The main reason that Australie chose the F/A-18E/F over the F-15E is that someone was fooled into believing that the F/A-18E/F was similar enough to the F/A-18A-D that there would be significant cost savings due to the commonality.

i see, anyone selecting the SH obviously must have been fooled

absolutely zero chance it was the best fit for their situation

why not just buy additional Su-30 and make up the operational cost difference, if any, with savings made from commonality with only Flankers.

well i guess it would depend on what the acquisition and thru-life costs of the flanker are (i don’t know)

i imagine the SH has better fuel economy and possibly cheaper maintenance

other reasons:
– reduced reliance on russia
– broad range of US/western weapons
– carrier capability
– growler/grizzly capability
– lower RCS

lol, like they need 9 months (3+6) to ‘negotiate’

it’s pretty obvious that they’re simply stalling, hoping that it will progress so far that there will either be good news or that the political conditions in the partner nations will change or to simply outlast the C-17 so they have no alternative.

at the end of 6 months they will want another 12 months to ‘negotiate’ and then another and another until it’s eventually 10 years later and it’s finally ready

60% for the F-22 is real

http://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/02/17/af-likely-to-get-60-more-f-22s-allies-out-of-luck/

[Air Force chief of staff Gen. Norton] Schwartz said “the truth of the matter is” the F-22’s rate is 60 percent including stealth issues and is “in the mid- to high-70s without low observable” issues. Looking at the system overall, the F-22’s reliability “is respectable,” he said.

however to me, that isn’t an argument against the F-35 as much as it is an argument against the F-22

‘Let’s go all F-22!!!111’

well, we can’t afford that, neither to buy it nor to maintain it

the F-35 will be cheaper to maintain

fewer engines, more advanced RAM, less overall RAM (smaller size), less mechanical complexity (thrust vectoring), more emphasis on maintainability from the very beginning

title is inaccurate in at least two ways

1. it’s not “Jane’s”, it’s Sprey and Wheeler

2. it’s not news. Sprey and Wheeler have been opposed to the F-35 since . . . forever, really

just more rehash of the same old same old

The F-22 is also a huge disappointment as a fighter

I think that tells you all you need to know about these clown’s credibility

Really? Do they give a warranty about that or is it just a clue, which is not enough and to replace the real specification work?
Where did all that delays come from, which did not show-up in the computer simulations? 😉

all those flight tests are to find and squash all the little bugs (which can be big bugs at the wrong moment)

but at this point in the program, they have a very good idea of the ‘big picture’ performance

the plane is built and it flies and flies well

‘finishing’ is important and it takes a while to catch and clean-up all the corner cases, but to say they don’t know how it will perform at this point is absurd

basically at this point, any major program-killing design flaws would have been uncovered

those of you who keep harping on the number of test flights remaining are either
1. going to be sorely disappointed when nothing major turns up
2. using it as an EXCUSE to criticize the F-35 program. It’s not that you care about the flight tests per se, it’s that you don’t like the F-35 anyways, and this just gives you another talking point

here’s a little thought experiment: if all the flight testing had been finished satisfactorily, would you support the F-35?