First time ever -  

@@skubisan If B61s were to be used chances are something has already been nuked and it's a retaliation.

Nga va trung quoc :iran trieu tien: 4quoc gia nay ket dong minh rui/4thanh nay :ta ac nhat the gioi

Well, hold on a minute now with the nuclear bombs. Finland also ordered 64 F-35A:s but this wasn't on the agenda then. although now that I think about it the idea starts to sound like fun. But in all seriousness, dispersal of assets is important even against a conventional first strike aiming to destroy our air force on the ground. It was deemed that the F-35A can operate from highway bases well enough.

Same in Finland. The ONLY way to go, unless they are in their caves...

Soviet Union, including Ukraine too did partial dispersion plans. Of course Finland and Sweden to the different level, pretty much aiming at 100% dispersion. leaving empty hangars to be bombed.

As seen in taistelukenttä 2020, fins are not waiting missiles to land on target, but commanding planes to leave the ground if missiles are about to hit the roadbase. After that the base will be some place else. For now until exposed or attacted again. Good luck for any enemy. A bit of same strategy a artillery uses after bombardment. They are not going to wait for enemy to strike back.

Finland has done it since WW2 so the concept is well-rehearsed.

Happens about once a year. There's a massive military training exercise twice a year too. Loppusota if you're interested.

Also partly it is about atleast on some amount deterring attack in first place. If enemy can be certain "the planes are on that base in those hangars", it is a no brainer decision to hit the base with everything you got. Now mind you for example the main bases in say Finland would be hit anyway. However after that *quick relocating capable* dispersal system leads to a cat and mouse game. There is a reason places like Finland and Sweden have *tens* of dispersal road strips and also plotted out dispersals to places like small general aviation airstrips. There needs to be enough of them so that "just bombard all of them" comes resource infeasible or atleast non-desirable. After that enemy can only strike, if they have at least some idea they have pinpointed where the dispersal base is at the moment and with some probability at least some part of the base team is still there. Optimally of course locate the planes there and launch fast strike. Which leads to said cat and mouse. The idea of the base team is "setup at place X, run sorties and operations from there for a time, pack up and leave before enemy can confidently locate the base". More like the last part is "last base ground segment drives away little before the cruise missile lands". Ofcourse one of the ground bases getting hit on not having evacuated in time is always possibility and must be resiliency calculated. Concept is illustrated by the Finnish Defence Forces Battlefield 2020 video ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-bTmWCbcYwb8.htmlsi=cWZtaum2--8TXO8N in it at 2 and half minutes it's told due to increased tensions Air force has dispersed all the squadrons to various dispersal bases from main bases. minute later it's told missile strikes are tracked in bound towards Finland, dispersal bases to quickly launch all aircraft airborne to avoid getting destroyed on ground. Base gets hit, planes have left in time, ground base elements take casualties. It is a brutal and fast based game, but pretty much only possible one in world of being in easy cruise missile range and in age of surveillance drones and spy satellites. No runway can be reinforced cratering proof. Hangars can be and has been duck deep enough to sustain even bunker buster. However it usually means limited amount of heavily fortified entrance tunnels and well now the mouths of the tunnels are the weakness. Plane might be fine in it's deep mountain cave, but it is useless plane after someone collapsed/cratered/blocked it's exit path to run way by targeting the base tunnel mouths and collapsed or rubbled them enough. Atleast until repair and clearance crews can clear up the entrances. As such the best defence of plane is simply to not be on the ground, when the ground strike hits. Which means fast mobile operations. Problem is *one needs to do that for months on end* . Wars rarely are as short as people predict them to be. It isn't simply just "disperse, they can take of", fine. The hard part is *the logistics and supply* regime mobile,robust and lenient enough to do the disperse relocate, relocate,relocate routine without pause for months. While keeping planes air worthy. That is the hard part. Plane being able to land and take off from road is just the first face bare minimum necessary ability and not at all single handedly sufficient factor for "dispersing will work". For example if it takes too long to wake up the plane and get engines running... congratulations, plane just in pieces on ground. Since when enemy border is 200 km away and nearest base 500 km away... you only get warning in range of less than 30 minutes air alert warning from the cruise missile launch until hit lands. Meaning the plane better be able to be up from ground within say 10 minutes of alert or it's sitting duck. It must be capable of that, not during short intense alert period. It must be on that alert status *through the whole war* .

I do not know too much about the Scandinavians. Finland isn't one of them. Nordic or even Fennoscandia if you want Scandinavia + Finland but exclude Iceland.

For as long as we've had fighters.

I’m from Finland and i’m pretty sure i heard that we were getting 64 block 4 F-35A’s with similar mosifications due to weather as Norway…

@@markotark Thanks. Yes, very likely that Finland will go the same ❄️ route. I recently read your F-35 Programme update from the Finnish Air Force, issued 15 Sep 2023, as presented by Major General J-P Keränen. Glad to learn that Finland will receive your first F-35A airframes alredy in 2025 at Ebbing Air National Guard Base, Arkansas (location is preliminary, stationed there only for training of Finnish pilots). And first operational F-35 to arrive in Finland scheduled for 2026 - that’s soon, too. Excellent choice, for both Finland and Norway. For close cooperation 🇫🇮🇳🇴

It's not a non issue and it's a misnomer to just characterize these blacktops as "a road".

The Interstates are really designed for truck convoys and not aircraft, but straight stretches without overpasses could be turned into an airstrip.

@dou. . . I know that, but the interstates were a " backup ", for air force.

All road bases have parallel roads which are used to pass the road base. Therefore the road base can be used continuously for extended periods, and the disruption for road traffic can be kept minimal. The designated road bases are built outside urban areas, and there are none in immediate vicinity of the largest cities. Therefore, there is no extensive commuter traffic on those roads.

8000 ft (2.5 km) is required. The Swedish JAS 39 Gripen can handle much shorter strips of road, but Finland (still flying F-18, soon to fly F-35) has like Sweden also adopted their road network for their conventional take-off and landing aircraft). Norway can not do this because of topography as any aircraft would end up on the side of a mountain if trying to land on Norwegian highways😆

Internal load only or with heavy external load? With only internal load, less than many with external load. And definitely less than 2.5km, More like 700-800m would be my guess.

@@glacieractivity Thank you very much!

@@juhanivalimaki5418 Thank you and have a great day!

With almost 900 F-35s in service right now the irony turns into coincidence.

@@petertimowreef9085 planes fall out of the sky. who knew

only the marine corps verison F35B is vtol, these are the air force verison F35A

They aren't the only one all western tactical aircraft can. There is a beautiful video of the F-104 taking off from the autobahn in the seventies. We did the same with the same aircraft, NF-5 and F-16.

​@@jacksonteller1337a highways were designed 50 b52s

Sweden (not saab) basically wrote the book on force dispersal. In the advent of their bases are knocked out, the forces have several options at their disposal The US does the same thing but with difference sites called hasty and aircraft With USMC. their concept is F-35B supported by MV-22 carrying personnel and CH-53K carrying fuel and weapons The much larger concept used by USAF and USMC is KC/MC-130s carrying everything and setting up a hasty location for aircraft land , refuel ,rearm and depart The benefit is that enemy keeps guessing but support aircraft are at risk Sweden concept keeps the enemy guessing but the enemy is not likely to target roads because at the end of the day, they need them too Paved roads are far easier to use than rough country

Lol and where is SAAB now....have they called TaTa to be able to start them like the Brits and the rest of the Eurotrash vehicles ? 😂

No, this is nothing new. It depends on the host country. The US doesn't need to use its highway during war time. If US bases located in the US are hit, it would most likely meant we're in a full nuclear war and the point is moot.

@@dnguyen9747 Who are you replying to...? You're denying points I never made.

The CF-35 is just an F-35 with a drogue chute. Its the same as the norwegian variant. There are no differences betwween the two.

It's not imitation. This kind of training has been happening for over 50 years by a whole host of nations.

Sorry Roop. This was not done by India a way back. This an F-35 and India did not have any F-35's "a way back". Also, I notice a complete lack of reference for your claim. And "push pride of us" ?Now, what is that supposed to mean?

F-35B can take off conventionally, so it would be fine here

It'll MELT the asphalt if it takes off vertically. Short take offs are fine...@@Orbital_Inclination

@@carboncarbonx43 yeah I got that, hence why it would just take off normally rather than vertically here

I dunno, but, tbh it's just an update I guess. and to be precise, its a Defense Update as the name of this vlog would imply.

@@juzanewbie6194 Well said Juza. It's an update Wallace.

It is not. The roads are built with this in mind. The bigger issue is the maintanance, logistics and protecting the "mobile" air base.

That is not accurate. Lots of places suitable and some with tunel hangars.

That is very accurate, you cant have driven much in Finland the Roads are 10x the quality of Norwegian roads.

@@svenhaheim It may be right on average, but what does that have to do with anything? That does not change the fact that many places in Norway are suitable and in more than good enough condition to function as landing strips.

@@ronnysundt3249 Very few places in Norway are suitable,both Swedish and Finnish road systems were designed with this feature in mind. No system thought was put into the Norwegian network.

@@svenhaheim We have a very different geography though but it should be doable to implemented here as well.

Do you have civil war bombs and shooting every day 💔 Sweden is kaput!

These sections of road have been there for decades. There are many such parts that have been designed to explicitly act as runways. So no special arrangements is true.

In peacetime exercises it is normal to have more safety margins. In a real war you can afford to take more risks.