Loke8000 euros? Halloweene, did you have some French wine tonight? 🙂
LokeOtherwise, the hearing featured the usual news from an F-35 program manager: Software development is, as Bogdan put it, “really hard stuff,” and will force new delays.
This time, it will be four to six months, Bogdan told the subcommittee.
“Block 3F [software] is dependent upon the timely release of Block 2B and 3I, and at present, 3F is tracking approximately four to six months late without taking steps to mitigate that delay,” Bogdan said.
Michael Sullivan of the General Accountability Office warned the subcommittee that any new software delays will trigger delays and cost overruns across the entire program, which Pentagon officials and analysts say is the most expensive and complex in US history.
Still, Bogdan said the program more recently — meaning under his watch — has made “slow and steady progress.” He expects it will meet initial operational capability (IOC) goals for the Marine Corps and Air Force in 2015 and 2016, respectively.
http://www.defensenews.com/article/20140326/DEFREG02/303260041/Further-Delays-Predicted-F-35-Program
would be fantastic if they can deliver with only 4-6 months delays — however I am sceptical. I would not be surprised if there are further delays.
LokeLengthy article from an Italian blogger:
http://ukarmedforcescommentary.blogspot.it/2014/03/italy-and-f-35-pd-document-that-backs.htmlAccording to him all F-35’s from LRIP 6 through 9 will be ordered, but LRIP10 order will be frozen in order to meet budget cuts.
And that is about it…
The really interesting bit:
The real discovery, and this one truly does amaze everyone, is that there is a fully multirole Typhoon in production: it is called RAPHALE and it is the “french variant of Typhoon”.
Well, i’m sure Eurofighter and Dassault will both be delighted of finding this out.A big advantage of throwing more money into Typhoon by producing this “french variant” is that the “works-shearing” arrangements are more favorable than those of the F-35 program.
Fantastic.
If you think the politicians in your country are horrible, look to Italy… 🙂
Lokehttp://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/f-35-fighter-purchase-reasonable-report/story-e6frfku9-1226862761303
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/mar/24/lockheeds-troubled-f-35-fighter-jet-wins-big-s-kor/
A bit of positive press coming in… Cue the birds of doom
No doom here, but it is also not entirely positive if Australia also cuts its order… are they really considering to do that?
LokeAfrican Defence Review on Gripen:
http://www.africandefence.net/know-your-aircraft-the-gripen/
with a list of the different operations the South African Gripens have conducted so far.
LokeDid BS really write that article?
To me it does not make sense to compare the F-35 and Gripen E; they are in completely different classes.
The F-35 is much larger, much more expensive, but also much more survivable in high-threat environments. So flying above e.g. Libya, Mali, Afghanistan, and probably even Syria, one might as well use the E; however if you need to approach the most advanced integrated SAM networks, or if you need to fight modern fighters like the PAK FA, then I think any pilot would prefer the F-35 to the Gripen E.
The E makes a lot of sense for countries that does not need or cannot afford the extra bells&whistles offered by the F-35.
LokeTherefore a consensus can be drawn about the F-16 forum. It is full of ignorant and arrogant fools. 🙂
Why don’t you go there and correct them 🙂
LokeWell… The “S-duct discussion” is over, but now it’s “3D-nozzles discussion”? :rolleyes:
I must admit I did not follow the “s-duct discussion” in much detail; what was the conclusion? Will it be s-ducts, radar blockers, or something else?
I am asking because I ended up in a discussion regarding this point on a certain f-16 forum; the consensus there is that the PAK FA has neither blockers nor s-ducts and therefore will have a pretty high RCS. Any definite statements with links to relevant sources would be appreciated.
LokeI agree with your post and I think Saab is very good at what it does. But what is fishy is why other partners play along when it means they are shooting themselves in the foot. Esp the european partners.
Nic
Well, it’s better to supply two very diverse models that to only minor extent are competitng, than to supply only one (high-end) model. Assume for a moment that Gripen E had never been developed.
What would Switzerland have done? Definitely not bought the Typhoon.
What would Brazil have done? Definitely not bought the Typhoon.
What would Sweden have done? Definitely not bought the Typhoon.
You see, it’s already a win for the European companies.
LokeIt doesn’t matter if it’s open yet or not… It’s never really going to be an ‘open competition’. Why’s it so difficult to accept…
Canada has invested too much to go for an alternative, their future; regarding workshare, employment/apprenticeships, income etc. is much more compelling with the F-35 than it is for the likes of Rafale, Typhoon, Gripen and Super Hornet because they’re not going to be produced for the next couple of decades, thus have less to offer to their industry. Canada are doing exactly what South Korea and Japan done, they’re “inviting” other venders to take part in this (fake) “open competition” so they can get a lower price from LM. Nothing more!
You’re only promising yourself something that doesn’t really exist…
I agree that it’s a “fake” competition however I am not sure if the main motivation is to get a lower price. I think it’s mainly for political reasons. The F-35 process was handled poorly in Canada and was heavily critiziced for that by the political opposition. Thus for political reasons they were forced to launch a “competition”.
LokeThere’s also the question how Sweden can develop a fighter program that’s about half as expensive as the Rafale program for less airframes, for a small country, while we are said by everyone and their mother that it’s impossible to develop a fighter alone even if your name is France, Germany or the UK. There’s the question of all those new upgrades that seem to cost nothing to develop. Gripen NG being allegedly less expensive than the previous ones, despite having to develop a whole new GaN EW suite, an AESA while completely redesigning the internals.
Nic
They do it in part by picking components that have already been developed by others; for instance the F414 all R&D costs were sunk already; the IRST system is just an evolution of the Typhon IRST; the EWS is an evolution of the current; the Raven AESA is evolved from an existing Selex AESA; Elbit also provides some sensors (was it RWR?) with R&D costs already sunk, etc. etc.
LokeWell at least Rafale is delivering to french armed forces promised capabilities, on schedule and within expected budget… Not like some other planes…
True, but it’s not completely alone in that respect. Both SH and Gripen have (so far ) delivered promised capabilities on schedule and within expected budget.
LokeUnder the NIFC-CA construct, Rear Adm. Mike Manazir, the Navy’s director of air warfare, told USNI News in December 2013 that the service would need a minimum of two airborne EA-18Gs linked via a high-speed data-link to each other and to a third point—a Northrop Grumman E-2D Hawkeye — to perform a time distance of arrival analysis to precisely locate threat emitters.
Manazir said that the Navy hopes to use either the Rockwell Collins-developed Tactical Targeting Network Technology waveform or a Link-16 Concurrent Multi-Netting-4 network to link the jets together.
With the three separate points, the Navy expects to be able to narrow down the location of multiple mobile threat emitters to a narrow enough “ellipse” as to generate a weapons quality track in real time.
However, an industry source said that the tactic works best when there are three Growlers working in conjunction with each other. The Navy performed a demonstration of the new tactic with three Growlers in the summer of 2013, the source said.
While the Hawkeye has an excellent electronic support measures suite, it has neither the capability of the EA-18G nor can it get as close to the threat.
“The EA-18G is your best sensor for building that electromagnetic spectrum picture, what is out there that is emitting, and from that picture, the warfighters can decide how they will deal with that threat,” the industry source said.
http://news.usni.org/2014/03/12/navy-wants-growlers
They argument for getting more Growlers is quite interesting, however what I don’t understand is how this argument can convince anybody? Surely the F-35 would be able to fill the role described above, with it’s fantastic sensors and data links?
Or will they not have F-35 on all carriers?
LokeDesperate? Well, Yes and No! 🙂
Yes, because the Raffie’s new toy smell is wearing off and as time goes by it will be harder and harder to compete against newer shinier aircrafts… ok, impossible!
No, because Dassault Aviation are sitting on a big wad of cash. So they don’t need the money… at the moment.More interesting for me is that Dassault seem to be softening their stance (as a seller) and be more willing to negotiate. If only they learned that lesson before the UAE public spanking!
Well so far they have lost ALL competitions but one, and the number of opportunities are rapidly diminishing, realistically perhaps just 2-4 countries left on this planet that can be considered potential Rafale buyers.
LokeDassault will never go to Korea after FX1…Maybe they simply want a real confrontation in an open competition?
Well in that case what are they doing in Canada!?
Sign In
