Marine Aviation has no Other Option but Wait for JSF

Marines do not seem to be the kind of people who easily accept things like “not having an option”. :diablo:

I rather think that statements like this work as a red carpet to a bull and they will just have to prove otherwise :):)

It is indeed a surprise to hear that F-35’s will be supplied without a 50% price rise. Wouldn’t that be below production cost? Even if LM sells them to US govt, US govt sells them to Denmark etc at a loss, it doesn’t sound legal to me under WTO rules. Called dumping, isn’t it?

they are just announcing any type of misleading … :rolleyes:

and behind the curtain they are negotiating like hell :diablo:

Why would the production cost of the F-35 have to jump up if 50 less airframes (Denmark) or 150 less (Denmark+Australia) were ordered? The increase in manufactured unit cost for 150 less F-135A would be tiny. It’s the 60%-90% real increase in program cost which is the problem.

I think that you should not only look at an increased production cost (indeed, 150 more or less may not mean that much on a total of 2400 planes) .

But countries do not only pay for the production cost of the planes, they take also a share in the development costs and there is a complex system of economical compensations in place (for denmark 20 billion kroner?).

Denmark and Austrailia leaving probably means that all this has to be renegotiated with all countries involved. Less planes to build overall gives less work for the local industry so the plane becomes even more uninteresting.

but you are right, it is the failure of the program which is the real cause of all the troubles but then, the last thing to do when trying to build a cheaper plane than the best thing you are able to make (the f-22) is raising the bar way above the already very high standards set for the F-22.

Probably, the technicians involved in this mission impossible will get the blame and the punishments for wacko decisions made elsewhere

the F-35 is supposed to be a specialist in everything, that is a contradiction in terms

on top of that it is supposed to be cheaper than the F-22 which is specialised in air superiority alone

and now it starts showing badly that the above is just wishfull thinking

if Denmark bails out, and Australia does the same, then the unit price for the remaining countries will jump up and more countries will decline.

Will aircraft like Typhoon Tranche 3 be able to cut it, or is it time for another 20 year development saga i wonder?

What seems to be forgotten in these discussions is that we are in the net-centric age. This means that any information gathered from ground stations, ships, airplanes … whatever … are immediately available … everywhere.

PAK-FA, F-35, F-22, Typhoon, Rafale should NOT be considered on their own merits but on their role within that complete package.

As an example: suppose that a country develops an alternative waterproof “stealthradar” (in absence of a better name). Even when such thing would be the size of a footbalfield it could be linked to all airplanes, boats, artillery, SAM… and would strongly reduce the value of stealth.

In this respect i think that the Boeing (?) tests with experimental mach 6 missiles (Mach 6 cruise missiles, imagine) and the development of laser beam technology are far more significant than yet another 5th gen. fighter.

Stealth needed for first day of the war operations in 2020? forget it!