Pentagon Grounds F-35 Fleet After Runway Fire

a reply to: ThePeaceMaker

Short of starting over from scratch, it couldn't be done.

Why aren't we throwing all our exotic technology into VTOL-based craft that can take off/land anywhere? I understand the F-35 can do that, but it's still using an air-breathing jet engine.........

a reply to: Zaphod58

What physical equipment are you referring to that is not avionics? The F22 has all the physical equipment it needs. Yes, converting carriers cost billions. UK will save in the long run by doing what needs to be done. UK should ask US to help pay for this, for not delivering on JSF.

a reply to: EternalSolace

That is what the US did when they developed the F14 from the F111. Give Northrup the contract and let them do it. You would still get them within 8 years if we started today. The US Navy needs a replacement for the F14 which had double the range, and larger payload, than JSF or F18.

a reply to: _Del_

You are starting with a proven fighter with the F-22. Yes it would take years to develop a derivative engine, but a new engine core would not have to be developed, which is the most expensive part of the engine. UK has leverage on this, but they have to ask.

a reply to: Zaphod58

The US needs another 500 F-22s when the JSF is halted.

originally posted by: boomer135

originally posted by: Matt1951
a reply to: Zaphod58

It would cost a lot less to restart production of the F-22, compared to just fixing the problems on the 100 or so mistake jet JSF we have already purchased.
JSF can really only be called a strike fighter when it is carrying external loads, and then it is not stealthy. Not that stealth will mean much now that there are ways to detect it.
The last F-22 were made in 2011, I doubt building new will double the price since 2011. Actually the F-22 cost less in the same year, than the LRIP JSF made in 2011. Or any JSF to date.

The last F-22 production cost was around $150 million US. You have to look, not very hard, to see the propaganda on cost of the JSF. You need to add in the cost of the engines and long lead items. I think, and you can easily verify with searches on line, cost of the JSF to date has been in the $200-300 million range, depending on which version.
The F-35A in 2012 broke under the 100 million mark per aircraft for the first time in the LRIP. That's not even close to the cost of a raptor. How can a twin engine, much larger, way more stealthier aircraft cost the same as a single engine, smaller less stealthy aircraft? Its projected that by 2019-2020 range, each JSF produced will be in the 75 million range. Your not going to build a raptor for that.

As for external loads, its no secret that companies are developing stealthy pylons including LM and Boeing to fit on aircraft like the JSF, Advanced Super Hornet, F-15SE, etc. Also, the JSF's purpose it not to fight an entire war completely maxed to the T with stealth. Once the initial bombings are over with and the enemies air defenses are neutralized, they will add the external weapons to the JSF.

originally posted by: JimTSpock
There are no real alternatives to the F-35, the F/A-18 Hornet is too old and virtually obsolete, Eurofighter Typhoon not stealthy, Saab Gripen not stealthy, Dassault Rafale not stealthy, F-22 Raptor US only too expensive not built anymore. If stealth was as dead as some say then why are Russia and China building stealth jets? If it was really dead there would be no point. Another point about the F-35 is that if it is really as bad as it's made out to be I imagine most countries would've dropped out by now.
The only alternative is to not buy the F-35 and keep existing jets flying longer and wait 10 or more years for something else to come along. Maybe a stealthy hypersonic UCAV, and as Zaphod has said there is the control lag issue. Fix that problem somehow and I think that is the future.

Yes there are alternatives to JSF. US already has radar deployed that can detect the Russian and Chinese stealth fighters. Stealth may be useful if a country wants to bomb Zimbabwe or Panama. Radar suppression is going to take precedence over stealth. According to Aviation Week, the latest Saab Gripen will use new infrared sensors, imported from Scotland, that would detect JSF.
As for the Typhoon, war games were conducted between the Luftwaffe and the US in Alaska, and the Typhoon did very well against the F-22.

a reply to: Matt1951

You think the only advantage the F-35 will be the vertical landing? It has sensors and equipment the F-22 can only dream about.

a reply to: Matt1951

Yeah, right. At the cost it would be to restart the line they won't get one. If they couldn't even get 300 at the original price, what makes you think they could get 500 at a much higher price.

a reply to: Matt1951

No US or allied aircraft in any wargame is using 100% of its capability. The F-22, and all stealth aircraft, including the F-35 can do things that are only used in actual combat.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Matt1951

You think the only advantage the F-35 will be the vertical landing? It has sensors and equipment the F-22 can only dream about.

Tell me what hardware or equipment the F-22 lacks. I am still waiting for an answer on that one. Is it classified? I can understand why you can't say if it is.
As for sensors all the F-22s are being upgraded.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Matt1951

No US or allied aircraft in any wargame is using 100% of its capability. The F-22, and all stealth aircraft, including the F-35 can do things that are only used in actual combat.

Very true, but the Typhoon is not the dog some people are making it out to be.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Matt1951

Yeah, right. At the cost it would be to restart the line they won't get one. If they couldn't even get 300 at the original price, what makes you think they could get 500 at a much higher price.

The cost to restart a line is not that large. Many military programs are purchased, then the line goes dead, then they are restarted. CH-53 Helicopter, perhaps the M1 tank.
The F-22 had severe cost overruns. Lockheed strikes again. But, it does look like, it costs no more or perhaps less, to produce an F-22 compared to a JSF.
The learning curve is past the F-22, but not the JSF. Concurrency failed.

a reply to: Matt1951

They are not getting EODAS, or the communications system the F-35 has, or the other classified systems.

originally posted by: Matt1951
But, it does look like, it costs no more or perhaps less, to produce an F-22 compared to a JSF.

Perhaps you should look again?

a reply to: Matt1951

The CH-53 line didn't end and restart, it's a totally new aircraft compared to previous CH-53s.

In 2011 it wouldn't have cost much (under $200M). The more time that passes the more those costs increase. Through FY17 you're looking at almost $20B just for recurring production costs for 75 aircraft.

What would be sweet is a neural interface for the pilot for faster reaction times. I've heard too that they're working on a HUD that lets the pilot even see "through" the floor of the aircraft. That would be impressive.

a reply to: Matt1951

Very few people have said it's a dog. It's not all it's supposed to be yet, but it's not a dog.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Matt1951

The CH-53 line didn't end and restart, it's a totally new aircraft compared to previous CH-53s.

In 2011 it wouldn't have cost much (under $200M). The more time that passes the more those costs increase. Through FY17 you're looking at almost $20B just for recurring production costs for 75 aircraft.

Hi, I was referring to legacy CH-53, not the new 53K, which is an all new helicopter. The A through E were in and out of production.