Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

F-35 Cancelled, then what ?

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

F-35 Cancelled, then what ?

Old 6th Nov 2014, 18:26
  #5381 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: northofwhereiusedtobe
Posts: 1,252
That almost suggests that where we've ended up is a very bad place. I think I'd balance that with the observations that :
It does more than suggest a very bad place - there is no 'plan B' (and no chance of any plan B) and still with an extremely risky aircraft project !
And it still has not done a skijump !

Painted into a corner or what ??
longer ron is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2014, 18:40
  #5382 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 2,896
Agreed, but perhaps more importantly, no-one in MoD is capable of constructing a "should-cost" estimate in sufficient meaningful detail to force certain companies to justify their programme costs, let alone allow MoD to manage their risks.
This was the job of the HQ posts I mentioned prior to early 88. Requirements were broken down in to Programme Element Costings (PECs, which speaks for itself), and the incumbent (for example, a single civilian HPTO was responsible for ALL RN avionics) worked closely with the MoD(PE) project Directorates (the technical project managers) to produce what all agreed were accurate as possible estimates. You may have got the estimate wrong, but you rarely omitted a whole programme element; which is common place today.

That HPTO post was the boss of the Requirement Managers - 4 of whom managed all RN avionics. (Today it is no longer a centralised function, so there are scores with a finger in the pie, but none who have an overview or detailed knowledge). I use that as an example as I held such a post in the mid-80s. Then you got promoted to the most junior grade in MoD(PE). THAT's the problem nowadays! Very senior people in DE&S don't know any of this, so although they may appreciate there is a problem, none understand the solution is to implement mandated regulations. (Which were never actually cancelled. They just did away with the posts and they naturally fell in to disuse). Still got my copy!
tucumseh is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2014, 19:59
  #5383 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 786
Tuc,

I can confirm everything you said in your last post - and improbably, it's even worse now.

On a recent project I was involved with, there was NO detailed independent 'should cost' estimate. The PM started with a figure that was dreamed up between the two star and the (sole) supplier. No full cost model was prepared (despite being offered by contractors) because that was said to be 'the contractor's job'. The contractor then refused to provide a full cost breakdown, and was backed up by the PM and the TL because , we were told, 'we can trust them'.

CAAS were also cut back, and are still being rebuilt by KPMG. Their ability to cary out any decent cost investigation was hindered by a lack of requirements and any decent technical description of the modification being proposed.

And it gets better - the 'modern' way is apparently to get the contractor to write their own Systems Requirements Document (SRD). Of course, any document coming out of this process is absolutely, completely, fully, risk free 'up front' - which results in a document that doesn't even line up with the original URD. Our RM (a really decent and hard working guy) was in a constant state of despair. You are absolutely right - lack of proper requirements capture and articulation is the biggest challenge DE&S faces.

Best regards to all those trying to do the right thing

Engines
Engines is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2014, 09:19
  #5384 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,389
China's Anti-Stealth Radar Comes to Fruition

China Touts Anti-stealth Radar
ORAC is online now  
Old 23rd Nov 2014, 11:13
  #5385 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Tarn et Garonne, Southwest France
Posts: 5,283
Doesn't come as any surprise, it was discussed here a long time ago. I guess the question is, who will they sell it to? I think I know the likely answer.

Russia has a long list of VHF and L Band systems too. The ECM vs ECCM war continues.
Courtney Mil is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2014, 11:40
  #5386 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 1,918
When it comes to the F-35 it is probably the first time the ECCM has arrived on the market before the ECM.

The countermeasure cycle is usually drawn with the arrows going clockwise….
Just This Once... is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2014, 11:42
  #5387 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Melbourne
Age: 53
Posts: 628
I built an ECCCCM system in my back yard.

Or so I claim...
Romulus is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2014, 12:12
  #5388 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Welwyn Garden City
Age: 59
Posts: 1,229
I built an ECCCCM system in my back yard.
So you've managed to find a way of countering the counter to the counter to the original counter measure of the enemy radar system.

That Sir is tremendous, keep up the good work, because you never know with the Bad Guys, they'll as likely come up with a counter to it?!

FB
Finningley Boy is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2014, 12:17
  #5389 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Welwyn Garden City
Age: 59
Posts: 1,229
Hang on,

Yeah but No but,

If you've invented a ECCCCM, and the original intent was to counter an enemy radar system, then you've just countered our counter to their counter to our original counter. Blast it all man!

FB

PS I think?
Finningley Boy is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2014, 12:49
  #5390 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The Whyte House
Age: 91
Posts: 1,887
'Tis only a matter of time before an ECCCCCM appears then.
Willard Whyte is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2014, 14:30
  #5391 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,083
About 150 pages ago i think I mentioned that the F-35 program delays have probably caused the Russians to spend zillions wayyyyyy before they needed to............

Now its the Chinese......
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2014, 14:46
  #5392 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 3,960
Don't forget that F35's stealthy characteristics are designed to counter I-band fighter RADARs. So the Chinese can build all the bi-static and low frequency RADARs that they like, the F35 will still get the first volley of air to air shots away before their fighters have even seen them! After the first shots are fired the cat is kind of out of the bag for stealth anyway.

LJ
Lima Juliet is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2014, 16:13
  #5393 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Tarn et Garonne, Southwest France
Posts: 5,283
Unfortunately, Leon, that doesn't help against SAMs using VHF 3D radar targeting. And those radars sit well below the frequency coverage of HARM and AlARM (S or L band). Also, fighters can be controlled by VHF radar units and, as we know, use IRST and longer range IR guided versions of AA10 or 12. Better go on a cloudy day. No not so good after all.
Courtney Mil is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2014, 20:14
  #5394 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Arrow

Yeah courts but the airframe has both class leading acceleration and manoeuvrability so will be able to avoid being engaged kinematicly as well as using stealf once it has evaded the initial engagement...
glad rag is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2014, 21:11
  #5395 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 3,960
CM

Yes, but stealth is but one club in a very large golf bag of capabilities for F35 to operate in a hostile air environment. I agree to all of your points, but each of them have counters and as always "when there's a will, there's a way" to work through them.

LJ
Lima Juliet is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2014, 21:25
  #5396 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Tarn et Garonne, Southwest France
Posts: 5,283
golf bats aside, I think this does show the significance of Orac's post.
Courtney Mil is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2014, 22:56
  #5397 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Perth Western Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 809
bout 150 pages ago i think I mentioned that the F-35 program delays have probably caused the Russians to spend zillions wayyyyyy before they needed to............

Now its the Chinese......
Hmm, I smell a conspiracy here. Could it be the F35 is just an expensive front, just so there's a shadow aircraft being developed with different characteristics without the scrutiny.

Kill two birds with one stone, make them waste money and get a fighter that they don't have counter measures for. Sorry I will go back to watching X files.
rh200 is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2014, 06:26
  #5398 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Welwyn Garden City
Age: 59
Posts: 1,229
Joking aside it really does look like those involved at any level with the F-35 programme have been left (the Americans and us as well) up a Gum Tree. The entire rationale behind the F-35 has long been dismissed, in terms of economy, and in our own case, role, intended use and what it was to replace. None of what was planned has panned out as planned. The original aim for a cost effective replacement for existing airframes has gone way by the board, ironically becoming hideously espensive and growing.

As someone posted in response to a question of mine earlier, its no longer, in respect of U.K. requirements, simply required to replace the Sea Harrier/Harrier. Its much fewer and much more costly numbers, are to replace the afore mentioned SHAR/HAR and the Tornado GR4. In this regard, we've stuck ourselves with the runt of the litter, all for the sake of VSTOL. Meanwhile, it has become, reportedly, the most expensive commercial project of all time. We're only going to get 48, at least that many albeit, which we know of, rather than the 138 originally planned just as a Harrier replacement, and the cost has spiralled as extraordinarily as the number of faults which keep getting sniped at by the media.

FB
Finningley Boy is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2014, 08:18
  #5399 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Tarn et Garonne, Southwest France
Posts: 5,283
To pick up on FB's comment about the media sniping at F-35's faults, I wonder if this program has been handled well.

Having started a media campaign to fanfare program successes, we have ended up with a massive PR engagement that has also put all the failures and faults squarely in the public gaze. The good news is expected by the public in a modern program (I'm talking expectations, not reality, OK?), but so many failures have never really been made so obvious before.

This grand engagement with open media has done two things:

Backfired in that it has aired more dirty laundry than anyone expected to see,

Offered a LOT of free intel to its potential future opponents - yes I know classified stuff is controlled, but it all adds up.

Was it sensible to go so public?

P.S. Ooh look... ...http://threepercenternation.com/2014...armingly-like/

Last edited by Courtney Mil; 24th Nov 2014 at 13:22. Reason: Add P.S.
Courtney Mil is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2014, 14:39
  #5400 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 71
Posts: 1,938
Britain confirms first four of 14 F-35 jet orders... delivered in 2016

Another dribble of the drab then:

Britain confirms first four of 14 F-35 jet orders; batch to be delivered in 2016 - Europe News & Top Stories - The Straits Times
SpazSinbad is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.