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 ?

Reply

Old 9th Jun 2018, 15:32
  #11401 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 6,809
Originally Posted by TorqueOfTheDevil View Post
That didn't stop us getting the Buccaneer, did it?
Sad thing is the RAF could have ordered years before - it was pretty much forced on them as the only option at the end
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10th Jun 2018, 20:41
  #11402 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Lon UK
Posts: 266
It was very good to see them arrive.

A Typhoon /F-35 combo will make a pretty potent package.
https://world.eurofighter.com/articl...art-of-new-mix
Brat is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11th Jun 2018, 00:25
  #11403 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: London/Oxford/New York
Posts: 1,879
Heathrow Harry,

Except for the fact that the Buccaneer came nowhere near meeting the specification, so would have failed all the procurement requirements in the competition, so the RAF couldn't have "ordered them years before" owing to totally failing to meet, just as a few examples;
1. Mach 2+ at altitude.
2. Supersonic dash at low level over target
3. Rough field capability.
pr00ne is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11th Jun 2018, 10:20
  #11404 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 6,809
Originally Posted by pr00ne View Post
Heathrow Harry,

Except for the fact that the Buccaneer came nowhere near meeting the specification, so would have failed all the procurement requirements in the competition, so the RAF couldn't have "ordered them years before" owing to totally failing to meet, just as a few examples;
1. Mach 2+ at altitude.
2. Supersonic dash at low level over target
3. Rough field capability.
Indeed - but as they were happy to have them later the spec was clearly somewhat over ambitious in terms of affordability................ v similar to the US B-70 ... you reach for the stars but the bean counters can raise all sorts of road -blocks

PS why in on earth did we need rough field capability AND Mach 2+ AND supersonic lo dash??? Surprised they didn't add in 24 loiter capability and ASW as well....................
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11th Jun 2018, 10:24
  #11405 (permalink)  

 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bourton-on-the-Water
Posts: 801
Excellent upsum by Tony Osborne in Aviation Week of last week's arrival. His piece includes good official pictures. If you scroll through the pics, you get different bits of the article as well.
Photo Gallery: British F-35s Are Now Calling Britain Home Aviation Week

airsound
airsound is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12th Jun 2018, 13:46
  #11406 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: London/Oxford/New York
Posts: 1,879
Heathrow Harry,

No idea, but that’s what the blue suited winged wonder VSO’s of their day demanded.
I have heard it said, somewhat mischievously, that those specific requirements were in the spec to make damn sure the Buccaneer could not qualify!
pr00ne is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12th Jun 2018, 14:41
  #11407 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 14,056
The requirements were eventually made official in November 1956 with General Operational Requirement 339 (GOR.339), which was issued to various aircraft manufacturers in March 1957.[16]
[17] This requirement was exceptionally ambitious for the technology of the day, requiring a supersonic all-weather aircraft that could deliver nuclear weapons over a long range, operate at high level at Mach 2+ or low level at Mach 1.2, with STOL or possible VTOL performance.[14]
[18] The latter requirement was a side-effect of common battle plans from the 1950s, which suggested that nuclear strikes in the opening stages of war would damage most runways and airbases, meaning that aircraft would need to take off from "rough fields" such as disused Second World War airfields, or even sufficiently flat and open areas of land.[19] Specifically, the requirement included:[18]
  • Delivery of tactical nuclear weapons at low level in all weathers, by day and night
  • Photo-reconnaissance at medium level (day) and low level (day and night)
  • Electronic reconnaissance in all weathers
  • Delivery of tactical nuclear weapons day and night at medium altitudes using blind bombing if necessary
  • Delivery of conventional bombs and rockets
Low level was stated to be under 1,000 ft (300 m) with an expected attack speed at sea level of Mach 0.95. The operational range was to be 1,000 nmi (1,200 mi; 1,900 km) operating off runways of no more than 3,000 ft (910 m).[20] The TSR-2 was able to operate at 200 ft (60 m) above the ground at speeds of Mach 1.1;[21] its range allowed it to operate strategically in addition to tactical scenarios.[22]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAC_TSR-2

Except for the fact that the Buccaneer came nowhere near meeting the specification, so would have failed all the procurement requirements in the competition, so the RAF couldn't have "ordered them years before" owing to totally failing to meet, just as a few examples;
1. Mach 2+ at altitude.
2. Supersonic dash at low level over target
3. Rough field capability.
Oddly enough, one aircraft came close and we cancelled that.... TSR2 See top quote and link
NutLoose is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12th Jun 2018, 17:25
  #11408 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 6,809
Thanks Nut... tbh I doubt we could achieve that spec today....... of course TSR2 never had the chance to show if it could meet the spec

ah well back to the hideous f 35...
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12th Jun 2018, 19:49
  #11409 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 253
Originally Posted by Heathrow Harry View Post
Thanks Nut... tbh I doubt we could achieve that spec today....... of course TSR2 never had the chance to show if it could meet the spec

ah well back to the hideous f 35...
ISTR it was having to meet the spec that in part did for TSR2 - not least the rough field requirement, where the resultant odd undercarriage arrangement was a source of problems.
Frostchamber is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 13th Jun 2018, 05:43
  #11410 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Brighton
Age: 64
Posts: 9,157
USN orders yet another 18 F/A-18E/F.......

June 11 (UPI) -- Pentagon officials have announced a new modified contract with Boeing for the manufacture and delivery of F/A-18 Super Hornet variants.

The contract, from Naval Air Systems Command and announced on Friday, is valued at more than $862.2 million and enables Boeing to provide 15 F/A-18E and three F/A-18F aircraft for the U.S. Navy, according to the Defense Department.

Work on the contract will occur in multiple locations across the United States, as well as Canada, and is expected to be complete in June 2020.

The total cumulative value of the contract will be obligated to Boeing at time of award -- the funds will be allocated from Navy fiscal 2018 aircraft procurement funds, the Pentagon said. None of the obligated funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year.

ORAC is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 13th Jun 2018, 13:18
  #11411 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 64
Posts: 1,641
Originally Posted by ORAC View Post
USN orders yet another 18 F/A-18E/F.......The contract, from Naval Air Systems Command and announced on Friday, is valued at more than $862.2 million and enables Boeing to provide 15 F/A-18E and three F/A-18F aircraft for the U.S. Navy, according to the Defense Department.


Wow! That's only 47.8 million per Super Hornet. I'm guessing the engines are a separate contract with GE.
KenV is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 13th Jun 2018, 14:47
  #11412 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 591
I very doubt an FMS customer would get Super Hornets for that price. Not a fair comparison, never mind the differences in capability; of which a Super Hornet cannot use QEC.

Aside from that....
Deliverance is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 13th Jun 2018, 16:10
  #11413 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Brighton
Age: 64
Posts: 9,157
KenV, same price as the last lot they ordered in 2017. These contracts are modifications/additions to the last multi-year buy authorised for the F-18, hence the same price. Not sure if, or how many, more can continue to be added to the same contract - though I am sure Boeing won’t object.

.....”In a separate contract released on Sept. 13, the Pentagon announced that the US Navy will actually paying $676.6 million for six F/A-18E and eight F/A-18F aircraft, or $48.3 million each for the Lot 41 aircraft it is buying in this financial year”....
ORAC is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 13th Jun 2018, 17:15
  #11414 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 6,809
Presumably Mr. B makes a profit at that price?

If they sold them overseas at the same price they'd seriously cut into the F 35 market..
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 14th Jun 2018, 01:04
  #11415 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Lon UK
Posts: 266
Meanwhile for all the pissers, moaners, and 'what will we do when it’s cancelled' crowd, the numbers of F-35’s delivered has now reached 300. And, as its numbers go up exponentially with time, it should go further up the scale quite quickly.

The price of an F-35A has reduced more than 60 percent from the first contract, labor by about 75 percent over the last five years and production span time about 20 percent since 2015.
300th F-35 delivered, costs falling towards 'same levels as current fighters'

From the beginning the F-35 program had eight partner countries that helped pay for development. These are now slated to purchase over 600. Israel, Japan and South Korea came on board before development was completed. This is not taking into account the F-35’s that will go the the US Air Force, USMC and the US Navy.

800 planes are expected to be bought by other countries through the Foreign Military Sales program with potential customers including Belgium, Finland, Germany, Singapore, Spain, Switzerland, India and United Arab Emirates.

Over the long term, other major air forces that consider themselves potential US allies will want an aircraft as survivable, versatile, cost-effective, and, as capable of working closer with U.S. air power than any other competing aircraft.
Brat is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 14th Jun 2018, 03:51
  #11416 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Australia
Posts: 67
Originally Posted by Heathrow Harry View Post
Presumably Mr. B makes a profit at that price?

If they sold them overseas at the same price they'd seriously cut into the F 35 market..
If they’re sold under FMS, that is what the end user would pay, plus the US Government administration fee. How? For FMS sales, Boeing’s customer is the US Navy.
2805662 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 14th Jun 2018, 05:21
  #11417 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Brighton
Age: 64
Posts: 9,157
Not so - especially politics over the F-35 come into play. Which is one reason why Canada ended up buying used F-18s from Australia rather than new....

Canada Charged Six Times As Much As US Navy for Super Hornets

Last edited by ORAC; 14th Jun 2018 at 06:21.
ORAC is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 14th Jun 2018, 06:20
  #11418 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Brighton
Age: 64
Posts: 9,157
The Times: Scientist held amid fears of Chinese plot to steal secrets of F-35B jet

A British scientist who held a senior position at Rolls-Royce has been arrested amid fears that the Chinese government tried to steal secrets about the RAF’s new £100 million stealth fighter jet.

Bryn Jones, the company’s former chief combustion technologist, was held after MI5 learnt that classified defence information may have been leaked to Beijing, according to The Sun. The scientist, 73, was questioned in connection with the alleged plot on Tuesday after a sting by officers from Scotland Yard’s SO15 counterterrorism command. He was detained at his home in Derbyshire on suspicion of breaching the Official Secrets Act, according to the newspaper.

A Metropolitan Police spokesman said: “At approximately 14.25 on Tuesday officers arrested a man in Derbyshire as part of an investigation under the Official Secrets Act. The man, who is in his 70s and worked within private industry, has been taken to a police station in Derbyshire where he remains in custody. We are not prepared to discuss further at this stage given the nature of the investigation”.

The offices of a West Midlands company linked to Professor Jones, a married father of five, were also searched during the police operation, which is said to centre on fears over Rolls-Royce’s top-secret work on the F-35B jet.......

Professor Jones, who has been married to Dorothy, 75, for 49 years, describes himself as a visiting professor in gas turbine combustion at the Aeronautical University of Xian, central China.

After leaving Manchester Grammar School in 1963, he studied mechanical engineering at the city’s university. On graduating in 1968 he started a job in Rolls-Royce’s combustion engineering section and stayed in the role for 28 years. In 1996 he became chief of combustion technology acquisition, which involved “assessing military and civil product needs”. Four years later he was made chief combustion technologist. Professor Jones is thought to have left Rolls-Royce in 2003 and launched a consultancy firm. It is understood that he would have had to have signed the Official Secrets Act because of the nature of his work at Rolls-Royce.

Police were seen carrying boxes away from his £400,000 four-bedroom home in Derbyshire, a 20-minute drive away from Rolls-Royce’s HQ. He now works as a combustion engineer for Bladon Jets in Coventry........

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/652380...r-jet-secrets/


ORAC is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 14th Jun 2018, 07:44
  #11419 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Brighton
Age: 64
Posts: 9,157
Fleets within fleets - and not yet out of testing......

https://www.snafu-solomon.com/2018/0...-upgrades.html
ORAC is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 14th Jun 2018, 14:03
  #11420 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: South Skerry
Posts: 300
That's an interesting story about the Prof. It reflects the degree to which China was not considered a technological threat in 2003 - I would assume that, today, one's NDA would proscribe running off to be a professor at a Chinese technical university. From the same era...

https://www.cfmaeroengines.com/press...able-in-china/

We'll see how the story unfolds, but given his RR role in "technology acquisition" one wonders whether the US may have raised the alarm concerning the UK's compilation and curation of their data. (Remember RR was on the GE F136 program, not the F135.)

I'm actually sceptical about China's ability to emulate Western engine technology (one area where developments have lagged predictions).
George K Lee is online now  
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service