Le F-35

[Darkjmfr]

How to Kill the Joint Strike Fighter, Part 2: just what does "unacceptable" mean?

http://www.jameshasik.com/weblog/2010/03/how-to-kill-the-joint-strike-fighter-part-2-just-what-does-unacceptable-mean.html

Vous remarquerez que quand il parle de dogfighter, on entend parler du typhoon, du gripen... mais pas de celui auquel on pense tous :)

[alexandreVBCI]

L'Iralie s'inquiète grave de la hausse du coût des F-35, d'autant qu'il s'agit pour eux d'un programme majeur, le F-35 est censé remplacer 3 appareils en service !

GENOA, Italy — The Italian ministry of defense is increasing the pressure on both the U.S. government and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter prime contractor Lockheed Martin to win better terms for technology transfer and local industry involvement. Italy’s potential requirement at the moment stands at 131 F-35s, including 22 short-takeoff-and-vertical-landing (Stovl) F-35Bs for the navy and a mix of 109 conventional F-35As and Bs for the air force. But the high cost of the F-35B is putting budget pressure on air force plans.

Nonetheless, Italian defense officials consider the F-35 acquisition one of their highest-priority programs. The navy has no alternative to replace its force of AV-8B Harrier II Stovl aircraft. The air force is willing to replace the AMX fighter bomber first and then at least part of its Tornado fleet with the F-35.

The air force is urgently trying to assess what extra costs may stem from F-35 delays, recently acknowledged by the Pentagon, since it will be forced to keep its current fighter-bomber fleet in service longer. And having two fighter-bomber types is logistically and operationally complicated and very costly. In addition, the number of upgrades that the AMX and Tornado are slated to receive could increase if they are to remain in active duty for substantially longer. However, some internal trade-off studies call for retiring the AMXs on their original schedule.

So far the issue of the increased F-35 costs has not been officially tackled by the defense ministry or the parliament, but this is sure to be a hot topic when Italy finally signs production orders, when overall procurement numbers could be affected or procurement rates diluted.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=aerospacedaily&id=news/asd/2010/04/01/01.xml&headline=Italy%20Pressuring%20U.S.,%20Lockheed%20Over%20JSF%20Work

[TMor]

Vous remarquerez que quand il parle de dogfighter, on entend parler du typhoon, du gripen... mais pas de celui auquel on pense tous :)

C'est normal, il faut être français avec habituel complexe d'infériorité pour prétendre être au dessus des autres, alors que la réalité a prouvé le contraire. Les Typhoon et Gripen, eux, ils vont pas prendre la peine de contredire ces foutaises. Ils vont juste faire de jolies plaquettes publicitaires.

Ainsi, le Gripen est l'avion le plus maniable du monde, et l'Eurofighter... aussi.

Je suis ironique, mais hors de France, c'est le discours normal.

[P4]

A la limite ce n'est pas le pire, Dassault et Rafale sont cités plusieurs fois dans le texte.

[BPCs]

DoD Begins New F-35 Cost Estimate

http://www.defensenews.com/mobile/index.php?storyUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.defensenews.com%2Fstory.php%3Fi%3D4571454%26c%3DAIR%26s%3DTOP

BY JOHN REED | PUBLISHED: 6 APR 2010 19:04

The Pentagon has officially kicked off another independent cost estimate for the embattled F-35 Joint Strike Fighter after formally notifying Congress that the program has breached the Nunn-McCurdy statute in the wake of cost estimates that price the jet at up to $115 million per aircraft in 2002 dollars, or $138 million in today's dollars.

The Pentagon will update the F-35s baseline number of jets in the program once this new review, which will take into account the total lifetime costs of designing and flying the airplane, is completed, according to the F-35 Selected Acquisition Report. The document states that Congress was officially notified of the Nunn-McCurdy breach March 26.

In mid-March, Ashton Carter, the Pentagon's top weapons buyer, told lawmakers that the program would breach the statute due to massive cost growth over 2001 estimates that pegged the F-35s price tag at $50.2 million apiece. At the time, the Defense Department stated the costs would balloon to between $80 million and $95 million in 2002 dollars. That's $95 million and $113 million in 2009 dollars, respectively.

DoD now predicts that the jets will now cost between $97 and $115 million each in 2002 dollars, when development work is included in the price tag, according to the newly released SAR.

The planes could cost between $79 and $95 million per-jet, in 2002 average dollars, when costs such as R&D are not factored into the buy, the document states.

In February, Defense Secretary Robert Gates conducted a sweeping reorganization of the program by shifting additional money and resources into the test program, extending the jet's test phase, slowing the production ramp and replacing the government program manager.

[Castor]

je suis le seul à trouver que les discounted cash flow c'est fatiguant ???? =(

[debonneguerre]

je suis le seul à trouver que les discounted cash flow c'est fatiguant ???? =(

Voyons cher ami, c'est un indicateur incontournable, garant de la rationalité financière d'un projet.

Bonne nuit.

[BPCs]

First Mission-System Test F-35 Flies

Posted by Graham Warwick at 4/7/2010 1:33 PM CDT

The first F-35 Joint Strike Fighter equipped with the mission system - radar, electro-optical sensors, electronic warfare, comm/nav/ident etc - has flown today (Apr. 7) at Fort Worth. Aircraft BF-4 is also the fourth short take-off and vertical landing F-35 to have flown.

BF-4 completed a 54min sortie with test pilot David Nelson at the controls. The aircraft is loaded with the initial Block 0.5 version of the mission-system software, which provides air-to-air search and synthetic-apterure radar modes, IFF, integrated UHF/VHF radios, radar warning receiver, and GPS/INS navigation.

The mission system installed for the initial flight includes the APG-81 active electronically scanned array radar, EW system, integrated CNI, integrated core processor and the pilot's helmet-mounted display. The electro-optical targeting sensor and 360-deg EO distributed aperture system will be added later.

MAIS SUR INSIDEDEFENSE.COM :

DOD: JSF Combat Radius Shrinks, Logistic Footprint Grows As Design Matures

DefenseAlert, April 7, 2010 -- While the Joint Strike Fighter program has made marginal improvements in select performance areas over the last two years, the aircraft still lags behind benchmarks established at the outset of the program in 2002 for combat range, logistics footprint and sortie-generation rates, according to a Pentagon document.

DOCUMENT: DOD Report To Congress On JSF Acquisition Costs

RELATED: Exclusive: DOD Warns Congress JSF Costs Could Skyrocket To $388 Billion By Summer

[alexandreVBCI]

L'upgrade du F35 pour lui donner une capacité de frappe nucléaire est prévu... mais son prix va passer à 158,1 millions de dollars par appareil.

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/04/nuclear-upgrade-for-the-pentagons-gajillion-dollar-fighter/

[Rescator]

le gouvernement danois a officiellement annoncé qu'il remettait à 2020 sa décision d'acheter des F35 compte tenu des incertitudes sur le programme, et en particulier la maitrise des coûts.

[g4lly]

http://www.dodbuzz.com/2010/04/14/docs-say-f-35b-too-hot-noisy/

When the Marine Corps commandant says equipment he is buying for his people works and is safe, we listen. So when Gen. James Conway told us the vertical takeoff version of the Joint Strike Fighter was not too hot to damage carriers or amphibious ships and was not too loud to harm crews or communities, we listened. So did some folks on Capitol Hill and they questioned whether the Marine leadership was singing too sweet a song.

Testing documents obtained by DoD Buzz, said by congressional sources to be the most recent available, raise serious questions about the effects of heat and noise from the F-35B on pilots and ships’ crews, on ship decks and on critical flight equipment.

For example, an operational assessment of the JSF says that heat from the STOVL version may result in “severe F-35 operating restrictions and or costly facility upgrades, repairs or both.” The OT-IID report says “thermal management” will “increase the number of sorties required to prepare an operational unit for deployment during summer months” at most American bases. Overall, it rates basing as red: “unlikely to meet criteria — significant shortfall.”

Another document, a briefing chart rating the plane’s systems, rates as “red” flight operations noise “below deck and island structure” and “on the flight.” Direct exhaust “deck personnel burns” are rated red, as is “personnel blow down” and “off-gassing.” On top of that, the non-skid coating is rated red, as is the impact of the plane’s power systems on “spotting” and the plane’s outwash “on spotting of adjacent aircraft.”

A congressional aide was biting in his reaction to Conway’s assurances that the plane was marginally hotter than the AV-8B Harrier and about as loud as existing planes.

“AV-8B and F-35B temperatures might be the same, but so far they haven’t shown anyone their data; plus, you have to look at it from the perspective of total kinetic energy of the engine thrust. AV-8B has a thrust rating of 23,000lbs, whereas an F-35B thrust rating is 41,000lbs. He’s comparing a cigar torch lighter to a blow torch. Additionally, he’s got other thermal issues he needs to worry about as well, like overheating avionics and cockpit temperatures,” the aide said.

The testing report says that “continued cycling” of the engine for carrier takeoff raises “serious issues” because a pilot’s backup oxygen supply is depleted when the integrated power package (IPP) is disengaged to give the plane more thrust. Cutting off the IPP also means there is “potential that overheating of the radar and avionics may result.” On top of all that, temperatures inside the cockpit on the ground and in low altitude, high-speed fly “will be high,” more than 90 degrees even during a day when the mercury hits 59 degrees outside. That could “hamper pilot performance” during such missions.

The congressional aide then went on to noise. “As for the noise issue, the concern is not in the aircraft flying pattern, the noise concern is for those onboard ship, both above and below deck that are going to have issues. If none of this is a concern, why is the risk matrix still red after developmental testing mitigations are removed?” the aide asked.

We showed the documents to Winslow Wheeler, a top defense analyst at Washington’s Center for Defense Information. “The documentation makes extremely clear that the Navy and Marine Corps know they have a problem on their hands. But they don’t know the dimension of the problem and they don’t know how to address it. But the problem is very clear,” he said.

The congressional staff who spoke said they were concerned that the Marines are unwilling to address what could be fundamental problems for the fifth-generation STOVL plane and, one said, “are purposely disingenuous in their misrepresentation of facts.”

Ils en veulent vraimet pas de ce F-35 !!!

[fool]

http://www.dodbuzz.com/2010/04/14/docs-say-f-35b-too-hot-noisy/

Ils en veulent vraimet pas de ce F-35 !!!

32°C dans le cockpit avec 15°C exterieur ........va falloir voler en débardeur avec le camelback sur les genoux en A-stan ou en arizona  :lol:

moi je mettrais un porte gobelet pour le brumisateur , LM doit pouvoir faire ça pour 5m$ et problème fixed !  :oops:

[BPCs]

Quand on pense qu'il y a déjà de sérieux questionnement en Norvège sur le bruit à proximité des futures bases de F-35, on imagine aisément que sur le pont d'un LHD la problématique va être encore amplifiée même si il y a des protections phoniques...

Franchement vu la pléthore d'avocats spécialisés dans le droit médical aux USA (170 pages dans le botin deL.A. apparemment), si ils commencent à avoir des risques de santé potentiel, je leur conseille de clore tout de suite le programme  :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Marcus]

32°C dans le cockpit avec 15°C exterieur ........va falloir voler en débardeur avec le camelback sur les genoux en A-stan ou en arizona  :lol:

Il va falloir ouvrir un nouveau  fil de discussion sur le forum Air-Defense : "Macho Women with Big Plane"

Excusez-moi, je sort. :-[

[Asgard]

Juste comme ca, en enlevant la "furtivité" du F35, y'a un remplaçant assez moderne envisagé pour les flottes style Italie ?

[cvs]

J'ai rien pigé à cet avion.

Il est sorti, il est pas sorti. On est encore au prototypage ? En phase de test ?

Je ne comprends rien.

[pascal]

Seuls volent les avions de présérie ...

2013/2014 sont les dates prévues d'entrée en service de certaines versions dans les unités d'expérimentation

pour le reste c'est flou point barre

le problème de nombreux clients comme les MARINES les Marines espagnoles italiennes et britanniques, l'AERONAUTICA MILITARE... et certains autres c'est qu'il n'y a pas de plans B sauf à relancer la chaîne Harrier pour un éventuel III ou bien à racheter du F 16 block X voir comme les israéliens à demander de nouveaux F 15 un avions certes excellent mais conçu fin 60's

Bref la joie

[cvs]

Seuls volent les avions de présérie ...

2013/2014 sont les dates prévues d'entrée en service de certaines versions dans les unités d'expérimentation

pour le reste c'est flou point barre

le problème de nombreux clients comme les MARINES les Marines espagnoles italiennes et britanniques, l'AERONAUTICA MILITARE... et certains autres c'est qu'il n'y a pas de plans B sauf à relancer la chaîne Harrier pour un éventuel III ou bien à racheter du F 16 block X voir comme les israéliens à demander de nouveaux F 15 un avions certes excellent mais conçu fin 60's

Bref la joie

Quel bordel n'empêche. ç'est quoi qui bloque pour que ça avance ?

[pascal]

le concept du 3 en 1

[cvs]

le concept du 3 en 1

Pff, autant dire qu'on est pas sorti de l'auberge.

[g4lly]

Pff, autant dire qu'on est pas sorti de l'auberge.

C'est essentiellement le B qui pose de gros souci, le A a priori moins ambitieux pose moins de probleme, et le C ... bas on sait meme pas si finalement il va y en avoir un.

[BPCs]

Air Force Halts Plans To Increase JSF Production To 110 Jets Per Year

Inside the Air Force, April 16, 2010 -- The Air Force has indefinitely suspended plans to ramp up production of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter to as many as 110

[xav]

Italy, Netherlands See JSF Plans In Flux

Italian workshare demands are adding to the Pentagon’s list of headaches regarding the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, just as the U.S. is trying to come to terms with a major program restructuring aimed at dealing with development delays and cost overruns.

In an effort to extract more work from prime contractor Lockheed Martin or other F-35 partners, the Italian government is—at least briefly—blocking plans to set up a JSF final assembly and checkout (FACO) facility at the Cameri air base in northern Italy. Undersecretary of Defense Guido Crosetto has told his country’s lawmakers that the return on investment in the program has been insufficient and does not reflect current and planned budget outlays. The Italians also are unhappy about tech-transfer arrangements, and Crosetto hopes an agreement can be reached “within two or three months” to bridge the differences.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/awst/2010/04/12/AW_04_12_2010_p32-217611.xml&headline=Italy,%20Netherlands%20See%20JSF%20Plans%20In%20Flux&channel=defense

[jean-françois]

C'est quand même hallucinant que ça ne soit que maintenant qu'ils s'en rendent compte.

Ils n'ont pas lu le contrat qu'ils avaient signé ???

[zx]

Comme toujours, on ne lit jamais les toutes petites lignes en bas du contrat.  :lol: