bush_cheney2004 Posted October 19, 2013 Report Posted October 19, 2013 LockMart began production of Australia's first F-35 (AU-1) last week, with more to follow. http://blogs.defensenews.com/intercepts/2013/10/get-a-glimpse-of-the-first-australian-f-35/ Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Guest Derek L Posted October 19, 2013 Report Posted October 19, 2013 I didn't speak directly to any plane... I referenced "pre-production vs. production". In any case, you're consistent if nothing else! You consistently trot out the LRIP (in whatever the hell state the F-35 truly is in... who knows!) and presume to cost compare it to anything/everything. Sure I do, especially when the price tag of low rate production F-35A is less than full production European aircraft…… Fwiw, I did chuckle at your 'B' video reference; considering you've been the guy to forever chastize others for daring to speak to anything other than the 'A' version! Go figure. Chuckle all you wish, but the DAS is shared by all three versions. Quote
Guest Derek L Posted October 19, 2013 Report Posted October 19, 2013 LockMart began production of Australia's first F-35 (AU-1) last week, with more to follow. http://blogs.defensenews.com/intercepts/2013/10/get-a-glimpse-of-the-first-australian-f-35/ As confirmed by the new Government in Oz..... Quote
waldo Posted October 19, 2013 Report Posted October 19, 2013 Sure I do, especially when the price tag of low rate production F-35A is less than full production European aircraft… again... you with the LRIP!!! Of course, the following presumes on actual sales follow-through... per the original procurement commitments (U.S. domestic and export orders) - how's that working out for ya, hey? Given the ~30 production number today ("LRIP production"), what kind of wizardry will realize the required 6-fold increase in production numbers to reach the required targets? By the by, any news on Korea? Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 19, 2013 Report Posted October 19, 2013 (edited) But F-35 sales are up....with firm commitments from several nations. Canada who ? F-35 fighter jet orders are picking up. Lockheed Martin expects more F-35 stealth fighter jet orders from Norway, Britain and Turkey by year end. South Korea is also interested. Singapore placed an order for a dozen F-35 jets in February. After years of political wrangling, the Netherlands last week became the seventh foreign country to make a firm commitment to buy F-35s, joining Britain, Australia, Italy, Norway, Israel and Japan. Norway is expected to order six more jets in December, its fourth order for the new warplane, according to one source familiar with the F-35 program. http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/Latest-News-Wires/2013/0925/F-35-fighter-jet-Why-orders-are-up-worldwide-video Edited October 19, 2013 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Guest Derek L Posted October 19, 2013 Report Posted October 19, 2013 again... you with the LRIP!!! Of course, the following presumes on actual sales follow-through... per the original procurement commitments (U.S. domestic and export orders) - how's that working out for ya, hey? Given the ~30 production number today ("LRIP production"), what kind of wizardry will realize the required 6-fold increase in production numbers to reach the required targets? By the by, any news on Korea? When were your figures published? I'm guessing not after the inking of LRIP 6 & 7.........Of course you already know taking an average of the three different aircraft is dishonest from a Canadian stand-point As to South Korea, I was remiss in not updating a short while ago: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/24/us-korea-fighter-idUSBRE98N00R20130924 Quote
ReeferMadness Posted October 19, 2013 Report Posted October 19, 2013 In the spirit of thanksgiving, let's "talk turkey" and serve up the real grits on this flying butterball. he Joint Strike Fighter is the most expensive weapons system ever developed. It is plagued by design flaws and cost overruns. It flies only in good weather. The computers that run it lack the software they need for combat. No one can say for certain when the plane will work as advertised. Until recently, the prime contractor, Lockheed Martin, was operating with a free hand—paid handsomely for its own mistakes. Looking back, even the general now in charge of the program can’t believe how we got to this point. In sum: all systems go! http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/2013/09/joint-strike-fighter-lockheed-martin In fact, Wheeler — a longtime military-cost analyst on Capitol Hill (where he toiled on both sides of the aisle) and the Government Accountability Office — says the plane’s $159 million purported per copy price in that latest Pentagon SAR — continues to rise, and is actually well north of that sum. Read more: http://nation.time.com/2013/06/03/how-much-does-an-f-35-fighter-really-cost/#ixzz2i92htb7H For all of the boosterism that shows up on this site, it is amazingly easy to find dirt on this gobbler. A recent report from the Pentagon’s internal watchdog reveals that the next gen fighter jet is plagued with hundreds of issues. The Defense Department’s Inspector General conducted a series of quality assurance assessments that found the Joint Program Office and Defense Contract Management Agency performed “inadequate oversight,” failing to adhere to widely adopted quality management protocols while losing control of contractors that have already sunk an estimated$400 billion taxpayer dollars into what is the most expensive weapons system ever developed by the U.S. government. http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/10/the-f-35-fighter-jet-program-has-precisely-719-problems/280193/ The test pilots don't seem too fond of it either. An evaluation criticizes the visibility in the cockpit of the multi-role fighter, and contains blunt comments from test pilots that suggest the shortcomings could get planes shot down in combat. The design prevents pilots from looking behind them. "The head rest is too large and will impede aft [rear] visibility and survivability during surface and air engagements," one test pilot was quoted as saying in the U.S. Defence Department's directorate of operational test and evaluation report. A second pilot reportedly said visibility is crucial and any disruption "will get the pilot gunned" down in dogfights. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/f-35-fighter-panned-by-u-s-test-pilots-1.1412602 The only reason the program hasn't been killed yet is that the geniuses at the pentagon keep dropping performance standards. To put it bluntly, the Pentagon's new trillion-dollar fighter jet doesn't go a fast as it should, doesn't turn as sharp as it should and doesn't handle as nimbly as it should. This is bad news, explains Wired's David Axe. For the pilots who will eventually take the F-35 into combat, the JSF’s reduced performance means they might not be able to outfly and outfight the latest Russian- and Chinese-made fighters," writes Axe. "Even before the downgrades, some analysts questioned the F-35′s ability to defeat newer Sukhoi and Shenyang jets." That all sounds like bad news, doesn't it? If our expensive new jets can't beat the Russians or the Chinese, who can we fight? I'm pretty sure al Qaeda doesn't have an air force. http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/the-pentagons-new-trillion-dollar-jet-is-a-garbage-can But, unlike traditional thanksgiving turkeys, these birds are invincible. No, I don't mean that militarily, just politically. The political process that keeps the Joint Strike Fighter airborne has never stalled. The program was designed to spread money so far and so wide—at last count, among some 1,400 separate subcontractors, strategically dispersed among key congressional districts—that no matter how many cost overruns, blown deadlines, or serious design flaws, it would be immune to termination. It was, as bureaucrats say, “politically engineered.” http://gizmodo.com/inside-the-pentagons-trillion-dollar-f-35-embarrassmen-1325863089 Oh, yeah. We Canadians are sooooo jealous. Quote Unlimited economic growth has the marvelous quality of stilling discontent while preserving privilege, a fact that has not gone unnoticed among liberal economists. - Noam Chomsky It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair
Guest Derek L Posted October 19, 2013 Report Posted October 19, 2013 In the spirit of thanksgiving, let's "talk turkey" and serve up the real grits on this flying butterball. http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/2013/09/joint-strike-fighter-lockheed-martin For all of the boosterism that shows up on this site, it is amazingly easy to find dirt on this gobbler. http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/10/the-f-35-fighter-jet-program-has-precisely-719-problems/280193/ The test pilots don't seem too fond of it either. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/f-35-fighter-panned-by-u-s-test-pilots-1.1412602 The only reason the program hasn't been killed yet is that the geniuses at the pentagon keep dropping performance standards. http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/the-pentagons-new-trillion-dollar-jet-is-a-garbage-can But, unlike traditional thanksgiving turkeys, these birds are invincible. No, I don't mean that militarily, just politically. http://gizmodo.com/inside-the-pentagons-trillion-dollar-f-35-embarrassmen-1325863089 Oh, yeah. We Canadians are sooooo jealous. Vanity Fair eh? Well, good recovery with Wheeler........ Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 19, 2013 Report Posted October 19, 2013 .Of course you already know taking an average of the three different aircraft is dishonest from a Canadian stand-point It's more than dishonest.....Canada couldn't figure out it's own flight hour costs for "classic" CF-18's, so it used Yankee 'Merkin numbers instead. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
waldo Posted October 19, 2013 Report Posted October 19, 2013 When were your figures published? I'm guessing not after the inking of LRIP 6 & 7.........Of course you already know taking an average of the three different aircraft is dishonest from a Canadian stand-point my figures? They're not my figures... they're U.S. government figures. Do you have something else, other numbers... something official... something other than LockMart propaganda? I thought the graph's breakout in isolating 'Air Force' was clear - care to share your corresponding (to that graph) reference to "average"? what's this '3 aircraft average business' you're speaking to... the graph clearly shows a breakout for Air Force versus Navy. As to South Korea, I was remiss in not updating a short while ago: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/24/us-korea-fighter-idUSBRE98N00R20130924 yes, of course... granted, before your lil' timeout, I do recall you being quite giddy any time you could find a link that presumed on sales... I do recall you being somewhat somber over the apparent loss of South Korea from the F-35 fold. Of course, LockMart (and the U.S. military) have a long-reach as we've seen with past interventions with other countries (Norway, Japan, for example)... clearly, the current state of the F-35 and the past decade+ development boondoggle aren't the foundation for sales - are they? I do note a tinge of cautious reservation in your simple update, no more giddyness... hedging your bets, hey? since you seem so keen to want to flog the latest LRIPs, why not lay down a summary reference point. Why not provide a simple matrix of U.S. and member country sales - initial procurement commitment versus actual numbers. Make sure to apply dates to those actual procurement projections. Hey, while you're at it, throw in a row/column for speculative sales..... oh, wait..... that's what they all are now, right? Those pesky budgets just keep getting in the way of F-35 fan-boys! But seriously, put the numbers down! Let's see the actual timeframe to get from today's LRIP numbers to the targets... let's just see the kind of production magic LockMart will be required to bring forward. Put the numbers down! . Quote
ReeferMadness Posted October 19, 2013 Report Posted October 19, 2013 “The jet was supposed to be fully functional by now and that’s why they put people down in Eglin in 2010–2011—they were expecting a fully functional jet in 2012,” he said. “But the only military mission these planes can execute is a kamikaze one. They can’t drop a single live bomb on a target, can’t do any fighter engagements. There are limitations on Instrument Flight Rules—what’s required to take an airplane into bad weather and to fly at night. Every pilot out there in civil aviation, his pilot’s license says he can take off and land in perfect weather. Then they have to graduate to instrument conditions. What the program is saying is that the J.S.F., your latest and greatest fighter, is restricted from flying in instrument meteorological conditions—something a $60,000 Cessna can do.” http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/2013/09/joint-strike-fighter-lockheed-martin Quote Unlimited economic growth has the marvelous quality of stilling discontent while preserving privilege, a fact that has not gone unnoticed among liberal economists. - Noam Chomsky It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair
waldo Posted October 19, 2013 Report Posted October 19, 2013 http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/2013/09/joint-strike-fighter-lockheed-martin a great article, if for no other reason than the author is one of MLW member 'Derek L's' favourites. Of course, he just rails on about Wheeler being a know-nothing... although, strangely, when I've provided opportunity for him to directly refute statements from Wheeler, Derek L has simply gone walkabout! If you're not aware Wheeler actually used to work for the U.S. GAO... but, apparently, that lil' ditty, just irritates F-35 cheerleaders even more. Quote
Guest Derek L Posted October 20, 2013 Report Posted October 20, 2013 my figures? They're not my figures... they're U.S. government figures. Do you have something else, other numbers... something official... something other than LockMart propaganda? I thought the graph's breakout in isolating 'Air Force' was clear - care to share your corresponding (to that graph) reference to "average"? what's this '3 aircraft average business' you're speaking to... the graph clearly shows a breakout for Air Force versus Navy. Figures linked to by you, released prior to the signing of LRIP 6 & 7........Hence incorrect based on the latest contracts. yes, of course... granted, before your lil' timeout, I do recall you being quite giddy any time you could find a link that presumed on sales... I do recall you being somewhat somber over the apparent loss of South Korea from the F-35 fold. Of course, LockMart (and the U.S. military) have a long-reach as we've seen with past interventions with other countries (Norway, Japan, for example)... clearly, the current state of the F-35 and the past decade+ development boondoggle aren't the foundation for sales - are they? I do note a tinge of cautious reservation in your simple update, no more giddyness... hedging your bets, hey? The signings to date have all been linked in this thread (or other related threads)........ As I've said numerous times, despite your suggestions (Dutch, Italy, Oz) not a single partner has left the program, new nations have joined, costs are dropping and development is proceeding.........And though I admit shock at the initial press reports of South Korea going with Boeing, said reports have both been countered by Lockheed and the South Korean Government. As I've said numerous times, let me know when a country leaves.......or the F-35 loses a bid in a non-partner nation...... since you seem so keen to want to flog the latest LRIPs, why not lay down a summary reference point. Why not provide a simple matrix of U.S. and member country sales - initial procurement commitment versus actual numbers. Make sure to apply dates to those actual procurement projections. Hey, while you're at it, throw in a row/column for speculative sales..... oh, wait..... that's what they all are now, right? Those pesky budgets just keep getting in the way of F-35 fan-boys! But seriously, put the numbers down! Let's see the actual timeframe to get from today's LRIP numbers to the targets... let's just see the kind of production magic LockMart will be required to bring forward. Put the numbers down! The numbers & timelines have already been "put down" in this thread.......IOC dates have been listed (and have been brought forward for the Marines and USAF) for the US military and the other members that have already confirmed their purchases.....I've zero inclination to revisit those prior posts of mine for your benefit. Quote
Guest Derek L Posted October 20, 2013 Report Posted October 20, 2013 a great article, if for no other reason than the author is one of MLW member 'Derek L's' favourites. Of course, he just rails on about Wheeler being a know-nothing... although, strangely, when I've provided opportunity for him to directly refute statements from Wheeler, Derek L has simply gone walkabout! If you're not aware Wheeler actually used to work for the U.S. GAO... but, apparently, that lil' ditty, just irritates F-35 cheerleaders even more. Oh yes, the same Wheeler that also predicted the abject failures the F-15, M-1 Abrams, D5 Trident, AH-64 Apache etc would become.......... Perhaps the member would be better served by visiting the Australian “aerospace blog” authored by a former merchant of cellphones………..Or better yet, Cosmo or TV Guide, I’m sure their views on the F-35 should provide for hours of stimulating discussion…. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 20, 2013 Report Posted October 20, 2013 ....As I've said numerous times, despite your suggestions (Dutch, Italy, Oz) not a single partner has left the program, new nations have joined, costs are dropping and development is proceeding.........And though I admit shock at the initial press reports of South Korea going with Boeing, said reports have both been countered by Lockheed and the South Korean Government. Yes...you have been proven right at every decision by partner and non-partner nations. More than 100 units over all three variants have now been produced. Boeing is peddling last century's strike fighter products, with free oil changes for the first 1,000 hours ! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Guest Derek L Posted October 20, 2013 Report Posted October 20, 2013 Yes...you have been proven right at every decision by partner and non-partner nations. More than 100 units over all three variants have now been produced. Boeing is peddling last century's strike fighter products, with free oil changes for the first 1,000 hours ! Thank-you kindly...........Any bets on what Belgium, whose air force’s F-16s are very closely aligned with the Dutch Force, will select as their next generation fighter in the next 6-8 months? Or any takers on the RSAF moving ahead their F-35 selection to not only replace their F-5s, but also a portion of their F-16C/D fleet…….. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 20, 2013 Report Posted October 20, 2013 The RSAF has taken a keen liking to the F-35B, and with more Australasian nations on board, it could be a sweep for LM. Tiny Belgium will always be in some partnering scenario, so that will help drive their decision. France can't seem to move any Rafales off the lot, and Belgium would have been their best hope. Momentum is building against older airframes that require more strike package support than the F-35. Few wish to be left with their pants on the ground when the Lightning II hits full stride by 2020. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
ReeferMadness Posted October 20, 2013 Report Posted October 20, 2013 a great article, if for no other reason than the author is one of MLW member 'Derek L's' favourites. Of course, he just rails on about Wheeler being a know-nothing... although, strangely, when I've provided opportunity for him to directly refute statements from Wheeler, Derek L has simply gone walkabout! If you're not aware Wheeler actually used to work for the U.S. GAO... but, apparently, that lil' ditty, just irritates F-35 cheerleaders even more. To me, the identity of the author is less of an issue than the claims he makes. I've noticed that the people around here who seem to get off on war porn haven't argued with what he is saying. They keep going on about how many countries are in the queue, even though none of those sales will be real if these turkeys don't get fixed. Lockheed Martin has been working on these things for almost 20 years and they are nowhere near combat ready. Let's post that quote again: “The jet was supposed to be fully functional by now and that’s why they put people down in Eglin in 2010–2011—they were expecting a fully functional jet in 2012,” he said. “But the only military mission these planes can execute is a kamikaze one. They can’t drop a single live bomb on a target, can’t do any fighter engagements. There are limitations on Instrument Flight Rules—what’s required to take an airplane into bad weather and to fly at night. Every pilot out there in civil aviation, his pilot’s license says he can take off and land in perfect weather. Then they have to graduate to instrument conditions. What the program is saying is that the J.S.F., your latest and greatest fighter, is restricted from flying in instrument meteorological conditions—something a $60,000 Cessna can do.” Do any of the war porn cheerleaders have any evidence that any of this is wrong? Quote Unlimited economic growth has the marvelous quality of stilling discontent while preserving privilege, a fact that has not gone unnoticed among liberal economists. - Noam Chomsky It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair
Guest Derek L Posted October 20, 2013 Report Posted October 20, 2013 To me, the identity of the author is less of an issue than the claims he makes. I've noticed that the people around here who seem to get off on war porn haven't argued with what he is saying. They keep going on about how many countries are in the queue, even though none of those sales will be real if these turkeys don't get fixed. Lockheed Martin has been working on these things for almost 20 years and they are nowhere near combat ready. Let's post that quote again: Do any of the war porn cheerleaders have any evidence that any of this is wrong? The fellows claim's are absurd, or depending on the age of the piece, extremely dated: There are limitations on Instrument Flight Rules—what’s required to take an airplane into bad weather and to fly at night. Every pilot out there in civil aviation, his pilot’s license says he can take off and land in perfect weather. Then they have to graduate to instrument conditions. What the program is saying is that the J.S.F., your latest and greatest fighter, is restricted from flying in instrument meteorological conditions—something a $60,000 Cessna can do.” From early 2012: From April of last year: I'd like to see a Cessna do that...........Get new sources for insight into the program. Quote
Guest Derek L Posted October 20, 2013 Report Posted October 20, 2013 The RSAF has taken a keen liking to the F-35B, and with more Australasian nations on board, it could be a sweep for LM. Tiny Belgium will always be in some partnering scenario, so that will help drive their decision. France can't seem to move any Rafales off the lot, and Belgium would have been their best hope. Momentum is building against older airframes that require more strike package support than the F-35. Few wish to be left with their pants on the ground when the Lightning II hits full stride by 2020. Exactly..........It’s telling that with the level of positive developments within the program, reductions in cost and support, bi-partisan political support from the partner nations (sans of course the extreme fringes of the “left”) that those with negative views of the program are quickly becoming less and less…….Fore those entrenched in opposition still……well, like their ilk’s past critiques of prior programs (F-15, F-16, F/A-18 etc) from decades ago, their unfounded opinions are quickly being ignored and like past programs, they will again be on the outside looking in……. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 20, 2013 Report Posted October 20, 2013 …well, like their ilk’s past critiques of prior programs (F-15, F-16, F/A-18 etc) from decades ago, their unfounded opi……nions are quickly being ignored and like past programs, they will again be on the outside looking in……. Yep....Australians of that ilk bitched and moaned about the FB-111's, which would go on to a service life of 37 years. President Carter canceled the B-1A, but it came back stronger than ever. Canada still struggles with rotary winged aircraft procurements, and is in no position to play games when it comes to replacement strike fighters, which are going to cost big bucks no matter what. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Guest Derek L Posted October 20, 2013 Report Posted October 20, 2013 Yep....Australians of that ilk bitched and moaned about the FB-111's, which would go on to a service life of 37 years. President Carter canceled the B-1A, but it came back stronger than ever. Canada still struggles with rotary winged aircraft procurements, and is in no position to play games when it comes to replacement strike fighters, which are going to cost big bucks no matter what. Not for much longer.........several new options have entered the game Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 20, 2013 Report Posted October 20, 2013 Not for much longer.........several new options have entered the game God...I hope so, as it has gone way beyond "pathetic" now. Even the haters are saying "just buy the damn helos" that are already in production. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Guest Derek L Posted October 20, 2013 Report Posted October 20, 2013 God...I hope so, as it has gone way beyond "pathetic" now. Even the haters are saying "just buy the damn helos" that are already in production. As they say, third times a charm (for AugstaWestland ) Of course, Sikorsky is muddying the works with a (cheaper) offer of Romeos and -60 Sierras............ Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 20, 2013 Report Posted October 20, 2013 Of course, Sikorsky is muddying the works with a (cheaper) offer of Romeos and -60 Sierras............ No...the irony gods want it to be the AW101...just like the first time. That can be the final laugh in this long running procurement circus. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.