Below is a recent Lockheed Martin briefing that is dated in the middle of December 2011. (H/T-Spudman on F-16.net)
It is, as usual, overly optimistic. So much so as to be yet another deception from the sales force.
Also we have been blessed with 2 more Low Rate Initial Production Batches; up to 11. It was 9 and at the start of the program 6. All this due to defective management. Interesting because there is no recent Memorandum Of Understanding (MOU) signed off on by Joint Strike Fighter Partner Nations. The most recent is
2010 (PDF). Many troubles have appeared since then.
Back in 2010 the F-35 program Milestone-B (a basic certification that allows it to exist as a normal DOD procurement program) was removed due to its second Nunn-McCurdy breach. DOD officials--as a practice of good management oversight--have not figured out how to put Humpty Dumpty back together again. There is no solid long-range plan.
11 comments:
I think Italy is going to be the first country to blink when it comes to reducing/cancelling F35 order. I think maybe the Navy gets 30 to 35 F35Bs and that's it. Without the -B, their carrier is an very heavy anchor, then again it didn't stop the Brits from getting rid of their Harriers.
I think then it's a free for all, we'll see reductions from a couple of countries...
With the LRIP-V F-35B engine/propulsion systems ALONE costing in excess of $125M each, does anyone still really believe that the even the golden child US Marines, much less the near bankrupt Italians, are ever going to be able to load their decks with combat capable F-35s? Esp with what it will cost to resolve all the other unresolved issues...
Just how vital are those mini carriers to Italian national security, anyway?
JL
Someone just buy the tooling from the British and start manufacturing new Harriers.
Great market.India, Italy, Spain, Japan, Australia, Thailand etc
why would Australia want to operate harriers?
Because they work.And the Marines will be operating them for another 20 years, eh.
Err, no the Marines will not be operating AV-8B's for another 20 years. That would put them out to 2032. Even with the purchase of the entire UK Harrier force (72 aircraft) for spare parts the best we will see is probably 10 years more without there being a major (and I mean MAJOR) rebuild and life extension of the design being critical. By then the F-35B will (unless there is a miracle) be dead and buried and the Marines forced to rely on a more realistic scenario of USN aircraft or their own Super Hornets. At which point somebody might bother to ask the Elephant in the room question, "why are the Marines operating their own aircraft when the Navy has around 10 carriers now exclusively decked with multi-role aircraft?" At which point sanity and budget reality prevails and we see Marine fixed wing aviation disappear.
The perfect fighter for the USMC exists NOW,its made in Sweden and its called the Gripen.
Light, small, capable of operating with all US weapons systems, unber reliable, and can actually operate under austere conditions near the front from existing roadways with confirmed STOL fully loaded.
"The perfect fighter for the USMC exists NOW,its made in Sweden and its called the Gripen."
Huh?! Ain't no way in hell that 'murrika's and Gawd's blessed Corps would be caught dead flyin' around tail first in that puny thing made by a bunch'a furrin gawdless atheists in that frozen socialist hell hole!
Canada is spending $468M to keep the Hornet flying until 2017, with an option for renewal to 2020.
http://www.rcaf-arc.forces.gc.ca/v2/nr-sp/index-eng.asp?id=10938
I'm glad we're farther back in the queue, so that problems can be sorted before we have to purchase. Although in my opinion, I still see the program tanking before we have to sign the P.O.
Our DND is already looking at severe budget cuts of $1B over the next 2 years, but that's mostly for ops rather than equipment.
IMHO, I don't see why Canada needs an F-35. We have had two basic air missions over the last several decades for our air force.
1) N.A. air intercept via NORAD, mostly over the northern airspace.
2) 2nd tier fighter/bomber missions around the world (NATO, peacekeeping).
Some of the reasons for the original F-18 purchase.
"Reasons for the selection listed by the Canadian Forces were many of its requested features were included for the U.S. Navy; two engines for reliability (considered essential for conducting Arctic sovereignty and over-the-water patrols), an excellent radar set, while being considerably more affordable than the F-14 and the F-15."
- AKA - We need a less expensive to purchase and operate fighter.
"Many features that made the F/A-18 suitable for naval carrier operations were also retained by the Canadian Forces, such as the robust landing gear, the arrestor hook, and wing folding mechanisms, which proved useful when operating the fighters from smaller airfields such as those found in the Arctic."
- AKA - Arctic forward bases do not have 10K Ft runways, or a lot of tarmac.
Next issue: Range
The two major air bases are Cold Lake and Bagotville, which are a long way from the arctic. Hence CF-18's, usually fly with a belly tank and two wing tanks.
Next issue: op cost and turn around time.
The RCAF is a small force compared to big brother (US). We don't have the manpower for complicated aircraft. That's why we have F-18's in the first place. It's the same basic reason why it's a valuable aircraft for the USN. Easy to maintain and get back in the air.
These are some of the many reasons why an F-35 doesn't come close to meeting RCAF needs, even if all the engineering issues went away.
Huh?! Ain't no way in hell that 'murrika's and Gawd's blessed Corps would be caught dead flyin' around tail first in that puny thing made by a bunch'a furrin gawdless atheists in that frozen socialist hell hole!
Uh..OK...ah sure...I think! :-)
Post a Comment