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 16th Apr 2018, 08:05
  #11261 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: au
Posts: 49
Originally Posted by glad rag View Post
What a Shambles.
Buyer halts further deliveries, till a resolution on a dispute is settled. Is this is the first procurement you have ever followed?
golder is offline  
Old 16th Apr 2018, 08:13
  #11262 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,120
Not sure if this makes it look better or worse. When you’re in a hole - stop digging......

https://www.defensenews.com/air/2018...rds-lord-says/
ORAC is offline  
Old 16th Apr 2018, 14:08
  #11263 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: virginia, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 781
Originally Posted by ORAC View Post
Not sure if this makes it look better or worse. When youíre in a hole - stop digging......

https://www.defensenews.com/air/2018...rds-lord-says/

Sounds like this should have been done several times during the program. Think there was so much pressure to field jets no one wanted more delays.


Now watch LM charge for storage.....
sandiego89 is offline  
Old 16th Apr 2018, 16:20
  #11264 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: South Skerry
Posts: 305
Meanwhile,,,

Pentagon Could Kill F-35 JPO, But Not Until 2035 | Defense content from Aviation Week

"The Pentagon will gradually dissolve the JPO over a period of nearly two decades."

Wasn't that what the Sarlacc did?
George K Lee is offline  
Old 1st May 2018, 15:19
  #11265 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: virginia, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 781
Looks like Japan has completed their study, and......the B could work off the Japanese (not- a)carrier. Of course this would only be if asked to support US F-35B operations....

Izumo-Class Destroyers Deemed Fit to Carry F-35B Aircraft, If Remodeled (excerpt)
Izumo-Class Destroyers Deemed Fit to Carry F-35B Aircraft, If Remodeled (excerpt)(Source: Yomiuri Shimbun; published April 28, 2018)The [Japanese] Defense Ministry released a report on Friday concluding that Izumo-class destroyers of the Maritime Self-Defense Force can handle takeoffs and landings of fighter aircraft, if remodeled.

The report positively evaluated the Izumo-class destroyers for their “high potential to improve aircraft operational capabilities.”

Izumo-class destroyers are the largest in the MSDF. The Izumo and Kaga destroyers, both currently in service, are under consideration to be remodeled into aircraft carriers by the MSDF.

The report, which was submitted on March 22, is based on an investigation the MSDF entrusted to Japan Marine United Corp., the company that manufactured the Izumo-class vessels.

According to the report, the company examined whether the most advanced stealth F-35B fighter aircraft, which are capable of making short take-offs and vertical landings, can be operated from the Izumo-class vessels. The report lists what needs to be remodeled and other necessities that would enable the aircraft to take off, land, refuel and hangar.

The investigation was conducted under the assumption that the purpose would be to provide logistic support to U.S. military aircraft. Aircraft maintenance work on the Izumo-class vessels was among the situations not envisaged.

The company also examined the possibility of operating unmanned aircraft with rotor blades or fixed wings.


(EDITOR’S NOTE: The Asahi Shimbun said that “the Defense Ministry's precondition for the study was to look into how the Izumo could be used to provide rear-line support to the U.S. military,” but not to operate F-35Bs on its own ships.
The company was asked to provide estimates for the cost and construction schedule if changes were made to allow U.S. F-35B stealth fighter jets to land vertically on the deck and to use elevators to transport aircraft to their hangars, it reported.)


-ends-
sandiego89 is offline  
Old 11th May 2018, 08:04
  #11266 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,120
The headline mentions ships - but the only programme mentioned in the article is the F-35.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/m...osts-97hx79bgl

MoD is billions short for new ships and jets after losing control of costs

Britain’s defence chiefs have lost control of their budget and cannot afford to buy all the warships, jets and submarines they need, MPs warn today.

The public accounts committee says in a report that it is “highly sceptical” that a defence review, due to conclude in July, will fix a funding gap of up to £21 billion over the next decade while also equipping troops to counter new threats from cyber, chemical and electromagnetic warfare......

“How can you afford not to?” one official told a group of journalists at a briefing yesterday.... The official indicated concern about the UK’s ability to afford all 138 of the next generation of stealthy warplanes that the Ministry of Defence has said it plans to buy as part of a multibillion-pound US-led programme. “The [UK] government has a choice as to whether they are going to continue to fund their defence at the level at which they previously said it needed to be funded — 138,” the official said, referring to the 138 F-35 Lightning II jets......

The public accounts committee describes as unrealistic the MoD’s plan to purchase and support military equipment, including at least 48 of the F-35 jets, by 2027. Its report is published almost six years to the day since Philip Hammond, as defence secretary, said that the government had “resolved” a £38 billion hole in the defence budget.......

The MoD is also criticised for a lack of transparency on its financial position. The annual equipment plan was made public ten months after the period that it covers began. A particular mention is made of the cost of the Lockheed Martin F-35 programme, the most expensive and technologically advanced warplane in history. The MoD has refused to offer a price estimate for a single, combat-capable F-35 jet, including upgrades and spare parts, or how much the total programme will cost. The MPs say that they “frustratingly” received more information on cost from the F-35 joint programme office in the US than from the MoD........

ORAC is offline  
Old 11th May 2018, 09:39
  #11267 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 1,540
PAC plagiarises previous NAO report and elements of HCDC inquiries. Republishes as "new". Sigh....
Not_a_boffin is offline  
Old 11th May 2018, 11:16
  #11268 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,085
Conclusions and Link to full text of report at

Public Accounts Committee roasts MoD.. again

Nothing terribly new but again reinforces the perception that the whole place is out of control
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Old 11th May 2018, 12:02
  #11269 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: South Skerry
Posts: 305
PAC plagiarises previous NAO report and elements of HCDC inquiries. Republishes as "new". Sigh....

This is a standard spin on bad news.

The first time the story appears, the official response is "don't worry, chaps, we're working on it".

A year later, it becomes apparent that the problem has not been fixed. And the response is "Why are you harping on that? It's old news."

Put it this way: if MoD has a robust plan to reach a fixed and affordable LCC for the F-35, it is well ahead of the US Air Force. Bully for the MoD if that's the case, but permit me to express some doubt.
George K Lee is offline  
Old 12th May 2018, 01:03
  #11270 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Lon UK
Posts: 276
Doubt George, about the F-35, it would seem to be your middle name, between P and S.

http://researchbriefings.files.parli...5/CBP-8175.pdf

How much does one value protection.
Brat is offline  
Old 12th May 2018, 07:49
  #11271 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 25,535
Do I hear that the UK now favours a mix of F-35B and F-35A? Perhaps with a number of Voyagers modified to include a boom (which would be savagely expensive) in order to be able to refuel not just the F-35A, but also the UK's C-17, RC-135, E-3D and P-8A?
BEagle is offline  
Old 12th May 2018, 08:19
  #11272 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 605
Beagle, as Iím sure you already know, the E-3D has the ability to refuel using either boom or probe and drogue. On the other hand, the E-7 will be boom only!?.

Sorry, thread drift and now back to the future.... F35
Party Animal is online now  
Old 12th May 2018, 10:10
  #11273 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 264
On the question of cost, the chart on page 5 of that briefing paper is quite an eye opener. It shows that in real terms, after removing the effects of normal inflation, defence spending in 2016-17 was broadly the same as it was in around 1990. Yet the difference in what that "buys" in terms of numbers of aircraft, ships, submarines and people is of a different order of magnitude. OK today's kit is far more high tech, but even so...
Frostchamber is offline  
Old 13th May 2018, 16:42
  #11274 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: River Thames & Surrey
Age: 71
Posts: 8,390
First 4 due to be delivered to 617 Sqdn at Marham on 5 June.
chevvron is offline  
Old 13th May 2018, 22:04
  #11275 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,633
Originally Posted by chevvron View Post
First 4 due to be delivered to 617 Sqdn at Marham on 5 June.
When they going on Ops?

Last edited by glad rag; 13th May 2018 at 22:05. Reason: Sorry missed the smiley out again..
glad rag is offline  
Old 14th May 2018, 07:18
  #11276 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Next door.
Posts: 652
Originally Posted by glad rag View Post
When they going on Ops?
6th June? Or do they need the software upgrade..
Stitchbitch is offline  
Old 14th May 2018, 12:57
  #11277 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: River Thames & Surrey
Age: 71
Posts: 8,390
Originally Posted by Stitchbitch View Post


6th June? Or do they need the software upgrade..
Airframe numbers suggested as ZM145 - 148 incl.
chevvron is offline  
Old 15th May 2018, 01:29
  #11278 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: The Alps
Posts: 2,115
ILA 2018

My photos of both Luke's finest on display and of course the F-35A mock up (get a free baseball cap with German flag when you sit inside lol)
cheers














chopper2004 is offline  
Old 15th May 2018, 01:34
  #11279 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: The Alps
Posts: 2,115
Nuclear Option for Europe

I also heard at ILA from various folk - that the marketing of the F-35 to likes of two NATO nations Belgium and Germany, takes into consideration the nuclear commitment. Typhoon is being marketed to the Belgian Air Component while 90 odd are on order as Tonka replacement for the Luftwaffe. I am led to believe that the F-35 can carry the bog standard US bucket of sunshine whereas the Typhoon has not been cleared for bucket of sunshine even here.

Please can anyone shed any light on this or am I hearing BS?

cheers
chopper2004 is offline  
Old 15th May 2018, 02:05
  #11280 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leicestershire, England
Posts: 1,139
Originally Posted by chopper2004 View Post
Typhoon is being marketed to the Belgian Air Component while 90 odd are on order as Tonka replacement for the Luftwaffe...
Typhoon has only been offered as a replacement for the Tornado thus far, not actually been ordered...

-RP
Rhino power is online now  

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.