JSF and A400M at risk?
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toulouse area, France
Age: 93
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not so moveable feast ...
@ Stopstart
Agreed that RAF AT is highly stressed, but as for "immediate" relief by means of C-17 or C-130, I seriously wonder what the lead time would be for either of these aircraft. They aren't exactly stacked at the dealers while customers wait for a new "cash for clunkers " scheme.
BTW, I'm having a private "contest" about whether the A400 will fly before the 787 - not that that would bring entry into effective service all that much closer !
Agreed that RAF AT is highly stressed, but as for "immediate" relief by means of C-17 or C-130, I seriously wonder what the lead time would be for either of these aircraft. They aren't exactly stacked at the dealers while customers wait for a new "cash for clunkers " scheme.
BTW, I'm having a private "contest" about whether the A400 will fly before the 787 - not that that would bring entry into effective service all that much closer !
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Going off how long it took the Danes to procure J and the UK to procure 17's 5 and 6.
Oh, and the fact the 400 hasnt even flown yet. Perhaps I should rephrase. From order to full operational readiness, the J and 17 has the a400's ass whooped.
Oh, and the fact the 400 hasnt even flown yet. Perhaps I should rephrase. From order to full operational readiness, the J and 17 has the a400's ass whooped.
Not having the C17 order book to hand I would still suggest that if you were to put a bid in for 'x' C17s today they would be fully operational out of Lye/Brize/wherever far sooner than the equivalent capability in A400M. The A400M has not flown yet. I'm assuming it then has to go through the full flight test schedule (and perhaps a full Boscombe flight schedule (unless they are being run concurrently). Even then when have we ever bought an aircraft into Service that is fit for everything we require of it straight away? I would imagine we could pick up a C17 from the factory (waiting list notwithstanding), and apart from a paint job and a shakedown, pretty much have it on the flight line straight away. Despite a lot of confidence from posters on this thread I cannot see that being the same for the A400M. Problem is the longer we wait then either the longer the queue gets for the C17 or worse the production line is shut down (if it hasn't been already
) or worse still the 'fixed price' for the A400M goes up again (
) and so we buy less .....
) or worse still the 'fixed price' for the A400M goes up again () and so we buy less .....
The E
You are obviously in a far more informed position than I so we will have to agree to disagree! It does worry me slightly that whenever there is talk of something being late, without a full capability and over budget that we are just going to repeat the mistakes made in much of our recent procurement. I'm sure given time the A400M will be a wonderful bit of kit but I don't think we have that time available. And the longer we leave it the harder it is to back out! At the end of the day it doesn't matter how short the Boscombe flight trial time is if it's not delivered to us on time (the original time not the reworked (and reworked?) time) in the first place. At the end of the day, however, I hope I'm proved wrong
You are obviously in a far more informed position than I so we will have to agree to disagree! It does worry me slightly that whenever there is talk of something being late, without a full capability and over budget that we are just going to repeat the mistakes made in much of our recent procurement. I'm sure given time the A400M will be a wonderful bit of kit but I don't think we have that time available. And the longer we leave it the harder it is to back out! At the end of the day it doesn't matter how short the Boscombe flight trial time is if it's not delivered to us on time (the original time not the reworked (and reworked?) time) in the first place. At the end of the day, however, I hope I'm proved wrong
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just cannot believe the hassle of developing the A400M, including flight test, developmental delay, New IPT setup, new Engineering setup, new logistics setup, new training will be worth minimal future capability given.
Lets face facts. A400 moves crap from point A to Point B. Fres is now looking decidedly unlikely; we manage what we do well with the 2 types we have.
Dont get me wrong, in a world of unlimited budgets and less op pressure, I would be fully behind A400M and if it comes into UK service, would love the opportunity to fly it. But unfortunately, being a realist, I see that is not the case.
We need tough decisions. Money is most definately going to be a finite resource next year onwards for the military, we shouldnt waste what little we will have.
Lets face facts. A400 moves crap from point A to Point B. Fres is now looking decidedly unlikely; we manage what we do well with the 2 types we have.
Dont get me wrong, in a world of unlimited budgets and less op pressure, I would be fully behind A400M and if it comes into UK service, would love the opportunity to fly it. But unfortunately, being a realist, I see that is not the case.
We need tough decisions. Money is most definately going to be a finite resource next year onwards for the military, we shouldnt waste what little we will have.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: by the Great Salt Lake, USA
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looks like the C-17 line might be on for another year...
India Seeks To Bolster Transport With 10 C-17s - Defense News
India Seeks To Bolster Transport With 10 C-17s - Defense News
India Seeks To Bolster Transport With 10 C-17s
By Vivek Raghuvanshi
Published: 5 Nov 2009 17:07
NEW DELHI - The Indian Defence Ministry is negotiating the purchase of C-17 heavy-lift Globemaster aircraft from the United States through the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) route, say ministry sources.
The U.S. Air Force flew the Globemaster in a joint air exercise between the air forces of the two countries held in India Oct. 19-23 at Agra to let the Indian military familiarize itself with the transport craft, said a senior Indian Air Force official.
India is negotiating the purchase of 10 C-17 aircraft made by U.S.-based Boeing, disregarding the Russian IL-76 transport even though the American aircraft is three times costlier, Defence Ministry sources said. The C-17's advantages include its easier handling (compared with the IL-76) and ability to operate from short and rough airstrips, added the sources.
The $1.7 billion deal, likely to be finalized by early 2010, would be Boeing's second-largest deal with India since New Delhi signed a $2.1 billion agreement in January to purchase eight P-8 maritime patrol aircraft.
The Indian military needs to do three things: augment its ability to quickly lift larger numbers of troops as it views possible threats on its border with China; strengthen its presence on the Pakistani border; and fight terrorism and low-intensity warfare, said a senior Defence Ministry official.
India needs to triple its lift capacity, said the official.
India already has contracted for six C-130J aircraft from the United States, the delivery of which is expected to begin by 2011.
The Air Force's current fixed-wing transport fleet comprises 40 Russian-made IL-76 and more than 100 AN-32s, which are being upgraded by Ukraine, and the U.S.-made C-130J transport aircraft.
In addition, the Indian Defence Forces are buying about 800 rotary-wing assets in the next seven years.
In July, India signed a $400 million contract with Ukrainian military export agency Ukrspetsexport to upgrade 100 Soviet-built AN-32 cargo aircraft for the Indian Air Force.
By Vivek Raghuvanshi
Published: 5 Nov 2009 17:07
NEW DELHI - The Indian Defence Ministry is negotiating the purchase of C-17 heavy-lift Globemaster aircraft from the United States through the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) route, say ministry sources.
The U.S. Air Force flew the Globemaster in a joint air exercise between the air forces of the two countries held in India Oct. 19-23 at Agra to let the Indian military familiarize itself with the transport craft, said a senior Indian Air Force official.
India is negotiating the purchase of 10 C-17 aircraft made by U.S.-based Boeing, disregarding the Russian IL-76 transport even though the American aircraft is three times costlier, Defence Ministry sources said. The C-17's advantages include its easier handling (compared with the IL-76) and ability to operate from short and rough airstrips, added the sources.
The $1.7 billion deal, likely to be finalized by early 2010, would be Boeing's second-largest deal with India since New Delhi signed a $2.1 billion agreement in January to purchase eight P-8 maritime patrol aircraft.
The Indian military needs to do three things: augment its ability to quickly lift larger numbers of troops as it views possible threats on its border with China; strengthen its presence on the Pakistani border; and fight terrorism and low-intensity warfare, said a senior Defence Ministry official.
India needs to triple its lift capacity, said the official.
India already has contracted for six C-130J aircraft from the United States, the delivery of which is expected to begin by 2011.
The Air Force's current fixed-wing transport fleet comprises 40 Russian-made IL-76 and more than 100 AN-32s, which are being upgraded by Ukraine, and the U.S.-made C-130J transport aircraft.
In addition, the Indian Defence Forces are buying about 800 rotary-wing assets in the next seven years.
In July, India signed a $400 million contract with Ukrainian military export agency Ukrspetsexport to upgrade 100 Soviet-built AN-32 cargo aircraft for the Indian Air Force.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Savage attack on the whole JSF program in an Op-Ed at Military.com:
Tactical Air's Gloomy Future
The Defense Authorization bill just signed into law by President Obama pretends a bright future for the Pentagon's Joint Strike Fighter. The program is fully funded, and Congress even added separate authority for the alternate GE engine, advice sure to be taken when the definitive DOD Appropriations bill is enacted later this year. Meanwhile, in the real world, the F-35 program continues to fall apart. The latest - but hardly last - shoe to drop is a new internal analysis (breathlessly refuted by Lockheed) that the cost growth stage for this airplane is just beginning.
Lockheed's refutation of the Joint Estimating Team (JET) analysis of cost growth and delays in the F-35 program borders on the hilarious: new computer aided design, simulation, and desk studies (un-validated by empirical testing) make cost growth in truly modern defense technology a thing of the past, they assert. Indeed, just like in DDG-1000, LCS, FCS, VH-71, etc., etc., etc.....
How pathetic.
Even sadder than Lockheed's desperate grasp for reasons to do nothing to fix the self-dismembering F-35 program is the fact that the future of Western combat aviation relies on it. The 2,456 models of it on order for the Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps will ultimately replace almost all tactical aircraft now in our inventory, except for the F-22, for which production beyond 187 aircraft was cancelled this past summer. Major allies, including Britain and much of the rest of Western Europe, Canada, Australia, Japan, and Israel have all made commitments to buy the aircraft. Sales to many others (there's a long list) are postulated, and those who do not intend to buy the F-35 will probably copy it to the extent their treasuries, government bureaucracies, and technological development permit.
Unfortunately, the F-35 is unaffordable, and it is a technological kluge that will be less effective than airplanes it replaces. It will undo our air forces and our allies', not help them............... [more]
Tactical Air's Gloomy Future
The Defense Authorization bill just signed into law by President Obama pretends a bright future for the Pentagon's Joint Strike Fighter. The program is fully funded, and Congress even added separate authority for the alternate GE engine, advice sure to be taken when the definitive DOD Appropriations bill is enacted later this year. Meanwhile, in the real world, the F-35 program continues to fall apart. The latest - but hardly last - shoe to drop is a new internal analysis (breathlessly refuted by Lockheed) that the cost growth stage for this airplane is just beginning.
Lockheed's refutation of the Joint Estimating Team (JET) analysis of cost growth and delays in the F-35 program borders on the hilarious: new computer aided design, simulation, and desk studies (un-validated by empirical testing) make cost growth in truly modern defense technology a thing of the past, they assert. Indeed, just like in DDG-1000, LCS, FCS, VH-71, etc., etc., etc.....
How pathetic.
Even sadder than Lockheed's desperate grasp for reasons to do nothing to fix the self-dismembering F-35 program is the fact that the future of Western combat aviation relies on it. The 2,456 models of it on order for the Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps will ultimately replace almost all tactical aircraft now in our inventory, except for the F-22, for which production beyond 187 aircraft was cancelled this past summer. Major allies, including Britain and much of the rest of Western Europe, Canada, Australia, Japan, and Israel have all made commitments to buy the aircraft. Sales to many others (there's a long list) are postulated, and those who do not intend to buy the F-35 will probably copy it to the extent their treasuries, government bureaucracies, and technological development permit.
Unfortunately, the F-35 is unaffordable, and it is a technological kluge that will be less effective than airplanes it replaces. It will undo our air forces and our allies', not help them............... [more]
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Waiting to return to the Loire.
Age: 54
Posts: 386
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmm...
Well that article is not exactly sitting on the fence is it?
Hard points of logic though - a shed load of USDs for a fatter & less effective aircraft in every aspect of combat performance, save 'stealthyness'.
Hard points of logic though - a shed load of USDs for a fatter & less effective aircraft in every aspect of combat performance, save 'stealthyness'.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
And the expected response comes. But as the above article says, name one previous program where it has been achieved. Lies, bluster, fudged statistics and whistling in the wind..... 
Carter: Plan Afoot to Halt F-35 Cost Hikes, Delays
U.S. defense officials expect to finalize by late November a plan to avoid new F-35 cost increases and schedule slips that have been forecast by a Pentagon analysis cell, Ashton Carter, undersecretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics, said Monday.In an exclusive interview at the Pentagon, Carter confirmed reports that a Pentagon "joint estimate team" (JET) has determined current program plans would spawn sizeable cost growth and schedule delays after completing an annual review of the triservice, international fighter program.
"The JET II study shows both some cost increases and schedule slips, which we should do everything we can to avoid," Carter said. "Those are forecasts which say what will happen if we don't change what we're doing. And we should change what we're doing so that those predictions don't come fully to pass."
During the next few weeks, defense acquisition and program officials will weigh a number of options and ultimately put in place a plan designed to steer the fighter initiative away from the JET-predicted trouble.........
Carter: Plan Afoot to Halt F-35 Cost Hikes, Delays
U.S. defense officials expect to finalize by late November a plan to avoid new F-35 cost increases and schedule slips that have been forecast by a Pentagon analysis cell, Ashton Carter, undersecretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics, said Monday.In an exclusive interview at the Pentagon, Carter confirmed reports that a Pentagon "joint estimate team" (JET) has determined current program plans would spawn sizeable cost growth and schedule delays after completing an annual review of the triservice, international fighter program.
"The JET II study shows both some cost increases and schedule slips, which we should do everything we can to avoid," Carter said. "Those are forecasts which say what will happen if we don't change what we're doing. And we should change what we're doing so that those predictions don't come fully to pass."
During the next few weeks, defense acquisition and program officials will weigh a number of options and ultimately put in place a plan designed to steer the fighter initiative away from the JET-predicted trouble.........
Hang on - I seem to recall......
From the very outset the principal aim of the Joint Strike Fighter program was to produce a low cost mass production strike aircraft which exploits the latest avionic/computer, stealth and production technologies.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 932
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BEagle
Dave *IS* low cost... compared with F-22! A mere snip at $100m vs $350m - let's buy loads!!!
Or not.
The broader point is that if it works, A400M will probably be very good: in around 2015. However, the UK desperately needs something to retire the K's and compliment the J fleet in days few - and a C-17/C-130J mix is about the only game in town - especially as we have both types in service already.
On the question of FRES. FRES Utility Vehicle (UV) was down-selected to the GD Piranha V last year before being cancelled this year (Well Done! £m lots wasted on that fiasco...).
Anyway, FRES UV has been replaced this year as FRES programme lead by the SV variant (Scout) that will replace CVR(T) in the reconnaissance role (until it's cancelled at the cost of £m lots, of course).
S41
Dave *IS* low cost... compared with F-22! A mere snip at $100m vs $350m - let's buy loads!!!
Or not.
The broader point is that if it works, A400M will probably be very good: in around 2015. However, the UK desperately needs something to retire the K's and compliment the J fleet in days few - and a C-17/C-130J mix is about the only game in town - especially as we have both types in service already.
On the question of FRES. FRES Utility Vehicle (UV) was down-selected to the GD Piranha V last year before being cancelled this year (Well Done! £m lots wasted on that fiasco...).
Anyway, FRES UV has been replaced this year as FRES programme lead by the SV variant (Scout) that will replace CVR(T) in the reconnaissance role (until it's cancelled at the cost of £m lots, of course).
S41
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Tullahoma TN
Posts: 482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
South Africa Ditches A400M
Nov 9, 2009
By Douglas Barrie
South Africa has pulled out of the Airbus Military A400M airlifter program, abandoning its intention to buy eight of the type.
South Africa ordered the A400M in 2005. Reuters quoted South African Defense Minister Lindiwe Sisulu as saying: “We have terminated the contract with Airbus but we’ve not terminated our quest to ensure we have the necessary capabilities. That is very clear.”
...
South Africa Ditches A400M | AVIATION WEEK
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Britain presses Airbus on A400M costs
DUBAI, Nov 14 (Reuters) - Britain needs all 25 military transport planes on order from Airbus (EAD.PA) and expects the planemaker to come up with a plan to tackle cost overruns by mid-December, the British airforce head said on Saturday.
Britain is one of seven European NATO countries that ordered the A400M, whose future has been threatened by delays and increased costs.
"We are saying 25 is the answer, what is the question," Air Chief Marshall Sir Stephen Dalton, head of Britain's Royal Air Force told Reuters at a military conference in Dubai.
"We have got to stand firm and challenge industry," he said. "They have got to come back in the middle of next month and tell us what can be done."
Dalton said negotiators were looking at whether Europe's biggest defence contract could be saved by reshuffling upfront costs and finding more efficient ways to carry out aircraft maintenance, one of the costliest parts of military procurement.
DUBAI, Nov 14 (Reuters) - Britain needs all 25 military transport planes on order from Airbus (EAD.PA) and expects the planemaker to come up with a plan to tackle cost overruns by mid-December, the British airforce head said on Saturday.
Britain is one of seven European NATO countries that ordered the A400M, whose future has been threatened by delays and increased costs.
"We are saying 25 is the answer, what is the question," Air Chief Marshall Sir Stephen Dalton, head of Britain's Royal Air Force told Reuters at a military conference in Dubai.
"We have got to stand firm and challenge industry," he said. "They have got to come back in the middle of next month and tell us what can be done."
Dalton said negotiators were looking at whether Europe's biggest defence contract could be saved by reshuffling upfront costs and finding more efficient ways to carry out aircraft maintenance, one of the costliest parts of military procurement.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Another S**thole
Age: 51
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So the A400M debacle rumbles on and on......
We know we need all 25 of them but we need to know when they will finally arrive and what the capabilities will be
Meanwhile the capability gap in the AT fleet continues to expand as another C130K is scrapped due to wing box cracks, with the possibility that the remaining airfames will go early next year as a cost-saving measure.
That would release the engineering personnel to concentrate on the C130J lines and avoid all the costs of moving a legacy fleet to Brize for 14 months.
Just the sticky problem of disbanding LXX Sqn to get past the Air Force Board!!!
We know we need all 25 of them but we need to know when they will finally arrive and what the capabilities will be
Meanwhile the capability gap in the AT fleet continues to expand as another C130K is scrapped due to wing box cracks, with the possibility that the remaining airfames will go early next year as a cost-saving measure.
That would release the engineering personnel to concentrate on the C130J lines and avoid all the costs of moving a legacy fleet to Brize for 14 months.
Just the sticky problem of disbanding LXX Sqn to get past the Air Force Board!!!
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sounds as if so.
Surprised to hear they are demanding all 25. Perhaps SA pulling out as forced them to reappraise? I was expecting them to pay the same amount, for less jets as a result of overspend on development?
Surprised to hear they are demanding all 25. Perhaps SA pulling out as forced them to reappraise? I was expecting them to pay the same amount, for less jets as a result of overspend on development?
Last edited by VinRouge; 14th Nov 2009 at 10:58.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toulouse area, France
Age: 93
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More A400M progress
Although Airbus Military grossly neglects its web site "news" page, there is progress happening ... MSN 001 was handed over to the test facility on Nov. 12 to start checks before first flight.
Coincidentally, at Everett the 747F-8 freighter moved to the paint shop before in turn being handed over to the test outfit.
Bit of a race for first flights before Week 3/December for two of the 3 delayed programmes - 787 seems to be on hold to see if the wing-join fix works ...
Developments 16/11
The 747-8 seems not to be a runner in this "race" any more, as it won't fly before New Year.
Meanwhile, at Dubai, they're showing pix of the A400M's engines running (one at a time so far, but "all together now" set for 16/11).
Coincidentally, at Everett the 747F-8 freighter moved to the paint shop before in turn being handed over to the test outfit.
Bit of a race for first flights before Week 3/December for two of the 3 delayed programmes - 787 seems to be on hold to see if the wing-join fix works ...
Developments 16/11
The 747-8 seems not to be a runner in this "race" any more, as it won't fly before New Year.
Meanwhile, at Dubai, they're showing pix of the A400M's engines running (one at a time so far, but "all together now" set for 16/11).
Last edited by Jig Peter; 16th Nov 2009 at 11:13.