It happened and the source was a couple of tweets.
http://www.businessinsider.com/general-chuck-yeager-f-22-f-35-2016-8

With all due respect to Gen Yeager, the last time he had anything to do with combat, he was flying with big spiny thing in front, had to get the enemy within 1 mile & EXACTLY in front of him, and only had his Mk1 Eyeballs for Situational Awareness… Someone call the the Home, one got loose.

Please define what falls in new technologies ?

Something completely new or a significant upgrade vs currently fielded systems like:

–Most powerful single fighter engine, whcih can also do VTOL
–VLO shaping
–RAM you can walk on without special booties and is actually part of the plane’s structure as opposed to an add-on coating
–Fully fused data (ie not just fusing pre-determined tracks)
–Completely customizable large single display
–Direction LPI datalinks to connect 25 nodes to share raw data (not just tracks)
–Combining IRST, FLIR, & LTP functionality into a single system
–360 IIR based MAWS that does that and also tracks all WVR airborne objects, tell you where a SAM is heading, detects groundfire (AAA, mortars, RPGs, etc), providers self-BDA, and acts as NVGs
–HMDS that displays anything you want from the system, including video
–No HUD
–Software programmable radio suite
–AESA radar-based ESM connected to the rest of the ESM system
–COTS/VM/Middleware/modular based avionics
–Automated maintenance system (ALIS)

So how it comes that all other military producers are creating new technologies, introducing new models of planes and vehicles and not wasting such amount of money?
Or you really think that the only innovation in this field are “made in USA”?

What new technology did the Rafale or Eurofighter bring to the table?

btw, Only the US makes their dev & procurement programs as open as they are. Just try and get real numbers (ie not from an interview or other non-budgetary source).

Upgrading F-16s in lieu of ramping up F-35 production is counter intuitive and a plain waste of money.

F-22 production was canceled for purely political reasons. Even though it’s production costs were right on target vs cost estimates (within 3%), it was accused of being “too expensive” and “un-affordable” by the same people wo approved the contracts years prior. It was low hanging fruit and had little to do with the F-35.

The whole concurrency thing serves no better purpose than forcing a client an aircraft which might not even meet the requirements but has already been made in 200+ copies so whatdahell, let us simply shift the goalposts down, again.. LM has achieved the F-35 to become “too big to fail” long time ago, now they are on the best way to make it “too big to fix”..

You seemed to have forgotten that concurrently was a demand of Congress, not LM.

Besides that, it serves the purpose of recapitalizing your forces quicker, ramping up quicker, and developing the aircraft quicker.

Don’t know where you are getting the “too big to fix” BS, but concurrency fixes are already being implemented across the LRIP fleet.

Anyone have the actual memo?

On the schedule issue, I think that the JPO’s ability to cram an entire year’s worth of weapon testing into a single month shows not only their commitment, but also their ability to get things done outside of traditional means. Given that Gilmore’s risk warnings are all based on traditional timelines, the JPO could well pull it off on time.

The Pentagon’s director of operational test and evaluation (DOT&E) has found issues with weapon integration on the F-35 that could hinder the declaration of full operational capability for the stealth fighter.

Full story: http://aviationweek.com/defense/weapons-tester-cites-further-f-35-challenges

Gilmore did not “find” anything. He is simply shining a light on what the JPO has already found & reported to him.

“There were absolutely no surprises in the recent memo from the OSD Director of Operational Test and Evaluation,” Bogdan says. “Specific to the memo, the JPO has been and is currently acting on all the recommendations.”