F-35 Multirole Joint Strike Fighter

[fretburner]

I'm not in anyway advocating the F-35 program be cancelled. It simply does NOT make sense to do so.

What I was suggesting is not buy it in the same numbers as originally planned and focus on the 6th Gen fighter. High-mid-low, not an all 5th-gen High-low mix of F-22s and F-35s.

 

[localhost127]

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.

EODAS
and it is present on f-35a (blends in with the background; you may have missed it)

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

 

[localhost127]

I'm not in anyway advocating the F-35 program be cancelled. It simply does NOT make sense to do so.

What I was suggesting is not buy it in the same numbers as originally planned and focus on the 6th Gen fighter. High-mid-low, not an all 5th-gen High-low mix of F-22s and F-35s.

with f22 and now f35 being so far overrun regarding costs, one can only imagine the cost figures for a 6th-gen platform. the track record doesn't inspire confidence...

wouldn't the US need operational experience with battlespace mgmt capabilities and new warfare tactics with the f35 (and integration with other assets) before embarking on 6th gen? are the details of the requirements for 6th gen known, when the tweaking for 5th-gen warfare hasn't even been matured yet? would warfare evolve further once mass quantities of f35 are operational, and thus some real, concrete operational data is known?

wouldn't *not* buying in the numbers originally planned simply drive up per-unit costs, which may make them no longer financially affordable to other countries? which would have a domino effect?

wouldn't the logical/maint costs continue to decrease as more f35s are made operational - and as f35s replace legacy platforms?

and i dont see much in the room for free financial resources to put forward to 6th gen with so much cash in today's dollars being needed to complete f35 dev.

 

[Todjaeger]

I'm not in anyway advocating the F-35 program be cancelled. It simply does NOT make sense to do so.

What I was suggesting is not buy it in the same numbers as originally planned and focus on the 6th Gen fighter. High-mid-low, not an all 5th-gen High-low mix of F-22s and F-35s.

Pretty much as localhost said, reducing the numbers of F-35's ordered would just drive up the individual unit cost, making the per aircraft price higher and causing other nations to reduce, cancel or not place their orders. This would in turn drive the F-35 price higher still since foreign orders are still significant in number.

The SDD is close to being completed, which means most of the developmental costs have been spent. Those costs need to be amortorized across the F-35 programme, which means significant reductions in numbers would only save the manufacturing costs for any aircraft not ordered. In terms of the total programme cost, that is not as significant an amount overall.

Also, attempting to develop a 6th gen aircraft prior to having the F-35 enter service is IMO premature. As the RAAF has found with the SHornets entering service, there is a significant jump in capability, attempt to 'leapfrog' developments can lead to information overload and reduced efficieny and effectiveness, since the capabilities cannot be managed or utilized effectively.

One of the other things which is key, is that in order for the 6th gen aircraft to be designed, a determination has to be made on what a 6th gen aircraft is... In basic terms, a 5th gen is 5th gen because of work done to provide it with the best possible control of situational awareness. Using Sig management, datalinks, advanced sensors and sensor fusion, a 5th gen fighter attempts to give the pilot the best possible 'picture' of the battlespace in a usable format, while at the same time attempting to reveal as little information about the fighter to potential hostiles present.

This can allow the pilot of a 5th gen to control the terms of an engagement, choosing when, where, how and who to engage/act on and forcing others to react. Until more is known about what capabilities would be required to allow a 6th gen aircraft such control of engagements, it is not really possible to start too much design work on them.

-Cheers

 

[jack412]

from what i have gathered,
reducing total orders will increase the cost by adding the development cost to fewer platforms, this applies to usa
the partners which have their own development costs (and FMS with a fee of less than 4%) dont pay the USA development costs
what will affect costs is the number built in that years buy order, if they remain the same and its just a shorter total run, its ok for everyone except the usa

 

[fretburner]

I do understand that cutting the numbers of F-35s purchased would increase the unit costs... the F-22 was that expensive because it was bought at a fewer numbers than planned right? Why should the F-35 be an exemption?

Increased F-35 unit costs would still be significant savings for total cost of the program. Savings which can be spent partly in support of a 6th Gen platform - ensuring the USA is ahead of everyone else (I'm talking about PAK-FA, J-20) - and for buying most likely cheaper, improved 4.5 Gen platforms which would do a great job in most missions, e.g. Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya.

I'm also sure that there's a black project somewhere, i.e. Skunkworks, Phantomworks, looking at if not developing already what will be a 6th Gen Fighter. And who knows, maybe you can also divert funds to the Next-Gen Bomber. After all, the NGB ( probably along with stealthy cruise missiles and probably weaponized decoys) is envisioned to be the key to gaining "access" to "denied areas" right?

I'd dare to say cut your losses and buy improved 4.5 gen AC which will still do the job. It does not have to be all 5th Gen -- not in the ditch that the US economy is now and with Obummer at the helm.


By the way, this EO DAS thingy is AWESOME! [nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1NrFZddihQ&feature=player_embedded"]‪AN/AAQ-37 EO DAS for the F-35‬‏ - YouTube[/nomedia]



Will it be as good as advertised?
Can it be transplanted into 4.5 Gen platforms?

 

[JWCook]

Sen McCains letter.

View attachment 4713


None of the points raised are easy to answer for the Sec of Defence

 

[ADMk2]

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.

That is the housing for the EOTS - Electro-Optical targetting system (air to ground sensor based on developed Sniper XR pod and integral IRST system) on early SDD airframes it is solid as the EOTS system hardware is not yet installed.

On the more recent examples it has been replaced with the production standard sapphire 'glass' window and the production EOTS hardware.

It is a common sensor and most definitely is on the -A models.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_BPOCxDs7Ypg/TBT-VL2BWjI/AAAAAAAAAaQ/AjIHYR1tXSY/s800/f-35_e10.jpg

 

[wormhole]

Spending on defense is like paying for insurance. You pay for the amount of coverage that gives you the reassurance you seek to cover unforeseen contingencies, which, in a national security scenario, can have dire consequences.

On the F-22, we can appreciate its dominance in the A2A theater. But it pales by comparison to the F-35 in attacking surface targets. Its sensor suite is not as comprehensive and capable. Its internal weapons bay limits the size and variety of weapons it can employ. It also costs approximately twice as much as a JSF once they start building enough of the latter to bring down unit costs. It will be significantly more expensive to operate and maintain over its lifetime.

The major challenge of the JSF has shifted from technological issues to one of achieving efficient production rates. The results this year from the latest program reset to-date are impressive and the testflight program is literally soaring to new heights - finally. However, events seem be conspiring to push back production orders from both the US and partners.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

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.

I agree with the F-35, they should have never started with the F-35B.

I doubt they will delay the CVN, you just end up paying more money down the round anyway let alone cancel it outright. CVNs have big support in Congress from both parties.

I also doubt the Pentagon will support a smaller Virginia class SSBN with 12 less capable Trident C-4 sized missiles when an Ohio size SSBN with 16 D-5 missiles is far more survivable for the nuclear triad. Also Russia is planing on building 8 Borie class subs with missiles the same range as the Trident II it makes no sense to rely on less capable subs when other nations build far better. Plus Virginia class size sub will require a hump-back design making it less than ideal on the performance front.

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?

Defense spending is not the reason for America's debt crisis, its the run away entitlement spending combined with low taxes that did it.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

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..

No its not the military spending that caused America's debt crisis. Its only 19% of the federal budget I think.

I say take the Rublican stance when it comes to cutting socal spending while leaving military spending alone BUT also I think they should also raise taxes including on the rich and raise revenues like what the Democrat's want.

Yes the UK has made huge military cuts and look where that left them. They no longer have a carrier strike capability, they have only a few strike fighter squadrons, cut 40% of their tanks and 35% on their heavy artillery and mazzive troops cuts to the point where they can no longer deploy more than 30,000 troops and thats only for a short time where in 2003 they can deploy at least 46,000 over a long period of time.

For the UK that will prove catastrophic in the future and it makes me truly sad to see a world military power such as the UK to go down that path. And to just to think this all could have been avoided.....

 

[NICO]

I agree with the F-35, they should have never started with the F-35B.

I doubt they will delay the CVN, you just end up paying more money down the round anyway let alone cancel it outright. CVNs have big support in Congress from both parties.

I also doubt the Pentagon will support a smaller Virginia class SSBN with 12 less capable Trident C-4 sized missiles when an Ohio size SSBN with 16 D-5 missiles is far more survivable for the nuclear triad. Also Russia is planing on building 8 Borie class subs with missiles the same range as the Trident II it makes no sense to rely on less capable subs when other nations build far better. Plus Virginia class size sub will require a hump-back design making it less than ideal on the performance front.



Defense spending is not the reason for America's debt crisis, its the run away entitlement spending combined with low taxes that did it.

Yeah, I agree on the carrier,more than likely we will go from 4 to 5 and now 6 year build but doubt cancellation. I disagree for SSBNX, it does look like Virginia based SSBN is back in play again from what is being published , don't think it has anything to do with performance but price, you probably can get it done for around 4 billion a sub where as SSBNX will be between 8 to 10 billion.

Plenty of other programs are going to be cut though.

We can talk all day about why and who is responsible for USA troubles but personally, tired of it and it isn't the place for it anyways.:sleepy3

To get back on JSF thread, I think isn't about if or maybe but when we will see cuts in JSF orders from DOD. I have no doubt they are coming, again 2443 JSFs just ain't happening. If you go by what happened to F22 buy, we might be looking at maybe 600 to 800 JSFs for DOD. If you think about what is happening around the world politically and economically, opinions in USA, you are probably going to see troops withdrawals not just from Afghanistan or Iraq but Europe and SK and closure of many foreign bases, nukes are going to be removed from Europe,etc...then 2443 JSF just seem like a extravagant expense this country not only can't afford but one really needs to wonder or at least have debate if all that capability is needed.

 

[ADMk2]

Remember also guys, the GoT is currently running at about $170b a year at present. The greater proportion of those costs will be ended in 2-3 years, now that's not all going to go to JSF, but pressure on the US defence budget WILL reduce long before the bulk buys are due.

I don't think the US will see 2400+ JSF's in-service either, but 800 strike fighters won't be acceptable to the US under any circumstances. I believe we'll see huge draw-downs in current fighters to see immediate budgetary effects rather than risk the future capability.

My guess is USAF will end up with 1400-1500 JSF's and USN/USMC will get 300-400. A 700-800 fighter shorter run than planned but far from some of the '800' fighter predictions people are making.

F-22 was able to be cut significantly because the aircraft they were supposed to be replacing still had legs in them. The same will not be the case with F-35. F-16C/D and F/A-18C/D are shagged NOW, but F-35 won't be replacing them in numbers yet (as mentioned earlier) for another 5-6 years when a lot of today's budget pressure should have decreased.

 

[localhost127]

The major challenge of the JSF has shifted from technological issues to one of achieving efficient production rates. The results this year from the latest program reset to-date are impressive and the testflight program is literally soaring to new heights - finally. However, events seem be conspiring to push back production orders from both the US and partners.

i am a complete hobbyist. having said that,
now, question is very limited and broad. but is there anyone here who could provide insight as to the primary cause for time-delay issues within an aircraft mfg line?
where does the most difficulty lie? is it with baking the original structure? the fuselage? is it with the actual transport of multiple components made around the world - and the logistics of making sure everything is delivered to 'final assembly' on time, at the same time? is the delay with installing the avionics or electronics? what about availability of said components?... is it with testing the platform before it can be delivered and marked as 'operational'?? (a la f22 OBOGS issues) ... does anyone have any experience with any part of the current mfg line (or supply chain) and could provide some commentary as to where they feel a severe bottleneck either lies or could quickly form?

is not a global supply chain the easiest target to disrupt? if regional instabilities were to manifest themselves, what options does the US have to continue production of said platforms? how quickly could they migrate production of small yet critical components back on-shore? if another adversary were to take a back door and secretly but forcefully cause quality issues regarding a certain component of which whose incorrect mfg specs would not be noticed until final assembly (many months later after said component was build) ... what is the US' course of action?

does anyone have any public domain data on whether f35 production was in any way shape form disrupted during the march tsunami?

 

[gf0012-aust]

Lets stay on topic and away from the politics thanks....


lets also stick with the facts

when people get excited and talk about reduced orders etc they should probably do some basic research and discover that no orders have been reduced - even those who have talked about deferring have not cut nuimbers.

when people also get excited about the program getting cut they also seem to ignore that right up to his exit Gates said that it is a critical program - and out of all the programs that have been cut in the last 2 years, or discussed with US allies before announcement, NONE have referred to the JSF. Apart from excited congressmen and women with Boeing and BAE shops in their respective States, there's a shortage of fact in a lot of the regular hysteria trotted out as proof of life....

 

[F-15 Eagle]

I don't think the US will see 2400+ JSF's in-service either, but 800 strike fighters won't be acceptable to the US under any circumstances. I believe we'll see huge draw-downs in current fighters to see immediate budgetary effects rather than risk the future capability.

My guess is USAF will end up with 1400-1500 JSF's and USN/USMC will get 300-400. A 700-800 fighter shorter run than planned but far from some of the '800' fighter predictions people are making.
.

1400-1500 F-35s is still a good buy same goes for the USN/USMC buy. Add the F-22s, next generation bomber and new unmanned drones you then have an air force better than what we have today even.

Yeah there is less fighters but they are better than the 4th generation fighters, I think they said 1 F-35 can do the job of 6 F-15s or F-16s or something like that.

 

[ADMk2]

BF-5 ferried to NAS Patuxent River


Photo by Carl Richards
F-35B BF-5 was ferried to NAS Patuxent River, Maryland, on 16 July 2011. The aircraft joins seven other F-35B/C models now being operated at the US Navy’s flight test center. BF-5 is the final test flight aircraft delivered for the F-35 program.

News : Code One Magazine

 

[Volkodav]

When is Australias first F-35A due?

I am currious if it will be completed in RAAF markings and whether any of the first batch would be available to visit Australia any time soon.

 

[jack412]

since this was plan anounced there has been further slips in producton but it's said we will get 14 units from 2014 for test and training, initially done in usa
Australian Government, Department of Defence - Senator the Hon John Faulkner Minister for Defence

 

[ADMk2]

When is Australias first F-35A due?

I am currious if it will be completed in RAAF markings and whether any of the first batch would be available to visit Australia any time soon.

IIRC, Australia's initial F-35's will be comng from LRIP Phase 6 and 7. It can be judged from that when they will be ready but as I understand it, the first 2 will come from LRIP 6 and the remaining 12 from LRIP 7.

These will be based in the US initially. There is a security issue with F-35's, that will effect early customers. They've got to reach a certain Block phase before they will be cleared to leave the US, which is part of the reason why all the partner Countries will be doing their initial training activities in the US.

The aircraft has to reach Block 2B or something along those lines before it will be cleared to fly outside Continental USA. It won't be any great issue as many Countries already conduct their initial training in the USA these days on their new, advanced fighters, as seen wth Australia on the Super Hornets, Singapore on their F-15's, Morocco and UAE on their F-16's and so on.