I am not exactly sure what else do you expect. When it comes to dark topics like bribery, the sources will most likely be labeled as “suspect” with the exception of those cases which when the companies providing commission payments got caught. In case of LMA it would be several cases of C-130s for Chad, C-130s for egypt, L-1011 for Japan, F-104 for Japan, suspect bribery with F-104G for Germany and the already mentioned buying off classified info from ROKAF ex Chief of Staff. Is that little or quite much? Hard to say but cases like that most likely form only a tip of a huge iceberg.

If you are trying to convince me that bribery exists, then you can save the effort. I have already said as much. You also need not resort to obviously biased sources for a reasonable discussion of bribery as many have made it their purpose to study bribery.

The problem comes in when you rely on the specter of bribery to dismiss anything and everything you wish were not so.

There is likely more bribery than is discovered, but that is not to say that every deal everywhere is riddled with bribery.

Just today I have had a discussion with a Greek interpreneur who has mentioned that their defense minister has accepted commissions from HAF F-16 purchases valued up to 10% of overall contract value. Again, these were not even labeled as bribes, but declared as official commissions. Greeks have obviously not defined a term “conflict of interests” as of yet.

So? I have encountered more than a few people that have been happy to relay implausible stories to me over the years.

The most recent Peace Xenia deal had a value of about $2 billion. Do you really think the Greek Defense Minister was given a $200 million “commission?”

Do you realize that that deal was done through the US FMS program, which has significant protections in place against bribery, do you not? I think hiding a $200 million payoff in a FMS contract would require no small effort… but hey, some guy told you otherwise so I guess it must be true.

Anyway, I wonder what exactly would persuade a man like yourself that LockMart and other companies bribes and buy off people in charge whenever possible? You cannot seriously expect their own official commitment to this topic. Those “suspect” sources will often be all we got.

In Western Europe bribery is most certainly the exception to the rule. That isn’t to say that it doesn’t ever happen, but it is absolutely not a standard business practice.

Especially in this case you are completely right. I resort to “suspect” sources because they are the only ones who at least remotely touch the truth. Do you expect official press release from Lockheed admitting to corruption and bribery? Don’t be ridiculous..

Ah yes, “suspect” sources are the only ones that confirm your “truth.” Seems like you might take that as a hint huh?

What would you say to someone that only trusted flaky “alternative” news sites because they were the only ones that confirmed this person’s flaky beliefs?

We agree the bribery exists. The difference is that you seek to use it as an excuse to avoid accepting anything you don’t wish to believe, even absent any evidence whatsoever.

Now you have successfully described yourself. You wouldn’t spend a tiny fraction of your time defending the F-35 if it was French made.

Not at all.

Unlike those on this board that seem to be on one sort of crusade or another I recognize the strengths and weaknesses of each of the various aircraft that are discussed here.

You don’t see me camping out on the Rafale, Gripen, or Eurofighter threads slinging mud on a daily basis and accusing any source or evaluation that provides a favorable review of one of those aircraft of bribery as you do on this thread.

Each of those aircraft are extremely modern and offer some noteworthy strengths. I don’t need to pretend that any evaluation that ranks one of them first must have been bought off to avoid acknowledging some inconvenient truth.

Have you ever examined your own motivations? How many hours a week would you guess you devote to slinging mud at the F-35? What do you hope to gain? Certainly your goal doesn’t appear to be one of persuasion given the abrasive persona you maintain here, nor is it one of knowledge seeking given your unwillingness to accept information that doesn’t fit your preconceived views.

Another excellent insight.. Similarly, you are talking about yourself. All sources describing your favorite pet aircraft are discredited and ridiculed (Kopp, Sweetman…) and you are happy to seek whatever biased sources like LMA test pilots, LMA press releases, LMA magazine which speak exactly what you want to hear…

I am glad that you have recognized what your posts are all about. Thanks. I could not have said it better.

I don’t dismiss Kopp and Sweetman’s writing outright, but on the F-35 both have proven biased and seem to harbor personal animosity toward the F-35 for reasons that really aren’t clear to me. The recent piece about the ongoing fighter acquisition program in Korea is a perfect example. The article Sweetman wrote was unprofessional and unethical.

As for the reports of test pilots, active duty pilots and company press releases… each have value. You can’t take them as the gospel truth but they are the individuals with direct access to the aircraft. If you rule them out completely you are left with your various “suspect” sources (and 3rd, 4th etc hand accounts)

Numbers don’t necessarily result in proportionally low costs or good value for money. Boeing and Airbus build aircraft at very diverse rates and they all result in value for money for the operator – one reason being that they all tap the same supply chain. Saab claims that they have reduced costs on the Gripen as they have reduced rates, and by even the most optimistic estimates the F-35A will never cost less than the similarly sized F/A-18E/F, even if the 100+ rates for that version, and the 150+ rates for the F-35 family, are attained.

Higher production rates do not automatically reduce costs, but higher production rates certainly do tend to drive costs lower. It is possible to produce a manufactured good inexpensively at a low production rate, but higher rates are advantageous.

As for the Super Hornet versus F-35A comparison, that really depends. If you wish to compare a current Super Hornet with the F-35A that may well prove to be the case, but the difference in capabilities between the two platforms would be large. (An F-16A is certainly cheaper to produce than an F-16 Block 60, but is that a valid comparison?) If you wished to compare an “Advanced Super Hornet,” complete with the proposed internal IRST, missile warning sensors, conformal fuel tanks, weapons pod, improved cockpit, and uprated engines I suspect the difference in price would be negligible at best, and the F-35 would retain key performance advantages.

Important point: vs. Typhoon or SH, the F-35 will not achieve order-of-magnitude higher rates; and even the fastest aircraft production lines are, in the greater scheme of things, not mass production. There’s no aircraft in the world that has a higher production rate than Lamborghini.

Everything is relative. I suspect there are more Lamborghinis produced than 737s as well and yet I expect Boeing would consider their 737 effort to be “mass production.” (while Toyota would consider Lamborghini’s entire production line little more than an experiment)

The key thing to understand here is that higher production rates tend to drive down costs, and that the trend exhibits diminishing returns. The F-35 won’t be produced in numbers similar to some of the production programs of earlier eras, but that does not mean that its larger production run will not be a substantial advantage when compared to those of its competitors that are or will be produced at trickle rates. (essentially all of them)

Looks like the Korean Air Force is going to get its first choice after all, and without a reduction in orders.

Korean Air Force Leaning Toward Stealth Fighter

The Air Force recently submitted an improved required operational capacity (ROC), with a greater emphasis on stealth capability for the next-generation fighter-jet program, to the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS), a military official said.

“The Air Force emphasized stealth capability in the ROC,” he said.

His remark indicates the F-35 stealth fighter is likely to be a standalone candidate in the fighter requirement program because two other possible bidders ― Boeing’s F-15 Silent Eagle and the European Aeronautic Defense and Space Company (EADS)’s Eurofighter Typhoon ― are expected to have difficulty meeting the updated ROC that puts priority on stealth capability.

The low-observable technology played a key role in the nation’s September rejection of the less-stealthy F-15 as a replacement for the Air Force’s aging fleet of F-4s and F-5s.

…

According to Naeil Shinmoon, multiple government officials were quoted as saying that the government is leaning toward purchasing 60 F-35s over a longer period of time due to budget constraints. It added that the present government will buy 40 F-35s and the remainder will be added under the next administration.

http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2013/11/116_146012.html

Naturally the Korean Air Force isn’t at all interested in capabilities. Nope, they couldn’t care less which plane they buy. All that matters are the bribes. :highly_amused:

Ah, your beer emoticons.. Short on arguments, again?

Last time I have proven you that the ex-Chief of Staff of ROKAF has taken at least $2.5mil in bribes from LMA over two years for providing LockMart with classified military information on what ROKAF plans to buy, from whom and for how much. Your only response was crawling back under your stone and shutting up like a clam..

And I am a conspiracy theorist.. Gimme a break, troll.

You -are- a conspiracy theorist. You invent conspiracy theories to explain things you don’t understand. That is what a conspiracy theorist does.

Now that doesn’t mean there aren’t ever real cases of bribery or indeed actual conspiracies… but the idea that LM has just bought everyone everywhere isn’t plausible. If all it took was a few bribes then BAE, no stranger to bribery itself, would have no problem selling Eurofighters. (or for that matter Dassault selling Rafales)

The “experts” which selected the POS understand squat. They have never even bothered to seriously consider alternatives, just made the choice based on paper specs and presentations promising a completely different fighter at a completely different price at that time.

Of course, let us completely omit the little detail that many of them have been on LMA’s payroll for years..

Sure, not at all like you. You have it all figured out. :very_drunk:

All the evaluators/professionals are bought off, even the ones in places like Israel and Korea that may find themselves relying on the F-35 to defend themselves against an existential threat. All the contests are rigged. Nobody who actually has access to the aircraft or its performance specs can be trusted because they are all in on the conspiracy.

Good thing you were too smart for them. :eagerness:

Dassault is working on Rafale MLU, and was just allocated 1 billion euros for F3R standard + further studies.
Phase 1 of FCAS (and provisions for the beginning) is fully funded by UK and Fr governments.

Here is a photo of concept model presented at pas 13 btw

[ATTACH=CONFIG]222812[/ATTACH]

Sure, there are some upgrade projects in the works, and there will be for some time, but that type of work only delays the inevitable unless clean slate projects materialize.

This is the same problem that is confronting Boeing. They have kept busy with their Silent Eagle and Advanced Super Hornet projects, but they know their future in the fighter business is dependent on their early 6th generation work and to a lesser extent their T-X work.

As for FCAS, what constitutes “fully funded?”