F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)

[WingsofFury]

His attempts were less than successful...I could go into more detail but I'm not about to disclose on a public forum conversations that I've had in private.

His assessment of Canada's needs is very politically based.

To me it's no surprise that the party wants to eliminate the F-35 from competition; easier to convince an uneducated public why 2 engines is better than 1, why stealth isn't important, why it appears to be cheaper, etc, than to actually do some research and see that there are no other viable options available that beat the -35 on so many different fronts.

Politically it's a smart move; appeal to your voting populace.  All the press has done in their reporting on the F-35 is create a monster in the minds of the public. Instead of actually showing the population what is wrong with the procurement system, they take it out on a single platform and now as a result Canada will end up flying a plane that was developed over 20 years ago by the time that it enters service with us and that will cost more than the F-35 and which will cost more to support in 15 years time.

But hey...he's an ex Hornet driver....so he must be right....right?

 

[Good2Golf]

No one has really addressed the issue of how Canada intends to implement the rest of the 5th Gen battlespace within which the F-35 would operate in Canada.

 

[MarkOttawa]

Major AvWeek article:

Budget Threats Return To Haunt F-35 Ramp-up
F-35 program builds momentum, but cost-cutting, international politics pose challenges

Lockheed Martin knows international F-35 sales are key to cutting unit costs. But even as the company delivers the first aircraft to Norway, the fourth overseas operator, program officials warn that gridlock over the U.S. defense budget will jeopardize the production ramp-up underpinning the cost reduction drive.

Speaking at the unveiling ceremony for the first of up to 52 F-35s for the Norwegian air force, Pentagon procurement chief Frank Kendall says budget instability will potentially hit the U.S. Air Force and Marine Corps and, in the longer term could also hinder plans for the launch of a multiyear, multinational “block buy” of F-35s. Aimed at securing sufficient export orders to support planned production-rate increases in 2018-20, the block buy will likely include the U.S. However, the block-buy plan itself “depends to some extent on the stability of our own budget,” says Kendall.

“The threat of a CR [continuing resolution] I think is real, the threat of a sequestration budget is real, and even the possibility of a government shutdown is real,” says Kendall. “All will have a negative impact on the Defense Department budget and our ability to execute our plans successfully. I hope Congress will come to some sort of compromise agreement that the president can accept,  which will resolve [the issue for] fiscal 2016 as soon as possible.”..

Program officials acknowledge that the U.S. budget jitters will not help solidify block-buy commitments from partner nations for fiscal 2018-20. Among these is Canada, with a 65-aircraft requirement, which decided to delay contract signing for a new fighter after opting in 2014 to extend the life of the Royal Canadian Air Force’s Boeing F/A-18s. Now, in the run-up to October’s federal election, the program continues to be a political football. Canada’s Liberal Party has declared that if reelected it will reopen the fighter competition and seek a less-expensive alternative.

For the moment there is little the managers of the F-35 program can do but watch from afar. However, the industrial implications of a potential Canadian defection from the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) camp is likely to become an election issue, say program officials. There are more than 110 Canadian companies which, according to statistics from the Canadian government, had earned almost $640 million worth of business on the F-35 through late 2014. Should the country sign an F-35 contract, the most recent report indicated total contracts and “identified opportunities” would be worth more than $10.8 billion over future program years.

“We are being patient,” says Bogdan. “My job is to provide Canada with the best information I can on the F-35, so they can make the best choice for their future. We will remain patient and be a strong ally and partner with them. We will let their political process work out,” he adds...
http://aviationweek.com/defense/budget-threats-return-haunt-f-35-ramp

Mark
Ottawa

 

[dapaterson]

No one has really addressed the issue of how Canada intends to implement the rest of the 5th Gen battlespace within which the F-35 would operate in Canada.

I'm on it.

Technical means

Analysis cell

 

[Kirkhill]

For the moment there is little the managers of the F-35 program can do but watch from afar. However, the industrial implications of a potential Canadian defection from the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) camp is likely to become an election issue, say program officials. There are more than 110 Canadian companies which, according to statistics from the Canadian government, had earned almost $640 million worth of business on the F-35 through late 2014. Should the country sign an F-35 contract, the most recent report indicated total contracts and “identified opportunities” would be worth more than $10.8 billion over future program years.

I thought you might want to say that bit a little louder Mark 

A 100% offset of the 65 planned aircraft would support a current flyaway price of $166 MCAD each.

Anudder funny thing about the offsets. 

Trudeau buys Super Hornets from closed production lines.  He has to buy spare parts from foreign sources and is stuck negotiating small contracts for obsolete parts and suffer the vagaries of the exchange rates.

Buying the F35 he still has to buy the spare parts but the lines are open, the parts are current, the fleet is large and some of the suppliers are Canadian - who are selling to the world wide fleet.  The exchange rate means some parts we buy will cost more, but equally the parts we sell will make more profit - offsetting the effects of the exchange rate.  Effectively the benefits that accrue to the Canadian aerospace industry will compound with a weak Canadian dollar - Just like Tom Mulcair suggested when he wanted to cure the Dutch Disease.

 

[MarkOttawa]

Kirkhill: This is not advocacy but worth noting SuperHornet/Growler line may be kept going for while yet (USN wants that and has quite a bit of support in Congress)--as for spare parts USN intends to fly SH into 2040s:

1) Keeping SH line open:
http://news.usni.org/2015/07/22/boeing-plans-to-keep-super-hornet-line-open-after-positive-signs-from-congress-international-navies

http://www.businessinsider.com/r-cyber-missions-could-fuel-boeing-ea-18g-orders-us-navy-chief-2015-9

2) 2040s:
https://cgai3ds.wordpress.com/2015/04/23/mark-collins-usn-looking-for-more-super-hornets-maybe-upgraded-and-more-growlers/

3) SH SLEP:
https://cgai3ds.wordpress.com/2015/08/13/mark-collins-us-navy-slow-f-35c-arrivalsuper-hornet-life-extension/

Mark
Ottawa

 

[MarkOttawa]

F-35 program critic Bill Sweetman at AvWeek:

Opinion: European Upgrades Change Fighter Business
Nations buying fighters have rarely had it so good

The revolution in the global fighter market started with good news and bad news at the end of 2013. The good news was for Saab: Brazil’s selection of the JAS 39 E/F Gripen as its future fighter. This unlocked the Swedish government’s support, which was contingent on an international partner. The bad news was the United Arab Emirates’ (UAE) dismissal of the Eurofighter Typhoon...

Eurofighter’s fractious community of government sponsors and service customers (two of them also JSF partners, with divided budgets, if not loyalties)...started to make decisions, laying out a firm schedule for badly needed improvements—Storm Shadow, Brimstone and the Meteor air-to-air missile—and funding development of an active electronically scanned array radar, for which Kuwait will be the likely launch customer (see photo). There is even a 10-year development road map, via the Phase 4 Enhancement program; something the Rafale has had, and Typhoon has lacked, since the early 2000s.

Then, in 2015, Dassault gained new customers in Egypt and Qatar, while trading a shaky 126-aircraft coproduction India deal for 36 firmer sales. This was good news to a point for Dassault, although it puts India’s need to replace hundreds of aging MiGs back in play.

In the U.S., Boeing has unveiled plans to rebuild F-15C/D Eagles with up to 16 air-to-air missiles, conformal fuel tanks and advanced EW. The U.S. Navy could acquire as few as 12 F-35Cs per year in the 2020s, which would make the service dependent on life-extension programs for the Super Hornet to fill its carrier decks.

From the customer’s viewpoint, however, one feature being added to all these aircraft is more important than any weapon or radar: It is a long-term future, out to 2040 or beyond...
http://aviationweek.com/defense/opinion-european-upgrades-change-fighter-business

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I'm not in love with the F-35 and rather see a 80 fighter fleet made up of 2 types, but the Liberal plan is just a rehash of Chretain screwing DND because he can. You note this idea popped up shortly after He appeared on stage with boy wonder.

 

[The Bread Guy]

I'm on it.

Technical means

Analysis cell

I thought THESE guys were the analysis cell ....

... or am I confusing them for the button & bows committee?

 

[Kirkhill]

Colin - Here's your mixed fleet

The only thing is I would take the pilots out of the Hornets and keep the aircraft on the ground (to preserve airframe hours) as additional strike assets.  Have them carry the SEAD pods and extra missiles - and if the enemy sees them - that isn't always a bad thing.

The technology exists.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Latest lob, from the "Canadian Joint Industry Group", shared under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-42) ....:

A group that represents Canadian companies involved in the F-35 program say abandoning plans to buy the oft-maligned stealth fighter would endanger contracts and jobs.

Justin Trudeau has said a Liberal government would exit the multibillion-dollar program and opt for a less expensive jetfighter to replace the country’s aging fleet of CF-18s.

Conservative Leader Stephen Harper says that would “crater” the aerospace industry – even though the Pentagon’s head of acquisitions says Canadian companies already participating in the program would likely retain their contracts.

In a statement released today, the Canadian Joint Industry Group says existing “opportunities and future technological advancements will be in jeopardy” if the plan to buy 65 F-35 fighters is scrubbed.

The federal government estimated earlier this year that 33 Canadian companies were working on the program, bringing in an estimated $637-million per year in revenue, but the industry group says the figure is now $750-million.

The group also says state-of-the-art manufacturing expertise would be lost to wider Canadian industry because the stealth fighter is full of advanced technology that could eventually have civilian application.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Alan Williams, who signed the original deal for the F-35 (also attached if link doesn't work), on what SHOULD be done:

If the government were serious, it would have:

    Appointed a trusted minister not tainted by the past (i.e., from outside DND, PWGSC or Industry Canada) to lead the initiative.
    Appointed a trusted DM not tainted by the past (i.e., from outside DND, PWGSC or Industry Canada) to report to the minister and lead the bureaucratic effort.
    Agreed to provide quarterly updates to parliament.
    Agreed to provide annual independent audits.
    Prepared “terms of reference” specifying that the government is committed to undertaking an open, fair and transparent competitive process to sustain a Canadian Forces fighter capability. As an immediate first step, it would have committed to modify the statement of requirements to allow for such a process to begin.
    Agreed to prepare and make public realistic cost estimates before parliament rises. These estimates are readily available. The information gained by the recent visit of the bureaucrats to the Joint Strike Fighter Program Office coupled with information assembled through discussions with the Pentagon, through a review of their Selected Acquisition Reports (SAR), through discussions with the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) and through a review of their GAO reports will provide a solid foundation for the estimates. I would also advise the government that rather than continually understating the costs it should provide the highest, most comprehensive reasonable forecast along with any appropriate explanatory notes. It is much better to come in under the estimate then having to justify why its cost estimate is low. As these cost forecasts change (as they inevitably will) the government should keep the public informed. Better that we hear and read about it from the government than through third parties.


The government’s seven-point action plan and its terms of reference are a continuation of the same government strategy we have seen to-date ....

More from Mr. Williams this week:

....  A former head of procurement at the National Defence Department who has been one of the most vocal opponents of the government’s 2010 decision to sole-source the F-35 without competitive bids told The Hill Times Mr. Harper’s comments “undermine everything the government has claimed” about reviewing the project following an explosive 2012 report by Auditor General Michael Ferguson.

“At no time has the government truly moved away from its planned acquisition of the F-35,” former assistant deputy minister Alan Williams told The Hill Times Thursday.

“It is something I have reiterated many times over the past few years. Shame on the government for distorting and manipulating the truth,” Mr. Williams said ....

 

[Kirkhill]

As an immediate first step, it would have committed to modify the statement of requirements to allow for such a process to begin.

In which case I am sure that someone would have complained that the rules were being changed to benefit somebody else.

The problem people focused on "efficient" linear processes when "best" results are iterative and are based on two really simple questions:

What do I want to do?
What can I do?

Which brings you to the question:

What do I want to do with what I can?

And repeat ad nauseam

 

[MarkOttawa]

More problems from US Congress"

Long-Term Continuing Resolution Would Ax 19 F-35s In 2016
Amy Butler

A continuing resolution (CR) lasting longer than the one now in place until Dec. 11 would slice the number of F-35s the Pentagon plans to buy in its next production lot, jeopardizing the path for reducing the price of the jet to a promised $80-85 million by the end of the decade, according to defense officials.

“The F-35 program is able to function under a short-term continuing resolution without driving significant impacts to the program; however, a long-term continuing resolution would be detrimental to the F-35 production ramp-up and drive increased costs for the United States and our international partners,” says Joe Dellavedova, a spokesman for the U.S.-led F-35 Joint Program Office.

The Pentagon plans to contract for 57 F-35s in low-rate initial production (LRIP) lot 10 in fiscal 2016. But a CR, which freezes spending for all programs at fiscal 2015 rates, would force the office to slice the buy by 19, including 16 F-35As for the U.S. Air Force and three F-35Bs for the U.S. Marine Corps.

Contract negotiations with airframer Lockheed Martin and F135 engine provider Pratt & Whitney are on track for resolution by December, Dellavedova says. But funding uncertainty for the second half of the year could jeopardize that timeline.

This comes just as the program has finally been postured to begin its long-awaited steep ramp to full production, according to Air Force Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan, F-35 program executive officer...
http://aviationweek.com/defense/long-term-continuing-resolution-would-ax-19-f-35s-2016

Mark
Ottawa

 

[CougarKing]

Another F-35 problem:

Defense News

Exclusive: F-35 Ejection Seat Fears Ground Lightweight Pilots

WASHINGTON — Concerns about increased risk of injury to F-35 pilots during low-speed ejections have prompted the US military services to temporarily restrict pilots who weigh less than 136 pounds from flying the aircraft, Defense News has learned.

During August tests of the ejection seat, built by Martin-Baker, testers discovered an increased risk of neck injury when a lightweight pilot is flying at slower speeds. Until the problem is fixed, the services decided to restrict pilots weighing under 136 pounds from operating the plane, Maj. Gen. Jeffrey Harrigian, F-35 integration office director, told Defense News in a Tuesday interview.

“The bottom line is, they have to get into the realm where the seat allows that weight of a pilot less than 136 pounds [to] safely eject out of the airplane,” Harrigian said. “They found some areas that particularly at slower speeds they were concerned about, so that drove the restriction that we have right now.”
(...SNIPPED)

 

[SupersonicMax]

Re: Weight limit.  This is no different than the Hornet's NACES seat we currently use.  Actually, this is the exact same weight limit.

 

[Kirkhill]

So, how come you haven't started handicapping fighter jocks?

 

[PuckChaser]

Re: Weight limit.  This is no different than the Hornet's NACES seat we currently use.  Actually, this is the exact same weight limit.

But because its for the F-35, its a completely new issue and supports the narrative that its problem-prone and too expensive.

How many fighter pilots realistically fall below 136lbs? I'm guessing not very many.

 

[MarkOttawa]

Norwegians sticking to their plan:

Norway reconfirms plans to acquire 52 F-35s
...
Of the 52 required, 28 will be operational by 2020 and the other 34 by 2024...
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/norway-reconfirms-plans-to-acquire-52-f-35s-417409/

Meanwhile non-program partner Japanese get work and know-how:

Northrop builds first F-35 centre fuselage for assembly in Japan
...
“[MHI] will perform final assembly and checkout of the Japanese F-35As. The process includes mating the centre fuselage to the forward fuselage/cockpit and wings produced by Lockheed Martin, and the aft fuselage produced by BAE Systems...

Under a licensing agreement signed in 2013, 38 aircraft will be assembled in Japan and the first four are being delivered through Lockheed’s Fort Worth plant. The first aircraft is expected to roll off the Nagoya line in 2017...
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/northrop-builds-first-f-35-centre-fuselage-for-assem-417425/

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Kirkhill]

So we have

Norway, a member of the program, orders aircraft, gets work
UK, a member of the program, orders aircraft, gets work
Italy, a member of the program, orders aircraft, gets work

Japan, not a member of the program, orders aircraft, gets work

Canada, a minor member of the program, has not ordered aircraft, will it continue to get work?