Le F-35

[BPCs]

Et les Allemands ?

Je rappelle les posts comme celui-ci :

By 2015, therefore, a new electronic warfare aircraft is scheduled to make its appearance – one based on the F 35 airframe, with strong self-defense capabilities as well as electronic attack potential. The so called "Eurolightning" is based on the "Joint Strike Fighter" F 35 and has 90% commonality with its counterpart, just as its predecessor the ECR-Tornado was based on the robust Tornado IDS fighterbomber . At present, the Eurolightning is slated to be the only dedicated electronic warfare aircraft in the Luftwaffe´s future force – and since the USA is the only western country with such aircraft by now, it would become the sole source of tactical jamming support for NATO air forces as a whole.

The F-35 Lightning II is a major multinational program which is intended to produce an “affordably stealthy” multi-role strike fighter that will have three variants: the F-35A conventional version for the USAir Force et. al.; the F-35B Short Take-Off, Vertical Landing for the US Marines, British Royal Navy, et. al.; and the F-35C conventional carrier-launched version for the US Navy.

The Eurolightning will use the F-35A conventional version as its base, and add a new mission system developed by EADS, including a revolutionary non lethal weapon system for peacekeeping operations.

http://www.luftwaffe.de/portal/a/luf...LmRv#7_20_1AG6

mais qui avec plus de précisions amènent à :

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/germany_buys_eurolightning.html

So What's new ?

[Krogort]

Il est plutôt jolis sous cet angle.

[Fenrir]

Et les Allemands ?

Je rappelle les posts comme celui-ci : mais qui avec plus de précisions amènent à :

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/germany_buys_eurolightning.html

So What's new ?

Que je sache, la Luftwaffe préférait se tourner vers les drones pour ce genre de mission mais bon il suffirait aussi d'attribuer ces capacités aux foufounes puisque ils sont en théories multirôles...

[Babou]

petite question... le F-35 aura une version biplace...? :-[

[LighTning]

Non il n'y a pas de version biplace de prévue pour le F35. ;)

[BPCs]

Que je sache, la Luftwaffe préférait se tourner vers les drones pour ce genre de mission mais bon il suffirait aussi d'attribuer ces capacités aux foufounes puisque ils sont en théories multirôles...

Surtout que le lien du Spiegel que j'ai mis plus bas fait aboutir en fait à la page Wiki des Poissons d'Avril !

:oops:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/germany_buys_eurolightning.html

[Bruno]

ils vont mouiller tous leurs alliés car c'est un superbe moyen d'inféodation et le pire c'est que çà marche mais je dirais que les Japonais ne seront pas les hollandais les danois ou les turcs

D'autant plus que le feuilleton du programme F2 leur a donné un aperçu du sens que les américains donnent au mot "partenariat"  ^-^

[Philippe Top-Force]

Que je sache, la Luftwaffe préférait se tourner vers les drones pour ce genre de mission mais bon il suffirait aussi d'attribuer ces capacités aux foufounes puisque ils sont en théories multirôles...

Ce n'est pas de cette allusion sur les allemands que BPCs veut te faire comprendre Fenrir.

Mais bon, sur ce les britanniques c'est.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmedm/60329e01.htm

That this House notes with concern the decision taken by the Bush Administration to withhold from the UK access to top-secret stealth technology in the new F-35 joint strike fighter; further notes the decision taken by George Bush to cancel plans for a second engine which was to be jointly built by Rolls-Royce and GE; supports the statement made by Lord Drayson, Minister for Defence Procurement, that the UK would not buy the 150 aircraft it currently plans to order unless technology transfer takes place; and calls on the Government to ensure that it continues to place the interests of the UK aerospace sector at the forefront of its negotiations with the US Administration.

[Philippe Top-Force]

J'ajouterais que le Canada n'aura sûrement pas le sursaut de fierté nationale qu'il lui faudrait pour arrêter d'être un bon vassal des yankees et se tourner vers le Typhoon et encore moins vers le Rafale, car ce serait contrarier l'oncle Sam qui adore son voisin canadien mais seulement s'il va dans le sens de ses affaires : si jamais ton pays choisit un autre appareil que le F35 ce sera le F18F, histoire de ne contrarier que l'entreprise Lockeed Martin, mais pas la nation voisine.

On se demande comment un pays de 30 millions d'habitants pourraient être autre chose qu'un pays ami d'un pays 10 fois plus peuplé qui a une frontière de 5000 km avec lui (et qui est de loin la première puissance militaire mondiale), et dont la menace principale hors USA, est la Russie.

La seule capacité que pourrait se donner le Canada est l'arme nucléaire et il y a renoncé dans les années 50 alors qu'il en avait la possibilité de même qu'il a annulé son projet d'intercepteur national, et le gouvernement pourtant conservateur de l'époque a même fait disparaître volontairement la compétence pour que personne n'ait l'idée de pouvoir prendre ses distances avec les USA y compris dans le cas improbable ou des Québécois francophones arrivaient au pouvoir.

Il faut être réaliste.

La seule chose que demande le Canada en tant que vassal consentant, est de ne pas être obligé d'intervenir par obligation auprès des USA et en toute circonstance, sur des théatres lointains.

Le Canada n'existe encore que parce que il a eu l'intelligence de s'allier aux USA après que ceux-ci soient devenus plus fort que l'empire Britannique et qui d'ailleurs, n'existe plus.

Jusque dans les années 30, les USA élaboraient encore des plans d'invasion du Canada au cas ou.

Ils n'achèteront qu'un avion américain ou éventuellement l'Eurofighter car il est Britannique donc l'avion d'un allié lui même bon allié des USA et en dépendance partielle des USA.

[Skw]

Pratt & Whitney F135 Engine Powers F-35 Historic First In Flight STOVL Conversion

(Source: Pratt & Whitney; issued January 8, 2010)

 

EAST HARTFORD, Conn. --- Pratt & Whitney's F135 engine and Rolls-Royce LiftFan® successfully powered the Lockheed Martin F-35B Lightning II short takeoff/vertical landing (STOVL) fighter through the first in-flight engagement of its STOVL propulsion system. Pratt & Whitney is a United Technologies Corp. company.

"Pratt & Whitney is tremendously proud to celebrate this significant program milestone with our teammates from Lockheed Martin and the F-35 Joint Program Office, Rolls-Royce, and our sister company, Hamilton Sundstrand," said Warren Boley, Vice President of F135 Engine Programs. "After more than eight years of development and test and more than 12,850 hours of combined ground and flight testing, it is a testament to the hard work of thousands of people that the F135 propulsion system performed 'as advertised,' and validates the performance and capability of the Pratt & Whitney F135."

During the flight, F-35 Lead STOVL Pilot Graham Tomlinson of BAE Systems engaged the shaft-driven LiftFan propulsion system at 5,000 feet and 210 knots, then slowed to 180 knots with the system still engaged, before accelerating to 210 knots and converting back to conventional-flight mode. The STOVL propulsion system was engaged for a total of 14 minutes during the flight. The successful test is the first in a series of planned STOVL-mode flights that will include short takeoffs, hovers and vertical landings.

"We look forward to continuing to support our customers as they transition flight test operations to Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Md., and continue demonstrating the remarkable capability of the F-35 Lightning II," Boley said.

The F135 System Development and Demonstration (SDD) program surpassed 12,850 hours of engine test time and has successfully completed 164 hours of flight time. Missions have included augmented takeoffs, supersonic flight, in-flight cycling of the weapons bay doors, air-to-air refueling, in-flight engine restarts, and cross-country flights to and from Eglin and Edwards Air Force Bases and Patuxent River Naval Air Station.

Pratt & Whitney has designed, developed and tested the F135 to deliver the most advanced fifth generation fighter engine for the U.S. Air Force, Marine Corps and Navy, as well as eight international partner countries. The F135 is derived from proven technology of the only operational fifth generation fighter engine, the Pratt & Whitney F119. It has been further enhanced with technologies developed in several Air Force and Navy technology programs.

The F135 is the only engine powering the F-35 Lightning II flight test program. The F135 propulsion system has proven it can meet diverse aircraft requirements, and the ground and flight test experience demonstrates the maturity and the associated reliability of the F135 engine for armed forces around the world.

Pratt & Whitney is a world leader in the design, manufacture and service of aircraft engines, space propulsion systems and industrial gas turbines. United Technologies, based in Hartford, Conn., is a diversified company providing high technology products and services to the global aerospace and building industries.

-ends-

www.defense-aerospace.com

[Chaps]

Avec la vidéo qui résume bien le texte ;)

[g4lly]

http://www.dodbuzz.com/2010/01/12/navair-offers-f-18-ammo-amid-jsf-woes/

Congressional aides are beginning to wonder if the Navy should buy the carrier version of the Joint Strike Fighter, in light of the program’s rising price tag and its higher flight costs.

“I’m growing more and more convinced that the Navy variant of the F-​​35 might not be worth buying. The program is sliding further and further to the right, as costs increase. When we have an 80 percent solution in active production, and significantly cheaper, the F-​​35C looks like a great candidate for cancellation,” said one congressional aide. “Gates has talked about choosing 75 percent solutions over expensive ‘exquisite’ systems and this is a perfect candidate.”

For its part, the Navy, already worried it won’t have enough planes for its carrier fleet, has briefed senior Pentagon leaders that the Joint Strike Fighter program “will have a significant impact on naval aviation affordability in the FYDP and beyond.”

A source who follows JSF closely quoted portions of the NavAir study, “Joint Programs TOC Affordability.” A congressional aide who has seen the report confirmed the information. The study was briefed to DoD leaders earlier this month;

The source said that the study finds “the cost to operate and support the F-​​35 (all variants) will be $442 billion or more depending on additional costs for integration on ships and currently unforeseen development costs. This estimate is in FY 2002 program baseline dollars; the current dollar cost will be significantly higher. The production and development costs are cited, by the JET II, to be $217 and $46 billion respectively (2002 $), thereby making total program ownership cost to be $704 billion, or more, in 2002 dollars,:” according to this source.

That would put operating costs of the F-​​35 B and C versions some 40 percent higher “than the cost to operate the existing (larger) fleet of F-​​18A-​​Ds and AV-​​8s. Cost per flight hour of the combined F-​​18A-​​D and AV-​​8 fleets is estimated to be about $19,000 per hour; F-​​35B/​C cost per flight hour is estimated to be about $31,000,” the source said. “These higher and growing operating costs are certainly typical for a new generation aircraft, but the revelation of these estimates at this relatively early point in the program would seem to demonstrate some real and growing concern that the highly complex F-​​35 is anything but ‘affordable.’”

An industry source noted that the chief of Naval operations “has been very interested across the force in terms of total operating costs. It is significant that this study addresses this.” The industry source said that Super Hornet flying hour costs are about $5,000 an hour.

A second congressional aide raised some questions about the study’s methodology, saying that “the worker level people, when asked about the assumptions by an assistant secretary in the Navy, didn’t have real good answers to that question. So while some of the numbers are very specific, the assumptions are not.” But this aide, who follows both programs, agreed that the NavAir study was a good argument for the F-​​18. “But yes, if they are looking for tails versus presumed better capability for more money and given the budget crunch and need for more ships they have HUGE problems,” the aide said.

The source who provided the study results noted that it “shows nothing for F-​​18E/​F flight hour costs, which makes me suspicious.”

While Congress may not be ready to cancel the carrier version of the F-​​35, the industry source noted that support for the F-​​18 “has been gaining momentum in the Congress really over the last three years,” largely to address what has been identified as a shortfall in the number of planes available. “Each year more and more language has been written noting Congress’ concern with the shortfall as well as questioning what the Navy and DoD are going to do about it.”

Most interestingly, this source said the Navy is looking over the long term for a sixth generation aircraft, one with “increased range, increased persistence, increased speed and increased payload.” The F-​​35 is, of course, a fifth generation fighter.

[BPCs]

La Navy a déjà tenté de se passer du F-35C pour commander plus de F-18 Maintenant et aller directement vers un X-47

[Skw]

MoD to slash jet fighter orders as it struggles to save aircraft programme • Defence chiefs decide UK cannot afford current plan • Cost of 140 US-built planes has risen by £25m each

Richard Norton-Taylor guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 12 January 2010 22.30 GMT Article history

The F35 Joint Strike Fighters' price has risen from £37m each four years ago to £62m now.

Defence chiefs are preparing drastic cuts to the number of American stealth aircraft planned for the RAF and the Royal Navy's proposed new carriers, the Guardian has learned.

They will be among the first casualties, with existing squadrons of Harrier and Tornado jets, of a huge shift in military spending being considered by ministers, officials and military advisers.

As they head towards their biggest and most painful shakeup since the second world war, a consensus has emerged among the top brass that they can not afford the 140 American Joint Strike Fighters (JSF) they have been seeking.

The JSF, or F35 as it is now called, has been subject to costly delays and the estimated price has soared from £37m each four years ago to more than £62m today.

One compromise would be for the Ministry of Defence (MoD) to halve its order from 140 planes to 70.

There is also a growing view that Britain will not be able to afford to build the two large aircraft carriers, already delayed, let alone the planes due to fly from them.

"The carriers are under real threat. There will certainly be a big reduction in JSF numbers," a well-placed military source told the Guardian.

"The carriers are about more fast jets. They are very hard to justify," added a defence official, referring to a growing consensus that the RAF already has too many fast jets.

If the order was halved, it would probably be split so that there was a short take-off and vertical landing (Stovl) version for the carriers, and a conventional version based at RAF ground stations.

Among other options being considered are: downsizing the second carrier to a much cheaper platform for helicopters, marine commandos, and unmanned drones; building both carriers but selling one, perhaps to India; and equipping them with cheaper catapult-launched aircraft.

No decisions will be made until after the general election. However, there is a consensus developing in the MoD that Britain simply cannot afford existing plans to build two large carriers in a project which, if the JSF planes are included, would cost an estimated £25bn.

The view is that it is extremely difficult to justify at a time when troops in Afghanistan are being deprived of helicopters and surveillance systems – including unmanned drones – which provide badly needed intelligence about what insurgents and suspected terrorists are up to.

The two proposed carriers, the Queen Elizabeth, due to go into service in 2016, and the Prince of Wales, due to follow in 2018, are already £1bn over the original estimated cost of £3.9bn. This excludes the cost of any aircraft flying from them.

The money spent on carriers and their jets is even more difficult to justify, say critics, at a time when the navy is getting six new frigates at £1bn apiece and a replacement for the Trident nuclear ballistic missile system, which ministers say could cost £20bn while admitting they do not know what the final figure will be.

A decision on the proposed new Trident submarine's basic design contract – due last September – has been put back. "Further time has been required to ensure that we take decisions based on robust information," the defence secretary, Bob Ainsworth, told MPs before Christmas.

The final cost of Trident could amount to £97bn over the system's 30-year life, according to Greenpeace. The MoD has not challenged the figures.

What is likely to be a debate with much blood on the carpet was triggered last autumn by General Sir David Richards, soon after he became head of the army. "We cannot go back to operating as we might have done even 10 years ago when it was still tanks, fast jets, and fleet escorts that dominated the doctrine of our three services," he said. "The lexicon of today is non-kinetic effects teams [carrying out 'hearts and minds' operations], counter-IED [improvised explosive devices], information dominance, counter-piracy, and cyber attack and defence."

Richards warned that even large states such as China and Russia could adopt unconventional tactics rather than preparing for fighting with missiles and fixed formations of troops and armour. "Attacks are likely to be delivered semi-anonymously through cyberspace or the use of guerrillas and Hezbollah-style proxies," he said.

The First Sea Lord, Admiral Sir Mark Stanhope, and Sir Stephen Dalton, the head of the RAF, have publicly challenged Richards's argument, saying it is dangerous to assume the days of "state against state" warfare are over.

However, all agree that the defence budget is under unprecedented pressure. Malcolm Chalmers, professorial fellow at the Royal United Services Institute, estimates the MoD will have to cut its budget by up to 15%, and possibly more, by 2016. If future cuts fall disproportionately on capital projects then the MoD could be one of the hardest-hit departments after the general election, whoever wins it.

The annual defence budget is about £35bn, not including the cost of operations in Afghanistan, which are running at about £4bn a year and are paid for out of the Treasury's contingency fund.

Guardian

[Chaps]

Et hop on jette encore des chiffres sans queue ni tête.

Donc on a un coût moyen d'utilisation des F-18A/D et Harrier combiné de 19000$/h.

Intéressant, le F-18A/D est en fin de vie et presque absents des portes-avions depuis 2006.

Puis on lance le F-35 à 31000$.

Et finalement, on parle du Super-Hornet à 5000$/h.

Alors que les Brésiliens l'annonce à 14000$/h...

Finalement, les coûts en dollars 2002 font penser que l'étude se basent sur cette époque d'où la référence au F-18A/D et à des coûts estimés exagérement bas pour le F-18E/F qui commençaient sa carrière ops.

[Skw]

90% of Last Year’s F-35 Test Flights Were Not Completed As Planned (excerpt)

  

(Source: Bloomberg News; published Jan. 19, 2010)

 

 

 

WASHINGTON --- Lockheed Martin completed only about 10 percent of its planned test flights of the F-35 joint strike fighter last year because of delays in production of the test aircraft, according to a Pentagon report.

Only 16 of 168 planned flights were completed in fiscal 2009, the second year of flight testing, according to Michael Gilmore, the Pentagon’s director of weapons testing. The program called for 5,000 sorties to prove the aircraft’s flying capabilities, electronics and software.

Some additional test flights have been completed since that time, but overall the program continues to be far behind schedule.

The testing backlog is one reason Defense Secretary Robert Gates has delayed the program, cutting planned purchases of the plane by 122 in fiscal years 2011 through 2015. More than $2.8 billion that was budgeted to buy the military’s next-generation fighter would instead be used to continue its development, according to a 2011 budget document.

The development phase must now be extended by at least one year, to October 2015, according to Gilmore, the former head of the Congressional Budget Office’s defense unit.

The F-35 assessment is in the annual report of testing of major weapons systems sent to Congress on Friday and scheduled for release later this week.

The program entered fiscal 2009 at "significant risk" of not meeting its goals, and that risk will increase through 2012 because flight testing hasn’t kept pace "due to the failure to deliver test aircraft," according to Gilmore’s report.

"Even assuming all the success that management plans" in the remaining roughly 4,970 flight tests, Lockheed will need a "minimum schedule addition" of one year to complete development, Gilmore wrote. (end of excerpt)

Si vous en voulez plus : cliquez ici puis suivez le lien

En fait, on s'en doutait déjà un peu. Sweetman avait déjà donné des chiffres laissant envisager cela.

[xav]

Non

Lockheed says F-35 fighter excels in test flights

* 'Brand-new phenomenon,' Lockheed says

* Partner countries said sticking to purchase plans

* Company agrees to changes to keep program on track

* Lockheed shares up 1 cent at $78.20

WASHINGTON, Dec 3 (Reuters) - Lockheed Martin Corp (LMT.N) said Thursday that its multinational F-35 fighter aircraft, the Pentagon's costliest acquisition program, was performing surpassingly well in early test flight.

"We have never seen, ever, success in terms of avionics stability and maturity this early in a program," said Ralph Heath, executive vice president of the company's aeronautics business unit.

Lockheed, the Pentagon's No. 1 supplier by sales, projects it will sell up to 4,500 F-35s worldwide to replace its F-16s and 12 other warplanes for 11 nations initially. The United States plans to spend about $300 billion over the next 25 years to buy 2,443 F-35s.

Heath said about three-quarters of the jets returning from test flights were ready to go again, a standard he said normally applied to production models, not test planes.

"So it really is a brand-new phenomenon," he told a webcast Credit Suisse aerospace and defense industry conference in New York.

The test flight program is far behind schedule. The development program overall is facing a potential $16 billion shortfall through 2015, according to independent studies commissioned by the Pentagon.

Lockheed Martin agrees with initiatives, floated publicly last week by the Pentagon's chief arms buyer, aimed at getting the program back on track, said Bruce Tanner, the company's chief financial officer.

Tanner said the company had discussed with Ashton Carter, the arms buyer, plowing some of Lockheed's future award fees into putting more aircraft into the test program and speeding development of the mission software.

"We support Dr. Carter with that objective," Tanner told the conference. He did not make clear how much this might cost in terms of foregone profits. Neither the company nor the Pentagon's F-35 program office responded immediately to questions about this.

Carter told reporters on Nov. 23 that he wanted Lockheed to share the cost of preventing F-35 cost overruns and schedule slips.

Lockheed has a "cost-plus" development contract, meaning the government typically picks up the bill for any cost overruns.

Eight countries have helped the United States finance three variants of the F-35: Britain, Italy, the Netherlands, Turkey, Canada, Australia, Denmark and Norway. Together, the core group has been projected to buy about 730 aircraft

A "couple" of these countries are delaying planned purchases of the jet, a move that will boost its initial prices, Jon Schreiber, a senior official in the Pentagon program office, told Reuters on Nov. 23.

Heath, at the industry conference in New York, said Lockheed's view was that the partner countries "remain very solidly supportive of the program."

Competitors include Boeing Co's (BA.N) F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and the Eurofighter Typhoon, made by a consortium of British, German, Italian and Spanish companies.

Lockheed's chief F-35 subcontractors are Northrop Grumman Corp (NOC.N) and BAE Systems Plc (BAES.L).

Shares of Lockheed were up 1 cent at $78.20 in afternoon New York Stock Exchange trading.

Qui croire? :)

[Rob1]

Hypothèse : Les 10% de tests effectués se sont très bien passés. Comme ca tout le monde est d'accord.

[Perry]

En général, la maman dit toujours que son rejeton est la huitième merveille du monde...

Pure propagande.

[Skw]

Xav, tu crois encore à la communication de chez LM ?  =)

Pour rappel, ils nous expliquaient, quelques mois auparavant, que les essais pourraient être drastiquement réduits en nombre. Tout se ferait par simulation... Bref, on voit où on en est, et il ne me semble pas que le nombre de sorties prévues ait réellement diminué.

Pour le prochain avion des troupes OTAN, je propose une joint-venture entre LM et EADS :lol: Il devrait être marrant le méccano industriel.

[Skw]

F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)  

(Source: US Department of Defense; dated Jan. 15, 2010)

 

The following are excerpts from a report by Michael Gilmore, DoD Director of Operational Testing and Evaluation, on the status of the Joint Strike Fighter program. Some of this report’s conclusions were reported by Bloomberg News on Jan. 19.

This assessment of the F-35/JSF program is part of the Pentagon’s annual report of testing of major weapons systems, sent to Congress on Jan. 15 and scheduled for release this week. (Emphasis added in bold type below—Ed.)

One worrying conclusion in the report is that “Continued production concurrent with the slow increase in flight testing over the next two years will commit the DoD and Services to test, training, and deployment plans with substantial risk.”

It also implies that completion of IOT&E of Block 3 capability could occur in early to mid-2016 provided the associated extension of SDD is supported with additional flight test aircraft, timely delivery of effective software, and an adequate pace of testing is maintained.

This means that Dutch participation in the IOT&E phase has to be delayed (it is now planned for August 2013 to October 2014). This will prove embarrassing to the Dutch government, because its decision to buy two early LRIP aircraft against the wish of Parliament was based on an undertaking that IOT&E would NOT be delayed.

The report notes that only 12 of 3,000 planned SDD verification points (equivalent to barely 0.4% of the total program) were actually verified during the first years of testing.

Here are some of the more significant points in the report:

ACTIVITY: F-35 FLIGHT TEST

-- SDD flight test operations added SDD STOVL test aircraft BF-2 in February 2009. First flight occurred 10 months later than envisioned in the 2007 mid-course risk reduction.

-- During FY09, the test team accumulated only 12 test flights with BF-2 and four flight test sorties for aircraft BF-1 for a total of 16 test flights of the approximately 5,000 total planned for SDD. The approved master schedule called for 168 test flights, including the completion of the first vertical landing, before the end of the fiscal year. Completion of the first vertical landing has slipped from mid-2009 to January 2010.

Aircraft BF-1 completed initial hover pit testing at the contractor’s test facility in Fort Worth, Texas. While the testing concluded four months later than planned in the F135 engine recovery plan, all test objectives were completed and engineering staff concluded that the F135 provides sufficient thrust for STOVL operations. Discoveries included high temperatures in the shaft clutch, need for lift fan door seal change, and potential for hot gas ingestion under certain wind conditions.

(…/…)

ASSESSMENT:

-- Concurrency of production, development, and testing increased in FY09 as verification and flight test did not attain the planned pace due to the failure to deliver SDD test aircraft. Only 16 test flights of 168 planned in FY09 and the 5,000 needed to complete SDD were accomplished, and only 12 of over 3,000 SDD success criteria were verified.

Click here to download the JSF assessment portion of the report (6 pages in PDF format).

source : defense-aerospace

Maintenant, on sait qui croire. Je vous conseille la lecture du PDF proposé à la fin de l'article : il vaut son pesant d'or. On y devine par exemple que les avions expédiés sur les aires de test ne sont en fait pas réellement opérationnels [Mais il faut des chiffres qui correspondent à peu près à ce qui était prévu dans le calendrier.] En outre, LM serait encore incapable de définir les missions que seront capables de mener les premiers exemplaires délivrés. Pas facile de s'organiser et d'anticiper du côté des forces militaires !

[TMor]

Marrante, l'allusion aux Hollandais... Sachant que le Rafale F3+, lui, il est à l'heure...  :P

[Bruno]

Marrante, l'allusion aux Hollandais... Sachant que le Rafale F3+, lui, il est à l'heure...  :P

Oui mais comme on l'a fait tout seuls, sans l'oncle Sam ni son fidèle vassal d'outre-Manche, c'est forcément une daube, of course !! 8)

[cvs]

C'est vrai qu'il faut envoyer les avions aux US si on veut faire la maintenance ?

Car je lisais un article qui disait que c'est l'une des raisons pour laquelle les israéliens ne commandent pas encore l'avion.

[jérôme]

c'est plutot les techniciens us qui çe déplacerons pour faire la maintenance des f 35! eeeuuuh du moins je pençe :-[ :-[