You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Africa North
US fuel stops Gripen Libya mission
2011-04-13
Hat tip Information Dissemination.
The Swedish JAS Gripen aircraft deployed in Sicily as part of NATO's Libya mission remained grounded on Thursday as the fuel available is suitable only for US navy aircraft.
So British/French complaints that nobody else is stepping up to the plate aren't quite fair.
The eight fighter jets are located in the US part of the Sigonella airbase on Sicily and the only fuel available it that which is used for US navy aircraft. The Gripen were due to participate in their first mission over Libya on Thursday but this has now been delayed and test flights have been postponed.

According to the outline plan, the eight aircraft were all due to monitor the UN no-fly zone over the civil-war torn country from Thursday but on arrival at the base they discovered that no fuel was available.

The Sigonella base is designed as a naval air force base, lieutenant colonal Mats Brindsjö, head of the Swedish Air Operation Center, said.

"And US navy aircraft use somewhat different fuel to that which we use in our planes," he told the TT news agency.

The US fuel variety is known as JP5 while the Gripen normally fly using a civil fuel known as Jet A1.

"Certain additives and some equipment are needed to change JP5 to Jet A1 in a controlled manner. This equipment is not as yet in place down there and in the time being we are trying to buy the fuel from a place off the base."
From a commenter at ID:

The Navy still uses JP5. JP8 replaced JP4 but not JP5. Sigonella does not have JP8. If it ever had it in the past, it was many years ago. The former Fuels Chief (3 tours at Sigonella) never dealt with JP8 at Sigonella.

Swedes knew before they showed up that Sigonella had only JP5 but were under the impression it would not be an issue. Turns out the engine burns JP5 just fine, it is some of the ancillary systems on the aircraft that require the properties of JP8 (or Jet A1) that JP5 does not have.

Yes, there is a commercial airport down the road, and when the refuelers showed up to refuel the Swedish aircraft, they were unable to refuel the aircraft due to not being the proper type of refueling truck.

First deployment outside of Sweden in 50 years--there were bound to be issues to be worked through.
"This really should have been investigated as soon as we arrived, but we didn't have time with all the other details," Mats Brindsjö said, adding that he expects the Gripen aircraft to be in the air on Friday.

The Swedish aircraft will undergo a test flight in order to familiarize themselves with the airspace before NATO authorities are informed that the Gripen stand at the ready.

Sweden is not a member of NATO, although it has been in NATO's Partnership for Peace programme since 1994 and has contributed some 500 troops to the alliance's International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) force in Afghanistan. Sweden also took part in operations in Kosovo.

Nevertheless Sweden's air force has not been involved in action since it took part in a UN-mandated operation in the then Belgian Congo from 1961-63.

The Libyan operation will be the first combat tour for the JAS Gripen 39, produced by the Swedish defence group Saab.
Pic at this link: April 8th; a Gripen gets a drink from a Swedish AF C-130 tanker.
Posted by:Steve White

#11  Water Modem: I strongly suspect that the whole situation was contrived by some people in the Swedish forces who really didn't want to get involved in the cluster$$$$ and used this as a way of dealing with the situation.
Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain   2011-04-13 14:37  

#10  The most common equipment is US and ex-USSR. IF you wish to sell into a market dominated by giants like that you should be certified to be able to eat the same supplies. If you don't... your stockholders should EXECUTE your Board and make the CEO eat his bennies.
Posted by: Water Modem   2011-04-13 14:28  

#9  I had a Saab in the late 80's awful car. You can't drink and drive when the ignition is in the floorboard, one spilled drink and you have buy a new ignition.
Posted by: Beavis   2011-04-13 11:02  

#8  My, how things change. The Russians were late in getting to Austerlitz because nobody noticed that they were still on the Julian, not Gregorian calendar. That, and the Prussians were not too cool about three Russians armies crossing their turf.
Posted by: Anonymoose   2011-04-13 10:48  

#7  Interoperability bites back. One of the key functions often overlooked in Coalition warfare is the ability of members sharing logistic support. Gas quality, size of the gas nozzles to feed equipment, size of the loaders to reach the place to transfer material, size of bullets, ability of radio communications to talk to each other, etc etc etc. It's hard enough to get our own services to cooperate, image the teeth pulling to get NATO members to play and then again to non-NATO. That creates its own army of administrators and bureaucrats.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2011-04-13 09:59  

#6  ...Not to mention that one reason (of several) that the F-22 isn't patrolling the skies of Tripoli is that its secure comm system can only talk to other F-22s and US AWACS (E-2, E-3) - it can't talk to Allied aircraft except over an open channel, which is like, you know, dangerous in combat. For some reason, our Allies never decided to develop a secure comm unit that would talk to the airplane that was intended to defend their butts. (There is a US unit in low rate production that can do it, but we're pretty much paying for the whole program and we're equipping our birds first) There was a VERY strong concern that an Allied pilot, being sneaky and all that, might somehow track a -22 (it can still be seen visually, it does have an IR signature albeit a small one, and there are any number of possibilities that could create an increased radar signature) and blow it out of the sky thinking he'd just whacked one of Qadaffi's finest. Wouldn't have looked at all good for the USAF to be explaining a $135,000,000 hole in the ground caused by one of our Allies.

Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski   2011-04-13 08:45  

#5  Re: fairness of the British/French complaints,

military capability entails more than just buying equipment. Logistics matter a lot, as do doctrine, training and political clarity about military operations.

NATO has atrophied in all those areas. Both the US and Europe are complicit in this - the US asserting a dominating leadership (for good historical reasons) and the resentful free-riding Europeans having, as Fred wrote a while back, their hands in our pockets while also criticizing the style and color of our clothes.
Posted by: lotp   2011-04-13 07:53  

#4  ION WAFF > B-1B LANCER UPGRADES [MER] WILL TRIPLE PAYLOAD, espec as per JDAMS munitions.

USA Official = the B-1B can already carry 2X the payload of a BUFF B-52, MER Upgrades will increase same to 4X a B-52.
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2011-04-13 02:37  

#3  The Gripen will fly fine on JP-5 (see F-18) but the Swedes were too cheap to certify it for JP-5. After all the the Gripen is land based, therefore needs only Jet A-1/JP-8. Coalitions? The Swedes don't need no stinkin' coalitions.
Posted by: Zebulon Thranter9685   2011-04-13 01:17  

#2  the mythological flying lion

So can I take it that noone has seen one fly yet? ;-)
Posted by: gorb   2011-04-13 00:42  

#1  The Saab Gripen, aka "Griffin", the mythological flying lion.
Posted by: Scooter McGruder   2011-04-13 00:38  

00:00