F-35 Multirole Joint Strike Fighter

[OpinionNoted]

Turkey REALLY wants the codes and puts a hold on the order.

Bigger question, what are they talking about in the underlined sections?

The external flight codes are equally important, if not more, as they can be used externally to navigate the jets.

Whats does that mean exactly?...can a f35 be remote controlled externaly while manned and in flight...to different navigation points?

 

[Aussie Digger]

The F-35 in its current forms is not optionally manned. However the plan can fly itself so the pilot can concentrate on the air battle. Basically it can fly in a point and click manner like many autonomous UAVs.

The Turks are just being overly demanding as is their way. Once again they've overplayed their hand for domestic consumption.

It's hilarious. They're publicly threatening not buy the aircraft meanwhile spending hundreds of millions on building a new factory for TAI to build centre fuselages, knowing perfectly well that work as always is linked to purchases...

 

[Pathfinder-X]

Even before entering service, the F-35 brought its first target in the form of Canadian government. While I don't think the deal will get cancelled, I forsee at 2 year delay heading in CF's way.

By Mark Bourrie

OTTAWA, March 25 (Xinhua) -- For the fourth time in seven years, Canadians will be going to the polls to try to break a political deadlock that began a decade ago when the country's dominant party, the Liberals, were caught in a corruption and kickback scandal.

The last election, like the two previous campaigns, resulted in a hung parliament. Stephen Harper's Conservatives won the most seats, but not a majority in the 308-member house.

The Conservatives needed the support of at least one of the three opposition parties in the House of Commons to pass legislation.

Friday, all of the opposition parties voted to censure the government for failing to disclose the price of new F-35 fighter planes and an expanded prison system, among others.

Canada plunged into unscheduled national election campaign

The opposition Liberals, NDP and Bloc Québécois came together Friday afternoon in a historic vote to say they no longer have confidence in the Conservative government.

The motion says the House agrees with a committee report tabled earlier this week that found the government in contempt of Parliament, "which is unprecedented in Canadian parliamentary history, and consequently the House has lost confidence in the Government."

Earlier this week, the procedure and House affairs committee tabled a report that said the government is in contempt of parliament for refusing to supply enough information on the cost of the F-35 fighter jets, their justice system reforms and their projections for corporate profits and tax rates.

Election to kick off Saturday - Politics - CBC News

 

[toxicfreak]

does canada need f-35

2 thing first im sure that the f-35 is a hell of a bird but the price tag is a bit insane .....
How much f-18 super hornet could we buy ..... a truck load

also Canada is huge we need a 2 engine bird period .what happen is a single engine failed over tthe arctic ..... a dead pilot that for sure.

So personally its more about do we need that bird or not or can we afford that bird or not .

 

[Aussie Digger]

2 thing first im sure that the f-35 is a hell of a bird but the price tag is a bit insane .....
How much f-18 super hornet could we buy ..... a truck load

Actually the F-35A which Canada is looking at buying is quite reasonable when you compare it to most modern fighter aircraft. Sure you can buy a Super Hornet from Boeing for about $65m.

But you'll need some engines. And a radar. And a targetting pod. And drop tanks. And an electronic warfare system. And so on. These things don't come for free and they aren't made by Boeing...

The F-35A in it's SDD or low rate initial production costings is competitive against modern 4th Gen aircraft which are in full rate production.

There is a significant difference in these things. Especially if you consider what the F-35 will cost when IT is in full rate production... Quite simply, build more the price goes down. Build fewer, price goes up. We are seeing this already with the F-35's price dropping in each successive LRIP batch as more aircraft are ordered.

also Canada is huge we need a 2 engine bird period .what happen is a single engine failed over tthe arctic ..... a dead pilot that for sure.

So personally its more about do we need that bird or not or can we afford that bird or not .

Ah the single engine issue. Seems it wasn't so important when Canada chose the F-86 Sabre or the CF-104 Starfighter for her primary air combat aircraft, but today in an age of far more reliable engines, it suddenly is absolutely imperative that a twin engine fighter be chosen?

You might be interested to learn that the most reliable fighter aircraft operated by the USAF, a force that also operates over a very large area and a service that operates a very large number of modern twin engine jets, is a single engine jet...

The F-16. The very fighter jet that the F-35A is intended to replace...

A modern twin engine fighter is hardly more reliable than a modern twin as it is not typically the engine that causes modern jets to crash...

Need I remind a Canadian of a most spectacular recent crash? Pretty sure it had 2 engines...

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4yMVM2Vxas"]YouTube - CF-18 Crash[/nomedia]

 

[SteelTiger 177]

I just learned that the Brits are going to a blended force of F-35As and Cs.Aside from the U.S.M.C. Italy has plans for buying F-35Bs for their new carrier Cavour.Does anyone know if Spain,India or Thailand has plans to aquire the F-35B given that they to operate STOVL carriers in their fleets?

 

[Abraham Gubler]

I just learned that the Brits are going to a blended force of F-35As and Cs.Aside from the U.S.M.C. Italy has plans for buying F-35Bs for their new carrier Cavour.Does anyone know if Spain,India or Thailand has plans to aquire the F-35B given that they to operate STOVL carriers in their fleets?

The British are not planning on buying a mixed force of F-35 versions. They have always planned a single type force shared between the RN and RAF. They just changed the model type from B to C so they had an excuse to slash their fighter force over the next 10 years and only operate a single carrier as part of an international force.

Italy is a Level II partner in the F-35 and so contributed $1 billion to development (Australia is a Level III partner and only contributed $144 million). Italy plans on buying 62 F-35Bs for their Navy and 69 F-35As for their Air Force.

The Spainish Navy has clear plans for the F-35B but it has not materialised yet into a firm order plan. The Indian Navy has looked at both the F-35B and C but no firm orders. It has been about 10 years since the Thai Navy actually flew its Harrier aircraft and current plans are to acquire an attack helicopter to provide this capability.

PS You could have found out all of the above on Wikipedia. I won't answer any low level questions you have in the future so show some initiative and get off your arse and find simple things out for yourself.

 

[JWCook]

I'm just waiting for the chief of the airforce (RAAF) to come out with an "every confidence" statement in the next day or two.

Chief of Air Force Air Marshal Mark Binskin :-The air marshal said that despite negative reports, the Joint Strike Fighter project the most expensive weapons program in history was progressing well and he had no concerns about Australia's involvement.
He said the expected capability of the planes had evolved over the life of the project and the jet fighter was exactly what Australia needed.
''The JSF is what is best for us it is the future of the RAAF,'' he said.

Ok I was wrong it took a week..

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Ok I was wrong it took a week..

So? Someone who knows a lot more about the F-35 project and capability, contemporary air power and the procurement of weapons by the CoA compared to the US GAO and other paid rabble rousers says there is nothing for Australia to worry about. You would have to subscribe to a whole range of conspiracy theories to doubt his statement...

 

[JWCook]

So? Someone who knows a lot more about the F-35 project and capability, contemporary air power and the procurement of weapons by the CoA compared to the US GAO and other paid rabble rousers says there is nothing for Australia to worry about. You would have to subscribe to a whole range of conspiracy theories to doubt his statement...

Do you think being critical of the JSF in the RAAF is a career limiting move? or do think that frank and fearless advice is being advocated.

Regards

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Do you think being critical of the JSF in the RAAF is a career limiting move? or do think that frank and fearless advice is being advocated

Ahh in case you didn't notice the person making the comments was the CHIEF of the air force. How is he going to limit his career?

As to the air force's appreciation of the F-35 this is something I have been exposed to across the board and it is very technical and very much based in high level assessments. It is far from the group think conspiracy theory proposed by its detractors to explain why the air force disagrees with them.

I am yet to meet someone in the air force who has been exposed to the F-35 capability at a high level who was not supportive of it as an acquisition. The same goes for the Super Hornet another conspiracy according to the same mob of detractors - including you in this very forum.

The only person claiming career limitation via opposition to the F-35 was a third rate fighter pilot (drafted into the force from airliner flying to make up for loses caused by Atar failures in Miros) who never achieved any high level fighter postings (like FCI, Aggressor, exchange or unit command) or conversion to a systems fighter (like the Hornet) and only subsequently served after Miro retirement in mid level APSesque secretarial appointments.

From my experience believers in conspiracy theories are either highly ignorant of actual events, have political barrows to push or are crazy. Most are all of the above.

 

[Rickredline]

Abe...you missed one category...!!

In your analysis of your experience you missed out the category of defense enthusiast, like some of the people on this site, that are intelligent enthusiasts and just know that incidents like the whole of the super efficient USAF not responding timeously to the threat of multiple incoming threats in the form of 'hi-jacked' jetliners in the 911 debacle, is just so impossible that the official explanation IS the conspiracy theory. Otherwise...I find your comments informative, cutting edge and enlightening.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

In your analysis of your experience you missed out the category of defense enthusiast, like some of the people on this site, that are intelligent enthusiasts and just know that incidents like the whole of the super efficient USAF not responding timeously to the threat of multiple incoming threats in the form of 'hi-jacked' jetliners in the 911 debacle, is just so impossible that the official explanation IS the conspiracy theory. Otherwise...I find your comments informative, cutting edge and enlightening.

Well I think you're a nutcase.

 

[Mindstorm]

So? Someone who knows a lot more about the F-35 project and capability, contemporary air power and the procurement of weapons by the CoA compared to the US GAO and other paid rabble rousers says there is nothing for Australia to worry about. You would have to subscribe to a whole range of conspiracy theories to doubt his statement...

Abraham Gubler [Mod Edit: Text deleted. There is a difference between disagreement and disrespect. If you act in a troll like manner, don't be surprised if the response from another member is more acid than usual.]


"The air marshal said that despite negative reports, the Joint Strike Fighter project the most expensive weapons program in history was progressing well and he had no concerns about Australia's involvement.
He said the expected capability of the planes had evolved over the life of the project and the jet fighter was exactly what Australia needed."


not different from some hundreds on the same line (and of course equally devoid of any reference to informed figures or parametrical elements....) coming from high officers of nations involved in JSF acquisition program after the usual bad new come out in this project , more value than the observations fruit of highly detailed system's analysis ,data model processing and structure projection produced by the most important and authorative US Instituition in charge of examine the compliance of each State program with its original plans : US General Accountability Office.

As you well know ,the major problems until now experienced by JSF program are linked to two main elements : Time of research ,development and validation and the Costs of each segment of this same process.

Now attempting to take ,on those central problems, the circumstantial words up reported of Air Marshal Mark Binskin or others, similarly unsubstantiated, like those of Canada Defense Minister Peter MacKay :“This aircraft is the best that we can provide our men and women in uniform and this government is committed to giving them the very best ,....” over the higly informed declarations of someone like the Director of Acquisition Management of the US General Accountability Office , Mike Sullivan (see its curriculum , it is a real "non plus ultra" in USA in this field,) who have directed and completed dozen and dozen of very precise adn complex surveys for the US Congress, is not simply wrong but truly without any sense.
"Someone who knows a lot more about.... the procurement of weapons by the CoA compared to the US GAO and other paid rabble rousers " is a statement no worth of you Abraham...

For the curious ,that is a video with some of its most recent declarations on the real costs of Canadian F-35A (110-115 ml dollars )

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HsQlBFDBKxk"]YouTube - Canada's F-35 Jet Cost Concerns[/nomedia]

 

[Abraham Gubler]

I am curious to which airframe the inevitable future models of the F-35, the two seater, the SEAD version, the enhanced deep penetrator (F-15E replacement) etc will be based on. Logic would seem to suggest the larger, heavier, stronger F-35C.

I doubt it. The F-35C’s bigger wing is so it can fly slower and land on a carrier. While it uses the bigger wing to carry a lot more fuel it also causes a lot more drag and therefore needs to burn more fuel to fly the same distance as the F-35A. The F-35 Block III is already a SEAD/DEAD platform far more capable than any Wild Weasel or F-16CJs.

While a two seat version (think stealth Growler) and range enhancements are possible they will likely be variants of the F-35A if land based. Conformal fuel carriage is more likely than wing extension for extra range. Or even the over wing bags that Lockheed were talking about for the FB-22. If they wanted a drastic increase in range (5-6 hours on internal fuel) and internal weapons then the F-35 could go through the same changes as the FB-22. Fuselage stretch for a second seat and more tankage, delta wing for more fuel while keeping drag down and weapons panniers for more internal weapons.

The F-15 was launched with the motto of "Not a pound for air to ground"

No it wasn’t. This motto was a slogan developed for public use. The F-15A actually had a really good bombing computer and set new accuracy levels in its flight testing. Its just USAF Tacair at the time was strongly pushing the ATA issue because of VietNam and the new generation of Soviet fighters.

The ATF (which became the F-22) was originally conceived as the replacement for the F-111, F-105 and F-4E in the air to ground role. But fear of losing air superiority to swarms of MiG-29s and Su-27s saw it reshaped as an ATA platform and the strike role taken up by a competition between the RF-15 and the F-16XL with the former wining which was renamed the F-15E.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Now attempting to take ,on those central problems, the circumstantial words up reported of Air Marshal Mark Binskin or others, similarly unsubstantiated, like those of Canada Defense Minister Peter MacKay :“This aircraft is the best that we can provide our men and women in uniform and this government is committed to giving them the very best ,....” over the higly informed declarations of someone like the Director of Acquisition Management of the US General Accountability Office , Mike Sullivan (see its curriculum , it is a real "non plus ultra" in USA in this field,) who have directed and completed dozen and dozen of very precise adn complex surveys for the US Congress, is not simply wrong but truly without any sense.
"Someone who knows a lot more about.... the procurement of weapons by the CoA compared to the US GAO and other paid rabble rousers " is a statement no worth of you Abraham...

LOL. You big mistake is to assume that the chief of the air force (and canuck Mindef) are making unsubstantiated statements. Just because they did not footnote a detailed report and provide a resume at the end of these media quotes does not mean they are just making things up. Its such a ridiculous belief that I think I should file it alongside red line rick’s 911 conspiracy theory nutcaseness.

 

[Mindstorm]

Its such a ridiculous belief that I think I should file it alongside red line rick’s 911 conspiracy theory nutcaseness

[Mod Edit: Text deleted. You are trolling and consistantly trolling defence professionals across multitple threads. The Mod Team have reviewed your prior posts and we are telling you directly that you need to seriously reconsider your engagement style. There will be no further warnings.

There is a difference between disagreement and disrespect. You inherently disrespect the intelligence of members of this forum who read your posts by consistently insisting that you are correct, when there are obvious deficiencies in what you post.]

Have you seen and heard Mike Sullvan's declarations in the video i have pointed out ?

[Mod Edit: Text deleted. Your inherent and consistent lack of respect for yourself and other members will no longer be tolerated. Consider yourself officially warned.]
I invite you to urgently reassess the priority's order of your critical thinking .

 

[Rickredline]

Well I think you're a nutcase.

Dear Abe, I had not thought to pose this question previously, however I can at this moment think of no finer forum of collected expertise to explain the shortcomings of the mighty USAF on that day. This is a serious question so please hold back on the insults till we have assembled an answer??. This forum discusses the prowess of the aircraft down to the minute detail....weigh's one up against the other as adversaries...and delivers accurate finding/voices expert opinion on projected outcomes. Wether or not you think the heavies were hijacked, howcome they were not intercepted? It takes 7 mins to put a fighter in the air from Andrews and they had 40 mins lead time on the one heavy....tracked all its slow cumbersome moves....never will the USAF have such an easy target!Think of the disaster had this been a real military attack with 'hard to hit' incoming ordinance. We here in Africa have certainly not had an explanation as to what caused the mightiest airforce in the world to fail so dismally.What is the use of all this loot spent on these state of the art aircraft....when they dont even perform this relatively routine proceedure?I eagerly anticipate some technically proficient answers.

 

[Preceptor]

General warning to All: This thread topic is about the F-35 Lightning II, aka Joint Strike Fighter/JSF. Keep posts relevant to the thread topic, and not on other topics. If there is a particular topic one wishes to discuss and a thread does not exist for it, open one.

Also, it has been mentioned in the last several posts different conclusions regarding the cost, effectiveness, viability etc. al. of the F-35, with differing 'expert' points of view offered as 'proof'. Something which needs to be kept in mind regarding those same experts, is what the person would considered an 'expert' in, as well as their role/function in government. In this case, experts from various militaries and a US Congressional investigative arm have been offered. It is up to DT forum members themselves to decide who they would consider to have a more relevant position on something like the JSF.
-Preceptor

 

[jeffb]

[Mod Edit: Text deleted. You are trolling and consistantly trolling defence professionals across multitple threads. The Mod Team have reviewed your prior posts and we are telling you directly that you need to seriously reconsider your engagement style. There will be no further warnings.

There is a difference between disagreement and disrespect. You inherently disrespect the intelligence of members of this forum who read your posts by consistently insisting that you are correct, when there are obvious deficiencies in what you post.]

Have you seen and heard Mike Sullvan's declarations in the video i have pointed out ?

[Mod Edit: Text deleted. Your inherent and consistent lack of respect for yourself and other members will no longer be tolerated. Consider yourself officially warned.]
I invite you to urgently reassess the priority's order of your critical thinking ...

F-35 Joint Strike Fighter - Next Generation Fighter Capability

There is a pretty clear explanation of the F35 costs for Canada there, clearly stating a unit price of 75ish million for a production model. That is what they will be buying after all, a production model, there is little point considering the price of LRIP models now or the average unit cost of the entire program.

It also goes through some of the costs which have been thrown around which might be confusing you.

I guess you could call it "a granitic Truths hiding who know how detailed knowledges of JSF state program" if you can't be bothered to read the information publicly available.