What Future for the JSF?

reply to post by answerman


More F-18E/F... hopefully we could get the F-22 though... at a reduced price of course.

Originally posted by Harlequin
as for cancelling - there have been programmes cancelled at more advance stages than this - crusader and comanche are 2 that come to mind.

But, both programs were much much smaller in comparison. And both had questionable utility in todays world. The Commanche with its mega computer and stealth could be taken out by a kid with an RPG and the Crusader (Which was an awesum platform I mean it could do its own TOT attack firing 6 shells in 1 minute ) really did not have a true mission that the Paladin coul dnot already handle IMHO.

Originally posted by answerman
If Obama cancels the JSF where would that leave Australia and what would we have to do to secure our airspace?

Boeing is being very agressive with the F-18E/F in terms of price and throw in AESA and its a pretty potent platform. You can also go with the F-15E with AESA which would help with some of the strike potential lost with the F-111's.

Eurofighter is a nother solid candidate if they do not get the JSF as well. Sure its not really a bomb truck but it is versitile and with AESA would make for an impressive Air Superiority for Aus.

Thanks FredT.

Apologies for the short post.

JSF would never be cancelled right now there is too much money tied up and many different companies are tied up in this project. If it did get cancelled it would be far greater than the tanker dispute that was going on. As for foreign sales, well that is what this program was created for. US allies wanted an improved aircraft and did not want to be left behind while our technology advanced past the F-22. This is simply a way for us to give them a scaled down F-22 and make all of our allies happy.

-Kdial1

Originally posted by C0bzz
Australia will never buy 250 fighters. That's baloney. Maybe if we doubled our defense budget... As for whether the JSF will be cancelled, I don't know; I just hope the right decision is made.

reply to post by weedwhacker

 

All partners involved have donated a few hundred million dollars, each. Each partner is involved in making parts of the JSF, only assembly is in Fort Worth. JSF is probably going to get a massive amount of foreign sales...

[edit on 20/1/2009 by C0bzz]

www.defense-aerospace.com...

The Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) — DOD's largest acquisition program procuring aircraft for the Air Force, Navy, Marines, and U.S. allies — also recently declared a Nunn-McCurdy unit cost breach. This program faces considerable risks stemming from its decision to reduce test assets and the flight-test program to pay for development and manufacturing cost increases.

So as of now , 3 years before IOC its a Nunn-McCurdy cost breach at abov 15% , but below the automatic cancellation figure of 25% - but how close to 25% is the real question


as of now lockheed cannot afford to ramp the cost up or they risk losing billions.

reply to post by Harlequin


I would bow out of this conversation, except to say....anytime we get the US DOD, and the other various military branches involved in the design of a new 'suppossed' JSF, we're approaching the concept of the 'Camel designed by Committee' problem....

Or, more simply....Too Many Cooks Spoil the Broth.

Two age-old adages that are still true, to this day. It's just sad that Politics and hackneyed machininations continue to spoil the stew.....

Originally posted by Harlequin
So as of now , 3 years before IOC its a Nunn-McCurdy cost breach at abov 15% , but below the automatic cancellation figure of 25% - but how close to 25% is the real question

That "law" holds no water and is usually wavered in cases involving national strategic assets. Support for the F-35 could not be stronger from the three branches involved. Not to mention all the top DOD civilians love it, albeit at the cost of the F-22. The F-35 isn't going anywhere, not this year or the next.

My prediction, JSF survives, F22 does not.
_________________________2nd________________________

reply to post by WestPoint23


actually the law is very relevant ,as it requires a mandatory federal review of the entire programme - and with many senior officers pushing for the `cost effective` alternative of more super hornets , which also has massive support in government , then this will mka e for interesting times - lockheed had better get its act together on costs.

and yes whilst i agree that in most cases the projects arn`t terminated , a very public , slap on the wrist , especially when the USA is close to bankruptcy , houses have a 90% repossesion rate and those who need help are told theres no governemtn money , then congressmen and senators will likely come under alot of pressue from the people who oput them there to find out why they are starving when a programme is billions over budget.

reply to post by Harlequin


Super Hornets? If so, may god help us all.

I want to see BOTH the JSF and F-22 come to fruition. That way, I'll be able to build scale models of them both.

Actually, it's probably moot now, anyway. The vast MIC is in charge, and the money will be frittered away, regardless.....

Originally posted by weedwhacker
I want to see BOTH the JSF and F-22 come to fruition. That way, I'll be able to build scale models of them both.

Actually, it's probably moot now, anyway. The vast MIC is in charge, and the money will be frittered away, regardless.....

The F-22 is in squadron service right now BTW

interesting the noises being made about buying more F-22`s - IF they can bomb it up resonably well (ala typhoon), then less F-35`s will be needed.

www.flightglobal.com...

reply to post by Harlequin


Well, I STILL want more models to be forthcoming, hopefull in both 1/48 and 1/32 scale.

One of my greatest triumphs was a 1/32 scale F-4, a Revell kit originally. The FAA man who gave me my Private, Commercial and Instrument checkride loved that airplane, so I built a model for him. (after my Commercial/Instrument checkride...)

That was a long time ago....I was barely 19....his name was Al Ruggeri.

(Hint....I'm 51 now....you can do the math....)

reply to post by weedwhacker


you don`t find many quality plastic kits nowdays , when i was younger i had a celing full of them , but now all kids want are playstation this or xbox that.

reply to post by Harlequin


Accurate Miniatures, for one. Check out some of the Japanese products as well, they're quite good.

Same holds true with model railroad miniatures....the Japanese blow the socks off everyone else, usually....

BUT...IF the F-35 has already been deployed, then what of the JSF?!?

reply to post by weedwhacker


F-22 not F-35 as F35 IS jsf

reply to post by Harlequin


Yup! Caught me!!!

The various 'F' designations are making my head spin!

I mean....it's hard enough to keep the F-18 versus F/A-18 variations aligned!

Good thing that commercial airplanes are easier to follow.....

OK Folks, let's get a few BASIC concepts in place and re-assess the question!

Firstly, the BASIC reason military forces renew and replace equipment falls into one of a very few situations (let's face it, the public, who pay for all this won't stand for spending money just for the sake of spending money - and rightly so) ........

1. The existing equipment is no longer technically capable of meeting existing or projected threats - this is very much a matter of perception concerning projected threats and all manufacturers (who must make a profit to exist) will ALWAYS tend to tell you that the potential treat is becoming more sophisticated or of larger proportions - whether in reality it is or isn't! History is strewn with arms races based on false perceptions and over estimations of what the other guy has, or indeed, what the other guy's real intentions are.

2. Existing equipment is running out of life and must either be rebuilt or replaced. This is the one that appears to be overlooked to a great extent on this kind of forum. Everything has a useful life, after which it breaks or is too expensive to maintain (ie:- it is cheaper to buy a newer product - with better capabilities for less that it would cost to maintain the existing stuff),

3. New (and I mean genuinely new) technology which alters the way in which conflicts are conducted and therefore new (and different) capabilities are required to defend one's self, or

4. It is economically or politically important to maintain the industry and/or its workforce, and therefore it is worth investing in new product just to keep those companies (and their design and construction skills) intact.

There are virtually NO OTHER VALID REASONS for purchasing any particular system or product (indeed this goes for just about any government expenditure, doesn't it).

Now, returning to the original question....... Where would Australia be if the JSF was to be canceled?


OK, there are two parts to the answer.....

1. JSF won't be canceled! Why, because the useful life of F-15, A-10 and F-16 are VERY quickly running out (Reason 3 above). (In USAF service the F-35 is designed and intended to replace the F-16, specifically). So, unless the perceived potential threat level is reduced (remember it is a perception only) something WITH THE CAPABILITY of F-35 must be produced - in the required numbers - in the appropriate time - to replace those airframes that are running out of life. Since there are no other airframes on the horizon that fit that solution then there's your answer - IT HAS TO HAPPEN.

The other reasons for purchase are also pretty compelling in this case - if JSF were to be canceled there would be loss of jobs (which equals loss of skills as these people go off and get other jobs) and possibly even the closure of large companies (loss of capability in a political sense).

Of course, if the POTENTIAL THREAT is down graded then perhaps JSF (in US service) might be able to be canceled and replaced with more F-22s, F-15s, F/A-18's etc.

BUT, down-grading a potential threat is a POLITICAL DECISION. Essentially assessing a potential threat is something done by think-tanks with the final decision and stance being determined by the political administration, so considering how volatile political decisions are, anything could really happen. America could well decide tomorrow that China, Iran and North Korea are your NBFs (New Best Friends) and who are any of the rest of us to say that it isn't so!!!!!! In some ways, even the public statement of such a thing can tend to make it so - just the same as publicly calling someone your enemy tends to make it so!!! (Does America buy arms to defend itself against the possibility of the UK attacking America - well no - the UK is a friend of America - consider if China, Iran and North Korea WERE friends of America - they have been in living memory! - the MIC would have to dream up another potential enemy, wouldn't they)

2. Where would cancellation leave Australia ? Answer - exactly where we are right now!

There MAY be a PERCEPTION that Australia NEEDS greater technology. You can probably debate that for the next 100 years, suffice to say that it is all based upon a PERCEPTION, OK.

Australia DOES need new aircraft because our existing ones are running out of life. So we DO HAVE TO PURCHASE.

Now here's your real answer to your question......

What Australia will buy what is available to us, that we can afford (hopefully) and that will do the job that we need done! If JSF is canceled, Australia will buy SOMETHING ELSE (because we have to) and that, like the US, could be F-15's, F-22's, etc, or unlike the US, could be Typhoon, Rafale or Gripen, etc. What that would be exactly depends on exactly what is on offer, how it fits the job needing to be done, and naturally, what sort of deal we can get on it!

Basically you do what you can with what is available to you - the rest is BS!

The Winged Wombat


[edit on 27/1/09 by The Winged Wombat]