Le F-35

[SharkOwl]

Avec ses grandes ailes le F-35C a touché le sol à 135 Noeuds.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/06/08/342927/first-flight-for-f-35c-keeps-lockheed-on-track.html

Avec un vent debout et un porte avion poussé à 25 Noeuds pour les pontées ca devrait donner des appontages relativement faciles à accomplir.

Tout comme le Rafale Marine.

D'ailleurs revisionnez la video et vous constaterez que l'attitude et

la vitesse d'approche ressemble énormément à celle de Rafale Marine

à l'appontage.

:|

SharkOwl

[pascal]

avec des commandes de vol électriques et la pleine autorité sur la propulsion çà va tout de suite mieux...

en revanche sont prudents chez LM le train reste sorti

[SharkOwl]

Le marché canadien 2 :

Selon des documents obtenus par le Globe And Mail de Toronto le gouvernement conservateur minoritaire du Canada refuse de réouvrir l'entente fermée de "source unique" conclue avec Lockheed Martin pour l'acquisiton de 65 x F-35A :

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/harper-bending-to-us-on-sole-source-fighter-purchase-documents-reveal/article1600070/

Le contrat totalise 16 Milliards de dollars sur 20 ans incluant 6,5 Milliards de dollars pour les 65 x F-35A

à 100 Millions pièce et 9,5 Milliards sur 20 ans pour l'entretien de la flotte.

Le gouvernement canadien actuel a même reçu des assurances sur le plan légal qu'un contrat à

"source unique" de ce type ne pouvait pas être contesté par des équipementiers rivaux de LM. 

Selon le gouvernement canadien actuel, une réouverture de cette entente serait mauvais pour

l'image du Canada puisque l'implication sur ce projet à débuté dès 1997.

;)

SharkOwl

 

[zx]

Mr Secretary - Why Does the Pentagon Say the JSF is a 5th Generation Fighter . .  Really?

Air Power Australia - Australia's Independent Defence Think Tank

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-NOTAM-081109-1.html

[fool]

J'ai vraiment du mal avec le F-35 , je n'aime vraiment pas ce truc mais ce tableau et cet article  bien que drôles c'est du grand port'nawak  ......doit-être LM qui a fabriqué la boule de cristal a carlos kopp  :lol:

[alexandreVBCI]

The jet that's supposed to make up more than 90 percent of America's combat aviation fleet may have become a lot easier to shoot down.

Lockheed Martin, makers of the Joint Strike Fighter, has been under huge pressure to stabilize the jet's skyrocketing costs. Production prices have nearly doubled on what was supposed to be an "affordable" fighter. R&D money is up another 40 percent. Some analysts predict the program could run as much as $388 billion for 2,400 jets.

So Lockheed decided "to trim 11 pounds and $1.4 million from each aircraft by removing shutoff valves for engine coolant and hydraulic lines and five of six dry bay fire-suppression systems," according to InsideDefense.com.

But those cuts made it much harder for the Joint Strike Fighter to withstand a hit from an anti-aircraft weapon. "When you have something full of fuel under high pressure, some of it very hot, flowing close to hot metal parts and 270 VDC electrical components, your shutoff and check valves and fire suppression in the dry bays (places fuel will spray into) are your only defense," a knowledgeable observer notes.

Michael Gilmore, the Defense Department's chief weapons tester, recommended in a letter to Congress last month "that these features be reinstated." The amount saved by trimming these components, he noted, would be more than made up, if just two aircraft were lost.

"Live-fire ballistic testing has demonstrated that the JSF is vulnerable," added Lt. Gen. George Trautman, the Marines' deputy commandant for aviation.

Now, one of the JSF's now selling points was that it wouldn't have to worry to much about taking on anti-aircraft fire; the jet would be so stealthy that the ground-to-air guns would never find it. But according to a report published by Air Power Australia, the plane is easier to spot than originally advertised. In fact, it is "demonstrably not a true stealth aircraft."

Locheed says a recent "technological breakthrough" has fixed all that: a fiber mat that can blend stealthy qualities right into the composite skin of the aircraft.

And in an e-mail to Danger Room, Lockheed spokesman John Kent basically said the Pentagon tester was all wrong about the plane's vulnerability.

"Rigorous combat analysis revealed that the survivability improvements afforded by the engine fuses and fire extinguishing features were very small," Kent wrote. "These changes were thoroughly reviewed by the F-35 Operational Advisory Group and approved through the joint JSF Executive Steering Board, which includes membership from all nine JSF partner counties. All agreed that the weight saved by the elimination of these components would be better utilized in maintaining the performance capabilities of the aircraft. The present design meets the JSFPO's expectations for vulnerability."

Well, yeah. That's true. "With the exception of a 30mm high-explosive incendiary round typically associated with light anti-aircraft artillery," Trautman wrote. Like the kind Russia has, and sells all around the world.

http://gizmodo.com/5561408/gajillion+dollar-stealth-fighter-now-easier-to-shoot-down

[zx]

Il est effectivement bizarre ce tableau, mais il cite aussi le T50 et le JXX,  :|

[artyparis]

Pour la faire courte, tous les pays partenaires du projet F35 se retrouvent pieds et poings liés par LM?

Pas d'avion de rechange pour sortir du projet (qui doit etre verrouillé par des tas d'indemnités^^), maitrise techno américaine: bref, c'est un peu "tais toi, et paye."

Ca ressemble à ça?

Est ce vraiment une catastrophe pour l'aeronautiques européenne?

[BPCs]

"Navy: Price Tag To Alter Ships For JSF At Least $70 Million

DefenseAlert, June 11, 2010 -- The Navy estimates it will cost at least $70 million to modify each large-deck amphibious ship to accommodate the Marine Corps' F-35B variant of the Joint Strike Fighter, including infrastructure modifications and efforts to mitigate engine heat from the short-take-off, vertical-landing JSF variant, according to a senior Marine."

http://www.insidedefense.com/secure/defense_docnum.asp?f=defense_2002.ask&docnum=6112010_june11a

[Asgard]

Bah il y a toujours le rafale M, t'imagines la honte?

Dsl Arka, j'écrivais de mon portable à ce moment et pas trop eu le temps de m'appliquer (tactile de merde >.<) xD

[Arka_Voltchek]

Bah il y a toujours le  rafale M mais tu imagines la honte?

fixed.

@+, Arka

[Chaps]

Si je suis bien le tableau, le Rafale serait à -5 ou -6 selon ce qu'on entend par Large Thrust to Weight

Multi Engine Thrust Growth...  Pour ce que cela vaut évidemment.

[alexandreVBCI]

The Obama administration may have to rethink whether the U.S. military will need 2,500 F-35 fighter jets, and needs to craft a clear, prioritized national security strategy, a top Pentagon adviser told reporters June 29.

The world has changed tremendously since when the F-35 fighter was designed, and potential American foes have acquired systems that could render other kinds of U.S. aircraft, missile systems and other platforms more useful in certain situations than the multibillion-dollar F-35, said Andrew Krepinevich, president of the Washington-based Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.

With possible American enemies, like China, developing and fielding ever-more advanced systems - such as sophisticated radar suites and surface-to-air missiles - Pentagon and administration officials must examine if the Lockheed Martin-made Lightning II will bring as much "value" to combat by the time it comes online next decade as thought decades previous when it was designed, he said.

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4691586&c=AME&s=TOP

2500 F-35 achetés à prix d'or ne serait donc pas la meilleure solution ?  :lol:

[xav]

Dutch May Pull Out Of Next F-35 Phase

LONDON The U.S. Joint Strike Fighter program office is developing options to allow the Netherlands to withdraw from the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter initial operational test and evaluation phase.

http://www.network54.com/Forum/211833/thread/1277999935/last-1278010077/Dutch+May+Pull+Out+Of+Next+F-35+Phase

[zx]

Le retour de bill,

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2010/07/bill-sweetman-vs-f-35-round-2.html

Sweetman, an outspoken critic of the F-35's cost, performance and basic need, suffers from no such hesitation. He doesn't accuse Lockheed of lying, but of merely talking around the cost debate by discussing price, which is not the same thing.

"One thing we know for sure is that Lockheed Martin and the team have not significantly changed the cost of the aircraft over the time span of the LRIP-4 negotiations," Sweetman writes.

Sweetman argues that Lockheed is keeping price down by pressuring suppliers to accept losses today in order to recoup margins at a later time. The logic of the argument is difficult to question, but it could be made stronger by presenting evidence of such a ploy.

There's another statement in Sweetman's entry I want to discuss. It's this: "Keep in mind that Lockheed Martin has been talking only about the F-35A price and that only 23 of the 43 aircraft in LRIP-4 are A-models."

It's my understanding that's no longer true. As of late April and early May, it was accurate to say that Lockheed intended to negotiate a fixed-price contract for only the F-35A model. That strategy appears to have changed since then under pressure from Gates. On two occasions since early May I have been told by Steve O'Bryan, Lockheed's F-35 vice president of business development, that the fixed-price deal for LRIP-4 will include all three variants, including the carrier variant which only flew for the first time less than a month ago.

[jérôme]

le gouvernement hollandais a demandé à Lockheed Martin (LM) d’étudier le moyen d’annuler la commande par la Hollande de l’exemplaire (très cher : autour de $140 millions) du JSF

http://www.dedefensa.org/article-le_jsf_et_les_tulipes_de_l_incertitude_05_07_2010.html

[cvs]

Alors ça vient ce F-35 ? combien de fois vais-je devoir le répéter ? >:(

[collectionneur]

F-15SE à 100 millions de $ ?  :oops:

[jérôme]

F-15SE à 100 millions de $ ?  :oops:

vive le f15 se  :oops: a mort le jsf  :oops:

[Rob1]

+10000000

[Berkut]

En même temps ça veut dire réouvrir une chaîne d'assemblage pour F15 parce que je vous rappelle que papy est plus tout jeune et nous a fait quelques crises d'ostéoporose au niveau des longerons.

Bon, vu le coût du programme JSF, c'est à se demander si des retrofit basés sur sa technologie pour les F15//F16/F18 ne seraient finalement moins coûteux.

[BPCs]

F-15SE à 100 millions de $ ?  :oops:

Ce qui était marrant sur la proposition de Boeing c'est qu' ils affirmaient que la SER serait au niveau de celle d' un Jsf export ce qui bien sur a fait bondir LM.  ...

[chimère]

Ne me dites pas que se F-15 (tout Silent Eagle soit il) aura une SER inférieur à un Rafale?!

[Berkut]

Mais bien entendu! le F15 SE il a une SER à rien :lol:

[BPCs]

Mais bien entendu! le F15 SE il a une SER à rien :lol:

[move]on en a topolisé pour moins que ça[/move]