F-35 News

[Penguin]

Finlândia demonstra interesse pelo F-35
Sex, 14 de Novembro de 2008 12:25
Um jornal e uma cadeia de emissoras de radio e TV estatais da Finlândia divulgaram nesta quarta-feira (12) que a Ilmavoimat (Força Aérea Finlandesa) esta considerando o caça de 5ª geração Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II como um substituto em potencial para seus F/A-18C/D Hornet produzidos na época de sua aquisição pela McDonnell Douglas.

Esses dois órgãos da mídia finlandesa informaram que a tomada de decisão política para aquisição de um novo caça, cuja escolha poderá contemplar a Lockheed Martin, deverá ser tomada em 2015. Declarações do Major-General Jarmo Lindberg, comandante da Força Aérea Finlandesa, confirmaram essa intenção. Segundo os planos da FAF, os 63 caças F-18 Hornet em serviço naquela Força Aérea começarão a ser desativados em 2025 e o último retirado da ativa em 2030.

http://www.tecnodefesa.com.br/index.php ... &Itemid=55

[Carlos Lima]

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... speed.html

F-35 atinge velocidade Supersônica com 2450Kg de armas (inérteis).

F-35 prototype achieves supersonic speed
By Stephen Trimble

F-35 Joint Strike Fighter prototype AA-1 registered its first Mach 1.05 test point on 13 November, passing the milestone flight test event carrying a full, 2,450kg (5,400lb) inert weapons load. Lockheed Martin says this includes two Boeing 907kg joint direct attack munitions and two Raytheon AIM-120 advanced medium-range air-to-air missiles.

In all, the AA-1 completed four runs to Mach 1.05, achieving about eight minutes of supersonic speed.

The supersonic flight began after a take-off at about 2pm from Fort Worth, Texas. Earlier the same day, AA-1 had also completed a high-subsonic flight test to evaluate flutter.

[]s
CB_Lima

[caixeiro]

Thursday, November 20, 2008
F-35I too costly for Israelis
Israeli defense officials are shocked that a F-35 customized with Israeli equipment will cost three times more than the projected $80 million per plane.

"It's unbelievable," a member of the IDF General Staff said. "First it was $40 million to $50 million, and then they [the IAF] told us $70 million to $80 million. Now, we're looking at nearly three times that amount, and who's to say it won't continue to climb?"


Esse F-35 ainda vai dar muita dor de cabeca ...

[Penguin]

A LM solta mais informacoes sobre o F-35 e dos demais.


Fonte: ARES Blog

Lockheed Martin's veteran salesman, George Standridge, took the podium a couple of weeks ago in Florence, at IQPC's Fighter Conference, to push the Joint Strike Fighter. In the process, he rolled out some new PowerPoints to counter the criticism leveled at the JSF's air-to-air capability.

To support his case, Standridge relied on three performance comparison charts. The first was top speed with weapons carried:



The second, subsonic acceleration:



And the third, supersonic acceleration:



Standridge also presented comparisons on beyond-visual-range engagements:



... and WVR engagements.



It all looks very convincing, as it's designed to be, but let's take a step back and make some (very obvious) points.

Nobody's ever said that the JSF won't have decent straight-line acceleration or speed - Lord knows it should, with the fighter equivalent of a 472-cubic-inch V-8 in the back end - although whether a clean JSF would be able to outrun an Su-35, with tanks punched and AAMs carried, is an open question. (I suspect the speed and acceleration comparisons are based on tanks carried, but if it's come to a chase, the tanks will go.)

However, if straight-line acceleration and speed were everything, then Lockheed would truly have built the world's champion air combat fighter...

The issue on which most critics have hit the JSF is skirted here - particularly by use of the qualification "with typical air-to-air weapon loads". For the JSF, that's four AMRAAMs, or (for UK only) two ASRAAMs and two AMRAAMs. The others carry more weapons.

At the core of the criticism of the JSF in air combat is concern that the kill probability of the AMRAAM at long range - particularly against an alerted, jamming and evading target who's actually trying to run you out of missiles, and in a confusing multi-aircraft engagement - could be the JSF's Achilles heel. That's not addressed in any detail in this presentation. In the BVR and WVR scenarios, the number of missiles carried is not even listed as a factor.

But there are a couple of other interesting points about the presentation, notable for what isn't there. The Rafale is mentioned but the Typhoon - faster by design - is not. The Su-30 variant is the MKI, operational now for six years, not the JSF-contemporary Su-35BM.

Best of all, though, the Gripen variant used in the comparison is none other than the JAS 39C, with from the perfomance point of view is identical to the A-model that has been in service for 12 years - in fact, almost 20 years older in design than the JSF. The Next Generation version that Saab is pitching today has a lot more thrust and more internal fuel.

We know Lockheed Martin has access to all the same Saab material on the Gripen NG that we do, if only because a reporter from LockMart's Code One magazine attended all of Saab's briefings at Farnborough. (It raised some eyebrows in Saab PR - and so far none of that reporter's work has been published.) So why not compare the JSF against the jet that it's actually competing with?

Could it be that Fort Worth's getting nervous?

[Penguin]

Pode-se comparar alguns interessantes parametros entre o Su-30 da FAV e o Rafale, potencial caca da FAB.

[soultrain]

Ui que eles estão nervosos e apelar ao spin...

[P44]

http://www.star-telegram.com/190/story/1049585.html

Norway picks US fighters to replace aging fleet
By DOUG MELLGRENAssociated Press Writer

Norway selects F-35 to replace F-16s
Misunderstanding shuts down I-20 near Weatherford
Norway chooses Lockheed Martin F-35 for next-generation fighter jet




OSLO, Norway -- The U.S.-developed F-35 fighter jet has been chosen to replace Norway's aging F-16 aircraft in a purchase that would cost the NATO member about 18 billion kroner ($2.5 billion) for 48 aircraft, officials said Thursday.

Norway chose the aircraft to replace U.S.-made F-16s in preference to JAS Gripen fighters from Sweden. The new fighters would be phased in between 2016 and 2020, the government said in a statement.

Parliament still needs to approve the deal to buy up to 48 of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighters, and one of the three parties in the governing coalition said it needed more time to discuss the deal. Opposition parties also said they want to study the conclusion.

The F-35 - a single-seat, single-engine jet - is being developed by Bethesda, Maryland-based Lockheed Martin, with engines made United Technologies Corp.'s Pratt and Whitney unit and General Electric Co.

A news release said the total cost of the deal over the aircraft's' expected 30- year life span would be about 145 billion kroner ($20.7 billion) for the fighter, weapons, maintenance, infrastructure and operations.

"The Joint Strike Fighter is the best fighter and it is the cheapest," Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg said at a news conference. He said a majority of the coalition had agreed on the American fighter Thursday, and decided to announce its stand of the market-sensitive nature of the decision.

"We wanted everyone to have the same information," he said after the coalition began to discuss the decision with its parliamentary groups. The prime minister said Norway does not expect to sign contracts for the F-35 jets until 2014.

Defense Minister Anne-Grete Stroem-Erichsen said, "The Joint Strike Fighter is considered to be the better of the two candidates regarding intelligence and surveillance, counter air, air interdict and anti-surface warfare."

She said, "It would be a good thing to start contract negotiations (with Lockheed Martin) as soon as possible," she said. Stroem-Erichsen also said Norwegian companies would win valuable contracts as part of the deal.

Two of the three parties in Norway coalition, Labor and the Center Party said they backed the decision to choose the U.S. fighter.

The third, the anti-NATO Socialist Left party, said it needed more time to discuss the decision since it wanted to spend as little as possible on military equipment.

Socialist Left leader Kristen Halvorsen said the party would make its decision in early December.

Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt said Norway's decision to drop the Gripen was "a setback" for Sweden, "but that's their decision and we have to respect that."

The European EADS consortium, which makes the Eurofighter Typhoon, broke off talks over the contract in December 2007, saying it was uncomfortable with the bidding process. The consortium declined to comment on the reasons, but Norwegian news media reported then that EADS felt the bidding process favored the Americans.

[Túlio]

Aquele powerpoint é puro comércio, o comentarista levantou ótimas dúvidas: seria como, para vender o Rafale F4, a Dassault o comparasse ao Gripen A e ao F-16C-30...

E menos, né Santiago: Rafale (com AESA, datalink com R99 e Meteor) x Su-30 MKK (sem nada disso)???

O MINISTÉRIO DA SAÚDE ADVERTE: PRickofobia causa constipação e o mal estar conhecido como 'CHORA VIOLA' (quando o Rafale for escolhido)...

[PRick]

http://www.star-telegram.com/190/story/1049585.html

Norway picks US fighters to replace aging fleet
By DOUG MELLGRENAssociated Press Writer

Norway selects F-35 to replace F-16s
Misunderstanding shuts down I-20 near Weatherford
Norway chooses Lockheed Martin F-35 for next-generation fighter jet




OSLO, Norway -- The U.S.-developed F-35 fighter jet has been chosen to replace Norway's aging F-16 aircraft in a purchase that would cost the NATO member about 18 billion kroner ($2.5 billion) for 48 aircraft, officials said Thursday.

Norway chose the aircraft to replace U.S.-made F-16s in preference to JAS Gripen fighters from Sweden. The new fighters would be phased in between 2016 and 2020, the government said in a statement.


Defense Minister Anne-Grete Stroem-Erichsen said, "The Joint Strike Fighter is considered to be the better of the two candidates regarding intelligence and surveillance, counter air, air interdict and anti-surface warfare."

She said, "It would be a good thing to start contract negotiations (with Lockheed Martin) as soon as possible," she said. Stroem-Erichsen also said Norwegian companies would win valuable contracts as part of the deal.

Two of the three parties in Norway coalition, Labor and the Center Party said they backed the decision to choose the U.S. fighter.

The third, the anti-NATO Socialist Left party, said it needed more time to discuss the decision since it wanted to spend as little as possible on military equipment.

Socialist Left leader Kristen Halvorsen said the party would make its decision in early December.

Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt said Norway's decision to drop the Gripen was "a setback" for Sweden, "but that's their decision and we have to respect that."

The European EADS consortium, which makes the Eurofighter Typhoon, broke off talks over the contract in December 2007, saying it was uncomfortable with the bidding process. The consortium declined to comment on the reasons, but Norwegian news media reported then that EADS felt the bidding process favored the Americans.

Deixa só os israelenses saberem desse precinho! Olha o papel aceita tudo, qualquer "notícia".

[ ]´s

[PRick]

Aquele powerpoint é puro comércio, o comentarista levantou ótimas dúvidas: seria como, para vender o Rafale F4, a Dassault o comparasse ao Gripen A e ao F-16C-30...

E menos, né Santiago: Rafale (com AESA, datalink com R99 e Meteor) x Su-30 MKK (sem nada disso)???

O MINISTÉRIO DA SAÚDE ADVERTE: PRickofobia causa constipação e o mal estar conhecido como 'CHORA VIOLA' (quando o Rafale for escolhido)...

Por sinal, os hamburguerianos adoram esse programa do Tio Bill Gates, ele faz maravilhas!! E o melhor de tudo é que ele tem dados incríveis, que nem os fabricantes dos caças conhecem!

[ ]´s

[Adriano]

http://www.star-telegram.com/190/story/1049585.html

Deixa só os israelenses saberem desse precinho! Olha o papel aceita tudo, qualquer "notícia".

[ ]´s

Boa!

[Bolovo]

Achei bem exagerado esses slides da LM.

[Penguin]

Aquele powerpoint é puro comércio, o comentarista levantou ótimas dúvidas: seria como, para vender o Rafale F4, a Dassault o comparasse ao Gripen A e ao F-16C-30...

E menos, né Santiago: Rafale (com AESA, datalink com R99 e Meteor) x Su-30 MKK (sem nada disso)???

O MINISTÉRIO DA SAÚDE ADVERTE: PRickofobia causa constipação e o mal estar conhecido como 'CHORA VIOLA' (quando o Rafale for escolhido)...

Claro que eh puro comercio. Foi feita por um vendedor.
Mas em termos dinamicos nada muda entre um Rafale F-1 e o F-4. E se o apresentado tem relacao com a realidade, o Su-30MKI acelera mais que o Rafale entre M0,8 e M1,2 e o Rafale um pouco melhor entre M0,6 e M0,95 e com carga tipica de misseis o Su eh seria mais rapido. O Rafale podera compensar essa desvantagem com melhores sistemas e menor assinatura (senti uma sensacao de deja vu )

Na apresentacao consta um tal de "Advanced 4th Gen". O que seria isso? Typhoon, SH, Su-35, Gripen NG?

E desde quando Dassault Rafale = Prick? A FAB estara bem com qq um dos 3. Chora Viola seria se o FX-BR dancasse por causa de restricoes orcamentarias ou algo do genero.

[]s

[Carioca]

FX-3 aproximando-se a passos largos...bom prepararmos violas...os pacs da vida não podem parar...

[Penguin]

Mientras tanto....com crise e tudo...

DATE:20/10/08
SOURCE:Flight International
USAF's $8.4 billion budget shift to bolster F-35
By Stephen Trimble

The US Air Force's new leadership has moved quickly since July to dispel long-running doubts about the service's commitment to the Lockheed Martin F-35A Joint Strike Fighter.

Since the appointment of Gen Norton Schwartz as chief of staff in July, service officials have disclosed two new spending proposals worth a combined $8.4 billion that are aimed primarily at restoring a plan to buy 110 F-35As a year from fiscal year 2013.

A leaked internal planning document, first reported last week by InsideDefense.com, proposes retiring about 300 conventional fighters early and diverting the $3.4 billion savings mostly towards buying more F-35As.


© Lockheed Martin


That proposal comes less than three months after Schwartz told lawmakers the Department of Defense would contribute an extra $5 billion to the USAF's fighter recapitalisation account, with part of the proceeds flowing to the JSF account.

"You kind of look at it and say the air force is serious here," says Doug Royce, aerospace analyst for Forecast International. "This shows they're willing to sacrifice the force size and take some risk to buy more JSFs."

Both proposals, if approved in the FY2010 spending plan, would help the USAF reach its newly stated goal to nearly double annual F-35 orders. The USAF is planning to buy 1,763 F-35As.

There have been widespread concerns among the international partners about the F-35's affordability since the USAF in 2007 reduced its annual orders for the full-rate production phase from 110 to 48.

Several international partners, including Australia, Israel, the Netherlands, Norway and the UK, are approaching major acquisition decisions involving the F-35.

Meanwhile, the USAF appears to be gambling that the benefits of buying F-35s faster will compensate for a short-term fighter shortfall caused by the early retirements of 137 Boeing F-15s, 177 Lockheed F-16s and nine Fairchild A-10s.

At his July confirmation hearing, Schwartz said the F-35 would be the centrepiece of his plan to shrink the average age of the USAF's aircraft inventory from 24 years to 15 years by 2030.

That plan requires the USAF to raise its combined aircraft purchases a year from 115 to 165, which is roughly the same amount as the planned increase for the F-35A programme.

It remains unclear how much of the $8.4 billion spending package would be devoted to the F-35 programme and even how much impact that would have. Currently, the USAF plans to spend $5 billion in FY2013 to buy 48 fighters, or roughly $104 million per aircraft.

Richard Aboulafia, a Teal Group vice-president, also noted that savings from operations and maintenance budget rarely flow into procurement accounts. Another flaw with the USAF's plan is potential opposition from Congress, which typically opposes aircraft retirements.

"They like jobs, and they like force structure," Aboulafia says. "I think it's prudent to expect air force F-35A procurement to stay at about 48 a year. But the big variable is added funding for F-22s. That, of course, would largely come out of F-35 funding, which probably helps explain the air force's desire to bolster the F-35."