F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)

[MarkOttawa]

Lots more at AvWeek:

New Questions Facing the F-35: A Block Buy And A Block 4
Pentagon finally backs idea of an international ‘block buy’ for F-35s
…
Lockheed Martin produced 36 of the stealthy, single-engine jets in 2014, underscoring the steep increase in rate hoped for by program overseers. The company was pitching a block buy nearly a decade ago, long before the aircraft was mature enough for widespread commitments. Kendall’s willingness to push the concept now is a welcome relief to Lockheed Martin executives who have promised to reduce the per-unit price of the F-35A—most widely sought for export—more than $10 million apiece.

Lockheed Martin F-35 Executive Vice President Lorraine Martin said in December that she expects the per-unit cost of the F-35A in 2019, in full-rate production to be $85 million in then-year dollars, or $75 million in current dollars. This includes an aircraft with the Pratt & Whitney F135 engine and all mission systems, she said.

[Pentagon procurement chief Frank] Kendall says Pratt has made strides in reducing its price, though specifics are never shared by the Pentagon or the company. Pratt claims that its pricing should be secret due to competition. It is the sole-source supplier for the F-35 engine but points to forthcoming competitions as its basis for secrecy…

As program officials focus on establishing the block buy and marching toward the F-35’s first operational debut, for the U.S. Marine Corps with the F-35B in July, questions are surfacing about the future upgrade plan for the fighter.

The Pentagon has opted to break the so-called Block 4 into increments that will be released on two-year centers starting with 4.1 in 2019. Block 4 has long been viewed as the holy grail for the F-35. Partners agreed that in it, many weapons—especially those crucial to foreign allies—would be integrated. For the U.S. Air Force, the program office will upgrade it to be a “dual capable aircraft,” meaning it can drop nuclear weapons. And for services such as the U.S. Marines interested in maximizing air-to-ground potential, the 250-lb. Small Diameter Bomb (SDB) II would add significant volume to the number of moving ground targets the aircraft can attack.

These are among the priorities agreed upon by the F-35 partners, and they are being prioritized into the increments, says a program official. Among the partner weapons being included are Norway’s Joint Strike Missile, Turkey’s -SOM–J missile, and the U.K.’s low-collateral-damage Spear. The Navy is pushing for the Joint Standoff Weapon C1, and the Marines and Air Force are eager to get the SDB II. “We will be able to accommodate all the U.S. and partner weapons in Block 4, it is just a matter of when in that period of time between 2019 and 2025 we field that capability,” Bogdan told reporters last month.

The program office is also eager to implement an open architecture in the jet, making future upgrades easier and potentially introducing competition, rather than assuming Lockheed Martin alone will manage future blocks…
http://aviationweek.com/defense/new-questions-facing-f-35-block-buy-and-block-4

Mark
Ottawa

 

[MarkOttawa]

Prominent program critic Bill Sweetman of AvWeek--Canada at end of quote:

Firming Up Partner Contracts Is Key To JSF Cost Cuts
F-35 team needs to close partner sales

Lockheed Martin has promised that faster production combined with efficiency initiatives will cut $10 million off the unit cost of the F-35A Joint Strike Fighter over the next five years. International sales are expected to support the ramp-up, accounting for 43% of orders over the next seven lots, or 259 aircraft in the next five years.

But the program has only 30 under-contract international orders. Of the four largest original partners—signatories to the production, sustainment and follow-on development (PSFD) agreement—one has cut orders by one-third, another may defer two-thirds of its planned orders until the late 2020s or beyond (if it takes those aircraft at all), and a third has yet to contract for a single airplane.

Partner nations have cut 122 orders for the F-35 since 2010. That’s more than the 115 new foreign military sales (FMS) deals—33 of them being U.S.-funded aircraft for Israel—that the program has booked. Over 250 additional PSFD orders are at risk, due to budget cuts or political demands for competition.

This does not add up to a death spiral for the F-35. From low-rate initial production lot 10 (LRIP 10) U.S. orders alone support the highest production rate of any fighter since the Cold War. However, the program must retain its export orders if it is to perform on its “affordability” initiatives—hence the recent revival of the idea of a multi-nation, multi-year block order.

Of the original eight international partners, Australia and Norway have been the most reliable. Norway has added four aircraft to the 48 that it committed to under PSFD. Australia is committed to acquiring 72 of the 100 aircraft planned under PSFD, but there is no schedule for the remainder.

The U.K. signed for 138 aircraft under PSFD, but firm plans cover 48 jets that will support the Royal Navy’s new aircraft carriers. The remaining 90 aircraft were intended to replace Tornado bombers and early Typhoons, but in the past two years, the U.K. has been funding efforts to add air-to-ground capability to its later Typhoons, and the Royal Air Force has talked about retaining some of the Tranche 1 aircraft past their planned retirement date, as air-defense fighters or aggressors. This year’s strategic defense and security review should clarify British plans.

Italy has reduced its buy from 131 to 90. Centrist and leftist parties have called for more cuts, but the government of Matteo Renzi—under U.S. pressure, including an offer to place third-country maintenance work in Italy—released plans in late May that call for 30 more F-35s to be ordered between now and 2020, anticipating the delivery of all 90 aircraft by the mid-2020s. Opponents have reacted angrily, calling for the resignation of Defense Minister Roberta Pinotti and threatening a no-confidence vote.

Canada issued a defense acquisition guide in late May indicating that a contract for a new fighter is not expected before 2018-20. The conservative government decided last year to extend the life of the Royal Canadian Air Force’s Boeing F-18 Hornet fighters, punting the controversy beyond the next election, due on Oct. 19. Observers believe that a conservative majority government will pursue a sole-source F-35 buy, but an opposition coalition would probably launch a competition; a minority conservative government could go either way...

http://aviationweek.com/defense/firming-partner-contracts-key-jsf-cost-cuts

Mark
Ottwa

 

[Colin Parkinson]

So the new orders roughly balance out the firm cuts but the "at risk" portion remains.

 

[MarkOttawa]

Flightglobal:

OPINION: After a $100bn spend, it's time for F-35 to deliver
...
On 1 June, Gen Herbert “Hawk” Carlisle, chief of the US Air Force’s Air Combat Command, sounded ­desperate. He is concerned that an upgraded electro-optical targeting system and a “Big SAR” mode for the Northrop Grumman APG-81 active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar could drift beyond the Block 4 version of the F-35 that is scheduled to appear in about five years.

Lockheed and programme officials have long touted the F-35’s impressive surveillance capability. As the first aircraft to package an AESA radar, visual targeting system and advanced electronic warfare system into a stealthy airframe, the F-35 is indeed an impressive ­intelligence-gathering machine. But there is some fine print that undermines those claims, and the “Big SAR” mode is an excellent example. It colloquially describes a wide-area surveillance mode for the APG-81. This currently has a narrowbeam synthetic aperture radar mode – but one of Carlisle’s highest priorities is to make sure a wide-area mode does not slip past Block 4.

That’s where the story starts to get interesting. In 2007, Flight International reported that Lockheed had agreed to deliver a “Big SAR” capability with the Block 3 version of the F-35, then scheduled to be available in 2013. Subsequent delays, however, postponed an initial version of that standard – dubbed Block 3I – to 2016, with the full capability of Block 3F to arrive by the end of 2017. At the same time, the programme ­office allowed Lockheed to defer key capabilities, such as the Big SAR mode, to the Block 4 configuration.

For $100 billion, Carlisle should get what he needs.
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/opinion-after-a-100bn-spend-it39s-time-for-f-35-to-413138/

Mark
Ottawa

 

[MarkOttawa]

Plus Bill Sweetman at AvWeek:

Opinion: Time To Define The F-35 Upgrade Plan
F-35 upgrades need more clarity
http://aviationweek.com/defense/opinion-time-define-f-35-upgrade-plan

Mark
Ottawa

 

[MarkOttawa]

Long lead time procurement for low rate initial production (LRIP) batch 10 (US FY 2016, starts Oct. 1, 2015):

…
Lockheed Martin Corp., Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co., Fort Worth, Texas, is being awarded a $920,350,132 advance acquisition contract for long lead time, materials, parts, components, and effort for the manufacture and delivery of 94 F-35 Lightning II low rate initial production aircraft. This contract provides for 78 F-35A aircraft for the Air Force (44), the government of Italy (2), the government of Turkey (2) ; the government of Australia (8); the government of Norway (6); and for various foreign military sales customers (16). In addition, this contract provides for the procurement of 14 F-35B aircraft for the Marine Corps (9), the government of Britain (3) and the government of Italy (2), as well as 2 F-35C aircraft for the Navy and Marine Corps…
http://www.defense.gov/Contracts/Contract.aspx?ContractID=5556

More from LockMart on LRIPs:
https://www.f35.com/assets/uploads/downloads/13567/f-35fast_facts2q2015.pdf

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Privateer]

Air Force, Marines Cancel F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

WASHINGTON — Citing “disastrous” management of the F-35 development program and “obvious, catastrophic failings” in the aircraft itself, the Air Force and Marine Corps will jointly announce this afternoon the cancellation of the most expensive procurement project in history, sources have told Duffel Blog.

Gen. Mark A. Welsh III, Air Force Chief of Staff, and Gen. Joseph Dunford, Commandant of the Marine Corps and nominee to be the next Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, will make the announcement together at the Pentagon at 5:30pm.

“We’ve already spent over $400 billion on the development of this aircraft,” said a senior Pentagon official who requested anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the program with the media. “Just to put that in perspective, when Reagan wanted a 600-ship navy, his most aggressive plan would have cost $119 billion over six years.”

“We’ve known for years it was a failure, but the argument was always ‘we’ve already sunk so much into it, just a few more dollars will make it work,’” he added.

White House sources have hinted that Dunford was nominated as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs in large measure so that he could be the one to cancel the aircraft.

“It’s the Marines who have driven this program into the ground, with their vertical [takeoff and landing] requirements,” said a senior White House budget official, who also spoke on condition of anonymity. “Only Nixon could go to China, and only a Marine could kill the F-35, what with 43 states participating in its manufacture.”

Signs of the major changes in the program have been appearing in offices around the Pentagon for several days, with numerous reassignments and demotions in the civilian acquisitions staff. Air Force Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan was rumored to be on his way out, with Dunford convening Article 32 hearings for several officers in senior management positions.

The Department of Justice is also reportedly preparing indictments against top officials at several defense contractors who were associated with the program’s disastrous cost overruns, mismanagement, and delays.

“This thing had a total lifetime cost estimate of $1.5 trillion. $1.5 trillion!” the senior Pentagon officials said. “With the savings we capture here, we are going to rebuild the fleet. We’re going to set some money aside for a couple hundred F-22s, which is over its over growing pains. We will save the A-10 and look at upgrading it. And we’re going to replace or refurbish all the worn out equipment from 14 years of war.”

International partners in the development process in Great Britain, Italy, and the Netherlands, each of whom committed more than $1 billion, will be offered F-16 E/F Block 60/61 aircraft, the most advanced F-16 variant, at a reduced cost, along with participation in the unmanned strike fighter that is expected to become the military’s primary new aircraft development project.

“We cannot afford this project any longer, nor have we really been able to for many years,” Dunford will say later this afternoon, according to prepared remarks obtained by Duffel Blog. “It is unfortunate that we have thrown so much bad money after good, but the time has come to cut our losses, and acknowledge that this is a bad aircraft — a bad system. The day of giant, do-everything projects is over.”

“Going forward,” Welsh is expected to say, “we are going to focus on smaller systems that do one or two things well, that can be developed affordably and quickly. We will also look on a case-by-case basis at adding capabilities to existing, proven systems.”

The senior White House official was more blunt: “This program nearly destroyed the Department of Defense, the Air Force, the Marine Corps, and the ability of the United States to be the number one military in the world,” he said. “It will take us years to recover fully, but we must and we will.”

Read more: http://www.duffelblog.com/2015/06/air-force-marines-cancel-f-35-joint-strike-fighter/#ixzz3dF5PGOAl

Courtesy of the DuffelBlog: http://www.duffelblog.com/2015/06/air-force-marines-cancel-f-35-joint-strike-fighter/#ixzz3dF51VWVT  ;D

 

[sidemount]

Oddly enough, if it wasn't posted on duffleblog.......would this be REALLY that far fetched to believe.

:facepalm: ;D

 

[MarkOttawa]

AvWeek's Bill Sweetman--sensors, weapons for future:

Back To Basics for F-35
http://aviationweek.com/paris-air-show-2015/back-basics-f-35

Mark
Ottawa

 

[YZT580]

200 F-22s would make one hell of an air force.  It actually makes sense too.  Maybe if enough people read it, think it real an write their congressman it can happen.  As likely as Trudeau having an original idea that doesn't involve growing pot I suppose.

 

[PuckChaser]

You thought the F-35 was expensive? A F-22 flyaway was $150 million USD in 2009, and the production line has been shut down.

 

[Ostrozac]

200 F-22s would make one hell of an air force.

???

200 F-22s is more than the USAF have in service. So yes, an air force bigger than the USAF would, in fact, be one hell of an air force. But it's not very likely.

 

[MarkOttawa]

At Defense Industry Daily, further links at original:

Not a single F-35A was downed by “hostile” fire during the Air Force’s recent Green Flag West exercise, the first exercise external link in which the Joint Strike Fighter has participated. None of the F-35s were shot down external link, whilst F-16s and A-10s were. The inclusion of the JSF in the exercises has been criticized as a public relations stunt external link; additionally, the level of operational pressure the F-35s were put under during the exercises compared with other aircraft has not been released. Whether the F-35 genuinely outperformed the other aircraft and as a result received no simulated destruction – or was just exposed to less severe operational testing – is hard to say…
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/af-funds-research-allowing-one-pilot-to-control-many-uavs-belarus-mulls-s-400s-russia-willing-to-sell-su-35s-to-china-despite-likelihood-of-design-grab-030346/

Mark
Ottawa

 

[MarkOttawa]

More at AvWeek by Amy Butler:

F-35 Unscathed by Hostile Fire in Green Flag
http://aviationweek.com/defense/f-35-unscathed-hostile-fire-green-flag

Mark
Ottawa

 

[OTR1]

First ski-jump STO by an F-35B at Pax River last week in the video.

TP was Pete Wilson, from BAE. Previously both RAF and RN Harrier driver.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pIO5K-fUMzQ

 

[Colin Parkinson]

and it's not moving into the wind either.

 

[OTR1]

Indeed.

Just like the ski-jump at RAF Bedford, used for initial trials in 1976.

And the ski-jump at Farnborough.

And the ski-jump at RNAS Yeovilton, used for +/- 25 years.

First embarked ski-jump trials are currently scheduled for 2018.

 

[MarkOttawa]

Failed NDP federal candidate 2008 ( http://thethunderbird.ca/2008/09/25/ndp-candidate-michael-byers-calls-for-end-to-tar-sands/ ) and now fighter capabilities expert Prof. Michael Byers:

The F/A-18 Super Hornet — a better fighter jet

Pity Canada’s fighter jet pilots: their 33-year-old CF-18 Hornets are suffering from metal fatigue, to the point where strong G-forces could rip off their wings.

Some of the CF-18s are being refitted in a move that officials claim will extend their lives to 2025. But metal fatigue is difficult to address through refits and for safety reasons, the planes are no longer used for training in aerial combat, or sent to places where they might become involved in a “dogfight.” Instead, they drop precision-guided bombs in places where there are no enemy jets.

The need to avoid air-to-air combat helps explain why the six CF-18s deployed with great fanfare to Romania and Lithuania last year for NATO support were quietly withdrawn just seven months later. The Canadian planes were of limited use for training Eastern European pilots and of little deterrence value vis-à-vis the Russian Air Force...
http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/michael-byers-the-fa-18-super-hornet-a-better-fighter-jet

Really?

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Bearpaw]

Another recent report about the F-35:

http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/06/f35-loses-to-1970s-era-f16-carrying.html

 

[OTR1]

Ah yes, another wild-eyed diatribe by David Axe in a tinpot website that pretends to be kosher media. How cute.

Get back to me when this mysterious 5-page document appears in the real world and the "unnamed test pilot" acquires an equally real world birth certificate.

Yawn.