And how are you going to fund it all?

That’s the problem.

You’ve got over 2,000 airframes to replace and most of them will be approaching crunch time in 2020-2030 period.

Even assuming $80 million per airframe, that’s $160 billion without taking into account R&D costs, service entry costs, etc etc.

There’s also T-38 Talon replacement (up to 500 a/c).

That cost is spread over a long period of time. So its impossible to say where money would come from without building a multi decade airforce budget. Mostly you need to look at if there is a potential replacement for current system ether currently available are one being designed.

For most of planes you listed there are replacements available are soon to be available. Worry about items where there are no clear replacements available or even being considered to start design phase on.

Trying to plan out defense budgets 20 years into the future is futile.

Its not a EITHER , OR as far as risk is concerned. There are various levels of risk, and out of these 3 the F-35 is at the highest currently. The typhoon only has to field an AESA, which it is already testing, and as such the Typhoon is OPERATIONAL and has its chinks sorted out…The Silent Eagle is not that BIG of a radical upgrade that can compare to the level of risk that surrounds the F-35. Risk is also relative, no program is going to fail to deliver what it promises, the problem is with the time-lines, and here the F-35 performs poorly, with 2/3 of testing still left, there is still quite a bit of risk there that can cause the In service dates to slip. The Typhoon as an AESA program is virtually risk free, as i doubt many would seriously think that the program is working on a risky upgrade program with the AESA that they cannot deliver by 2019. Same goes for Boeing…

But will Typhoon have a aesa equal F35 in 2019? Will it have a aesa equal to the current aesa South Korean F15 have today? Why would South Korea want a semi obsolete but low risk aesa? If the aesa isn’t semi obsolete then why is it low risk compared to F35 aesa that is much better funded and in production at this time?

You seem to find this astonishing, but I don’t.
Who signed the MOU with the JPO (not with LM or P&W), was the General Secretary of Defence. This agreement was definitivelly approved by the Parliament in 2009 and the amount is budgeted over 20 years circa (the end of the acquisition is scheduled by 2027).
And yes, the Ministry of Defence, by its General Secretary has the authority to sign contracts. Even expensive contracts like the one for the EFA, that then had to be approved by the Defence parlamentary commission.

For the JSF acquisition Italy allocated 500 M Euro in 2013, while for 2014 and 2015 respectivelly 535,4 M and 657,2 M. The Total Defence budget amounts to 14413 M Euros for 2013

The percentage of the budget for the Defence function vs. the Italian GDP was 0.87 % circa in 2012 (comparable values for France, Germany and UK were respectivelly 1.46%, 1.19% and 2.1%, if I reacall well).

So what?

I wasn’t surprised at all. My above statement was how I read the situation from first time I heard about it a week are so ago.

In this case am I right to think that parliament has already given its approval. Are will contract for 90 F35 if its signed by MoD have to go back for another final approval after its signing?

There is also chance that parliament could rescind it’s prior approval before the contract is signed though that seems unlikely.

The biggest failure in F35 program has been the the delays. But the hard truth is the people buying the planes don’t seem to care. They in fact actually seem to like the fact that F35 is going to be seven to eight years late. They got to put off spending any new money on fighters for almost a decade. A decade where a huge economic crisis has engulfed most of the planet. So the biggest failure of F35 program is a non issue and a semi positive to many buyers. LM got very lucky in this regard other then Australia buying a few F18E-G they haven’t lost any sales to the delays. A couple more months of delays added to program wont have much impact ether.

I don’t think A or C versions would have been produced ether.

There would have been a semi redesign of plane. To a merged spec that also removed allot of compromises and extra costs in both the A and C models that were needed for the B model resulting in a price lower then A model.

Marines would be flying AV-8 tell there wings fell off just like the air force will fly A10s tell there do.

Whats the estimated empty weight for the J20?

I see 29.300lb for F35A while J20 looks to be at least twice the size of F35A.

In 1991 Iraq had an army, up to third world standard’s; in 2003 that army was broken, figuratively and literally.

True but objectives were also less in first Iraq war. Removal of Iraqi army from Kuwait versus invasion and overthrow of all of Iraq in the second Iraq war.

There was allot of area bombing by formations of planes in the first Iraq war and that tactic was simply not used very much at all in second Iraq war.

If you approach first Iraq war with the same wide spread use of PGM as was present the second Iraq war. The required numbers of planes needed would still have been far less then were used regardless of the higher quality of Iraq’s military in first Iraq war.

Thinking about it occurs to me you can just slap a booster stage to back of cuda and then your back up to amraam ranges and most likely better, in a amraam sized package. You also have better end game performance once you drop the booster stage.

Hit to kill though is not ever going to be a optimal choice for a anti radar missile.