F-35 Program - General Discussion

[swerve]

Money is no object? Afraid not. You must always watch the price. You must consider not only what you have got, but what you could have got if you'd spent that money elsewhere.

The Soviet view was MONEY IS NO OBJECT! - and look what happened. Went bust. That's not good for national defence, is it?

A strong military force needs a sound economy to pay for it. Spending without limit ruins the economy, & that reduces what's available to pay for the military, & thus its strength.

 

[Eskodas]

Do you have a source for this 50mn $2001? I tried to make a post earlier that sourced early prices and showed the actual price increase was fairly modest but it got canned by the mods(probably for sourcing with links, which is ridiculous).

 

[Blackshoe]

Well Gentlemen, when it comes to the defense of the USA and I would assume AUS and GB, money is NO OBJECT! We live in a dangerous world, if the bean counters leave us defenseless, they are men without vision. I watch my money carefully, but when it comes to home defense, I am well prepared!

The F-35 is imperative to the defense of my nation, and I assume yours as well, so lets stick together and build a bunch of em! The bad guys aren't going to be concerned with our GDP, they are like a pack of Jackals waiting for an opportunity???

I suspected that was sarcasm.

But in case anyone's reading this and hasn't noticed that...

Money is very much an issue for US defense spending now, for the last 4 years or so, and for the foreseeable 2-5 years (ceteris paribus of course).

That doesn't mean the F-35 won't be bought...but it means other things might not be bought so we buy the F-35 instead (for the Navy, you can replace "F-35" with "ORP/SSBN-X").

 

[John Fedup]

I suspected that was sarcasm.

But in case anyone's reading this and hasn't noticed that...

Money is very much an issue for US defense spending now, for the last 4 years or so, and for the foreseeable 2-5 years (ceteris paribus of course).

That doesn't mean the F-35 won't be bought...but it means other things might not be bought so we buy the F-35 instead (for the Navy, you can replace "F-35" with "ORP/SSBN-X").

The money issue is critical. If the money available for the US armed forces is restricted by economic crisis or political pressure, the unit prices for everyone involved goes up. For foreign buyers, this means higher prices and likely increased political opposition leading to reduced numbers further increasing costs, a really vicious circle.

As for the USN, they sort of have a fall back position with the advanced Superhornet in conjunction with a suitable UCLASS but the pressure to remain committed to the F-35C is immense. The ORP will happen regardless of the F-35 situation.

 

[swerve]

Do you have a source for this 50mn $2001? I tried to make a post earlier that sourced early prices and showed the actual price increase was fairly modest but it got canned by the mods(probably for sourcing with links, which is ridiculous).

Not here. I have some of the details on another computer, but can't reach 'em right now. But seek & ye shall find. IIRC F-35A was $47 mn or so flyaway, & F-35B/C between $50 & $60 mn, weighted average about $50 mn. May have been 2002 prices. Try searching on those terms & you'll find plenty of references.

 

[Eskodas]

The airframes(inc engine) have only increased by 41% the PAUC is up 68% but that includes changes in reporting and estimating, additional war spares etc

 

[RobWilliams]

https://www.f35.com/news/detail/message-from-joe-dellavedova-f-35-jpo-spokesman

Official JPO spokesman statement about the gun pod, its development and the timescales. All of which match up with what Spud said.

I wonder if the anti-F35 bandwagon people will report this as well . . . .

 

[ADMk2]

https://www.f35.com/news/detail/message-from-joe-dellavedova-f-35-jpo-spokesman

Official JPO spokesman statement about the gun pod, its development and the timescales. All of which match up with what Spud said.

I wonder if the anti-F35 bandwagon people will report this as well . . . .

Of course not. Reporting things accurately is hardly in their 'interest'...

 

[weegee]

Of course not. Reporting things accurately is hardly in their 'interest'...

Talking about reporting not being what it used to be. I found this on news.com today as per usual a very one sided view.

F-35 compared to Russian, Chinese stealth fighters

 

[ASSAIL]

Talking about reporting not being what it used to be. I found this on news.com today as per usual a very one sided view.

F-35 compared to Russian, Chinese stealth fighters

Really...its a bit like the late 19th century commentators complaining that the new steam ironclads don't sail as well as "proper warships"

 

[Volkodav]

Talking about reporting not being what it used to be. I found this on news.com today as per usual a very one sided view.

F-35 compared to Russian, Chinese stealth fighters

Just further proof that the average interested amateur is more knowledgeable on defence maters than the average so called journalist is these days.

 

[weegee]

Really...its a bit like the late 19th century commentators complaining that the new steam ironclads don't sail as well as "proper warships"

Haha perfect response. Where is the like button.

 

[RobWilliams]

Was just doing some random google earth searching of air bases and if you go over Eglin AFB you see an F-35 leaving a sheltered area on the runway and heading towards the runway.

 

[Ranger25]

Thoughts from the experts?

Was just doing some random google earth searching of air bases and if you go over Eglin AFB you see an F-35 leaving a sheltered area on the runway and heading towards the runway.

Understanding it's all hypothetical and simulated, but to what is the groups thoughts on the F35 vs future peers? Can we always count on a limited supply goof 186 F22s being there to provide cover?


SNAFU!: F-35 News. They did a simulation between the F-35 vs. SU-35?

 

[Bonza]

Understanding it's all hypothetical and simulated, but to what is the groups thoughts on the F35 vs future peers? Can we always count on a limited supply goof 186 F22s being there to provide cover?


SNAFU!: F-35 News. They did a simulation between the F-35 vs. SU-35?

I'd put money on the F-35 versus any 4th generation aircraft, including 4.5 tweeners such as high end Sukhois, advanced Strike Eagle variants (F-15SG, K), Euro-canards etc. I'm not going to get into all the details because this question has been asked and answered many many times on these forums so you should be able to find info in the relevant threads using the search function. Suffice to say that low observability (and you must include the radar with that as it has such frequency hopping capabilities that most aircraft's radar warning receivers won't see it) is just one card in the deck. The datalinking capability is world class and will be incredibly useful in actual combat, where systems fight systems, rather than a single platform fighting another single platform, gladiator-style.

There's a lot of online negativity regarding the F-35, and I used to buy into it, until I was corrected and pointed to some resources to help further my point of view. I'll see if I can find a link for you from a defence analyst think tank who responded in full to a bunch of the negative press out there, very good read. You could also try reading the following threads:

https://www.defencetalk.com/forums/air-force-aviation/air-power-101-new-members-12457/

https://www.defencetalk.com/forums/air-force-aviation/brief-history-lo-10856/

I hope they serve their purpose and give you some direction, perhaps not answering your question directly but at least giving you some context for the whole thing.

And I'd be curious to see where this simulation came from, if they're talking about the RAND corporation "simulation" that was the talk of the anti-F-35 crowd a few years back, then it's a worthless argument. The RAND simulation didn't account for air power much at all. It wasn't what it was designed to do. If it's something newer then I'd still like to see it and I'm certainly not set on the belief that the people with the full specs of an operational F-35A and Super Flanker would be in on a simulation, there would have to be data sections where assumptions were made. Why use real world specifications when you're doing a test that's getting talked about in the public domain? There's no compelling reason to do so. Hell, you might well understate specs just to keep the other guy guessing...

 

[ADMk2]

Understanding it's all hypothetical and simulated, but to what is the groups thoughts on the F35 vs future peers? Can we always count on a limited supply goof 186 F22s being there to provide cover?


SNAFU!: F-35 News. They did a simulation between the F-35 vs. SU-35?

Which 'peers' would that be exactly? The Russian PAK-FA that is presently grounded and the buy has been reduced to 12 aircraft?

The Chinese '5th generation' aircraft that benefit from such incredible materials science that they can't yet build their own engines and instead still rely on imported Russian engines, yet according to the internet have 'amazeball' capabilities?

The F-35 has greater than F-16 level aerodynamic performance (demonstrated through in excess of 11,000 hours of flight test) and maneuverability, low observability, the best sensor and avionics fit on the planet and the (in time) the best weapons systems on the planet.

Yet the myth persists that it is somehow 'not up to the task'.

The Israeli Air Force chooses it above advanced F-15 and F-16 variants. Apparently this endorsement doesn't mean anything.

The South Korean Air Force chooses it above advanced F-15, F-16, Super Hornet and Typhoon. Doesn't apparently mean anything.

The Japanese Air Force chooses it above Typhoon, advanced F-15 and Super Hornet. Doesn't mean anything and on it goes.

Hilarious. What will be even more hilarious is when it proves it operationally.

 

[Ranger25]

Which 'peers' would that be exactly? The Russian PAK-FA that is presently grounded and the buy has been reduced to 12 aircraft?

The Chinese '5th generation' aircraft that benefit from such incredible materials science that they can't yet build their own engines and instead still rely on imported Russian engines, yet according to the internet have 'amazeball' capabilities?

The F-35 has greater than F-16 level aerodynamic performance (demonstrated through in excess of 11,000 hours of flight test) and maneuverability, low observability, the best sensor and avionics fit on the planet and the (in time) the best weapons systems on the planet.

Yet the myth persists that it is somehow 'not up to the task'.

The Israeli Air Force chooses it above advanced F-15 and F-16 variants. Apparently this endorsement doesn't mean anything.

The South Korean Air Force chooses it above advanced F-15, F-16, Super Hornet and Typhoon. Doesn't apparently mean anything.

The Japanese Air Force chooses it above Typhoon, advanced F-15 and Super Hornet. Doesn't mean anything and on it goes.

Hilarious. What will be even more hilarious is when it proves it operationally.

Thank You


Both of your replies helped immensely which is why impaoe the question

 

[ADMk2]

Thank You


Both of your replies helped immensely which is why impaoe the question

Well as your mind is clearly already made up, one wonders why you even bothered 'impaoeing' the question in the first place?

Congratulations on understanding more about air power than ALL the intended users of this aircraft combined.

Clearly, all of them have been hoodwinked and if 'only' they'd listened to reporters and persons such as yourself, their imminent demise could have been averted...

 

[t68]

Well as your mind is clearly already made up, one wonders why you even bothered 'impaoeing' the question in the first place?

Congratulations on understanding more about air power than ALL the intended users of this aircraft combined.

Clearly, all of them have been hoodwinked and if 'only' they'd listened to reporters and persons such as yourself, their imminent demise could have been averted...

That's an interesting reply AD, don't know how thanking you and Bonza for showing and *leading the way to question things they have seen online or wherever means he has to move to your position. Not everyone one on these boards have the same *opportunity in their levels of education, but it does not give the right for anyone to belittle someone for making spelling error's and if they don't have the *share same view point*


just like you cannot take for granted that the Russians or the Chinese cannot move forward in the future with their own projects. Whilst their own projects might be bogged down to overcome some setbacks, all projects have there fair share of problems and criticism and the F35 has certainly shown that.*

 

[ADMk2]

That's an interesting reply AD, don't know how thanking you and Bonza for showing and *leading the way to question things they have seen online or wherever means he has to move to your position. Not everyone one on these boards have the same *opportunity in their levels of education, but it does not give the right for anyone to belittle someone for making spelling error's and if they don't have the *share same view point*


just like you cannot take for granted that the Russians or the Chinese cannot move forward in the future with their own projects. Whilst their own projects might be bogged down to overcome some setbacks, all projects have there fair share of problems and criticism and the F35 has certainly shown that.*

If you can't recognise a troll who was only here to stir things up, that is your issue, not mine.

Want to debate things, fine, by all means, that is the point of this website afterall. But he wasn't interested in debate, he was merely interested in 'showing us' how deficient the F-35 supposedly is, hence his original link to that nutcase and fraud 'Soloman Snafu' blog.

Hence why he never debated, only asked us to comment on what had already clearly informed his opinion.

If you don't care for that reality, again your issue pal...