I really don’t think very much of people that write articles like this or the people that post them.

Here’s 2 more:

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/09/us-stealth-figh.html
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-11048.html

“…if the USAF doesn’t want to bet it’s future on JSF, why should you?”
-definite ‘Uncle Sam’ poster banner material.

From an economic point of view – its just part of the DoD budget – like all the systems – eventually the US government re-capitilis(z)es that cash spent through tax anyway – while stimulating one of the Wests biggest industries.

Anecdote to Keynsian Macro-economics 101:

US Budget Deficit 2008 (baseline): $407bn
US Budget Deficit 2009 (post Fannie & Freddie): $530bn, to remain 3-4% of GDP for the next decade totalling $7,000bn in extra debt (most optimistic projection)

US FY2008 Defense Budget: $481.4bn

Putting things in perspective:Lehman Brothers’ outstanding debt total: $600bn (that’s 2 x JSF programme)

sources: CBO & FT.

Personally, I consider much a waste of time to even rebut.

Hey, I’m just floating an idea (albeit a bit extreme/worst of the worst case scenarios). I mean stranger things have happened- who’d have thought 18months ago US sub-prime mortgage fallout would lead to near global financial meltdown?

Let’s look at a better case scenario, as per bring_it_on above: cuts in numbers acquired which will bloat unit costs to well over $100m (today’s prices, note probable sustained $ recovery)-either way potential customers will look to more cost effective alternatives- maybe Boeing still considers the SH as offering considerable growth potential, Eurocanards & Su-35 may join the fray- dare I say it maybe even PAK-FA-MK(X)?!

Wont happen in my opinion , the F-35 would most likely be scaled back , dates pushed forward , purchases reduced to a point where it becomes really really expensive and we still buy a less competant system then what the service wanted at greater the cost. Why change such a genious procurment process 🙂 .

This is a horrendous situation. Imho, the US DoD should cancel all domestic orders for F-35, depending on contractual default penalty costs, honouring export orders only (taking a leaf out-of Sukhoi’s book).

Secondly, re-open F-22 production line with LRP orders and open a tender for a 6G fighter post 2020- meantime adopt SH as a stop-gap, unless the US Govt. has plans to ask the Russians & Chinese to lend them the money for F-35 procurement (irony of ironies).

M. Pogosyan reported that the Su-34 will receive uprated engines and an active array in the future.

However, imho, I think Su-34 will remain in LRIP @ NAPO, with the RuAF adopting the 2-seater Indo-Russian PAK-FA in the dedicated strike role, hence few Su-34s will be procured only to help plug the gap ’till around 2020- much the same intention as its stablemate the Su-35…kinda makes sense really.

New Aussie fighter ‘clubbed like seal’
somehow i feel we’re not being told the whole story

“People with greater insight [into the F-35 programme] than I are looking at the [other] offerings available…Let people draw their own conclusions about why…”
Tom Bell, Boeing.

You’re damn right we’re not being told the whole story.

You can think what you want but the Su-35 is obsolete compared to an F-22

Nobody disputes that claim- least of all Sukhoi, RuAF/MoD. The question is, will the Su-35/27SM2 (production example) be second only to the Raptor(and later PAK-FA), irrespective of delivery time-lines & in-service dates- to which, imho, I’d say yes.

Hence, so-long as it remains price-competitive with it’s generational contemporaries it’s a definite front-runner, especially where 5th Gen are prohibitively expensive.
Remember, its new AA weapons have yet to be publicly unveiled and NIIP rates the Irbis’ capabilities so highly that it rules out an AESA upgrade.

Ironically, it’s the run-away success of the Su-30 series and their MLUs (BARS AESA+weapons) that would seriously hamper exports, but that’s an internal KnAAPO/Irkut/NAPO battle.