• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sharpey
  • Start date Start date
MilEME09 said:
Any existing party, I propose we form a political party from the members of Army.ca, with dapaterson, MCG, and FJAG up for party leader. I'm sure we would get lot's of votes :P

I will not accept if nominated and will not serve if elected.  ;D

:subbies:

 
Holy William Tecumseh Sherman--the accurate quote--BZ:
http://www.cnsnews.com/blog/rich-galen/if-nominated-i-will-not-run

:salute:

Mark
Ottawa
 
FJAG said:
I will not accept if nominated and will not serve if elected.  ;D

:subbies:

well there goes that idea, back on topic, I do feel we may see a push from the Trump White house, his SecDef choice just got his waiver, and after reading a bit Mattis will probably push for NATO to big up the slack, and draw back use of US military power. If we are beat into a corner and told to take up the slack in NORAD and NATO, perhaps we will see additional fighters.
 
FJAG said:
I will not accept if nominated and will not serve if elected.  ;D

:subbies:

"I don't care to belong to any club that will have me as a member". Groucho Marx
 
The war against stealth:

State Of Counterstealth Technology On Display At Airshow China

This is the fourth article in a series. Even as the Shenyang J-20 fighter performed its first public display above November’s Airshow China in Zhuhai, the tall arrays of low-frequency air surveillance radars standing over the crowds were evidence of Beijing’s efforts not only to match but to counter the U.S. advantage in stealth.

Towering over the flight line at Zhuhai were three air-defense radars from China Electronics Technology Group Corp. (CETC) and its Nanjing Research Institute of Electronic Technology (NRIET). The low-frequency trio reveals a similar design philosophy comprising tall arrays of horizontally polarized dipoles, the VHF-band JY-27A with 400 elements, UHF-band YLC-8B with 1,800 and L-band SLC-7 with 2,900.

The approach taken by CETC and NRIET to detecting low-observable aircraft while overcoming the limitations of lower-frequency radars appears different than that taken by Russia’s Nizhny Novgorod Research Institute of Radio Engineering (NNiiRT), which has employed wider arrays and, more recently, vertically polarized elements. Early Russian VHF systems like NNiiRT’s P-12 and P-18 used two rows of horizontally polarized Yagi antennas. The P-12 had six elements in each row, the P-18 had eight. In 1982, NNiiRT introduced the first VHF radar with 3-D capability—the ability to ascertain target elevation in addition to range and bearing—the 55Zh6 Nebo “Tall Rack.” This massive, semi-mobile system consisted of four arrays of horizontal dipole elements on top of each other, the bottom one consisting of six rows of 26. A few years later, the institute’s 1L13 Nebo-SV “Box Spring” entered service with six rows of 14 Yagis, shorter than those on the P-12/-18 and with folded dipoles.

In the early 2000s, Russia revealed its first active, electronically scanned array (AESA) VHF radar, the 1L119 “Nebo-SVU,” which had six rows of 14 short Yagis with folded dipoles, now vertically polarized. This was the first mobile VHF band radar to achieve 3-D capability, but its accuracy was limited, particularly in elevation.

NNiiRT addressed the problem by expanding the arrays while adding higher-frequency radars to the system. Later in the 2000s, the 55Zh6ME Nebo-M was introduced, consisting of three radars mounted on separate vehicles: VHF-, L- and S-band. The VHF radar had seven rows of 24 Yagi elements. A few years later, NNiiRT introduced the 55Zh6UME, which mounted a VHF-band AESA (with six rows of 20 elements) along with a 36-row L-band antenna on a single trailer...

SOS4-table.jpg

...
http://aviationweek.com/defense/state-counterstealth-technology-display-airshow-china

Lots more, beyond me.

Mark
Ottawa
 
When radars described as "towering over the flight line", "massive, semi-mobile system consisted of four arrays of horizontal dipole elements on top of each other, the bottom one consisting of six rows of 26", of even just "on a single trailer" can be squeezed into the nose of a fighter or warhead of a missile, there will be real cause for concern. Detection does not equal tracking does not equal shooting something down.

By the time that the capability to successfully detect, track, AND lock on to a stealthy fighter becomes real, a counter-technology will arise, followed, of course, by a counter-counter-measure and so on.

Even if/when stealth becomes defeatable, it will still give an advantage. Radar can track aircraft, but we still apply camouflage paint to fool the unaided eye, even if only for a few seconds or so. The slightest edge is still an edge.
 
We'll see, eh?  How cozy will Erdogan get with Putin?

Delivery of first F-35 to Turkey expected in 2019: defense undersecretary

Turkey expects to take delivery of its first Lockheed Martin F-35 aircraft in 2019, Turkish Defence Industries Undersecretary Ismail Demir told broadcaster NTV on Monday [Jan. 23].

The country's defense minister had said in November that Turkey expected to take delivery of the first two of a batch of 24 F-35s in 2018.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-lockheed-fighter-turkey-idUSKBN1571CU

Mark
Ottawa
 
MarkOttawa said:
We'll see, eh?  How cozy will Erdogan get with Putin?

Mark
Ottawa

If it still happens...Erdogan may get a return of deposit and no jets.

:2c:

G2G
 
A and B models look safe(ish):

Mattis Orders Comparison Review of F-35C and Advanced Super Hornet

Defense Secretary James Mattis is ordering a Pentagon review to compare the capabilities and cost between the emerging carrier-based Lockheed Martin F-35C Lighting II Joint Strike Fighter and an upgraded version of the Boeing F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet, according to a memo obtained by USNI News.

The three-paragraph directive orders Deputy Secretary of Defense Bob Work to, “oversee a review that compares F-35C and F/A-18 E/F operational capabilities and assesses the extent that F/A-18E/F improvements (an advanced Super Hornet) can be made in order to provide a competitive, cost effective, fighter aircraft alternative.”

The memo also directs Work to look at the overall F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program to find opportunities to significantly reduce cost while maintaining the requirements for the program.

The Work reviews are set to inform upcoming budget decisions, read the memo.

In a Friday [Jan. 27]https://news.usni.org/2017/01/27/mattis-orders-comparison-review-f-35c-advanced-super-hornet statement to reporters, Pentagon spokesman Capt. Jeff Davis said, “this is a prudent step to incorporate additional information into the budget preparation process and to inform the secretary’s recommendations to the president regarding critical military capabilities.”

The new review follows then President-elect Donald Trump’s December declaration that he wanted Boeing to price out a comparable Super Hornet to an F-35 as a cost saving measure...
https://news.usni.org/2017/01/27/mattis-orders-comparison-review-f-35c-advanced-super-hornet

Mark
Ottawa
 
So LockMart is now saying that they will have the cost of the F-35A down to $85 million per airframe by 2019. While we can debate what the real cost will actually be once combat systems and everything else gets factored in. Having a base price lower then anything else on the market just threw the Liberals argument of cost out the window.
 
MilEME09 said:
So LockMart is now saying that they will have the cost of the F-35A down to $85 million per airframe by 2019. While we can debate what the real cost will actually be once combat systems and everything else gets factored in. Having a base price lower then anything else on the market just threw the Liberals argument of cost out the window.

Yes, but wasn't the big issue for the Liberals that it was sole-sourced? 
 
Dimsum said:
Yes, but wasn't the big issue for the Liberals that it was sole-sourced?

Yes, like PM Chretien's two CL-604 Challengers bought in 48 hours without the RCAF ever having asked for the them. :nod:

Regards
G2G
 
Good2Golf said:
Yes, like PM Chretien's two CL-604 Challengers bought in 48 hours without the RCAF ever having asked for the them. :nod:

Regards
G2G

Ah yes, but they're Canadian and, most importantly, from Quebec.  :facepalm:
 
Dimsum:

...but wasn't the big issue for the Liberals that it was sole-sourced?
 

Nope.  From Sept. 2015:

F-35 and Canadian Election: Liberals Loose With Fighter Costs

...From the[ir] platform, p. 3:

    "…
    We will not purchase the F-35 stealth fighter-bomber. The primary mission of our fighter aircraft will remain the defence of North America. We will immediately launch an open and transparent competition to replace the CF-18 that will exclude requirements that do not reflect Canada’s interests, such as first-strike stealth capabilities. We will reduce the financial procurement envelope for replacing the CF-18s [that figure is $9 billion]. Instead of budgeting for the acquisition of 65 F-35s, we will plan to purchase an equal or greater number of lower priced, but equally effective, replacement aircraft.

    At an 80 cent dollar, the per unit fly away cost of each F-35 is $175 million, and the sustainment costs of each plane will be $270 million – given that repair work must largely be undertaken in the United States. Alternatively, the Super Hornet’s reported fly away price is around $65 million at an 80 cent dollar, and a large amount of the sustainment activity can be undertaken here at home, creating good jobs for Canadians.

    The Super Hornet is merely used as an illustration of cost savings and is not indicative of which aircraft would win a truly open and transparent competition…"

Now the real numbers...
https://cgai3ds.wordpress.com/2015/09/21/mark-collins-f-35-and-canadian-election-liberals-loose-with-fighter-costs/

Mark
Ottawa
 
MilEME09 said:
So LockMart is now saying that they will have the cost of the F-35A down to $85 million per airframe by 2019. While we can debate what the real cost will actually be once combat systems and everything else gets factored in. Having a base price lower then anything else on the market just threw the Liberals argument of cost out the window.

I am fairly certain that the 85M$ will include mission systems.
 
I am guessing that one of the big questions, as far as Lockmart is concerned, is whether they will get into Full Rate Production of those thousands of F35s that are "required".

So far they have been nickel and diming Low Rate orders with the constant threat of the entire project being cancelled like the F22.  In which case they have to eat all the costs from revenues already received.

On the other hand, if they are given certainty that there will be a long term commitment to a high rate of production then they can contemplate eating some short term costs from long term profits. Profits that will result not only from the manufacture of 2 to 3000 aircraft but also from maintaining and upgrading them for the next 50 years.
 
Price lines:

The Price of an F-35 Was Already Falling. Can Trump Drive it Lower?
...
f-35a_cost_over_time.jpg

...
http://www.defenseone.com/business/2017/01/f-35s-price-has-been-falling-can-trump-lower-it-even-more/134919/

Bit earlier:

Lockheed Martin’s F-35: What Is Left To Fix?
The Joint Strike Fighter: progress and problems
...
DF-F35FIX_graph.jpg

...
http://aviationweek.com/combat-aircraft/lockheed-martin-s-f-35-what-left-fix

Mark
Ottawa
 
Not quite ready for Norwegian prime time:

Norway Fears Lockheed Not Ready To Support F-35

Norway—As Norway readies to welcome its first F-35s in country in just nine short months, top defense officials here worry Lockheed Martin won’t be ready to support the new fleet.

The nation plans to begin operating the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) almost as soon as it arrives on Norwegian soil in November, according to air force officials. But while Lockheed has proved it can successfully deliver aircraft from the production line, the company has yet to show it will have a reliable system in place to support the aircraft on “day two,” says Maj. Gen. Morten Klever, Norway’s program director for F-35.

Norway has identified a number of “risk areas,” and is currently working with the F-35 Joint Program Office (JPO), Lockheed and engine maker Pratt & Whitney to mitigate those risks, Klever says.

“They will start training for initial operating capability immediately and everything needs to be in place for them to do that,” Klever says. “Is the industry ready to support and sustain the aircraft in Norway? There is a risk right now.”..
http://aviationweek.com/defense/norway-fears-lockheed-not-ready-support-f-35

Mark
Ottawa
 
F-35A cost, with engine, now getting into Super Hornet territory; one trusts Canadian media will notice--and note 35 of 90 planes foreign orders:

F-35A Drops Below $100M For First Time In Latest Deal

The Pentagon and Lockheed Martin have reached a deal on the latest batch of F-35s that marks the first time the price of a U.S. Air Force F-35A variant has dropped below $100 million.

The long-awaited agreement for the tenth batch of F-35s, announced Feb. 3, reflects a $728 million reduction when compared to the previous lot, according to a statement from the Joint Program Office (JPO). This falls in line with cost savings the JPO projected in December. At the time, JPO chief Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan predicted Lot 10 would reflect a price reduction of about 6-7% per unit from the $6.1 billion Lot 9 contract, which the Pentagon awarded unilaterally to Lockheed late last year.

Lockheed on Jan. 31 missed the deadline to appeal the Lot 9 deal, and will presumably move forward with the work.

In the latest contract agreement, which covers 90 aircraft total, the price of all three variants of the F-35 is down significantly. An F-35A now costs $94.6 million including engine and fees, a 7.3% reduction from Lot 9. Meanwhile, a U.S. Marine Corps F-35B fell by 6.7% to $122.8 million, and a U.S. Navy F-35C dropped by 7.9% to $121.8 million.

The announcement is a boon to Lockheed, the Pentagon and President Donald Trump, who made headlines last week when he claimed credit for $600 million in cost savings on the forthcoming contract. Although the savings were already in the works before Trump took office, Lockheed said Trump’s personal involvement in the negotiations accelerated the deal...

The contract includes 55 F-35s for the U.S. services and 35 for international partners and foreign military sales customers. The full value of the contract was not disclosed.
http://aviationweek.com/combat-aircraft/f-35a-drops-below-100m-first-time-latest-deal

US and foreign orders:

...
Here’s the breakdown of who’s buying which planes:

44 F-35A for U.S. Air Force
9 F-35B for U.S. Marine Corps
2 F-35C for U.S. Navy
3 F-35B for UK
6 F-35A for Norway
8 F-35A for Australia (presumably the sale occurs only if they don’t send us those refugees…)
2 F-35A for Turkey
4 F-35A for Japan
6 F-35A for Israel
6 F-35A for South Korea
http://breakingdefense.com/2017/02/f-35a-drops-below-100m-trump-pentagon-trumpets-jobs/

Super Hornet-current ballpark from US Navy (at end of story, not specified what all is included but engines certainly are):

...the Navy’s revised list...includ[es] $2.3 billion for 24 additional F/A-18 Super Hornets...
http://aviationweek.com/defense/light-attack-fighter-work-f-35-top-revised-usaf-wish-list

US dollars.

Mark
Ottawa
 
Back
Top