F-35 Cancelled, then what ?
First of all, before anyone bites my head off, I'll admit that my knowledge of the F-35 is no more than passing, and I can't be bothered to read 2100 odd posts.....
Having said that, regarding Gen Bogdan comments quoted in post 2084, specifically:
"Adding partners can help bring down costs,........., which could lead to a boost in orders that will force down unit costs in future...."
I thought that F-35 production for the US alone was originally in the region of 2,500. An order of say 30 JSF for Singapore and 60 for South Korea therefore represents an overall increase in sales of less than 4%!!
While no doubt having two more nations buy the aircraft adds to its prestige and reputation, I don't see how an increase in production of less 4% will produce any significant ecnomies of scale and reduce unit costs??? Let alone any requirement for offsets, setting up local production lines, etc - good for the host nation, but no doubt adding to overall costs!!
Having said that, regarding Gen Bogdan comments quoted in post 2084, specifically:
"Adding partners can help bring down costs,........., which could lead to a boost in orders that will force down unit costs in future...."
I thought that F-35 production for the US alone was originally in the region of 2,500. An order of say 30 JSF for Singapore and 60 for South Korea therefore represents an overall increase in sales of less than 4%!!
While no doubt having two more nations buy the aircraft adds to its prestige and reputation, I don't see how an increase in production of less 4% will produce any significant ecnomies of scale and reduce unit costs??? Let alone any requirement for offsets, setting up local production lines, etc - good for the host nation, but no doubt adding to overall costs!!
Last edited by Biggus; 27th Apr 2013 at 11:04.
I can't fault your logic there, Biggus. But I suspect you may now face a bombardment of spurious figures that will categorically prove that you are completely wrong. What you have done here is the JSF equivalent of doubting the existence of God. Of course, it doesn't really matter anyway because it's already such excellent value for money that further savings are really not necessary.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Earth
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by JSFfan
but if you use capability the f-35 is much cheaper than the f-16
Please read what you intend to quote in support of your claims, before you do so.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sorry mate, the 10% isn't on capability..it's simply on cost comparison
Biggus he is talking about annual build numbers in the ramp up years till 2020 I think he said, I gave the example of turkey shifting 2 units out of a build year and the remainder went up $1m each
the more planes they build for a given year...the cheaper they are.
Biggus he is talking about annual build numbers in the ramp up years till 2020 I think he said, I gave the example of turkey shifting 2 units out of a build year and the remainder went up $1m each
the more planes they build for a given year...the cheaper they are.
Last edited by JSFfan; 27th Apr 2013 at 12:09.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Earth
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by JSFfan
sorry mate, the 10% isn't on capability..it's simply on cost comparison
Originally Posted by JSFfan
"Comparable baseline assumptions were used to evaluate relative operational costs between F-35 and legacy aircraft."
Ah...
That might make sense, thanks. Although if I was a foreign nation buying JSF I'd want the aircraft to be as mature as possible when I got them, so wouldn't be looking to buy in the early ramp up years anyway......
Also, by definition, the General's comments don't apply to the programme as a whole then, just in some very specific years? You can't have it both ways....
That might make sense, thanks. Although if I was a foreign nation buying JSF I'd want the aircraft to be as mature as possible when I got them, so wouldn't be looking to buy in the early ramp up years anyway......
Also, by definition, the General's comments don't apply to the programme as a whole then, just in some very specific years? You can't have it both ways....
Last edited by Biggus; 27th Apr 2013 at 12:13.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yep..that's what their bitching about...no one wants a fleet of the early ones..just enough for training till peak production is reached...catch 22
Last edited by JSFfan; 27th Apr 2013 at 12:15.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Earth
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JSFfan,
I'm gonna avoid the trap CM finds himself often in
, but I do wonder one thing.
Why do you keep typing all sorts of letters and then pressing the Enter key?
I'm gonna avoid the trap CM finds himself often in
, but I do wonder one thing.Why do you keep typing all sorts of letters and then pressing the Enter key?
Last edited by NITRO104; 27th Apr 2013 at 12:20.
This thread would have been much better without JSFfan. He does not meet the spirit of this forum and I fear the moderation policy is far too light. One poster should not put everyone else from having an educated debate.
It does not appear that the US is going to cancel F-35 any time soon.
So who is?
So who is?
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sussex
Age: 66
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can see a number of European countries either again reducing their F35 buy or cancel their buy. What this would do to the economics of the USA's purchase levels and the timing of the purchase is unclear. It would certainly increase the USA's unit cost, however measured.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suspect most of the customer base will walk but no-one wants to be first
Normally it's the Canadians or the Europeans who see sense first when they realise the total cost of trying to emulate the USAF
Normally it's the Canadians or the Europeans who see sense first when they realise the total cost of trying to emulate the USAF
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lonewolf_50 I can't see anyone canceling..reluctance to buy too many LRIP's..extending the years that they buy over..reducing numbers..but as well as existing euro there may be at least another 3 to join.. Greece, Finland and Belgium.
cast your mind back to all the doom and gloom about f-16 sales..tall poppy syndrome
cast your mind back to all the doom and gloom about f-16 sales..tall poppy syndrome
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in the magical land of beer and chocolates
Age: 52
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Greece simply won't have the money.
Finland usually stretches its assets as far as possible, a bit like the Swiss who also seem to get the most mileage out of their military equipment.
As far as Belgium goes, at this moment in time it can go all ways, fact is that the budget won't allow for any more than a token fighter jet airforce if we go for the F35.
I would sooner put my money on Poland, I think that would be the best bet as a possible future F35 client.
Even the Norwegians, who are beyond the definition of rich have trouble funding this jet,
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2013/...s&emc=rss&_r=0
10.65 billion$ in 2013 value means close to 205 million per copy.
Finland usually stretches its assets as far as possible, a bit like the Swiss who also seem to get the most mileage out of their military equipment.
As far as Belgium goes, at this moment in time it can go all ways, fact is that the budget won't allow for any more than a token fighter jet airforce if we go for the F35.
I would sooner put my money on Poland, I think that would be the best bet as a possible future F35 client.
Even the Norwegians, who are beyond the definition of rich have trouble funding this jet,
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2013/...s&emc=rss&_r=0
Oil-rich Norway is stretching out its purchase of 52 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters from Lockheed Martin, the Defense Ministry said on Friday, a move that will nudge up the total cost but reduce the annual burden on the defense budget.
The country is about to place firm orders for six of the fighter planes and will extend the timeframe for the purchase of all 52 from four years to eight years, the ministry said.
The country is about to place firm orders for six of the fighter planes and will extend the timeframe for the purchase of all 52 from four years to eight years, the ministry said.
Last edited by kbrockman; 27th Apr 2013 at 15:13.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
something for those who might have missed it:
Flying the Flanker - The DEW Line
since the talk of supercruise:
Flying the Flanker - The DEW Line
since the talk of supercruise:
Slowing the Flanker down after almost 25 minutes of supersonic flight also showed interesting results. "I take it out of burner and I'm just at mil power and the speed dropped down to--I was still supersonic,"
In the basic plan, the JSF international partners are due to buy 730 jets.
100 are already gone due to cutbacks in Italy, Canada, Netherlands &c. (It's actually 104 but I am giving credit for the Noggies, who have upped their order.)
Of the remaining 630, about 300 are at risk. This includes the UK's aircraft beyond the initial 48, Italy being broke, the Netherlands arguing among themselves &c.
Moreover, the plan was for the international partners to buy heavily near the start of production (in the "program of record" they buy most of their jets by 2020). Now that the loyal Noggies have stretched their buy through 2024, others will follow suit.
Some of this is made up for by Japan (42) and the aircraft provided to Israel by the US taxpayer, but not all. Korea may well go F-15SE.
In the US, the USAF is unlikely to afford the planned buy rate but is not being allowed to say so, while the USN CV community is ambivalent at best to JSF, believing that Hornet/Growler upgrades offer a far better return on investment for the next decade. (Consider that manned deep strike, where stealth is most valuable, is not as crucial for the Navy as for the AF, and besides they have Tomahawks for that.)
The death spiral is very much a possibility.
100 are already gone due to cutbacks in Italy, Canada, Netherlands &c. (It's actually 104 but I am giving credit for the Noggies, who have upped their order.)
Of the remaining 630, about 300 are at risk. This includes the UK's aircraft beyond the initial 48, Italy being broke, the Netherlands arguing among themselves &c.
Moreover, the plan was for the international partners to buy heavily near the start of production (in the "program of record" they buy most of their jets by 2020). Now that the loyal Noggies have stretched their buy through 2024, others will follow suit.
Some of this is made up for by Japan (42) and the aircraft provided to Israel by the US taxpayer, but not all. Korea may well go F-15SE.
In the US, the USAF is unlikely to afford the planned buy rate but is not being allowed to say so, while the USN CV community is ambivalent at best to JSF, believing that Hornet/Growler upgrades offer a far better return on investment for the next decade. (Consider that manned deep strike, where stealth is most valuable, is not as crucial for the Navy as for the AF, and besides they have Tomahawks for that.)
The death spiral is very much a possibility.
