F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)

[jmt18325]

Details from RCAF senior leadership is "wild speculation," yet what's posted here is supposed to be rational, informed discourse?  :

Again, when did I say that?

 

[Journeyman]

Again, when did I say that?

If "that" means the RCAF leadership's comments, it's quoted directly from your post.  If you meant informed  discussion, and you're now arguing against having even implied that, then you are effectively claiming what many here have suspected -- your posts are not informed and you don't have the vaguest clue what you are talking about -- unlike some posters here, who I know have experience and knowledge of the aircraft, the requirements, and actual procurement processes.

Their  posts add value, rather than repetitively wasting bandwidth.

Clear enough....."chief"?

 

[Altair]

If "that" means the RCAF leadership's comments, it's quoted directly from your post.  If you meant informed  discussion, and you're now arguing against having even implied that, then you are effectively claiming what many here have suspected -- your posts are not informed and you don't have the vaguest clue what you are talking about -- unlike some posters here, who I know have experience and knowledge of the aircraft, the requirements, and actual procurement processes.

Their  posts add value, rather than repetitively wasting bandwidth.

Clear enough....."chief"?

Oh please. We are all wasting bandwidth. People going on about the F35 knowing full well the goverment will never buy them. Honestly any thread on aircraft not devoted to the Hornet and super hornet is a waste of bandwidth because that's all canada will be flying for the next 20 to 30 years.

Also jmt, don't let anyone mock you for your service to your community.

 

[Good2Golf]

The 'mockery' isn't about  JMT's service to his community, but rather his ongoing 'opinion-thinly-veiled-as-(purported)-informed-position' approach to a subject that, in light of informed (and in some cases official Government correspondence) information provided (including a guy who's actually flown one of the jets in question in combat and who does actually know what CP3 is and how much FLEI each of his aircraft has left), remains focused on providing cherry-picked quips back to any number of retorts/counter-arguments.  If JMT supports his community/society, good on him, seriously. :nod:  That doesn't make the "pluckage rectale" any less uninformed and of specious value.

:2c:

Regards
G2G

 

[Journeyman]

..... the "pluckage rectale"....

  :rofl:    FML ;D

 

[SupersonicMax]

I'm not a fan of the Habs,  I just hate every other nhl team [lol:

I don't hate then.  I just think, from my experience an knowledge, that it will not carry us effectively into the next 4 decades.  If it did, I'd happily support an acquisition.

 

[jmt18325]

The 'mockery' isn't about  JMT's service to his community, but rather his ongoing 'opinion-thinly-veiled-as-(purported)-informed-position' approach to a subject that, in light of informed

So refute the quotes from the US Navy brass.

 

[jmt18325]

If "that" means the RCAF leadership's comments, it's quoted directly from your post.

You have no such thing.  I said I have no confidence in the procurement system related to DND and the other involved departments to upgrade the hornets in time, given that there is only 5 years before the project must be complete.  If it's any consolation, I also have no confidence in the ability of the US Navy procurement system to replace the Super Hornet or even the Hornet in the timeline stated, given current delays.

 

[Good2Golf]

Obfuscation. The USN isn't the RCAF. I'm in the RCAF; I have nothing to refute.

Why don't you refute the official DND CF-18 Life Extension Study I linked to up-thread?

 

[jmt18325]

Obfuscation. The USN isn't the RCAF. I'm in the RCAF; I have nothing to refute.

Why don't you refute the official DND CF-18 Life Extension Study I linked to up-thread?

I'm fine with the life extension - I question the available timeline given our track record up to this point when it comes to timelines.  The US Navy statements prove false the idea that we'd be the only operator post 203.  We won't even be the only operator post 2040 based on recent statements from high placed sources.

 

[Good2Golf]

I'm fine with the life extension - I question the available timeline given our track record up to this point when it comes to timelines. 

So you disagree with the Department's cost, schedule and technical assessment by engineering and programmatic experts that ELE 2025 is NOT low risk, then?

From the DND official CF-18 ELE extension report I quoted earlier:

A CF-18 ELE extension to 2025 is assessed as a low risk option in terms of cost, schedule and technical factors.

That is your choice.  I hope your disagreement doesn't cause you to lose sleep over the next nine years...enjoy your opinion.

 

[jmt18325]

I wasn't aware that we weren't allowed opinions here.  I'll take that under advisement.

 

[dapaterson]

Opinions are like assholes.  Everybody has one, and most of them are full of shit.

Informed opinions, on the other hand, are somewhat more rare.

 

[Good2Golf]

I wasn't aware that we weren't allowed opinions here.  I'll take that under advisement.

Again with the "poor me" attitude.  Who here said you can't have opinions?  I simply wished that your own opinion didn't cause you to loose sleep.

You do know that some of the CF-18 fleet is already modified with CP3 and can fly for an extended period, right, so that programmatically, they just keep doing to more jets what they've already done?  You're doubting that the plan can be executed, when precursory activity is already done? ???

Like I said before, enjoy your opinion, to which your are fully entitled. 

 

[jmt18325]

Again with the "poor me" attitude.  Who here said you can't have opinions?  I simply wished that your own opinion didn't cause you to loose sleep.

You do know that some of the CF-18 fleet is already modified with CP3 and can fly for an extended period, right, so that programmatically, they just keep doing to more jets what they've already done?  You're doubting that the plan can be executed, when precursory activity is already done? ???

Like I said before, enjoy your opinion, to which your are fully entitled. 

I'm happy if we can do this in the time left - if that happens, I'm not about to be disappointed.  I simply expressed skepticism, which seems ever so troubling, for some reason.

 

[MarkOttawa]

JPO head on next LRIPs:

US pursuing smaller, hybrid block buy for F-35

Budget austerity and a resistant Congress is reining in a F-35 block buy for the US government that would include lot 12 of low-rate initial production, but the government is examining the potential of a hybrid block buy, the Joint Strike Fighter’s program executive officer said on 22 June.

The US does not have adequate funding in Fiscal 2017 to enter into a block buy that would include lot 12, which would begin in 2018, Bogdan says. The US revealed its planned procurement quantities for lots 12, 13 and 14 in a 16 June 16 announcement posted on the Federal Business Opportunities website, although the notice did not refer to the lots under a block buy.

Lot 12 would include 100 F-35As, 26 F-35Bs and six F-35Cs, according to the notice. Lot 13 would include 104 F-35As, 26 F-35Bs and 12 F-35Cs, while lot 14 would call for 88 F-35As, 30 F-35Bs and 18 F-35Cs, the notice shows.

Given current budget pressures, the US government’s best course of action is to wait until lot 13 to enter a block buy, Bogdan says. However, that does not mean other partners and foreign military sales customers who have committed to buying aircraft and have sufficient funding, would not want to start a block buy as soon as possible, he adds...
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/us-pursuing-smaller-hybrid-block-buy-for-f-35-426610/

Much later, if ever, for RCAF--suspect we'd be past LRIP 14 (US FY 2020, starting Oct. 1 2019).

Mark
Ottawa

 

[PuckChaser]

2020s should be into full production, barring any wierd software glitches popping up last minute. Be interesting to see price per unit in the LRIP lots for the 3 listed.

 

[Kirkhill]

JPO head on next LRIPs:

Much later, if ever, for RCAF--suspect we'd be past LRIP 14 (US FY 2020, starting Oct. 1 2019).

Mark
Ottawa

Jings, that seems like an awful lot of machines for an aircraft that is "far from working".

LRIP 01 - 02 AC
LRIP 02 - 12 AC
LRIP 03 - 17 AC
LRIP 04 - 32 AC
LRIP 05 - 32 AC
LRIP 06 - 36 AC
LRIP 07 - 35 AC

142 of those 166 AC were flying by Dec 2015.

LRIP 08 - 43 AC
LRIP 09 - 57 AC
LRIP 10 - 94 AC

An additional 194 AC approved bringing the fleet up to 360 AC

LRIP 11 - 94 AC  http://www.janes.com/article/56817/end-of-year-f-35-contracts-and-milestones-announced

Fleet now projected at 454 AC

LRIP 12 - 132 AC
LRIP 13 - 142 AC
LRIP 14 - 136 AC

Fleet projected at 864 AC by ca 2020.

The Super Hornet Fleet stands at 563 with an additional 138 Growlers for a total of 701 AC.

Rafale has 141 AC in the air.
Saab has some 247 older model Gripens in the air and the NG version prototype was just rolled out last month.

 

[suffolkowner]

The F-35 maybe not such a bad fighter after all

http://www.tyndall.af.mil/News/tabid/6600/Article/808248/10-questions-on-the-f-35a-lightning-ii.aspx
http://media.defense.gov/2016/Jun/21/2001557420/670/394/0/160621-F-EA289-002.JPG

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Just looking at those numbers for years 10 to 14: 94 aircrafts, 94, 132, 142, 136, etc. and as these years start, 264 aircraft have already been produced.

Just a stupid question: At which point does the moniker LRI (which apparently stands for "Low Rate", which at about 100 aircraft per year it isn't, "Initial", which after more than 250 airplanes have been produced it ain't) gets dropped and the thing is simply considered 'in production"?