F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

[ice berg]

The debate is still going on. But we are more or less stuck with f-35.

 

[indian_sukhoi]

Actually Norway do have an option.

Regarding about price, JSF isn't getting any cheaper. Almost every foreign customer are concern with price rise up.


Something tells me, They might end up buying Saab Gripen or maybe Rafale!!


Btw, How is their relations with Sweden?

 

[Tshering22]

Actually Norway do have an option.

Regarding about price, JSF isn't getting any cheaper. Almost every foreign customer are concern with price rise up.


Something tells me, They might end up buying Saab Gripen or maybe Rafale!!


Btw, How is their relations with Sweden?

Gripen has been offered to the Norwegians many times. In fact, there was this article I was reading somedays back where it was mentioned that the Swedes had planned Gripen sales as a "scandinavian" or northern European fighter meant for itself, Norway, Demark and Finland. However, the political pressure and arm twisting by USA got the best of all the three northern countries and they ended up with F-16s in their kitty.

Hopefully Gripen NG might be able to realize its dream if F-35 falls out.

 

[ice berg]

Actually Norway do have an option.

Regarding about price, JSF isn't getting any cheaper. Almost every foreign customer are concern with price rise up.


Something tells me, They might end up buying Saab Gripen or maybe Rafale!!


Btw, How is their relations with Sweden?

Gripen was rejected a few years ago. Which understandably pissed of the swedish.

It could be both political pressure and technical requirements.

 

[Tshering22]

Gripen was rejected a few years ago. Which understandably pissed of the swedish.

It could be both political pressure and technical requirements.

I doubt it is technical requirements. Swedish air force Gripens have outperformed USAF pilots in RED FLAG which is as close to real combat as you can get in peacetime. Norway and Sweden share same terrain, atmosphere, neighborhood, geo-political scenario etc. Why would their technical requirements not match Swedes?

Political pressure? Yes of course. Let's see; Denmark and Norway having more commonality with Swedes, found F-16 more superior (older versions) while Finland found a marine fighter F-18 Hornet as the most apt air force jet. Doesn't really match up what is called "reasonable explanations". Gripens were designed and developed with the worst in mind; A Soviet invasion. Don't see what else could be a bigger threat to Nordic nations today.

 

[ice berg]

We dont judge performance based on dog and ponny shows.

Here is some reading.
Svensk innrømmelse: – Gripen passer ikke Norge - tu.no/industri
If you cant read norwegian, here is the google translation.

Gripen can not fill all the requirements set Norway for its next fighter, admits the Swedish Defence Minister Sten Tolgfors on his blog.

American, no doubt
Last November it became clear that Norway chooses to buy new fighter jets from Lockheed Martin.

Selects American fighter

When appointed Defense Minister Anne-Grete Strøm-Erichsen F-35, also known as the JSF, which is the obvious choice instead of Jas-39 Gripen Next Generation (NG) from the Swedish Saab.

- JSF meets all requirements of the four threat images, while the Gripen NG meets only the requirements of the international threat. JSF is considered to be better than the Gripen NG in all combat aircraft's main tasks - data collection and monitoring, as well as combat targets in the air, ground and surface, said Strøm-Erichsen.

A few weeks went Strøm-Erichsen to Stockholm to give reasons for his Swedish colleague Sten Tolgfors face to face.

Strøm-Erichsen will explain Gripen no wrecks in Sweden

After the Swedish government analyzed the failed bid game in the neighboring country. The conclusion was clear this weekend.

- Norway wanted a plane that could carry out ground attacks on their own over enemy-controlled territory, protected by long-range anti-aircraft and next-generation fighters. In such a perspective, including stealth characteristics are important. Gripen is designed to act autonomously, but is designed as part of a larger system such as support of the airborne radar, writes Tolgfors.

Less weapons load
Swedish Radio Ekot confronts the defense minister that the Gripen was also rejected in aerial combat in the Norwegian analyzes.

- The scenarios are set up with very large distances, where the stealth characteristics and a small radar signature has had most to say, points out Tolgfors.

He also points out that the Gripen is worse when it comes to the ability to carry ground attack weapons in addition to self defense weapons.

- We do not prioritize attacks
- Since Sweden and other potential exporting countries do not prioritize attacking abilities, so says the Norwegian evaluation relatively small gripe that the system would not fill our needs, writes Tolgfors on the blog.

There are also shows that he still disagrees with Norway's calculation indicates that the Gripen is more expensive than the F-35. And not least, how Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg and Minister of Defence Anne-Grete Strøm-Erichsen presented the fighter selection.

 

[john70]

UK PM Hints at F-35 Joint Strike Fighter U-turn

By British Forces Broadcasting Service on Friday, March 23rd, 2012




RAF Requests New C-17 Engines for $300...
The Prime Minister told MPs today his Government was prepared to change defence purchases when the costs change, amid speculation of an embarrassing U-turn on fighters for Britain's new aircraft carriers.
David Cameron said the approach marked a stark change from the last Labour government, suggesting money had been wasted previously.
Speaking at Prime Minister's Questions, Labour MP Tom insisted the Strategic Defence and Security Review was "unravelling".
Ministers are said to be considering whether to revert to the original plan on carrier jets by the former Labour government to acquire the F-35B "jump jet" variant of the Joint Strike Fighter.
That proposal was dropped in the 2010 SDSR which opted instead to switch to the F-35C carrier version, which has a longer range, can carry more weapons and is interoperable with the French and US navies.
Mr Greatrex said: "You may recall that at the time of the SDSR you described it as a mistake and an error to use the short take-off, vertical landing variant of the JSF.
"As the Ministry of Defence is about to perform a U-turn on that decision to rescind that original decision, don't you now accept and understand the real mistake and error has been in a defence review that has been inadequate and is fast unravelling."
Mr Cameron said: "The real mistake and error was inheriting a £38 billion black hole in the defence budget.
"What the Defence Secretary wants is to be the first Defence Secretary in a generation to announce a balanced and funded budget for defence this year and for many years to come.
"That is what we are discussing. We will look at all of the evidence, all of the costings - and costings as you know will change in defence.
"But I do make this pledge. Unlike previous governments, if costs change, and if facts change, we won't just plough on regardless and make wrong decisions for political reasons.

 

[W.G.Ewald]

UK reverses controversial F-35 switch

The UK has reversed its controversial Joint Strike Fighter variant selection change of late 2010, and will go back to its original plan of acquiring the Lockheed Martin F-35 in its short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL) guise.

Confirmed as part of a carrier strike capability announcement made on 10 May, the step will remove the need to perform costly modifications to the Royal Navy's two future Queen Elizabeth-class vessels in order to accommodate the larger F-35C. This had doubled to an estimated £2 billion ($3.2 billion) for one vessel, the Ministry of Defence says and was to cause a three-year delay until 2023.

Royal Air Force and Royal Navy pilots will fly the STOVL-variant F-35B

 

[Zebra]

It's Official: U.K. To Switch Back to STOVL F-35.

May. 10, 2012 - 10:39AM |
By ANDREW CHUTER

It’s Official: U.K. To Switch Back to STOVL F-35 | Defense News | defensenews.com

 

[Armand2REP]

Now Hollande has no choice but to build the second carrier, PA2!

 

[p2prada]

Now Hollande has no choice but to build the second carrier, PA2!

Can you explain the reasoning behind this statement? I don't understand it.

 

[Armand2REP]

The Socialists expected to share the British carrier, but that is no longer an option without cats and traps.

 

[p2prada]

Hmm, that was an ambitious plan anyway.

 

[agentperry]

Washington: The F-35 fighter jet was supposed to offer technological wizardry at an affordable price but the Pentagon's ambitious plan for the new aircraft has stumbled in the face of engineering setbacks, production delays and ballooning costs.

With plans to deliver 2443 planes in different versions for the US Air Force, Navy and Marines, the program is now the most expensive in US military history. When it was launched in 2001, however, the one-size-fits-all approach was touted as a way to save money.

"The F-35 was conceived as a relatively affordable fifth-generation strike fighter" that would meet the needs of the Air Force, Navy and Marines with the same airframe instead of having to fund "three separate tactical aircraft designs," according to a Congressional Research Service report.

The cost of Lockheed Martin's Joint Strike Fighter has doubled since 2001 to about $162 million per aircraft, about three times the price of an F-18 Super Hornet fighter.

The total cost of the program is currently estimated at $395.7 billion, according to the Pentagon, a four per cent increase over last year.

"As the program continues to experience cost growth and delays, projected annual funding needs are unprecedented, averaging more than $13 billion a year through 2035," said the Government Accountability Office, the auditing arm of Congress.

The Pentagon maintains that the price of the supersonic, single-engine aircraft over the long term will stay within original plans, once a full rate of production is underway.

"Using today's dollars, the average purchase cost in 2019 will be $81.4 million," said spokesman George Little.

"There have been challenges in the past. We believe we're making progress overtime in putting controls around those overruns."

The program called for launching construction at an early stage, at the same time the aircraft was being put through flight tests -- on the assumption that technical hurdles had been worked out in computer modeling.

The approach was supposed to save time and money, but instead "concurrency" has become a vicious circle. Technical glitches force delays in production schedules, resulting in expensive redesigns and cost overruns.

"Fundamentally, that was a miscalculation," Vice Admiral David Venlet, who was appointed last year to oversee the program, said about concurrency.

Richard Aboulafia, an aerospace analyst with the Teal Group consultancy, said concurrency has had a "huge" impact on cost.

"You start building while you're still testing and while you're testing, you're making design changes, so you have to go back and modify the planes you've already built," he told AFP.

Despite more than five years of delays in the testing program that is due to be completed by 2016, only 20 per cent of the tests have been carried out, raising the prospect of yet more cost overruns.

Tests have revealed a host of problems, including excessive vibration, a malfunctioning high tech helmet display and a flawed tail hook on the F-35C that fails to catch arresting gear wires on aircraft carriers.

There are also persistent software problems, in an aircraft that has 24 million lines of code, three times the number for the latest model US fighter, the F-22 Raptor.

Seeking to reassure Congress, the program's chiefs say the technical challenges amount to growing pains, and that previous aircraft had similar problems.

"All three F-35 variants are encountering the sort of design issues historically encountered in advanced technology programs of this complexity," Venlet and two other senior officials overseeing the program said in a report to Congress in March.

"While the overall F-35 design is sound, there is significant risk remaining in the program."

Given the spate of financial and engineering problems, some experts have questioned the strategic rationale for the F-35, citing the US military's vast fleet of warplanes that outstrips any other air force.

However, the plane's advocates insist the fifth-generation fighter is needed to penetrate enemy radar undetected and swiftly deliver a blow to a potential adversary, usually portrayed as China.

After the attacks of September 11, 2001, the F-35 project was shaped by an era of abundance for the Pentagon, which former Defense Secretary Robert Gates castigated as "a culture of endless spending."

That time has passed. To limit the damage, the Defense Department expects to build 365 planes by 2017, instead of an initial plan for 1,591 in the same period. The difference would be made up later on, when technical problems are supposed to be solved.

Air Force Secretary Michael Donley has made clear there are no additional funds available if there are more cost overruns.

"We'll have to take down the number of aircraft that we have planned in procurement to pay for that work, because no more money is going to be migrating into this program."

 

[Singh]

First night takeoff for F-35C​

NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND, PATUXENT RIVER, Md. – Marine Corps test pilot Lt. Col. Matt Taylor ascends in F-35C test aircraft CF-2 June 13. The flight was the first night takeoff for the carrier variant of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and evaluated the aircraft's night lighting system. The F-35C carrier variant of the Joint Strike Fighter is distinct from the F-35A and F-35B variants with its larger wing surfaces and reinforced landing gear to withstand catapult launches and deck landing impacts associated with the demanding aircraft carrier environment. The F-35C is undergoing test and evaluation at NAS Patuxent River prior to delivery to the fleet.

PEO(JSF) Public Affairs

 

[Singh]

Dutch MPs back ditching the f-35 JSF fighter jet programme, despite huge cancellation costs.


====


The future of Dutch plans to buy dozens of JSF fighter jets is in doubt on Tuesday after it emerged a majority of MPs think the agreement should be scrapped.

Labour MP Angelien Eijsink said on Tuesday her party will enter a motion in parliament to cancel the JSF jet fighter project, according to media reports..

With Labour joining in calls for the project to be cancelled, there is now a parliamentary majority going into a debate on the subject on Thursday.

Investigation

The Socialist party, anti-immigration PVV, left-wing Liberals D66 and green party GroenLinks all said earlier they want the project stopped.

The small ChristenUnie will introduce a motion for a far-reaching investigation into the cost of the project and how many jobs will lost if it is cancelled.

Replacement

The JSF was ordered to replace the aging fleet of F-16s, but the rising price of its development and construction has brought growing opposition and the final decision to purchase has been delayed by past coalitions.

The first Dutch JSF jet fighter is currently undergoing fuel system tests. A second is on order.

Eijsink, whose party agreed to support the project in 2002 following advice to then prime minister Wim Kok from four right-wing Liberal VVD ministers, said the government should cut its losses and buy something 'off the shelf'.

The estimated cost of cancelling the project is €1bn.

Defence minister Hans Hillen told nu.nl on Monday he is worried the Netherlands will miss out on important defence orders if the JSF is cancelled.

DutchNews.nl - Most MPs back ditching the JSF fighter jet, despite the cost

 

[Singh]

 

[asianobserve]

 

[average american]

I expect a lot of countries will cut back on the F35 because of the economy cooling down including the USA. Also there has been a delay in any threat that F35 was designed to counter. Reform in Russia has been a catastrophic failure because neither political conditions nor economic institutions existed that would have permitted a successful rapid transition to full-blown capitalism. The political elite, from Yeltsin on down, were old Communist apparatchiks who, while rejecting Soviet socialism, were by no means democrats, and many were cynical opportunists on the make. Under their rule, there has been a gigantic looting of public assets, the rapid emergence of a financial and corporate oligarchy, no concern whatever for the deteriorating condition of the mass of ordinary citizens, and no attempt to pace the transition to a market economy in accord with the demands of equity, efficiency, or national development needs. This has been a corrupt revolution from above. Like the middle east they have a economic system based on oil and gas and lack the inferstructure to compete technologicaly with the USA. More and more countries are realizing that the T50 is just a pimped up SU27 with some new bells and whistles and a lame effort to copy US stealth technology and barring some miracle will be helpless against the F22 an F35 an wont have the support systems that will allow it to take on the USA upgraded teen fighters.

 

[Rahul92]

Well it's just not economy who will wait for 5 damn years