F-35 Multirole Joint Strike Fighter

[JoeMcFriday]

mmmmm interesting response, obviously hit a nerve there Joe ?
If I have something to say directly to you I would either address or quote you in my response, You seem to have a constant need to point out your pro stance on this, not sure why, we have read your post's.
You also seem to be taking some rather big assumptions as to the intent of my post and respond with material that was not in my original post
If you have a bit of a play with the search function you will find plenty of discussion some time ago about this, yes the link was a new report, but on old information, which are the anti F35 mob "Trolling", discussion on these and other issues with the JSF are also located in the RAAF thread, the JC1 Sea Trial, and also the now closed Hypothetical Carrier for the RAN thread IIRC

Aussienscale,

I've re-read your post and feel my response is justified.

I can't see where I've answered something you did not introduce.

Yes, you did hit a nerve and I don't usually turn the other cheek when attacked or insulted. Trolls are lowlifes ergo it is an insult to accuse one of trolling.

I do not like being described as a troll and the "if you guys" at the beginning of your post [and other linked phrases within it] certainly appears to include me and doesn't give the impression of a 'generalist' post.

I have found it necessary to often state my support of the F35 to avoid the rabid section of the 'pro' lobby accusing me of the opposite and wasting space in responses.

I've 'had a play' with the search function, didn't find where 'LM' had addressed the issue in such detail, will try again.

I have no desire for bad relations, even online and appreciate the quality of your other contributions, so perhaps we can leave this behind us?

Mac

Jack412,

Thanks Jack, as you can see I didn't take it that way but will be happy to drop it now.

Cheers,
Mac

 

[raptor2019]

Marines in SC getting ready for new F-35 jets

Marines in SC getting ready for new F-35 jets

The Marine Corps broke ground Thursday on a $70 million first installment toward a new era of F-35 jets at the air station in Beaufort.

Maj. Gen. Jon Davis, the commanding general for the 2nd Marine Air Wing, and Col. Brian Murtha, the Beaufort base's commanding officer, helped local officials turn over the first shovels of dirt for the ceremony.

"We have to be prepared for the jets and for everyone to come by Jan. 1, 2014," said Marine Corps spokeswoman 1st Lt. Sharon Hyland. "We have a lot to do before they arrive and this is the first phase of that work."

The Navy announced late last year that it intended to place three new active duty F-35 squadrons and two pilot training squadrons at the air station for a total of 88 aircraft.

 

[raptor2019]

The stealthy aircraft are designed to be the next generation of fighters for the Marines, Navy and Air Force and will replace the F-18 Hornets flown out of Beaufort.

The Marine version will be able to take off and land vertically and the new construction at the base will include a vertical lift off pad for pilot training.

The work begun on Thursday includes a $37 million, 60,900-square-foot hangar.

It is designed for parking seven of the jets inside and 18 on a parking ramp under sunshades. The multi-story hangar includes a maintenance bay, shop and administrative offices, pilot briefing rooms and data network offices, Hyland said.

 

[raptor2019]

The $33 million pilot training and simulation center will support 78 pilots a year and includes classrooms, briefing rooms, flight simulators, equipment rooms and administrative offices. It is 101,000 square feet.

Construction will take about two years.

In all, there will be about $350 million in construction at the base as it prepares to house the new stealth fighters.

Hyland said security will have to be tighter for the stealth aircraft, which are designed to evade opponents' radars and electronic attacking devices.

 

[gf0012-aust]

raptor2019

can you please avoid back to back posts

it's not a good look esp when they're minutes apart

 

[jack412]

I've 'had a play' with the search function, didn't find where 'LM' had addressed the issue in such detail, will try again.

Jack412,
Thanks Jack, as you can see I didn't take it that way but will be happy to drop it now.

Cheers,
Mac

Dont get me wrong, I didnt mean that the link didnt have more.
There is more detail, we didnt know that the fix will be next year's LRIP 5 until now

I saw this fa-18 pilot interview on SLD and thought it added to the f-35 capability story
"For Captain Wittel, an experienced F-18 pilot, the capabilities of several assets deployed off of the carrier are embodied in a single plane, the F-35. You can go from a fleet to a cockpit to shape electronic warfare and related mission sets".

http://www.sldinfo.com/shaping-an-economy-of-force-a-usmc-f-18-pilot-comments-on-the-f-35b/

 

[Twinblade]

JSF cost has several estimates, none solid

The official also said that while they have estimates, there is no way to know the real cost of the aircraft until the program starts to build the jets.

One thing is clear: The price tag for a production model of the Air Force version, the F-35A, is not necessarily $65 million in 2010 dollars, as Lockheed Martin officials have repeatedly asserted.

“The average estimated unit recurring flyaway cost for the F-35A is about $65 million in 2011 dollars,” said Lockheed spokes-woman Laurie Quincy, reiterating the company’s claim in an email Aug. 31.

“This is in line with current fourth-generation fighter costs which do not include targeting pods, jammers, decoy systems, [electronic warfare] equipment, fuel tanks, infrared search and track, night vision devices, helmet and other systems,” she wrote.

However, according to a report by the Teal Group of Fairfax, Va., as of 2011, the Pentagon’s cost assessment office was estimating a unit cost of $92 million in 2002 dollars, which would amount to about $111 million in 2011 dollars.

An official at the JSF program office said Lockheed’s $65 million price tag claim is “disingenuous” because the figure does not include the Pratt & Whitney F135 engine that powers the jet.

I think there are more cost estimates for JSF program than total number of fighters available in the market today.

 

[gf0012-aust]

JSF cost has several estimates, none solid



I think there are more cost estimates for JSF program than total number of fighters available in the market today.

They're solid for Australia

Against the build frame currently envisaged they're $67m per frame - and thats been confirmed as recently within the last 30 days by the Chief of Air Force

Australia built in an exchange rate variance and allowed contingency for platform creep.

It was $67m 5 years ago, it's $67m today - and thats despite the exchange rate variances where we've allowed for slippage.

Those who seek to bring in sunk costs and then distribute those costs across the frames are being more than a little mischievous - if not disingenuous. Its doesn't stop them trotting out the doom and gloom

me? well I'll trust the numbers that are crunched up by the airforce which are line item analysed by Dept of Finance and Prime Minister and Cabinet (independant of Defence) and thus challenged and validated by those tasked with independant review,

I don't care what the US pays as their frame cost is calculated differently and is ultimately irrelevant unless they dramatically (and I mean dramatically) change the end volume state

 

[StobieWan]

Is that 67 mill for an airframe, then GFE like engines plus radar or is that a sticker price for a flyable bird?

Has the UK got anything like a similarly firm number to play with at this time? There's a lot of rubbish being chucked around about our buy so I'm just curious if there's anything like a solid number floating out there for partners.

Ian

 

[gf0012-aust]

Is that 67 mill for an airframe, then GFE like engines plus radar or is that a sticker price for a flyable bird?

Has the UK got anything like a similarly firm number to play with at this time? There's a lot of rubbish being chucked around about our buy so I'm just curious if there's anything like a solid number floating out there for partners.

Ian

$67m is the RAAF flyaway, unsure as to the others as it depends on when and what they buy in a given tranche period

I would think that all of the interim foundation buyers have their fixed prices in place - its how and why we all committed.

 

[StobieWan]

To the point and lucid as ever - thanks for the reply - I'm still fending off folk telling me we can buy SH's for half the price


Ian

 

[fretburner]

Senate Appropriators: Kill JLTV, Cut JSF $1.2B

In its markup of the 2012 defense spending bill, the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on defense is recommending terminating the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) and cutting $1.2 billion from the Air Force's F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program...

As for the $1.2 billion cut to the JSF program, Inouye cited "excessive concurrency in development and production," and recommended maintaining 2011 production levels for two more years "in order to limit out-year cost growth."

"The test program is only 10 percent complete, yet the request continues to ramp up production of aircraft in fiscal years 2012 and 2013," Inouye said. "For each aircraft we build this early in the test program, we will have to pay many millions in the future to fix the problems that are identified in testing."

I wonder if this ever get through. It doesn't say cut the number of orders though, but cut spending in 2012 only.

 

[jack412]

It's just political spin showing how diligent they are, as you said no numbers are cut, other than previously announced
Also not counted are 6 export f-35 for 2013 lrip6, 2 for australia and 4 for italy

 

[Abraham Gubler]

The budget cut is because they don't think the F-35 program will spend the money because they are behind in schedule. If so all it means is instead of the money sitting in Treasury waiting for F-35 to lodge receipts to spend the cash the US won't have to appropriate it this year. Its hardly significant to the project except F-35 PO won’t have some wiggle room.

 

[SpudmanWP]

There is no GFE - Electronics for the F-35, it's all CFE. This is different than say the F-18. See the 2012 budget docs attached.

JSF FY2012
View attachment 4809

F-18 FY2012
View attachment 4810

 

[jack412]

I'm only guessing but perhaps its because it is an international joint program, there is no "government furnished equipment"

 

[fretburner]

It's just political spin showing how diligent they are, as you said no numbers are cut, other than previously announced
Also not counted are 6 export f-35 for 2013 lrip6, 2 for australia and 4 for italy

Now the US Senate wants to cut the number of AC down to 32 up to LRIP 7: F-35 production freeze ... or new ice age?

The request sent to Congress in February asked for 32 aircraft in LRIP-6. In 2008, LRIP-6 was supposed to be an order for 118 F-35s, including 82 aircraft for the US services and 36 aircraft for the international partners. Foreign orders have not solidified yet, but the US order for 82 aircraft is out of the question. Anticipating a Senate move to free F-35 production, the DoD asked the Congress for only 32 F-35s in FY2012, a 50-aircraft cut from the 2008 production profile.

The Senate's appropriations subcommittee now wants to extend the 32-aircraft production plateau into LRIP-7. According to Davis' chart in 2008, the DoD planned to buy 90 F-35s in FY2013, with the partners chipping in for another 42 aircraft.

Seems like the likelyhood of Australia and Italy getting their F-35s for LRIP-6 are a little slimmer now. The Senate is pushing back hard.

 

[aussienscale]

Now the US Senate wants to cut the number of AC down to 32 up to LRIP 7: F-35 production freeze ... or new ice age?

The request sent to Congress in February asked for 32 aircraft in LRIP-6. In 2008, LRIP-6 was supposed to be an order for 118 F-35s, including 82 aircraft for the US services and 36 aircraft for the international partners. Foreign orders have not solidified yet, but the US order for 82 aircraft is out of the question. Anticipating a Senate move to free F-35 production, the DoD asked the Congress for only 32 F-35s in FY2012, a 50-aircraft cut from the 2008 production profile.

The Senate's appropriations subcommittee now wants to extend the 32-aircraft production plateau into LRIP-7. According to Davis' chart in 2008, the DoD planned to buy 90 F-35s in FY2013, with the partners chipping in for another 42 aircraft.

Seems like the likelyhood of Australia and Italy getting their F-35s for LRIP-6 are a little slimmer now. The Senate is pushing back hard.

Not sure I understand your point ? What does the US Senate Appropriations committee have to do with Australia Defence Aquisitions ?

 

[jack412]

yes, LRIP 5 and 6 has already been limited to around 32 for usa, it is old history that is being sprooked to try and make a story
as aussienscale said, it doesnt affect export and infact long lead parts are already being made for the 6 export

LRIP 7 being around 30 units is new and would be a change if that goes ahead

 

[JWCook]

yes, LRIP 5 and 6 has already been limited to around 32 for usa, it is old history that is being sprooked to try and make a story
as aussienscale said, it doesnt affect export and infact long lead parts are already being made for the 6 export

LRIP 7 being around 30 units is new and would be a change if that goes ahead

Doesn't affect exports!!, the reason why they are limiting the production numbers is because the jet isn't mature enough, so you are buying mistake jets...

I think this qualifies as affecting exports, do we get a mistake jet discount?

Cheers

Admin. And now you're trolling. Here's your first warning.