F-35 Cancelled, then what ?

[ORAC]

However John, you can draw two lines on the graph, increasing cost and declining numbers purchased.

With the expected F-35 purchase and GR4 retirement we are nearly at the point of the old joke of having one operational aircraft, and the RN and RAF each flying it on alternate days......

[LowObservable]

There is another exception to the trend - just not in the UK, US or France. Rated by one European customer at 0.5 x operating costs of the Rafale or Typhoon. Nose-to-nose life-cycle cost comparison by different governments of similar size fleets over the same time period: 0.33 x F-35.

[Hempy]

Originally Posted by rh200

Ummm, well that is capitalism, I was under the understanding thats how it was supposed to work.

Did you actually read and comprehend the post that I was replying to? For reference;

...if that supplier were doing their honest best for the Nation (plus allies) as well as making a reasonable profit

No kidding that it's capitalism, Walt. That was my entire point.

[Engines]

ORAC,

Surely a slip on your part - you forgot to mention all those many Typhoons the RAF has been supplied with. At some significant expense to the UK taxpayer. I seem to remember CAS and other 'independent' experts saying that they have a 'demonstrated' and 'fully cleared' air to ground strike capability. I definitely remember the claims that they were the 'key' aircraft in the UK's Libya operations.

Right? I mean, they do have a cleared capability, don't they?

I apologise in advance for an outbreak of sarcasm, but I do think that latching on to F-35 as an example of rising combat aircraft costs (quite justifiably, in my view) but not mentioning the huge costs of the single role Typhoon is a little inconsistent.

Best regards as ever to those having to juggle the budgets

Engines

[LowObservable]

I hold no brief for Typhoon costs. Both Typhoon and Rafale are pretty expensive aircraft to acquire and to operate.

However, neither was sold as a breakthrough in affordability, in acquisition and operations.

[MSOCS]

but not mentioning the huge costs of the single role Typhoon is a little inconsistent.

Engines me-old, I presume you mean Typhoon being single role on Service entry last decade? I say this as the current P1EB upgrade to the jet now gives it a very nice A-G capability, quite a way beyond the "austere" sticking plaster it had during the Libyan intervention of 2011.

This of course is a bit of an aside to the thread but frankly after 300 pages the OP topic has grown more roots than the Amazon Rainforest.

However, neither was sold as a breakthrough in affordability, in acquisition and operations.

Ah the 4 pillars of the F-35 Program - report those who came up with such nonsense to Trading Standards immediately!!

[Courtney Mil]

MSOCS,

I think Engines was referring to Typoon entering service with a single role. I suspect he knows its capabilities since. On the face of it, it's a valid comparison with F-35, although the risks with F-35 are probably far greater and the budget-juggling more intense.

[malcrf]

Can we have some Gripens please?

About 120, with Eurojet engines.

This stealth stuff is bollox anyway. We need some numbers, we can both afford to but and to operate!

[Engines]

Gents,

Thanks for coming back, and once again I apologise for being a little frivolous. But:

Yes, the P1Eb upgrade seems to give the Typhoon a decent Paveway capability. The point I was making was the severe 'overclaiming' that has gone on for some three or four years over Typhoon's strike capability, and the relative silence on PPrune about it. (Certainly compared to the criticism of F-35). And no, I don't think I would call the P1Eb upgrade a 'paradigm shift'. (BAES press release Nov 14).

I'm not having a pop at BAE: I know how hard they have had to work to get to this stage. But I also have a decent grasp of how much the UK has had to pay to get here, and how long it's had to wait. I also have a reasonable handle on how much the UK would have to do (and pay) to take the Typhoon much further.

Doing this combat aircraft stuff is hard. F-35 certainly made a rod for their own backs with the claims and publicity early on. But they're by no means the only program to suffer delays and challenges.

Anyways, free forum and all that. For my part, I'm waiting to see how the next set of F-35B sea trials go.

Best regards as ever to all those managing the mods

Engines

[Hempy]

Originally Posted by Engines

The point I was making was the severe 'overclaiming' that has gone on for some three or four years over Typhoon's strike capability, and the relative silence on PPRuNe about it

At a guess I'd suggest that most are experienced (aka cynical) enough to understand that posturing and 'overclaiming' are de rigueur when agendas are at play. The Typhoon, however, is a proven aircraft. The F-35, by anyones standards, has proven nothing. Therein lies the difference.

[ORAC]

ORAC,

Surely a slip on your part - you forgot to mention all those many Typhoons the RAF has been supplied with.

"Many" Haaa!!

Not a slip. The Typhoon was bought primarily as a replacement for the AD force. (Remember when had 7 AD squadrons? I'm not even going back to the F4/Lightning/RAFG days).

Primarily designed as a Mig 29 killer, second daylight bombing role to replace the Jag before all its upgrades. So A-G was never a real design factor, not wanted by the other buyers and a late and therefore expensive add-on.

What's the F-35 excuse?

And even if it eventually meets the design capability - it doesn't answer my point about numbers. Quantity has a quality all of its own.

[typerated]

Typhoon entered service as an excellent basic airframe with superlative performance but hindered by mediocre systems.


At best will the F-35 be the opposite?


If all the smarts (apart from stealthy shape) from the F-35 was put into the F-15SE would that have been more for less?

[FODPlod]

Originally Posted by Hempy

...The Typhoon, however, is a proven aircraft. The F-35, by anyones standards, has proven nothing. Therein lies the difference...

I think people are just pointing out how long and how much more money it has taken since the first Typhoon flight in Mar 1994. Typhoon didn't assume responsibility for UK QRA until Jun 2007 (13 years later) and wasn't formally declared an advanced AD platform until Jan 2008 (14 years later).

Although the first F-35A flight was in Dec 2006, the first F-35B flight wasn't until Jun 2008.

[kbrockman]

Somebody who should have some idea about the F35

Ex-British defence minister says US fighter jet F-35 'history's biggest white elephant' | Siasat

London, May 10:

A former defence minister has warned that a plane that is touted to be the world's most advanced stealth fighter jet and could lend Britain and the U.S. air superiority in any future conflict is turning out to be one of the "the biggest white elephants in history."

...

While the Ministry of Defence (MoD) maintains that the U.K. fleet will have the "warfighting capability required" by 2018 - six years late. But former defence minister Sir Nick Harvey said there was "not a cat in hell's chance" the F-35 would be combat-ready by 2018.

[Not_a_boffin]

Ex MinDef, over two years out of post and a "communications executive" by trade. Presumably briefed only by CS and mil while in post.

Pinch of salt required wrt the hyperbole used methinks......

[glad rag]

Don't shoot the messenger, prove him wrong.

I doubt that you can do that though.

[Not_a_boffin]

Nor can you prove him right - which is the point I'm making.

For some it's the greatest thing since sliced bread - an uber-jet. For others we're all doomed, the sky is falling, it's the biggest white elephant in history.

The truth will undoubtedly be somewhere in the middle.

[LowObservable]

N-a-B...

I'm not that optimistic. Follow the trajectory of the JSF news since they started. It's already gone through "it's late and it will cost more" and "it's later than that and will cost even more": the Cloggies have come down from 85 jets to 37, and who knows when or how far the UK will get beyond 48 aircraft to the 138 now planned.

The USAF is trying to throw the A-10 force into the crusher to alleviate huge pressures on maintenance people (because of "don't ask ALIS"), which are already crimping F-16 readiness. Aesa upgrade of the F-16s has already been binned, which will leave them very susceptible to EW in the 2020s. (Amraam engagements? GLWT.)

Fortunately our adversaries have sat on their hands instead of perceiving a vulnerability and developing sensors aimed dead-center at F-35 stealth levels. Wait, what?

[Not_a_boffin]

No-one is ever going to hold it up as a model programme, that's for sure.

On the other hand, it's the programme most of "the west" bet on. Like it or not, it's what we're stuck with, so making it work becomes the priority. Endless calls of "we're doomed" sometimes on the flimsiest of evidence are not necessarily an indicator of the truth either.

There are a couple of things that don't get reported as much - the reduction in unit price (yes, I know it's not what was originally promised) below many of the predictions and the curious absence of anyone who's actually flown the jet decrying it in public - at least as far as I can see. They can't all be still in or on LMs payroll can they?

None of which makes it an uber-jet, but none of which makes it a white elephant either.

Hindsight is a curious thing. The big cost savings were seen as being commonality of kit for which apparently, the airframe had to be pretty much the same. You get the same in ships where people suggest that a common hullform might be a great way of saving money. Problem is that when you get into the detail of the hullform (much as with an airframe), the different arrangement drivers and loads, tend to move you away from there.

In hindsight, it might have been better to concentrate on common system / equipment items (eg engines, radar, displays, helmets, actuators etc) to get your logistics savings, but let the designers optimise the airframe and its structure for the mission. Would have made STOVL extremely difficult to fund, but that was always going to be the case. Might also have maintained a wider fighter design expertise base, which would have been beneficial for F/A XX and so forth.

But then people are convinced that the future is autonomy and anyone who ventures otherwise is clearly a heretic who needs to be burned at the stake. As with whether the F35 is an eventual success or not, time will tell......

[Hempy]

developing sensors aimed dead-center at F-35 stealth levels. Wait, what?

You mean all that non-stealthy crap hanging off the wings?