Internationale fighter ontwikkelingen, deel 3

[dudge]

Eurofighter Typhoon: Flight tests with Storm Shadow missile started

Press release | 1 day ago

Eurofighter Partner Company Alenia Aermacchi has confirmed that the first in a major series of flight tests to integrate the MBDA Storm Shadow missile onto Eurofighter Typhoon has now taken place.

Initial flight trials to demonstrate that the missile can be safely carried have been successfully started.  The trials began on 27th November, by the Alenia Aermacchi Flight Test Centre at Decimomannu Air Base, in Sardinia, Italy, with the support of the Eurofighter Partner Companies, BAE Systems and Cassidian.

The intensive flight test programme  began with flutter tests and an air data system large store interference assessment, using Instrumented Production Aircraft 2 (IPA2) updated to the Phase 1 Enhancement standard.

The Chief Executive Officer of Eurofighter GmbH, Alberto Gutierrez, said: "The successful start of the flight tests is good news for our programme. This is one of a number of enhancements that are coming on stream and there are many more to come. Storm Shadow is a major step forward significantly increasing the air-to-ground capabilities of the Eurofighter Typhoon."

The Storm Shadow, already in service with the Italian Air Force and Royal Air Force Tornados, is a conventionally armed, stealthy, long-range stand-off precision weapon designed to neutralise high value targets. The new weapons systems will add the capability to strike in day or night in all-weather conditions, well-defended infrastructure targets such as port facilities, control centres, bunkers, missile sites, airfields and bridges that would otherwise require several aircraft and missions. This is a new addition to the Eurofighter Typhoon's potent simultaneous multi-/swing-role capabilities.

Powered by a turbo-jet engine, with a range in excess of 250 km, the Storm Shadow missile weighs approximately 1.300kg and is just over 5 metres long. It will be available to operators from 2015 when the Eurofighter Typhoon Phase 2 Enhancements become operational.

Storm Shadow will provide a significant leap in the Eurofighter Typhoon's operational capabilities, enabling the platform to deploy multiple weapons at a very long range well clear of danger from air defences.

Background information:

Eurofighter Typhoon is the most advanced new generation multi-role/swing-role combat aircraft currently available on the world market. Seven customers (Germany, the United Kingdom, Italy, Spain, Austria, Saudi Arabia and Oman) have already ordered the Eurofighter Typhoon. With 719 aircraft under contract and 571 on order, Eurofighter Typhoon is currently the largest military procurement programme in Europe. Its high technology strengthens the position of European aerospace industry in the international market. The programme secures more than 100,000 jobs in 400 companies. Eurofighter Jagdflugzeug GmbH manages the programme on behalf of the Eurofighter Partner Companies Alenia Aermacchi/Finmeccanica, BAE Systems and Cassidian in Germany and Spain, which are the most important aviation and aerospace companies in Europe with a turnover of about 126 billion euro (2012).

Since the first Typhoon entered service in 2003 , more than 390 Eurofighter have been delivered to six countries: Germany, Great Britain, Italy, Spain, Austria and Saudi Arabia. The seventh customer, Oman ordered a total of 12 aircraft in December 2012. Until now, the combined Eurofighter fleet has completed more than 210,000 flying hours.

High-resolution images of the Eurofighter Typhoon can be downloaded from our website: http://www.eurofighter.com/multimedia

http://www.eurofighter.com/news-and-events/2013/11/eurofighter-typhoon-flight-tests-with-storm-shadow-missile-started

[Chrisis]

Swedes to earn less on Swiss Gripen deal: report

According to the terms of a deal struck between Sweden and the Swiss government, Switzerland has set aside a total project budget of 3.1 billion Swiss francs, or roughly 21.5 billion kronor ($3.3 billion) for the purchase 22 Gripen E fighters, Ny Teknik magazine reports.

The Swiss will also rent eleven Gripen C and Gripen D planes for five years as part of the deal.

But "secret" documents about the deal reviewed by the magazine reveal that Switzerland will actually pay only 17.7 billion kronor for the fighters.

The new figures mean that the price for each Gripen to be sold to Switzerland as a part of the deal will sink by about about 20 percent, from one billion kronor to 800 million.

The new figure also means a drastic reduction in the overall proceeds of the deal, which is still awaiting approval by Switzerland, as the cost of building the planes is estimated to be around 17.2 billion kronor.

All income from the deal will go straight to the development of the new Gripen E, according to the Ny Teknik report, which reported that the recently released Swedish budget clearly showed that selling fighter jets to Switzerland was pivotal to finance the continued research and development of the aircraft.

"The income from Switzerland must be made available in addition to funds already agreed upon by parliament," the budget proposal read.

Earmarking the sales money and directing it to the fighter-jet programme is unusual, Defence College professor Gunnar Hult told the magazine.

"Traditionally, money from state-level plane deals has gone not to the armed forces but to the finance department," he said.

Either, the government has signaled that the Jas Gripen developers need the cash, he underlined, or it is political maneuvering to make sure the programme has funding regardless of the hashing out in parliament of details of the country's entire defence budget.

The result would be that the Swedish state would take home very little of the income, Ny Teknik noted.

Furthermore, wrangling over how much the Swiss state should pay Sweden upfront has been ongoing, with Ny Teknik reporting that the Swedes wanted 60 percent of the price tag, while the Swiss were gunning for 15 percent.

The compromise landed on 40 percent, to be paid out by 2018, according to reports in Swiss media.

Later on Wednesday, Swedish defence export agency FXM (Försvarsexportmyndigheten) denied that claims by Ny Teknik that the deal would bring in less money to Sweden.

"It's totally wrong," FXM spokeswoman Sofia Karlberg told Svenska Dagbladet (SvD) newspaper.

She claimed the Ny Teknik was comparing two different things and that there hadn't been any change in the price for the Swiss Gripen purchase and that the 17.7 billion figure for the price of the planes can't be compared with the 21.5 billion kronor framework agreement price, which also includes money for support, logistics, and weapons.

She added that the actual per-plane price of the Swiss Gripen deal is classified.

TT/The Local/at


http://www.thelocal.se/20131009/50684

-------------------------------

Dat zou de stukprijs voor Zwitserland onder 100 miljoen euro brengen.

Nog steeds wel veel geld per stuk. Niet zo absurd als de prijs voor een Super Hornet die Australië betaald heeft maar toch.
Wel weer meer dan een F-16 blk 60.

Het is hetzelfde als in Nederland.

Het totale bedrag is bestemd voor het gehele project, net als in Nederland voor de JSF gereserveerd is.... Men suggereerde vanuit de Klu in Nederland dat de prijs van de GripenE voor Zwitserland het totaal gedeeld door 22 was.. heel suggestief natuurlijk.

In dit artikel lees je dat de directe prijs voor de Gripens veel lager is. Dat daar ook al directe support in zit... MAAR OOK Support gedurende de levensduur, dus toekomstige update's dit is in feite hetzelfde als wat men indertijd aan Nederland aanbood.

85 Gripen E voor € 4.792 miljard en voor 30 jaar support ongeveer eenzelfde bedrag erbij...

Zie voor de vlieguurkosten Jane's rapport http://www.ftm.nl/exclusive/de-jsf-afleidingsmanoeuvre-van-jack-de-vries/


Ik kwam op basis van 2 vliegvelden á € 25 milj p/j en 68 GripenE á 180 vlieguren tegen € 3.500,00 per vlieguur op € 87,5 Miljoen euro per jaar aan directe exploitatie! Het belangrijkste punt dat ik wil maken is dit: wij kunnen het als leken wel proberen uit te rekenen.. maar dit is werk wat Defensie en DMO had MOETEN doen... in een eerlijke kandidaten vergelijking. Op basis van officiële informatie.. DMO had de fabrikanten dit moeten laten aantonen dmv officiële bewijsstukken. Tijdens de besprekingen met fabrikanten begin dit jaar, heeft defensie geweigerd deze informatie aan te nemen... men wist alles al.. vervolgens dus een selectieve google want als men echt goed had gekeken... dan had men het Janes rapport tenminste op moeten merken.. en geloof mij, ze wisten daarvan...

•Grote vraag is waarom men er voor kiest om niet de standaard vergelijking te maken zoals de Algemene Rekenkamer dat in het rapport Uitstapkosten heeft voorgerekend. Waarom niet even overzichtelijk vergelijken van kosten onderverdeeld per post? Waarom zijn alleen de exploitatiekosten voor de JSF globaal genoemd? (namelijk dat we met 37 JSF onder de huidige exploitatiekosten van de 68 F-16's willen blijven... Dit rekenvoorbeeld zou toch al tot enige vorm van nadenken moeten aanzetten. We vergelijken de kosten van 68 F-16 met die van 37 JSF en dan durft de JSF lobby inclusief, minister Hennis, en Fokker directeur Hans Buthker  te beweren dat de F-16 zo duur is om mee te vliegen...
...

Gebruikmakend van een schatting van het internationaal erkende en gerenommeerde Janes IHS, komen we tot een verbijsterende conclusie. Ja 68 F-16's kosten ruim 270 miljoen Euro, en ja de JSF blijft daar met 37 toestellen, naar alle waarschijnlijkheid, binnen. Maar als we de beoogde, exploitatiekosten van, in dit geval de Gripen E er naast leggen... dan kunnen we niet om de uitkomsten heen. Men heeft in één klap een bedrag van rond de €  182.480.908,00 te besteden (binnen Defensie natuurlijk....) Zou de landmacht daarvan de tanks weer operationeel kunnen maken? Of zouden daarvan wellicht betere Lange Afstands geleide wapens tegen landdoelen kunnen worden aangeschaft? Of zou de luchtmacht daarvan bijvoorbeeld nieuwe Meteor BVRAAM wapens kunnen kopen?  Of Taurus KEPD 350 lange afstandskruisvluchtwapens? Men zou ook tussen de 60 en 80 Gripen E kunnen aanschaffen. waardoor de effectiviteit aanzienlijk toe zal nemen. De marine zou haar nieuwgebouwde JSS niet hoeven te verkopen.  Hoezo is er géén verdringingseffect vanwege de JSF?

Ook meer info in mijn eigen blog: http://dutchforce21.wordpress.com/2013/10/14/parallellen-met-denemarken/#more-131

[IPA NG]

Gooi er voor de goede vergelijking dan ook training, onderdelen, en de huur van 11 F16's gedurende 5 jaar bij.
Het blijven indicaties, want volgens mij is ook uit de Australische deal niet bekend hoeveel er naar de randvoorwaarden is gegaan.

Ik probeer een beetje een beeld te krijgen van de kosten van de Gripen E/F en de 'beste' F-16 varianten aangezien ik ook weer een geupdate visie wil gaan maken. Maar ik vind 37 kisten dus echt te weinig. Vandaar dat ik het een must vind de F-35 aan te vullen met een 'low-end' kist.

Alleen de JAS-39 en de F-16 voldoen aan mijn criteria dus wil die tegen elkaar afspiegelen.

Misschien dat Polemne, als zijnde de huis-expert hier, zich heeft op het kostenverschil tussen beide kisten alsmede de gebruikskosten?

[dudge]

Dat zou de stukprijs voor Zwitserland onder 100 miljoen euro brengen.

Nog steeds wel veel geld per stuk. Niet zo absurd als de prijs voor een Super Hornet die Australië betaald heeft maar toch.
Wel weer meer dan een F-16 blk 60.

Gooi er voor de goede vergelijking dan ook training, onderdelen, en de huur van 11 F16's gedurende 5 jaar bij.
Het blijven indicaties, want volgens mij is ook uit de Australische deal niet bekend hoeveel er naar de randvoorwaarden is gegaan.

[IPA NG]

Swedes to earn less on Swiss Gripen deal: report

According to the terms of a deal struck between Sweden and the Swiss government, Switzerland has set aside a total project budget of 3.1 billion Swiss francs, or roughly 21.5 billion kronor ($3.3 billion) for the purchase 22 Gripen E fighters, Ny Teknik magazine reports.

The Swiss will also rent eleven Gripen C and Gripen D planes for five years as part of the deal.

But "secret" documents about the deal reviewed by the magazine reveal that Switzerland will actually pay only 17.7 billion kronor for the fighters.

The new figures mean that the price for each Gripen to be sold to Switzerland as a part of the deal will sink by about about 20 percent, from one billion kronor to 800 million.

The new figure also means a drastic reduction in the overall proceeds of the deal, which is still awaiting approval by Switzerland, as the cost of building the planes is estimated to be around 17.2 billion kronor.

All income from the deal will go straight to the development of the new Gripen E, according to the Ny Teknik report, which reported that the recently released Swedish budget clearly showed that selling fighter jets to Switzerland was pivotal to finance the continued research and development of the aircraft.

"The income from Switzerland must be made available in addition to funds already agreed upon by parliament," the budget proposal read.

Earmarking the sales money and directing it to the fighter-jet programme is unusual, Defence College professor Gunnar Hult told the magazine.

"Traditionally, money from state-level plane deals has gone not to the armed forces but to the finance department," he said.

Either, the government has signaled that the Jas Gripen developers need the cash, he underlined, or it is political maneuvering to make sure the programme has funding regardless of the hashing out in parliament of details of the country's entire defence budget.

The result would be that the Swedish state would take home very little of the income, Ny Teknik noted.

Furthermore, wrangling over how much the Swiss state should pay Sweden upfront has been ongoing, with Ny Teknik reporting that the Swedes wanted 60 percent of the price tag, while the Swiss were gunning for 15 percent.

The compromise landed on 40 percent, to be paid out by 2018, according to reports in Swiss media.

Later on Wednesday, Swedish defence export agency FXM (Försvarsexportmyndigheten) denied that claims by Ny Teknik that the deal would bring in less money to Sweden.

"It's totally wrong," FXM spokeswoman Sofia Karlberg told Svenska Dagbladet (SvD) newspaper.

She claimed the Ny Teknik was comparing two different things and that there hadn't been any change in the price for the Swiss Gripen purchase and that the 17.7 billion figure for the price of the planes can't be compared with the 21.5 billion kronor framework agreement price, which also includes money for support, logistics, and weapons.

She added that the actual per-plane price of the Swiss Gripen deal is classified.

TT/The Local/at


http://www.thelocal.se/20131009/50684

-------------------------------

Dat zou de stukprijs voor Zwitserland onder 100 miljoen euro brengen.

Nog steeds wel veel geld per stuk. Niet zo absurd als de prijs voor een Super Hornet die Australië betaald heeft maar toch.
Wel weer meer dan een F-16 blk 60.

[Elzenga]

Wat een paradox ook, overgaan op een toestel dat in zichzelf meer kan, waardoor je als force uiteindelijk minder kan....

dat meer kan als alles naar behoren werkt. En wat is meer in deze?...ik vind het in ieder geval geen goede ontwikkeling. Want kwaniteit is ook belangrijk.

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

Wat een paradox ook, overgaan op een toestel dat in zichzelf meer kan, waardoor je als force uiteindelijk minder kan....

Vandaar dat ik voorstander ben van een (ook kostbare) high end / low end mix

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

Air Forces Acquiring Fewer Fighters As Prices Rise

By Bill Sweetman / Source: Aviation Week & Space Technology

November 25, 2013

Leaders of smaller air forces are worried that they could be priced out of flying fighter aircraft by rising acquisition and operational costs, and countries that once fielded large forces are recognizing that they cannot cover all their historic missions as they switch to the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF).

That program's leaders admit that the F-35's projected operational costs are not affordable—while promising to bring them down—but one major U.S. contractor has broken ranks and challenged the value of the Pentagon's huge investment in radar cross-section (RCS) reduction, the JSF's dominant technology.

Much of the U.S. defense community "has lost sight of reality" as to what stealth means, a Raytheon executive told the Defense IQ International Fighter Conference here this month. Michael Garcia, the company's senior business development manager for active, electronically scanned (AESA) radars, suggested that longer-range sensors and weapons and electronic attack should be considered part of stealth, rather than placing complete reliance on RCS.

Comparing detection and weapon ranges, as well as RCS, Garcia argued that the "essence of stealth is that the Blue circles [for detection and weapon range] impact Red before Red can detect," and that jamming, sensors and weapons affect that calculation.

"The level of RCS has not been improving," Garcia said, and it cannot be greatly improved through an aircraft's life. "It is time-stamped with whatever date it came out of the factory. There has been a revolution in detection" of low-RCS targets, meanwhile, he added, citing the Russian development of an operational, mobile VHF AESA radar (AW&ST Sept. 2, p. 28) and resurgent interest in infrared search-and-track systems. "Conventional stealth is vulnerable to low-band detection," Garcia said. "And the 'fifth-generation' scenario has become outdated over the past five years." He mentioned contrails and visible vortices as signatures that are not affected by RCS reduction. Other analysts have noted the dense wingtip vortex trails visible in many inflight photos of F-35s.

Raytheon is a major supplier to the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet program and has a small stake in the F-35. However, this is the first time that any U.S. contractor has gone on the record with a direct critique of the JSF's prime rationale.

The fact that Raytheon's fighter customer is the U.S. Navy may also be important. At the conference, executives close to the Navy's procurement process said the service had not made a bureaucratic error when it issued a solicitation in October calling for more F/A-18s in fiscal 2015. "The error was that it became public," one official said, adding that the solicitation was rescinded under pressure from the U.S. Air Force and Marine Corps. The same executives confirmed that the Navy's alternate program objective memorandum process, which is looking at spending if the Budget Control Act's cuts remain in force, includes options to defer the F-35 by two or three years.

However, a senior JSF program manager told the conference that he is "cautiously optimistic" that the project will get better grades in the next report from Michael Gilmore, the Pentagon's director of operational test and evaluation, due early next year. Gilmore warned in June that software was behind schedule and that most of the schedule margin for weapons integration had been consumed (AW&ST July 1, p. 23).

Capt. Paul Overstreet, JSF weapon systems program manager, acknowledges some risk in on-time delivery of Block 3F software that meets the initial specifications for the aircraft. The program office is confident that the interim 2B and 3I software will arrive in time for the Marine Corps and Air Force to declare initial operational capability, but the 3F package remains "highly dependent" on performance in the interim packages. At the same time, the program is still "playing catch-up" on its vital Autonomous Logistics Information System, offboard mission-planning system and the aircraft's health management system. Overstreet concedes that operating cost estimates are "not affordable," but he adds that a high-level effort to reduce costs is underway.

JSF schedule performance is important to the Royal Air Force, which is approaching a 2015 decision date on the retirement of its final three squadrons of Tornado GR4s, according to Air Commo. Dave Waddington, Tornado force commander. Two out of five 12-aircraft GR4 squadrons retire next year, and "there is a plan for Tornado out of service date" as the RAF adds numbers and capability to its Typhoon force, but that plan will be "validated or adjusted" in the next U.K. strategic defense review, due in 2015.

The RAF's migration from a Tornado/Typhoon force to a Typhoon/JSF force will be managed "to retain sufficient quantity while retaining key [Tornado] capabilities until they exist on other platforms," Waddington says. While there is "more we can do" with the Typhoon, he stresses that it is "a superb air-to-air platform," while the JSF will be "our top-end capability in transforming the RAF, able to access and serve the full range of targets." This suggests that the service may shift Tornado missions to the JSF rather than expanding the Typhoon's air-to-surface capability.

The challenge, Waddington adds, "is that we are not buying very many F-35s, at least for a while." The U.K. is acquiring an initial batch of 48 aircraft, equipping an operational conversion unit and two squadrons that will have "the same training and embark [on the new aircraft carrier Queen Elizabeth] for the same amount of time," he says. With one operational squadron embarked, this would leave one land-based squadron for deployment.

The complementary nature of the Typhoon and JSF is also the key to Italy's plans, according to Col. Vito Cracas, commander of the air force's 36th Fighter Wing. "The JSF does not have a high-end air-to-air capability," he told the conference. We need to have both aircraft."

Smaller air forces do not have that option. The Netherlands' Court of Audit noted in a recent report that the nation's planned force of 37 JSFs will, according to the defense ministry, permit the sustained deployment of only four aircraft to support coalition operations while defending domestic and allied airspace. This, the court adds, assumes that the Netherlands shares responsibility for air defense and policing with Belgium, subject to current negotiations.

Belgium itself plans to issue a request for information for a new fighter in early 2014, with the aim of retiring its F-16s starting in 2023, according to Col. Fred Vansina, chief of staff of the Belgian air component. The service has 54 active F-16s and five aircraft in reserve. The minimum number of aircraft "depends on which aircraft we choose," Vansina says, and the ability to share operations, as with the Netherlands, "could and should impact the numbers."

Delegates from smaller air forces—including Colombia and Ukraine—were even less sure how they would replace their aircraft. Lt. Gen. Craig Franklin, commander of the USAF 3rd Air Force and U.S. air forces in Europe, suggested a harsher solution: Under a "smart defense" concept, "not every nation needs a fighter force," he said.

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/AW_11_25_2013_p41-638956.xml&p=2

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

F-35 Production Depends on Tests Not Budgets, Carter Says

By Tony Capaccio - Nov 21, 2013

Increased production of Lockheed Martin Corp.'s (LMT) F-35 depends more on how the fighter fares in testing than how deeply the Pentagon budget is cut, Deputy Defense Secretary Ashton Carter said.

"The principle thing that is determining in the next couple of years" whether to ramp up production of the Joint Strike Fighter "is less our budget situation than it is the maturity of the program," Carter said in an interview.

The comments by Carter, who's preparing to leave his post as the Pentagon's No. 2 civilian official on Dec. 4, reflect the Defense Department's continuing effort to shelter the costliest U.S. weapons system from $500 billion in defense spending cuts over a decade under the budget process called sequestration.

"Nothing's going to be completely insulated" from planned budget reductions, "but the Joint Strike Fighter program is in a lot better position that it was four years ago," Carter, who has overseen efforts since 2009 to reduce spiraling costs of the program, said in the Nov. 19 interview.

The current price tag for 2,443 aircraft is $391.2 billion, a 68 percent increase from the projection in 2001, as measured in current dollars. The number of aircraft the Pentagon plans to buy is 409 fewer than called for originally. This year, lawmakers, the Government Accountability Office and the Pentagon's test office have said the aircraft is making progress in flight tests and in stabilizing production.

"Our industry partners came to understand that the key to the Joint Strike Fighter was control of cost," Carter said. "That's what we've been working on these last four years."

Saving $48.5 Billion

The Congressional Budget Office said last week in its annual menu of options for reducing the federal deficit that the Pentagon could save as much as $48.5 billion in budget authority through 2023 ending the program at the 150 already on order, while continuing to buy Boeing Co. (BA) F-18E/F fighters and Lockheed F-16s. The Pentagon's current plan has it buying about 2,300 F-35s through 2037 in addition to about 150 on order the agency said.

The F-35 program has political support on Capitol Hill because it includes contractors in 45 states with 1,300 suppliers supporting 133,000 jobs, according to Bethesda, Maryland-based Lockheed. United Technologies Corp. (UTX)'s Pratt & Whitney unit makes the engines in Connecticut.

Eight primary international partners have committed to buying the plane, including the U.K., Canada and Australia.

The Pentagon's current budget plans call for increasing production to 42 of the fighters in fiscal 2015, which begins Oct. 1, from 29 each this year and the previous year. The rate would increase to 62 in 2016, 76 in 2017 and 100 in 2018, according to internal Pentagon budget documents.

Carter, 59, was the Pentagon's top weapons buyer before taking over as deputy secretary in late 2011. He has tackled challenges including equipping U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan with fortified vehicles and other equipment, informed by visits with the troops during eight trips to Afghanistan.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-21/f-35-production-depends-on-tests-not-budgets-carter-says.html

[Harald]

Mijn gevoel zegt dat dit een samenspel is geweest van  en de US defensie om de verkoop van de F35 te vergroten.
Het kan eigenlijk niet, als er in een aanbesteding waarbij eisen gesteld worden aan het aantal aan te schaffen toestellen en de hoogte van het budget. De uitkomst naast zich neer wordt gelegd en opzij wordt geschoven en ander toestel en minder aantallen worden aangeschaft.
Er zullen wel geheime afspraken gemaakt zijn.

[Mourning]

Of optie 4, ijdelheid en niet willen onderdoen voor je grote buurland.
En als de kritiek allemaal fictie zou zijn, dan zouden er nu toch al tientallen F35's in Afghanistan rondvliegen.....

Oh, en laten we niet vergeten dat ook Zuid-Korea, naar het schijnt, geen informatie over het programma krijgt, en het moet doen met toezeggingen van LM en USAF.

Ach... vertragingen vinden zeker niet alleen bij de JSF plaats maar ook bij diverse Europese projecten waar ik de JSF-criticasters en vaak eurofielen (dat laatste ben ik zelf overigens ook maar wel in gematigde mate) dan vervolgens niet over hoor of deze met argumenten komen dat de vertragingen bij die andere projecten vooral "begrepen" moeten worden uit strategisch aspect... iets met dubbele standaard enzo m.i..  .

Ik breng de Eurofighter Typhoon Tranche-3 en de NH-90 maar eens even aan als voorbeelden van bovenstaande.

Maar het is wel raar inderdaad dat een order van 60 F15SE wordt omgezet in 40 F35's. Het zou mij dan ook niet verbazen als er ergens geld in zakken is verdwenen waar dat in ieder geval niet thuishoort.

[dudge]

Als een land carte blanche heeft voor de aanschaf van 60 F15SE, dit afschiet, om vervolgens alsnog te gaan voor 40 F35A dan kan je een aantal zaken afvragen:

1. is de lobby van LM/politiek bijzonder goed?
2. Wie is er heel veel rijker geworden?
3. Is de F35A wat geadverteerd wordt en is de anti hype tot kunst verheven?

Wat het ook moge zijn, 40 extra kisten met een optie op 20 extra is ook goed nieuws voor Nederland.

Of optie 4, ijdelheid en niet willen onderdoen voor je grote buurland.
En als de kritiek allemaal fictie zou zijn, dan zouden er nu toch al tientallen F35's in Afghanistan rondvliegen.....

Oh, en laten we niet vergeten dat ook Zuid-Korea, naar het schijnt, geen informatie over het programma krijgt, en het moet doen met toezeggingen van LM en USAF.

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

Als een land carte blanche heeft voor de aanschaf van 60 F15SE, dit afschiet, om vervolgens alsnog te gaan voor 40 F35A dan kan je een aantal zaken afvragen:

1. is de lobby van LM/politiek bijzonder goed?
2. Wie is er heel veel rijker geworden?
3. Is de F35A wat geadverteerd wordt en is de anti hype tot kunst verheven?

Wat het ook moge zijn, 40 extra kisten met een optie op 20 extra is ook goed nieuws voor Nederland.

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

November 22, 2013 6:50 am

South Korea agrees Lockheed fighter jets deal

By Simon Mundy and Song Jung-a in Seoul

South Korea has agreed to buy 40 F-35A stealth fighter jets from Lockheed Martin, after a protracted bidding war that also involved Boeing and Eurofighter.

Seoul surprised many observers in September by reopening its tender for 60 fighter jets, confounding predictions that it was poised to select Boeing's F-15 aircraft – the only bid that met the stated budget limit.

But on Friday the country's joint chiefs of staff said that the F-15 and Eurofighter's Typhoon did not meet the programme's revised technical requirements, leaving only the F-35, which has stealth capabilities allowing it to escape detection by modern radar systems.

"We made the decision in consideration of the stealth function, because this is the key capability considering North Korea's realised nuclear and missile threats, and the possibility of limited provocation," they said in a statement.

The jets would be delivered beginning in 2018, they added, without revealing the value of the deal.

The decision to buy only 40 jets was in line with speculation that had suggested South Korea would reduce the volume of its order to secure the F-35 without exceeding its stated budget of $8bn.

However, the defence ministry said that it still planned to purchase a further 20 fighter jets, although these would be introduced only from 2023.

Explaining their decision to revise the programme requirements with a greater focus on stealth technology, the joint chiefs of staff referred to "neighbouring countries" securing so-called fifth-generation stealth jets.

Japan ordered 42 F-35 jets in 2011, while China is developing the Chengdu J-20, which has similar stealth capabilities.

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/d658c5dc-533c-11e3-b425-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2lM5m2Hn4

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

S. Korea set to decide on purchase of Lockheed F-35As

2013/11/21

By Kim Eun-jung

SEOUL, Nov. 21 (Yonhap) -- South Korea is expected to decide this week to purchase Lockheed Martin's F-35A stealth fighters without opening bidding for its new fighter jet program, sources familiar with the matter said Thursday.

The Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) will hold a meeting of top commanders on Friday to confirm the required operational capability (ROC), the number of jets and the delivery schedule for the acquisition program, which will be more favorable conditions for the F-35 with advanced radar-evading capabilities.

The Air Force has asked for the government to buy the combat aircraft with a lower radar cross section, one of the key stealth functions, and advanced avionic warfare capabilities.

"The Air Force has not specified the radar cross section in the ROC, but its technical requirements were aimed at selecting the F-35," a senior military official said, asking for anonymity.

The decision comes three months after the South Korean government rejected Boeing's F-15 Silent Eagle -- the only bid within the 8.3 trillion won (US$7.2 billion) budget -- to get a more advanced, radar-evading jet to replace its aging fleet.

Potential bidders have paid keen attention to the upcoming decision as the military requirement is critical for the new competition as the F-35 is the only plane in the running that meets the heightened standards for stealth. Boeing's advanced F-15s and EADS's Eurofighter are considered to have relatively weak stealth capabilities.

As the F-35 is sold only through the U.S. foreign military sales (FMS) program, if it's the sole candidate, it could raise the chance for a government-to-government sale.

Although the Air Force has asked for 60 jets to be delivered between 2017 and 2021, multiple sources said there is a possibility that the total number of jets could be decreased to 40 to meet the budget or that the aircraft will be purchased through a multi-phased program.

The Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) can extend the funding up to 120 percent of the total budget assigned for the past program, but such a decision needs approval from the finance ministry and the parliament. Assigning an increased budget for the costly fighter acquisition could also draw complaints from other military branches that are eager to upgrade their equipment.

While the FMS program could shorten the acquisition process compared to the competition, the proposed schedule could be delayed one or two years due to a protracted decision, according to military officials.

Unlike the fierce competition for the past project, industry experts say the one-way bid would give Seoul less room for negotiating other conditions such as technology transfer and industrial cooperation in connection with the program.

While Lockheed Martin is keen on the number of jets and estimated budget, Boeing and EADS have raised their sales pitch in case Seoul opts to buy a mix of jets.

Boeing has proposed a mixed purchase of F-15s and F-35s to minimize a security vacuum, while EADS has highlighted an offset deal, including the transfer of technology and industrial participation for South Korea's indigenous fighter jet project for synergies between the aircraft procurement and development program.

In case the total number of jets is reduced, Lockheed officials have hinted at scaling back its offset deal that's based on 60 aircraft, which included developing and launching a military satellite and technology transfer for Korea's indigenous fighter development program, codenamed KF-X.

Friday's JCS meeting will also include a decision on the KF-X project, which aims to build F-16 class fighter jets to replace the Air Force's aging fleet of F-4 and F-5 fighter planes.

South Korea has been seeking to develop a much larger indigenous fighter jet program with the help of major defense contractors, although that has been delayed due to budget constraints and questions over its feasibility.

The state arms development agency has been working on the concept and designs of the aircraft, and has been waiting for the government's approval to start a full-scale project.

Once the JCS endorses plans for the KF-X, local institutes will be able to start the system development from next year, a senior defense ministry official said.

"While the KF-X has been included in the long-term plan, the upcoming meeting will confirm the required operational capability and the deployment schedule," the senior military official said, asking for anonymity. "The military will confirm the requirement, taking into consideration domestic development."

   Previous studies by the Korea Development Institute (KDI) showed that the KF-X would cost at least $6 billion for system development alone and would bring about fewer economic benefits than expected, and total cost for production and maintenance could snowball in the future.

In its 2015-2019 defense plan, the defense ministry estimates the total development cost at about 9.3 trillion won, with plans to allocate the budget to related agencies.

A recent study by the Korea Institute for S&T Evaluation and Planning (KISTEP) pointed out the delayed jet acquisition serves as a setback for the development of the indigenous fighter.

"As (the government) decided to reconsider the fighter jet acquisition, the KF-X hasn't been able to set up technology partnerships with companies," the report said. "The project is currently evaluated as lacking feasibility."

   The report illustrates concerns that Seoul may not be able to get enough support from Lockheed Martin, which sells F-35s under a U.S. arms export control policy that has greater restrictions than those on EADS, the largest aerospace firm in Europe.

While the Agency for Defense Development (ADD) has been working on concepts and shapes of aircrafts, some experts point out that the Air Force has not yet prepared a concrete concept for the aircraft and underestimated its total cost.

Scientists and defense contractors, however, stress the need for government-level efforts to build South Korea's own combat jets with a long-term vision for the aerospace industry.

http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/national/2013/11/20/52/0301000000AEN20131120010451315F.html