Auditors: F-35 will need ‘unprecedented’ levels of funding to continue

http://thehill.com/news-by-subject/defense-homeland-security/149725-auditors-f-35-will-need-qunprecedentedq-levels-of-funding

This is not what the program needed right now. Let’s hope that the GAO is wrong.

We were offered integration of our weapons onto F-35 by Lockheed Martin, in the USA, at a price set by LM.

Sorry for the OT but: Do you have a source for that?

According to Spudmanwp the UK would not need source codes to integrate weapons, there should be some kind of interface (forgot the name). According to Mr. SWP it was the silly UK politicians who don’t understand anything of this who insisted on having the source codes….

Who’s more committed? Germany, with no other type planned, or the USN, with a new type already on order? Ditto Spain, with no plans for anything else small numbers of F-35B for naval use only, & the other two are committed to the EF as their primary air-air platform for the foreseeable future.

“American weapons cheaper” is an assumption, not a fact. Compare, for example, JASSM with Storm Shadow. Looking at actual procurement costs, rather than the hopelessly optimistic projections, one finds that JASSM has cost a few times as much to develop, & unit production cost is slightly higher, making per unit programme cost significantly greater.

Also, unit cost isn’t what matters. Cost/effectiveness is.

It seems to me that all three Eurocanards are still behind the SH in terms of maturity. Unfortunately. And getting things in place takes some time. If there had not been a push from the export market to get an AESA, I am sure the Typhoon AESA would have taken even longer.

Saying that “American weapons cheaper” is a generalization — however it is more often correct than incorrect. Of course one can find examples where European weapons are cheaper however in most cases the US weapons are indeed cheaper than the European weapons.

Meteor was quite impressive when it was designed… 10 years ago.

Actually Meteor is still quite impressive. The US has IMHO still not yet produced it’s like although they are certainly in the process of doing so.

And Meteor is now ready and is being ordered! One just needs to finalize the integration and that is being worked on, for all the Eurocanards I believe. 🙂

“Bang for the buck”, now, hmmm possibly, “bang for the buck” for the next 40 years? Don’t hold your breath. The US types are just about passed their sell by date and theres at least two other aircraft in the competition that have a lot more to offer for the future.

I think the USN will fly the SH for quite some time — perhaps longer than what the UK will operate their Typhoon… :diablo:

A lot of people says that the F-16 has limited growth potential left.

Few seem to say the same about the SH.

With all due respect,you do not understand Indian politics…there is absolutely no chance the American jets will win. This is not the same as buying transport aircrafts..combat jets are high profile items and there is no way Antony will ever agree to buy anything under American pressure. The guy has been involved in anti-American socialist politics his entire life.

If there was no chance why US jets would win, why would Antony reject the meeting? If he attended the meeting and then announced a Eurocanard to win would he then look bad in Indian media?

I did not say that he would agree to buy anything under American pressure. The fact that he rejected the meeting seems to indicate that he wants to be perceived as unbiased and “pure”. However the same fact could also indicate that US fighters may win (if you follow the logic of what I wrote above).

Make no mistake: the US fighters are very capable and quite cost-effective. So they could potentially win without too much meddling from the US. But if they do win mainly on merit and price then some people may still claim it was due to “Politics” and pressure from the US etc. etc. Perhaps that’s why he cannot meet Gates now.

As for the rumor on Rafale and Gripen; it’s just a rumor…

Starting during the early 1990s, Sweden’s National Defence Research Establishment and the national contractor Ericsson Microwave began flight testing the 20 to 90 MHz ultra-wideband CARABAS I Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) technology demonstrator aboard the Svenska Flygvapnet’s (SF – Swedish Air Force) Rockwell Tp 86 Sabreliner testbed aircraft 86001. According to Jane’s sources, CARABAS I made use of fast Fourier transform post-collection processing and an antenna array that comprised a pair of aft-facing units mounted in 5.5 m long by 0.3 m diameter inflatable sleeve fairings. Functionally, each of the system’s multi-element antennas acted as a transceiver dipole, with each `arm’ of the array transmitting and receiving alternately. During the cited trials, the radar is reported as having demonstrated 3 × 3 m resolution at a range of 10 km.Subsequent to the CARABAS I programme, the same development team launched a second effort centred on the CARABAS II equipment. CARABAS II (which was mounted aboard SF TP 86 Sabreliner aircraft 86002) differed from its predecessor in making use of a pair of forward-facing, ultra-light, omni-directional, 8.2 m long probe antennas. As with the earlier equipment, the new system made use of post-collection processing (time domain) and maintained track accuracy via the use of a ground and air phase-differential application of the Global Positioning System. Flight trials with CARABAS II are reported to have begun during November 1996 and to have demonstrated a minimum resolution of 2 × 1 m.

http://www.janes.com/articles/Janes-Electronic-Mission-Aircraft/Rockwell-Tp-86-Sabreliner-Coherent-All-RAdio-BAnd-Sensing-CARABAS-radar-testbed-Sweden.html

More info here:

http://www.crcnetbase.com/doi/abs/10.1201/9781420037296.ch12

Interesting.