F-35 Cancelled, then what ?
AR1 - Indeed the UK is committed. However, current actions will influence what the final bill will be (=what other capabilities will be cut to pay for the carrier force) and how much capability the force itself will have, and when.
AR1 does this thread even have a point....
this has become the F-35 news and views thread on this forum. Maybe with the new year we should try again to start a fresh one....
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Annapolis
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's been interesting to see F-35 authorizations rise during various committee hearings this fall. First, we get an extra six -Bs to fulfill its unfunded requirements, the justification being those are to replace the Harriers lost during the Camp Bastion attack, an argument the USMC has been trying for the last few cycles. Congress adds an additional 12 Super Hornet (split between E/F/Gs) orders to fulfill a Navy unfunded priority, but only two of eight unfunded -Charlies are authorized. The last five F-35 were split between -Bs and -As, noting that the USAF did not request additional F-35As.
Looking at the funding that was actually included in the bill, it is apparent that these aircraft will be produced using AP funding from prior years, and modification and O&S funds from somewhere else. The theory that production slots and long lead items availability allow it to happen fairly painlessly seems valid.
Finally, my cynical side see a bit more than a coincidence between 12 Boeing Supers and 11 Lockheed Martin F-35s. I'd wager some "handshakes" were made.
Looking at the funding that was actually included in the bill, it is apparent that these aircraft will be produced using AP funding from prior years, and modification and O&S funds from somewhere else. The theory that production slots and long lead items availability allow it to happen fairly painlessly seems valid.
Finally, my cynical side see a bit more than a coincidence between 12 Boeing Supers and 11 Lockheed Martin F-35s. I'd wager some "handshakes" were made.
Maus - I'm making the case in this thread that the F-35 plus-ups are to sustain the production ramp until (in theory) actual partner/FMS contracts catch up with the projections. Do you think that's correct?
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Annapolis
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LO - certainly plausible. As you know, they've be spending lots of money on infrastructure to support a certain level of production. To allow those facilities to run at an uneconomical rate would be, uneconomical. Carter's very recent push towards aircraft production (both F/A-18 and F-35) vs. ships could also pump up the volume in the next few years - if the Navy goes along. Lots of mixed messages re: F-35 numbers coming out of OSD this month. The game continues.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 84
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah,
Behind all the maneuvering by DoD on the F-35 to prevent the price of the aircraft from exceeding promised figures is the avoidance of a hearing in Congress like this. This happens to be the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Secretary of Defense testifying to the Senate on US Syrian strategy. Imagine a hearing like this on the F-35 skyrocketing costs... Both the Congressional supporters and the DoD supporters of the F-35 Program need to get beyond the November 2016 elections without this type of hearing happening, watch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQwofJEQ6ng
Behind all the maneuvering by DoD on the F-35 to prevent the price of the aircraft from exceeding promised figures is the avoidance of a hearing in Congress like this. This happens to be the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Secretary of Defense testifying to the Senate on US Syrian strategy. Imagine a hearing like this on the F-35 skyrocketing costs... Both the Congressional supporters and the DoD supporters of the F-35 Program need to get beyond the November 2016 elections without this type of hearing happening, watch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQwofJEQ6ng
There is a myth busting video here - not sure how to post a YouTube clip...
Also CVN availability seems to becoming an issue - hence stories like this:
The US has deployed AV-8B Harriers fighter jets to support Operation Inherent Resolve (OIR) in its fight against the terrorist group Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) in Iraq.
The Harriers from the US Marine Corps (USMC) Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron (VMM)162 will conduct their first missions over Iraq.
VMM-162(REIN) is the aviation combat element of the 26th MEU, currently embarked with the amphibious assault ship USS Kearsarge (LHD 3) Amphibious Ready Group (ARG).
Additionally, the ARG-MEU team of marines and sailors are deployed throughout the region to carry out missions in support of OIR, including theatre security cooperation and maritime security operations.
"We're here to assure our allies, deter any adversaries and provide a persistent US presence here in the US 5th Fleet area of operations."
Kearsarge ARG commander captain Augustus P Bennett said: "The Kearsarge Amphibious Ready Group with the embarked 26th MEU, along with our coalition partners, are here to degrade and destroy ISIL's current operations under OIR.
"The combined ARG-MEU team is an expeditionary Navy/Marine Corps force that stands ready and has been trained for these types of operations. We're here to assure our allies, deter any adversaries and provide a persistent US presence here in the US 5th Fleet area of operations."
In October, the last naval aviation missions in support of OIR were conducted from USS Essex (LHD 2).
Just as well there is a ship-borne STOVL option!
Also CVN availability seems to becoming an issue - hence stories like this:
The US has deployed AV-8B Harriers fighter jets to support Operation Inherent Resolve (OIR) in its fight against the terrorist group Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) in Iraq.
The Harriers from the US Marine Corps (USMC) Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron (VMM)162 will conduct their first missions over Iraq.
VMM-162(REIN) is the aviation combat element of the 26th MEU, currently embarked with the amphibious assault ship USS Kearsarge (LHD 3) Amphibious Ready Group (ARG).
Additionally, the ARG-MEU team of marines and sailors are deployed throughout the region to carry out missions in support of OIR, including theatre security cooperation and maritime security operations.
"We're here to assure our allies, deter any adversaries and provide a persistent US presence here in the US 5th Fleet area of operations."
Kearsarge ARG commander captain Augustus P Bennett said: "The Kearsarge Amphibious Ready Group with the embarked 26th MEU, along with our coalition partners, are here to degrade and destroy ISIL's current operations under OIR.
"The combined ARG-MEU team is an expeditionary Navy/Marine Corps force that stands ready and has been trained for these types of operations. We're here to assure our allies, deter any adversaries and provide a persistent US presence here in the US 5th Fleet area of operations."
In October, the last naval aviation missions in support of OIR were conducted from USS Essex (LHD 2).
Just as well there is a ship-borne STOVL option!
Last edited by WE Branch Fanatic; 28th Dec 2015 at 10:05.
More like recycling myths, I suspect, although I did not get far, with the narrator sounding like the voice-alert system from a 1986 Toyota.
Sounds like the Kearsage is being positioned to do CSAR (see: Libya) in the event of an "oops, butterfingerski" from the S-400 crew, or whatever "Fox 2... oh
" sounds like in Turkish.
What it almost certainly is not is adding six AV-8Bs because of inadequate bomb-dropper numbers, because it seems that the choke-point for the operation is ISR, PED and other targeting phases.
Sounds like the Kearsage is being positioned to do CSAR (see: Libya) in the event of an "oops, butterfingerski" from the S-400 crew, or whatever "Fox 2... oh
" sounds like in Turkish. What it almost certainly is not is adding six AV-8Bs because of inadequate bomb-dropper numbers, because it seems that the choke-point for the operation is ISR, PED and other targeting phases.
1. Because for the next 15 years, not every mission will be flown by F-35's.
2. Because one can expect the EM spectrum to get more interesting, not less so, and our old habits of keeping some EW in a strike package aren't all bad.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe late to the party with this, however..
F-35 Officials Prove Need for Cyber Testing by Cancelling One
"..cyber tests are particularly important for the F-35, which is commonly referred to as a “flying computer.”
The plane has approximately 30 million lines of software code controlling all of the plane’s functions, from moving flight surfaces to creating images in its infamous $600,000 helmet.
All this is tightly integrated with the ALIS program, which many consider to be the plane’s largest vulnerability.
Should an enemy hack the ALIS system successfully, they could disable F-35 systems in combat, cause disastrous crashes, or ground the entire fleet."...
"..cyber tests are particularly important for the F-35, which is commonly referred to as a “flying computer.”
The plane has approximately 30 million lines of software code controlling all of the plane’s functions, from moving flight surfaces to creating images in its infamous $600,000 helmet.
All this is tightly integrated with the ALIS program, which many consider to be the plane’s largest vulnerability.
Should an enemy hack the ALIS system successfully, they could disable F-35 systems in combat, cause disastrous crashes, or ground the entire fleet."...
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Should an enemy hack the ALIS system successfully, they could disable F-35 systems in combat, cause disastrous crashes, or ground the entire fleet."...
Once you have a computer between you and the flight controls or engine, you are entirely exposed to hacking if an enemy manages to get into your software. The fact that nobody has managed it yet suggests it ain't easy....
This is just a moron article.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leicestershire, England
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
-RP
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: England's green and pleasant land
Posts: 697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Article clearly bolleux. There are not 30 million lines of software code, leading me to believe it's a completely incredible and weighted pile of journalistic rubbish.
Still, if it fits the narrative of the poster....
Still, if it fits the narrative of the poster....
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How is this different from the computer running the fly-by-wire system or FADEC of any fighter since F16?
Once you have a computer between you and the flight controls or engine, you are entirely exposed to hacking if an enemy manages to get into your software. The fact that nobody has managed it yet suggests it ain't easy....
This is just a moron article.
Once you have a computer between you and the flight controls or engine, you are entirely exposed to hacking if an enemy manages to get into your software. The fact that nobody has managed it yet suggests it ain't easy....
This is just a moron article.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I tend to take a step back and look at the overall picture...
Last edited by glad rag; 27th Dec 2015 at 17:51.
Probably six and a half just now; maybe eight and a half when it's finished. But what exactly is a "line of code"? If they're talking instructions and including the diagnostics and all the other stuff the onboard boxes need to interface with, they could be right. But not all defence experts understand software architecture or even the terms used to describe it.
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: England's green and pleasant land
Posts: 697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's around "8.5 - 9" million lines of software code for SDD; devil being in the detail, of course.
CM - as always you make a good point but I'm still suspicious of a x4 ish order of magnitude inflation in their facts.
Software has always been the biggest sticking point for me and they have always been behind, since around 2005. Some poor decisions were made back then and we've faced the brunt of those decisions since.
CM - as always you make a good point but I'm still suspicious of a x4 ish order of magnitude inflation in their facts.
Software has always been the biggest sticking point for me and they have always been behind, since around 2005. Some poor decisions were made back then and we've faced the brunt of those decisions since.