F-35 News

[soultrain]

Pois é, mas tentaram meter esse melão no c... da FAB, havia quem defendesse assinar um contrato em Branco.

Isto é apenas o começo, pois com o aumento dos custos vai haver uma redução das encomendas, como os Ingleses já fizeram e não sei se ficam por ai.

Menos encomendas, mais caro fica ainda, já perceberam porque os vendedores da LM andavam desesperados? Eles queriam fechar as vendas antes destas noticias.

[[]]'s

[Carlos Mathias]

A trolha vai voar baixo pros participantes do "consórcio".

[Vinicius Pimenta]

Sacanagem, estou até hoje esperando o F-35BR FF.

[P44]

no seguimento da noticia postada pelo Soul...

Pentagon Study Shows F-35 Jet to Cost More—Report (excerpt)


(Source: Reuters; published Oct. 23, 2009)



WASHINGTON --- A new Pentagon study has affirmed previous findings that Lockheed Martin Corp's F-35 Joint Strike Fighter aircraft, the costliest U.S. arms purchase program, will require billions of dollars more than planned, and more time, an online news service said on Friday.

A military "Joint Estimate Team" tasked in July to examine the program has found the F-35 program's performance "is not markedly improving," InsideDefense.com said, citing an unidentified source.

Lockheed is developing three radar-evading F-35 models to replace at least 13 types of aircraft, initially for 11 nations.

The United States plans to buy 2,443 F-35s. Purchases by partner nations Britain, Canada, Italy, Denmark, Netherlands, Norway, Turkey and Australia and others could raise production to 3,000 or more.

Northrop Grumman Corp and BAE Systems Plc are Lockheed's chief F-35 sub-contractors.

"A new assessment of the Joint Strike Fighter program affirms earlier findings that substantially more money and time are required for the Pentagon's largest acquisition effort, a conclusion that could pose a formidable test of Defense Secretary Robert Gates' recent support for the F-35 program and President Barack Obama’s pledge to terminate weapons with bloated price tags," InsideDefense.com reported.

Its headline said the program would need "billions" more.

Obama vowed in March to reform the Pentagon's procurement practices and to crack down on programs that run over budget.

Earlier this year, Defense Secretary Robert Gates decided to cap production of the Lockheed F-22 fighter at 187 planes, citing his support for the $300 billion F-35 program.

The study was undertaken to update one last year that found the program would need at least two more years and nearly $15 billion more.

"The initial results are as bad as last year's," InsideDefense.com quoted its source as saying. "In other words, things have not improved. And their cost estimate will be at least where they were last year."

In response, Bethesda, Maryland-based Lockheed Martin, the Pentagon's No. 1 supplier by sales, said it disagreed with the joint estimate team conclusions.

"Lockheed Martin acknowledges that modest risks to our cost and schedule baselines exist," said John Kent, a company spokesman, "but we envision no scenario that would justify a substantial delay to completion of development or transition to production milestones." (ends of excerpt)


Click here for the full story, on the Reuters website.
http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsN ... 023?rpc=44

-ends-

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... eport.html

[Carlos Mathias]

Sacanagem, estou até hoje esperando o F-35BR FF.

Bem feitô!
Bem feitô!

[LeandroGCard]

Colin has advanced the story broken by InsideDefense.com this morning about huge cost estimates that could dramatically restructure the Joint Strike Fighter program.

A preliminary Pentagon cost estimate that the F-35 could cost as much as $17.1 billion more than currently planned is prompting calls from congressional sources for the program to be reassessed and restructured.

The congressional sources also wryly noted this seemed to raise questions about the wisdom of Defense Secretary Robert Gates’ recent trip to the F-35 plant in Fort Worth to show his support for the program. One aide scoffed that the new cost estimates were “no surprise to anyone who hasn’t drunk the JSF Kool-Aid.”

The new cost estimate comes from the JSF Joint Estimate Team, formed this summer by Deputy Defense Secretary William Lynn.

Two congressional aides familiar with the program said. the cost estimate seemed to indicate that the approach of developing, building, flying and testing planes as they come off the assembly line – known as concurrency – may pose too much program risk in the short term and should lead Defense Secretary Robert Gates to scale back the emphasis on producing and testing planes and trim the number of planes the Pentagon wants to buy in next year’s budget.

Be sure to read the entire story and to troll over to Inside for the the JET gouge. As one intelligent observer noted when he heard the news: "this could mean the end of manned combat flight"...

-- Christian
October 23, 2009 01:42 PM





Afinal não estou tão surpreso, eu não estava "drunk the JSF Kool-Aid", toda a gente já sabia menos a LM e a claque de apoio.

[[]]'s

Ps: Drinking the Kool-Aid significa acreditar cegamente em algo, aceitar argumentos sem contestar, estilo fan boy.

Como os parceiros externos do programa JSF vão engolir isso? O maior deles, a Inglaterra, já desistiu de equipar com o avião um dos novos PA's que vai construir, e vai transformá-lo em um porta-helicópteros (com 65.000 ton, acho que o maior da história!!!)

Os demais parceiros vão arcar com que proporção destes novos custos? Ou vão redizir as compras do avião assim como fizeram os ingleses? Neste último caso o custo unitário vai subir mais ainda!

Do jeito que vai a coisa este programa também está subindo no telhado, como aconteceu com o F-22 (e este já caiu de lá).

Leandro G. Card

[Sintra]

Colin has advanced the story broken by InsideDefense.com this morning about huge cost estimates that could dramatically restructure the Joint Strike Fighter program.

A preliminary Pentagon cost estimate that the F-35 could cost as much as $17.1 billion more than currently planned is prompting calls from congressional sources for the program to be reassessed and restructured.

The congressional sources also wryly noted this seemed to raise questions about the wisdom of Defense Secretary Robert Gates’ recent trip to the F-35 plant in Fort Worth to show his support for the program. One aide scoffed that the new cost estimates were “no surprise to anyone who hasn’t drunk the JSF Kool-Aid.”

The new cost estimate comes from the JSF Joint Estimate Team, formed this summer by Deputy Defense Secretary William Lynn.

Two congressional aides familiar with the program said. the cost estimate seemed to indicate that the approach of developing, building, flying and testing planes as they come off the assembly line – known as concurrency – may pose too much program risk in the short term and should lead Defense Secretary Robert Gates to scale back the emphasis on producing and testing planes and trim the number of planes the Pentagon wants to buy in next year’s budget.

Be sure to read the entire story and to troll over to Inside for the the JET gouge. As one intelligent observer noted when he heard the news: "this could mean the end of manned combat flight"...

-- Christian
October 23, 2009 01:42 PM





Afinal não estou tão surpreso, eu não estava "drunk the JSF Kool-Aid", toda a gente já sabia menos a LM e a claque de apoio.

[[]]'s

Ps: Drinking the Kool-Aid significa acreditar cegamente em algo, aceitar argumentos sem contestar, estilo fan boy.

Como os parceiros externos do programa JSF vão engolir isso? O maior deles, a Inglaterra, já desistiu de equipar com o avião um dos novos PA's que vai construir, e vai transformá-lo em um porta-helicópteros (com 65.000 ton, acho que o maior da história!!!)

Os demais parceiros vão arcar com que proporção destes novos custos? Ou vão redizir as compras do avião assim como fizeram os ingleses? Neste último caso o custo unitário vai subir mais ainda!

Do jeito que vai a coisa este programa também está subindo no telhado, como aconteceu com o F-22 (e este já caiu de lá).

Leandro G. Card

Leandro

A RAF já pediu os "Serial Numbers" para a frota de JCA´s (F-35B em "Britanês") à meses atrás. Pediram 66 serial numbers...
O POW não vai ser um (ou melhor "só") Porta Helicópteros, não acreditem em tudo o que a imprensa generalista escreve.
A Dinamarca já disse que vão reduzir a encomenda para 25 a 35 aviões. A Turquia disse o oposto querem aumentar a encomenda de 100 para 120.

Abraço

[soultrain]

Sintra,

Isso é tudo muito ainda na área do que pode ser. O facto é que os Britânicos já reduziram de 138 para 66.

Este aumento ainda é uma previsão, não está ainda incorporado, é provável que a USAF, a USNAVY e USMC reduzam as encomendas, porque os budjets não esticam e será uma bola de neve, a incógnita é o tamanho.

[[]]'s

[soultrain]

Primary customer: USA
Level 1 partner: UK
Level 2 partner: Italy and The Netherlands
Level 3 partner: Canada, Turkey, Australia, Norway and Denmark
Security Cooperative Participants (SCP): Israel and Singapore

Já agora UK é um paceiro level 1 e teve de discutir muito entre presidentes para conseguir empregar o F-35 com uma cadeia de comando somente Britânica, entre outras coisas.

Sabem o que quer dizer?

[[]]'s

[Ilya Ehrenburg]

Fato é que as aeronaves de combate de 1ª linha tornaram-se tão caras, que por decorrência seu uso e existência tornam-se inviáveis: um verdadeiro "cheque-mate". Os burgueses vampiros da indústria aeroespacial, vão ter que buscar outra jugular, já que a atual esgotou-se.

[LeandroGCard]

Leandro

A RAF já pediu os "Serial Numbers" para a frota de JCA´s (F-35B em "Britanês") à meses atrás. Pediram 66 serial numbers...
O POW não vai ser um (ou melhor "só") Porta Helicópteros, não acreditem em tudo o que a imprensa generalista escreve.
A Dinamarca já disse que vão reduzir a encomenda para 25 a 35 aviões. A Turquia disse o oposto querem aumentar a encomenda de 100 para 120.

Abraço

Mas tudo isso não foi ANTES desta notícia do aumento dos custos? Com ela a encomneda americana no mínimo deve diminuir (alguém realmente acredita que eles manterão o total de mais de 2000 unidades?). Aí os custos unitários iriam subir ainda mais, e aí como é que a coisa fica? O contribuinte americano até toparia pagar muito mais por unidade, mas com uma redução no total de aeronaves que mantivesse o custo total do programa dentro de um valor razoável. Mas como é que os demais parceiros vão justificar um custo muito mais alto?

Leandro G. Card

[Penguin]

DATE:29/10/09
SOURCE:Flight International
Lockheed offers 2014 delivery date for South Korea's first F-35s
By Siva Govindasamy


Lockheed Martin remains confident that South Korea will select its F-35 Joint Strike Fighter for the third phase of its F-X competition, with the company saying that Seoul could even get access to the aircraft from 2014 if required.

"The F-35 is the best value fighter for South Korea. The country has received a classified briefing, and studies are under way to see if the aircraft can fit the various capabilities required by the air force. This will continue into 2010," says Steve O'Brien, Lockheed's vice-president of F-35 business development.

"There are slots available in 2014 for the first FMS [Foreign Military Sales] customer to take delivery of the F-35. We've given a number of different briefings to different customers on this issue, and it is up to the customers if they would like to come on board."

Just as it has with Japan, Lockheed is dangling the prospect of South Korean industry possibly participating in the F-35 programme by becoming second-tier suppliers. It could also allow some form of assembly work to take place in South Korea, similar to its agreement with Italy.


South Korea is looking to buy around 60 fighters through its next F-X programme. However, there are worries in Seoul about possible delays to the F-35 programme, and that early versions of the type may not be as sophisticated as later models.
That could pave the way for Boeing and its new F-15 Silent Eagle, which the company has proposed with countries such as South Korea in mind. The F-15K was selected for the first two phases of South Korea's F-X competition, and Boeing is pushing Seoul to consider the F-15SE as an alternative to the F-35.

Industry sources say Boeing is willing to offer South Korea some work in the co-development of the stealth technology that it plans to use in the F-15SE, an offer that could help the country when it begins to work on its proposed KF-X light fighter.
"Boeing looks forward to Korea's anticipated competition. We are developing an advanced F-15, which we hope will fulfil Korea's defence capabilities and needs for many years to come," says Greg Laxton, vice-president Korea business development at Boeing Integrated Defense Systems.

"We are committed to building on the success of the F-15K next fighter I and II programmes, by working with our Korean industry partners to continue to strengthen Korea's aerospace industry."

Lockheed points out that only the F-35 and its F-22 Raptor are truly fifth-generation stealth fighters, while the F-15SE has only some "stealth elements", a fact that Boeing accepts.

"Stealth systems must be designed into the aircraft. This cannot be replicated in fourth-generation fighters. And the F-35 is about 10 years ahead of the F-22 in this regard," says O'Brien. "We won't comment on our competitors' products, but what I know is that the US government is going to purchase only fifth-generation aircraft and that is the F-35."

[Penguin]

Colin has advanced the story broken by InsideDefense.com this morning about huge cost estimates that could dramatically restructure the Joint Strike Fighter program.

A preliminary Pentagon cost estimate that the F-35 could cost as much as $17.1 billion more than currently planned is prompting calls from congressional sources for the program to be reassessed and restructured.

The congressional sources also wryly noted this seemed to raise questions about the wisdom of Defense Secretary Robert Gates’ recent trip to the F-35 plant in Fort Worth to show his support for the program. One aide scoffed that the new cost estimates were “no surprise to anyone who hasn’t drunk the JSF Kool-Aid.”

The new cost estimate comes from the JSF Joint Estimate Team, formed this summer by Deputy Defense Secretary William Lynn.

Two congressional aides familiar with the program said. the cost estimate seemed to indicate that the approach of developing, building, flying and testing planes as they come off the assembly line – known as concurrency – may pose too much program risk in the short term and should lead Defense Secretary Robert Gates to scale back the emphasis on producing and testing planes and trim the number of planes the Pentagon wants to buy in next year’s budget.

Be sure to read the entire story and to troll over to Inside for the the JET gouge. As one intelligent observer noted when he heard the news: "this could mean the end of manned combat flight"...

-- Christian
October 23, 2009 01:42 PM





Afinal não estou tão surpreso, eu não estava "drunk the JSF Kool-Aid", toda a gente já sabia menos a LM e a claque de apoio.

[[]]'s

Ps: Drinking the Kool-Aid significa acreditar cegamente em algo, aceitar argumentos sem contestar, estilo fan boy.

Como os parceiros externos do programa JSF vão engolir isso? O maior deles, a Inglaterra, já desistiu de equipar com o avião um dos novos PA's que vai construir, e vai transformá-lo em um porta-helicópteros (com 65.000 ton, acho que o maior da história!!!)

Os demais parceiros vão arcar com que proporção destes novos custos? Ou vão redizir as compras do avião assim como fizeram os ingleses? Neste último caso o custo unitário vai subir mais ainda!

Do jeito que vai a coisa este programa também está subindo no telhado, como aconteceu com o F-22 (e este já caiu de lá).

Leandro G. Card

Royal Navy could be forced to build aircraft carrier which doesn't carry planes
By TOM KELLY
Last updated at 7:51 AM on 26th October 2009
Comments (43)
Add to My Stories

Spending cuts could force the Royal Navy to build an aircraft carrier which carries no planes, it emerged yesterday.
Admirals have commissioned two new 65,000-ton ships to carry the elite Joint Strike Fighter jets.

But financial constraints have threatened the second, the Prince of Wales, which is due to be completed in 2018.


Budget cut: One of the Royal Navy's new aircraft carriers may not actually carry any aircraft

It is too late for the Navy to cancel the contract, but the carrier may have to be downgraded to a commando ship, with only helicopters on board to carry troops.

The move would save about £8.2billion from the defence budget. It follows Gordon Brown's announcement last month that he plans to cut one of the Navy's four Trident nuclear deterrent submarines. The Prince of Wales and its sister carrier Queen Elizabeth have been billed as the 'biggest and most powerful warships ever constructed for the Royal Navy'.
Both were due to take up to 40 aircraft, with flight decks as big as three football pitches.

Downgrading the Prince of Wales would mean the Navy having to borrow a carrier from France whenever the Queen Elizabeth goes in for a refit.

French president Nicolas Sarkozy has already suggested to Mr Brown that refits of French and British aircraft carriers should be co-ordinated.

Building only one aircraft carrier will cut the number of JSFs to be flown by RAF squadrons from 138 to about 50, saving £7.6billion. Using the Prince of Wales as a commando ship will save a further £600million.

Both Labour and the Tories are committed to conducting a strategic defence review after a General Election, which must be held by the late spring.

Tory defence spokesman Liam Fox said any decision to axe a carrier before the review would be 'absolutely unacceptable' and typical of the Government's 'chaotic, inconsistent and incompetent defence procurement policy'.

He said the move exposed the Government's claim that it wanted a completely independent strategic defence review.
'The Government is saying it is fully committed-to the carriers while at the same time forcing them to be cut,' he said. 'It is confusing for the Navy, it is confusing for industry and it is completely inconsistent with the whole concept of running an independent defence review.'

Last month the head of the Navy admitted that the decision to build the two large aircraft carriers could be overturned. Admiral Sir Mark Stanhope said the Navy was bracing itself for cuts, and some 'difficult decisions' would have to be made.
The Ministry of Defence said: 'Challenging financial circumstances mean some difficult decisions will have to be taken to prioritise our forces' efforts in Afghanistan.'

But the spokesman said Defence Secretary Bob Ainsworth remained '100 per cent committed' to the aircraft carriers.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z0VQ6BCwN3

[Penguin]

no seguimento da noticia postada pelo Soul...

Pentagon Study Shows F-35 Jet to Cost More—Report (excerpt)


(Source: Reuters; published Oct. 23, 2009)



WASHINGTON --- A new Pentagon study has affirmed previous findings that Lockheed Martin Corp's F-35 Joint Strike Fighter aircraft, the costliest U.S. arms purchase program, will require billions of dollars more than planned, and more time, an online news service said on Friday.

A military "Joint Estimate Team" tasked in July to examine the program has found the F-35 program's performance "is not markedly improving," InsideDefense.com said, citing an unidentified source.

Lockheed is developing three radar-evading F-35 models to replace at least 13 types of aircraft, initially for 11 nations.

The United States plans to buy 2,443 F-35s. Purchases by partner nations Britain, Canada, Italy, Denmark, Netherlands, Norway, Turkey and Australia and others could raise production to 3,000 or more.

Northrop Grumman Corp and BAE Systems Plc are Lockheed's chief F-35 sub-contractors.

"A new assessment of the Joint Strike Fighter program affirms earlier findings that substantially more money and time are required for the Pentagon's largest acquisition effort, a conclusion that could pose a formidable test of Defense Secretary Robert Gates' recent support for the F-35 program and President Barack Obama’s pledge to terminate weapons with bloated price tags," InsideDefense.com reported.

Its headline said the program would need "billions" more.

Obama vowed in March to reform the Pentagon's procurement practices and to crack down on programs that run over budget.

Earlier this year, Defense Secretary Robert Gates decided to cap production of the Lockheed F-22 fighter at 187 planes, citing his support for the $300 billion F-35 program.

The study was undertaken to update one last year that found the program would need at least two more years and nearly $15 billion more.

"The initial results are as bad as last year's," InsideDefense.com quoted its source as saying. "In other words, things have not improved. And their cost estimate will be at least where they were last year."

In response, Bethesda, Maryland-based Lockheed Martin, the Pentagon's No. 1 supplier by sales, said it disagreed with the joint estimate team conclusions.

"Lockheed Martin acknowledges that modest risks to our cost and schedule baselines exist," said John Kent, a company spokesman, "but we envision no scenario that would justify a substantial delay to completion of development or transition to production milestones." (ends of excerpt)


Click here for the full story, on the Reuters website.
http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsN ... 023?rpc=44

-ends-

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... eport.html

O custo total do programa está estimado pelo GAO em abril de 2009 em $ 245 bi.

[ninjanki]

Oque aparentemente deixa o F-35 a um custo básico de 100 milhões de dólares a unidade, se forem produzidas 2400... E ainda tem gente achando que vamos fazer um caça de 5a geração sozinhos, só com a indústria nacional e as compras da FAB...rsrsrsrsrsrs

Allan