F-35 Multirole Joint Strike Fighter

[fretburner]

I'm for more Raptors or Super Hornets, and then just wait for the next-gen manned fighter. So you're going to have a high, mid, low mix, of F-22s, F-35s, F-15/16/18s instead of an all-5th-gen high, low mix of F-22s and F-35s. Maybe the 6th Gen fighter will have a better chance of being on-cost and on-time.

 

[Swampfox157]

I'm for more Raptors or Super Hornets, and then just wait for the next-gen manned fighter. So you're going to have a high, mid, low mix, of F-22s, F-35s, F-15/16/18s instead of an all-5th-gen high, low mix of F-22s and F-35s. Maybe the 6th Gen fighter will have a better chance of being on-cost and on-time.

I'm personally suspecting the 6th-generation fighter will be a manned strike aircraft built by Boeing, for carriers. This immediately makes me think that it will be, if not affordable, something that COIN-obsessed politicians won't be able to axe. Sorry Mr. Gates, Predators can't fight J-20s.

But an idea: start advocating more Raptors. Make it an issue for the next election.

 

[Haavarla]

Well, God willing, he will, but that's not the issue at hand here. There have been serious concerns raised about the Air National Guard. ANG F-16s are the primary interceptors available over CONUS, and these are set to be retired by 2025. I'm extremely concerned that the ANG either will receive their JSFs late, after their Vipers have been retired, or that the JSF buy will be cut below acceptable minimums. In that case, SOMETHING needs to be bought to maintain the CONUS air defense ability. I'm either for F-16E/F airframes or 150-odd more Raptors from the next administration.

Why blame Obama for the F-35 program..

What Mr Gates did, during his time with the Democrats was the same he started out with in the Bush camp.. cutting away..chop chop.

I'm for more Raptors or Super Hornets, and then just wait for the next-gen manned fighter. So you're going to have a high, mid, low mix, of F-22s, F-35s, F-15/16/18s instead of an all-5th-gen high, low mix of F-22s and F-35s. Maybe the 6th Gen fighter will have a better chance of being on-cost and on-time

So in effect what you are saying is US have to choose between two monstrously expensive aircraft F35 and F-22.. or even worse get both of them
That doesn't sound very realistic, where are US going to find loans/funding for open up F-22 again.

It will never happen, no point in debating it..

 

[Swampfox157]

Why blame Obama for the F-35 program..

What Mr Gates did, during his time with the Democrats was the same he started out with in the Bush camp.. cutting away..chop chop.



So in effect what you are saying is US have to choose between two monstrously expensive aircraft F35 and F-22.. or even worse get both of them
That doesn't sound very realistic, where are US going to find loans/funding for open up F-22 again.

It will never happen, no point in debating it..

I never insinuated that Obama was responsible for the F-35 program, I just commented that I would very much not like him to be reelected.

As for the Raptor, if we can afford $5-10B per year for maybe six years, we can afford approximately 144 more aircraft to replace most of our Golden Eagles. Basically, we need to replace Kadena, Elmendorf, Lakenheath, and FL/MA/LA/OR ANG units. To fund it, cancel the F-35B and give the USMC the F-35C, and look for other surplus programs in case the dropped production doesn't reduce costs enough.

 

[Milne Bay]

We all continue to discuss the US military as though the US economy is in fine shape.
To an outsider, this seems at the very least, interesting.
It is about two seconds to midnight on the US bankruptcy clock, and lots of expensive programs across the country are under review. What amazes me is the fact that the military seem to think that they are immune from budget cuts - or at least any meaningful cuts.
Who brought the US economy to its current parlous state is a matter for a discussion of its own, but I am willing to bet it wasn't President Obama.

Talk of re-opening the F-22 line when you can barely afford a P-51 is ...... well ........

 

[Haavarla]

As for the Raptor, if we can afford $5-10B per year for maybe six years, we can afford approximately 144 more aircraft to replace most of our Golden Eagles. Basically, we need to replace Kadena, Elmendorf, Lakenheath, and FL/MA/LA/OR ANG units. To fund it, cancel the F-35B and give the USMC the F-35C, and look for other surplus programs in case the dropped production doesn't reduce costs enough.

Where does the F-15SE or some new Golden Eagle fit in here?
Asaik, the F-15 prod line has not been closed down yet..
Yeah i agree with the F-35B though.

Last, who says US need all those aircraft/airbases in the future, judging by the eco, US might have to settle for less.

We all continue to discuss the US military as though the US economy is in fine shape.
To an outsider, this seems at the very least, interesting.
It is about two seconds to midnight on the US bankruptcy clock, and lots of expensive programs across the country are under review. What amazes me is the fact that the military seem to think that they are immune from budget cuts - or at least any meaningful cuts.
Who brought the US economy to its current parlous state is a matter for a discussion of its own, but I am willing to bet it wasn't President Obama.

Talk of re-opening the F-22 line when you can barely afford a P-51 is ...... well ........

Hear hear.. my thoughts exactly, was afaid to say out loud in danger of beeing shot down and burned in here..:argue

 

[F-15 Eagle]

I never insinuated that Obama was responsible for the F-35 program, I just commented that I would very much not like him to be reelected.

As for the Raptor, if we can afford $5-10B per year for maybe six years, we can afford approximately 144 more aircraft to replace most of our Golden Eagles. Basically, we need to replace Kadena, Elmendorf, Lakenheath, and FL/MA/LA/OR ANG units. To fund it, cancel the F-35B and give the USMC the F-35C, and look for other surplus programs in case the dropped production doesn't reduce costs enough.

Everything you said would happen if we lived in an ideal world that was just flat out a better place than the one we are in now. Sadly though we don't live in that world.

A restart of the F-22 is very unlikely, it would be better just to focus on its replacement...the 6th generation unmanned done fighter. Bear in mind this is still +30 years away.

As for the F-35B I don't think they should cancel it however I would change my mind if its to preserve higher priority Navy programs such as aircraft carriers and the new SSBN(X). Than I would support canceling the F-35B and have the Marines buy the F-35C or even the F/A-18 SH(save even more money) instead.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

Last, who says US need all those aircraft/airbases in the future, judging by the eco, US might have to settle for less.

I reject the idea that the US can just cut its spending on the military by X% and think everything will be fine, without any risk assessment, threat analyst and military strategy.. The world we live and the threats America faces will not go away. Retreat, retrenchment and decline is not in America's best interests IMO nor is it in Defense Secretary Leon Panetta's interest ether.

As Panetta said, I too do not believe in the short sighted idea that the US has to choose between fiscal responsibility and strong national defense. It should have both.

But I also believe that US defense spending is not responsible for America's debt and should not be apart of any debt reduction deal.

You can't just pick a random number and cut defense by X% without doing a proper review of military strategy to determine what the nation really needs for its defense and how much funding that requires.

I hear numbers like $400 billion(Obama)....$700 billion(rumored proposols from debt negotiations but not confirmed) ....$1 trillion(a few independent reviews) to cut defense over 10-12 years. All of these proposals of cuts are naive, short-sighted, and irresponsible without determining how much funding the military really needs to defend America and its interests around the world and maintain the best military on the planet. Thats why arbitrary cuts to defense could be catastrophic...

 

[Locarnus]

We all continue to discuss the US military as though the US economy is in fine shape.
To an outsider, this seems at the very least, interesting.
It is about two seconds to midnight on the US bankruptcy clock, and lots of expensive programs across the country are under review. What amazes me is the fact that the military seem to think that they are immune from budget cuts - or at least any meaningful cuts.
Who brought the US economy to its current parlous state is a matter for a discussion of its own, but I am willing to bet it wasn't President Obama.

Talk of re-opening the F-22 line when you can barely afford a P-51 is ...... well ........

Interesting is a nice word.
Bankruptcy ahead, China openly "considering" to stop "lending" money and in this thread discussions about incredibly expansive F35 or even more expansive F22...

edit: question removed after reading some previous discussions/posts...

 

[Comrade69]

Lockheed adds $771 million to early F-35 production bills

...Sen John McCain, minority leader of the Senate Armed Services Committee, on 12 July revealed the amount of the F-35 cost overrun on his Twitter account, adding the revelation was "outrageous" and "disgraceful"...

I'm starting to believe that this fighter will be lucky to get 50% of what was initially planned for it. Especially if Obama loses in 2012.

like i asked earlier in this thread but got flamed and everyone told me to go read the 83 pages of this thread...

how is this plane not cancelled yet.....put the prototypes in a museum, give the NATO countries their money back and let them build their own 5th gen fighter

it feels like an experiment gone wrong, so far all i read about its production is negative stuff.

 

[ADMk2]

like i asked earlier in this thread but got flamed and everyone told me to go read the 83 pages of this thread...

how is this plane not cancelled yet.....put the prototypes in a museum, give the NATO countries their money back and let them build their own 5th gen fighter

it feels like an experiment gone wrong, so far all i read about its production is negative stuff.

Fair enough. Start reading from the correct sources then.

July 14:

First production F-35 arrives at Eglin Air Force base:

First F-35 arrives at Eglin Air Force Base | eglin, first, afb - Northwest Florida Daily News

The plan shows that by the end of September Eglin AFB will have 6 production aircraft on the flightline. 5 more to come in the next 2 and a bit months. If that doesn't show a ramped up production, I wonder what exactly you think does...

July 14 - Flight Test update:

Highlights - Flight Test program hit 1000 flights in March 2011. A further 200 flights have been flown since then.

AF-1 expanded flight envelope to Mach 1.53 at 39,000 feet.

16 F-35's are now flying in the test program and a total of 25 pilots have flown the aircraft with 21 actively flying it.

Article : Code One Magazine

July 13,

Second F-35A Joins Edwards Maturity Testing

"Lockheed Martin hopes to make headway with the “maturity” flights of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter at Edwards AFB, Calif., now that AF-6, the second of two test aircraft at Edwards, was expected to conduct its first maturity flight as soon as July 12."

http://tinyurl.com/5w3vh5c

July 13,

F-35C completes jet blast deflector testing.

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbyebvc3LF4&feature=feedu"]‪F-35C Jet Blast Deflector Testing‬‏ - YouTube[/nomedia]

June 28,

JSF Sees Action in Alaska -- Virtually


"Early results from the use of the F-35 Block III software are good after the Air Force used it during a recent Northern Edge exercise, according to USAF Maj. Gen. CD Moore, deputy director of the Joint Strike Fighter program.

The software and the JSF electro-optical and infrared distributed aperture sysem (DAS) was flown on a BAC 111 test surrogate; actual F-35 platforms were not used in the trials.

Participating in the Northern Edge exercise for the second time, the AN/APG-81 radar demonstrated robust electronic protection, electronic attack, passive, maritime and experimental modes, and data-linked air and surface tracks to improve legacy fighter situational awareness.

Northrop Grumman Completes Successful Joint Strike Fighter Sensor Testing at Northern Edge 2011 Joint Exercise


That is all I can be bothered with off the top of my head. There is SO much good news out there, but plenty of places have an agenda in relation to this aircraft that isn't always positive. That says absolutely nothing about the aircraft though.

Finally some nice purtty piccies to show that production IS actually coming along...

http://tinyurl.com/6gpjq94

http://img841.imageshack.us/img841/6450/18231049.jpg

 

[NICO]

Fair enough. Start reading from the correct sources then.

July 14:

First production F-35 arrives at Eglin Air Force base:

First F-35 arrives at Eglin Air Force Base | eglin, first, afb - Northwest Florida Daily News

The plan shows that by the end of September Eglin AFB will have 6 production aircraft on the flightline. 5 more to come in the next 2 and a bit months. If that doesn't show a ramped up production, I wonder what exactly you think does...

July 14 - Flight Test update:

Highlights - Flight Test program hit 1000 flights in March 2011. A further 200 flights have been flown since then.

AF-1 expanded flight envelope to Mach 1.53 at 39,000 feet.

16 F-35's are now flying in the test program and a total of 25 pilots have flown the aircraft with 21 actively flying it.

Article : Code One Magazine

July 13,

Second F-35A Joins Edwards Maturity Testing

"Lockheed Martin hopes to make headway with the “maturity” flights of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter at Edwards AFB, Calif., now that AF-6, the second of two test aircraft at Edwards, was expected to conduct its first maturity flight as soon as July 12."

http://tinyurl.com/5w3vh5c

July 13,

F-35C completes jet blast deflector testing.

‪F-35C Jet Blast Deflector Testing‬‏ - YouTube

June 28,

JSF Sees Action in Alaska -- Virtually


"Early results from the use of the F-35 Block III software are good after the Air Force used it during a recent Northern Edge exercise, according to USAF Maj. Gen. CD Moore, deputy director of the Joint Strike Fighter program.

The software and the JSF electro-optical and infrared distributed aperture sysem (DAS) was flown on a BAC 111 test surrogate; actual F-35 platforms were not used in the trials.

Participating in the Northern Edge exercise for the second time, the AN/APG-81 radar demonstrated robust electronic protection, electronic attack, passive, maritime and experimental modes, and data-linked air and surface tracks to improve legacy fighter situational awareness.

Northrop Grumman Completes Successful Joint Strike Fighter Sensor Testing at Northern Edge 2011 Joint Exercise


That is all I can be bothered with off the top of my head. There is SO much good news out there, but plenty of places have an agenda in relation to this aircraft that isn't always positive. That says absolutely nothing about the aircraft though.

Finally some nice purtty piccies to show that production IS actually coming along...

http://tinyurl.com/6gpjq94

http://img841.imageshack.us/img841/6450/18231049.jpg

I would say, FINALLY some good news, I have been telling everyone I know PLEASE LMT give us some good news so maybe we can defend this program.
I am afraid it might be too little, too late as we are again seeing costs overruns.

F-35 LRIP overrun value raised to $1.15B

Also I am not sure we have a firm LRIP-V so maybe we might have some more bad surprises, costs wise. In the end, what might do this program in is USA just can't throw money around to solve every problem like it used too and I just don't see the 2443 birds that are supposed to be ordered ever happening. Personally, I would have cancelled the F35B as soon as it ran into difficulty and kept all the focus on -A and -C. I think that would have saved a lot of time, money and all personnel directed solely on the other 2 variants, we might actually be somewhat closer to the original schedule.

 

[JWCook]

F-35 LRIP overrun value raised to $1.15B

McCain sent a letter asking how much it would cost to close the F-35 program after being told that the overun was $771m, the revised figure isn't going to help much, and he want to refuse to pay the overruns.. So where does that money get saved from if thats the case??.

reduction of orders?

 

[NICO]

McCain sent a letter asking how much it would cost to close the F-35 program after being told that the overun was $771m, the revised figure isn't going to help much, and he want to refuse to pay the overruns.. So where does that money get saved from if thats the case??.

reduction of orders?

I don't see any other way, with what looks like a slow down on new CVN ( I doubt they will cancel it outright) and what appears as new life into Virginia proposal for SSNBX, there is no way, no how that F35 won't be touched. All services are going to have to justify every expense and every program. Originally F22 buy was in the 700 range, one for one replacement for the F15 and we are getting 187 today, what do you think/expect is going to happen to F35 program? :smash Lots of programs are going to have a hard time in coming years, LCS, V22,etc....

There just isn't the money and I think LMT has done a poor job on this program overall (overruns and delays) which have made it extremely vulnerable as it is also one of the biggest. Without F35B, once again I say it, this program would have had a chance as it wouldn't have been so delayed and might even be already in service but instead we are getting years later NOW the first F35A to the USAF.

 

[Haavarla]

I reject the idea that the US can just cut its spending on the military by X% and think everything will be fine, without any risk assessment, threat analyst and military strategy.. The world we live and the threats America faces will not go away. Retreat, retrenchment and decline is not in America's best interests IMO nor is it in Defense Secretary Leon Panetta's interest ether.

As Panetta said, I too do not believe in the short sighted idea that the US has to choose between fiscal responsibility and strong national defense. It should have both.

But I also believe that US defense spending is not responsible for America's debt and should not be apart of any debt reduction deal.

You can't just pick a random number and cut defense by X% without doing a proper review of military strategy to determine what the nation really needs for its defense and how much funding that requires.

I hear numbers like $400 billion(Obama)....$700 billion(rumored proposols from debt negotiations but not confirmed) ....$1 trillion(a few independent reviews) to cut defense over 10-12 years. All of these proposals of cuts are naive, short-sighted, and irresponsible without determining how much funding the military really needs to defend America and its interests around the world and maintain the best military on the planet. Thats why arbitrary cuts to defense could be catastrophic...

Soo.. its not the insane spending on US military fault that the foreign dept is spiraling out of control?
And Republicans(and some democrat) do not want to rais taxes to correct the current situation.
USA may not be allowed to get more loans, if so US need to cut in everything, including its military.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/15/b...ction-on-debt.html?_r=1&partner=rss & emc=rss

UK have seen the reality and try to correct the situation with its huge military cuts(not just defence cuts).
I just don't understand how Gates and Hillary C can criticise NATO country like UK for not pulling their share.. and the huge defence cuts.

What good does it do to have a strong defence if your country faces eco-crises

Drop the F-35B i say..

 

[Locarnus]

What good does it do to have a strong defence if your country faces eco-crises

Or is at the mercy of creditor countries that have conflicting interests.
Do you actually defend a country by buying military hardware by increasing your already enormous debt to other countries? Or are you actually helping those countries to gain control over your country?

 

[fretburner]

Why blame Obama for the F-35 program..

What Mr Gates did, during his time with the Democrats was the same he started out with in the Bush camp.. cutting away..chop chop.



So in effect what you are saying is US have to choose between two monstrously expensive aircraft F35 and F-22.. or even worse get both of them
That doesn't sound very realistic, where are US going to find loans/funding for open up F-22 again.

It will never happen, no point in debating it..

We all continue to discuss the US military as though the US economy is in fine shape.
To an outsider, this seems at the very least, interesting.
It is about two seconds to midnight on the US bankruptcy clock, and lots of expensive programs across the country are under review. What amazes me is the fact that the military seem to think that they are immune from budget cuts - or at least any meaningful cuts.
Who brought the US economy to its current parlous state is a matter for a discussion of its own, but I am willing to bet it wasn't President Obama.

Talk of re-opening the F-22 line when you can barely afford a P-51 is ...... well ........

Was the F-22 production line already closed, i.e. ALL the F-22 delivered already? Because I thought they're still going to be building a few more until 2012 and that ALL the important tooling is put on storage so that restarting it would be less painful and less costly?

Where does the F-15SE or some new Golden Eagle fit in here?
Asaik, the F-15 prod line has not been closed down yet..
Yeah i agree with the F-35B though.

Last, who says US need all those aircraft/airbases in the future, judging by the eco, US might have to settle for less.

If it really is TOO costly to restart the F-22, then yes, the F-15SE would ideal for the USAF and F-18 International for the USN. You will probably NOT need F-22s and F-35s in MOST missions anyway.

Problem is, the F-15SE or F-18 International might end up being just as costly as the F-35, which would be a double whammy.

Seems like politicians will have to either believe LM or Boeing on their sales pitch. The one thing that's favoring Boeing to be able to deliver on cost is their Super Hornet. LM on the other hand has gotten a bad rap on cost (NOT capability) with the F-22 and F-35.

Tough decision.

 

[ADMk2]

Seeing as though there is clearly"only" bad news for the F-35, brace yourselves for news gents...

8th production F-35 flown (AF-13).

Lockheed Martin test pilot Dan Canin flew the eighth production model of the F-35 Lightning II, F-35A AF-13, on its inaugural flight on 14 July 2011 from NAS Fort Worth JRB.

http://www.codeonemagazine.com/images/news/2011_AF13_FF_01_1269967624_7491.jpg

 

[fretburner]

What's that "protrusion" under the -35C and -35Bs chin?

http://www.codeonemagazine.com/images/media/CF1_At_Pax_01_1267828237_1924.jpg

http://www.codeonemagazine.com/images/media/20091229_BF2_LK_1267828237_9003.jpg

It's NOT present in the -35A.

 

[Todjaeger]

Was the F-22 production line already closed, i.e. ALL the F-22 delivered already? Because I thought they're still going to be building a few more until 2012 and that ALL the important tooling is put on storage so that restarting it would be less painful and less costly?

AND

If it really is TOO costly to restart the F-22, then yes, the F-15SE would ideal for the USAF and F-18 International for the USN. You will probably NOT need F-22s and F-35s in MOST missions anyway.

Problem is, the F-15SE or F-18 International might end up being just as costly as the F-35, which would be a double whammy.

Seems like politicians will have to either believe LM or Boeing on their sales pitch. The one thing that's favoring Boeing to be able to deliver on cost is their Super Hornet. LM on the other hand has gotten a bad rap on cost (NOT capability) with the F-22 and F-35.

Tough decision.

If memory serves, a few F-22's are still being produced, but the long-lead items contracts have lapsed. What that means is that before production could be ramped up, contracts would need to be placed and the long-lead items would need to resume production and become available. While the F-22 tooling is supposed to be retained, I would imagine that some of the suppliers which supply the subcomponents have since switched their production lines over to other parts, etc since their role in F-22 production is essentially finished. I would also imagine that many of the Lock Mart F-22 workers have since gone onto other Lock Mart product lines, or perhaps other companies or industries altogether.

With the tooling having been retained, it would potentially make it less expensive to restart F-22 production, but that does not mean that restarting production would be 'cheap'.

Plus there is the minor detail that the F-22 could really use some updates and upgrades prior to re-entering production. Some of the F-35 software and avionics work really ought to be implemented with the F-22 to ease updates and upgrades. Not to mention allowing the F-22 perform air-to-ground missions (be it strike, CAS, recce, etc...)

As for the F-35 being (too) expensive, yes, it is expensive. Name a modern fighter aircraft which is not, yet is also capable, has good mission availability, and does not have extremely high operating costs compared to other fighters?

Once full rate production starts, the F-35 pricing is AFAIK still expected to be comparable to current fighters like the F-15, F-16 and F/A-18. While the US Gov't could opt to cancel the F-35 and just order more of the latest versions of aircraft already in inventory, all that will do is delay when the US needs to replace the current aircraft. As foreign aircraft designs are starting to come out, as well as the increased prevalance of AEW usage by foreign air arms, datalinking, advanced SAM's etc, foreign systems are becoming more complex. This means that use of current/legacy platforms will become less viable for the USAF and USN as time progresses.

That in turn means that some replacement will still need to be designed, tested and then introduced into service. Since LRIP F-35's are already in the air and undergoing testing, IMO it would be senseless to 'kill' the programme now, particularly since the projections over the long-term suggest that the F-35 option is less expensive than replacing the existing fighter inventory with current variants and then running MLU/SLEP to keep them relevant.

-Cheers