Le F-35

[BPCs]

Un article sur le F35:

http://www.economist.com/node/18958487

LEON PANETTA is under no illusions about what Barack Obama moved him from the CIA to the Pentagon to do. The wily Mr Panetta, who took over from Robert Gates as defence secretary at the beginning of the month, is everyone’s idea of a safe pair of hands. But his greatest claim to fame (other than presiding over the plan to kill Osama bin Laden) is as the director of the Office of Management and Budget who paved the way to the balanced budget of 1998. Mr Panetta has inherited from his predecessor the outlines of a plan to reduce military spending by $400 billion by 2023. But America’s fiscal crisis (and the lack of any political consensus about how tackle it) makes it almost certain that Mr Panetta will have to cut further and faster than Mr Gates would have wished.

That could be bad news for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the most expensive military-industrial programme in history, and its lead contractor, Lockheed Martin. The plane is expected to come into service six years late (in 2016) and wildly over-budget. The Pentagon still plans to buy 2,443 F-35s over the next 25 years, at a cost of $382 billion. But in a parting shot, Mr Gates gave warning that although he did not think the F-35 faced cancellation, “the size of the buy” might have to be cut.

[Philippe Top-Force]

Le programme F35 Lightning II est au stade du point de non retour.C'est l'avion qui écrase les autres industriels de l'aéronautique sur les années 2017-2050.

C'est un programme sacralisé et intouchable malgré les 14.500 milliards de dettes publiques US.Déficits abyssaux !

[Klem]

Comme disait Frédéric Dard, il faut savoir se retirer

Vrai Klem, mais ABB disait aussi dans un Sana : "En matière de politique extérieure, la France est toujours comm cul et chemise avec les autres pays. Dommage qu'elle joue plus souvent le premier role que le second... =D

+1  ;)

[xav]

A Billion Here, A Billion There

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a6119fd6a-d07a-4b56-85a9-acb6c841bc36&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest

Plus

http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/af168/Horde01/JSF%20Schedule%20and%20Production/SASCLettertoDEFSECOnJSFcancel_14Jul11_C.jpg

[prof.566]

Ben dis donc, y'a un prématuré dans le lot. Allez hop ! Retour à la couveuse !

Un prématuré ou un mort né?

[artyparis]

J ai tjrs un plaisir sadique a venir lire ce fil.

C est le prochain avion de nos allies, mais ils se font tellement rouler ds la farine que c en est tordant.

[alexandreVBCI]

Le premier F-35A de production a été livré à la base USAF d'Eglin.

A terme la base d'Eglin comptera 59 F-35A.

http://defensetech.org/2011/07/15/first-f-35a-jsf-arrives-at-eglin-afb/

[jérôme]

vivement que l'on voie se qui la dans le ventre 

[Chevalier Gilles]

vivement que l'on voie se qui la dans le ventre   

heu a part du métal, je ne vois rien d'intéressant au niveau perf

[BPCs]

F-35 LRIP overrun value raised to $1.15b

By Stephen Trimble

The F-35 programme office has confirmed the estimated cost overrun for the first 28 production jets is roughly $1.15 billion, and not $771 million as previously reported. The higher figure includes the roughly one-third share of the overrun absorbed by Lockheed Martin and Pratt & Whitney.

The US government has to pay the remaining $771 million in extra costs under the terms of the first three lots of low-rate initial production (LRIP).

Sen John McCain first revealed the $771 million figure in a tweet on 12 July, calling the cost overrun "disgraceful".

On 13 July, Lockheed Martin tweeted that the F-35 is showing "significant progress", which drew a quick response from McCain via the same online medium.

"To most observers, a $771M cost overrun for 28 F-35s doesn't qualify as 'significant improvement.' Taxpayers deserve better," he wrote.

The dispute could set up a clash in final negotiations over the fiscal year 2012 budget. The Department of Defense has asked for another $264 million to pay the initial overage costs. If McCain succeeds in blocking the additional payment, the money would have to be found somewhere else or F-35 orders could be reduced.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2011/07/15/359508/f-35-lrip-overrun-value-raised-to-1.15b.html

LM s'était fait sucrer 700 m$ de bonus sur le F-35 l'année derniere : ils rerentrent par la fenêtre !

[Joab]

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=7128837&c=AIR&s=TOP

The United Kingdom has proposed trading F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) aircraft with the United States, according to a Pentagon letter to the U.S. Congress.

Under the proposal, the United States would give the United Kingdom one of its carrier variants (F-35C) of the F-35 in exchange for a short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL) version, called the F-35B.

he trade, which the Pentagon describes as "mutually beneficial" and "cost neutral," requires a legislative amendment to the 2012 defense authorization bill.

The Pentagon requested the amendment in a June 14 letter from Elizabeth King, assistant secretary of defense for legislative affairs, to Vice President Biden, in his role as president of the U.S. Senate.

The United Kingdom decided last year, as part of its Strategic Defense and Security Review, to stop buying the F-35B. Instead, the Royal Navy will only buy the F-35C, which is being designed for conventional takeoffs and landings on aircraft carriers.

The cost-savings measure resulted in the U.K. having an extra F-35B on its hands.

The United States, which is buying the F-35B for the U.S. Marine Corps and the F-35C for the U.S. Navy, was not scheduled to receive its F-35Bs until later. A third variant, the F-35A, is being developed for the U.S. Air Force.

Under the exchange, the United Kingdom would have to cover any costs required to upgrade its F-35B aircraft so that it would be identical to the version the U.S. had planned to buy, according to the letter.

The United Kingdom would also be responsible for any unique requirements it has for the F-35C.

Under the plan, United States would get an F-35B two years earlier. This means $10 million in additional operations and maintenance costs for the Marine Corps in 2013 and 2014. This would be due to increased flight hours, fuel, training costs, etc.

In January, former Defense Secretary Robert Gates put the F-35B portion of the JSF program on probation for two years, saying he had serious concerns about the aircraft's performance in tests.

"If we cannot fix this variant during this time frame and get it back on track in terms of performance, cost and schedule, then I believe it should be canceled," Gates said.

The cost for developing and procuring the F-35 is usually cited to be about $382 billion, according to U.S. budget documents.

Of that amount, $72 billion has been spent.

[jérôme]

le jsf avec tous se qui se prend dans la poire il y a un pseudo qui lui irai a merveille calimero !

c'est pas juste

 

[zx]

Tiens je l'avais raté celui la

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2011/07/somebody-in-canada-missed-the.html

Canadian journalist David Pugliese's ever-vigilant Defence Watch blog for the Ottawa Citizen informs us today that Canadian deputy minister of national defence (DND) for materiel Dan Ross appears to be grossly misinformed about his ministry's biggest acquisition programme.

As Pugliese notes that the DND's highest cost estimate for the F-35 has now risen to CAD$80 million per aircraft, he also quotes Ross' testimony last month to Parliament's Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates. Here's Ross, according to Defence Watch:

"Right now that estimate is 75 to 80 million for the conventional takeoff variant, not for the other two which are more expensive and have more developmental risk. That variant, our variant has finished its development.  It is in production and the United States Air Force has taken its first production aircraft and will stand up its first squadron this year." [Emphasis added]

Claiming the F-35A "has finished development" is simply untrue. This is different than normal PR spin, which upon scrutiny often proves generally true yet misleading at the same time. No, this statement is factually incorrect, and Ross is just plain wrong. 

Development testing for the F-35A is currently scheduled through 2016. Don't believe me. Just do a quick Google search. Believe this press release from the US Air Force, or this press release by the Department of Defense, or this report from the director of Office of Test and Evaluation. This is not a secret and the US government has made no attempt to conceal or obscure the F-35 programme's development schedule. This is true even though production aircraft are being delivered to Eglin AFB. These aircraft must be modified to the operational configuration after development is complete.

Telling a Parliamentary panel otherwise is simply wrong.   

[debonneguerre]

"Claiming the F-35A "has finished development" is simply untrue."

héhé =)

"Development testing for the F-35A is currently scheduled through 2016."

haha =D, dans 5 ans..

[zx]

il est loin d'être fini, pourtant le F35A est le plus abouti des 3 versions, pas avant 2016.

C'est sympa ! Mc Cain donne le surnom du projet JSF 'a train wreck'

http://www.economist.com/node/18958367?story_id=18958367

Things look less rosy a decade on. The F-35 is now unlikely to enter service before 2016; programme costs have risen to more than $380 billion; the average price of each plane has nearly doubled; and the Pentagon now thinks the F-35 will be a third more expensive to run than “legacy” aircraft, with lifetime costs of $1 trillion. Senator John McCain calls the project “a train wreck”. Even supporters, such as Robert Gates, the former defence secretary who was forced to restructure the programme last year, reckon numbers may have to be cut.

The F-35’s range of around 600 miles (1,000km) is another problem. The potential adversary that will dominate American military planning in the decades ahead is China. Even now, China is acquiring weapons, such as accurate anti-ship ballistic missiles, that will push American carriers out into the western Pacific, well beyond the range of seaborne F-35s. For all its sophistication, against a “near peer” opponent the F-35 may not be able to do the job for which it has been intended nearly as well as the next generation of pilotless armed drones and hypersonic cruise missiles. Indeed, it could be obsolescent only a few years after it enters service. At a time of shrinking defence budgets, the F-35’s huge cost and the affection of service chiefs for fast jets flown by brave chaps should not be allowed to crowd out the development of more capable weapon systems. Cut back the F-35s and spend the money there.

[Perry]

Les Brits équipent leurs deux Porte-Avions classe Queen Elisabeth de catapultes ! Bye-Bye F-35B. Il semble toutefois que les US Marines gardent leur intérêt pour l'appareil mais s'ils sont tout seuls, cela va être des vrais goûts de luxe !

[Berezech]

D'après wikipédia la décision de prendre des F-35C à la base des F-35B a été prise en octobre, mais ce n'est pas sourcé ...

[Chevalier Gilles]

D'après wikipédia la décision de prendre des F-35C à la base des F-35B a été prise en octobre, mais ce n'est pas sourcé ...

ca n'a pas besoin d'être sourcé, c'est écrit noir sur blanc (plutôt blanc sur vert :lol:) dans le document officiel du gouvernement sur la sdsr et ceux qui l'ont lut (dont moi) pourront te dire que ce sera bien des versions c,... cvf tous les deux catobar,...

pour ce qui est du développement, dans le dernier (ou celui d'avant) afm, ils précisaient que les avions qui seront livré seront la version final, il y a juste le software qui n'est pas terminé, les F-35a auront le soft block 1 qui est juste le soft de l'entrainement, pour ce qui est du soft de combat, normalement, il suffira juste de mettre a jour le soft, il n'y aura pas besoin de faire des changements a proprement parler

pour préciser, le ministre canadien n'a fait que jouer sur les mots car:

oui le développement du F-35A est terminé, cdve, enveloppe, avionique, ...

c'est juste un eu comme le rafale ou on ajoute encore actuellement des modes au radar et de nouvelles armes, t c'est ce développement la qu'il reste a faire car on peut très bien dire aussi que le rafale est toujours en développement puisqu'il y a toujours des tests pour le radar, nouvelles armes

car n'oublier pas que les us veulent certifier tout le panel de leurs armes sur F-35 et faites le compte, il y en a beaucoup

[Joab]

. Il semble toutefois que les US Marines gardent leur intérêt pour l'appareil mais s'ils sont tout seuls, cela va être des vrais goûts de luxe !

Et les espagnols et les italiens, ils feraient quoi de leur Porte Aeronefs?

[debonneguerre]

Et les espagnols et les italiens, ils feraient quoi de leur Porte Aeronefs?

On manque de feedback là-dessus, un rapide tour sur la toile ne m'a pas plus éclairé, tout semble extrêmement ancien :

http://defensetech.org/2010/12/08/italy-considers-cutting-its-f-35b-purchase/

Mais bon, ces deux là ne comptant pas parmi les économies les plus fraîches de la zone euro, il y a fort à parier que l'arbitrage ira vers la solution la moins onéreuse!

Porte aéronefs => porte voilure tournante! pas cher missieur!

[Klem]

Il vont pouvoir en mettre des hélicos sur les beaux portes aéronefs tout neufs .... Enfin si ils ont les sous pour ....

Je pense que les italiens devraient revendre le Cavour pour rembourser leur dette.

De toute façon, vu leur courage politique en matière militaire, il devrait pas servir à grand chose, même avec des F-35 dessus O0

[alexandreVBCI]

A mon avis les américains vont produire les 3 versions du F-35 quel que soit le coût, ils ont investis trop d'argent pour faire machine arrière et aucun gouvernement n'assumera politiquement l'échec d'une partie du programme.

Annuler le F-35 et repartir de zéro est inenvisageable, ça serait perdre à la fois les milliards déjà investis et attendre 15 ans de plus pour un futur appareil qui a aucune chance d'être moins cher....

Ils se contenteront d'acheter un nombre réduits d'appareils (et compenseront la différence par des drones ou des F-18) comme ils avaient réduit la commande de F-22. Il ont d'ailleurs déjà réduit considérablement la commande. Les Marines n'ont pas d'autre choix que le F-35B.

Pour les italiens, espagnols et australiens, ils n'ont pas le choix et prendront le F-35B en quantité symbolique pour justifier le maintien en service de leurs porte-aéronefs et compléterons avec des hélicos d'attaques.   

[Chevalier Gilles]

pour les italiens, ils sont obligés d'en acheter car au prix ou ils ont acheté leur cavour...

[BPCs]

pour les italiens, ils sont obligés d'en acheter car au prix ou ils ont acheté leur cavour...

Il avait deja été envisagé de convertir le Cavour en Stobar en 2002

Les italiens sont surtout sensés avoir une ligne de production chez eux

[BPCs]

Je colle ici le pdf de la Rand sur l'extension de vie du F-18 :

Sinon pour les courageux le Slep du f-18 E/F

http://m.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/technical_reports/2010/RAND_TR844.pdf

Il y a plusieurs schémas qui la compare en cout à l'arrivée d'un F-35 C :

Leur cout unitaire est 80 m$ pour le F-35, on imagine ce qu'il en sera si il continue de monter.

Si un programme d'extension de vie des SuperHornet est lancé, ce sera mine de rien un signal fort de désaffection pour le F-35C