Do you think its more of an issue for the US? If the UK (and others) are looking for the supersonic Harrier replacement they have always hankered after, and are getting much more (in terms of sensors and stealth), then what is the problem?

As snafu says price is one big factor.

The other is that the JSF is going to be reliant on a big brother being around to deal with any significant airborne threats (i.e. F-22 vs. PAK-FA). For everywhere bar the US (and I guess, UK with Eurofighter), this is not an option and in an anything like equal footing*, the F-35 would appear to be nothing like a match for the PAK-FA. Which leaves these other nations in somewhat of a quandary giving up both the numerical advantage that a Gripen may bring and the qualitative edge (or parity depending on your POV I guess) in the arena of aerial combat that an F-22 would bring.

*I accept that this is very much based on conjecture at this time, but given the alleged range, speed and range at speed advantages of the PAK-FA, then assuming anything like functional sensors and off-board parity, it will be able to dance an F-35 out of fuel, or to a low energy state for an uncontested long ranged missile launch, or even just run it out of ammo (2/4 long range AAMs vs 6), or if the F-35 must hide at low altitude to avoid optimal IRST conditions, then its exposed to all sorts of trashfire and SAMs.

Edit- For those who are unfamiliar with POGO, their 30 year history includes: attacking the M-1 tank (arguably the most successful post-WWII tank)

Arguably the what?!?!

http://www.pogo.org/our-work/reports/90s/ns-m1tank-1990.html

the M2 Bradley,

Dunno, cannot comment.

the AMRAAM, F-22..

The AMRAAM was a disaster when it first entered service, with performance worse than the AIM-7.

The AFT program should have been stopped and restarted in 1991. They were right to be critical of something so niche which had massive over-runs due to re-design… despite the end-product remaining niche.

Some of the most successful DoD programs of the last 30 years came under attack by POGO.

I don’t know what major programs the DoD has ran that could be qualified as successful. I suppose, “most successful” is a relative term. Maybe your happy with mediocrity and wasting tax-payers dollars.

Worse of all, their arguments are absurd, google the POGO analysis of the F-22.

The oxygen problem?

Funny thing, the recently submitted DoD budget request exceeds the Congressionally-mandated spending caps by $36bn and includes retiring the A-10.

Corruption is rife within the US armed forces and their equipment suppliers.

Yet, unfortunately the US taxpayers are so blindly patriotic they don’t seem to question or realise they are getting shafted.

If I were in charge, I’d give serious thought to a total clear out of the USAF top brass. By total, I mean total. No-one above the rank of Lt Col remains (and even of the ranks Major and Lt. Col, only those with in-air experience across the board remain – that is both support and combat.

I’d do similar in the Army, Navy and USMC. In fact, I’d probably look to pull the whole lot together under one armed forces banner. Then the constituent services could properly challenge each other’s procurement plans in-house to make sure it all best meets need.

Look at it:

USN: Zumwalt. F-35. LCS.
USAF: F-35. JCA.
USArmy: FCS. JCA.
USMC: F-35. EFV.

A complete unmitigated disaster zone. When did they last get one right?

The development cost for the T-X would most likely be a fixed price contract.

Yes… and if you can do it cheaper, then your in better shape to get the award. All competitions will contain brownie points for cheaper bidders.

The USAF don’t need any more unnecessary complexity. The DoD have made 6 decades worth of cluster___ks on the back of overly complex.

I’m not disagreeing that they (Boab) are not going down the Gripen-Lite route — Its just I disagree with their decision (unless there is a good reason I am as yet unaware of for it).

No it wasn’t it was not bad all considered.

It wasn’t bad… it was f__king awful! Worse than awful given the scenarios they were being fired in.

We have discussed this before.

I know. Its kicking around the forum somewhere. IIRC Pk was south of 20%. 14% maybe? Can’t be sure though.

BTW, there are many different types of AIM-120.

Indeed. But given the timeframes of discussion here, we’re talking early AMRAAMs… which obviously had to be an improvement on the AIM-7 which they replaced, right?

Thomas Wang, director of the Aviation Safety Council, said:
“The plane flashed a flame-out signal for one of the two engines at 10:53:28 when the plane climbed to an altitude of 1,200ft, triggering a warning,” AFP news agency quoted Mr Wang as saying.

“Then the other [left] engine was shut down manually. The pilot tried to restart the engines but to no avail.

“That means that during the flight’s final moments, neither engine had any thrust. We heard ‘Mayday’ at 10:54:35,” he added

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-31162351

Sounds like (yet) another f__k-up in identification of the problem and in-correct procedure in dealing with it. I guess another revision of cockpit instrumentation and procedure will be needed.

A simple first step would be – the engine switches are illuminated red, yellow or green. If the FADEC (+fuel system etc) is happy with that engine, then the switch for that engine is green. If the FADEC is questioning that engine, it is yellow. If the FADEC is not happy with the engine, its red.

At least it would be a first step to avoiding another balls up like this again.

<>

The fight went exactly as an unbiased observer would have expected it to. The Mig’s were totally ineffective against the AMRAAM armed fighters and were running for their lives almost from the moment they took off. Nothing would have changed if the Serbs had had 10 or 20 times as many Mig-29s. Their fundamental problem was that they were facing an opponent that could track and kill them from far beyond the Mig’s effective range.

Yet still the AMRAAM Pk was utterly dismal.