F-35 originally intended to use the same pneumatic racks as F-22, but SWAT found them to be too heavy. So F-35 has contracted with ITT to develop and build new pneumatic ejector racks. The racks mount to light weight adapters that bolt to the ceiling of the weapons bay.

ITT website

Nice. Thanks for the photos.

Very simple answer, it’s a typo and easily proved so. What they did, and they are human after all, is put the LRIP 1 numbers in for the Flyaway Unit Cost and Weapon System Cost instead of averaging LRIP 1 & 2.

1. Look at the Flyaway Unit cost from the FY2009 budget, it is the exact same $229.600 as shown for the AVERAGE of LRIP 1&2 in the FY2010. A clear carry over and typo.

2. If you add up all the numbers from the FY2009 budget for LRIP 1&2, the numbers match those on the FY2010 docs… except the Weapon System Unit Cost… another probable carry over and typo from LRIP 1.

3. The only increase from FY2009 to FY2010 in relation to LRIP 1&2 is a $117.447 million increase in Advance Procurement Cost.

As above, this was a carry over of the LRIP 1 price by itself ans was a typo.

That “Cost” row is Net P-1 cost, not URF (Unit Recurring Flyaway).

Don’t worry about the mistakes, it took me a while to see where the USAF had goofed in the carrying over of the numbers.

Here are the true numbers (Flyaway Unit Cost) for the first two LRIPS.

<br />
1st Final Cost<br />
LRIP Estimate Cost Difference<br />
1 243.570 229.600 -13.97<br />
2 200.100 179.860 -20.24<br />


btw, I took a quick look at the USN early LRIPs in previous and FY2010 docs and they did not make the same error as the USAF. The USN numbers are the same from year to year.

The only way to explain this type of error is that they manually put these numbers into PDF form instead of having them computer generated from a database. This is inexcusable.

Spudman

I dont think it was a typo at all, look at the “Weapons Syspens Cost” for LRIP 1 & 2 (budget 2011 – 280,883 Million Us$) it´s VASTLY bigger than the same numbers in the previous budget (budget 2010 ((285,847 million $*2)+(235,350 million $ *6))/8= 247,694 million $). And that value wasnt carried from an older document…
The unit weapons systems cost goes up by 33 million $ and somehow the Fly Away unit cost goes down?!
It was no typo.

Cheers

LM disagrees:

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/data/assets/aeronautics/products/f35/A07-20536AF-35Broc.pdf

on page 6 it’s written clearly: on internal fuel it has 590 nautic miles combat range for teh AF version and 600 nautic miles for the navy version

the ferry range is 1200 nautic miles which means that, no matter what load you put in (even nothing except fuel) you’ll never be able to go beyond 600 miles and back on internal fuel

now, maybe you know better than LM who builds it and sells it (and usually talks more than positively about it)

Thats quite an old document. From the 2008 LM Norwegian air force presentations we have a range of 610 NM on internal fuel with two Kongsberg JSM/NSM plus two AIM-120 , with EFT´s it goes to 728 NM. Nevermind that the external tanks have been erased from the development spiral right in 2006.

bills funny isnt he, first he said it had AC, now he said it didnt work and they are onto mk 2 AC
and his sourse ?
us dumb asses here on key, does he have any credability left ?

Jack

To be honest i dont think that most of us would agree with that “dumb ass” coment.
Second, if Bill is using official French budgetary documentation backed up by Tmor´s comments, his credibility is not affected one inch, quite the oposite, that only proves that he´s using some of the best available public sources…

yes, they are blk 3 lot 6, but test and training frames to us, we are keeping them in the states for test and train till 2018 and leaving one there indefinately for our test bed

Yes, that´s what i´ve read.

Cheers

with the exception of Hungary, Romania is a latin island in a sea Slavic countries.. the most hostile of which is Bulgaria.. F-35s are needed to prevent aggression. EU won’t help Romania in this case

Whats next? Spain invades Portugal, France and Germany start a new armed row about Alsacia-Lorena, Austria threatens Hungary (and vice versa), Denmark declares that Norway is a rebel province, and some funny chap wearing a kilt calls himself Robert the IV?

Yep, Romania and Bulgaria are right at each others throats… :rolleyes:

The last time that UK MoD officially reported the unit productional cost for Eurofighter was 69.3 million GBP per fighter in 2008. Since then, the UK MoD keeps the cost of Typhoon as an unspeakable secret.

PS: The price of GPB changed dramatically (from 2.1 USD per GPB to 1.5 – 1.6 USD per GPB) during 2008 because of the world financial crisis. Therefore, I think it is very hard to evaluate the price of Typhoon at the basis of USD at that time.

The RAF Typhoon costs have been publicly disclosed by the NAO in December 2009.

The headline is absolutely spot on. It says “..up to nearly 90%”
Truely pathetic reporting on your behalf.

Well, i find the idea of pfcem calling the work of Stephen Trimble “pathetic reporting” highly amusing! 😀
Stephen Trimble is just THE defense aerospace specialist of flight global, the oldest aerospace magazine in the planet, and one of the most respected.
pfcem on the other hand…