Coota, you may be interested in this cut from another forum: Contributor is KurtPlummer
Posted Sun 15 January 2006 20:53
>>
That's nearly three times the original budget price for the F-35.
It should be pretty obvious as to why the numbers are falling back!
>>
Self fulfilling prophecy because Lunchmeat (Baloney Inc.) almost certainly 'bought in' to the program with technology base investments in ways that could only be recovered through the F-22 as much as F-35 padded long term production and particularly FMS sales.
That won't happen now because as the USAF (lynchpin sale with 2,400 originally planned, 1,763 'officially needed' and probably fewer than the 1,250 now rumored as likely) numbers fall, it's center variant profit margin will cause the 'cousin' airframes (both more expensive) scalar economics to go to heck as well.
And pre-critical-mass failing all three together (for U.S. service) will so spike the FMS prices as to drive the FMS '4,000 export airframes' completely away.
And so it is that 'joint' was not an economic sales point. But a point of doom. Because the aircraft are not COMMON in their basing modes. And the structural diversity that derives from that also drives /down/ the minimum threshold inventory number by which any one service will stick it out to buy a 'slightly more expensive' variant and not compromise the others.
Of course the idiots abroad who form the Tier-2 and 3 customer base will have another shock, much as the Brits are doing with their failure to secure FACO level access to 'all aspects' of VLO technology. So that they can hand it all over to EADS/Thales.
In that stealth technology which _cannot be_ made tamper-proof enough to let USAF level VLO be exported as a technology base will almost certainly mean several orders of magnitude increase in on-plane signature values as well.
And this leaves you with a bomber that is less 'capable' (unengaged by as much as superior to any opfor platform) than existing Gen-4 fighter options which are at least largely paid for in their 60-80 million dollar 'honest sticker shock' of MSRP.
With the the Neurone and similar UCAV having a clear road ahead now that we've cancelled J-UCAS like the utter idiots we are. It becomes likely that the future of everyone-but-U.S. airpower will be a hilo split between manned combat controlers. And unmanned renta-pylons.
Cruise with landing gear.
And we have absolutely _no_ excuse for not seeing this coming.
Given that CBO were predicting 70+ as early as 1997 and Mike O'Hanlon was saying 65 USAF and 77 USN in his 'go slow and preplan significant cuts' paper on the subject in 2001.
Futher given that we _knew_ what JDAM was in 1994 when this whole pork-politics mess started and were already looking at things like the Alenia Diamondback and Aussie Awadi options to further '1 plane, TWO disparate target sets as much as aimpoints within them' multiply the effectiveness of tacair; there is no excuse for not taking into account what MMTD and GBU-38 would eventuate as: weapons which multiply by 4 or more what the existing tacair fleet can 'Both pylons today I tell'ya!' do.
And that is the petard by which a selfserving Congress will hoist the USAF when their little cash cow gets mad heifer disease and has to be put down.
"Divide your inventory (Mission Element Needs) Day-1:Raid-1 requirement by the number of aimpoints you can REACH, without EA or DEAD route corridors, using small slingbomb techniques from 20-30miles or more. And maybe, if you're nice, we'll divide THAT number by half and split amongst the three of you."
Which would still be a significant total number of jets (probably 500+, maybe as much as 750-900) IF men could land on carriers with any kind of UPT and no carqual currency.
Like a UCAV does routinely, with JPALS.
But they can't. And their inability to do so is depriving us of not just a more capable airpower modus. But one which is sufficiently cheap as to pump inventory counts right back up to F-16/18 levels.
As such condensing our 'pgm-same, landing mode diverse' airpower into a single force which can deploy anywhere, land or sea, without hyperextending the Navy in particular (in terms of cruise length or available 'fill' squadrons to generate their 7 carrier emergency deployment force) must be the way we look ahead.
And all I can say is it's about damn time. This nation does not need three airforces, half of which cannot deploy to an access denied theater, the rest of which cannot do FTSF beyond about 400nm thanks to a tanking problem.
Because if they hadn't been playing merc enforcer to a bunch of Arab Oil Sheiks, two airliners wouldn't have crashed into civillian targets here at home. And if they 5th, 7th and 6th fleets hadn't been 'too busy' to sail the 2,500nm that separates their coverage overlaps. We might have had men on the ground and airoverhead. 9/15 instead of 10/10.
It is only to be hoped that, for this alone, the Pilot Mafia will be faced by a RICO based attack on their egotistical presumption of cancelling everything to maintain cockpit airpower as a Federal Dole.
And that the aftermath of Iraq and the wiretapping/secret prison debacle as well as the economic default of the JSF program if not America as a whole will, collectively, so completely ruin ALL the armed forces for retention and modernization funding.
That they will _NOT_ get 'just one more generation, pleeeeeaze!' of manned airpower waste.
But will be forced to make uninhabitteds work.
Or do without.
How ironic then, that what was advertised as a cheaper-by-bulk manned system is in fact going to finally put a stake in manned aviations undead heart.
By being too expensive for what it tried to do all at once.
KPl.
Posts: 173 | Registered: Mon 22 November 2004
