F-35 Cancelled, then what ?

[Courtney Mil]

I can't fault your maths, LO, but it's more like a lot of the 300 doing STOVL 10% of the time rather than 10% doing it all the time. You know what I mean.

[peter we]

His maths isn't wrong, its his logic.

Originally Posted by LowObservable

Do you think that the idea is that the Marines will wait until hostilities approach to train for shipboard and austere-base ops?

The vertical landing element only takes up 10% of training whereas it took significantly more with the AV-8B (especially with the Marines). This makes for a much cheaper training for the F-35B, which is an advantage. Isn't it?

[LowObservable]

Er, no. The pilot training is only part of the operation. The entire unit has to train and practice in sea or austere-base operations. What the Marines are admitting is that STOVL ops will actually comprise small detachments on some, not all, of the amphibs. This is a strategically nonsensical misalignment of resources given the costs that STOVL has imposed on the project.

[Just This Once...]

That's the way read it too. Once you are embarked STOVL ops are the only option so the only way to reduce the % is to fly from land and use CTOL.

[NITRO104]

peter we,
If you want to cite $125m for the F-35A, it'd be only fair to use the same criteria all around by which metric the SH measures $54m per unit (URF).
Also, I believe MC proposed a 10% of the entire service life ops to be conducted in STOVL, which was then the basis for calculating LCC for B.

[Courtney Mil]

Originally Posted by peter we

His maths isn't wrong, its his logic.

I almost said that in my post, but I don't think that's completely true. It was just maths applied too literally. If maths can be literal. Anyway, LO does make some very good points about training effort and the compromises of going down the STOVL route. But, if the CVLs are being cut, I suspect the figure could rise way above 10%.

Anyway, too many figures for this time of night.

Bon nuit.

P.S. Nitro, good point made about like for like costs.

[peter we]

Originally Posted by NITRO104

If you want to cite $125m for the F-35A, it'd be only fair to use the same criteria all around by which metric the SH measures $54m per unit (URF).

Its difficult to get like-for like comparisons. However S. Korea has just been give the costs for the F-15, Eurofighter and F-35 for 60 units, everything included. for a defined requirement.

The F-15 and Eurofighter were offered (eventually) on budget at $7.9Bn (direct commercial sale). The F-35 came in at $10.8bn (Foreign Military Sales process)

Fighter jet bidding extended again

Which indicates the F-35A is currently 37% more expensive than comparable aircraft (10.8/7.9= 1.37). Still, its 80% (according to LO) of the functionality for 73% of the price

The F-18 will surely come in at the same ball park (ref - Australia's A$10billion+ SH program Australia?s 2nd Fighter Fleet: Super Hornets & Growlers )

[oldmansquipper]

Hang on to your hat?

Technical fault left RAF pilots unable to see where they were flying the Ł100 million aircraft | Mail Online

So its back to the future then?

[SpazSinbad]

Alternate Good News for the NON Alternate Helmet M'Lud

Yep it is - future backup helmet no-go - most Brit newspapers belong in the 19th century but anyways...

F-35 Program Stops Alternate Helmet Display Development | Aviation International News

[NITRO104]

peter we,
to clear any doubt, http://www.saffm.hq.af.mil/shared/me...130408-079.pdf
which shows Congress allocating about $125m in FY14 (LRIP6) to manufacture each JSF 'A'.
I don't think Korea will be getting LRIP6 but subsequent and less expensive batches, so $180m export price in '18 or so doesn't look encouraging, particularly since souped-up Eurofighter is being offered at a comparatively modest $130m.

[peter we]

Nitro

The Korean requirement is immediate, I don't think they can wait to 2018.

For interest, FWIW. Flyaway unit cost in FY 2018 $96.152milion, Gross/Weapon System Unit Cost $107.14

(Flyaway unit cost includes recurring flyaway, non-recurring flyaway, and ancillary equipment.)

[Squirrel 41]

Peter we

Originally Posted by peter we

The Korean requirement is immediate, I don't think they can wait to 2018.

Well, in that case they'd better not buy F-35s as the JSFs aren't going to be combat ready in a meaningful sense until 2018/20 or so.

Can't have it both ways, I'm afraid.

S41

[SpazSinbad]

Final combat-capable Block 3-F version in late 2016?

Some recent info for the squirrel.... who opined:

"...they'd better not buy F-35s as the JSFs aren't going to be combat ready in a meaningful sense until 2018/20 or so...."

Lockheed Martin touts F-35’s strengths in future combat 31 Oct 2013 Song Sang-ho

"..."...Observers and officials are concerned the decision [South Korean next-generation fighter jet project reset] could cause a delay in the plan to deploy 60 high-end warplanes from 2017-2021.

Scott expressed confidence about the delivery commitment despite worries about a possible delay.

“The offer that the U.S. government and Lockheed Martin submitted included deliveries beginning as early as 2017, and we can still maintain those deliveries if there is a decision made to proceed forward in the near future,” he said.

Touching on the acquisition cost, Scott reiterated that Korea would be in the “sweet spot” of the cost curve as the production of the F-35 would ramp up with more customers placing orders.

“The cost of the F-35 has come down substantially. From the first-year production to the seventh-year production, we decreased the price by 55 percent and we will continue to decrease that price as we increase the production rate,” he said.

“The U.S. government projects the F-35A model ordered in 2018 and delivered in 2020 will be $85 million for the airplane. To that, we need to add spares, support and training and other things that go to create a full capability for the ROKAF (Republic of Korea Air Force). But that is a very competitive price compared to current generation planes.”...

...Scott said the development of the F-35 software was on track. Now, the “Block-2A” software is being tested with a plan to complete the final combat-capable Block 3-F version in late 2016...."

Lockheed Martin touts F-35?s strengths in future combat

[SpazSinbad]

Get Used to CVF via SIMulation Interactivity

Exhibition shows life on board new aircraft carriers at Yeovilton 02 Nov 2013 Western Daily Press

"...visitors to the Fleet Air Arm Museum at Yeovilton in Somerset can experience what life will be like aboard ship and for their new generation of fighter pilots.

A new permanent exhibition on HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales has opened at the museum near Yeovil. It plots the history of Royal Naval flying from its earliest days and features films showing the unique 'building block' construction process of the new carriers, which are the largest and most powerful surface warships ever built for the Royal Navy. Interactive displays allowing the user to manoeuvre aircraft on the flight deck and take off....

...The Royal Navy's first F35 pilot, Lieutenant-Commander Ian Tidball is contributing to a blog in the new gallery."

Exhibition shows life on board new aircraft carriers at Yeovilton | Yeovil People

[peter we]

Originally Posted by Squirrel41

Well, in that case they'd better not buy F-35s

The Typhoon bid was rejected because they only included 6 twin seaters. There was no requirement for two seat aircraft and, of course, the F-35 is a single seater.

Nothing is as it seems in this 'competition'.

[Squirrel 41]

Originally Posted by SpazSinbad

...Scott said the development of the F-35 software was on track. Now, the “Block-2A” software is being tested with a plan to complete the final combat-capable Block 3-F version in late 2016...."

Exactly my point, Spaz. Even assuming that the Block 3 is on time and to budget (draw your own conclusions based on the performance so far.... ) in late-2016, then if you're South Korea:

- Take delivery of 60 JSFs;

- Train air and ground crews;

- Integrate JSF into the RoKAF.

None of this happens overnight, so even if the "late-2016" timeline is right, a JSF operational capability for RoKAF is most unlikely before 2018. Hence, if you are South Korea and want something useable before then, you don't buy JSF.

S41

[SpazSinbad]

Pentagon's F-35 office eyes possible change in testing approach

What South Korea does in what timeframe is up to them. Perhaps this development may help them along - if all goes well.

Pentagon's F-35 office eyes possible change in testing approach

[airborne_artist]

Meanwhile the cost of the carriers "is expected to be almost twice the original estimate, the Ministry of Defence is expected to confirm this week"

"A government source said it had inherited a flawed contract that was now being renegotiated to ensure industry shared the burden of any future rises.



During the course of the project, an order for carrier jump jets - capable of short take-offs and vertical landings - was switched to jets with a longer range that could carry more weapons.



However, in February last year, the MoD decided to revert to the original jets for logistical and financial reasons."

[chopper2004]

Bone Dome problem

Think you've see all this? RAF pilots left ?blinded? at 1000 mph by helmet technical glitch - Home News - UK - The Independent I saw it on the Air Forces Monthly FB link

[SpazSinbad]

'chopper2004' perhaps you were blinded by the light of this very similar report here: http://www.pprune.org/military-aircr...ml#post8133193

With a reply here below that link. Rptd here: F-35 Program Stops Alternate Helmet Display Development | Aviation International News