Mortyman From Norway, joined Aug 2006, 3431 posts, RR: 1 Posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3774 times:
The Norwegian government today announced that they would invest 1029 million NOK in the continued development of the Norwegian JSM missile. The missile wich is a development from the navy NSM missile ( used on Norwegian firgates and MTB's ) will be developed to go with the F35 fighter. Two in the belly and 4 on the wings.
The investment is for step two in the program.
The NSM is considered to be the most advanced seatarget missile in the world
sebolino From France, joined May 2001, 3672 posts, RR: 5 Reply 1, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 3539 times:
I fail to understand why the European defense is not built in common by all European countries. It would cheaper, and much more effective to have common developpements, like the Typhoon, but at an even larger scale. Of course, some countries may want different options, like France with the Rafale (they insisted in having a single aircraft to fulfill all missions).
But for a missile ????? WTF ! Well, Norway is a (very) rich country, they can afford it, even with a small population.
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 12947 posts, RR: 79 Reply 3, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 3433 times:
Quoting sebolino (Reply 1): I fail to understand why the European defense is not built in common by all European countries. It would cheaper, and much more effective to have common developments,
Well the multi national MDBA missile company was once such rationalisation, with systems such as the Meteor AAM.
Kiwi Rob, yes, however it does depend on the missile, for example if the UK puts the Storm Shadow on the wings of F-35C the weapon itself is LO.
This Norwegian system being LO shaped and composite should not be a problem either.
I think the UK should buy (and licence produce) the NSM, to replace Harpoon on warships as well as for carriage on the Typhoon and F-35.
It seems logical to have a system carried on multiple platforms, the anti-ship requirement for the UK is (now at least) a low priority, so a system that can cover this and land attack, was designed for littoral style combat, would make sense.
I gathered that, but are they still stealthy when attached to the wings of a plane, especially when there are 4 of them. I would imagines there would be all sorts of angles which should disrupt the stealth of the plane carrying them.
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 12947 posts, RR: 79 Reply 7, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 3078 times:
Quoting mffoda (Reply 6): These missiles are not really in the same class... as far as warheads are concerned.
Yes, though the principle UK asset for attacking major warships are nuclear subs/Spearfish torpedo's.
Sea Eagle retired, Sub Harpoon retired.
You want to keep an anti ship missile capability, however the reality of tight budgets is the need for versatility, better yet, multi-platform too.
Adding to the ability to attack major warships with a new system, won't get approved, unless it can do other targets too.
With a diminishing number of warships to carry anti ship weapons, you need to cover that task with something that can do something else (and is more likley to be called to do so), such as land attack.