Le F-35

[P4]

F-35 Cost on Rise as Europe Negotiates Possible Production Line

GAYLE S. PUTRICH, PARIS

Since the initial price tag on the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter was set, costs have gone up 30 percent, said U.S. Air Force Brig. Gen. C.R. Davis, the program’s executive officer in the Pentagon.

U.S. Nunn-McCurdy laws call for a review of programs that breach the 50-percent cost increase mark, forcing the Defense Department to report to Congress on why the aircraft is essential and what the new spending parameters should be.

Davis said the service and partner countries are working with Lockheed Martin to set up long-term purchasing agreements for some JSF materials, particularly specialty metals, which he said are driving cost increases of 3 to 4 percent a year.

“We’re constantly looking for ways to drive down the cost of the product itself,” said Tom Burbage, Lockheed’s vice president and general manager of the F-35 program.

The Air Force’s concern remains that a proposed final assembly and checkout line in Italy would end up costing partners even more.

A proposal is on the table to set up a JSF line in Italy, but Davis and Burbage both said nothing is even close to being settled at this point and that the U.S. is staying out of Europe’s way on the negotiations, granting the OK for the necessary technological releases and standing back for now.

“It’s dependent on the Italian government and Italian industry making some decisions,” Burbage said at a June 20 program briefing. He said the Italians are in negotiations with the Netherlands but that he was not privy to the content of government-to-government talks.

If an Italian-built plane would have a heftier price tag than one built in the States, the additional costs would have to be absorbed by the Italians, Burbage said.

A detailed trade study is being conducted by Lockheed and the Italian government on the estimated cost of an Italy build. Results are expected to be released by the end of the year.

F-35 Cost on Rise as Europe Negotiates Possible Production Line

L'Air force se plaint du fait qu'une ligne d"assemblage et de maintenance en Europe(Italie) augmenterait le cout unitaire de l'avion .

[Darkjmfr]

Encore une production délocalisée au tiers monde ! (je sais c'est très c*** mais j'ai pas pu m'empêcher pour faire plaisir à european =D allez, allez, j'en pense pas un mot !)

Les connaissant, ils vont tout faire pour éviter ce genre de choses, n'en déplaise à certains... Et puis l'argument est on ne peut plus valable, quand on voit le résultat sur le programme eurosphincter... même si en tant que français je comprend très bien pourquoi tous ces pays ont voulu une ligne d'assemblage: pour être indépendants, c'est très français en fait.

[DEFA550]

même si en tant que français je comprend très bien pourquoi tous ces pays ont voulu une ligne d'assemblage: pour être indépendants, c'est très français en fait.

C'est encore plus "bas" que ça... Parce que l'indépendance ils ne l'ont pas du fait qu'aucun d'entre eux ne fabrique la totalité des éléments.

Ca se résume à une question d'emploi. Faute de travailler sur leurs propres projets, ils travaillent sur ceux des autres...

[European]

The Italian jobs

By Jon Lake

Governments agree to JSF assembly line in Italy

The US and Italian governments have reached agreement to site a final assembly and check out (FACO) line for the F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter at Cameri in Piedmont, northern Italy.

The line will be the responsibility of the Alenia business unit of Finmeccanica, but will be owned by the Italian Government.

Alenia will be responsible to Lockheed Martin for delivery of the aircraft. Sources say Cameri has been selected in preference to Alenia's existing facility at Caselle, largely on security grounds.

Construction of the FACO at Cameri, a highly secure and remote Italian air force base that is home to Italian Tornado maintenance, and which already hosts the Italian Bell Agusta BA609 test programme, will begin in 2010, leading to initial aircraft deliveries in 2014.

Though the two governments have agreed to the line in principal, final agreements have still to be hammered out. Lockheed requires that any FACO should be ‘cost neutral’, and Alenia must meet particular US security requirements before it can obtain the required technical assistance agreement – though the physical security provided by basing the FACO at an active Italian air force base may facilitate this.

Italy has had a long-standing aspiration to host a European assembly line for the Joint Strike Fighter, hoping to assemble and maintain the 131 F-35s that Italy has ordered, as well as some of those being purchased by other European customers.

Siting of a FACO in country may also help calm concerns over technology transfer and operational sovereignty, and may enhance Italy’s ability to autonomously support, sustain and upgrade its own aircraft.

The Netherlands (which has ordered 85 aircraft) is believed to have already agreed to use the Italian-based FACO. Some reports have suggested that Dutch industry would receive work on Italian JSF engines as part of the same deal, while Norway is reported as having been present at the meeting that led to the agreement between Netherlands and Italy.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2007/06/20/214956/the-italian-jobs.html

=D =D =D =D =D

Vive le F35.

[DEFA550]

N'importe quel gamin sait jouer au Légo. Pas de quoi être fier...  :cool:

[P4]

pognon, pognon, pognon .

CSBA Lays Out Options for Revamping JSF Program

By JOHN T. BENNETT

The Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments rolled out four options to cut Pentagon costs on the multibillion-dollar Joint Strike Fighter program, including halving the proposed purchases by two U.S. services — and canceling it altogether.

The report, prepared by CSBA’s Steve Kosiak and Barry Watts, says the JSF may cost so much that the Pentagon’s air warfare plans “may be unbalanced in favor of fighters, vice longer-range strike aircraft.”

The tri-service, international program could cost $240 billion in 2008 dollars over its life, Kosiak told reporters June 20. The Air Force has said it will buy 1,763 F-35s, while the Navy and Marine Corps have laid out plans to purchase 680.

Service-specific fleets of those sizes would bring the cost of the Air Force variant, the F-35A, to about $74 million per plane and the Navy-Marine Corps version to about $97 million per fighter, an average of $81 million per aircraft, according to Kosiak.

“There is reason to worry that the JSF’s funding requirements will crowd out future investment in long-range strike capabilities,” the report said.

And because many in the U.S. defense realm point to the enormous Asia-Pacific region as the next likely theater for American forces, warplanes capable of traveling farther than existing and new U.S. fighters will be needed, Watts said.

The report suggests four ways to save JSF money for a nascent Air Force effort to develop a new long-range bomber or other programs, including:

• Cancel the F-35. Kosiak and Watts say the Air Force could replace its JSFs with Block 60 versions of the F-16 fighter, while the Navy and Marines could buy more F/A-18E/F Super Hornets. Doing so, according to the study, could save $3 billion to $3.7 billion.

• Alter the Air Force portion of the program. This option calls for the air service to buy just half its planned 1,763 F-35s and replace the ones not bought with Block 60 F-16s, which several U.S. allies have recently bought. This approach might free between $300 million and $350 million, CSBA says.

• Sink the Navy’s carrier version. By instead purchasing additional F/A-18E/Fs, the military could save $450 million to $550 million, the report estimates.

• Half conventional, zero carrier variants. Under this plan, the Air Force would buy only 880 conventional F-35As, while the Navy would scrap its carrier variant and buy more Super Hornets. This approach, the study said, could free up $800 million to $1.1 billion.

Watts said the Air Force and Navy could still conduct their expected future missions with new Block 60 F-16s and Super Hornets, largely because of the advent of precision-guided munitions.

“The maturation of guided munitions and battle networks argues that fewer advanced fighters will be needed in the future than were required in the prior era of industrial-style warfare in which munitions missed their aim points or targets,” the report said.

The report omits any mention of the F-22A Raptor, and the Air Force’s steadfast desire for 381 of the stealthy jets. Watts acknowledged that Air Force leaders would likely seriously consider buying more of their prized F-22As, not Block 60 F-16s, if the service ever found unallocated dollars in its fighter account.

CSBA Lays Out Options for Revamping JSF Program

[Invité Orca]

Moi qui pensais que l'abandon était un fantasme de dedefensa. En fait ils y songent réellement.

[hadriel]

L'installation de la ligne en Italie arrange bien les anglais qui pourront demander des versions US sans dommages pour leur industrie.

[Duralex]

"Tout va bien Madame la Marquise..."  ;/ ;/ ;/

J'espère que pendant ce temps là la fanfare de la Navy entonne dignement un air guilleret... comme sur le Titanic  =D

[P4]

le site web du CSBA

et le rapport

[Invité Rob]

Le CSBA n'est pas un institute officiel.

[Invité Orca]

Je comprends pas pourquoi ils parlent de l'abandonner?

Avec le budget dont ils disposent, ils n'y arriveraient pas, alors que nous francais on l'a fait pour le Rafale ?

Ou alors il n'est pas si bien qu'ils le prévoyaient et décident de l'annuler ?

J'avoue n'avoir pas tout saisi.

[Dario]

"Tout va bien Madame la Marquise..."  ;/ ;/ ;/

J'espère que pendant ce temps là la fanfare de la Navy entonne dignement un air guilleret... comme sur le Titanic  =D

Tant qu'on n'a pas de l'eau jusqu'au genoux, tout va bien.

For auld lang syne, my dear

For auld lang syne

We'll take a cup o'kindness yet

For auld lang syne

=D

(les paroles anglaise de ce qui est connu en France comme "ce n'est qu'un au revoir")

[Duralex]

Bientôt sur vos écrans : encore plus beau, encore plus grand, encore plus fort : "Le retour de la vengeance du JSF"

Le chasseur tellement furtif que personne ne le verra jamais  =D =D =D

[g4lly]

Je comprends pas pourquoi ils parlent de l'abandonner?

Avec le budget dont ils disposent, ils n'y arriveraient pas, alors que nous francais on l'a fait pour le Rafale ?

Ou alors il n'est pas si bien qu'ils le prévoyaient et décident de l'annuler ?

J'avoue n'avoir pas tout saisi.

C'est plus un probleme de quantité ... les US veulent/ont besoin de beaucoup d'avion et l'inflation du cout JSF a budget constant risque de les contraindre a reduire leur flotte a terme, et j'ai l'impression que pour eux c'est innenvisageable.

Donc ils pensent a se fournir tout ou partie en avions moins cher mais en quantité ...

[P4]

Dans l'introdution cette phrase en dit long .

"there also appears to be a growing need for airctaft that can loiter over the battelfield long enough to find emerging, fleeting or otherwise time- sensitive targets" .

[Invité Rob]

C'est peut-etre aussi important pour le F35.

Bush signs accord easing defence exports to UK

By Stephen Fidler in London and Demetri Sevastopulo in Miami

Published: June 21 2007 22:53 | Last updated: June 21 2007 22:53

Tony Blair and George W. Bush on Thursday signed via videoconference a treaty aimed at easing the export of arms and defence technologies from the US to Britain.

The difficulty of gaining approval for US military exports to Britain, probably the closest military ally of the US, has been a source of contention in relations between the two countries.

The treaty, which will require ratification from the UK parliament and a two-thirds majority of the US Senate, has implications for co-operation between the US and UK armed forces as well as for companies with operations in both countries.

The treaty will end the need for a separate US export licence for each piece of defence equipment and technology sent to the UK.

The treaty is a two-way agreement that will cover equipment for which the US and UK governments are the end-users. But it has been US exports to the UK that have been fraught with the greatest difficulty.

More than 8,000 licences were granted last year by the US government for exports of defence equipment and technologies to the UK, about half of which would not have been needed had the treaty been in force.

Lord Drayson, UK minister for defence equipment and support, called the treaty “a real breakthrough” that built on an agreement last year to share US Joint Strike Fighter technology with the UK.

*The UK Ministry of Defence said current military operations could benefit because it would speed the export of off-the-shelf equipment purchased urgently by the UK from the US. It should also allow the two militaries to operate more effectively together.

Industry would gain from being allowed closer and deeper co-operation with US companies and it would allow UK companies to bid more easily on US defence programmes.

The treaty calls for the creation of a so-called “approved community” of individuals in each country, given security clearance to discuss and deal with technological transfers. In the UK, these people would be sworn to secrecy under the Official Secrets Act, UK officials said.

The treaty represented a change of approach by the Bush administration. Previous efforts to improve defence co-operation were aimed at securing waivers for the UK and Australia from the US International Trade in Arms Regulations that cover such exports. Only Canada has such a waiver.

But these efforts foundered on opposition from the House of Representatives. Some prominent members questioned the strength of UK export control regulations and voiced fears that sensitive US technologies could leak to third countries through Britain.

John Rood, assistant secretary of state for international security and non-proliferation, said the treaty was broader in scope than previous waivers the White House unsuccessfully asked Congress to provide the UK. It would, for example, include classified goods and services.

Mr Rood said both sides needed to work out implementation agreements, which could take several months, before sending the treaty to the Senate for approval. He said the ”bar was high” for Senate approval - which requires a two-thirds majority - and stressed that it would not be a ”simple matter” to convince Congress.

The agreement would not require approval from the House, which has previously blocked efforts to give preferential treatment to the UK and Australia. Mr Rood said Congress would still have to be notified about technology transfers even though licenses would no longer be required.

The treaty would also be reciprocal, and paves the way for the UK to export highly effective devices for detecting roadside bombs used in Northern Ireland that the Pentagon wants for Iraq.

Mr Rood said the administration had no plans to draft similar treaties with other allies, but said ”never say never”. However, he added that it was ”premature to speculate” about whether a deal could be done with Australia.

Link.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/3e167c38-203f-11dc-9eb1-000b5df10621.html

[Invité ZedroS]

Il me semble qu'au final c'est au Congrès de valider ce genre d'accords, et que par le passé le Congrès s'est souvent montré contre non ?

[Invité Rob]

Il me semble qu'au final c'est au Congrès de valider ce genre d'accords, et que par le passé le Congrès s'est souvent montré contre non ?

Non, seulement en part. C'est un treate, pas un ITAR waiver. Un ITAR waiver besoin le "oui" des deux chambres de "Congress". Un treate besoin seulement le "Senate". Jusqu'a ici je pense que le "House of Representatives" etait le plus grand probleme.

[European]

Nouvelle video du F35:

http://www.jsf.mil/video/f35test/AA-1%20Montage_high.wmv

[Fusilier]

Nouvelle video du F35:

http://www.jsf.mil/video/f35test/AA-1%20Montage_high.wmv

Como se dicce en Italiano aquesto tipo di proyeto ?  Cattedrale en el desierto?  =D

[European]

Cattedrale nel deserto.

Il vol tres tres bien le nouvelle avion.

Extraordinsire.

Flight #18. All perfect.

[Neo]

Il vole oui, enfin bom mon planeur aussi vole, et presque tirer plus de G que le F-35! (7G)

En dogfight  contre moi il a aucune chance! ^^

[Spadassin]

J'ai pas fait tout le topic, je ne sais pas si quelqu'un a parlé du X-32 de Boeing qui a été en concurrence avec le F-35 pour le Joint Strike Fighter Program

3 versions etaient proposées, dont une a décollage vertical, et 2 ont été construites.

les caracteristiques présentées n'etaient pas mauvaises

personnellement je trouve juste l'aspect derangeant: un peu "pataud"

[Neo]

C'est vrai qu'on se demande comment un machin comme ca peut voler!  =D

Quoi que, vieux dicton de pilotes: "Le Phantom est la preuve vivante qu'avec suffisamment de puissance, même une brique peut voler !"