F-35 Cancelled, then what ?
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Home alone
Posts: 295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The US isn't going to go down, the gilt yields on its borrowing aren't going to be rocketing through the roof any time soon so it is easily capable of servicing all it's debt. The total level of debt, by enlarge, isn't the big issue, but rather the timespan and cost of repaying the debt.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Cornwall
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bastardeux, what happens if the debt keeps growing over the next 10 to 20 years at around the current rates? Assuming that it can last that long. I would imagine the idea of to big to fail comes into play but how long can that last for!? Your far more optimistic than I am.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Home alone
Posts: 295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's highly unlikely to keep growing at the same rate over the next 10 to 20 years, hence the budget control act. They recognise their current spending is completely unsustainable and that they need to cut their deficit as soon as possible. I would never say never, but it's wholly unlikely.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,575
Likes: 0
Received 51 Likes
on
45 Posts
The ART of Making of an F-35 Pilot
The Making of a Joint Strike Fighter Pilot Welcome to the fifth generation.
By Art Tomassetti Air & Space magazine, November 2013
The Making of a Joint Strike Fighter Pilot | Military Aviation | Air & Space Magazine
By Art Tomassetti Air & Space magazine, November 2013
"...Center stick pilots need to become side stick pilots. Push button and analog pilots need to become touch screen and digital pilots. Head-up-display pilots need to become helmet-mounted-display pilots. Fourth generation pilots need to become fifth generation pilots. We’re still learning what the F-35 can do, and we need people who know the airplane and can continue to drive it to its ultimate performance...."
&
"Colonel Art Tomassetti retired from the U.S. Marine Corps in August after 27 years of service and 3,200 hours in 40 types of aircraft. He served two tours as an AV-8B pilot, including combat missions in Operation Desert Storm."
&
"Colonel Art Tomassetti retired from the U.S. Marine Corps in August after 27 years of service and 3,200 hours in 40 types of aircraft. He served two tours as an AV-8B pilot, including combat missions in Operation Desert Storm."
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 24th Sep 2013 at 02:28. Reason: Add BIO
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JF wrote "Sorry I don't know what financial mess you are referring to."
The Congressional Budget office shows that Federal Debt as a % of US GDP is set to rise from around 80% today to 100% in the late 2020's and 200% by 2038
On October 1st 35% of annual budget requires re-authorisation by a totally split Congress who aren't even talking to each other
Sounds like a bit of a mess to me John................ something has to give and as it's unlikely to be federal Salaries, Medicare, pensions, interest on the national Debt, homeland security etc
The Congressional Budget office shows that Federal Debt as a % of US GDP is set to rise from around 80% today to 100% in the late 2020's and 200% by 2038
On October 1st 35% of annual budget requires re-authorisation by a totally split Congress who aren't even talking to each other
Sounds like a bit of a mess to me John................ something has to give and as it's unlikely to be federal Salaries, Medicare, pensions, interest on the national Debt, homeland security etc
something has to give and as it's unlikely to be federal Salaries, Medicare, pensions, interest on the national Debt, homeland security etc
And so the deficit issue will solve itself eventually.
The pentagon was voted the ability to choose where its cuts apply but every other department loses a further 10% each year without any discretion whatsoever. Apparently, the F-35 will be the last budget to be cut, everything else will go first..
Last edited by peter we; 23rd Sep 2013 at 16:38.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
except the pay of generals, admirals and other SO's no doubt....................
CBO projected in February 2013 that under the sequester and Budget Control Act caps:
The report, provided yesterday and required by the current year’s defense appropriations measure, lists the amounts that Congress appropriated for the Pentagon’s 2,500 programs, project and budget activities, and shows how much each will be reduced by the automatic spending reductions that took effect March 1.
The Air Force’s $2.5 billion to buy 19 F-35 jets made by Lockheed reflects a sequestration cut of $503 million, according to the report. The Navy’s final $808 million to buy four carrier-model F-35s incorporates a $157 million cut, and its $1 billion for six Marine Corps short-takeoff-and vertical landing fighters reflects a $146 million reduction.
While the report doesn’t spell out the number of weapons cut in each program, defense companies will be able to use the report to determine “what funding is available for that particular program for the fiscal year,” John Roth, the Pentagon’s deputy comptroller for programs and budgets, said in an interview.
The purpose is to provide Congress a baseline of Pentagon funding that defense committees will review as they consider a Pentagon reprogramming request to move $9.6 billion between categories and mostly into readiness accounts.
V-22, Drones
In other weapons cuts, the Navy’s $1.3 billion appropriation to buy 18 additional V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft from Boeing Co. (BA) and Bell Helicopter Textron Inc. (TXT) reflects an $18 million reduction.
The Air Force’s final $82 million on 717 laser-guided Lockheed Hellfire missiles fired by Predator and Reaper drones incorporates a cut of $313,000.
On shipbuilding, the $1.74 billion Congress approved for construction of Littoral Combat Ships made by Lockheed and Austal Ltd. (ASB) reflects a cut of $43.6 million, and $437 million provided as a down payment on DDG-51 destroyers built by Huntington Ingalls and General Dynamics Corp. (GD) reflects a $28 million reduction.
The $3 billion for two additional Virginia-class submarines made by Huntington Ingalls and General Dynamics reflects a $227 million reduction.
CBO projected in February 2013 that under the sequester and Budget Control Act caps:
- Defense spending outlays (including "overseas contingency operations" for Iraq and Afghanistan) will be reduced from $670.3 billion in 2012 to approximately $627.6 billion in 2013, a decrease of $42.7 billion or 6.4%. Defense spending will fall again to $593.4 billion in 2014, a decrease of $34.2 billion or 5.5%.
- Defense spending will rise gradually from $593 billion in 2014 to $714 billion by 2023, an annual growth rate of 2.1% during the 2014 to 2023 period and 0.6% for the 2012-2023 period. The 2.1% growth rate approximates CBO's projected rate of inflation and is well below the annual spending growth rate of 7.1% from 2000-2012.
- Defense spending will fall steadily from 4.3% GDP in 2012 to 2.8% GDP by 2023. Defense spending averaged 4.0% GDP from 1990 to 2012, ranging from 3.0% GDP to 5.2% GDP.
The report, provided yesterday and required by the current year’s defense appropriations measure, lists the amounts that Congress appropriated for the Pentagon’s 2,500 programs, project and budget activities, and shows how much each will be reduced by the automatic spending reductions that took effect March 1.
The Air Force’s $2.5 billion to buy 19 F-35 jets made by Lockheed reflects a sequestration cut of $503 million, according to the report. The Navy’s final $808 million to buy four carrier-model F-35s incorporates a $157 million cut, and its $1 billion for six Marine Corps short-takeoff-and vertical landing fighters reflects a $146 million reduction.
While the report doesn’t spell out the number of weapons cut in each program, defense companies will be able to use the report to determine “what funding is available for that particular program for the fiscal year,” John Roth, the Pentagon’s deputy comptroller for programs and budgets, said in an interview.
The purpose is to provide Congress a baseline of Pentagon funding that defense committees will review as they consider a Pentagon reprogramming request to move $9.6 billion between categories and mostly into readiness accounts.
V-22, Drones
In other weapons cuts, the Navy’s $1.3 billion appropriation to buy 18 additional V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft from Boeing Co. (BA) and Bell Helicopter Textron Inc. (TXT) reflects an $18 million reduction.
The Air Force’s final $82 million on 717 laser-guided Lockheed Hellfire missiles fired by Predator and Reaper drones incorporates a cut of $313,000.
On shipbuilding, the $1.74 billion Congress approved for construction of Littoral Combat Ships made by Lockheed and Austal Ltd. (ASB) reflects a cut of $43.6 million, and $437 million provided as a down payment on DDG-51 destroyers built by Huntington Ingalls and General Dynamics Corp. (GD) reflects a $28 million reduction.
The $3 billion for two additional Virginia-class submarines made by Huntington Ingalls and General Dynamics reflects a $227 million reduction.
Last edited by Heathrow Harry; 23rd Sep 2013 at 16:47.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oz
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SpazSinbad
The Making of a Joint Strike Fighter Pilot Welcome to the fifth generation.
By Art Tomassetti Air & Space magazine, November 2013
By Art Tomassetti Air & Space magazine, November 2013
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
Another chance for the F35 in S Korea.
Boeing Spurned as South Korea Plans New Tender for Jet Fighters - Bloomberg
Boeing Spurned as South Korea Plans New Tender for Jet Fighters - Bloomberg
Boeing Spurned as South Korea Plans New Tender for Jet Fighters
Someone's playing a very canny game there. It will be interesting to see if LockMart budge on their price. Of course, if they did, all the other customers will want the same deal.
Do a Hover - it avoids G
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Chichester West Sussex UK
Age: 91
Posts: 2,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HH
Having read my post again it might have been better if I said which financial mess not what financial mess.
I do not suggest that there are not all sorts of financial messes around in the US the UK and the world.
My water bag just does not happen to feel that any of them will lead to any F-35 related cancellation.
Having read my post again it might have been better if I said which financial mess not what financial mess.
I do not suggest that there are not all sorts of financial messes around in the US the UK and the world.
My water bag just does not happen to feel that any of them will lead to any F-35 related cancellation.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well the Dutch cited costs in cutting their planned order in half and they didn't rule out further cuts if the price continues to escalate
the Dutch have been one of the first, but not the last, out of several programs over the years IIRC
the Dutch have been one of the first, but not the last, out of several programs over the years IIRC
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
How to Make Sense of the U.K.'s F-35 Buy: Hire Better Sub Editors
.....had I dreamed up the whole thing about the government cutting the Labour administration's order? Wasn't it all part of an SDSR that had stressed how the purse strings had to be tightened and that the profligacy and reckless over-commitment by the previous administration had to come to an end? I went back to the SDSR: but no, it's still there - page 26/7. So I called the MoD press office to ask how it's possible that the prime contractor and the minister seem to be proceeding as if the SDSR had never happened.
"We'll get back to you," they said. And, on Friday morning, they did. The planned reduction in the number of aircraft was, it turns out, tied to the decision to buy the C rather than the B. The thinking - unpublished in the SDSR but known to its authors - was that the greater range of the C meant that fewer aircraft would be required to deliver the same military capability. When that decision was reversed, and the STOVL version went back on the UK's shopping list, the reduction in fleet size was also reversed, and the planned UK buy went back from the unspecified lower number to 138.
As if all of this wasn't already reading like a draft for a plot line in a future episode of Yes, Minister or The Thick of It, the reason for my confusion seals the deal. I have been confounded by a point of grammar.
The item at the top of page 27 reads, in full: "...reduce our planned number of Joint Strike Fighter aircraft. Installing a catapult on the new aircraft carrier will allow us to switch to the more capable carrier variant." Had those two sentences been rearranged and written as one - perhaps, for instance: "...Installing a catapult on the new aircraft carrier will allow us to switch to the more capable carrier variant, reducing the number of Joint Strike Fighter aircraft we need to acquire" - the meaning would have been clear.
The cut in numbers is not a separate issue from the change to cat-and-trap planes - and had those two points not been in separate sentences, everyone would have known for all this time that Britain was still buying 138 jets. My colleagues in the aerospace and defence media who have been writing those detailed editorials and speculative future-force analysis pieces for the past three years could have saved themselves all that brain hurt had a sub-editor in Whitehall managed to grasp the utility of the semicolon. Three years of everyone in the world (apart from staff at Lockheed Martin and the MoD) assuming that the spiralling financial crisis that has seen unprecedented cuts to the British armed services would not, after all, affect the amount of money the country is intending to spend on the most expensive defence equipment programme in history could have been avoided with a little more care in the presentation of two sentences in a single government publication.
Only one small issue remains unresolved. Presumably, therefore, at the time I first spoke to O'Bryan in 2011 - at which point Britain was committed to buying the F-35C - the British government's position was that it was buying fewer than 138 of them, but had not informed Lockheed Martin. Or maybe they did try to tell them, but they put a comma in the wrong place.
In the wrong hands, the English language can be a dangerous tool. At least, this time, its misuse will not - it would appear - end up costing British businesses millions. And for that, at least - and finally - I am thankful. I await Main Gate, and/or the next SDSR, with interest.
.....had I dreamed up the whole thing about the government cutting the Labour administration's order? Wasn't it all part of an SDSR that had stressed how the purse strings had to be tightened and that the profligacy and reckless over-commitment by the previous administration had to come to an end? I went back to the SDSR: but no, it's still there - page 26/7. So I called the MoD press office to ask how it's possible that the prime contractor and the minister seem to be proceeding as if the SDSR had never happened.
"We'll get back to you," they said. And, on Friday morning, they did. The planned reduction in the number of aircraft was, it turns out, tied to the decision to buy the C rather than the B. The thinking - unpublished in the SDSR but known to its authors - was that the greater range of the C meant that fewer aircraft would be required to deliver the same military capability. When that decision was reversed, and the STOVL version went back on the UK's shopping list, the reduction in fleet size was also reversed, and the planned UK buy went back from the unspecified lower number to 138.
As if all of this wasn't already reading like a draft for a plot line in a future episode of Yes, Minister or The Thick of It, the reason for my confusion seals the deal. I have been confounded by a point of grammar.
The item at the top of page 27 reads, in full: "...reduce our planned number of Joint Strike Fighter aircraft. Installing a catapult on the new aircraft carrier will allow us to switch to the more capable carrier variant." Had those two sentences been rearranged and written as one - perhaps, for instance: "...Installing a catapult on the new aircraft carrier will allow us to switch to the more capable carrier variant, reducing the number of Joint Strike Fighter aircraft we need to acquire" - the meaning would have been clear.
The cut in numbers is not a separate issue from the change to cat-and-trap planes - and had those two points not been in separate sentences, everyone would have known for all this time that Britain was still buying 138 jets. My colleagues in the aerospace and defence media who have been writing those detailed editorials and speculative future-force analysis pieces for the past three years could have saved themselves all that brain hurt had a sub-editor in Whitehall managed to grasp the utility of the semicolon. Three years of everyone in the world (apart from staff at Lockheed Martin and the MoD) assuming that the spiralling financial crisis that has seen unprecedented cuts to the British armed services would not, after all, affect the amount of money the country is intending to spend on the most expensive defence equipment programme in history could have been avoided with a little more care in the presentation of two sentences in a single government publication.
Only one small issue remains unresolved. Presumably, therefore, at the time I first spoke to O'Bryan in 2011 - at which point Britain was committed to buying the F-35C - the British government's position was that it was buying fewer than 138 of them, but had not informed Lockheed Martin. Or maybe they did try to tell them, but they put a comma in the wrong place.
In the wrong hands, the English language can be a dangerous tool. At least, this time, its misuse will not - it would appear - end up costing British businesses millions. And for that, at least - and finally - I am thankful. I await Main Gate, and/or the next SDSR, with interest.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
ORAC - I'll bet we buy less than 64.................
Do a Hover - it avoids G
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Chichester West Sussex UK
Age: 91
Posts: 2,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FA18
I agree with what you say about Art. He did an excellent job on the X program when the competition pressures as well as the technical ones were considerable.
The write up linked above is worth a very slow and careful read. It only has one word wrong - camera instead of projector on the second page.
I agree with what you say about Art. He did an excellent job on the X program when the competition pressures as well as the technical ones were considerable.
The write up linked above is worth a very slow and careful read. It only has one word wrong - camera instead of projector on the second page.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
but the higher the cost (or at least the headline cost as used by newspapers and politicos) and hence the greater "dividend" in cancelling
If Labour are thinking of ditching the HS rail link I can't see many F-35's surviving
If Labour are thinking of ditching the HS rail link I can't see many F-35's surviving
Bloody hell! That is alarming to say to say the least. Now you have posted that, ORAC, I am re-reading earlier publications in a different light. All I can say is "Bugger". So now what? It's not being properly thought through, is it?
Lockheed have gone on record to say that as the UK hold 20% of the IP of the F-35, cutting the order won't make much difference.
Last edited by peter we; 25th Sep 2013 at 16:11.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,575
Likes: 0
Received 51 Likes
on
45 Posts
Lockheed eyes dozens of orders for F-35 jets in coming months
Speculation on the Singapore B Buy has been well canvassed at this point.... Lotsa order speculation in the article.
Lockheed eyes dozens of orders for F-35 jets in coming months 25 Sep 2013 Andrea Shalal-Esa
Lockheed eyes dozens of orders for F-35 jets in coming months - Yahoo Finance UK
Lockheed eyes dozens of orders for F-35 jets in coming months 25 Sep 2013 Andrea Shalal-Esa
"WASHINGTON, Sept 24 (Reuters) - Lockheed Martin Corp , nearing completion of its 100th F-35 fighter jet, anticipates dozens of international orders or commitments for the new radar-evading warplane in coming months, according to U.S. government officials and industry executives....
...And Singapore may announce an initial order of one dozen F-35 jets or more at the Singapore air show in February.
Military officials from the United States and eight other countries that helped fund development of the F-35 will meet in Istanbul this week to review progress on the fighter jet that will replace the popular F-16 and a dozen other warplanes now in use around the world, according to a Pentagon spokeswoman....
...FOREIGN ORDERS FIRMING UP
After years of political wrangling, the Netherlands last week became the seventh foreign country to make a firm commitment to buy F-35s, joining Britain, Australia, Italy, Norway, Israel and Japan....
...Meanwhile, Singapore was moving closer to formalizing plans for an initial order of F-35[B?]s, according to U.S. and industry officials, who say an announcement about a dozen or more jets could come at the Singapore air show in February...."
...And Singapore may announce an initial order of one dozen F-35 jets or more at the Singapore air show in February.
Military officials from the United States and eight other countries that helped fund development of the F-35 will meet in Istanbul this week to review progress on the fighter jet that will replace the popular F-16 and a dozen other warplanes now in use around the world, according to a Pentagon spokeswoman....
...FOREIGN ORDERS FIRMING UP
After years of political wrangling, the Netherlands last week became the seventh foreign country to make a firm commitment to buy F-35s, joining Britain, Australia, Italy, Norway, Israel and Japan....
...Meanwhile, Singapore was moving closer to formalizing plans for an initial order of F-35[B?]s, according to U.S. and industry officials, who say an announcement about a dozen or more jets could come at the Singapore air show in February...."
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 24th Sep 2013 at 22:13.