F-35 - International Participation
- Thread starter OPSSG
- Start date
Including, can't help but feel it would be made very clear if Japan was adding on 28 aircraft onto it's initial order.
My understanding is the 28 aircraft are due to be purchased over a 5 year period, with a payment for 4 aircraft to be made in FY2014.
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/20...ending-hike-covers-pay-ministry/#.Urm8Mfv_KSo
My understanding is the 28 aircraft are due to be purchased over a 5 year period, with a payment for 4 aircraft to be made in FY2014.
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/20...ending-hike-covers-pay-ministry/#.Urm8Mfv_KSo
How my source has worded it definitely makes it seem like they intend to see the systems inducted rather than being additional purchases. Done a bit of Googlefu and haven't found any articles commenting about additional Japanese purchases making up a fleet of 70.
RAF Squadron Leader Andy Edgell flew the first sortie with the F-35C with a full external weapons load (4 GBU-12's and 2 AIM-9X)
The Aviationist » Not very stealthy: first image of F-35C carrying full load of weapons (externally)
Nothing to get excited about about variants, simply carrying out our responsibilities as a tier 1 partner with respect to test duties.
The Aviationist » Not very stealthy: first image of F-35C carrying full load of weapons (externally)
Nothing to get excited about about variants, simply carrying out our responsibilities as a tier 1 partner with respect to test duties.
Yep, funny how the flexibility to do full LO or large external (and internal) loads is rarely mentioned as a positive. The aircraft is still going to have the advantages of a stealtier airframe than non-LO focussed aircraft, all of it's SA and C4ISREW advantages.
With such a load the F-35 has an enormous payload carrying capability, with up to 6x GBU's, 4 air to air missiles, a gun and the full range of targetting capability.
Very few tactical fighters can manage such warloads, yet in the F-35 it's somehow portrayed as a negative...
Factor in smaller payload weapons like SDB (Or Brimstone II + SPEAR 3) which will have multiple weapons racked on one hardpoint, the strike payload of that aircraft is going to be very flexible in a pinch.
UK close (again) to making its first big order of F-35's
UK orders near for F-35 'stealth’ jet - Telegraph
*Don't read anything into this, it's just the old requirement which the MOD hasn't signalled Lockheed Martin officially that there's any change in these assumptions.
UK orders near for F-35 'stealth’ jet - Telegraph
The only real fact here is a comment reassuring us that the order for 14 is separate from the current fleet of 3+1 aircraft that'll be based in the UK. Don't forget though, apparently our first order was meant to be made at the end of 2013, and the date for this one is "the coming weeks".
*Don't read anything into this, it's just the old requirement which the MOD hasn't signalled Lockheed Martin officially that there's any change in these assumptions.
This appears to be only a couple of months behind the intended order, not so bad at all. Surely not a death watch for the F-35B Joint Strike Fighter. While the program has had its delays, the program appears to be on track today. And as the production numbers have increased, costs are coming down too, just as Lockheed Martin had said previously. I believe the Joint Strike Fighter is going to be the best fighter program ever. The cynics are eating crow more and more.
the initial fourteen would be good to slowly start building the fleet (as far as I know the UK is still planning on 138)
Meh, just cynical because i've heard this "an order is imminent" before, plus I didn't say it was a death watch. It's a great aircraft and i'm looking forward to us ordering them.
@harryreidl
One can be the optimist in the sense that the UK Govt has never officially indicated a difference in the 138 number and the current planning assumption within the MOD is still with 138, but IMO it's still highly doubtful we'll get them all. The RAF is working out what force balance it wants to strike with manned and unmanned aircraft in the future.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Defense-aerospace is reporting Italy may reduce its F-35 order. Yesterday's Cdn budget announced delays for both the naval ship replacement program and the fighter purchase. This means no F-35 purchase until after the next election which the Liberals will likely win. That will be the kiss of death for LM in Canada and likely for most DND capital replacement programs. The only fun part of this likely outcome will be the Liberals wallowing in their own excrement, the CH-148 cyclone and Victoria sub purchases. What goes around comes around.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
The F-35 for Canada was already becoming a hard sell based on the numerous negative press stories being reported, albeit many of them misleading or outright false. However, the recent articles regarding software delays, new cracks in the F-35B, and the plan to delay F-35C purchases by the USN by up to 2 years doesn't exactly enhance the jet's image. I have supported the Cdn govt's plan to acquire this aircraft as the other choices don't offer much improvement over what we already have other than being new. One of the main objections, price, isn't so much of a concern if the recent LRIP contracts continue to drop but the recent production cuts will slow this price decline. LM has hyped stealth and superior situation awareness and kinematic performance no longer has to be as good as previous fighters. I will let others debate this but I am starting to have doubts. The helmet and software issues will be solved at some point but at what cost and when? This jet could have been so much better if the F-35B had been a separate program. Rand may be correct in concluding that joint service programs don't provide any advantages but a F-35A/C without the design constraints of the B version would likely prove to be a better jet. The F-4 Phantom worked out pretty well. A twin engine F-35A/C with less exotic engines than the F135 might have been the way to go (the Chinese seem to think so, e.g. J-31).
As there is no other 5th gen alternative, the F-35A had better start performing as per LM claims or Canada might as well save some money and wait for gen 6.
As there is no other 5th gen alternative, the F-35A had better start performing as per LM claims or Canada might as well save some money and wait for gen 6.
the road runner
Active Member
You know the press have not said much about the A version for a while.
This can only be a good thing for Canada and Australia and another number of nations who will purchase the A version. A program as big as the JSF will always have issues as its a cutting edge platform and the rules are being written as this aircraft is develop.
This can only be a good thing for Canada and Australia and another number of nations who will purchase the A version. A program as big as the JSF will always have issues as its a cutting edge platform and the rules are being written as this aircraft is develop.
t68
Well-Known Member
You guys are in the same boats as the RAAF and the USMC in regards to legacy Hornet platforms they need replacing soonish not when 6gen is up and running you wont have any fast jets in the air by then.
China runs with two engines on 'light' fighter designs because it's indigenous engines suck. Hence why it buys most of it's engines off Russia.
If it could produce anything close to an F-135 in terms of power, weight, reliability and fuel burn, you'd see single engine designs there too.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
At present China's engine technology is inferior and will be for sometime but they are spending billions in R&D as well as outright stealing Western secrets that we haven't already given them in exchange for market access over the next so this limitation will be less of an issue when gen 6 designs appear in 10-20 years.
For Australia, Canada, and the USN using less exotic engines in a twin engine fighter has worked out pretty well in previous designs. Although Western jet engines are extremely reliable, considering the vast empty spaces the aforementioned users operate in, twins are not a bad thing and using upgraded existing engine designs would have been less expensive than developing the F135.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
It's called being between a rock and a hard place. Do we buy a jet that might prove to be a flawed product, buy a limited life jet (Superhornet) or do nothing until something else comes along. The last option isn't viable but you can bet we have a lot of politicians that would buy into this option anyway.
King Wally
Active Member
Any developmental 5th gen program that doesn't admit to "flaws" and "issues" needing to be resolved is likely just not telling you about them.
It's part of development. You test, you identify you resolve. I can't see anything fundamental about the F-35 that is unfixable over the years ahead. The customer base has the will and the budgets to see any issues resolved and I'd have faith by the start of the 2020's the F-35 is going to be a bloody lethal war fighting machine.
What more, there is no real, "better then F-35" development program due to hit sunlight in the decade to follow so if your considering paying many Billions to purchase an interim fighter fleet with a hope of leap frogging the outcome I'd be pretty confident that all you would get is heartache and a realisation that your interim fleet has become your long term fleet for the next 25 -30 years and looking at current pricing probably would have cost you 75% of the investment of a 5th gen F-35 fleet regardless.
Well the F-16 has provided and continues to provide excellent service to a stack of nations. Australia selected the F/A-18 in part because of the losses experienced with the Mirage III, but this was not the only, let alone the major factor in the selection. Anyway the F-16 has well and truly demonstrated the viability and reliability of single engine designs.
exactly
quite frankly the continuing shrillness about the JSF is getting a tad tiresome. There seems to be some selectivism in the arguments about its tenure.
Aust JSF price has never adjusted north and has never been remotely anywhere near what some of the more hysterical claim
Has anyone bothered to count how many are built already and then looked at the intent of the 8.3 partners - let alone the optional 4 on the outside?
Japan has also indicated a potential for STOL so as to be able to fight if runways are compromised etc....
There needs to be some reality checking rather than continued naysaying because the brutal reality despite all the oft made claims made about its demise fail the first credibility tests.
People predicting the demise of JSF have been made to look wanting and silly persistently - despite all their enthusiastic and frantic attempts to try and kill it by noise generation and barely controlled shrill outbursts.