Le F-35

[g4lly]

Je me demande ce que peut faire le F35 en terme d'évolutions selon quelles trappes sont ouvertes...

Faut pas abuser... les structure caisson composite/carbone/verre/alu c'est aussi rigide que pascal au réveil hein pas de souci la dessus je pense ;)

[Darkjmfr]

Ma parole ! le voilà qui étale sa vie privée sur le forum ! :D

[xav]

Les premier effets "de la crise"? (Faut bien aller les chercher quelque part les 700 Milliards pour renflouer l'economie)

US Congress passes $487.7 defence spending bill, slashes aircraft

The US Congress today passed defence spending bills slashing funds for the Lockheed Martin F-35 and Lockheed/AugstaWestland VH-71 presidential helicopter, and also left the Lockheed F-22 and Boeing C-17 production lines still in a state of programmatic purgatory.

A joint conference committee passed the $487.7 billion defense appropriations for fiscal 2009, marking a 6.1% increase over the FY08 budget but $4 billion less than the Bush Administration’s request.

The spending proposal, if enacted upon review by the White House, would strike two blows at the F-35 programme.

First, the bill would cut one aircraft each for the US Air Force and the US Navy from the FY09, reducing the overall count from 16 F-35s to 14.

Second, Congressional appropriators added language urging the USN to request funds in FY10 for signing a third multi-year procurement deal for Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornets, citing concerns about a fighter shortfall until F-35Cs are delivered.

The lawmakers proved less decisive about the fate of the F-22 and the C-17.

The appropriators added $523 million in long-lead funding, potentially extending F-22 production from the end of FY09 through FY10. However, Congress also passed a defence policy bill that forbids the Pentagon from spending most of the money until the next administration agrees to buy more F-22s.

Similarly, the fate of the imperiled C-17 production line is also confused. The defence policy bill authorizes the USAF to spend $2.1 billion for six C-17s, but the appropriations bill fails to provide funding. Congress also may propose to add funds for up to 15 C-17s in an emergency supplemental bill.

Meanwhile, another budget cut is likely to create a new crisis for the VH-71 presidential helicopter. Citing delay risks for the Increment 2 phase, lawmakers agreed to cut $212 million from the programme. Research and development for the Increment 2 fleet was hardest hit, falling by two-thirds in FY09. The Increment 1 programme was fully funded.

The Bell Helicopter ARH-70 Arapaho armed reconnaissance helicopter also sustained more funding cuts in the new spending bills. Congress voted to provide $198 million to buy 12 aircraft, which is $161 million and 16 aircraft less than the Bush Administration requested.

http://www.flightglobal.com

Si la navy achete plein de F18E et F en 2010... ils commenderont forcement moins de F35C a terme... risquant meme de purement et simplement annuler cette version.

Le F22 et C17 semblent etre plus important que le F35... sympas pour les pays partenaire... mais d'un autre cote on comprend le congres  ;)

[pascal]

Ce qu'il y a de bien pour les américains avec le F35 c'est que ce sont AUSSI les partenaires qui payent.

[Berkut]

Quoi? Ce sont les aussies qui payent? Rha les pauvres!... :lol:

au final ce sont les associés qui vont payer le développement de l'appareil US et ce sont les associés qui vont payer les versions export.. Right?

[xav]

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2008/09/download-infamous-rand-air-pow.html

Download infamous RAND air power briefing.

[Berkut]

j'aime bien le "can't turn, can't climb, can't run" ils auraient dû rajouter "just cry" :lol:

Par contre ils sont balèzes pour donner des infos sur le PAK FA. Bon ok, on connaît grosso merdo sont poids DECLARE et la poussée unitaire de ses moteurs mais quand même...

[SpongeBob]

Côté anglais on met la pression.

Britain considers £9bn JSF project pulloutMichael Smith

BRITAIN is considering pulling out of a £9 billion project with America to produce the new Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) aircraft, intended to fly off the Royal Navy’s forthcoming aircraft carriers.

The move is part of an increasingly desperate attempt to plug a £1.5 billion shortfall in the defence budget. The RAF’s 25 new Airbus A400 transport aircraft could also be at risk.

Studies have now been commissioned to analyse whether Eurofighters could be adapted to fly off the carriers.

If Britain abandons the JSF, it will be seen as a further snub to the Americans following Gordon Brown’s decision last week not to send 4,000 more troops to Afghanistan.

Only a week earlier, during a visit to London, Robert Gates, the American defence secretary, had said he understood Britain would be sending more troops to meet what commanders say is a 10,000 shortfall.

The possible ditching of the JSF results in part from spiralling costs that have seen the price of the planned 150 British aircraft rise from the original £9 billion estimate to £15 billion.

Britain has already paid out £2.5 billion in preliminary costs but next spring must start paying for actual aircraft. At that point it is committed to the entire project whatever the price.

Once full production begins, Britain will be paying more than £1 billion a year for the aircraft, exacerbating the already dire state of the Ministry of Defence (MoD) budget.

“That has really concentrated minds at the MoD,” said Francis Tusa, editor of Defence Analysis. “Put simply no-one has the faintest idea how much this project will cost.”

The cost is only part of the problem. There is serious concern over the aircraft’s lack of firepower as it can only carry three 500lb bombs, compared with as many as eight on the Eurofighter.

There is also increasing frustration over the continued American refusal to share information on the technology involved.

President George Bush signed a deal with Tony Blair shortly before the former prime minister handed over to Gordon Brown, promising to share top secret technology with Britain.

The deal has still to be ratified by Congress and the Senate foreign relations committee has written to Bush warning him it will not now be ratified until the new president takes office.

There is consternation over the lack of information Britain is receiving on the aircraft and this country’s lack of input into designing its capability.

BAE Systems, manufacturer of the RAF’s Eurofighter, has been asked to produce a study into whether it could be flown from the carriers, which are due to enter service in 2014 and 2016.

The JSF is a short-take-off-and-vertical-landing (STOVL) aircraft similar to the Harrier aircraft that are currently being flown off the Royal Navy’s two old carriers.

Flying Eurofighter from the new carriers would require pilots to learn a completely new skill of landing conventionally at sea — a task likened by experts to a “controlled crash”.

It would also require the Eurofighter fuselage to be strengthened, the attachment of an arrestor hook to stop the aircraft on landing, and protection against saltwater erosion.

The BAE Systems study, carried out earlier this year, determined that the aircraft could be built to land on carriers without major difficulty.

A company spokesman would only confirm that the study had been carried out and that the MoD had seen the results which confirmed the aircraft could be adapted to fly off carriers.

Replacing JSF with some of the 232 Eurofighters the RAF is committed to buying would be attractive for the Treasury, which has always wanted to find ways to cut its £16 billion cost.

The deal committed all four major partners — Britain, Germany, Italy and Spain — to paying for all the aircraft they originally ordered even if they later decided to cut the numbers they needed.

The cost of the project, now running at close to £1.2 billion a year, is the biggest single contributor to the £1.5 billion shortfall in the defence budget.

Efforts to stave off the payments dragged the government into the controversy over the decision to call off a Serious Fraud Office investigation into alleged bribes paid by BAE Systems.

The probe into the company’s £43 billion al-Yamamah arms deal with Saudi Arabia was expected to examine the bank accounts of members of the Saudi royal family.

A £6 billion deal under which Saudi Arabia agreed to take 72 Eurofighters from Britain — earning the MoD a two-year payments holiday on its own aircraft — was dependent on the probe being called off.

That has only served to focus attention on the fact that when the payments holiday ends, Britain will be committed to a decade of paying well in excess of £2 billion a year for two different strike aircraft.

The additional measure of cancelling the military version of the Airbus A400 would only save a total of £1.5 billion but is attractive to the Treasury because it would cost nothing.

The aircraft has consistently failed to meet deadlines with manufacturer EADS admitting last week that it could not meet the deadline for the first test flight.

“The RAF and the MoD would prefer to enforce penalty clauses providing compensation for delays while continuing with the project,” said defence sources. “But the Treasury would happily bin it.”

The MoD said “marinising” Eurofighter had been looked at as an option but “JSF remains our optimum solution to fly off the carriers”.

A spokesman said Britain remained “fully committed to the defence trade cooperation treaty and we are working closely with the American administration to find a way forward.”

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article4837746.ece

[xav]

Fighter manufacturer offers deal if Canada commits to purchase

David Pugliese , Canwest News Service

Published: Sunday, September 28, 2008

U.S. aerospace giant Lockheed Martin hopes to offer Canada and other nations interested in its high-tech Joint Strike Fighter a deal that would see the price of each aircraft ordered set at around $50 million US in return for countries committing to the purchase by a certain time.

There has been some concern among nations, including Canada, about the final price of the JSF. Australia has estimated the price tag for the aircraft will be $70 million US per plane when it takes delivery of its aircraft in 2013, according to media reports.

Other nations have considered delaying their purchases since the cost of the planes is expected to be higher at the beginning of the program.

But Lockheed Martin hopes to have a fixed price for the aircraft ready for various countries to consider by next year, said Tom Burbage, Lockheed's general manager for JSF program integration.

Canadian defence officials acknowledge they have taken part in meetings where the increasing cost of the JSF has been discussed. But they say they don't have an estimated JSF price tag for Canada since the government has yet to officially commit to buying the planes and the cost would depend on the number of aircraft purchased.

Canada has already invested $150 million US in JSF. The government has also decided to take part in the next phase of the aircraft's development, agreeing to invest around $500 million US over the next 45 years to pay for the specialized equipment for JSF production.

Burbage said Lockheed is gathering information from its suppliers to come up with a fixed price. A standard price that has been used previously is around $50 million US per plane, he added.

"We're certainly hoping that the pricing we get back from our suppliers will either ratify or improve that number," he said.

The proposal would see countries putting in their orders for a five-year run of aircraft before a specific date in return for a firm fixed price.

Canada expects to make its decision in 2011 on whether to buy the JSF or another fighter jet.

Norway, which is also considering the purchase of other fighter aircraft, has requested a binding price for the JSF. Media reports note that it was given a cost of $58.7 million.

Other aerospace firms are trying to entice countries to instead order their aircraft. In August, Boeing offered Denmark the Super Hornet, an advanced version of the F-18.

There has also been some talk in Canadian defence circles about whether the air force can afford the JSF since it is also in the process of purchasing new C-130J transport planes and Chinook helicopters. In the past the Defence Department has projected the total cost of replacing its CF-18 fighter jets at around $10 billion but that figure was based on 80 aircraft.

The Harper government has announced that its long-term defence plan would see the purchase of 65 aircraft to replace the CF-18s, although it has not specified the JSF. The CF-18 fighter aircraft fleet is expected to be phased out between 2017 and 2020.

Canadian defence officials have declined several times to discuss the JSF program. However, in an e-mail issued several months ago, the department acknowledged there have been some increased costs in the JSF program but it remains unclear what impact those might have.

"The Department is closely monitoring the cost of the Joint Strike Fighter program; however, at this point the figures are still being examined," the e-mail noted. "The partner countries should have a better appreciation of the total cost increase and the impact of any increase at a later date."

"Unit aircraft costs will be dependent on final order quantities and schedules," the department e-mail added.

Government officials have promoted the benefits of the JSF program for Canada's aerospace industry. They say Canadian firms have been awarded around 150 JSF contracts so far. Canadian industrial opportunities are expected to total more than $5 billion US over the life of the JSF program. That total could increase if other nations decide to buy the fighter.

But Martin Shadwick, a strategic studies professor at York University, said that he expects Canada's purchase of JSF to proceed.

"Politically and industrially we've thrown our lot in with the JSF," he said. "It would be difficult to go elsewhere now. The question is how many, when and what model."

$50 mil???

What a great partnership.

Co-fund development and tools using tax payer's money... And you get to buy a product from private industry that no one knows how much it will cost and when it might be ready. I wish all state supported programs were run like this.

Ah well, at least they can order sensor upgrades and such from a 3rd party since they all receive the source codes right?

Pffffff

[xav]

Israel to buy $15.2 bln in Lockheed fighters

WASHINGTON, Sept 30 (Reuters) - The U.S. government on Tuesday said it approved the sale to Israel of 25 F-35 Joint Strike Fighter aircraft built by Lockheed Martin Corp (LMT.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) and an option for 50 more in coming years -- a deal valued at up to $15.2 billion.

The Pentagon's Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA), which oversees major arms sales, said the deal is vital to U.S. national security interests to assist Israel as it develops and maintains "a strong and ready self-defense capability."

Israel needs the aircraft to enhance its air-to-air and air-to-ground defense, the agency said.

The DSCA notified Congress about the proposed arms sale before lawmakers head back to their districts for the November election. Lawmakers now have 30 days to block the sales, but such action is rare, since the agreements are usually carefully vetted beforehand.

The Pentagon agency said Israel wants to buy an initial 25 F-35s in the Conventional Take-Off and Landing (CTOL) configuration, with an option to buy an additional 50 F-35 CTOL or Short Take-Off and Vertical Landing (STOVL) aircraft.

All aircraft would be equipped with either the F-135 engines built by Pratt and Whitney, a unit of United Technologies Corp (UTX.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz), or the F-136 engine being developed by General Electric Co (GE.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) and Britain's Rolls-Royce Plc (RR.L: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz).

Lockheed Martin said it welcomes the decision. "As the first potential foreign military sale of the F-35, this would be an important first step in expanding interest in the Joint Strike Fighter beyond the U.S. government and eight international F-35 partner nations," said Lockheed spokesman Tom Jurkowsky.

Earlier this month, the Pentagon approved up to $330 million in three separate arms deals for Israel.

Top Israeli and U.S. government officials met in Washington this month for the most senior bilateral high technology dialogue ever between the two allies. Discussions focused in part on ensuring that sensitive technologies were not passed to third parties.

Separately on Tuesday, the Pentagon approved Brazil's request to buy up to $525 million worth of 15 United Technologies Black Hawk helicopters and 30 General Electric engines. (Reporting by Andrea Shalal-Esa, editing by Gerald E. McCormick)

15 Milliards...

Allez savoir si ils auront la version US/UK ou la version export genre Pays bas :) Et si ils pouront en faire leur F35i

[alexandreVBCI]

Les australiens sont toujours aussi remontés contre le F35 et ses capacités air-air très inférieures au SU-30 vendus à leurs voisins :

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/The-F-35s-Air-to-Air-Capability-Controversy-05089/

On Sept 11/08, The Sydney Morning Herald reports that Australian Defence Minister Joel Fitzgibbon has asked for a full report from Australia’s DoD, in response to public reports that a classified computer simulation of an attack by Russian-built SU-30 family aircraft on a mixed fleet of F-35As, Super Hornets and F-22s, had resulted in success for the Russian aircraft.

[Berkut]

tiens, c'est curieux, la simu n'était pas seulement faite entre Lightning II et Flanker 30MK? Je ne me rappelle qu'il ait été fait mention d'un contingent de F-18 et de F-22... Raptors qu'ils n'ont pas d'ailleurs.

[cvs]

15 Milliards...

Allez savoir si ils auront la version US/UK ou la version export genre Pays bas :) Et si ils pouront en faire leur F35i

Va savoir, pour avoir le soutien US, ils sont prêts à tout. Mais ils n'ont pas le choix, ils ne peuvent pas acheter autre chose que du US.

Par contre, il me semble qu'ils ont bataillé et finalement obtenu la possibilité de mettre leur propre électronique.

M'enfin bon, j'espère qu'ils n'auront pas une version "downgradé". Et puis faut encore que ça passe dans le budget et ça tant qu'il n'y a pas les élections israéliennes et US, tout peut arriver.

[Sidewinder]

tiens, c'est curieux, la simu n'était pas seulement faite entre Lightning II et Flanker 30MK? Je ne me rappelle qu'il ait été fait mention d'un contingent de F-18 et de F-22... Raptors qu'ils n'ont pas d'ailleurs.

Il n'y a pas eu de simulation Australie contre X.  L'article de Defense Industry Daily parle de la meme simulation "China vs US over Taiwan" ou les F-35 ne figuraient pas du tout.  C'etait avant tout une simulation de logistique, et non pas de combat aerien.  Elle donnait un taux de 100% d'efficacité aux missiles des F-22, et 0% (zero) a ceux des Su-27/30 Chinois contre les F-22.  Mais, en bref, la Chine gagne quand meme, parce que la seule opposition aérienne contre eux est la flotte de F-22 US basée a Guam.  Pas d'USN, pas de bases au Japon, pas de RoCAF, etc.  Et malgré leur invincibilité statistique dans le "sim", les F-22 ne savent pas en meme temps defendre le Taiwan et proteger leurs propres ravitailleurs.  Et hop, plus de ravitailleurs, plus de presence USAF.

Il n'y avait pas de contingent de F-18 ni de F-35 dans cette simulation.  On peut supposer que le scenario décrit une attaque eclair par la Chine contre le Taiwan, donc pas le temps d'amener la Navy ou autres unités USAF a temps pour empecher la destruction de toutes les bases RoC.

[Berkut]

Ok, merci pour les précisions.  ;)

[phexo]

Quoi? Ce sont les aussies qui payent? Rha les pauvres!... :lol:

au final ce sont les associés qui vont payer le développement de l'appareil US et ce sont les associés qui vont payer les versions export.. Right?

:lol: :lol:

tout en claquant une bonne partie de possibles contrats pour l'industrie européenne !

[xav]

Haaaa !!!

Italy Pulls Out of JSF’s Initial Operational Test and Evaluation

Quote:

Letter to Parliament (excerpt)

(Source: Dutch Ministry of Defence; issued Oct. 7, 2008)

(Issued in Dutch only; unofficial translation by defense-aerospace.com)

As a result of the general consultation of 1 October last, I am informing you of the decision by Italy concerning its participation to the Initial Operational Test And Evaluation (IOT& E) of the JSF. (…/…)

Recently the Italian project director has informed the Dutch, American and British partners that Italy will abandon its participation to the IOT& E and, with that, also of the purchase of the first test aircraft this year.

As a reason, the new [italian] government has invoked the need to reduce expenditure.

The Italian decision has no financial consequences for the Netherlands.

Moreover, the Italian government has reaffirmed its explicit support for the JSF program, and has confirmed the Italian participation to the System Development & Demonstration (SDD) phase.

(Signed)

Dr. Jack (J.G.) de Vries

State Secretary for Defence

Click here for the full letter to Parliament (in Dutch; 3 pages in PDF format) on the Dutch MoD website.

(EDITOR’S NOTE: Repeated attempts to contact the Italian Ministry of Defense on Oct. 7 and 8 were unsuccessful. We will update this item as warranted.)

(ends)

The JSF, Italy and Europe

(Source: Alenia Aeronautica); issued Oct. 7, 2008)

The [Rome-based] Institute for International Affairs presented the results of its research on the Italian and European participation in the F-35 program at a conference held yesterday in Rome. The Joint Strike Fighter is the fifth generation fighter intended to allow air forces to meet 21st century operational requirements, but also today’s largest aeronautical program, with potential sales running into the thousands.

Italy joined the program very early as a Tier II partner, just behind the United Kingdom, and is the candidate to host the only Final Assembly and Check-Out facility outside the US. In the past weeks Alenia Aeronautica signed the first contract for wing production, for which it will be the second source supplier with a potential run of 1,200 wings.

The importance of the JSF was underscored by the high-level attendance at the conference, which ranged from Undersecretary for Defence Giuseppe Cossiga, to the Chairman of the Defense Committee of the Italian Chamber of Representatives and the Chief of the Defense Staff Gen. Vincenzo Camporini, who spoke together with industry representatives Remo Pertica, Chairman of the Italian Aerospace and Defense Industries Association, and Giovanni Bertolone, CEO of Alenia Aeronautica.

The speakers all stressed that the research – coordinated for IAI by Michele Nones with Giovanni Gasparini and Alessandro Marrone and sponsored by Alenia – stands out for its rigorous methodology and objective approach. The IAI paper confirms the great operational value of the JSF, including its ability to operate away from its home base with minimal logistic support, but also highlights some of the positive and negative aspects of the program.

These include on one hand the technological progress (starting from netweork-centric capabilities and stealthiness) and great industrial potential; on the other hand, there are still some critical issues relating to transferring technologies (also related to industrial roles) and the bureaucracy which might make it difficult to ensure the timely flow of parts in an international program, but also to the need for European countries to increase their cooperation to increase their bargaining power.

The speakers underlined how all these aspects are crucial if Europe is to reap the opportunities that the Joint Strike Fighter program can offer Italy and Europe.

-ends-

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/cgi-bin/client/modele.pl?session=dae.42046516.1223563518.FOYFjX8AAAEAACKADdgAAAAX&prod=98615&modele=release

[Berkut]

En ces temps de disette, il n'y a pas de petites économies...

[pascal]

c'est-y pô malheureux...

Les italiens commencent peut être à la trouver saumâtre.

En clair ils en pnt marre d'avoir mal quand ils s'assoient

[flashball]

j'ai pas eu le courage de lire les 107 pages du topic , m'enfin j'aimerais savoir :

Il est recyclable ??

Parce que j'aimerais m'en prendre un pour repasser mes toiles de tente.

[xav]

En ces temps de disette, il n'y a pas de petites économies...

Ouais, a mon avis il n'y aura pas que l'Italie, mais d'autres pays impliquer dans le projet suivront...

[Berkut]

tous les pays n'ont pas la capacité magique à creuser un déficit comme on le ferait dans son jardin. Si la crise se fait encore un peu plus sentir il y a de bonnes chances que les iouesses perdent des alliés pour ce qui est du co-financement du Lightning II et que les partenaires restants se voient affublés d'une surcharge rédhibitoire en termes de coûts de développement.

[xav]

Est ce que les arguments ci dessus se tiennent et sont fondes?

Car Franchement,  LM n'a pas pu se gourrer a se point la non? Ou alors c'est le cahier des charges du JSF qui oblige ces limitations ou designs degradant les perfs?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

F-18, F/A-18, F-22 ALL suffered from vertical fin buffet due to their dual vertical surfaces configuration.

It's a WELL known FACT that the fix on F-18 was to add a par of strakes on top of the fuselage to create another set of vortexes and a "suscion" effect on the main LEX-generated vortexes.

Since they didn't want to hit the same problems at L-M after they got RID of the previous large LEX (due to the 230-5 configuration enlarged wing) they actually did test in windtunnel showing that the chin did "generated a strong vortex at high alpha" and they had to add structural reinforcement to the fins (proving that these vortexes leave the aircrafe and wings surfaces).

These vortexes are only diffusing the front intake chin and front lower fuselage pressures due to the design of this area which is to make sure it stays under the limit of the two fuselages surfaces which is only a faceted L.O feature.

Since there is NO surface under them (Behind the vortex root) because the fuselage lies parralel to the relative wind and that they simple hit the fin tip after separating from the boundary layer (NO MERGE THERE), they have NO LIFT EFFECT at high or even moderate AoA.

DELETED LEX MEANS NO LIFT-GENERATING SURFACE.

TO OBTAIN THE LIFT-ENHANCING EFFECT YOU NEED A CLOSE COUPLE CONFIGURATION OR A LARGE LEX LIKE THAT OF THE F-16/18 OR EVEN THAT OF THE F-22.

   

[Fenrir]

Ahaha Xav, tu n'aurais pas trouvé ce post avec pour nom d'auteur Thunder?

[xav]

Si si... Mais son (apparente) connaissance de l'aeronautique et aerodynamique n'a malheureusment pour egale que sa haine du F35...

J'aimerai faire le tri entre la connaissance factuelle et la haine :)