F-22 / F-35 5th Generation jets | News & Discussions.
- Thread starter Lankan Ranger
- Start date
gambit
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2009
- Messages
- 28,569
- Reaction score
- 148
- Country
- Location
The crux of your arguments rests on the concept of engineering/manufacturing concurrency, which you implied as flawed. Yes, the F-35 does have issues, but then so does the 777 and the A380 when those aircrafts were under production. This sub-forum is not to promote the F-35 but to discuss it, flaws and successes.
You have been proven wrong about the concept of engineering/manufacturing concurrency to start. That is the wave of the future. As for the F-35, the US military cannot afford dedicated platforms any more, especially in large quantity. The future is in multi-role platforms and if it is not the F-35, it will be another.
gambit
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2009
- Messages
- 28,569
- Reaction score
- 148
- Country
- Location
What is there to 'disprove' ? That the F-35 does not have any problems ? Basically, what you want is for me to agree with you. If that is the case, then what is the point of having a debate any way ? I am not running away from you, son. I am challenging you in the correct arena.
Hurter
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2014
- Messages
- 1,916
- Reaction score
- -1
- Country
- Location
Do we have a chance to get these in future if budget allows?
Highly unlikely.
dexter
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2009
- Messages
- 6,111
- Reaction score
- 25
- Country
- Location
Read on and envy her ! Photographs taken by Liz Kaszynski, she is one of 10 aerial photographers here at Lockheed Martin who are trained and certified to take pictures while flying in the backseat of fighter jets.
Liz is the sole female aerial photographer for the F-35.
Liz is the sole female aerial photographer for the F-35.
gambit
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2009
- Messages
- 28,569
- Reaction score
- 148
- Country
- Location
Who is the true creator of the 'stealth' aircraft ?
The definition of 'creator' is:
: a person who makes something new
: one that creates usually by bringing something new or original into being;
To be a creator, one does not need to create all the components beforehand. An inventor/creator is someone who often invents/creates new things from components that are already available. After all, the transistor was invented in 1947 by American physicists John Bardeen, Walter Brattain, and William Shockley, and transistor radio came in 1954, but no one gave credit of the radio to Bardeen, Brattain, and Shockley. The transistor is a component of the transistor radio. A vital component, to be sure, but the radio itself predate the transistor.
Between the Horten Brothers of WW II era Nazi Germany and Soviet Russian mathematician Pyotor Ufimtsev, those who insisted that either was the true parent of the modern day 'stealth' aircrafts do so asserted out of ignorance of the technical and historical issues involved, and/or an irrational desire to deny as much as possible US intellectual contribution into the concept.
...Of the Horten Brothers and the Ho-229...
The Ho-229 was a tubular framed and plywood skin experimental aircraft. The reasoning is that since the -229 is a flying wing design, just like the 'stealth' B-2, and that the Hortens impregnated charcoal (carbon) into the plywood, it mean the men were working on a 'stealth' aircraft long before Americans at Lockheed came out with the F-117, reputedly the world's first 'stealth' aircraft.
Jack Northrop, of the famed Northrop Corporation, experimented with the flying wing design back in 1940 with a scaled model. The flying wing design itself was already well known throughout the aviation community long before WW II. If the desire is for long range and duration, nothing is better than the flying wing. The major issue and problem for the flying wing is controllability, particularly in the yaw axis. Northrop, the Hortens, and dozens of other major names back in those early days of aviation probably experimented on their own versions of different flying wings designs. There is nothing mysterious about it.
As for the flying wing's low radar cross section (RCS) or 'stealthiness', it is purely coincidental. In radar detection, the more physically complex the body, the greater the tendency for a higher RCS which translate to higher detectability. The flying wing is naturally a less complex structure than the currently well known aircraft design of a distinct fuselage (main body), a pair of wings, a pair of rear horizontal stabilators, and at least one vertical stabilator. Most aircrafts usually have at least one pair of fixed stabilizing fins somewhere as well, often on the underside. The flying wing design either have no distinct fuselage or the fuselage is highly blended in with the wing shape itself. This make the flying wing, as a shape under radar bombardment, naturally more 'stealthy' to many degrees than the currently well known configuration for aircrafts worldwide.
As for the charcoal applied to the plywood, there is nothing unusual about this as well. Long before the Ho-229 came, radars have been used to detect submarines' periscopes and in response, the German submarines used a basic form of radar absorbent material (RAM), or more like a paint, to reduce the periscope's radar signature.
Radar-absorbent material - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The -229's original intention was to be a long range bomber to directly attack continental US (CONUS), hence the direction towards the flying wing design. The -229 never got beyond the experimental stage, in both basic flight and under radar testing. Overall, there is no credible technical evidence to support the argument that Nazi Germany was the first to create a true 'stealth' aircraft.
...Of Pyotor Ufimtsev...
Ufimtsev was a Soviet Russian mathematician. Today, he is a retiree in the US after his emigration to the US and after his professorship at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA).
Although Ufimtsev is often associated with 'stealth' aircrafts, he originally had nothing about aviation in mind when he created arguably his greatest work in mathematics: physical theory of diffraction (PTD). Published as 'Fundamentals of the Physical Theory of Diffraction. In essence, what Ufimtsev did was mathematically formalized the behaviors of waves upon contact with physical bodies.
When it is possible to formalize the behaviors of something, it becomes possible to predict those behaviors before that something is in motion, whether that something is in economics as in how consumers could spend their monies, or in automobile safety as in how a frame would collapse upon collision. How electromagnetic (EM) waves deflects off surfaces are not confined to bodies designed for aviation. Scientists and engineers have used those formulas to design better antennas for transmissions and receptions of information using EM waves. Antennas that can specifically direct their focus in giving and receiving. This leads to decreased interference in high EM traffic situations. His work was considered so militarily benign that he was allowed by the Soviet government to publish internationally, which he did.
This does not mean the behaviors of EM waves, particularly of radars off bodies, were unknown before Ufimtsev and PTD.
History of radar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
As far as the military aviation aspect goes, Lockheed and all the major aviation companies in the world knew of these behaviors. It is just that before Ufimtsev and PTD, predicting these behaviors was so complex that it discouraged all into relegating the project into secondary importance status. The SR-71 from Lockheed is considered to be the first serious attempt to produce an aircraft whose radar cross section (RCS) is lower than its physical dimensions should produce at certain tactically important frequencies, usually the ghz bands. Lockheed designed the -71 to be as low radar observale as possible through guess work of how radar signals would behave off the aircraft. In the absence of PTD, those guesses gave -71 gave an RCS equivalent to that of the much smaller Cessna 150, a light propeller driven aircraft whose take off speed is less than 100 mph. This was an amazing accomplishment in itself and it proved that radar 'stealth' is possible.
Could it be argued that if Ufimtsev did not produce PTD, would radar 'stealth' exist at all, whether from Lockheed or even from the Soviets ? Absolutely it could be so credibly argued. Again, what Ufimtsev and PTD did was gave the world the mathematical tools to work on these behaviors virtually, saving engineers unknown man-hours and finances, in and out of military work, to produce devices that exploits EM signals.
So when there was a need to produce a military aircraft that would be as low radar observable as possible at tactically important frequencies, Lockheed was looking for anything to help in that project, and PTD came for that assist.
Just as the credit for the transistor radio went to Texas Instruments and the Regency Division of IDEA, and not to Bardeen, Brattain, and Shockley, the inventor of the transistor, this mean the proper credit for who is the 'father of stealth' is the US, particularly Lockheed. Not Pyotor Ufimtsev of Soviet Russia.
The definition of 'creator' is:
: a person who makes something new
: one that creates usually by bringing something new or original into being;
To be a creator, one does not need to create all the components beforehand. An inventor/creator is someone who often invents/creates new things from components that are already available. After all, the transistor was invented in 1947 by American physicists John Bardeen, Walter Brattain, and William Shockley, and transistor radio came in 1954, but no one gave credit of the radio to Bardeen, Brattain, and Shockley. The transistor is a component of the transistor radio. A vital component, to be sure, but the radio itself predate the transistor.
Between the Horten Brothers of WW II era Nazi Germany and Soviet Russian mathematician Pyotor Ufimtsev, those who insisted that either was the true parent of the modern day 'stealth' aircrafts do so asserted out of ignorance of the technical and historical issues involved, and/or an irrational desire to deny as much as possible US intellectual contribution into the concept.
...Of the Horten Brothers and the Ho-229...
The Ho-229 was a tubular framed and plywood skin experimental aircraft. The reasoning is that since the -229 is a flying wing design, just like the 'stealth' B-2, and that the Hortens impregnated charcoal (carbon) into the plywood, it mean the men were working on a 'stealth' aircraft long before Americans at Lockheed came out with the F-117, reputedly the world's first 'stealth' aircraft.
Jack Northrop, of the famed Northrop Corporation, experimented with the flying wing design back in 1940 with a scaled model. The flying wing design itself was already well known throughout the aviation community long before WW II. If the desire is for long range and duration, nothing is better than the flying wing. The major issue and problem for the flying wing is controllability, particularly in the yaw axis. Northrop, the Hortens, and dozens of other major names back in those early days of aviation probably experimented on their own versions of different flying wings designs. There is nothing mysterious about it.
As for the flying wing's low radar cross section (RCS) or 'stealthiness', it is purely coincidental. In radar detection, the more physically complex the body, the greater the tendency for a higher RCS which translate to higher detectability. The flying wing is naturally a less complex structure than the currently well known aircraft design of a distinct fuselage (main body), a pair of wings, a pair of rear horizontal stabilators, and at least one vertical stabilator. Most aircrafts usually have at least one pair of fixed stabilizing fins somewhere as well, often on the underside. The flying wing design either have no distinct fuselage or the fuselage is highly blended in with the wing shape itself. This make the flying wing, as a shape under radar bombardment, naturally more 'stealthy' to many degrees than the currently well known configuration for aircrafts worldwide.
As for the charcoal applied to the plywood, there is nothing unusual about this as well. Long before the Ho-229 came, radars have been used to detect submarines' periscopes and in response, the German submarines used a basic form of radar absorbent material (RAM), or more like a paint, to reduce the periscope's radar signature.
Radar-absorbent material - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
It would have been natural for the Hortens to try to reduce the -229's radar vulnerability by any method and if charcoal, which would have been lighter weight than iron particles in paint, would work, they would try charcoal.
The -229's original intention was to be a long range bomber to directly attack continental US (CONUS), hence the direction towards the flying wing design. The -229 never got beyond the experimental stage, in both basic flight and under radar testing. Overall, there is no credible technical evidence to support the argument that Nazi Germany was the first to create a true 'stealth' aircraft.
...Of Pyotor Ufimtsev...
Ufimtsev was a Soviet Russian mathematician. Today, he is a retiree in the US after his emigration to the US and after his professorship at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA).
Although Ufimtsev is often associated with 'stealth' aircrafts, he originally had nothing about aviation in mind when he created arguably his greatest work in mathematics: physical theory of diffraction (PTD). Published as 'Fundamentals of the Physical Theory of Diffraction. In essence, what Ufimtsev did was mathematically formalized the behaviors of waves upon contact with physical bodies.
When it is possible to formalize the behaviors of something, it becomes possible to predict those behaviors before that something is in motion, whether that something is in economics as in how consumers could spend their monies, or in automobile safety as in how a frame would collapse upon collision. How electromagnetic (EM) waves deflects off surfaces are not confined to bodies designed for aviation. Scientists and engineers have used those formulas to design better antennas for transmissions and receptions of information using EM waves. Antennas that can specifically direct their focus in giving and receiving. This leads to decreased interference in high EM traffic situations. His work was considered so militarily benign that he was allowed by the Soviet government to publish internationally, which he did.
This does not mean the behaviors of EM waves, particularly of radars off bodies, were unknown before Ufimtsev and PTD.
History of radar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
What Ufimtsev and his creation PTD did was gave the world the mathematical tools to analyze those behaviors initially without the need for physical experimentations, which should come later to produce either correlation or disassociation.
As far as the military aviation aspect goes, Lockheed and all the major aviation companies in the world knew of these behaviors. It is just that before Ufimtsev and PTD, predicting these behaviors was so complex that it discouraged all into relegating the project into secondary importance status. The SR-71 from Lockheed is considered to be the first serious attempt to produce an aircraft whose radar cross section (RCS) is lower than its physical dimensions should produce at certain tactically important frequencies, usually the ghz bands. Lockheed designed the -71 to be as low radar observale as possible through guess work of how radar signals would behave off the aircraft. In the absence of PTD, those guesses gave -71 gave an RCS equivalent to that of the much smaller Cessna 150, a light propeller driven aircraft whose take off speed is less than 100 mph. This was an amazing accomplishment in itself and it proved that radar 'stealth' is possible.
Could it be argued that if Ufimtsev did not produce PTD, would radar 'stealth' exist at all, whether from Lockheed or even from the Soviets ? Absolutely it could be so credibly argued. Again, what Ufimtsev and PTD did was gave the world the mathematical tools to work on these behaviors virtually, saving engineers unknown man-hours and finances, in and out of military work, to produce devices that exploits EM signals.
So when there was a need to produce a military aircraft that would be as low radar observable as possible at tactically important frequencies, Lockheed was looking for anything to help in that project, and PTD came for that assist.
Just as the credit for the transistor radio went to Texas Instruments and the Regency Division of IDEA, and not to Bardeen, Brattain, and Shockley, the inventor of the transistor, this mean the proper credit for who is the 'father of stealth' is the US, particularly Lockheed. Not Pyotor Ufimtsev of Soviet Russia.
The SC
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2012
- Messages
- 32,233
- Reaction score
- 21
- Country
- Location
American tech is usually of good quality, and quite practical, but I still have an issue with the complexities of the F-35 machine, and the maintenance headaches it will entail for its operators, mostly the VTOL variant.
One other thing bothers me too, and that is most American warplanes were proven efficient against lower tech mostly from Russia. They still have to fight on par tech to be really proven as superior fighters.
I have not seen F-15s against SU-30s or F-16s against MIG-29s, it has always been F-16s-15s against at best some MIG-23s, it was the same with F-4s against mainly MIG-17s in Vietnam.The only real tested one against similar opponents was the F-5 freedom fighter, who did not fare much against The Migs of its caliber.
With this said , I still like the American tech and design, but I do prefer the truth rather than fantasy. So I will believe in the US superior tech in war when it meets its match and wins, not when taking on smaller, older or badly equipped armies, which in my opinion is just some marketing stunt to sell its platforms as superior technology.
One other thing bothers me too, and that is most American warplanes were proven efficient against lower tech mostly from Russia. They still have to fight on par tech to be really proven as superior fighters.
I have not seen F-15s against SU-30s or F-16s against MIG-29s, it has always been F-16s-15s against at best some MIG-23s, it was the same with F-4s against mainly MIG-17s in Vietnam.The only real tested one against similar opponents was the F-5 freedom fighter, who did not fare much against The Migs of its caliber.
With this said , I still like the American tech and design, but I do prefer the truth rather than fantasy. So I will believe in the US superior tech in war when it meets its match and wins, not when taking on smaller, older or badly equipped armies, which in my opinion is just some marketing stunt to sell its platforms as superior technology.
500
BANNED
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2010
- Messages
- 16,678
- Reaction score
- 38
- Country
- Location
Thats because u dont know what u are talking as usual.
17 January 1993 US F-16C shot down an Iraqi Mig-29.
24 March 1999 Dutch F-16AM shot down a Serbian MiG-29.
4 May 1999 US F-16C shot down a Serbian MiG-29.
Well in 1982 USSR had nothing newer than MiG-23.
Hakan
RETIRED INTL MOD
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2014
- Messages
- 6,274
- Reaction score
- 39
- Country
- Location
Lockheed Martin Teams with Roketsan of Turkey on New Standoff Missile for the F-35
Ankara, Oct. 22, 2014 – Roketsan and Lockheed Martin [NYSE: LMT] signed a teaming agreement today for collaboration on the SOM-J, a new generation air-to-surface Standoff Cruise Missile for the F-35 Lightning II.
The SOM system is an autonomous, long-range, low-observable, all-weather, precision air-to-surface cruise missile. The SOM-J variant is tailored for internal carriage on the F-35 aircraft. The companies will jointly develop, produce, market
and support SOM-J for internal carriage on the F-35 aircraft or external carriage on
other aircraft.
Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control Executive Vice President Rick Edwards and Roketsan Chairman of the Board Eyüp Kaptan signed the agreement.
“Lockheed Martin has a long history of partnership with the Republic of Turkey, and we look forward to working closely with Roketsan on this very important project,” Edwards said. “SOM-J will provide the F-35 and other aircraft an exceptional capability to meet the most challenging mission requirements. We look forward to combining the skills and know-how of our two great companies to produce a world-class system to meet customers’ expanding needs for long-range, survivable cruise missile technology.”
“At Roketsan, we believe this teaming will increase the attention on SOM-J and present a superior solution to fulfill the requirements of anti-surface warfare capabilities on the F-35 aircraft,” Kaptan said. “We value our partnership with Lockheed Martin and look forward to additional business opportunities in the future.”
Roketsan Inc. was founded in 1988 for the purpose of “possessing a leading institution in the country for designing, developing and manufacturing rockets and missiles.” Roketsan is rapidly going forward to become a global company in defense industries sector with personnel of more than 1,800, 51 percent of which comprise engineers, an invested capital of TL 4 billion and its accumulation of technologic knowledge. Roketsan has become a corporation, the operations of which now extend beyond the borders of the country, which participates in NATO programs in its field of technology and is capable of supplying its products to friendly countries besides the Turkish Armed Forces.
Headquartered in Bethesda, Maryland, Lockheed Martin is a global security and aerospace company that employs approximately 113,000 people worldwide and is principally engaged in the research, design, development, manufacture, integration and sustainment of advanced technology systems, products and services. The Corporation’s net sales for 2013 were $45.4 billion.
Lockheed Martin Teams with Roketsan of Turkey on New Standoff Missile for the F-35 · Lockheed Martin
AMDR
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2014
- Messages
- 1,109
- Reaction score
- 16
- Country
- Location
Britain orders more F-35s as part of biggest-ever defence project
UK orders four more F-35B stealth jets as partners work to reduce the cost of the controversial fighter-bomber
British defence and engineering companies including BAE Systems and Rolls-Royce have been given a boost after the Ministry of Defence struck a deal to order the first production batch of F-35 fighter-bombers.
Defence Secretary Michael Fallon said the MoD had reached an agreement in principle to buy four F-35 Lightning II stealth aircraft.
About 15pc of each aircraft is manufactured in Britain and BAE is the only tier one partner in the F-35 programme, which is headed by Lockheed Martin and is the biggest-ever defence project.
The US company expects the estimated 3,000-aircraft programme to cost a total of $1.01 trillion (£620bn) over its 55-year lifespan when development and support costs are included.
The UK military has already taken delivery of three of the short take-off and vertical landing F-35B jets, which are being tested in the US ahead of their introduction into service. Another one is expected to be delivered in 2016.
The new F-35Bs – expected to be delivered from mid-2016 – are part of an 43-jet international order agreed with Lockheed Martin as the company increases production of the controversial aircraft.
The F-35 project has suffered delays and technical problems – including an engine fire that caused embarrassment when it prevented the aircraft from making its much-heralded UK debut at this year’s Farnborough airshow – as well as cost over-runs.
Lockheed Martin would not give details of the cost of each aircraft until the contract is finalised, but said as production steps up the price is falling, with the latest batch of jets 3.6pc cheaper than the previous ones.
Lorraine Martin, general manager of the F-35 programme, said affordability is a “key performance parameter” for the project. To drive down costs, she said a “Blueprint for Affordability” scheme is in place to reduce the price of the fifth-generation F-35 to the equivalent of a current fighter by the end of the decade.
Lockheed Martin said this initiative “leverages upfront investments from key industry partners Lockheed Martin, BAE Systems and Northrop Grumman to drive down production costs”.
Economies from its introduction would begin to be felt in the next batch of orders, she added.
Mr Fallon said: “This is a major step forward. The Lightning II will equip the Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force with a highly advanced multi-role stealth combat aircraft, operating from both our new Queen Elizabeth-class carriers and land bases.
“This programme is also bringing substantial industrial benefits to the UK, providing thousands of skilled jobs in the UK aerospace industry.”
British businesses heavily involved in the F35 programme include:
A BAE spokesman said: “We welcome today’s announcement by the UK MoD confirming agreement in principle has been reached on an order for the first production batch of four F-35 Lightning II stealth combat aircraft.
“BAE Systems is a teammate on the F-35 programme, which supports almost 2,000 jobs in our UK business where we build the aft fuselage, horizontal and vertical tails for all three variants of the aircraft.”
The order was also praised by ADS, the defence trade association. Paul Everitt, ADS chief executive, said: “The announcement from the MoD that it will soon be ordering the first batch of F-35B operational aircraft is great news for the UK.
“Not only will these cutting edge aircraft deliver the best possible operational advantage to our armed services, but UK industry and the broader economy will benefit from our significant involvement in the programme.
“Around 15pc of each aircraft will be made here in the UK, recognising our world-leading capability in designing and developing future technologies. The programme will create and support around 24,000 jobs in 100 UK companies and their supply chains.”
The F-35Bs jets are expected to form part of the first UK-based squadron of F-35s based at RAF Marham in 2018.
UK orders four more F-35B stealth jets as partners work to reduce the cost of the controversial fighter-bomber
British defence and engineering companies including BAE Systems and Rolls-Royce have been given a boost after the Ministry of Defence struck a deal to order the first production batch of F-35 fighter-bombers.
Defence Secretary Michael Fallon said the MoD had reached an agreement in principle to buy four F-35 Lightning II stealth aircraft.
About 15pc of each aircraft is manufactured in Britain and BAE is the only tier one partner in the F-35 programme, which is headed by Lockheed Martin and is the biggest-ever defence project.
The US company expects the estimated 3,000-aircraft programme to cost a total of $1.01 trillion (£620bn) over its 55-year lifespan when development and support costs are included.
The UK military has already taken delivery of three of the short take-off and vertical landing F-35B jets, which are being tested in the US ahead of their introduction into service. Another one is expected to be delivered in 2016.
The new F-35Bs – expected to be delivered from mid-2016 – are part of an 43-jet international order agreed with Lockheed Martin as the company increases production of the controversial aircraft.
The F-35 project has suffered delays and technical problems – including an engine fire that caused embarrassment when it prevented the aircraft from making its much-heralded UK debut at this year’s Farnborough airshow – as well as cost over-runs.
Lockheed Martin would not give details of the cost of each aircraft until the contract is finalised, but said as production steps up the price is falling, with the latest batch of jets 3.6pc cheaper than the previous ones.
Lorraine Martin, general manager of the F-35 programme, said affordability is a “key performance parameter” for the project. To drive down costs, she said a “Blueprint for Affordability” scheme is in place to reduce the price of the fifth-generation F-35 to the equivalent of a current fighter by the end of the decade.
Lockheed Martin said this initiative “leverages upfront investments from key industry partners Lockheed Martin, BAE Systems and Northrop Grumman to drive down production costs”.
Economies from its introduction would begin to be felt in the next batch of orders, she added.
Mr Fallon said: “This is a major step forward. The Lightning II will equip the Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force with a highly advanced multi-role stealth combat aircraft, operating from both our new Queen Elizabeth-class carriers and land bases.
“This programme is also bringing substantial industrial benefits to the UK, providing thousands of skilled jobs in the UK aerospace industry.”
British businesses heavily involved in the F35 programme include:
- BAE Systems, which is providing the rear fuselage and tails, as well as the defensive electronic warfare suite from its US arm
- Rolls-Royce, which is producing the “liftsystem” that gives the jets their short take-off and vertical landing abilities
- Martin-Baker, which is manufacturing the ejector seats
A BAE spokesman said: “We welcome today’s announcement by the UK MoD confirming agreement in principle has been reached on an order for the first production batch of four F-35 Lightning II stealth combat aircraft.
“BAE Systems is a teammate on the F-35 programme, which supports almost 2,000 jobs in our UK business where we build the aft fuselage, horizontal and vertical tails for all three variants of the aircraft.”
The order was also praised by ADS, the defence trade association. Paul Everitt, ADS chief executive, said: “The announcement from the MoD that it will soon be ordering the first batch of F-35B operational aircraft is great news for the UK.
“Not only will these cutting edge aircraft deliver the best possible operational advantage to our armed services, but UK industry and the broader economy will benefit from our significant involvement in the programme.
“Around 15pc of each aircraft will be made here in the UK, recognising our world-leading capability in designing and developing future technologies. The programme will create and support around 24,000 jobs in 100 UK companies and their supply chains.”
The F-35Bs jets are expected to form part of the first UK-based squadron of F-35s based at RAF Marham in 2018.
AMDR
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2014
- Messages
- 1,109
- Reaction score
- 16
- Country
- Location
Pentagon: Latest F-35 Deal Shaves Unit Cost by 4%
Pentagon: Latest F-35 Deal Shaves Unit Cost by 4% | DoD Buzz
The U.S. Defense Department has struck a deal with Lockheed Martin Corp. to buy another batch of F-35stealth fighter jets, an agreement they say will reduce the aircraft’s unit cost by almost 4 percent.
The world’s largest defense contractor on Oct. 27 issued apress release announcing the deal, which calls for the Pentagon to buy 43 Lightning II aircraft as part of low-rate initial production, or LRIP, lot eight.
No dollar amounts were specified — those are expected to be released once the contract is finalized in coming weeks — but the release states that “the average unit price for all three variants of the airframe in LRIP 8 is approximately 3.6 percent lower than the previous contract.”
Under the previous production contract, the Pentagon in 2013 agreed to pay $112 million per F-35A, the Air Force’s version designed for conventional runways; $139 million per F-35B, the Marine Corps’ jump-set variant; and $130 million per F-35C; the Navy’s version designed for aircraft carriers.
A 3.6-percent reduction would reduce the figures to about $108 million per F-35A, $134 million per F-35B and $125 million per F-35C.
The price tags, known as unit recurring flyaway costs in acquisition parlance, include the airframe, engine, mission systems, profit and concurrency. They don’t include certain other expenses, including those for research and development.
The Joint Strike Fighter is the Pentagon’s most expensive weapons acquisition program, estimated to cost a total of $398.6 billion for a total of 2,457 aircraft. That breaks down to an overall per-plane cost of $162 million, including research and development. The Pentagon has about 100 F-35s in the fleet so far.
The latest production contract will buy 29 F-35s for the U.S. — including 19 F-35As, six F-35Bs and four F-35Cs — the first two F-35As for Israel, the first four F-35As for Japan, along with two F-35As for Norway, two F-35As for Italy and four F-35Bs for the United Kingdom, according to the release.
Air Force Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan, who manages the acquisition effort for the government, plans to meet with reporters Oct. 30 to discuss the contract and other program issues. Last month, he said he hopes to have a fix in place for a defective engine part by the end of the year.
Bogdan also said he expects the Marine Corps will begin operational flights of the F-35B jump-jet variant next July as scheduled, followed by the Air Force in 2016 and the Navy in 2018.
Pentagon: Latest F-35 Deal Shaves Unit Cost by 4% | DoD Buzz
The U.S. Defense Department has struck a deal with Lockheed Martin Corp. to buy another batch of F-35stealth fighter jets, an agreement they say will reduce the aircraft’s unit cost by almost 4 percent.
The world’s largest defense contractor on Oct. 27 issued apress release announcing the deal, which calls for the Pentagon to buy 43 Lightning II aircraft as part of low-rate initial production, or LRIP, lot eight.
No dollar amounts were specified — those are expected to be released once the contract is finalized in coming weeks — but the release states that “the average unit price for all three variants of the airframe in LRIP 8 is approximately 3.6 percent lower than the previous contract.”
Under the previous production contract, the Pentagon in 2013 agreed to pay $112 million per F-35A, the Air Force’s version designed for conventional runways; $139 million per F-35B, the Marine Corps’ jump-set variant; and $130 million per F-35C; the Navy’s version designed for aircraft carriers.
A 3.6-percent reduction would reduce the figures to about $108 million per F-35A, $134 million per F-35B and $125 million per F-35C.
The price tags, known as unit recurring flyaway costs in acquisition parlance, include the airframe, engine, mission systems, profit and concurrency. They don’t include certain other expenses, including those for research and development.
The Joint Strike Fighter is the Pentagon’s most expensive weapons acquisition program, estimated to cost a total of $398.6 billion for a total of 2,457 aircraft. That breaks down to an overall per-plane cost of $162 million, including research and development. The Pentagon has about 100 F-35s in the fleet so far.
The latest production contract will buy 29 F-35s for the U.S. — including 19 F-35As, six F-35Bs and four F-35Cs — the first two F-35As for Israel, the first four F-35As for Japan, along with two F-35As for Norway, two F-35As for Italy and four F-35Bs for the United Kingdom, according to the release.
Air Force Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan, who manages the acquisition effort for the government, plans to meet with reporters Oct. 30 to discuss the contract and other program issues. Last month, he said he hopes to have a fix in place for a defective engine part by the end of the year.
Bogdan also said he expects the Marine Corps will begin operational flights of the F-35B jump-jet variant next July as scheduled, followed by the Air Force in 2016 and the Navy in 2018.
Similar threads
