The Royal Norwegian Air Force has reactivated Bardufoss Mountain Air Station to house its F-35 fighter jets, utilising the natural protection of mountain hangars to enhance aircraft survivability, according to a NATO press release.
Bardufoss Air Station, deactivated for the past 40 years, has been upgraded with structural and equipment improvements to support air operations.
Brigadier Tron Strand, head of the Norwegian Joint Air Operations Centre (JAOC), emphasised the strategic importance of Bardufoss, stating, “Bardufoss Air Station plays an important role in the further development of Norwegian, Nordic and Allied Air Power.”
He explained that NATO is focused on the ability of nations to disperse and quickly mobilise air forces through the Agile Combat Employment (ACE) concept.
“The deteriorating security policy situation and the war in Ukraine mean that the Air Force must become sharper. Powerful stealth fighters are not enough. In a war situation, the planes are vulnerable on the ground. On the one hand, we are significantly increasing air defence for Evenes and Ørland Air Base – this is part of our long-term planning,” Brigadier General Strand said.
“On the other, the Air Force must be able to disperse its combat aircraft and operate out of several other airports and air stations, both in Norway and the Nordic countries if a crisis or war so requires.”
He further elaborated on the necessity of utilising available mountain facilities for protection, stating, “Within the framework of Norway’s national operational distribution concept, we are using the entire air station at Bardufoss. First and foremost, this is about being prepared and in the long term, this may involve more national and Allied activity here.”
Colonel Eirik Stueland, commander of 131 Air Wing, highlighted the dual role of Bardufoss as both a military and civilian airport, making it well-suited for the operational distribution concept. “The whole idea of dispersal of capabilities is to be able to use all available airports throughout the Nordic region; at Bardufoss, due to the existing infrastructure, we will also be able to play a larger role in an initial mobilisation phase,” he said, adding that the mountain facility could also support Allied deployments.
Bardufoss Air Station, Norway’s oldest operating air station since its opening in 1938, is a key part of NATO’s ACE concept, which aims to strengthen the resilience and survivability of Allied air operations by combining existing air bases with temporary operational bases to generate combat air power through resource dispersal.
Certainly drone-proof.
Capital plan! 👍 The Norwegians have definitely received the message that storm clouds are gathering Unstated, but presume there is also increased emphasis on GBAD. Other European NATO countries? Any options in the UK? Haven’t the Swiss made similar preparations?
Actually, there may be a reference to GBAD in the article, “…we are significantly increasing air defence for Evenes and Orland Air Base…” 🤔
Not really the landscape option in the UK for mountain side base. GBAD we should of sorted years ago.
Unfortunate that there is apparently nothing available in Wales or the Scottish Highlands.
There are plenty of mountains. Just not the money to do much with them.
Some locations have been constructed.
There are a couple, but of WW2 into Cold War vintage.
Blaenau Ffestiniog mine and Rhydymwyn spring to mind.
We have the mountains, but not the money.
Other places are built into hills, such as DM Ernsettle, and parts of Glen Douglas are beneath a fair sized hill too.
I think the issue is the proximity of a very solid hill to a plateau for an airfield with appropriate dimensional clearances?
These facilities were hand dug whereas these are now you would use a Tunnel Boring Machine.
The cost depends on the stability of the geology – look at the cast in situ concrete roofing in the photos of the Norwegian facility.
Per se it wouldn’t be that expensive to do something like this. However, UK wouldn’t accept the risks and limitations of the Norwegian facility as it ‘wouldn’t be good enough’.
Good point re the lie of the land. I’m unsure then if anywhere in the UK is feasible.
It’s all James Bond stuff anyway.
The UG stuff in the UK re military, MoD seems to be mostly reusing and adapting legacy sites.
The UK defence estate is huge.
Also UK construction costs are ridiculous due to a terrible skills shortage.
Indeed it is. I have a list of it!
Last MoD underground stuff was late 80s early 90s I think.
At least there is recent TBM experience with CT, Elizabeth line, and HS2 if we ever went crazy.
Problem is that Treasury don’t under and the need for continuous tunnelling works to bring costs down.
The workforce is already dispersed.
Hence Cross Rail 2 hitting the buffers and zilch going on to extend London’s underground. Which is vital if you want to get people off the streets.
Ah yes, the old drum beat. You’re right.
Hi Dm I know we’ve “storage” below ground but as SB refines below it’s the strong mountain/hill plus a lovely bit of flat land next to it. The cost is also a fair comment.
Be nice to have but our lists have more important thing on them.
Defo mate.
This is so cool!! 👍🤣👍
I drove past Bardufoss in 2019 while on Holiday. First sight of it was a 747 which looked to be parked in a forest but as you head up the hill to the north you can look down and see the airport layout and a very big runway for the area.
There are several memorials to the battles of 1940.around the area which happened before the decision was taken to evacuate the king and crown prince to the UK in a British war ship.
British and French soldiers as well as Norwegians were involved.
Thanks, wondered about a WWII legacy.. 👍
Would a mountain HAS make any difference if a tac nuke landed on the base? The runway and base infrastructure would be like a glowing ploughed field.
The people inside and other facilities would survive, and then gloves off the other way. Buts this definitely helps with drones and cruise missles.
People surviving is enough really, art5 triggered strategic nuclear response is in the outbox. The world as we know it is over!
Agree there would be at least F-35As, armed w/ B-61s, headed in the opposite direction. And three independent decision nodes deciding whether a strategic response was merited.
I think that would probably warrant a SLBM somewhere important from 1 off the 3
The aircraft are in the hard mountain shelter but if the runway is put out of action what then? I sure there is a scandi plan for aircraft dispersal which we won’t know about.
Much like Sweden, Norway will use roads as makeshift runways, if attacked.
If you travel through Norway most of their roads travel through mountains, rather than around or over them. Within these tunnels there are roads lead further in to the mountain, blocked off by huge steel doors. A lot of these additional tunnels would be used as bomb shelters. Quite a few can hold vehicles and even jets.
We conducted a number of exercises with the Norwegians from such tunnel systems.
Davey,
Unaware of that, but not surprised. We’re the Norwegians thinking outside the box as early as WWII, or simply CWI?
Were…🙄 (autocorrect strikes again)
The hangars in the mountains at Bardu and Bodo are post war. Norway makes use of mountains for storage of military kit. Look at Wikipedia “US prepositioning in Norway” As good as any to start. A lot of NATO money gone into Norway. Improving runways building Jettys in remote locations. Given the depth and steep sides of the fjords all you need is a big blob of concrete and you have a jetty. They are visible on Google satellite. The picture on wiki of a ship unloading US kit look the location on Google sat you see the jetty and… Read more »
Thanks. 😊👍
The Norwegian approach- dig a tunnel!
Very impressive structures.
The NATO Agile Combat Employment (ACE) plan is specifically mentioned in the article. Further, it is reasonably difficult to indefinitely incapacitate an airbase manned by competent and determined personnel.
Runways are incredibly easy to repair. So much so that modern air supremacy thinking completely discounts them, and instead focuses on other enablers such as fuel and ammunition storage.
Good input everyone, thank you
We have Putin to thank. He and he alone has galvanised what many came to believe by the turn of the last century was an organisation that outlived its purpose.
I’m confused -why do they need to hide F35s underground? They are already stealthy.
Hat, coat, door, exit stage left .
😂😁
Been there, might protect against blast but not precision munitions like what Russia uses.
unless the precision munitions can somehow navigate an underground complex with tight tolerances. No such munition exists, simply in the terms of fantasy.
Nobody has recently alleged that Russia has precision munitions – a wild allegation!
Would’ve thought the F35b would be ideal for dispersed operations.
Not in the same context as in the Harrier days. Even when not using the afterburner. The exhaust is too hot for most roads when taking off and landing vertically. The best option is short take off and the rolling vertical landing. So a short stretch of road of around 100m would do. The F35B was designed to be operated from a main operating base or carrier. So some work will be required to make it more austere base friendly. Which would primarily be developing ground support equipment and more easily deployable sun shelters, that can be erected and taken… Read more »
Concrete road sections?
There was a reason why some bits of some motorways were built in thick concrete…..
When I joined up, they were doing trials with Jaguars taking off from dual carriageways. I would like to see them doing the same with Typhoon. The issue would be that with the Jag. The engine intakes were alongside the cockpit. So pretty high off the ground. Typhoon by contrast is below the cockpit and fairly close to the ground. Therefore to stop FOD ingestion, the roads it uses will have to be meticulously clean from loose debris. Otherwise there is a substantial risk that FOD will damage the engine. To mitigate this, there are still quite a few disused… Read more »
The French used jags with cats n traps on their carrier hence the long legs. Possibly the buccaneers were our air to ground equivalent.
The Sepecat did design and build a maritime version called the Jaguar M. However French politics decided that the Super Etendard would be chosen instead. As it was supposedly cheaper and not as complicated, plus was completely made in France, so had more potential for export profits. Sadly the maritime version never went in to service.
DB cheers