F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)

[Colin Parkinson]

To be honest I always wanted a mixed fighter fleet, preferably with 2 aircraft at different stages in their life cycle, so as one matures the other is being replaced. Not to mention you avoid having your whole fleet grounded at the same time due to unforeseen issues.

 

[Kirkhill]

To be honest I always wanted a mixed fighter fleet, preferably with 2 aircraft at different stages in their life cycle, so as one matures the other is being replaced. Not to mention you avoid having your whole fleet grounded at the same time due to unforeseen issues.

But Colin,

We're talking about the Last Manned Fighter.  This is as mature as it gets.

 

[MilEME09]

In a recent development for the Super arrow project, and a dream as it is

Dassault Systèmes is formally considering our request for sponsorship by providing our team with their advanced software engineering systems. I will post their response the moment the moment I get it. I'm very excited about this prospect

Bombardier has also recieved a request from him for sponsership, as much of a pipedream as it is to go into compitition with the F-35 is, if Dassault gets involved with the project the dream may be closer to reality, even as a technology demonstration aircraft.

 

[Haletown]

In a recent development for the Super arrow project, and a dream as it is

Bombardier has also recieved a request from him for sponsership, as much of a pipedream as it is to go into compitition with the F-35 is, if Dassault gets involved with the project the dream may be closer to reality, even as a technology demonstration aircraft.

Dreams are wonderful. Everyone should have an impossible one.

 

[WingsofFury]

Just for the sake of clarity, the Super Arrow project is not related in any way to the Bourdeau Industries initiative to create next generation Arrows.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

So, just to be clear- there are actually two, separate, projects in play to resurrect the Arrow?

 

[WingsofFury]

The Super Arrow project is just a concept design - there are no plans to produce it in numbers greater than a display jet.

Bourdeau Industries is the entity which wants to create an entire production line for the creation of jets which are intended to be put up for sale to the Canadian Government.  Bourdeau is also the entity which made the rounds on the political talk shows late last year.

Hope that helps.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

But Colin,

We're talking about the Last Manned Fighter.  This is as mature as it gets.

Yep and tanks are obsolete, etc, etc

Other than China and maybe Russia who will be able to afford to build and operate top tier UAV fighters?

What I do see is a squadron of armed drones with simplified AI to attack any non-friendly object in a given area. their job will be to saturate the area causing the top tier fighters to expend missiles and fuel to defeat them and then be low on both when the real fighters come. A little bit similar to how the IDF used drones to soak up AA missiles in the Berka valley.

 

[Kirkhill]

Yep and tanks are obsolete, etc, etc

Other than China and maybe Russia who will be able to afford to build and operate top tier UAV fighters?

What I do see is a squadron of armed drones with simplified AI to attack any non-friendly object in a given area. their job will be to saturate the area causing the top tier fighters to expend missiles and fuel to defeat them and then be low on both when the real fighters come. A little bit similar to how the IDF used drones to soak up AA missiles in the Berka valley.

I foresee at least one "Manned Drone" buried in the pack to have on-scene situational awareness.  The Pilot is less likely to be a Driver than a Weapons Systems Operator.

 

[dapaterson]

I foresee at least one "Manned Drone" buried in the pack to have on-scene situational awareness.  The Pilot is less likely to be a Driver than a Weapons Systems Operator.

I think you mean "Air Combat Systems Officer".  >

 

[Kirkhill]

I think you mean "Air Combat Systems Officer".  >

I can never remember.  Is it pedant, pedagogue or pederast?  >

 

[CougarKing]

Pentagon considers cancelling F-35 program, leaked documents suggest

Quote:
Leaked documents from a Pentagon budget review suggest that the agency is tired of its costly F-35 fighter jets, and has thoughts about cancelling the $391.2 billion program that has already expanded into 10 foreign countries.

Pentagon officials held a briefing on Wednesday in which they mapped out ways to manage the $500 billion in automated budget cuts required over the next decade. A slideshow laid out a number of suggestions and exposed the Pentagon’s frustration with its F-35 jets, which are designed and manufactured by Lockheed Martin Corp. based out of Bethesda, Md. The agency also suggested scrapping plans for a new stealthy, long-range bomber, attendees of the briefing told Reuters.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel spoke to reporters on Wednesday and indicated that the Pentagon might have to decide between a "much smaller force" and a decade-long "holiday" from modernizing weapons systems and technology.

Pentagon briefing slides indicated that a decision to maintain a larger military "could result in the cancellation of the $392 billion Lockheed Martin Corp F-35 program and a new stealthy, long-range bomber," Reuters reports.

When officials familiar with the budget review leaked the news about the F-35s, the agency tried to downplay its alleged intentions.

(...)

link

 

[tomahawk6]

The F-35 will not be canceled as the aircraft it will replace are aging fast. The total yearly buy might be reduced, but the F-35 is needed now.Quality issues should be borne by Lockheed.

 

[Haletown]

Updates from the Brick Brain


Canada received a bilateral cost estimate from the F-35 Joint Program Office on 7 June 2013.  The bilateral sustainment cost estimate provided to Canada showed a significant year-over-year decrease in cost, in the order of 12%.  However, this 12% reduction contrasted with the Selected Acquisition Report 2012 (SAR 12) that the US Department of Defense tabled in Congress on 23 May 2013, which showed no significant change in the sustainment cost estimate. The SAR sustainment estimate did not change because it was based on the 2011 estimate prepared by the office of the Cost Analysis and Program Evaluation (CAPE), an independent US Government agency, which wasn't updated in 2012. The CAPE estimate is a more conservative position and does not take into account 2012 updates to the technical baseline and estimate inputs, whereas the F-35 program office estimate does."


http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/about-reports-pubs/next-gen-fighter-annual-update-2013.page

 

[MarkOttawa]

From the same webpage:

...
Risks and Uncertainty

Programmatic:  Consistent with previous fighter aircraft developmental programs, F-35 flight testing is revealing areas where refinements to the design are required.  Meanwhile, software continues to be a challenging technical risk for this program, and the F-35 Joint Program Office has taken steps to manage this risk.

Some of the Program’s current instability is related to the concurrency of development, test, and production.  Concurrency results from design and tooling changes and altered manufacturing processes concurrent with developmental testing.  However, while this remains a concern, the aircraft design is expected to continue to stabilize as it approaches full rate production.

As the F-35 program matures, manufacturing and supply processes are improving, and efforts are under way to try and lower annual operating and support costs.  In its latest report on the Joint Strike Fighter program, the United States Government Accountability Office noted that considerable progress has been achieved in addressing technical risks 1.  The bulk of developmental testing remains, however, and additional deficiencies are expected to be uncovered as the program continues to mature.  Royal Canadian Air Force personnel within the F-35 Joint Program Office continue to track and monitor the development closely.

Anticipated United States budget restrictions and their potential effects on F-35 prices remain an area of risk [emphasis added], as do the current forecasts for sustainment and operating costs, which would put pressure on future budgets...

Costs are coming down but much does depend on LRIP production rates over the next few years:

New F-35 Cost Target Slips Toward Goal

The Pentagon and Lockheed Martin have agreed to a handshake deal for the latest two lots of F-35 airframes, and based on cost projections the program for the first time is targeting a unit price under $100 million, excluding engines and retrofits.

But this goal in the seventh production run (next year) covers only the airframe. A breakdown of additional prices such as the F135 engine and projected retrofits reveals a far higher cost. Meanwhile, the Pentagon is preparing to consider whether the single-engine, stealthy aircraft is ready for full-rate production, as officials target a total unit cost at peak production of $80-90 million.

The deal covers 36 aircraft in low-rate, initial production (LRIP) 6 and another 35 in LRIP 7. Defense spending cuts handed down by sequestration in the fiscal 2013 budget did not ultimately affect the number of aircraft in LRIP 6, as once thought.

... the company says the unit cost of each variant will be reduced by about 4% lot over lot. Based on pricing targets for LRIP 5, per-unit goals can be projected for the new LRIP 6 and 7 jets.

The F-35A airframe, designed for conventional U.S. Air Force takeoff and landing (and the version with greatest appeal to international partners) is projected to cost $100.8 million in LRIP 6 and $96.8 million in LRIP 7. This is the first time since the program began production that the projected unit cost will fall below $100 million.

These prices do not include engines; the government contracts separately with Pratt & Whitney to purchase the F135. Pratt will not release its unit price, but a defense official says each F-35A engine costs roughly $14 million...

Adding up known engine costs, retrofit estimates and the target-unit projections, an F-35A in LRIP 6 would cost the U.S. government roughly $118.5 million and in LRIP 7, $114.5 million.

It remains to be seen whether Lockheed Martin will manage to fabricate the airframes on the cost targets laid out in LRIPs 6 and 7...

LRIP 6 includes 18 F-35As for USAF, six F-35Bs for the Marine Corps and seven F-35Cs for the Navy. Also included are three F-35As for Italy and two for Australia.

LRIP 7 includes 19 F-35As for USAF, six F-35Bs for the Marine Corps and four F-35Cs for the Navy. Also covered are another three F-35As for Italy, two F-35As for Norway and 1 F-35B for the U.K."
http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/AW_08_05_2013_p30-602514.xml&p=2 

Mark
Ottawa

 

[The Bread Guy]

HAD to share this one, just for the title alone:
"F35 fighter would be clubbed like baby seals in combat"

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Just what we need: Now Sir Paul and Brigitte Bardot will have to come out of retirement for a "save the JSF from clubbing" campaign.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Journalist Michael De Tandt suggests, at canada.com, that the "F-35 contract may be punted beyond next election."

He says, "The theory making the rounds in Ottawa is two-fold. First, members of the caucus and cabinet are acutely aware that they need good-news stories, or at least the absence of more bad news stories, as they head into the pre-election period. Second, in the context of U.S. President Barack Obama’s continuing chilliness towards the Keystone XL Pipeline, there is a new determination at senior levels of the government to put Canadian industrial regional benefits first, and cut the best deal possible, for the best plane, at the best price, with the greatest economic benefit to Canada."

I would only comment on one thing: there is no free lunch, and every single industrial regional benefit is paid for, by Canadian taxpayers, as part of the contract price. The "the greatest economic benefit to Canada" involves buying the aircraft that meets our minimum, validated, operational requirement at the lowest possible price.

 

[Edward Campbell]

I don't know the background to the Korean requirement/procurement process, but this article, which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from Yonhap News Agency is interesting:

http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/national/2013/08/18/82/0301000000AEN20130818001451315F.html

Boeing's F-15SE reportedly chosen as final candidate for S. Korea's next fighter plane

2013/08/18

SEOUL, Aug. 18 (Yonhap) - The Eurofighter Tranche 3 Typhoon by the European Aeronautic Defense and Space Company (EADS) has reportedly been eliminated from South Korea's multibillion-dollar fighter jet project, leaving Boeing's F-15 Silent Eagle as the sole final candidate, government sources said Sunday.

The Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) said that one of the two finalists -- Boeing and EADS -- in the nation's 8.3 trillion won (US$7.2 billion) fighter project has dropped out of the bidding due to problems with their documents.

EADS is known as the company to have stepped out of the race, according to sources in Seoul.

"We disqualified the concerned company and will consider the remaining one firm as a candidate in the committee for defense procurement projects," the DAPA said in a release, citing "flaws found in the bidding documents" as reasons of the elimination.

Although the DAPA required the bidders to submit prices for 15 two-seater jets and 45 single-seat jets, EADS reduced the number of double-seater aircraft to six, and offered prices based on the British pound, according to a company official.

"We submitted the proposal to meet the budget because two-seater jets are more expensive than single-seat jets," the senior EADS official said. "Out of 54 jets, the proposal offers to assemble 53 aircraft in South Korea."

  The DAPA will conduct an assessment on the jets and finally pick a winner in a committee meeting, which is to be presided over by Defense Minister Kim Kwan-jin in mid-September, according to officials.

The competition to win the South Korean project narrowed to a two-way race last week after the two aerospace firms offered their fighter jets for prices below the South Korea's state budget set at 8.3 trillion won. Another player, Lockheed Martin, submitted a price for its F-35 stealth, exceeding the state budget.

Seoul had initially picked a bidder last October with the goal of receiving the first delivery in December 2016, but it postponed the schedule to get the first batch in August 2017 to replace aging fleet of F-4s and F-5s in accordance with the delayed procedure.

Boeing has stressed the interoperability of the F-15 SE with other models purchased in the first two stages of the fighter modernization programs. Seoul has purchased 60 Boeing F-15 fighter jets since 2002.

It doesn't offer the same radar signature reduction as an F-35 and is only optimized for air-to-air combat stealth. What it does offer is greatly improved radar stealth over the F-15K and internal weapons.

pbr@yna.co.kr

(END)

I know the F-15 is a very old design. Rumour was that it was what our Air Force really wanted, way back when, when we finally selected the CF-18. But is still is a formidable interceptor and an interceptor is what our NORAD role needs, right?

 

[WingsofFury]

The "the greatest economic benefit to Canada" involves buying the aircraft that meets our minimum, validated, operational requirement at the lowest possible price.

If I may, does that mean that you believe we only need an aircraft to perform a single role, being the intercept of airborne threats?

If that's the case, I wonder how you feel about Canada taking part successfully in air to ground missions such as those performed recently in Libya?