F-35 News

Assuntos em discussão: Força Aérea Brasileira, forças aéreas estrangeiras e aviação militar.

Moderadores: Glauber Prestes, Conselho de Moderação

Mensagem
Autor
Avatar do usuário
P44
Sênior
Sênior
Mensagens: 55236
Registrado em: Ter Dez 07, 2004 6:34 am
Localização: O raio que vos parta
Agradeceu: 2750 vezes
Agradeceram: 2429 vezes

Re: F-35 News

#2431 Mensagem por P44 » Qui Dez 13, 2012 2:28 pm

Strider escreveu:Estão abandonado o barco :mrgreen:

é oficial!!!!



Ottawa Officially Scraps F-35 Purchase As Audit Pegs F-35 Costs at $45 Billion



(Source: The Globe and Mail; published Dec. 12 2012)



OTTAWA --- Stephen Harper’s Conservatives are officially recanting their 2 1/2-year-old decision to buy the cutting-edge F-35 fighter plane – but the federal government is still resisting calls to hold an open competition to pick Canada’s next jet purchase.

The Harper government on Wednesday officially announced it was backing off a sole-source plan to buy 65 F-35 Lightning jets as a replacement for Canada’s aging CF-18 Hornets. It was a rare U-turn for an administration that only infrequently acknowledges it was wrong – but one the Tories felt was necessary to repair their fiscal stewardship credentials.

“No decision has been taken on a replacement for the CF-18,” a senior government official told reporters in a not-for-attribution media briefing set up by the Tories so that top civil servants on the file could speak plainly about Ottawa’s new jet purchase policy.

The Conservatives have been dogged for months by a damning auditor general’s report last spring that said they selected the F-35 without due regard for price and availability. Back in July, 2010, the Tories announced to great fanfare they would forgo an open competition and would buy the Lockheed warplane because it was the only plane that would serve Canada’s needs. They defended the decision in the 2011 election and often excoriated critics who suggested they had made a mistake.

On Wednesday, Ottawa made a great show of backing away from that decision – while unveiling a full lifetime cost estimate for the Lockheed Martin plane that is five times greater than what the Tories originally advertised it would cost.

The “cradle-to-grave” bill to taxpayers for buying and operating the controversial F-35 warplane will exceed $600 million per jet – or $45-billion in total, the government announced Wednesday. The Tories originally sold the aircraft as a $9 billion purchase.

The $45-billion lifetime estimate may ultimately prove to be too low if the cash-strapped U.S. government cuts its own order for the F-35 – a move that would increase the average price.

Defence Minister Peter MacKay and Public Works Minister Rona Ambrose went to great effort Wednesday to distance themselves from the July, 2010, purchase announcement, an event where Mr. MacKay posed for photos in a dummy version of the fighter. “We are pressing reset on this acquisition in order to ensure a balance between military needs and taxpayer interests,” Mr. MacKay told reporters. “Let me be clear: The government of Canada will not proceed with a decision to replace the CF-18 fighter aircraft until all steps … are completed.” (end of excerpt)


Click here for the full story, on the Globe & Mail website.

(ends)


The Federal Government’s Continuing Spin On F-35 Costs Is Inexcusable (excerpt)



(Source: National Post; published Dec. 12, 2012)



So, just to be clear, they’re still spinning us. Even now. Even after all that has gone before, even with the release of its own specially commissioned independent review by the accounting firm of KPMG, the Conservative government still can’t bring itself to tell us the whole truth about the costs of the F-35.

I’ll leave others to try to figure out the rest: whether there will be a truly open competition now that the original sole-source contract is dead, whether Canadian firms will still be able to bid on F-35 work if we don’t buy it, and so on. I’d just like to focus on the comparatively simple question of how much these planes really cost, and why it matters.

You will be familiar with how the government’s official estimate of the cost of the planes has, ahem, evolved over the years: from $9-billion originally (just the acquisition cost), to $16-billion (including acquisition and “sustainment,” but not operating costs), to the $25-billion (including all costs, but only over 20 years) it grudgingly owned up to after the Auditor General’s report last spring.

As you’ll recall, the Auditor General said even that figure severely underestimated the true cost of the project, as the actual service life of the planes was not 20 years, but 36 years. Others, including the Parliamentary Budget Officer, put it at 30 years: that’s the number KPMG used. And the figure that popped out of its calculators was $45.8-billion.

.../…

The new line, as expressed in government documents and repeated by the Defence minister, Peter MacKay, is that the planes will cost $45.8-billion “over 42 years.” Not 20 years, or 30 years, but 42 years. And then the spin: it was a billion dollars a year before, it’s pretty much a billion dollars a years now. So you see? Nothing’s changed.

Except it isn’t 42 years. Not in any comparable sense. The 20 years used in previous cost estimates was the (supposed) service life of the planes: that is, how long they’re expected to be in use, after delivery. KMPG’s report, as I said, assumed a service life of 30 years. So to compare apples to apples, you would have to say the planes are now projected to cost $45-billion over 30 years.

How does the government get 42 years? By adding in 12 years for “development and acquisition,” from the decision to acquire the planes in 2010 to the delivery of the last plane in 2022. No previous estimate included development costs. And indeed they add next to nothing to the total: just $565 million. But by tacking on another 12 years, they allow the government to spread the cost over a much longer time frame, and make the annual cost of the planes seem much lower than it is. (end of excerpt)


Click here for the full story, on the National Post website.

-ends-
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... chase.html


----

e a Austrália parece ir pelo mesmo caminho:
Faced with ever-growing program delays, Australia has deferred its decision on whether to buy the F-35 and is considering buying a second batch of Super Hornets in the interim. (RAAF photo)

Australia’s Future Air Capability


(Source: Australian Department of Defence; issued Dec. 13, 2012)


(See highlighted paragraphs at bottom)

Minister for Defence Stephen Smith and Minister for Defence Materiel Jason Clare today provided an update on planning for Australia’s future Air Combat Capability.

“Australia’s Air Combat Capability is a vital part of our national security framework. The Government will not allow a gap in our Air Combat Capability to occur,” Mr Smith said.

In May this year, Minister Smith announced that the Air Combat Capability Transition Plan, an assessment of the F-35A Joint Strike Fighter project progress and any potential capability gap, would be presented to Government by the end of 2012 (Emphasis added-Ed.) to inform Government decisions about Air Combat Capability.

The Air Combat Capability Transition Plan prepared by Defence includes an assessment of whether alternative options need to be implemented to ensure continuity in Australia’s Air Combat Capability in light of Joint Strike Fighter project delays and the ageing of Australia’s Classic F/A-18 Hornet fleet.

The Air Combat Capability Transition Plan considered the process for managing the Royal Australian Air Force’s (RAAF) transition from the current mix of Classic Hornet and Super Hornet to a future Air Combat Capability fleet, including the Joint Strike Fighter.

The plan includes an assessment of progress of the Joint Strike Fighter project, the life of the existing 71 ‘Classic’ F/A-18 Hornets, any potential capability gap and management of the Super Hornet and Growler capabilities.

It includes options to purchase additional Super Hornet aircraft.

The Classic Hornet fleet, which originally comprised 75 aircraft, entered service in Australia between 1985 and 1990. The fleet has undergone an intensive maintenance program to ensure the fleet is able to operate until around 2020.

In September this year, the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) completed a performance audit on the management of the F/A-18 fleet upgrades and sustainment. The ANAO found that Defence’s management of the aircraft has been effective thus far in identifying the risks to their continued operation, that effective mitigation measures have been put in place for these risks, and outlined those that will require ongoing close management by Defence.

The Government has now considered the Air Combat Capability Transition Plan and has directed Defence to undertake further work on a range of Air Combat Capability options, including seeking from the United States up-to-date pricing information on Super Hornets.

RAAF currently has a fleet of 24 F/A-18F Super Hornet aircraft. The fleet was introduced between March 2010 and October 2011.

The F/A-18F Super Hornet was a major step forward in technology for Australia’s Air Combat Capability.

The Super Hornet gives the RAAF the capability to conduct air-to-air combat, to strike targets on land and at sea, to suppress enemy air defences and to conduct reconnaissance.

The Super Hornet is vital to ensuring Australia’s regional Air Combat Capability edge is maintained until the introduction into service of the Joint Strike Fighter capability.

The Government is also acquiring the Growler electronic warfare system for the Super Hornet. Growler is an electronic warfare system that gives the Super Hornet the ability to jam the electronics systems of aircraft and land-based radars and communications systems.

Australia will now send a Letter of Request (LOR) to the United States seeking cost and availability information for up to an additional 24 Super Hornet aircraft through the United States Foreign Military Sales program.

The Australian Government has not made a decision to purchase more Super Hornets. The sending of this LOR does not commit Australia to purchase more Super Hornets. It is being sent so that the Australian Government can further consider all options in 2013 with the latest and best cost and availability information. This has been made clear to both US officials and to the Defence industry.

Following receipt of the LOR response, Government will further and fully consider Australia’s Air Combat Capability in 2013.


(EDITOR’S NOTE: Minister Smith announced in May that the government would make a decision on F-35 purchases within the 2012-13 financial year. The delay announced above delays the decision by at least six more months, into a new budget and election cycle when anything may happen.)
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... rnets.html




Triste sina ter nascido português 👎
Avatar do usuário
Glauber Prestes
Moderador
Moderador
Mensagens: 8404
Registrado em: Sex Abr 06, 2007 11:30 am
Agradeceu: 413 vezes
Agradeceram: 257 vezes

Re: F-35 News

#2432 Mensagem por Glauber Prestes » Qui Dez 13, 2012 3:15 pm

A Boeing deve estar soltando fogos de artifício...




http://www.tireoide.org.br/tireoidite-de-hashimoto/
Cuidado com os sintomas.

Você é responsável pelo ambiente e a qualidade do fórum que participa. Faça sua parte.
Avatar do usuário
NettoBR
Sênior
Sênior
Mensagens: 2773
Registrado em: Sáb Abr 28, 2012 10:36 am
Localização: Ribeirão Preto-SP
Agradeceu: 1085 vezes
Agradeceram: 320 vezes

Re: F-35 News

#2433 Mensagem por NettoBR » Qui Dez 13, 2012 3:21 pm

É o preço que se paga por estar na vanguarda. E dá-lhe SH...




"Todos pensam em mudar o mundo, mas ninguém pensa em mudar a si mesmo."
Liev Tolstói
Avatar do usuário
marcelo l.
Sênior
Sênior
Mensagens: 6097
Registrado em: Qui Out 15, 2009 12:22 am
Agradeceu: 138 vezes
Agradeceram: 66 vezes

Re: F-35 News

#2434 Mensagem por marcelo l. » Seg Jan 07, 2013 1:20 pm

Canadian Military Would Need To Outsource F-35 Refueling



http://www.defensenews.com/article/2013 ... |FRONTPAGE

Terceirizar o reabastecimento...será que eles vendem na bacia das almas os Airbus CC-150 Polaris :?:




"If the people who marched actually voted, we wouldn’t have to march in the first place".
"(Poor) countries are poor because those who have power make choices that create poverty".
ubi solitudinem faciunt pacem appellant
Strider
Avançado
Avançado
Mensagens: 596
Registrado em: Qui Abr 27, 2006 4:54 pm
Localização: Barbosa Ferraz - Pr
Agradeceram: 1 vez

Re: F-35 News

#2435 Mensagem por Strider » Sex Jan 11, 2013 11:21 am

marcelo l. escreveu:Canadian Military Would Need To Outsource F-35 Refueling



http://www.defensenews.com/article/2013 ... |FRONTPAGE

Terceirizar o reabastecimento...será que eles vendem na bacia das almas os Airbus CC-150 Polaris :?:
País continental comprando caça 'perna curta' dá nisso aí. O F-35 é um bom caça, assim como o Gripen, mas se não tiver uns A-330MRTT ou similar na garagem não presta muito não.




"Uma nação que confia em seus direitos, em vez de confiar em seus soldados, engana-se a si mesma e prepara sua própria queda."

Rui Barbosa
Avatar do usuário
kekosam
Sênior
Sênior
Mensagens: 2500
Registrado em: Sex Out 03, 2008 10:17 am
Localização: Cuiabá-MT
Agradeceu: 24 vezes
Agradeceram: 34 vezes

Re: F-35 News

#2436 Mensagem por kekosam » Sex Jan 11, 2013 3:07 pm

O Polaris é um A313 ou um A332?




Assinatura? Estou vendo com meu advogado...
Avatar do usuário
Carlos Lima
Sênior
Sênior
Mensagens: 18932
Registrado em: Qui Mai 12, 2005 6:58 am
Agradeceu: 1275 vezes
Agradeceram: 631 vezes

Re: F-35 News

#2437 Mensagem por Carlos Lima » Sex Jan 11, 2013 5:30 pm

kekosam escreveu:O Polaris é um A313 ou um A332?
Polaris = A310.

[]s
CB_Lima




CB_Lima = Carlos Lima :)
Avatar do usuário
Boss
Sênior
Sênior
Mensagens: 4136
Registrado em: Ter Ago 10, 2010 11:26 pm
Agradeceu: 103 vezes
Agradeceram: 356 vezes

Re: F-35 News

#2438 Mensagem por Boss » Sex Jan 11, 2013 5:34 pm

O Canadá é um país ?

Achei que era estado-associado à Amerikwa. :mrgreen: :twisted:




REPÚBLICA FEDERATIVA DO BRASIL
Avatar do usuário
Luís Henrique
Sênior
Sênior
Mensagens: 8391
Registrado em: Sex Mai 07, 2004 12:25 pm
Agradeceu: 1 vez
Agradeceram: 184 vezes

Re: F-35 News

#2439 Mensagem por Luís Henrique » Sex Jan 11, 2013 11:26 pm

Strider escreveu:
marcelo l. escreveu:Canadian Military Would Need To Outsource F-35 Refueling



http://www.defensenews.com/article/2013 ... |FRONTPAGE

Terceirizar o reabastecimento...será que eles vendem na bacia das almas os Airbus CC-150 Polaris :?:
País continental comprando caça 'perna curta' dá nisso aí. O F-35 é um bom caça, assim como o Gripen, mas se não tiver uns A-330MRTT ou similar na garagem não presta muito não.
O F-35 leva quase 3 vezes mais combustível que o Gripen.
Não é perna curta.




Su-35BM - 4ª++ Geração.
Simplesmente um GRANDE caça.
Avatar do usuário
P44
Sênior
Sênior
Mensagens: 55236
Registrado em: Ter Dez 07, 2004 6:34 am
Localização: O raio que vos parta
Agradeceu: 2750 vezes
Agradeceram: 2429 vezes

Re: F-35 News

#2440 Mensagem por P44 » Sáb Jan 12, 2013 8:43 am

Turkey Postpones Order for Its First Two F-35 Fighters


Jan. 11, 2013 - 10:14AM |
By AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE |



ANKARA — Turkey said Jan. 11 it has postponed an order to purchase its first two U.S.-made F-35 fighter jets due to technical problems and rising costs, but said it still intends to buy 100 more in the long run.

“Due to the current state of the JSF (Joint Strike Fighter) ... and the rising cost ... it was decided to postpone the order placed on Jan 5, 2012, for the two aircraft,” the Undersecretariat for Defence Industry (SSM) said in a statement.

The SSM, the public body responsible for Turkey’s arms purchases, said the decision was taken because the technical capabilities of the aircraft were ”not at the desired level yet.”

After the initial purchase of the two jets, Turkey plans to order 100 units of the stealth fighter to replace its current fleet consisting mainly of F-4 Phantoms and F-16 Falcons, according to the statement.

Turkey is one of nine countries that are part of a U.S.-led consortium to build the F-35 fighter. The others are Britain, Canada, Italy, the Netherlands, Australia, Norway and Denmark.

The development of the stealth fighter has been plagued by technical problems that have prompted some countries to cancel, scale back or defer purchases.

http://www.defensenews.com/article/2013 ... |FRONTPAGE




Triste sina ter nascido português 👎
Avatar do usuário
P44
Sênior
Sênior
Mensagens: 55236
Registrado em: Ter Dez 07, 2004 6:34 am
Localização: O raio que vos parta
Agradeceu: 2750 vezes
Agradeceram: 2429 vezes

Re: F-35 News

#2441 Mensagem por P44 » Ter Jan 15, 2013 10:10 am

OT&E Reports New F-35 Problems


(Source: compiled by defense-aerospace.com; posted Jan. 14, 2012)



The annual report by Michael Gilmore, the Pentagon’s undersecretary for Operational Test and Evaluation, reveals major new problems with all three versions of the F-35, as well as significant shortfalls in meeting flight test milestones.

“The lag in accomplishing the intended 2012 flight testing content [will] contribute to the program delivering less capability in production aircraft in the near term,” the report says. It was submitted to Congress on Jan. 11 and is due to be made public on Jan. 15, according to OT&E. Its more salient points are excerpted below.

The report’s 17-page section on the F-35, first posted by Time’s Battleland blog, lists a surprising and unexpected number of design and production problems that emerged during the past year’s flight testing, including new airframe cracks; an average availability of less than 35%; vulnerability to PAO and fuel fires; delamination of surface coatings; lowering of performance (for example, acceleration time from 0.8 Mach to 1.2 Mach is increased by at least 43 seconds); severe transonic buffeting, and other issues.

Most critically, testing of the US Marine Corps F-35B STOVL variant was halted “in December 2012 after multiple cracks were found in a bulkhead flange on the underside of the fuselage during the 7,000-hour inspection,” the report reveals.

The report’s 17-page section on the F-35 can be accessed here.

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




Triste sina ter nascido português 👎
Avatar do usuário
Carlos Lima
Sênior
Sênior
Mensagens: 18932
Registrado em: Qui Mai 12, 2005 6:58 am
Agradeceu: 1275 vezes
Agradeceram: 631 vezes

Re: F-35 News

#2442 Mensagem por Carlos Lima » Qui Jan 31, 2013 3:02 am

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... ct-381683/

Pois é... parece que o F-35 vai mesmo virar realidade... mas a que preço... :?
Reduced F-35 performance specifications may have significant operational impact

The Pentagon's decision to reduce the performance specifications for the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter will have a significant operational impact, a number of highly experienced fighter pilots consulted by Flightglobal concur. But the careful development of tactics and disciplined employment of the jet may be able to mitigate some of those shortcomings.

"This is going to have a big tactical impact," one highly experienced officer says. "Anytime you have to lower performance standards, the capability of what the airframe can do goes down as well."

The US Department of Defense's decision to relax the sustained turn performance of all three variants of the F-35 was revealed earlier this month in the Pentagon's Director of Operational Test and Evaluation 2012 report. Turn performance for the US Air Force's F-35A was reduced from 5.3 sustained g's to 4.6 sustained g's. The F-35B had its sustained g's cut from five to 4.5 g's, while the US Navy variant had its turn performance truncated from 5.1 to five sustained g's. Acceleration times from Mach 0.8 to Mach 1.2 were extended by eight seconds, 16 seconds and 43 seconds for the A, B and C-models respectively. The baseline standard used for the comparison was a clean Lockheed F-16 Block 50 with two wingtip Raytheon AIM-120 AMRAAMs. "What an embarrassment, and there will be obvious tactical implications. Having a maximum sustained turn performance of less than 5g is the equivalent of an [McDonnell Douglas] F-4 or an [Northrop] F-5," another highly experienced fighter pilot says. "[It's] certainly not anywhere near the performance of most fourth and fifth-generation aircraft."

At higher altitudes, the reduced performance will directly impact survivability against advanced Russian-designed "double-digit" surface-to-air missile (SAM) systems such as the Almaz-Antey S-300PMU2 (also called the SA-20 Gargoyle by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization), the pilot says. At lower altitudes, where fighters might operate in for the close air support or forward air control role, the reduced airframe performance will place pilots at increased risk against shorter-range SAMs and anti-aircraft artillery.

Most egregious is the F-35C-model's drastically reduced transonic acceleration capabilities. "That [43 seconds] is a massive amount of time, and assuming you are in afterburner for acceleration, it's going to cost you even more gas," the pilot says. "This will directly impact tactical execution, and not in a good way."

Pilots typically make the decision to trade a very high rate of fuel consumption for supersonic airspeeds for one of two reasons. "They are either getting ready to kill something or they are trying to defend against something [that's trying to kill] them," the pilot says. "Every second counts in both of those scenarios. The longer it takes, the more compressed the battle space gets. That is not a good thing."

While there is no disputing that the reduced performance specifications are a negative development, there may be ways to make up for some of the F-35's less than stellar kinematic performance.

Pilots will have to make extensive use of the F-35's stealth characteristics and sensors to compensate for performance areas where the jet has weaknesses, sources familiar with the aircraft say. But engagement zones and maneuvering ranges will most likely be driven even further out against the most dangerous surface-to-air threats.

In an air-to-air engagement, for example, tactics would have to be developed to emphasize stealth and beyond visual range (BVR) combat. If a visual range engagement is unavoidable, every effort would have to be taken to enter the "merge" from a position of advantage, which should be possible, given the F-35's stealth characteristics.

Once engaged within visual range, given the F-35's limitations and relative strengths, turning should be minimized in favor of using the jet's Northrop Grumman AAQ-37 distributed aperture system of infrared cameras, helmet-mounted display and high off-boresight missiles to engage the enemy aircraft. If a turning fight is unavoidable, the F-35 has good instantaneous turn performance and good high angle of attack (50°AOA limit) performance comparable to a Boeing F/A-18 Hornet, which means a similar strategy could be adopted if one finds him or herself in such a situation.

Lockheed, for its part, maintains that the F-35 has performance superior to that of any "legacy" fighter at high altitudes. "Having flown over 4000 hours in fighter jets, I will tell you the F-35's capability at altitude, mostly driven by the internal carriage of those weapons, as a combat airplane, this airplane exceeds the capabilities of just any legacy fighter that I'm familiar with in this kind of regime," says Steve O'Bryan, the company's business development director for the F-35 during a January interview.

But much of the discussion is theoretical at this point, the F-35 has not been operationally tested, nor have tactics been developed for the aircraft's usage. How the aircraft will eventually fare once fully developed and fielded is an open question.
[]s
CB_Lima




CB_Lima = Carlos Lima :)
Avatar do usuário
NettoBR
Sênior
Sênior
Mensagens: 2773
Registrado em: Sáb Abr 28, 2012 10:36 am
Localização: Ribeirão Preto-SP
Agradeceu: 1085 vezes
Agradeceram: 320 vezes

Re: F-35 News

#2443 Mensagem por NettoBR » Qui Jan 31, 2013 1:25 pm

O F-35 é caro demais. Imagina a dor no coração quando 2 ou 3 cairem por qualquer motivo.

Vai quase 1 bilhão pro ralo.




"Todos pensam em mudar o mundo, mas ninguém pensa em mudar a si mesmo."
Liev Tolstói
Avatar do usuário
Bourne
Sênior
Sênior
Mensagens: 21087
Registrado em: Dom Nov 04, 2007 11:23 pm
Localização: Campina Grande do Sul
Agradeceu: 3 vezes
Agradeceram: 21 vezes

Re: F-35 News

#2444 Mensagem por Bourne » Qui Jan 31, 2013 3:40 pm

A frota de F16, F15 e outros estão cansados. A USAF precisa de caças novos. Então fazem o F35 entrar nos eixos ou pedem um "Super Falcon F16" ou "F15 de nova geração". Acredito que saia assim e com a produção de algumas centenas o custo vai se tornar aceitável. Pelo menos para a USAF.

A US Navy ainda pode apelar por comprar mais Super Hornet e encaminhar seu substituto para operá-lo em 2020 ou 2030. Quem sabe padronizando a frota com apenas um caça. A Boeing mostrou as ideias que estão no ar.




Avatar do usuário
P44
Sênior
Sênior
Mensagens: 55236
Registrado em: Ter Dez 07, 2004 6:34 am
Localização: O raio que vos parta
Agradeceu: 2750 vezes
Agradeceram: 2429 vezes

Re: F-35 News

#2445 Mensagem por P44 » Sex Fev 01, 2013 9:02 am

Having a maximum sustained turn performance of less than 5g is the equivalent of an [McDonnell Douglas] F-4 or an [Northrop] F-5,"
Vcs já têm um equivalente ao F-35 e ainda se queixam... :twisted:




Triste sina ter nascido português 👎
Responder