So, many holes in the article its not even funny………….;)

Yet you take LM’s cost and scheduling as gospel… astounding…:eek:

Are you for real or just trolling?:confused:

I suspect your trolling because your politics seem to be slightly to the right of Genghis Khan and that coupled with the geopolitical acumen of G.W. Bush brings to mind images of 12 fingered banjo playing redneck members of the NRA.

However if your not trolling then I salute you and crown you Generalissimo of the clueless..

Cheers

Also if you want to talk about taking blinders off how is the price of titanium shooting to the moon LM’s fault? 35% (or so) of the airframe is titanium and when the price of the material doubles or quadruples that’s going to have an effect. Anyone who thinks otherwise has their head in the clouds. And that’s just the Ti issue.

Hmmmmm.. that’s mighty expensive titanium at $46.6 billion dollars… you could raise the price of titanium to astronomical levels and still it would not be a good excuse for the budget blowout we have seen..

Its funny how its everyone else’s fault, but Never Ever LM’s.

In no particular order I have heard its:-

The price of titanium/Plastic/obsolete chips
The high Dollar
The Low Dollar
Airbus subsidies
The government cuts
The government wanting more testing.
The government wanting more capability.
The government wanting less cost.
Less C-17’s which shifts the hanger cost to the f-22 program
The French for.. well being French.
Osama Bin Laden for diverting attention away from sexy aircraft.
Chip manufacturers for closing down supply lines after only 15 years..
The Contractors for supplying non spec parts
The Press for reporting problems
The GAO, POGO, Air international for just reporting.
Non specific foreigners who are out to destroy the F-22.
Specific foreigners who are out to destroy the F-22 and then the world..
Solar flares
Plagues of locusts

The only silver lining that LM can see is Carlo Kopp is a huge fan..:diablo:

cheers

1991: 648 for $86.6 billion.
1993: 442 for $71.6 billion.

Eventually (~2001) production was capped at $37.6 billion ($69.7 billion total program).

Excellent work :-

So the original LM quote of a US$40 Billion program was ‘cut’ by adding another US$46.6 Billion dollars.. ROTFLMAO.

I love the way you started from the very highest program cost, and then claim a ‘cut’ – but I expected as much.

I think your getting confused with ‘total program costs’ and the ‘unit production cost’.:confused:

BTW re Why The Joint Estimating Team

Projections of higher production costs have been a source of concern for several years. In 1996, because of potential cost increases, the Air Force established a team–known as the Joint Estimating Team–to review the total estimated cost of the F-22 program.

The F-22 program was out of control financially, the result was reduction in numbers to reign in the blowout, whatever way you want to dress it up LM original quote was dreadfully low, a practice they have continued with the JSF.

This is what were arguing about, whats an LM estimate worth… the external factors contributing to the F-22 cost explosion are minor compared to LM’s low bidding at the program outset and its accounting during the EMD phase was equally dismal.

Now how much was the JSF again?

Cheers

Can’t you read?

due to the end of the cold war

LOL

OK 3 simple questions..

A. How much did LM originally say the program was to cost in $$$?

B. In terms of funding how much was cut from the above figure in $$$$?

C. whats A Minus B??? :diablo:

Cheers

So Airbus should be banned from the US tanker deal too then?

Err whats the purpose of the “Buy American” legislation 😉

Are you really THAT intellectually dishonset, or just plain ignorant?

The cuts from 750 to 648 to 442 were due to reduced force levels (due to the end of the cold war) NOT price.

ROTFLMAO….

And why did they reduce the numbers ????

QDR 1997 – We have decided to decrease total procurement of the F-22 from 438 to 339 aircraft, consistent with its much greater capability compared to the F-15, as well as our overall affordability concerns and force structure decisions.

In real life the F-22 gets more expensive, the Government then has to reduce the number of F-22’s it can afford. but you cry “its because they reduced the number being bought that caused costs to escalate!!!.”

What is the purpose of the Joint Estimating Team, why was it created..?

The “Dream” of 800 fighters initially promised for $40B and later for $70 Billion, fell to 648 F-22s for $64.2B after the 1992 SAR, to 442 for $64.2B after the BUR, and to 339 for $64.2B after a QDR.

Notice anything about the price???? and the numbers???

Cheers

Lockheed fails to produce JSF price tag
Published: Saturday 28 February 2009 10:38 UTC
Last updated: Saturday 28 February 2009 10:38 UTC

A group of MPs has visited the American aircraft maker Lockheed Martin in Texas to find out the real cost of the JSF fighter jet. The MPs say they have failed to obtain a clear answer. The same group earlier visited Saab in Sweden, which did provide a clear price tag for its fighter jet, the Gripen. Both models are being considered to replace the Dutch fleet of F16s. The cabinet says it intends to make a final choice next year.

Source http://www.radionetherlands.nl/news/zijlijn/6195864/Lockheed-fails-to-produce-JSF-price-tag

So it seems the prices quoted are just an LM guesstimates, and we know how reliable they are…:D

Again, cheap diversion. Because, regardless the way LM or EF calculate the costs, the more they built, the cheaper the unit price.

LOL

Planned procurement /Year
750 original
648 1990
442 1994
339 1997 still exceeded cap by $13B
277 2003
183 2006

I’ll give you a hint, these reductions were not because the price was falling…
Why did the program need a cost cap? because the alarms were sounding at the fantastic cost escalations!,

If LM had delivered the F-22 at the original price within the cost cap the USAF could have purchased 1500 x F-22’s…

So in the creditability stakes forgive me if I doubt LM costing predictions.

cheers