F-35 Cancelled, then what ?

[LowObservable]

a1bill - Don't insult the capacity of this forum by posting an eight-year-old marketing chart.

Orca - Gilmore does not have an empire, his title being a bit of a misnomer. He does not command operational test units or organizations; he reports to Congress and they are unlikely to get rid of him just because someone develops a streamlined test procedure.

It's worth noting that Gilmore strongly criticized a reduction in flight test sorties and hours that the JSF program planned in 2006-07, sorties which were restored by the program's post-2010 leadership.

And I fail to see how the Wasp trial has proven anything, given the huge divergence between the test and any conceivable combat operation in terms of sortie generation rates, space available, contractor support and the availability of large in-range land bases.

[glad rag]

Originally Posted by Turbine D

glad rag,

A place to start would be here:
http://www.public.navy.mil/surflant/...partments.aspx
Prior to the very first F-35B flight tests aboard the Wasp, training was accomplished ashore to familiarize the appropriate Wasp's crew members with the F-35B aircraft as I recall.

If the crew changed composition between the then and the May IOC, I would assume the Navy had most of the responsibility to train any newcomers, but I am really guessing.

TD

TD thanks for that link.

IMO the deployment [Wasp] report firmly points towards a poorly conceived and planned exercise/deployment where the term "ad hoc" was the primary motivator......

PS one thing of note from Wasp report was that main electrical power cannot be applied to the aircraft [in it's current form, no pun intended] when on the flight deck as it needs a "cooling cart" to do so.
I wonder if this is due to the inability to carry out an avionics isolation procedure as there is no electrical isolation equipment fitted [removed due to weight cuts] OR it's truly a design?????

Do our new UK carriers have the ability to provide this cooling facility built in? And if not WHY NOT??

I will assume that these deficiencies will be addressed on future build standards, no doubt with further detrimental effect to the F-35b's waistline...

[a1bill]

ORAC, the RAAF plans on a 2020 IOC. They are looking for block 3F.

LO, the old chart served the purpose of what the different blocks were looking at in capability.

[Turbine D]

orca,

I'm sure we've all considered this, but is there a chance that Dr Gilmore's memo is a stout defence (or defense) of his own empire.

To clarify some things for you on your points regarding Dr. Gilmore, his organization isn't that big, he sits in an "empire", but doesn't have an "empire" per-se. He and his organization are the check and balance guys that observe what the armed services are doing on testing and evaluations on all military programs and that includes the F-35 Program. The job sometimes includes separation of the wheat from the chaff or in plain American English, "Everything is Okey-Dokey" from "Everything isn't Okey-Dokey" and points in between. That is what he did on the F-35B May USS Wasp test, much to the chagrin of the USMC upper level brass. From the Department of Defense own published organization structure:

“There is a Director of Operational Test and Evaluation in the Department of Defense, appointed from civilian life by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.”
“Operational test and evaluation means --
the field test, under realistic combat conditions, of any item of (or key component of) weapons, equipment, or munitions for use in combat by typical military users; and the evaluation of the results of such test
“The Director shall --
prescribe, by authority of the Secretary of Defense, policies and procedures for the conduct of operational test and evaluation in the Department of Defense;
provide guidance to and consult with the Secretary of Defense and the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology and the Secretaries of the military departments in general and with respect to specific operational test and evaluation...;
coordinate operational testing conducted jointly by more than one military department or defense agency;
monitor and review all operational test and evaluation in the Department of Defense;
review and make recommendations to the Secretary of Defense on all budgetary and financial matters...;
monitor and review the live fire testing activities of the Department….

So, as glad rag aptly pointed out:

IMO the deployment [Wasp] report firmly points towards a poorly conceived and planned exercise/deployment where the term "ad hoc" was the primary motivator......

There would not have been such a furor, had the USMC top brass not linked this ocean demo to the previously established, hewn in stone, IOC date claiming it was IOC. Then when the facts emerged, claimed it wasn't ICO at all. IMHO, the whole IOC connotation was a "Rush to Judgement" and did not meet the requirements of IOC defined in agreement with the US Congress.

BTW, the word "deployment" is interesting, depending on the connotation attached. Deployment can be bad (deployed to the Arizona graveyard), good (deployed to the front line of hostilities, fully operational), or meaningless (neither good or bad), not defined as to the reasons for deployment. In the case of the F-35B, deployment to Japan will to take place in 2017 (land-based only) and 2018 (ship board deployment). There is time to figure out what needs to be accomplished between now and then, e.g., more operational test and evaluations…

TD

[Mach Two]

A1bill, I'm amazed a fanboy would post a graphic that shows us here in 2015 at the end of OT&E for block 4 and with block 6 well into development. By your measure, the RAAF should be fully up and running by now. What happened?

EDIT: Sorry, ORAC, just saw that you spotted the same thing.

[ORAC]

National Post: Michael Byers: The F-35 is now unaffordable thanks to the low Canadian dollar

The Royal Canadian Air Force’s (RCAF) hoped-for-purchase of F-35 fighter jets has hit another obstacle, in the form of a Canadian dollar that has dropped 25 per cent against its U.S. counterpart since 2013. Another, less expensive, non-developmental plane will now need to be chosen to replace the three decade-old CF-18s.

The cost of the F-35 first became an issue in 2010 when the Harper government announced it would acquire 65 of the planes for $9 billion, with a total project cost of $16 billion. The Canadian dollar was then at US$0.96. The Harper government also commissioned KPMG to clarify the cost of 65 F-35s. In November 2012, the accounting firm came up with a total project cost of $45.8 billion. The Canadian dollar was then at US$1.01......

By happenstance, the Canadian dollar has been hovering around US$0.755 for the last few weeks. This means that 65 F-35s would now cost $10.7 billion — well above the $9 billion acquisition cost limit set by the Harper government — and that the sustainment cost would now be $16.86 billion, up from $14.26 billion........

Here’s the bottom line: the total cost of the F-35 program is now $49 billion — an increase of $3.2 billion from the projections provided by KPMG in 2012 and DND in 2014. This includes all acquisition, sustainment and operating costs and assumes that development, disposal and attrition costs have not changed. Is it any wonder that Conservative Leader Stephen Harper has avoided mentioning the need for new fighter jets recently? For this $3.2 billion in additional costs will require a tough decision by any prime minister committed to balanced budgets.

One option is to purchase only 54 F-35s, which is all that $9 billion can now buy. The problem is, the RCAF has stated that it requires a minimum of 65 fighter jets. Another option is to divert the $3.2 billion from other military projects. But the Harper government has already cut defence spending to one per cent of GDP, the lowest level in half a century.

A third option is to purchase a less expensive plane. For instance, a fleet of Boeing F/A-18 Super Hornets would cost about $6.5 billion at the current exchange rate, and would be significantly cheaper to operate and sustain than a fleet of F-35s.

Unlike Harper, who has not revealed his current plan, both opposition leaders are committed to a full competition for new aircraft to replace the CF-18s. Yet any such competition would be constrained by a budgetary ceiling and a baseline number of planes, which — given current circumstances — would preclude the F-35 from the outset. It is certainly possible to envisage a competition involving one or more European-made fighter jets, but their already-high costs have also risen — due to a sharp decline in the value of the Canadian dollar against the Euro.

Although untendered procurements are far from optimal, a sole-source purchase of Super Hornets now seems likely. It might, in the end, deliver the very planes that Canada should have bought in a more organized and logical manner.

The fact is, Harper took a reckless approach to replacing the CF-18s. He could have held a fair competition at the outset, and bought a proven model of fighter jet on-time and on-budget. Instead, he reached for the latest and most expensive technology, took on a significant cost risk, and got burned.

[Heathrow Harry]

interesting article in the Economist a week agao about how the Candadian Armed Forces spend a lot less than most of their allies - I think the term "freeloading" occured in places................

[BEagle]

I'd guess that the RCAF will decide against the L-M black hole of defence expenditure and will decide either on the Rafale or the SuperBug....

Either of which will meet their needs MUCH less expensively than would the ridiculous F-35A.....

[Royalistflyer]

Pity our carriers won't let us do likewise

[LowObservable]

With a virtually-new Gripen in the works and solid mod programs under way for Rafale and Typhoon, it's a good time to be the customer.

[evansb]

Canada's Liberal Prime-ministerial candidate would cancel F-35

Trudeau says he would scrap F-35 plan, use money for navy | The Chronicle Herald

[a1bill]

now that normal pilots are being trained, we are getting home movies

[Rhino power]

Originally Posted by a1bill

now that normal pilots are being trained, we are getting home movies

Have all previously trained pilots been 'abnormal' then? What makes him a 'normal' pilot?

-RP

[Lonewolf_50]

Originally Posted by a1bill

USAF and home movies

I've got a word I was once taught: FOUO. Another one: OPSEC.

Further comments censored, beyond the USAF being lost in their quest to be more corporate. Where our folks have gotten to with this whole open kimono deal is really upsetting me.

[MSOCS]

Ah, bless...

[M609]

First RNoAF F-35A unveiled in big media do today.

[LowObservable]

Not much OPSEC risk from someone who confuses a camera with a projector.

[Courtney Mil]

M609, if you could find a picture that's just a tad bigger we won't be able to read the rest of the page at all.

EDIT: thanks. Much better.

[a1bill]

go easy on the f-35 guy, He forgot he had his FJ wristwatch on and did a snappy salute. He then spent a month in hospital and still gets things confused.

[ORAC]

That's what happens when you forget to put your $400K helmet on first......