Expect some serious political lobbying from the vested interests more like!!

Yes - and it will all go on the bill.................... :*:*

They managed to clear the A-4, F-104 and Jaguar to carry the B-61; I don’t imagine it would take great effort to clear the Typhoon if the US really wanted the GAF to hold on to the role.

@ORAC I am not convinced that the expense and effort of adding tactical nukes to tactical aircraft will be deemed to be worth it. Delivering that payload (Lord save us if it comes to that) is probably best left to other platforms, and I suspect that the cruise missile will be the delivery platform of choice: but I really hope it doesn't come to that.

Just for larfs, here's a new report on the NATO nuclear weapon program. And let's not forget that INF, for now, bans cruise missiles.

Building A Safe, Secure, and Credible NATO Nuclear Posture | Analysis | NTI

With and assumption that the sharing of responsibility for the storage and delivery of tactical nuclear weapons among member countries is a key aspect of NATO’s strategic deterrent, and, that NATO’s arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons consists of air-delivered B61 gravity bombs, currently U.S. forward-based fighters, and certain NATO countries Belgium, Germany, Italy, Netherlands and Turkey host tactical nuclear weapons. All but Turkey have dual-capable aircraft dedicated to their delivery.

There should indeed be serious questions about what is stored at Incirlic, and, the behaviour of NATO ‘allies’.
https://warontherocks.com/2018/02/dr...ations-turkey/

Tillerson is out...and Mabij would seem to be next.
Kazan Soda Elektrik Üretim Tesisi Aç?l?? Töreni - Ankara Haberleri
https://www.turkishminute.com/2018/0...-ottoman-slap/

Turkey...and the F-35??

No laughs here.

Shouldn't this be included in the price?
 

Why should future ongoing development costs of any item be included in the original price?

https://www.accountingtools.com/arti...ccounting.html

When they come intermixed with technical deficiencies, e.g., promised capabilities costs paid for in existing aircraft but not delivered by the supplier of the product. There is lots of creative accounting techniques to mask past shortcomings in hopes nobody notices.

LDP to propose introducing F-35B fighters

Japan's main governing Liberal Democratic Party plans to propose introducing F-35B fighter jets and a multi-purpose aircraft carrier to be operated under the country's defense-only stance.

The government is to review the National Defense Program Guidelines this year for the first time in 5 years. On Tuesday, the LDP panel on national security compiled a set of proposals to be considered. The panel stressed the need to enhance Japan's defense capabilities both in quality and quantity. It said North Korea's nuclear and missile development and China's military buildup and growing maritime presence are creating a security crisis.

The panel will call for procuring a multi-purpose aircraft carrier that can also serve as a hospital ship. It will be operated solely for defense purposes. Retrofitting of the Maritime Self-Defense Force's destroyer Izumo is to be listed as an option.

The panel also wants the Defense Ministry to acquire advanced F-35B stealth planes, which can take off from short runways. Panel chair Gen Nakatani suggested Japan must become able to hit back at enemy bases.

The LDP plans to submit the proposals to the government for discussion in late May.

Naa that's just smoke and mirrors that is..

..“Finally and most importantly, the program will likely deliver Block 3F [the untested, allegedly “fully combat-capable” F-35 model now entering production] to the field with shortfalls in capabilities the F-35 needs in combat against current threats.”

We had already established that the remaining USMC F-18A/Bs are in-line to be replaced with New purchase F-18C/Ds. That just left their F-18C/D Sqns future unresolved.

It has now been revelaed they are al going to have their radars replaced with AESA radars between 2020-2022. Presumably the amortisation period will be more than a couple of years, so they won’t be replaced by F-35Cs any times during the 2020s.....

USMC to upgrade Hornets with new AESA radar | Jane's 360

I don't think anyone is buying any "new" C/D models. Presumably you mean E/F.


There's a reason they're doing this - the average remaining frame life for the 460 or so C/D across the combined USN/USMC fleet is in the hundreds of hours. They've been spending on structural mods to get another 2000 hours out of them and have been for some years, to the tune of $2.7Bn or so.


Nor are "all" the USMC C/Ds going to have their APG65/73 replaced by AESA. The RFI is for 98 kits (7 sqns worth) and adding 98 AESA kits to that total is probably largely offset by savings in not having to support 65/73.


A bit of context from the actual budget materials usually puts these things in perspective.

NoB, the number of remaining Sqns under discussion number around... 6 or 7.

VFMA(AW) 224, 225, 242 And 533. VMFAT-101 and 501.

https://www.pprune.org/military-avia...-what-561.html

A circular reference. How illuminating.

http://www.aviation.marines.mil/Port...an%20FINAL.pdf

ORGANIZATION
The F‐35B and F‐35C will replace F/A‐18, AV‐8B, and EA‐6B. The Marine Corps will procure a total of 420 F‐35s (353 F‐35Bs and 67 F‐35 Cs) in the following squadron configurations:
1) 9 Squadrons x 16 F‐35B
2) 5 Squadrons x 10 F‐35B
3) 4 Squadrons x 10 F‐35C
4) 2 Squadrons x 10 F‐35B reserve
5) 2 Squadrons x 25 F‐35B Fleet Readiness Squadron (FRS)

The aircraft is currently tracking to reach its full program‐of‐record operational capability (Block 3F) in calendar year 2018.
The full transition from legacy to F‐35 will complete with the transition of the second reserve squadron in 2031.

F/A‐18A‐D HORNET (VMFA) PLAN VALUE TO THE MAGTF
The F/A‐18A‐D Hornet, with its complement of advance precision guided weapons, advanced LITENING targeting pod, network interoperability, and beyond visual range air‐to‐air missiles provides relevant and lethal
capability to the MAGTF and combatant commanders.

F/A‐18s remain the primary bridging platform to F‐35B/C with a planned sunset of 2030. Hornets will consolidate on the west coast by 2027 with the exception of VMFA (AW)‐242, which will remain assigned to MAG‐12
at MCAS Iwakuni until a scheduled F‐35B transition in 2028. The F/A‐18A‐D community continues combat operations for the sixteenth straight year as Hornets support Operation INHERENT RESOLVE: Land‐
based with SPMAGTF‐CR and shipboard on aircraft carrier deployments as part of our TACAIR Integration (TAI) commitment. The USMC fleet will have 10 active squadrons and one reserve squadron in
2018.

As transition to F‐35 continues, VMFAT‐101 will sundown in FY23 and VMFA‐323 will assume aircrew training responsibilities through FY29

ORGANIZATION
F/A‐18A‐D squadrons are assigned to MAG‐31 at MCAS Beaufort, SC
,
MAG‐11 at MCAS Miramar, CA, MAG‐12 at MCAS Iwakuni, JP, and MAG‐41 at JRB Fort Worth, TX :
1) MAG‐31: (1) F/A‐18A++/C+ (2) F/A‐18C (2) F/A‐18D
2) MAG‐11: (1) F/A‐18A++ (2) F/A‐18C (1) F/A18‐D (1) FRS
3) MAG‐12: (1) F/A‐18D
4) MAG‐41: (1) F/A‐18A++/C+ (reserves)
5) Two Squadrons x 25 F‐35B FRS (transition squadrons

Belgian F-16 Replacement Program In Turmoil

LONDON—Belgium’s future fighter program has been thrown into turmoil after it emerged that cheaper options to extend the life of the country’s F-16 Fighting Falcons had been deliberately hidden from ministers.

The scandal, which has already resulted in the suspension of several military officers and civil servants, came to light after the leaking of a Lockheed Martin assessment dated April 2016 to several Belgian news outlets on March 20. The documents suggested the country’s F-16s could be upgraded and given another six years of operational life, making a new fighter purchase less urgent than government officials had previously contended.

Defense Minister Steven Vandeput told the country’s Parliament that he had not been made aware of the report about the potential life extension option. “If this report actually exists, if its content is accurate, and if the defense [ministry] has decided not to share it, there is a problem,” Vandeput told a Belgian radio station.

The news comes just weeks after the British and U.S. governments submitted their best price tenders for the Belgian fighter program for the Eurofighter Typhoon and the Lockheed Martin F-35A Joint Strike Fighter, respectively.

It is unclear whether the €3.6 billion ($4.35 billion) program will be frozen or terminated in light of the life extension option. But Vandeput is eager for the program to continue unhindered. “The purchase program has reached a crucial phase and we do not want to disrupt this sensitive moment,” Vandeput said.......

Hmmmm. How much money would it have taken to extend their service life for six years? And had that money been allocated to F-16 service life extension, would that money have come out of the budget for a replacement aircraft and thereby endangering the replacement program? It appears that at best an investment in life extending the F-16 would have delayed the replacement decision by six years. And perhaps reduced the competition from two (Typhoon and Lightening) to just one (Lightening.)

Good questions - but ones that should have been asked of, and answered, by politicians who had been given access to all of the facts by their unelected subordinates.

Additional questions could include both whether those subordinates had been offered any post retirement jobs or emoluments.....