Thanks for Brody for the article!
via Business Insider...
Critical mass is arriving.
The UK goes from 138 to 48? The Netherlands are buying a paltry 37? The Italians are going from over 100 down to 90 odd and are considering going even lower.... And you say the death spiral isn't here? You must be smoking stuff that was once considered illegal in all 50 states.
via Business Insider...
Col Pietrucha told The Sunday Telegraph: “All fighter programmes have developed problems. This one is particularly troubling, not necessarily because the aircraft is inherently bad, but because … they are being bought before they have been proven. They have not been tested outside a computer simulation.”&
Britain originally said it would buy 138 of the fighters, but has now committed itself to only 48 of the jump jet variant, spread between the RAF and Navy. The first are due to enter service in 2018.
The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter being built for British and US forces is based on outdated ideas of air warfare, it is claimed. The aircraft could be unable to evade enemy radar and be too expensive for long campaigns.Yep.
The critique in the US Air Force’s own journal concludes that the new fighter may even have “substantially less performance” than some existing aircraft.
Critical mass is arriving.
The UK goes from 138 to 48? The Netherlands are buying a paltry 37? The Italians are going from over 100 down to 90 odd and are considering going even lower.... And you say the death spiral isn't here? You must be smoking stuff that was once considered illegal in all 50 states.
Those numbers are pie-in-the-sky sketchy "orders." Or vague intentions, or PR numbers to keep Uncle Sam off their necks. I've ordered a Lamborghini, too, but damned if I have the money to pay for it.
ReplyDeleteActually only a couple dozen planes have been or are being produced for F-35 "partners." The "partners" can't take immediate ownership, of course, because ...well, being a partner doesn't mean you actually GET a plane just because you paid a couple hundred million for it.
It's just as well. The -35 can't actually do anything besides go to christenings and things like that, sort of like a distant relative you see once in a while and that's too often.
I just hope when HMG comes to sell QEC we still get to keep the crews;maintaining establishment numbers is vital. And that we can leverage the savings from not running the two carriers against some equipment upgrades for T45, throw some more money at T26 (personally I would just buy FREMM but heck), and buy some helicopters. I wonder if we get enough money from the sale of them to buy another Astute. Now that would be good
ReplyDeleteMy guess is, most countries are hoping the project will implode so they can get out without too much political backlash from Washington. However, if America decides to go to full rate production some of these countries will bite the bullet and cancel even at the risk of angering the U.S.
ReplyDeleteThe Milestone C full rate production decision is currently scheduled for five years from now. First development testing must be completed, and they are only about half way through that. Then comes operational testing.
DeleteMeanwhile, as you suggest, there is continual talk of "ramping up production" (to reduce unit costs) but that would not only be illegal but require both a higher domestic budget and also foreign buyers who are interested in buying high-priced un-tested faulty prototypes despite poor program and test reports.
It's a classic example of a mis-managed development program, what Senator McCain has called “worse than a disgrace.”
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteOn the flip side, if the Air Force followed the same model of "reinvesting" into existing airframes, they could begin a phase out of older F-15s and replace them with F-15SE models, phase out older F-16s and integrate a newer variant of F-16 incorporating a few of the gajillion tested upgrades including supercruise and low observable nozzle variants...
ReplyDeleteOf course neither of those platforms are owned solely by Lockheed Martin, so I don't think it will happen. Boeing and General Dynamic can't seem to win in the lobbying department.
There is an obvious solution.
ReplyDeleteSuper Hornets and Growlers are way more efficient and affordable.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zB0ZxBurRc&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Pietrucha on lightweight fighters (unmanned) circa 2013, as force multipliers for other aircraft. It seems the Navy is paying attention this kind of innovative thinking.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2013/07/is-this-the-lightweight-fighte/
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete