Spitfire9GE is still very much in the game with the ADVENT/AETD programs. You could start to put money back into the engine, although what would make sense would be to just pick GE for the AETD follow on program as opposed to both GE and P&W. Given how the entire follow on program is short of a billion dollars at the moment it may come to that.
Once the AETD winds down, I would accelerate the follow on project and do so with just GE (Like the ADVENT) and look for a new Variable cycle engine towards the middle-end of next decade..you can then choose to look at applications such as an F-22 re-enging, FA-XX for the Navy, NGAD for the AF or newer engines for newer F-35’s coming from the line..
Can the ADVENT act as a substitute for F135? I mean engineers assembling F-35 frame 1024 look at what engine to put in it and choose an ADVENT from the stores rather than an F135. Somehow I doubt it.
Spitfire9The price tag for the Lockheed Martin F-35 joint strike fighter, the Pentagon’s most expensive weapons program, increased $7.4 billion in 2013, according to a new US Defense Department report.
…
This year’s procurement and development increase comes a year after the F-35 program posted a $4.5 billion decrease in DoD’s annual Selected Acquisition Reports (SARs), which provide cost estimates for the Pentagon’s major acquisition programs. The estimates reflect the lifetime cost to develop and acquire a system.
The cost of the F-35 aircraft itself increased $3.1 billion, according to the report, a number Bogdan said is primarily attributed to DoD jets from its budget plans between 2015 and 2018. Over that period the purchase of 33 aircraft, mostly Navy, were delayed.
http://www.defensenews.com/article/20140417
I admit I have trouble working out what is happening with this aircraft and its cost.
Spitfire9Saab has confirmed it has submitted proposals to the Malaysian government for the lease of Gripen fighters but said it wasn’t responding to a formal request for information.
Company executives said they delivered proposals earlier this year but wouldn’t reveal how many ex-Swedish Air Force C/D model aircraft are involved or the length of a possible lease deal.
Local Malaysian company DRB Hicom Defence Technologies will be its partner. The two companies already team on Saab’s bid to secure an airborne early warning aircraft program in Malaysia.
The Gripen fighter jet maker is the only one of the potential suppliers for Malaysia’s requirement for a multirole aircraft to at least partially declare its hand after the government in Kuala Lumpur effectively stalled a program to purchase jets outright and encouraged competitors to come up with a more affordable solution.
Why don’t SAAB wait until they are asked to prepare a proposal? Are they doing this to try to forestall Malaysia looking seriously at other contenders, in which case SAAB (a) gets the deal (b) starts earning faster on frames currently earning no money?
Spitfire9The Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II fleet recently surpassed 15,000 flight hours, marking a major milestone for the program.
“Flying 15,000 hours itself demonstrates that the program is maturing, but what I think is even more impressive is the fact that operational F-35s accounted for more than half of those flight hours,” said J.D. McFarlan, Lockheed Martin’s vice president for F-35 Test & Verification.
Spitfire9Canada’s re-assessment of F-35 descends into farce:
A Defence Department report billed as the first step in a more open, transparent era for the F-35 project initially listed many of the stealth fighter’s problems – such as issues around fuel efficiency and software development – but those sections were removed in the final version.
Spitfire9Re: #596 (Danish competition)
Isn’t Rafale conspicuous by its absence?
It is. I guess Dassault made it clear to Denmark that they would not be interested in spending money on preparing a tender. Whereas Rafale won’t go out of production soon, Typhoon will without additional orders (even more so the Super Hornet) so I suspect that Boeing and Eurofighter see an investment in a tender as justifiable even if the chances of winning an order are very low.
My guess is that it will be a decision based on the minimum number of F-35 required to field a fighter force. If the budget does not allow for that minimum Denmark may be forced to lower its sights and go for Gripen.
Spitfire9I like the Unique Super cruise capability
What does it mean?
Spitfire9The projected price tag for the new Boeing KC-46 tanker has fallen $1.8 million per aircraft, according to a new Government Accountability Office (GAO) report.
A bit mysterious to me. I thought I read in the last week that the program cost had risen by US$1+ billion. Did anyone read that?
Spitfire9The hijacking of an Ethiopian airliner to Geneva two months ago highlighted shortcomings in Switzerland’s capability to protect its airspace.
…
The airliner was intercepted by Italian Eurofighter jets, then handed over to the French Air Force before it landed at Geneva airport. The Swiss Air Force did not intervene, because it is only operational during office hours.
…
During a visit to the Payerne air base at the end of last month Maurer took his message up a notch.
“Our airspace will become very vulnerable from 2030 at the latest if we do not acquire new fighter jets,” he told journalists.
Opponents of the Gripen purchase have refused to follow Maurer. They say the fleet of 32 F/A-18 jets is more than sufficient to police Swiss airspace.
It is virtually the only task the Air Force has – and will have – according to campaigners against the Gripen purchase, as there is hardly any risk that Switzerland will be attacked by a foreign enemy force or that Swiss fighter jets will attack targets outside the country.
“We do not need new fighter jets for round-the-clock air protection. The existing fleet is enough by far,” said Daniel Vischer of the Green Party.
It does not matter how many fighters Switzerland has, nor how capable they are if none are available when needed, does it?
Spitfire9Mysterious announcement to come saturday on Dassault web TV channel… https://twitter.com/dassault_onair/status/453928372813316
Link does not work for me. Neither does http://...
PS in case you would like to further improve your already excellent English, samedi=Saturday, dimanche=Sunday etc
Spitfire9Dutch MOD: Letter about F-35 IOT&E and European Cooperation
Something to note: “(4) Cooperation with Belgium on airspace surveillance: Belgium seems to have decided to procure F-35s without further evaluation.”
Spitfire9I think its the cheer number of fighters/engines, it adds up if quantity counts in thousands,
plus, a general ‘fed-up’ sensation of ever increasing cost of the whole thing.
I can in fact sympathize strongly with this emotion
This is the thing that strikes me as being disturbing:
Pratt & Whitney’s single-source, monopoly position is so strong that the F-35 Joint Program Office cannot even force the company to reveal the true cost of the engines
If P&W are disinclined to reveal the costs involved in producing the F135, how can their client evaluate predictions of the cost of the engine when in full scale production? As you say, several thousand are expected to be produced. A through-life engine cost just US$1 million higher than it could be adds $2+ billion to US forces’ costs.
It looks to me like P&W wants the option of taking the US taxpayer to the cleaners. Why else would they want to withold information regarding costs?
I wonder how much it would cost to revive the F136 and to complete development.
Spitfire9PARIS — Having canceled the GE/Rolls-Royce F136 alternate engine program for short-term savings, the Pentagon finds itself powerless to force Pratt & Whitney to reduce the cost of its own F135 engine, now the single-source powerplant for the entire F-35 program.
While many in Congress tried to block cancellation of the F136 program for several years, arguing that competition had very effectively reduced fighter engine acquisition costs in the past, the program was eventually killed in December 2011 when GE and Rolls-Royce finally decided to stop funding the project in the hope the Pentagon would restore funding. At the time, the Pentagon opted to cut F136 funding as part of a program-wide campaign to reduce the F-35’s ballooning costs.
Pratt & Whitney’s single-source, monopoly position is so strong that the F-35 Joint Program Office cannot even force the company to reveal the true cost of the engines, Rear Adm. Randy Mahr, deputy program manager of the F-35. “I can’t force somebody to go ahead and report something that by law they are not” required to report, he told Aviation Week at the Sea Air Space 2014 conference in Washington, DC on April 7
Most fighters are designed around a single-source engine so that there is no competitive pressure on the engine OEM to lower price, lower ownership cost etc. What is different here?
Spitfire9Volvo aero signed an agreement last march with GE to be the european lead on the engine,
which was selected to power EADS’s planned mako advanced jet trainer.
GE would give volvo aero up to 30% of the F414M revenue stream in return for development, production and assembly work to “europanize” the engine.Volvo aero believes european nations may insist on higher content than the 40%
specified by GE and says final assembly is likely to be carried out in trollhattan facilities near gothenburghttp://www.flightglobal.com/FlightPDFArchive/2004/2004-02%20-%200018.PDF
(just realized this is a very old article but i’m guessing it’s still relevant)
Mako was never pursued. The agreement with Volvo was made in 2003, I think.
Spitfire9I believe the intention is to produce 40% of F414 in Europe
I recall SAAB explaing that one reason the Gripen E would cost so little was because the F414 would have a lower cost than the Volvo engine used in the C. Does that tally with producing 40% of the F414 in Europe? I can’t see it but I’m open to illumination.
Sign In
