Page 18 – Key Publishing

SpudmanWP

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 256 through 270 (of 4,849 total)

← 1 2 3 … 17 18 19 … 322 323 324 →

Author

Posts
September 14, 2018 at 4:13 pm in reply to: Forum Maintenance #218169

SpudmanWP
Participant

“Latest Activity” seems to not work when I just checked it.

September 6, 2018 at 4:14 pm in reply to: 2018 F-35 News and Discussion #2127223

SpudmanWP
Participant

KPPs are on Page 35 of this CRS doc
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RL30563.pdf

My 2007 reference was from this

September 6, 2018 at 3:41 pm in reply to: 2018 F-35 News and Discussion #2127231

SpudmanWP
Participant

The F-35’s KPP for Sortie Rate is 3/4/3 (A/B/C), but it’s largest public number is 6.41 (for the B from 2007). I’ll have to dig around to see if it has demoed any numbers higher than KPP recently at an LFE .

September 6, 2018 at 12:12 am in reply to: 2018 F-35 News and Discussion #2127277

SpudmanWP
Participant

That is just Lockheed trying to add a partner/funding to the pitch to Japan. The USAF did not ask for it although it would be a nice replacement for the F-15C and early F-15Es while waiting for PCA.

September 5, 2018 at 3:50 pm in reply to: 2018 F-35 News and Discussion #2127339

SpudmanWP
Participant

most advanced swing-role combat aircraft.

That is the quote that is laughable.

Faster does not make you more advanced and neither does range.

Technology makes you advanced and the F-35 beats it in spades (as does the F-22).

I can show you a 35nm pic from a Sniper XR (the EOTS predecessor), can you do the same with Pirate?

Is the EF more mature, sure, but that does not mean more advanced.

September 4, 2018 at 9:38 pm in reply to: 2018 F-35 News and Discussion #2127413

SpudmanWP
Participant

With 9 customers and 623 aircraft ordered, Eurofighter_1 is the world’s most advanced swing-role combat aircraft.

https://forum.keypublishing.com/foru…15#post3834815

Let’s see…
No operational AESA
Radar based MAWS
No VLO
No directional datalinks
Limited Data Fusion
Limited night ops due to NVGs

LOL… The F-35 would like a word.

September 4, 2018 at 7:25 pm in reply to: 2018 F-35 News and Discussion #2127486

SpudmanWP
Participant

F-35C, Super Hornet Damaged During At-Sea Aerial Refueling

An F-35C Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter flying from USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN-72) was damaged during an aerial refueling exercise, in the first major flight mishap for the carrier version of the JSF.

The engine of an F-35C from Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 125 was damaged while receiving fuel from an F/A-18F Super Hornet from VFA-103 on Aug. 22, Navy officials confirmed to USNI News. Debris from an aerial refueling basket was ingested into the F-35C’s engine intake, resulting in the damage, Naval Air Forces Atlantic spokesman Cmdr. Dave Hecht said on Tuesday.

Both fighters were able to land safely – the Super Hornet flew to Naval Air Station Oceana, Va., while the F-35C returned to Lincoln. No injuries were reported and the incident is currently under investigation, Hecht said.

More at the jump

August 31, 2018 at 4:41 pm in reply to: Can we have the old forum back #218242

SpudmanWP
Participant

Too much “white space”

[ATTACH=JSON]{“alt”:”Click image for larger version Name:t2018-08-31 08_57_21-Can we have the old forum back – Key Publishing Ltd Aviation Forums.png Views:t1 Size:t67.2 KB ID:t3834599″,”data-align”:”left”,”data-attachmentid”:”3834599″,”data-size”:”custom”,”height”:”186″,”title”:”2018-08-31 08_57_21-Can we have the old forum back – Key Publishing Ltd Aviation Forums.png”,”width”:”640″}[/ATTACH]

Image sizing issues. At max zoom out, this pic still cannot fit.

[ATTACH=JSON]{“data-align”:”none”,”data-size”:”custom”,”height”:”510″,”title”:”2018-08-31 09_09_14-The ‘JUST A NICE PIC…’ thread – Key Publishing Ltd Aviation Forums.png”,”width”:”640″,”data-attachmentid”:3834603}[/ATTACH]

The “sticky” threads are taking up over half of the “military aviation” forum for page 1 (Fixed over the last few minutes)

August 31, 2018 at 4:25 pm in reply to: 2018 F-35 News and Discussion #2127609

SpudmanWP
Participant

Comparing very old F-16 to brand new F-35? Wondering what would be the difference with block 52 for example.

Here is what the SAR says (ie, they are not Block 30s as most, if not a vast majority of USAF F-16s are Block 40 or 50).

The starting point for the F-16C/D CPFH is an average of actual cost incurred for this fleet during FY 2008 through FY 2010. In order to enable the direct comparison of the CPFH figures, the actual F-16C/D CPFH is adjusted to reflect the cost of fuel, the number of flight hours forecast for the F-35A, and FY 2013 inflation indices. The F-16C/D figures include costs that F-16 shares with other Air Force platforms: Systems Engineering/Program Management (SEPM), maintenance training costs, certain software development efforts, and information systems. Costs for mission planning are included in the F-35A CPFH figure, but equivalent costs for the F-16C/D are not available, and no adjustment was made for this element of cost. Finally, the F16C/D figures assume full funding of requirements consistent with the F-35A CPFH figures.

August 30, 2018 at 3:59 pm in reply to: 2018 F-35 News and Discussion #2127725

SpudmanWP
Participant

Even you have said that they plan to substitute the actual FLIR and DASS systems between a few years, so they would kept the LRIP on 3F configuration or would modify them as well?

The Adv EOTS that LM is proposing is not only backwards compatible with the existing F-35 (ie no need to change any hardware or software) at Block 3F, it is actually a rebuild of existing EOTS components. Cost, weight, and O&S costs have not been released like they have for the EODAS below, but it’s almost certainly cheaper thanks to new tech just as the new EODAS is.

The new EODAS coming in Block 4.2 is better than the existing EODAS in every way including cost thanks to advancements in tech over the last 15+ years. While it has not been reported, it is also likely backwards compatible with the existing EODAS unit. If it did this, then new units can be cut in as they are cycled through for deport work, even if the plane is still at Block 3F.

All in all, Block 4.1 (2021) is software and the upgrade cost is only about $5k (depending on if DoD personal or a contractor does it) and the hardware does not get added to the plan till Block 4.2 (~2023).

August 30, 2018 at 3:46 pm in reply to: SAAB Gripen and Gripen NG thread #4 #2127732

SpudmanWP
Participant

Likely.

I’d put the Gripen in the same RCS range as the SH, EF, & Raf which themselves are still 100x to 1000x larger than the F-22/35 when armed.

August 29, 2018 at 7:46 pm in reply to: SAAB Gripen and Gripen NG thread #4 #2127903

SpudmanWP
Participant

Size <> Stealth, it’s all about shaping and materials (RAM, RAS, etc)

Just look at the B-2 as an example as it’s RCS is much smaller than an Gripen yet the Gripen has a much higher RCS.

August 29, 2018 at 7:31 pm in reply to: Su-57 News and Discussion -version_we_lost_count!- #2127951

SpudmanWP
Participant

Isn’t at least the F-16 still cheaper to operate than the F-35?

I continued the F-35 parts on the F-35 thread:
https://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?144464-2018-F-35-News-and-Discussion&p=2455834#post2455834

August 29, 2018 at 7:30 pm in reply to: 2018 F-35 News and Discussion #2127953

SpudmanWP
Participant

In a discussion on the SU-57 page, the subject of the F-35’s $1.4 Billion Concurrency Cost number came up. I am continuing the discussion here so as not to put “F-35 only” data in that thread.

————————————————————

Now balance that against the cost of keeping all of the jets that the F-35 is to replace flying 10-15 years longer.

Isn’t at least the F-16 still cheaper to operate than the F-35?

The F-35A’s CPFH is about 14% higher than the F-16C. To keep those 4th gens flying for 10-15 years longer would also include several things that would be added to the CPFH calculation.
–A SLEP and upgrades to the 4th gen’s equipment (ie AESA radars, newer FLIRs, etc).
–Increased Operational Costs (ie a higher requirement for supporting assets like IFR, ISR, escorts, jamming support, decoys, etc).
–Increased LERs for 4th gen fighters

According to this page, just the SLEP for an F-16C is $2.5 mil each. Multiply that by the 2000+ fighters that would need to be extended and the SLEP alone will be over $5 BILLION. That does not take into account any upgrades to the avionics or other items above.
https://www.airforce-technology.com/news/usaf-conducts-slep-first-f-16-fighting-falcon-jet/

So yes, the F-35 concurrency cost of $1.4 Billion was far cheaper than the traditional plan of waiting till Milestone C to go into production.

August 28, 2018 at 11:55 pm in reply to: 2018 F-35 News and Discussion #2127999

SpudmanWP
Participant

Recent planes (LRIP 11 and 12) are VERY cheap when it comes to concurrency changes. Here is a chart that breaks down the costs per LRIP and the history (as of last fall) of what they estimated the cost would be.

Keep in mind that the services have already spent a lot of the Concurrency budget already getting the very early jets up to Block 2B/3i. The details were in the DOT&E from last year (pg 37 & 38 {7&8 actual} at http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2017/pdf/dod/2017f35jsf.pdf)
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 256 through 270 (of 4,849 total)

← 1 2 3 … 17 18 19 … 322 323 324 →