SpudmanWPThe FY2017 DOT&E report has been released
http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2017/pdf/dod/2017f35jsf.pdf
SpudmanWPThe DSCA FMA text is as follows.
The Government of Belgium has requested to buy thirty-four (34) F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Conventional Take Off and Landing (CTOL) aircraft, and thirty-eight (38) Pratt & Whitney F-135 engines (34 installed, 4 spares). Also included are Electronic Warfare Systems; Command, Control, Communications, Computer and Intelligence/Communications, Navigational, and Identification (C4I/CNI); Autonomic Logistics Global Support System (ALGS); Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS); Full Mission Trainer; Weapons Employment Capability, and other Subsystems, Features, and Capabilities; F-35 unique infrared flares; Reprogramming center; F-35 Performance Based Logistics; software development/integration; aircraft ferry and tanker support; support equipment; tools and test equipment; communications equipment; spares and repair parts; personnel training and training equipment; publications and technical documents; U.S. Government and contractor engineering and logistics personnel services; and other related elements of logistics and program support. The estimated total case value is $6.53 billion.
The RFP says that the Proposal must include support through 2030 and the FMS doc specifies parts & support.
Why would you assume that they are not talking about the same thing?
A clear example that the FMS announcement includes support after delivery (and for a significant time) is that the FMS doc specifies “software development/integration”. This would only be needed if the F-35 was to get post-delivery Block upgrades as part of the proposal.
Besides, this is moot since this is only an FMS announcement and not a final bid.
SpudmanWPHere is a rehash of ATK’s proposal
SpudmanWPIf you are looking at the complete lifetime cost, you have to also figure in the F-35’s larger amount of airframe hours over the F-16/18. This is one of the reasons why the Denmark numbers include higher numbers of the other fighters.
Then there is attrition…..
SpudmanWPSome more details from the Belgian RFP outlining what is required and for how long.
Capability Transition Period
The capability transition period is defined as the period starting at signature of the intergovernmental agreement (IGA) and ending with Full Operational Capability (FOC). For budgetary planning purposes, the FOC date is tentatively set for 31 December 2030.
During this build-up period, a substantial support from the partner nation will be required. The proposal for this period of performance will cover all activities in support of:
– Initial procurement and delivery of the weapon system and its related equipment;
– Weapon system management;
– Aircrew type conversion and continuation training;
– Conversion training of all other personnel (operational, technical, support);
– Operational and technical support;
– Operational and technical sustainment, including updates and upgrades on already delivered aircraft or support systems.http://www.vandeput.fgov.be/sites/default/files/articles/Request%20for%20Government%20Proposal_0.pdf
SpudmanWPYou seemed to miss the part where the FMS announcement includes support through 2030.
3.6 billion euros is for Procurement and the rest is for support through 2030.
. Capability Transition Period
The capability transition period is defined as the period starting at signature of the intergovernmental agreement (IGA) and ending with Full Operational Capability (FOC). For budgetary planning purposes, the FOC date is tentatively set for 31 December 2030.
During this build-up period, a substantial support from the partner nation will be required. The proposal for this period of performance will cover all activities in support of:
– Initial procurement and delivery of the weapon system and its related equipment;
– Weapon system management;
– Aircrew type conversion and continuation training;
– Conversion training of all other personnel (operational, technical, support);
– Operational and technical support;
– Operational and technical sustainment, including updates and upgrades on already delivered aircraft or support systems.http://www.vandeput.fgov.be/sites/default/files/articles/Request%20for%20Government%20Proposal_0.pdf
SpudmanWPYes, but the NEZ (No escape zone) shrinks depending on the speed and altitude of the incoming aircraft. Which was the point being made.
Your argument for a “cheaper” fighter is counter productive to your argument that it can fly higher & faster. Cheaper means it has to get closer for it’s sensors to work, which means that it has to get closer to the SAM to get the job done, which means that it has to put itself into situations that are more dangerous, which means a higher attrition rate.
The simple fact of the matter is that Sprey was wrong and the evidence is simple to prove, nobody did it. Not the US, any other NATO country, Chinese, USSR, or the Russians that followed.
SpudmanWPIf you are going to say that a single dumb bomb can hit a single target with any effectiveness (ie no need for PGMs), just post the CEPs.
JDAM kits add about $2k to the cost of the dumb bomb it’s attached to.
SpudmanWPGiven that their aiming devices give them now enough precision to engage a target with a single bomb instead of a whole rack
IMHO That is not the case, especially moving targets. By all means, show some documentation showing this system and its CEP.
Keep in mind that a PGM’s CEP is the same regardless of speed, release hight, weather, etc.
SpudmanWPLess collateral damage like in Raqqah City?
Have you seen the damage done by dumb bomb attacks? There are videos out there showing Russian/Syrian bombing runs where the bombs are dropping all over and only 1 (if they were lucky) even hit the intended target.
Yes, PGMs cause less collateral damage.
Can they be directed to the wrong target, sure. However, directing a dumb-bomb run on the same wrong target just means that multiple bombs will be dropped on and around the target guaranteeing even larger amounts of collateral damage than a single PGM would have caused.
Not only were smaller PGMs developed to allow for closer support (SDB), there is a specific version of it called Focused Lethality Munition (FLM) intended to reduce collateral damage even further.
Under a contract awarded in September 2006, Boeing developed a version of the SDB I which replaces the steel casing with a lightweight composite casing and the warhead with a focused-blast explosive such as Dense Inert Metal Explosive (DIME). This should further reduce collateral damage when using the weapon for pin-point strikes in urban areas.
There are even Concrete JDAMs/Paveways that where used in the ’90s to hit AAA/SAM units that the enemy put in urban areas where there were lots of civilians are present to deter air strikes (ie human shields). Those kinds of targets could not have been attacked with dumb-bombs without causing collateral damage.
Things like cluster bombing in urban areas is just begging for collateral damage.
SpudmanWPBelgium FMS Details released ($6.53 Billion for 34 jets)
http://www.dsca.mil/major-arms-sales/belgium-f-35-joint-strike-fighter-aircraft
Media/Public Contact:
[email]pm-cpa@state.gov[/email]
Transmittal No:
17-80
WASHINGTON, JAN. 18, 2018 – The State Department has made a determination approving a possible Foreign Military Sale to Belgium of thirty-four (34) F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Conventional Take Off and Landing aircraft for an estimated cost of $6.53 billion. The Defense Security Cooperation Agency delivered the required certification notifying Congress of this possible sale today.The Government of Belgium has requested to buy thirty-four (34) F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Conventional Take Off and Landing (CTOL) aircraft, and thirty-eight (38) Pratt & Whitney F-135 engines (34 installed, 4 spares). Also included are Electronic Warfare Systems; Command, Control, Communications, Computer and Intelligence/Communications, Navigational, and Identification (C4I/CNI); Autonomic Logistics Global Support System (ALGS); Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS); Full Mission Trainer; Weapons Employment Capability, and other Subsystems, Features, and Capabilities; F-35 unique infrared flares; Reprogramming center; F-35 Performance Based Logistics; software development/integration; aircraft ferry and tanker support; support equipment; tools and test equipment; communications equipment; spares and repair parts; personnel training and training equipment; publications and technical documents; U.S. Government and contractor engineering and logistics personnel services; and other related elements of logistics and program support. The estimated total case value is $6.53 billion.
This proposed sale will contribute to the foreign policy and national security of the United States by helping to improve the security of an ally and partner nation which has been, and continues to be, an important force for political and economic stability in Western Europe.
This proposed sale of F-35s will provide Belgium with a credible defense capability to deter aggression in the region and ensure interoperability with U.S. forces. The proposed sale will augment Belgium’s operational aircraft inventory and enhance its air-to-air and air-to-ground self-defense capability. Belgium will have no difficulty absorbing these aircraft into its armed forces.
The proposed sale of this equipment and support will not alter the basic military balance in the region.
The prime contractors will be Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company, Fort Worth, TX; and Pratt & Whitney Military Engines, East Hartford, CT. This proposal is being offered in the context of a competition. If the proposal is accepted, it is expected that offset agreements will be required. All offsets are defined in negotiations between the Purchaser and the contractor.
Implementation of this proposed sale will require multiple trips to Belgium involving U.S. Government and contractor representatives for technical reviews/support, program management, and training over the life of the program. U.S. contractor representatives will be required in Belgium to conduct Contractor Engineering Technical Services (CETS) and Autonomic Logistics and Global Support (ALGS) for after-aircraft delivery.
There will be no adverse impact on U.S. defense readiness as a result of this proposed sale.
This notice of a potential sale is required by law and does not mean the sale has been concluded.
All questions regarding this proposed Foreign Military Sale should be directed to the State Department’s Bureau of Political Military Affairs, Office of Congressional and Public Affairs, [email]pm-cpa@state.gov[/email].
SpudmanWPPrecision guided munitions will always be the preferred munition, as long as you can afford to use them.
Not only are they more accurate, but that accuracy allows for a smaller munition to be used, which in turn allows for it to be used closer to friendlies/civilians in order to keep collateral/blue-on-blue damage down.
SpudmanWPI’m looking forward to UAI in the F-35 so we don’t have to keep waiting for Blocks to get new weapons & functionality.
SpudmanWPIIRC it’s one of the Block 4.x weapons.
SpudmanWPSo let’s reverse the question: Would putting a laser up the fan of a F-35B made it a 6-gen plane?
I’d say “maybe” for the simple reason that it would have to be a “game changer” when it comes to how it affects the battle field overall. The word “generation” denotes a marked shift in capability.
As a SCOTUS judge one said of the threshold test of obscenity, “I’ll know it when I see it”. In other words, it will be an obvious jump in capability.
As far as the F-86D goes, hell no.
Sign In
