F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)

[MarkOttawa]

Back to Super Hornet front at AvWeek (Canada at end):

Boeing Offers New, Rebuilt, Upgraded Super Hornets To U.S. Navy
Bill Sweetman

Boeing is offering the U.S. Navy a plan that includes continued long-term production of the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet to alleviate a major projected shortfall in the service’s strike-fighter numbers and keep the force capable until a replacement is fielded, in the mid-2030s or later.

The Navy’s oldest Super Hornet fleet will reach its 6,000-hr. design lifetime in 2017. The rest of the fleet will follow at approximately the rate they were acquired—around 40 per year—but the Navy can afford 20 Lockheed Martin F-35C Joint Strike Fighters each year, at most, and may buy fewer than that...

The answer is a “holistic, integrated solution” combining SLEP, new production and upgrades, according to Dan Gillian, Boeing’s F/A-18E/F and EA-18G programs vice president.

Boeing’s plan—which does not envisage cuts to the F-35C buy—would continue new production well into the next decade [emphasis added]. SLEP and new production create opportunities to insert upgrades into the fleet while increasing the payback period for the initial investment. The company is no longer using the Advanced Super Hornet name but instead is briefing the Navy on an “enhanced Hornet flightpath,” with a menu of possible upgrades including conformal fuel tanks, an improved engine and a widescreen cockpit...

The company is in the process of slowing production down to two aircraft per month, the level at which it can maintain current prices. Current orders will keep the line open until 2017, but Congress’s final markup adds another 12 Super Hornets in the 2016 budget. Boeing is in “good discussions” with another Super Hornet export customer, Gillian says. Other industry sources say a 24-30-aircraft deal with Kuwait—a split buy with Eurofighter for Typhoons, a deal announced in September—is close to being finalized.

Those orders would sustain production through 2019, Gillian says. Boeing is still in competition in Denmark, planning bids in Belgium and Finland and would be in a strong position if Canada opens its requirement to competition after the Oct. 19 federal election...
http://aviationweek.com/defense/boeing-offers-new-rebuilt-upgraded-super-hornets-us-navy

Mark
Ottawa

 

[CougarKing]

The vultures, including Dassault, are starting to circle with Trudeau ahead in the polls, and his announced intention to cancel the F-35 if he wins.

CBC

F-35's French rival pitches 'Canadianized' fighter jet
Dassault Aviation's Rafale fighter jet is already in use by the French air force

(...SNIPPED)

A similar deal with Canada would allow major components to be manufactured here, according to Dassault's vice-president, Yves Robins.

"Should the Canadian industry wish to assemble or produce part of the Rafale in Canada, we are fully open to it," Robins told CBC News in Montreal.

Robins said the "intellectual property" associated with the Rafale would be part of any sale, including the source codes for the fighter's computer system as well as the know-how to adapt and update the aircraft — both hardware and software — throughout its lifespan.

(...SNIPPED)

 

[MarkOttawa]

Terry Milewski gets basic facts wrong--deal with India (still not finalized) in now for only 36 Rafales, all to be made in France:
https://cgai3ds.wordpress.com/2015/04/23/mark-collins-indian-defence-procurement-rafale-or-dis-gust/
https://cgai3ds.wordpress.com/2015/08/12/mark-collins-turbulence-again-for-franceindia-rafale-fighter-deal/

Also both Egypt and Qatar are buying the fighter:
https://cgai3ds.wordpress.com/2015/04/30/mark-collins-french-rafale-fighter-on-really-big-roll-now-qatar/

Fie.

Mark
Ottawa

 

[MilEME09]

Terry Milewski gets basic facts wrong--deal with India (still not finalized) in now for only 36 Rafales, all to be made in France:
https://cgai3ds.wordpress.com/2015/04/23/mark-collins-indian-defence-procurement-rafale-or-dis-gust/
https://cgai3ds.wordpress.com/2015/08/12/mark-collins-turbulence-again-for-franceindia-rafale-fighter-deal/

Also both Egypt and Qatar are buying the fighter:
https://cgai3ds.wordpress.com/2015/04/30/mark-collins-french-rafale-fighter-on-really-big-roll-now-qatar/

Fie.

Mark
Ottawa

With so many orders, building them in Canada might be the only way to get them in a decent time frame. Plus give our industry a boost

 

[MarkOttawa]

MilEME09: Dassault to ramp up production:

Dassault Aviation : "Trois Rafale par mois à partir de 2018"
Éric Trappier précise son programme industriel. Plusieurs centaines d’emplois seront créés à partir de 2016

Eric Trappier, le PDG de Dassault Aviation, vient d'annoncer au comité central d'entreprise son projet industriel. Les contrats qataris et égyptiens en poche, Dassault envisage de tripler la cadence en cas de troisième contrat, avec l'Inde...
http://www.sudouest.fr/2015/09/22/trois-rafale-par-mois-a-partir-de-2018-2130966-2939.php

Mark
Ottawa

 

[PuckChaser]

With the price Qatar is paying, Rafales x65 is roughly $15B euro. That's over $25B CAD, without the full 40 year life cycle costing that the F-35 was subjected to, plus whatever extra money they would want to charge for the IP rights to build in Canada. Hardly a good deal at all, especially for a gen 4 aircraft that's only recently being exported.

 

[Altair]

With the price Qatar is paying, Rafales x65 is roughly $15B euro. That's over $25B CAD, without the full 40 year life cycle costing that the F-35 was subjected to, plus whatever extra money they would want to charge for the IP rights to build in Canada. Hardly a good deal at all, especially for a gen 4 aircraft that's only recently being exported.

Would the SAAB Gripen be a better deal?

 

[PuckChaser]

Gripen is cheaper, but still just a Gen 4 aircraft. About $9B USD for the 65 we want, without all that lifecycle costing.

 

[Altair]

Gripen is cheaper, but still just a Gen 4 aircraft. About $9B USD for the 65 we want, without all that lifecycle costing.

what would make more sense in that case would be to get more of a cheaper plane 4th gen plane

 

[PuckChaser]

what would make more sense in that case would be to get more of a cheaper plane 4th gen plane

We're going to use it for the next 50 years. Lets drop aside 50 years, and say in 15 years, are these aircraft going to be competitive in the battlespace and able to communicate with our allies? Highly doubtful without an expensive upgrade, making it seem like not a great deal anymore.

 

[Loachman]

what would make more sense in that case would be to get more of a cheaper plane 4th gen plane

No, it would not.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

No, it would not.

I don't know how many times it's been explained on this forum by actual people in the know why the F35 is the best plane for Canada?  Some people are seriously dense.

 

[dimsum]

I don't know how many times it's been explained on this forum by actual people in the know why the F35 is the best plane for Canada?  Some people are seriously dense.

But playing armchair general is fun! 

 

[SupersonicMax]

what would make more sense in that case would be to get more of a cheaper plane 4th gen plane

Please enlighten me on why it is better having more 4th gen vs 5th gen.

 

[dapaterson]

Please enlighten me on why it is better having more 4th gen vs 5th gen.

1. The only available 5th Gen fighter is not yet operational, and has missed all major deliverables.

2. The only available 5th Gen fighter is a horrible multi-role / multi-platform a/c that has sacrificed considerable performance and safety to meet USMC requirements to the detriment of other users.

3. The advantages to a 5th Gen fighter will only be realized if there is a large investment in unsexy backend functions (comms and intelligence) that are above the current planned investments.

4. The collapse of the Canadian dollar compared to the US dollar have likely rendered Canada's minimum number to acquire as unaffordable within current funding allocations.

 

[SupersonicMax]

1. The only available 5th Gen fighter is not yet operational, and has missed all major deliverables.

It is IOC with the USMC.  It is on track to be operational with the USAF (A-model) in the next 2 years.  I doubt we'll get anything before then...

2. The only available 5th Gen fighter is a horrible multi-role / multi-platform a/c that has sacrificed considerable performance and safety to meet USMC requirements to the detriment of other users.

Hmm, from what expertise to you say this?  I consider myself an experienced multi-role pilot: I have more than 1200 hours in a multi-role aircraft, 200 of which are flying in combat in such missions.  I have flown with a multitude of other multi-role aircraft and in some case in those aircraft.  And I have flown the F-35A simulator (the real one, not the demostrator one) and I can tell you one thing:  it puts to shame any other multi-role fighter there is. 

3. The advantages to a 5th Gen fighter will only be realized if there is a large investment in unsexy backend functions (comms and intelligence) that are above the current planned investments.

Stealth is an obvious advantage.  It is there.  But it is not what makes the F-35 such a good aircraft.  Its sensor integration, weapons suite, multi-platform data sharing and its EW suite (in the large sense) makes it the best aircraft.  Nothing I have ever seen (to some extent, even the F-22) comes even close.

4. The collapse of the Canadian dollar compared to the US dollar have likely rendered Canada's minimum number to acquire as unaffordable within current funding allocations.

I hope you don't make decisions to buy something in 3 years with the current exchange rate. Whatever we buy, we need to accept it may be against us.

The Grippen is no kidding (a lot) worse than what we have now (the radar may be slightly better if we would get the AESA radar)...  Oh, and it is used a lot in the western world.. Great for integration with our allies....

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

. 

The Grippen is no kidding (a lot) worse than what we have now (the radar may be slightly better if we would get the AESA radar)...  Oh, and it is used a lot in the western world.. Great for integration with our allies....

South Africa uses it, it must be good  ;D

 

[Altair]

It is IOC with the USMC.  It is on track to be operational with the USAF (A-model) in the next 2 years.  I doubt we'll get anything before then...

Hmm, from what expertise to you say this?  I consider myself an experienced multi-role pilot: I have more than 1200 hours in a multi-role aircraft, 200 of which are flying in combat in such missions.  I have flown with a multitude of other multi-role aircraft and in some case in those aircraft.  And I have flown the F-35A simulator (the real one, not the demostrator one) and I can tell you one thing:  it puts to shame any other multi-role fighter there is. 

Stealth is an obvious advantage.  It is there.  But it is not what makes the F-35 such a good aircraft.  Its sensor integration, weapons suite, multi-platform data sharing and its EW suite (in the large sense) makes it the best aircraft.  Nothing I have ever seen (to some extent, even the F-22) comes even close.

I hope you don't make decisions to buy something in 3 years with the current exchange rate. Whatever we buy, we need to accept it may be against us.

The Grippen is no kidding (a lot) worse than what we have now (the radar may be slightly better if we would get the AESA radar)...  Oh, and it is used a lot in the western world.. Great for integration with our allies....

Maybe you can confirm something I've heard about the F 35.

Using the external hard points would make it far less stealthy and if it only uses the internal weapons bay then it's limited to 4?

 

[SupersonicMax]

4 what?  AIM-120C, AIM-120D, GBU-38, GBU-31, JSOW...?

 

[dapaterson]

It is IOC with the USMC.  It is on track to be operational with the USAF (A-model) in the next 2 years.  I doubt we'll get anything before then...

USMC IOC is driven more by their own internal dynamics than on the ability of the platform to deliver.

Hmm, from what expertise to you say this?  I consider myself an experienced multi-role pilot: I have more than 1200 hours in a multi-role aircraft, 200 of which are flying in combat in such missions.  I have flown with a multitude of other multi-role aircraft and in some case in those aircraft.  And I have flown the F-35A simulator (the real one, not the demostrator one) and I can tell you one thing:  it puts to shame any other multi-role fighter there is. 

Tech demos do not an operational aircraft make.  My comment was about trade-offs made to provide three dissimilar aircraft with enough commonality to permit Lockheed to claim with a straight face that it's a single platform.

Stealth is an obvious advantage.  It is there.  But it is not what makes the F-35 such a good aircraft.  Its sensor integration, weapons suite, multi-platform data sharing and its EW suite (in the large sense) makes it the best aircraft.  Nothing I have ever seen (to some extent, even the F-22) comes even close.

Sensor integration, data sharing and EW require a huge backend investment in the int world to fully enable the capabilities.  I am not downplaying them, just pointing out that in order to fully leverage those capabilities (if Lockheed delivers) there are significant additional costs.

I hope you don't make decisions to buy something in 3 years with the current exchange rate. Whatever we buy, we need to accept it may be against us.

If the $9B cap remains, Canada cannot afford 65 F-35s.  I do not know what portion of the acquisition plan is in USD, but a significant change in the exchange rate as we've seen over the past few years suggests that 65 is no longer possible.  Thus, to pursue the F35 means either (a) less aircraft or (b) increase in budget.

According to DND's own figures, a $0.755 dollar would mean a $1.7B pressure (http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/about-reports-pubs/next-gen-fighter-annual-update-2014.page#toc5_4); the dollar is now hovering around $0.77.  Baseline costing was done at $0.916.

"The Government’s $9B frozen acquisition envelope results in a $76 million acquisition contingency, which is considered low for a project of this scope and size. If the full acquisition contingency was required, the remaining shortfall could be met by buying fewer aircraft."

In other words, we've now got a nearly $1.7B hit against the plan, and only $76M to mitigate it.  That's a Problem, with a capital P.