On F-35 cost overruns
Another blog post by -that’s right- Bill Sweetman. H/T ARES
“The 2008 GAO report was not the first red flag, nor the last. It is part of a seven-year history in which there have been two completely different narratives in the JSF program, with the JPO, its contractors and its paid and unpaid supporters arguing that the program is sound and that setbacks are normal and temporary, and every independent agency saying something else.”
Kill the messenger?
As for ECM, as with the targeting systems most of what you’d see on a 4th generation aircraft is internal. It uses a both the AESA radar and the ASQ-239 for ECM. No pod required. For external missions, the Navy is developing a new jamming pod to replace the old ALQ-99s.
The NGJ pod is being developed for the Super Hornet, and later to be integrated on the F-35. The current plan for the NGJ does not require it to be LO, so if the F-35 carries it, it’s RCS would be affected. ECM is more for self-protection, and podded solutions like the ALQ-99 and the NGJ are for EA (electronic attack.) But borders do blur.
@Spudman
I think it would be helpful for the discussion that whenever you post a slide, clearly indicate (if possible) when the presentation/graphic was created and for what audience – when you originally post it. That would help eliminate some of the back and forth banter that really don’t add to the thread.
Thanks.
I’m not talking about C model, I’m talking about the B model using the C model’s wing.
From press reports / analyses, the -B cannot really afford to gain anymore weight. With the -C’s larger wing, the weight issue becomes even more critical.
I have for decades and know it well……….
VR, don’t understand it.
F-35 Analysts: recipe for trouble
http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/01/29/2806149/f-35-started-with-recipe-for-trouble.html
This came from a Fort Worth paper no less….
Last time I checked Iran was a US ally before the Islamic revolution……. the US is in big trouble if repeated in Egypt
Hugely different situation. The ties between the Egyptian military and the US military are perhaps stronger than any other US ally in the Mideast and elsewhere besides Israel.
You can believe what you want. Yet, the USN doesn’t agree with your accessment. Nor, does any other Naval Service that operates Aircraft Carriers.
As a matter of fact even back in WWII when most threats came from close range. Carriers did not operate close to shore. You don’t see pictures of Carrier operate anywhere near the Amphibious Forces. As they were far off……..
Sorry, people it’s been that way since the advent of Aircraft Carriers. (and for good reason)
You would do well for yourself if you reviewed the history of US carrier operations.
Here’s a fact for you:
“Before dawn on 19 March 1945 Franklin who had maneuvered closer to the Japanese mainland than had any other U.S. carrier during the war, launched a fighter sweep against Honshu and later a strike against shipping in Kobe Harbor. Suddenly, a single enemy plane pierced the cloud cover and made a low level run on the gallant ship to drop two semiarmor piercing bombs. One struck the flight deck centerline, penetrating to the hanger deck, effecting destruction and igniting fires throughout the second and third decks, and knocking out the combat information center and airplot. The second hit aft, tearing through two decks and fanning fires which triggered ammunition, bombs, and rockets. Franklin, within 50 miles of the Japanese mainland, lay dead in the water, took a 13 degree starboard list, lost all radio communications, and broiled under the heat form enveloping fires. “
So you are suggesting that they rely for air cover on rotary assets?. How much evidence do you need that putting attack choppers over built up hostile areas is a REALLY bad idea?
Wasn’t it the claim that the F35B was too costly and not affordable in these budget sensitive times?. You are proposing retasking a whole carrier strike group to cover the job a modest embarked STOVL jet capability could handle easily though?. You dont see the contradiction there?.
Last time I checked, Egypt was an ally – Tacair won’t be needed in this situation, but could be easily provided.
For those who chirp about CSG’s being tied up elsewhere, during Desert Storm the Lincoln diverted and joined the Midway and a Marine group to assist in the Philippines after a volcanic eruption – then continued to the Gulf region. The Lincoln also supported the Marines and various army units over Mogadishu in Operation Restore Hope. So, yea, CSG are retasked all the time, supporting Marine units who incidentally have embarked STVOL aircraft. No contradiction at all.
The F-35B is very expensive for the limited situations that its unique capabilities actually make a difference. It is in the category of “nice to have,” and is not essential to overall military force structure.
The supposition that a gator would operate in waters denied to a CVN does not make sense. Gators are just as vulnerable as a CVN, and considering the embarked Marines and equipment, they are high value targets whose loss would be catastrophic. No ship is going to venture close to shore until ASuW threats are sufficiently attrited and air supremacy is achieved.
For an Egyptian evacuation mission, do you need AV-8B’s? (The article suggests the AV-8B’s may not be aboard anyway.) If you needed tacair, you could bring up the CVN probably operating in or in transit to the Arabian Sea.
There are and have been delays in developing and testing software, reported by JET II and then reiterated in the recent OT&E report. Airframe availability issues have been exacerbating the problem, but software development is behind schedule and underperforming nonetheless.
F-35 software delays
“Software development problems lie at the root of a recently announced 13-month delay in the F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) programme, according to prime contractor Lockheed Martin. “
“The U.S. Air Force’s top general said on Tuesday he was concerned software development and production issues could delay the service’s plan to start using new F-35 fighter jets in April 2016.”
http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/11/23/lockheed-fighter-idUSN2318169620101123
“Lockheed Martin has flown an F-35 flight test aircraft with the third of five major blocks of software for the first time. The advance represents a key step, as the programme has struggled to deliver an estimated 11.6 million lines of code demanded by fusing the aircraft’s advanced sensors and avionics.”
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/11/15/349732/f-35b-flies-with-block-1.0-software.html