F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)

[Loachman]

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.

Except that they've recently stated that we absolutely must be able to meet our NORAD commitment and "NATO commitment" simultaneously, now, so that rather blows that part of the quote away.

 

[MarkOttawa]

Loachman: Ah, election platforms--from a 2014 post:

...This was said during the 2005-6 federal election campaign: “A Conservative government would also buy more Arctic utility aircraft…”  It is now over eight years later and nothing done.  Oh well.
https://cgai3ds.wordpress.com/2014/07/02/mark-collins-viking-airs-new-twotter-success-story/

Lots more on that platform here, draw one's own conclusions:
http://milnet.ca/forums/threads/36924/post-304319.html#msg304319

Meanwhile the Vietnamese navy has new-build Viking Air Twotters, with a great paint scheme:

Mark
Ottawa

 

[dimsum]

F-35A (USAF version, without V/STOL) at Red Flag.  The quote is a pretty good layman's version of the strength of the sensor fusion on the F-35As, and how 5th Gen fighters would work with older 4th Gen like our CF-18s and "interim" Super Hornets.

The F-35 Lightning II's advanced avionics software was the star of the show, as multiple F-35s successfully compiled data into a detailed layout of the battlefield with each individual threat pinpointed. The stealthy aircraft could then slip into weak spots in the defensive layout and take out SAM targets, opening up the space for follow-on forces of legacy fighters. Even when the F-35s ran out of munitions, F-22 and fourth-generation fighter pilots wanted the aircraft to remain in the combat zone, soaking up data and porting target info to the older fighters.

"Before where we would have one advanced threat and we would put everything we had-F-16s, F-15s, F-18s, missiles-we would shoot everything we had at that one threat just to take it out," Lt. Col. George Watkins, 34th Fighter Squadron commander, told Aviation Week. "Now we are seeing three or four of those threats at a time."

The F-35 and the F-22 Raptor pair up to make a particularly deadly team, according to the pilots. The Raptor uses its advanced air maneuverability to shield the F-35 from airborne threats while the F-35 relays data to the F-22 to paint a clear picture of the battlefield. Once the duo of fifth-generation fighters take out an initial wave of ground and air targets, F-18s, F-16s, and F-15s bring up the rear to provide support, all receiving target data from the F-35s in the field.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/f-35-dominates-air-years-175658930.html

 

[tomahawk6]

Scoring a 1 to 15 kill ratio is impressive.

 

[Journeyman]

advanced avionics software was the star of the show

Well, with today being the anniversary of the USS Greeneville (SSN-772) doing a ballast-blow surfacing maneuver and shooting to the surface….right underneath the Japanese fishing boat Ehime Maru  (killing nine Japanese crewmembers including four high school students).... all the sensors in the world won't help if you're too stupid to use them.  :nod:

/tangent

 

[OTR1]

...all the sensors in the world won't help if you're too stupid to use them.  :nod:

Well said, Sir!

Made me laugh. 

That should be a bumper sticker.  :nod:

 

[MarkOttawa]

As for keeping that F-35A price coming down:

F-35 cost target impossible without block buy, Lockheed says

A hand-shake agreement with US government negotiators slashes the cost of each F-35A ordered in the latest annual lot to $94.6 million, but the Lockheed Martin programme’s goal to drop the price to $85 million in three years is in jeopardy unless the Defense department invokes a package of special acquisition tools, says Lockheed chief financial officer Bruce Tanner.

The F-35 joint programme office and Lockheed have said for years that a long-sought, three-year block buy that would begin in FY2018 would be a key ingredient in reaching the $85 million unit recurring flyaway cost target a year later.

In remarks on 8 February at the Cowen Aerospace/Defense and Industrials Conference, Tanner took that approach a step further, saying the $85 million price target, including the Pratt & Whitney engine, is now impossible to achieve in the absence of one or some combination of another round of Blueprint for Affordability cost reductions in the manufacturing system, a block buy and an economic ordering quantity purchase.

“As we look at it now,” Tanner says, “one of those or combination of those are required to get to the $85 million.”..

Since the F-35 remains in the low-rate initial production through FY2019, the programme is legally prohibited from using a multi-year procurement authority, which allows US government agencies to award a single contract spanning multiple years rather than an annual lots. Instead, the F-35 has pursued approval of a “block buy”, which seeks bulk discounts by offering industry an upfront commitment of purchases over multiple years, but usually without cancellation fees...
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/f-35-cost-target-impossible-without-block-buy-lockh-433981/

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Kirkhill]

As for keeping that F-35A price coming down:

Mark
Ottawa

If you want to get me pregnant you're going to have to marry me.  [

 

[a_majoor]

The Marines are pushing hard to get their buy rate up to 37 Lightnings a year so they can quickly replace all their Hornets and Harriers:

Bulk purchases like that almost translate into assembly line purchasing, although what is really needed is a "Willow Run" facility that allows Lightnings to be turned out at a rate of one every 24 hours:

 

[Kirkhill]

More on the F35 at the last couple of Red Flags and also an interesting Norwegian link

http://www.sldinfo.com/f-35-at-red-flag-renorming-of-airpower-in-process/

 

[MarkOttawa]

As for ground attack:

F-35 Excels At Destroying Targets—If They Don’t Move

Despite being among the most technologically advanced low-observable warplanes on the planet, the Lockheed Martin F-35 has one significant shortcoming. The Joint Strike Fighter cannot strike moving ground targets using the targeting system and weapons loadout delivered in its final combat Lightning II configuration, Block 3F.

The challenge is the F-35 is currently unable to lead a target with its laser designator to compensate for movement. This means the aircraft is limited to striking fixed or slow-moving objects  such as the surface-to-air missiles it has proven so skilled at destroying in Red Flag exercises.

As the close air support fighter of the future and replacement for the 20th-century A-10, F-16, F/A-18 and AV-8B, this issue has prompted the services to try to move forward integration of the 500-lb. dual-mode Laser/GPS/IMU Raytheon GBU-49 Lot 5 Enhanced Paveway II (EP-2) guidance assembly. EP-2 has built-in proportional navigation software that automatically calculates and compensates for target direction and speed; its inertial measurement unit adjusts the flightpath for wind conditions.

“When [New England Patriots quarterback] Tom Brady throws a football, he doesn’t throw it at the person, he throws it out in front of the person,” explains Brig. Gen. Scott Pleus, who heads the Air Force’s F-35 integration office. “GBU-49 does that internally to the weapon itself, [giving us] for the first time, the capability to hit a moving target.”

The F-35 has already entered service with the U.S. Marine Corps (F-35B Block 2B) and Air Force (F-35A Block 3i), equipped with the laser-guided 500-lb. Raytheon/Lockheed GBU-12 Paveway II and GPS/IMU-guided 2,000- and 1,000-lb. Boeing GBU-31/32 Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM). Block 3F will add the 1,000-lb. Raytheon AGM-154 Joint Standoff Weapon (F-35C), 250-lb. Boeing GBU-39 Small-Diameter Bomb Increment 1 (F-35A), and the United Kingdom’s 500-lb. Raytheon UK Paveway IV (F-35B).

Those weapons can take out fixed or stationary targets, but not fast-movers such as tanks, trucks or mobile command posts. They would have some utility against relocatable, slow-moving targets if the F-35 had a lead-laser capability, which comes standard in modern targeting pods fielded on legacy, nonstealthy combat fighters and bombers. Weapons capable of automatically adjusting for so-called Kentucky windage without lead-laser correction will not arrive on the F-35 until the early 2020s as part of the Block 4 follow-on modernization program, under the existing plan...
http://aviationweek.com/combat-aircraft/f-35-excels-destroying-targets-if-they-don-t-move

Mark
Ottawa

 

[tomahawk6]

The USAF Chief of Staff described how the F-35 would take on China's J-20 and J-31 fighters. Essentially the F-35 would be net worked with other air assets so that there is not a one on one match up. I am not sure that response is very reassuring if your latest fighter cant take on a Chinese fighter one on one. In this a BVR missile would be the equalizer.

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/us-air-force-general-describes-171115721.html

 

[dimsum]

The USAF Chief of Staff described how the F-35 would take on China's J-20 and J-31 fighters. Essentially the F-35 would be net worked with other air assets so that there is not a one on one match up. I am not sure that response is very reassuring if your latest fighter cant take on a Chinese fighter one on one. In this a BVR missile would be the equalizer.

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/us-air-force-general-describes-171115721.html

To be fair, that's included in the name "Joint Strike Fighter"....as in its primary role is strike.

 

[MarkOttawa]

MND and Justin Trudeau note--looks like will little significant price differential between F-35A and Super Hornet if/when we decade on full "replacement" fighter for CF-18s; in fact seems JSF could well be cheaper:

F-35A Price Should Fall Below $85 Million, Bogdan Says

GEELONG, Australia—The Joint Strike Fighter program should be able to beat its 2019 price target for the Lockheed Martin F-35A Lightning aircraft, program chief Lt. Gen. Chris Bogdan says.

Speaking to reporters at the Australian International Airshow here, Bogdan also said the F-35’s performance at Red Flag exercises over the past year was “pretty impressive.”

The program has been committed to delivering U.S. Air Force F-35A version aircraft in 2019 for $85 million [that's with engine], compared with the most recent negotiated price of $94.6 million, Bogdan says.

“I am here to tell you today that that’s not enough,” he says. “We need the airplane to be lower in price in 2019 and 2020 than $85 million. And I think we can get there.

“We ought to be looking at about an $80 million airplane by that time frame and then continuing to decrease the price of the airplane lot over lot over lot,” Bogdan says. In part, that would be done by working with industry and maintaining steady production...
http://aviationweek.com/avalon-airshow/f-35a-price-should-fall-below-85-million-bogdan-says

As for Canada:

Permanent replacement of the current fleet

In November 2016, the Government of Canada committed to launching an open and transparent competition to purchase a permanent replacement for our fleet of CF-18 fighter aircraft.

The procurement process defined: Replacing Canada's CF-18 fleet
http://news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do?mthd=tp&crtr.page=1&nid=1158689&crtr.tp1D=930

Timeline of the competitive process

An open and transparent competition will be launched within the government’s current mandate.

Canada’s requirements for the permanent replacement aircraft will be informed by results of the upcoming Defence Policy Review. These requirements will include the number of aircraft needed, the level of in-service support required and the estimated time of delivery. The purchase is also required to bring economic benefits to Canada.

Planning for the competition is already underway, and we anticipate a request for proposals will be issued in 2019 [emphasis added]. As the process moves along, we will undertake industry engagement and provide regular updates.
http://www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/app-acq/amd-dp/air/snac-nfps/CF-18-eng.html#s1

Mark
Ottawa

 

[MarkOttawa]

Meanwhile Boeing vs Denmark:

Boeing suing the government of Denmark
Aircraft giant says government is withholding documents and makes good on threat to get litigious

US aircraft manufacturer Boeing is suing the government for rejecting its bid to produce Denmark’s new fighter aircraft.

Boeing’s Super Hornet lost out to a competitor, Lockheed Martin’s F-35 fighter, which will become Denmark’s new fighter.

Boeing is bringing the suit against the Defence Ministry because it wants to see the documents that led to the government choosing the F-35 over the Super Hornet – material the government has thus far failed to deliver.

The lawsuit makes good on a threat made by the company when the decision was announced.

“We believe that the ministry’s evaluation of the candidates is filled with fundamental errors that give readers the wrong impression of the combat aircraft’s price and properties,” said Debbie Rubb, the vice president of Boeing Global Strike, at the time the decision was announced.

Papers, please

Boeing has asked for access to all the material relevant to the decision-making process. According to Børsen, the state has failed to deliver a single document in the last six months.

The aircraft manufacturer insists it should be allowed to review the documents as the Danish decision could affect the Super Hornet’s chances in other countries [emphasis added, Canada note].

“We are taking this step because there is too much at stake, both in Denmark, and potentially in other countries that are considering buying the Super Hornet,” she said in September.
http://cphpost.dk/news/boeing-suing-denmark.html

Mark
Ottawa

 

[dimsum]

First two RAAF F-35s arrive for the Avalon Airshow near Melbourne.

https://www.facebook.com/senatormarisepayne/videos/1926351037584466/?hc_ref=NEWSFEED

 

[MarkOttawa]

LockMart wants block buy, faster "permanent" fighter decision for RCAF:

Lockheed says in talks with Spain, Belgium, others on buying F-35s

Lockheed Martin Corp (LMT.N) said on Friday [March 3] it was talking to the governments of Spain, Switzerland and Belgium about selling its F-35 fighter jets to the European nations.

Bringing new customers could help significantly reduce the cost of the military aircraft after several blowouts and production delays. The United States and 10 allies are clients of the F-35 currently.

"We are talking to several other countries - Switzerland, Belgium, Spain," Jeff Babione, Lockheed Martin's F-35 programme leader, told reporters at the Avalon Airshow in Australia.

"There are quite a few other European nations that are looking at perhaps having the F-35 as an opportunity," Babione said. "We are starting to see other customers think about the F-35 being added to their fleet."

Another person familiar with the discussions, who was not authorised to speak on the record, said that Finland was also in talks.

Babione said that countries already signed up to the F-35 program along with the United States - Australia, Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Turkey, the United Kingdom, Japan, South Korea and Israel - need to start ordering in blocks beyond yearly commitments to help meet a reduced target cost of $80 million by 2020 [emphasis added].

"It is actually a very reasonable target but it is going to take cooperation in changing the way we buy the aircraft," he said...

Babione also urged Canada to speed up a decision about whether it would buy the F-35s or Boeing Co's (BA.N) Super Hornets instead [emphasis added]... 
http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-airshow-australia-lockheed-idUKKBN16A0DY

Mark
Ottawa

 

[MarkOttawa]

Belgium holding new fighter competition (cf. Canada)--F-35A likely winner because of interoperability with Dutch:

Belgium seeks multi-billion F-16 fighter replacement

Belgium on Friday [March 17] opened a tender for the replacement of its ageing US-built F-16 jet fighter fleet, a contract potentially worth 15 billion euros over its 40-year lifespan.

"The current 54 F-16 fighters will be replaced by 34 new multi-role aircraft [emphasis added]," the ministry of defence said, arguing that because of technical advances, fewer planes would be needed to meet the same mission.

The cost of the 34 aircraft is put at 3.6 billion euros ($3.85 billion), with another 1.2 billion euros to cover training and maintenance, ministry spokesman Laurence Mortier told AFP.

Over the planes anticipated 40-year lifespan, the total cost could come to around 15 billion euros, Mortier said.

The ministry said the supplier would likely be named in 2018 but the government had shortlisted five manufacturers in NATO or European Union member states.

The likely favourite is America's Lockheed-Martin fifth generation stealth fighter, the F-35, which many US allies are acquiring but which has come in for harsh criticism as being too expensive and failing to meet project targets on time.

Meanwhile US aerospace giant Boeing (NYSE: BA - news) is offering a new, much upgraded version of the F-18 Hornet, the main strike jet for the US Navy.

The other three contenders are the Rafale of French manufacturer Dassault, the Typhoon built by the British-led Eurofighter consortium and Sweden's Saab Gripen E.

When Belgium acquired its F-16 fighters in the 1970s, it joined forces with the neighbouring Netherlands, plus Denmark and Norway, all of which have opted for the F-35.
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/belgium-seeks-multi-billion-f-135358989.html

Official announcement here:
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/release/3/182062/belgium-launches-f_16-replacement-rfp.html

We were planning for 65 F-35As.  The Netherlands are planning on 37 F-35As, so together with Belgium should be 71 total for two countries with combined population much less than half Canada's (28 million) and a lot less territory to cover.  Hmm.  Penultimate para. here for Dutch numbers:
http://aviationweek.com/defense/dutch-deployment-changes-public-opinion-f-35

Mark
Ottawa

 

[MilEME09]

how about the fact they only need a year to run a fair and open competition? take note government of canada, this is how you dont play politics

 

[jmt18325]

how about the fact they only need a year to run a fair and open competition? take note government of canada, this is how you dont play politics

In Canada?  Not likely.