s foreign ministers’ meeting in Brussel.

Not sure if this is significant?

Click to expand...

Interesting that they did that when NZ sent its Foreign Minister to the meeting. The NZ PM has received his invite to the NATO Leaders meeting in Lithuania but hasn't decided whether or not to go. We have a General Election this October and he'll be busy.

This article on Newsroom (NZ) discusses NATO, NZ and NATO's interest in the Indo Pacific.

A good assessment of Canada in this link wrt defence. Point 3 can't be overstated. Some other good links are within the link article. I can no longer comment on our PM.

John Fedup said:

A good assessment of Canada in this link wrt defence. Point 3 can't be overstated. Some other good links are within the link article. I can no longer comment on our PM.

MSN

Click to expand...

Unfortunately Norway (which even has a border with Russia) is another NATO country that is underspending. I am hoping this will change soon: a committee will soon publish their report with recommendations on Norways long term defence strategy.There are some indications it will contain some pretty strong wording regarding the Norwegian politicians lack of will to invest over the last few decades, and the poor state of the Norwegian armed forces. Given the solid Norwegian economy I am hopeful the Norwegian politicians will finally give in and start addressing the holes in Norway's armed forces. It will cost but we do need to strengthen our defenses. Now.

Vivendi said:

Unfortunately Norway (which even has a border with Russia) is another NATO country that is underspending. I am hoping this will change soon: a committee will soon publish their report with recommendations on Norways long term defence strategy.There are some indications it will contain some pretty strong wording regarding the Norwegian politicians lack of will to invest over the last few decades, and the poor state of the Norwegian armed forces. Given the solid Norwegian economy I am hopeful the Norwegian politicians will finally give in and start addressing the holes in Norway's armed forces. It will cost but we do need to strengthen our defenses. Now.

Click to expand...

I believe Norway’s pollies will rise to a much higher level than our current pathetic pollies. Unfortunately I don’t have much faith in their potential replacements.

Although pollie and citizen attitudes towards defence are a problem, Canada’s financial health does influence things. Household debt is now the worst in the G7 and continues to get worse while other members are improving. Then there is the government debt at both the provincial and federal levels. This why I see problems wrt the large capital outlays down the road. This is also why the 2% GDP number won’t be met IMO.

Canada's household debt is now highest in the G7 Canada's household debt is now highest in the G7

The Turkish Interior Minister campaigning for Erdogan:
I was hoping Turkey would try to improve the relationship to the US and Western countries. It does not look that way.

If they keep moving on this trajectory I think it will become increasingly difficult to keep Turkey in NATO.