F-35 Cancelled, then what ?
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Melbourne
Age: 57
Posts: 628
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by HH
the author is a well known spokesman for the military -industrial complex......... not likely to bite the hand that feeds him
The concept of distributed airpower and associated tactics must follow from some very interesting assumptions, primarily that direct air-to-air combat is not expected.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to French Senate and UK's NAO, the Rafale's unit cost in France is about $200m, while the EF costs UK about $170m per unit, both figures including R&D (PAUC).
Granted, UK's cost is not the whole Eurofighter bill since Germany, Italy and Spain are sharing R&D expenses, but that's what partnerships are for and something JSF partners like Norway are supposed to be exempt from, which suggests the JSF is even costlier.
Granted, UK's cost is not the whole Eurofighter bill since Germany, Italy and Spain are sharing R&D expenses, but that's what partnerships are for and something JSF partners like Norway are supposed to be exempt from, which suggests the JSF is even costlier.
SAR 2012 has the 2012 year dollar for average all (A,B,C) PAUC @ $134.5M
the other partners will be less because the USA is eating most of the R&D
why don't you look and see what is in the Norway 6 plane buy because I saw it said the unit cost of the plane is about $125m
so it looks like the f-35 is cheaper to me, no matter which way people want to measure it
Last edited by JSFfan; 28th Apr 2013 at 09:42.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
no the USA is offloading as much R&D cost as it can to other countries - you ignore the cost breaches which can and will shut the programme down - remember Comanche?
Singapore are likely to go for the `stealth` F15 (as will RoSK as well); why? as the R&D cost has already been `spread around`. The saudi `SA` version is proving the FBW system (and extra outer wing hardpoint) , the AESA radar is already being used by Saudi and Singapore , so that effectively leaves the CBW (in testing for 2 years now) the stealth paint and cantered rear fins.
costs will be roughly 66% less than the F35.
Singapore are likely to go for the `stealth` F15 (as will RoSK as well); why? as the R&D cost has already been `spread around`. The saudi `SA` version is proving the FBW system (and extra outer wing hardpoint) , the AESA radar is already being used by Saudi and Singapore , so that effectively leaves the CBW (in testing for 2 years now) the stealth paint and cantered rear fins.
costs will be roughly 66% less than the F35.
Last edited by HalloweenJack; 28th Apr 2013 at 10:07.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Romulus,
The system concept will fall on deaf ears, they really don't want to know
@HalloweenJack
of course you have a link to show your claim that a f-15 is less than a f-35
The system concept will fall on deaf ears, they really don't want to know
@HalloweenJack
of course you have a link to show your claim that a f-15 is less than a f-35
Last edited by JSFfan; 28th Apr 2013 at 10:21.
Once again I hesitate to put my head into the buzz saw that is this thread, however....
Without getting into great arguments about 2008 $ vs 2002 DM, etc, surely the cost of purchasing an aircraft is actually fairly irrelevant for the nation buying it, what matters is the overall costs of ownership over the life of the fleet (I don't want to argue about $ per flight hour either).
I once visited a UK aircraft manufacturer and was told that they made almost no money on selling an aircraft, where they made their money was in the costs they charged for supporting it over the next 25-30 years. It's not inconceivable that a manufacturer/nation would actually sell their aircraft at a loss, simply to achieve the sale and the long term follow on support.
I certainly remember reading many years ago that the French, in the days of the Mirage III, virtually gave the aircraft away, but then charged an arm and a leg to support it.....
I'll get back in my box now.....
Without getting into great arguments about 2008 $ vs 2002 DM, etc, surely the cost of purchasing an aircraft is actually fairly irrelevant for the nation buying it, what matters is the overall costs of ownership over the life of the fleet (I don't want to argue about $ per flight hour either).
I once visited a UK aircraft manufacturer and was told that they made almost no money on selling an aircraft, where they made their money was in the costs they charged for supporting it over the next 25-30 years. It's not inconceivable that a manufacturer/nation would actually sell their aircraft at a loss, simply to achieve the sale and the long term follow on support.
I certainly remember reading many years ago that the French, in the days of the Mirage III, virtually gave the aircraft away, but then charged an arm and a leg to support it.....
I'll get back in my box now.....
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are you saying that an aircraft , that's been in production for 20 years will cost more than a brand new still in development??
http://asw.newpacificinstitute.org/?p=11207
F15K cost $100mil inc spares and support - the SE will costs similar.
The FBW system has been paid for by Saudi Arabia for the F15SA ; the CBW are being designed by KAI so its of interest for RoSK to support its own industries by going with the `SE` variant.
And the Japan discussions placed the F35 @ $238mil per unit.
Support its own industry and get more ` bang for your buck` -RoSK and Singapore both IMO will go for the F15SE.
Israel will likely get the `bolt on ` CBW as well.
http://asw.newpacificinstitute.org/?p=11207
F15K cost $100mil inc spares and support - the SE will costs similar.
The FBW system has been paid for by Saudi Arabia for the F15SA ; the CBW are being designed by KAI so its of interest for RoSK to support its own industries by going with the `SE` variant.
And the Japan discussions placed the F35 @ $238mil per unit.
Support its own industry and get more ` bang for your buck` -RoSK and Singapore both IMO will go for the F15SE.
Israel will likely get the `bolt on ` CBW as well.
FA18,
The (10.65 billion$ in 2013 value means close to 205 million per copy) figure seems very difficult to explain. I tried all sorts of maths on it to see if I could work out what they meant by that figure, based on the estimated $m90 figure being used in Canberra at the moment. It's way too high for the unit cost and doesn't add up to the estimated total lifetime cost (itro £1 trillion for 50 years according to the USN?). Given the Aus dollar to US dollar exchange rate at the moment, it doesn't make much difference which you use. It's either a complete red herring or somebody's quoting a figure without telling us what it really means. But there are so many figures out there, it's hard to know who will pay what. For example, if Singapore is to pay $9 billion for 71 jets, they would come in at over £126 million each.
On cost per hour, the Pentagon's acquisition cheif (is that Kendall?) sees the cost per hour coming down from £31.9 thousand reported to last year's SAR, but not as much as Bogden is claiming - the Pantagon doesn't seem to be happy with the Company's new metrics. I think that's about as much as we can assume for now. I hope it's nearer the cost of the legacy jets than last year's estimates - we'll hear more next month.
Classification remains a big issue and is muddying the waters concerning costs. Some hope may be on the horizon there too:
“Adding insult to injury, the JSF program office classified all documents as “U.S. only,” which upset partner nations. Even if they are all buying the same aircraft, each country has its own air-worthiness qualification processes and other administrative procedures that require they have access to the aircraft’s technical data. JSF officials are working to re-classify the documentation, Bogdan said.”
The (10.65 billion$ in 2013 value means close to 205 million per copy) figure seems very difficult to explain. I tried all sorts of maths on it to see if I could work out what they meant by that figure, based on the estimated $m90 figure being used in Canberra at the moment. It's way too high for the unit cost and doesn't add up to the estimated total lifetime cost (itro £1 trillion for 50 years according to the USN?). Given the Aus dollar to US dollar exchange rate at the moment, it doesn't make much difference which you use. It's either a complete red herring or somebody's quoting a figure without telling us what it really means. But there are so many figures out there, it's hard to know who will pay what. For example, if Singapore is to pay $9 billion for 71 jets, they would come in at over £126 million each.
On cost per hour, the Pentagon's acquisition cheif (is that Kendall?) sees the cost per hour coming down from £31.9 thousand reported to last year's SAR, but not as much as Bogden is claiming - the Pantagon doesn't seem to be happy with the Company's new metrics. I think that's about as much as we can assume for now. I hope it's nearer the cost of the legacy jets than last year's estimates - we'll hear more next month.
Classification remains a big issue and is muddying the waters concerning costs. Some hope may be on the horizon there too:
“Adding insult to injury, the JSF program office classified all documents as “U.S. only,” which upset partner nations. Even if they are all buying the same aircraft, each country has its own air-worthiness qualification processes and other administrative procedures that require they have access to the aircraft’s technical data. JSF officials are working to re-classify the documentation, Bogdan said.”
Originally Posted by JSFfan
I just don't subscribe to the fantasy that the f-35 will be canceled and there will be a rush for eurocanard or boeing orders
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in the magical land of beer and chocolates
Age: 52
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the horses mouth;
- A major leap forward in our procurement of the F-35 - regjeringen.no
62.6 billion Krone = 10.68 billion$
10.68/52 = 205.4million per copy (okay , I was off by 400,000$)
- A major leap forward in our procurement of the F-35 - regjeringen.no
- Norway will acquire up to 52 F-35 combat aircraft to ensure that its future Armed Forces will be able to perform its missions in the best way possible.
- The Norwegian acquisition is estimated to cost NOK 62.6 billion (adjusted real 2013-value.) The overall Norwegian cost estimates have been stable since 2008.
- The first four F-35s that are to be used for the training of Norwegian personnel were approved by the Norwegian Parliament in 2011. Of these four, the first two will be delivered in the United States in 2015 and the last two in 2016.
- The Norwegian acquisition is estimated to cost NOK 62.6 billion (adjusted real 2013-value.) The overall Norwegian cost estimates have been stable since 2008.
- The first four F-35s that are to be used for the training of Norwegian personnel were approved by the Norwegian Parliament in 2011. Of these four, the first two will be delivered in the United States in 2015 and the last two in 2016.
10.68/52 = 205.4million per copy (okay , I was off by 400,000$)
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Earth
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by JSFfan
what year dollar?
(must be a type error, but there you go)
FA-18 - I stopped trying to compare fighter prices based on package-deal prices years ago, because deals are so different - mostly, it depends what support is included and for how long, or whether it's an initial buy or a top-up (cf $3.7 billion for 12+12 Hornet/Growler for Oz).
After all, the Noggies told their voters in late 2008 that the F-35s would cost them $52 million each. What's Norwegian for "Psych!"
Biggus - You're right, of course. And let's not forget that support in the digital area includes new software releases. Even some A320 operators grumbled about that, but on a fighter with SLOC in the millions it gets really expensive.
Romulus - Anyone who uses "Game Changer" in a headline is full of
.
Laird's "think" tank, SLD, lists LockMart as its Gold Sponsor. You can still be on someone's payroll and make sense, of course, but my issue with SLD's stuff is that they write about JSF capabilities as if they existed today, and ignore the idea that others may counter them asymmetrically, or emulate them on different platforms.
When the jet gets into service it may do some of these B2FB things and built a self-forming combat network, but it is far more probable that these capabilities will emerge gradually during the first decade of operations. Look at Super Hornet to see the real-world evolution of a multi-role information-intense platform.
Other things I have never seen SLD address:
How does JSF network with other platforms? The entire "Z-axis" theory (which SLD bangs on about on a Proustian scale) rests on this, but even in 2030 at least half the fighters anywhere will be jets in service today. They probably will have high-rate broadcast-type datalinks, but the problem is that a stealth jet neither wants nor needs any datalink that is not LPI, which inherently means pencil beams and consequent limits on number of users.
They talk about JSF as replacing ISR assets and providing a persistent ISR capability, battlespace awareness, Aegis targeting &c. How the do you do that with a jet that has two (B) or three (A/C) hours' endurance, tops?
What happens when the adversary sees all this magic and decides to flood the world with RF noise?
There's more than that, of course - like advocating hardened aircraft shelters in WestPac, despite the fact that precision-guided ballistic missiles are entirely feasible (I believe that the PLA successfully ripped off the Pershing 2 guidance system). And so on...
After all, the Noggies told their voters in late 2008 that the F-35s would cost them $52 million each. What's Norwegian for "Psych!"
Biggus - You're right, of course. And let's not forget that support in the digital area includes new software releases. Even some A320 operators grumbled about that, but on a fighter with SLOC in the millions it gets really expensive.
Romulus - Anyone who uses "Game Changer" in a headline is full of
.Laird's "think" tank, SLD, lists LockMart as its Gold Sponsor. You can still be on someone's payroll and make sense, of course, but my issue with SLD's stuff is that they write about JSF capabilities as if they existed today, and ignore the idea that others may counter them asymmetrically, or emulate them on different platforms.
When the jet gets into service it may do some of these B2FB things and built a self-forming combat network, but it is far more probable that these capabilities will emerge gradually during the first decade of operations. Look at Super Hornet to see the real-world evolution of a multi-role information-intense platform.
Other things I have never seen SLD address:
How does JSF network with other platforms? The entire "Z-axis" theory (which SLD bangs on about on a Proustian scale) rests on this, but even in 2030 at least half the fighters anywhere will be jets in service today. They probably will have high-rate broadcast-type datalinks, but the problem is that a stealth jet neither wants nor needs any datalink that is not LPI, which inherently means pencil beams and consequent limits on number of users.
They talk about JSF as replacing ISR assets and providing a persistent ISR capability, battlespace awareness, Aegis targeting &c. How the
do you do that with a jet that has two (B) or three (A/C) hours' endurance, tops? What happens when the adversary sees all this magic and decides to flood the world with RF noise?
There's more than that, of course - like advocating hardened aircraft shelters in WestPac, despite the fact that precision-guided ballistic missiles are entirely feasible (I believe that the PLA successfully ripped off the Pershing 2 guidance system). And so on...
Last edited by LowObservable; 28th Apr 2013 at 12:46.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in the magical land of beer and chocolates
Age: 52
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
F35 is getting MADL, F22 doesn't (yet) get it.
Northrop's MADL waveform completes flight testing on F-35 aircraft - Airforce Technology
Northrop's MADL waveform completes flight testing on F-35 aircraft - Airforce Technology
Northrop's MADL waveform completes flight testing on F-35 aircraft
24 April 2013
24 April 2013
F-22 & B-2 MADL integration was being planned but got kicked down the road a couple of years ago - because of money, and probably also because it was recognized that the sky was not going to be full of F-35s in 2015. The idea was to fit the stealth jets with MADL and then have a standoff. high-altitude gateway linking them to the rest of the world.
And then there's the RUMINT that the U.S. has done the B-2 radar trick on MADL - putting it smack-dab in a frequency band that has been flogged off for future satellite HDTV. Woopsers.
And then there's the RUMINT that the U.S. has done the B-2 radar trick on MADL - putting it smack-dab in a frequency band that has been flogged off for future satellite HDTV. Woopsers.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,577
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
45 Posts
F-35 Networking Diagram
F-35 networking: Link 16; Net; VMF (Variable Message Format) + MADL to other F-35s
Joint Tactical Data Enterprise Services (TDES) Migration Plan (JTMP) 2009
http://idlsoc.com/Documents/Symposiu..._OASD(NII).pdf (5.4Mb)
Click thumbnail
Joint Tactical Data Enterprise Services (TDES) Migration Plan (JTMP) 2009
http://idlsoc.com/Documents/Symposiu..._OASD(NII).pdf (5.4Mb)
Click thumbnail
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,577
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
45 Posts
'Courtney Mil' asked: "How does JSF network with other platforms?
Same as F-22 does. Or doesn't."
&
'Courtney Mil' asked: "The question being, how does it network with other platforms. It doesn't. It might, but not without a gateway."
Answer provided. 'Stealth Networking' not mentioned in questions.
Same as F-22 does. Or doesn't."
&
'Courtney Mil' asked: "The question being, how does it network with other platforms. It doesn't. It might, but not without a gateway."
Answer provided. 'Stealth Networking' not mentioned in questions.