Jump to content

Recommended Posts

It is hard to know whom to believe as far as military hardware development goes. The production cost will be be fixed until the goverment signs a long term procurement contract such as the US Navy did with the Super Hornet Multiyear procurement 3.

And it appears to be becoming harder every day in regard to this particular project. There are so many voices within the US now screaming "Listen to me, I have the real facts of the matter". One has to wonder if anyone actually knows what the facts of the matter are any more and in one of the articles quoted on this page of this thread it appears to conclude that the F-35 is too big to fail.

Ross.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently, the US Navy wants the UK to order F-35Cs ...

>>> Article <<<

Gregg

The USN Wants more people operating the C instead of the B? I am shocked! LOL :thumbsup: interesting article though.

UK: "Hey how much is that F-35 gonna cost? Things are getting tight over here"

USN: "Oh hey (this is awkward) we don't know. But guess what? We do know you are over paying for your carrier. We can see it from here"

in one of the articles quoted on this page of this thread it appears to conclude that the F-35 is too big to fail.

Thats what I have been screaming. For some reason people seem to think this thing is always just one split second from being canceled forever. Its not. In MCAS Yuma (just from what I have been hearing with friends stationed there) the Hangers are already being built, the bases, and support equipment are already gearing up just like bases all over the country. And they have invested way too much time and money already for this to just go quietly into the night. Simply put everyday the F-35 is around the odds of cancellation drop just that much more. conversely the longer it stays the more it does, its always getting closer to being in service. only in the world of the internet have people concluded that "its the last straw" and this thing will be canceled tomorrow.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did I read correctly in the article that the US Navy wants to base a squadron of its jets on a British carrier? ?????? That would be unprecedented.

Edited by DutyCat
Link to post
Share on other sites

:D, I don't know about being cancelled tomorrow TT, but if the costs increase too much more (and I don't know what "too much more" is) some of the smaller nations may well say "enough is enough, We're not going to throw any more money at this project, it's become like throwing good money after bad" and opt for something else. That possibility is on the cards. I'm sure the US will continue but some of the others may not.

:cheers:,

Ross.

Edited by ross blackford
Link to post
Share on other sites

Did I read correctly in the article that the US Navy wants to base a squadron of its jets on a British carrier? ?????? That would be unprecedented.

It could be new for the US Navy. Not sure about that.

USAF has had Joint or Lend-lease airbases with US Fighter Wings in Europe for many years. Among them are Italy, Turkey, England, Germany, Portugal. On the other hand, some US allied Air Forces also have permanent detachments in the US.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did I read correctly in the article that the US Navy wants to base a squadron of its jets on a British carrier? ?????? That would be unprecedented.

It almost seems like something they would say to entice the brits. More jointness if you buy our brand.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I love this "scoop." The F-35's helmet problems have been known for two years. A fix should be in place by 2014, maybe fully operational by 2016... that's a full year before Canada's first delivery. Here's my other question, how many other fighters have 360 degree low light capabilities?

Not one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I love this "scoop." The F-35's helmet problems have been known for two years. A fix should be in place by 2014, maybe fully operational by 2016... that's a full year before Canada's first delivery. Here's my other question, how many other fighters have 360 degree low light capabilities?

Not one.

:D, That is that we in the west know of Neu, :lol:, doesn't mean noone else has such capabilities or are very advanced on them. If the Russians or Chinese had such capabilities do we really believe they'd be crowing to us about them. I truly doubt it. No, I think they'd let us find out the hard way what their capabilities really are.

:cheers:,

Ross

Link to post
Share on other sites

:D, That is that we in the west know of Neu, :lol:, doesn't mean noone else has such capabilities or are very advanced on them. If the Russians or Chinese had such capabilities do we really believe they'd be crowing to us about them. I truly doubt it. No, I think they'd let us find out the hard way what their capabilities really are.

:cheers:,

Ross

They need to sell airplanes too...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Obtained from another website, I haven't seen this anywhere else but given other stories about data theft by the Chinese, I don't find it to be surprising.

March 30, 2012: British aircraft manufacturer BAE confirmed that, three years ago, Chinese hackers gained access to classified BAE aircraft design files. This included data on the American F-35 fighter, which BAE is helping to develop and build. BAE was working on the F-35 fuselage, portions of the wings and tail, the fuel system, crew escape system, life support and integration of British components for the British F-35s. All or much of the date on these items was apparently taken by the Chinese hackers.

Not that this is unique to BAE but it does raise the question of how secure sensitive info is when you have so many international companies collaborating on a program like this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bloomberg News: Boeing lobbies for Super Hornets as F-35 delayed.

Boeing is lobbying for a $60 million increase in the Navy’s fiscal 2013 budget for advance purchases of materials to keep building F/A-18 E/F Super Hornets beyond 2015.

Navy leaders would like to extend the multiyear contract and buy 13 more of the latest F/A 18 models in 2014, according to March 20 congressional testimony submitted by Navy officials including Vice Admiral Mark Skinner, the principal military deputy to the assistant secretary of the Navy for research, development and acquisition.

The Navy estimated last year that it sees a fighter shortage for its 11 aircraft carriers starting in 2015. Pentagon officials, including Panetta, said last year that the Pentagon needed to buy more Super Hornets as a hedge against delays in F- 35 production.

The Navy plans to retire older versions of the F/A-18 and shift to a combination of Super Hornets and carrier-based F-35s. The Marines are seeking a strike-fighter fleet made up solely of the F-35 version designed for short takeoffs and vertical landings and carrier-based jets once it can no longer extend the life of its Hornets and Harrier aircraft. The Marine Corps is looking at ways to keep its AV-8 B Harriers flying for as much as 20 more years, according to Skinner.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple of things. First, Ross' account was clearly hacked. He's never made posts these short.

Second, you can't pay enough for this jet:

http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2012-03-29/lockheed-f-35-aircraft-costs-rise-about-4-3-pentagon-says?category=

http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2012-03-30/lockheed-f-35-fighter-estimate-increased-9-in-a-year-u-s-says.html

Tony is an old hand at kicking LM in the nuts. The numbers are apparently so big, even he can't figure out the most damning way to report them.

On ether Chinese hacking of BAE, and Boeing trying to hawk SuperHornets, both are old stories. The Chinese hacking was reported a couple years ago, and Boeing wheels out the SuperHornets annually to try and Kerri the line open.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Without TRYING to get political. It appears our government is seriously back tracking on the buy now. Looks like we might get F-18 E/Fs (or nothing) after all.

http://news.sympatico.ctv.ca/home/military_kept_parliament_in_dark_over_f-35_costs_auditor/87f43784

Edited by phantom
Link to post
Share on other sites

Can the F-18 just win by default? Or do they have to start the whole process over? I'm guessing that they will start from scratch, weigh their options, and then select the F-35 anyway. It will take more time and money to come to the same conclusion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like the Sea Kings all over again. Except at least THIS time the government acknowledges the need for a replacement. 20 years on we STILL fly the Sea King.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Without TRYING to get political. It appears our government is seriously back tracking on the buy now. Looks like we might get F-18 E/Fs (or nothing) after all.

http://news.sympatico.ctv.ca/home/military_kept_parliament_in_dark_over_f-35_costs_auditor/87f43784

Maybe I'm missing some Canadian subtlety, but nowhere did I see the option of a recompete seriously discussed. Yes, AOL options are on the table, but even that statement was backed away from pretty quick.

It boils down to politics and requirements at this point. Canada can argue they don't need the F-35 since even the US Navy is flying SuperHornets for the next 20 years, but if they have certain requirements they can just as easily justify the F-35.

If the conservative govt falls, then I'd expect this to get messier.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So what if the F-35 is canceled completely ? All orders, the whole shabang. No just Canada.

The USAF need to extend the F-15 and F-22 lifespan.

Canada will hop on the Superhornet, and so will Europe probably.

Navy will extend Superhornet lifespan (where's a Tomcat when you need one ;) )

And, in the meantime a lot of other nations will get (cheap) 4.5 generation Flankers and Pak FA/J-20's. Does this mean a possible shift in air-supperiority between the West and the Rest ?

At the very least, the lead will deminish considerably.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So what if the F-35 is canceled completely ? All orders, the whole shabang. No just Canada.

The USAF need to extend the F-15 and F-22 lifespan.

Canada will hop on the Superhornet, and so will Europe probably.

Navy will extend Superhornet lifespan (where's a Tomcat when you need one ;) )

And, in the meantime a lot of other nations will get (cheap) 4.5 generation Flankers and Pak FA/J-20's. Does this mean a possible shift in air-supperiority between the West and the Rest ?

At the very least, the lead will deminish considerably.

I think the chances of that happening are next to zero. Too much has already been invested and the program is too far along. Unless the global economy takes another nosedive, it is highly unlikely that the program would be terminated. The worst case scenario is that a few existing international customers drop their orders and the US makes further reductions due to budget cuts. This would lead to increased unit costs, which would result in further reductions and in the end, leave the US with something like the F-22 force. Just a few hundred airframes backed up by a larger force of aging, legacy jets.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This would lead to increased unit costs, which would result in further reductions and in the end, leave the US with something like the F-22 force. Just a few hundred airframes backed up by a larger force of aging, legacy jets.

I know, that never gets old. :bandhead2:

Edited by TaiidanTomcat
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...