F-35 Purchase

[waldo]

oh my! Is this something from, "Yes, Prime Minister"... or Monty Python?

Almost as troubling were the technical snags the F-35C had started to hit, just as the B variant was coming good and being taken out of probation. Because of the F-35’s radar-cheating “stealth” design, the plane’s arrester hook was in the wrong place, raising the danger that it would fail to catch the wire on landing. A redesign would mean leaving Britain without carrier strike capability until 2025—a big embarrassment. Finally, it emerged that the F-35C would be too heavy to land on the deck of France’s Charles de Gaulle.

Switching back to the F-35B will in many ways be a relief to the air force and the navy who, after decades of experience with the Harrier jump jet (controversially taken out of service by the defence review) will be returning to an operational comfort zone. It also leaves open the option of operating two carriers rather than just one. But the downside remains: the B variant has half the range and a third of the payload of the F-35C. Joint operations with allies, deemed vital 18 months ago, are scuppered. Given the importance of these decisions—Britain will have to live with them for the next 40 years—the seesawing and lack of transparency is disturbing.

[waldo]

April 11, 2012: General Ronald R. Fogleman (Ret.) - Former Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force

Fogleman said he’s worried that the Air Force has essentially placed “all its eggs in one basket” by embracing the F-35 strike fighter “so completely.” He said: “I have no doubt that someday the F-35 will be a marvelous airplane.” But “I don’t think our Air Force can wait” until then. He said he doesn’t think the Air Force will ever buy the F-35 in the numbers it has planned [emphasis added] (the program of record is for 1,763). “That’s the first thing that nobody will admit, but it’s kind of a universal truth,” he said. “As soon as” F-35 unit reductions come, the aircraft’s ”price is going to start going crazy,” asserted Fogleman. By the time it becomes obvious in about eight to 10 years that the F-35 plan won’t play out, “it will be too late,” and the production lines for “several pretty good legacy fighters”—the F-15, F-16, and F/A-18E/F—will be shuttered, he said. “They’ll go dead about the time that we wake up,” he said, noting that he’d “like to set an alarm that says we ought to wake up a little earlier.” The Super Hornet should be in the potential mix even though “heaven forbid, the Air Force would ever buy a Navy airplane,” said Fogleman.

[Guest Derek L]

So I take it that's a no on:

Did you do the math yet?

So what did the inflated total result in? Contrast with the released price tag of the “A” version that we’ll be getting….

[bush_cheney2004]

LOL! Playing along with this American echo chamber....the US Air Force did buy a "Navy airplane"....the F-4 Phantom II.

[Guest Derek L]

oh my! Is this something from, "Yes, Prime Minister"... or Monty Python?

Strawman.......The change back is associated with the initial cost of EMALS and the additional cost of operating Cat & Trap carriers…….

[Guest Derek L]

April 11, 2012: General Ronald R. Fogleman (Ret.) - Former Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force

What year did the General retire? A Quick Google-fu shows 1997.………By and By, he’s been out of the loop longer than Mr Williams………

[bush_cheney2004]

Strawman.......The change back is associated with the initial cost of EMALS and the additional cost of operating Cat & Trap carriers…….

Definitely.....Y'all still want tailhooks on those F-35A's?

[Guest Derek L]

LOL! Playing along with this American echo chamber....the US Air Force did buy a "Navy airplane"....the F-4 Phantom II.

Indeed......And the mentioned tail hook “problem” (First mentioned here by myself last year) is associated with the positioning of the tail hook closer to the aft undercarriage……..The exact same “problem” effected the Goshawk in the late 80s…….the solution, a longer tail hook, hardly Rocket Surgery

[Guest Derek L]

Definitely.....Y'all still want tailhooks on those F-35A's?

Indeed......I’m puzzled by Waldo’s mention of the possible British Switchback, since we’ll be purchasing neither the “B” or “C”, and defiantly not operating them off aircraft carriers………Of mention, one must not that the British aren’t switching from the “C” to the Super Hornet or Rafale, but the other F-35.…..

[Army Guy]

nice read :

link

[Guest Derek L]

nice read :

link

The link doesn't work.....Is it on the DWAN?

[waldo]

April 11, 2012: General Ronald R. Fogleman (Ret.) - Former Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force

Fogleman said he’s worried that the Air Force has essentially placed “all its eggs in one basket” by embracing the F-35 strike fighter “so completely.” He said: “I have no doubt that someday the F-35 will be a marvelous airplane.” But “I don’t think our Air Force can wait” until then. He said he doesn’t think the Air Force will ever buy the F-35 in the numbers it has planned [emphasis added] (the program of record is for 1,763). “That’s the first thing that nobody will admit, but it’s kind of a universal truth,” he said. “As soon as” F-35 unit reductions come, the aircraft’s ”price is going to start going crazy,” asserted Fogleman. By the time it becomes obvious in about eight to 10 years that the F-35 plan won’t play out, “it will be too late,” and the production lines for “several pretty good legacy fighters”—the F-15, F-16, and F/A-18E/F—will be shuttered, he said. “They’ll go dead about the time that we wake up,” he said, noting that he’d “like to set an alarm that says we ought to wake up a little earlier.” The Super Hornet should be in the potential mix even though “heaven forbid, the Air Force would ever buy a Navy airplane,” said Fogleman.

What year did the General retire? A Quick Google-fu shows 1997.………By and By, he’s been out of the loop longer than Mr Williams………

perfect!... a big fat right back at ya! Cause, like ya know, that there Laurie "fighter jet" Hawn retired in 1994... to go into "financial services", before being elected as a Harper Conservative in 2006. It seems one can't read a thing about Hawn's continued F-35 schilling, without it including his former Air Force instructor/pilot time being emphasized - go figure!

and yet, Fogleman wasn't just a U.S. fighter jet pilot... no, he had the rank of General... was the Chief of Staff of the Air Force... Commander-in-Chief of the United States Transportation Command. And has been very active in his post-military career... one of those go-to military experts showing up at assorted security/military forums. As well as being on the board of major Aerospace/Defense Products & Service corporations like Alliant Techsystems, AAR Corp, etc.

but again... I note your extreme unwillingness to actually engage the actual quoted comments of General Ronald R. Fogleman (Ret.) - Former Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force, hey!

[waldo]

oh my! Is this something from, "Yes, Prime Minister"... or Monty Python?

Strawman.......The change back is associated with the initial cost of EMALS and the additional cost of operating Cat & Trap carriers…….

oh hardly a strawman... not when it's intended to showcase an example of the snafu's associated with JSF.

[Guest Derek L]

perfect!... a big fat right back at ya! Cause, like ya know, that there Laurie "fighter jet" Hawn retired in 1994... to go into "financial services", before being elected as a Harper Conservative in 2006. It seems one can't read a thing about Hawn's continued F-35 schilling, without it including his former Air Force instructor/pilot time being emphasized - go figure!

and yet, Fogleman wasn't just a U.S. fighter jet pilot... no, he had the rank of General... was the Chief of Staff of the Air Force... Commander-in-Chief of the United States Transportation Command. And has been very active in his post-military career... one of those go-to military experts showing up at assorted security/military forums. As well as being on the board of major Aerospace/Defense Products & Service corporations like Alliant Techsystems, AAR Corp, etc.

but again... I note your extreme unwillingness to actually engage the actual quoted comments of General Ronald R. Fogleman (Ret.) - Former Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force, hey!

Care to produce a transcript of General Fogleman's speech to the Mitchell Institute?

[Guest Derek L]

oh hardly a strawman... not when it's intended to showcase an example of the snafu's associated with JSF.

How does highlighting the Royal Navy’s CVF program do this? And how many “B” & “C” versions are we purchasing?

By the way:

Did you do the math yet?

So what did the inflated total result in? Contrast with the released price tag of the “A” version that we’ll be getting….

[waldo]

Care to produce a transcript of General Fogleman's speech to the Mitchell Institute?

oh, are you wanting to now leverage something from the guy you just tried to trash?

[waldo]

How does highlighting the Royal Navy’s CVF program do this? And how many “B” & “C” versions are we purchasing?

I appreciate you don't care for highlighting problems with the JSF... of course, that was just one of many examples. Would you like..... more? As in others not related directly to the “overdue, over-budget and over-hyped”. Would you like... more?

you keep harping on about doing the math! I believe it was MLW member punked who laughed your harping off by highlighting you (and no one) knows what the eventual cost will be. You continue to be presented with references speaking to the continued delays, the continued cost escalations, the deferments on production (pushing costs out), the outright dropping in numbers of tails... and none of this registers even a miniscule thought on your narrow-mindedness, your myopia, your war-hawk fervour! I just presented you with the quote suggesting a doubtfulness that the U.S. Air Force will come close to purchasing the numbers initially touted... and just what will that do to the overall per-plane costs, hey?

[Guest Derek L]

oh, are you wanting to now leverage something from the guy you just tried to trash?

Nah, I already heard it....And by admission, he back’s up my assertion that he’s been out of the service for near 15 years and runs a Porta Potty company down South......

[Guest Derek L]

I appreciate you don't care for highlighting problems with the JSF... of course, that was just one of many examples. Would you like..... more? As in others not related directly to the “overdue, over-budget and over-hyped”. Would you like... more?

you keep harping on about doing the math! I believe it was MLW member punked who laughed your harping off by highlighting you (and no one) knows what the eventual cost will be. You continue to be presented with references speaking to the continued delays, the continued cost escalations, the deferments on production (pushing costs out), the outright dropping in numbers of tails... and none of this registers even a miniscule thought on your narrow-mindedness, your myopia, your war-hawk fervour! I just presented you with the quote suggesting a doubtfulness that the U.S. Air Force will come close to purchasing the numbers initially touted... and just what will that do to the overall per-plane costs, hey?

So the reference to the Royal Navies carriers was just you grasping at straws?

[waldo]

oh, are you wanting to now leverage something from the guy you just tried to trash?

Nah, I already heard it....And by admission, he back’s up my assertion that he’s been out of the service for near 15 years and runs a Porta Potty company down South......

why are you so hesitant to link to whatever he said... is there a problem? In any case, I take it you, in kind, will now equally dispense with Laurie Hawn and his F-35 schilling in the same manner you just have with General Ronald R. Fogleman (Ret.) - Former Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force, yes?

perfect!... a big fat

right back at ya! Cause, like ya know, that there Laurie "fighter jet" Hawn retired in 1994... to go into "financial services", before being elected as a Harper Conservative in 2006. It seems one can't read a thing about Hawn's continued F-35 schilling, without it including his former Air Force instructor/pilot time being emphasized - go figure!

and yet, Fogleman wasn't just a U.S. fighter jet pilot... no, he had the rank of General... was the Chief of Staff of the Air Force... Commander-in-Chief of the United States Transportation Command. And has been very active in his post-military career... one of those go-to military experts showing up at assorted security/military forums. As well as being on the board of major Aerospace/Defense Products & Service corporations like Alliant Techsystems, AAR Corp, etc.

but again... I note your extreme unwillingness to engage the actual quoted comments of General Ronald R. Fogleman (Ret.) - Former Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force, hey!

[waldo]

So the reference to the Royal Navies carriers was just you grasping at straws?

I appreciate you don't care for highlighting problems with the JSF...

[Guest Derek L]

why are you so hesitant to link to whatever he said... is there a problem? In any case, I take it you, in kind, will now equally dispense with Laurie Hawn and his F-35 schilling in the same manner you just have with General Ronald R. Fogleman (Ret.) - Former Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force, yes?

Not at all, Mr Hawn is currently in Government…..General Fogleman left Government (Pushed out over Khobar Towers?) over 4 years prior to the Lockheed F-35 winning the competition over Boeing.

[Guest Derek L]

So, a possible reversal by the Royal Navy on the direction of their Carrier force, doesn’t effect Canada’s purchase of the F-35. Correct?

[waldo]

So, a possible reversal by the Royal Navy on the direction of their Carrier force, doesn’t effect Canada’s purchase of the F-35. Correct?

as I continue to highlight your reading & comprehension difficulty... that was not the point. When nothing is certain about F-35 scheduling & costs you seem hell-bent assured that significant JSF partner changes won't have an impact on the overall program. Of course you do! One of the points you gloss right over, of course, is the whole failed "inter-interoperability & joint operations" aspect this snafu highlights. We keep reading you MLW war-hawks trumpeting the JSF advantage to allow partner nations so-called synergies... I guess that just fell right apart, particularly between the British & French, over this British forced shift to the B variant... notwithstanding it's described, "half the range and a third of the payload", of the F-35C variant. Hey?

[waldo]

In any case, I take it you, in kind, will now equally dispense with Laurie Hawn and his F-35 schilling in the same manner you just have with General Ronald R. Fogleman (Ret.) - Former Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force, yes?

Not at all, Mr Hawn is currently in Government…..General Fogleman left Government (Pushed out over Khobar Towers?) over 4 years prior to the Lockheed F-35 winning the competition over Boeing.

this is all very illuminating on just how far you're willing to go to ignore critical review & comment... Fogelman has a most distinguished career... medals and awards out the ying-yang. Your "pushed out" characterization certainly doesn't fit the summations I've just scanned. In any case, I note your continued self-serving acceptance of Laurie "fighter jet" Hawn as a supposed authoritative source!