What would be the shortest development cycle for a naval Typhoon compared to work still to be done with the F-35? Will there be a cost saving or at least more money kept in the producing countries (Europe?)

Is it now the considered opinion that F-35 at this stage is dead insofar as UK is concerned?

Will Super Hornet then just be a stop gap product? but that would carry a costs as well?

Enligthen me a bit, all experts

If the UK shold dump the F-35 (which seems to be the consensus here now), what will it do to the entire F-35 project?

The Super Hornet has always seemed to be a more “finished” product to me.

Maybe it is “only” 4.5 instead of a 5th gen, but if it can still do the trick for another 10-15-20 years, a t a lower price, then it ought to be seriously consideret 9together with the rafale.

If the SH is 80-85% (say) of the F-35 functionality, but available NOW, then will the other 15-20% even matter, spececially if it is just “engineering dreams” and not based in required capabilities?

I have also read about the fact that the carriers are only ready when the F-35 is ready. However, those plans seem a bit thin on the ground as i cannot see contingencies in any of it, but only “hope for the best”.

I could be horrible wrong, in which case I humbly will slit my wrists.

maybe we should go here instead:

maybe it is time to look at this again?

or

Just a giggle!

is the sentiment that the UK has painted itself into a corner with betting on the F-35 now?

If further delays are encountered on the F-35, what is the alternative in a short term: SH? Rafale? And if chosen, will they stay as the solution ‘by default’?

Is the SH even a short time option or is it the solution in itself?

Ivan

Bring-it-on:

Sorry, I don’t follow your reasoning.

Are yu saying that only when the project is (in essence) finished can we determine if it met the cost schedules?

Surely we should have cost projections by now, as production is not a new art, even of hi-tech complex entities?

I am not a fan of the F-35 as (from a layman’s perspective) it is too complex, the specs trying to “be all things to all men” and weak project management. Combined with now dwindling numbers ordered, I am not sure this is a good idea at all.

The argument that we haven’t got anything else and therefore need to go ahead, is no good at all.

Should we chuck the B version?
Hope for the best?
Pour more money into it?

Maybe there is no alternative, but that would mean we have painted ourselves into a corner.

It is good to see that it is starting to come off the ground (x’cuse the pun), but that does not salvage the project if fundamental technological or economical flaws are surfacing.

Comments?

I know I am biased towards the Super Hornet, but even so.

It sounds like and idea to try to get it back on track by having a more phased approach to the sw development. Get something going, break a few records, etc. Impress the world.

Can the B version be salvaged? It is starting to make inroads now, but has it been compromised? costs? functionality? Overseas confidence in the project?

Just a pity the F-35 is so “ugly”. Nearly as ugly as the X-32 (and that one is a joke in design).

Ivan