Defensieforum.nl

Vervolg van  dit topic (http://www.defensieforum.nl/Forum/internationale_fighter_ontwikkelingen-t22004.0.html).

Lex
Algeheel beheerder

Volgens Mat Herben: uit de LinkedIn discussie omtrend een F16 Vervanger:

Mat Herben • @Ian. De enig juiste reactie, Franse afgunst. De ironie is dat de Rafale na de JSF het beste vliegtuig is, omdat ook de Fransen drommels goed beseffen dat data fusion absoluut noodzakelijk is. Het van de plank kopen van een leuke radar zegt helemaal niets over de mate van systeemintegratie. De problemen voor de Zweden beginnen pas met het verlanglijstje aan nieuwe systemen. Juist op dat cruciale punt maakt de Zwitserse luchtmacht gehakt van de Gripen NG (en trouwens ook van de Eurofighter).
Ik vraag me trouwens af of de NAVO zal instemmen met certificering van de Gripen voor network enabled capabilities, te beginnen met Link16. Saab gebruikt civiele boordcomputers, die goedkoop van de plank worden gekocht en ongetwijfeld aardig presteren in het gesloten Zweedse netwerk. Ik wil best aannemen dat beveiliging met een tiencijferige code volstaat, maar dat is niet wat de NAVO eist. Boven Libië was het 'tasken' van de Gripen ook al een probleem. De beveiliging is een van de redenen waarom de ontwikkeling van de JSF software veel tijd in beslag neemt en het lijkt mij dat dit niet voor niets gebeurt.
Het wordt hilarisch als de schrijver beweert dat de partnerlanden 'No industrial benefits" hebben. Na 2020 is de JSF waarschijnlijk het enige Westerse gevechtsvliegtuig in productie en wel tot minimaal 2035. De JSF zal het verkoopsucces van de F-16 (4500 stuks) gaan evenaren en dat is andere koek dan bouwen aan 300 Rafales of tachtig Gripens NG.
De productie van de Eurofighter stopt omstreeks 2017, die van de Rafale in 2020 (als India tenminste definitief tot aanschaf overgaat, anders eerder), en de Gripen NG in theorie ook. Ik zeg in theorie, want ik moet nog zien dat Zwitserland hem koopt. Als het marketingoffensief van Zweden en Zwitserland (een packagedeal voor de PC21 in ruil voor de Gripen NG) niet het gewenste resultaat heeft, namelijk een echte order uit Brazilié of India, dan wordt de NG niet eens in productie genomen. De Zweden zullen Gripens modificeren met de nieuwe radar en andere kleine aanpassingen. Ook de Zwitsers zullen uiteindelijk een soort MLU Gripen krijgen en dat kan ik best billijken: in zo'n klein land is extra vliegbereik nice to have, maar niet tegen hoge meerprijs. De NG vereist een zeer ingrijpende aanpassing van romp en vleugels: het landingsgestel moet naar de vleugels om extra brandstof in de romp te kunnen meenemen. Plus nieuwe motor, plus nieuwe radar, enz. Feitelijk wordt de NG gewoon een nieuw vliegtuig (als-ie wordt gebouwd). En dan zijn er mensen die een 'topic' openen over de F-35C omdat de vanghaak moet worden gewjzigd....

Citaat van: Mat Herben op 23/05/2012 | 20:34 uur
De JSF zal het verkoopsucces van de F-16 (4500 stuks) gaan evenaren en dat is andere koek dan bouwen aan 300 Rafales of tachtig Gripens NG.

En toen wist je het, die is ongeschikt als lobbyist...  :dead:

Het LinkedIn discussie platform geeft door (sommige) deelnemers, w.o. "Ian" een NL F16 piloot die in de VS gestationeerd is en zwaar betrokken is bij het JSF ontwikkelings progamma, interessante inzichten.

Voor de liefhebbers dus.

En geen woord over dat de bouw van de JSF vooral de Amerikaanse werkgelegenheid en schatkist ten goeden komt en het landen als Nederland voor de komende decennia strategisch afhankelijk maakt van de VS, wat in feiten een belangrijke economische concurrent van Europe/EU en dus ook Nederland is en zeker in sterkere mate zal worden. Maar Mat Herben levert zichzelf blijkbaar geheel en graag uit aan de Amerikanen...en hoopt blijkbaar dat ze ons weer komen "redden" als we in nood zijn of komen. Typerend gedrag van iemand die niet leert van het verleden maar in dat verleden blijft hangen.

Het zijn slecht reactie op voorgaande postings, dus het geeft een volledig beeld, maar deze vind ik ook wel interessant.

Posted by Mat Herben op LinkedIn

Er is geen geld beschikbaar voor eerdere aanschaf dan vanaf 2019. Daarom is een interimkoop van bijvoorbeeld 32 'gewone' Gripens, zoals Saab voorstelt, niet haalbaar. Als het geld er wel was om bijvoorbeeld in 2016 een squadron te kopen, dan zou de luchtmacht natuurlijk gewoon de F-16 Block 52 o.i.d. willen hebben. Met 24 F-16's zouden we veel uren kunnen maken, totdat de JSF het in de jaren twintig overneemt. Dan nog zou de F-16 nuttig blijven voor TOCC (Theater Operational Conversion Course), want gelijk vanaf de vliegschool via de simulator naar de eenzits JSF verdient niet de schoonheidsprijs. Het gevolg is dat een groot deel van de vliegopleiding in de USA moet blijven. Op zich is dat weer niet verkeerd, want het betekent minder geluidshinder hier en wellicht zelfs geen BTW over de toestellen die in de VS blijven.
Mijn voorkeur voor een instapvliegtuig- als er geld zou zijn - is de Koreaanse F/A-50 Golden Eagle, een soort Gripen, maar helemaal geoptimaliseerd als 'lead in fighter trainer' voor de JSF. Kost maar 25 miljoen...
Een mix van 24 Golden Eagles en 60 JSF's zou een uitgebalanceerde luchtmacht opleveren.
Het is helaas een dagdroom, want de hamvraag is of de luchtmacht de komende kabinetsformatie overleeft. Als sinds 2005 is duidelijk dat de PvdA helemaal niet geïnteresseerd is in het luchtwapen, ook niet in de Gripen, en het liefst zich wel beperken tot de verplichte air policing taak met een stuk of veertig tweedehands Eurofighters van de RAF. Wouter Bos voerde daar namelijk al in 2005 besprekingen over met Gordon Brown. Op mijn advies is toen ook de Gripen in beschouwing genomen. Het kan raar lopen...         
                   

Ik vraag me af hoeveel de lobbisten betaald krijgen   :devil:                

Iedereen heeft zijn/haar prijs.................... o wat zeg ik nu weer.......... zijn er nog wel onafhankelijke mensen ?    

Stel dat een F16piloot geen prijs heeft, zal deze dan nog onafhankelijk zijn want zwaar betrokkenen zijn bij iets kan je dan nog onafhankelijk zijn?
Daarnaast is deze in dienst van de regering mag die dan echt negatief zijn   Ik beschuldig niemand maar ik vraag me het gewoon af.

Mensen zijn vaak onder de indruk van iets waar zij zwaar betrokken bij zijn.  Stel dat je dan heel kritisch bent, mag dat dan?  Of wordt je dan vervangen?    

Ik heb zitten te googlen maar ik kan het platform niet vinden.  Geen idee of het mag: een link?

De F/A-50 wordt nota bene internationaal aangeboden met de F-414 motor...dezelfde als in de Gripen NG.
De nadelen van opereren met twee toestellen wordt genegeerd.

En veertig tweedehands Eurofighters zou helemaal geen slechte deal zijn...die met wat aanpassingen ook goed inzetbaar zijn voor de taken die Nederland WEL uitvoert (en mensen als Mat Herben niet alleen over dromen). Maar goed, ook de EF blijft een relatief duur toestel en dit zou zonde van het geld zijn...gezien waar Nederland zijn toestellen voor gebruikt. Gripens zijn meer dan voldoende capabel, zelfs nieuwe die een deel van de meest structurele en dure veranderingen van de NG versie missen.   

Citaat van: onderofficier op 23/05/2012 | 21:23 uur
Ik heb zitten te googlen maar ik kan het platform niet vinden.  Geen idee of het mag: een link?

http://www.linkedin.com/groups?home=&gid=4223036&trk=anet_ug_hm

Eerst aanmelden bij LinkedIn.

Citaat van: Elzenga op 23/05/2012 | 21:32 uur
En veertig tweedehands Eurofighters zou helemaal geen slechte deal zijn...die met wat aanpassingen ook goed inzetbaar zijn voor de taken die Nederland WEL uitvoert (en mensen als Mat Herben niet alleen over dromen). Maar goed, ook de EF blijft een relatief duur toestel en dit zou zonde van het geld zijn...gezien waar Nederland zijn toestellen voor gebruikt. Gripens zijn meer dan voldoende capabel, zelfs nieuwe die een deel van de meest structurele en dure veranderingen van de NG versie missen.  

Dit vind ik een kortzichtige uitspraak, gebasseerd op emotie en niet op ratio, puur vanuit de een Eurofiel perspectief, jij hebt duidelijk voor de Saab gekozen. Ik vind de Saab geen slecht idee, maar ik sluit mijn ogen niet voor positieve dan wel negatieve kritiek.

Elzenga bekijk het gehele topic met wijzen en minder wijze uitspraken in het gehele topic (ben je wel even zoet)

Nederland voert haar taken uit op een manier die zwaar bepaald wordt door de "kliek" van nu. Over een paar jaar kan het 180 graden gedraaid zijn.

Politiek... je zou het eigenlijk moeten afschaffen, zie wat het ons nu oplevert (op alle fronten)

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 23/05/2012 | 22:48 uur
Politiek... je zou het eigenlijk moeten afschaffen, zie wat het ons nu oplevert (op alle fronten)

Niets is er zo onbetrouwbaarder dan politiek

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 23/05/2012 | 22:48 uurDit vind ik een kortzichtige uitspraak, gebasseerd op emotie en niet op ratio, puur vanuit de een Eurofiel perspectief, jij hebt duidelijk voor de Saab gekozen. Ik vind de Saab geen slcht idee, maar ik sluit mijn ogen niet voor positieve dan wel negatieve kritiek.

Nee, vanuit een strategisch perspectief...en dat vind ik veel belangrijker dan of de JSF net ietsjes beter is of meer stealthy dan zijn concurrenten in deze vervanging. En vanuit dat strategische perspectief vind ik dus dat wij als Europees land en belangrijk EU-lidstaat zoveel mogelijk de Europese defensieontwikkelingen moeten steunen, ook in de keuze van ons materiaal. Ook al vraagt dit nog een bepaalde aanloop. Daar is niets emotioneels aan, maar zijn juist pure rationele afwegingen. Omdat onze "concurrenten" die ook rationeel maken en sommige hier en in Den Haag dat in hun juist emotionele stemming (Amerikanen onze bevrijders etc etc) vergeten of niet willen zien of onderkennen.  

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 23/05/2012 | 22:48 uur
Elzenga bekijk het gehele topic met wijzen en minder wijze uitspraken in het gehele topic (ben je wel even zoet)

Heb je een link?...kan ik kijken of ik de tijd kan vinden er verder naar te kijken...al vermoed ik dat het veelal een herhaling van feiten is zoals die op dit forum de revue al een aantal keren zijn gepasseerd.

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 23/05/2012 | 22:48 uur
Nederland voert haar taken uit op een manier die zwaar bepaald wordt door de "kliek" van nu. Over een paar jaar kan het 180 graden gedraaid zijn.

En laat ik me nu baseren op mijn eigen (en andere) veiligheidsanalyses en scenario's en juist niet op "die kliek" in Den Haag. Die overigens zowel in een linkse als nu rechtse samenstelling goeddeels dezelfde koers hebben gevaren wat betreft defensie...afbreken daarvan en beperkte missies uitvoeren of met beperkende rules of engagement (missies die veelal politiek-brede ondersteuning vereisen van de Kamer).

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 23/05/2012 | 22:48 uur
Politiek... je zou het eigenlijk moeten afschaffen, zie wat het ons nu oplevert (op alle fronten)

Er zijn politici die dat ook graag willen of graag het China-model, door Rob de Wijk in zijn boek de "Beijing Consensus" noemt.

Citaat van: Elzenga op 23/05/2012 | 23:14 uur
Heb je een link?...kan ik kijken of ik de tijd kan vinden er verder naar te kijken...al vermoed ik dat het veelal een herhaling van feiten is zoals die op dit forum de revue al een aantal keren zijn gepasseerd.

http://www.linkedin.com/groups?home=&gid=4223036&trk=anet_ug_hm

De inbreng is van voor en tegenstanders van de JSF, het geeft ook insider inzichten (zowel politiek al militair)

Citaat van: Elzenga op 23/05/2012 | 23:14 uur
Nee, vanuit een strategisch perspectief...en dat vind ik veel belangrijker dan of de JSF net ietsjes beter is of meer stealthy dan zijn concurrenten in deze vervanging. En vanuit dat strategische perspectief vind ik dus dat wij als Europees land en belangrijk EU-lidstaat zoveel mogelijk de Europese defensieontwikkelingen moeten steunen, ook in de keuze van ons materiaal. Ook al vraagt dit nog een bepaalde aanloop. Daar is niets emotioneels aan, maar zijn juist pure rationele afwegingen. Omdat onze "concurrenten" die ook rationeel maken en sommige hier en in Den Haag dat in hun juist emotionele stemming (Amerikanen onze bevrijders etc etc) vergeten of niet willen zien of onderkennen.  

Dit begrijp ik volledig, puur kijkend naar de ontwikkelingen zou het maar zo kunnen zijn dat de VS en Europa in 2030 niet meer op een vriendschappelijk lijn zitten, maar mij ontbreekt ook een kristallenbol.

Alle keuzes zijn omstreden en hebben voor- en tegenstanders, in principe ben ik voor de beste oplossing en niet de oplossing die de ego's van haantjes streeld waarbij ik niet een Amerikaan of een Zweed op een voetstuk wil plaatsen.

Rationeel zou ik een keuze maken voor de Fransoos.

Why Doesn't The F-35 Program Follow The Rules?

By Rep. Todd Akin

Published: May 23, 2012

Why would the most expensive defense acquisition program in American history not be required to follow the rules? The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is the future fighter for the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps. The program has been repeatedly reorganized due to growing costs and schedule delays. This year the President's budget requested $9.1 billion for the continued development and acquisition of the F-35.

Unfortunately, neither the budget nor anyone in the Pentagon can answer a simple but vital question about this program: when will the F-35 be ready for our warfighters?
Normally, defense acquisition programs establish an initial operational capability (IOC) date.

This is the date when the program will deliver a usable new widget or tank or plane to our warfighters. To date, the only major defense acquisition program to not have an IOC date established this far into the program is the F-35.

For more news and information on the swiftly-changing defense industry, please sign up for the AOL Defense newsletter. For the quickest updates, like us on Facebook.

During the House Armed Services Committee consideration of this year's National Defense Authorization Act, I offered an amendment that required the Department of Defense (DoD) to establish the IOC date of the F-35 or risk the loss of 50 percent of the program's procurement dollars until they did so. After twenty years in development, it is time the DoD and Lockheed Martin gave the American people some firm idea of when they could see a return on their $400 billion investment in the F-35 program.

Sadly, after lobbying by those in opposition [eds. note: Lockheed Martin lobbyists swarmed the HASC when word about the Akin amendment leaked], members of the Armed Services Committee decided my amendment went too far and instead required the DoD to establish an IOC date, but without any consequences if they fail to do so; something they have done on multiple occasions in the past. According to the ranking member, holding this multi-billion dollar program accountable would "send the wrong message to our allies; calling into question our commitment to the program."

No one, both personally and professionally, has a stronger commitment to our national defense and funding it properly than myself. I have long argued that we should devote a larger percentage of our budget to a robust defense establishment. That said, my commitment to providing our warfighters with every tool necessary to fight and win America's wars does not blind me to the fact that even the most well intentioned programs can fail to live up to their promise. Am I suggesting that is where we are with the F-35? Not yet. However, I believe this program, the most expensive in U.S. military history, needs to deliver on the promises it has made or we and our allies will have no choice but to find solutions elsewhere.

With respect to our allies, I question whether holding the Pentagon accountable would have generated any more doubt than the program's significant delays and cost overruns already have. In fact, in April our Dutch allies announced they would purchase fewer F-35s than planned because of the increasing cost of the aircraft. Additionally, this month the Australians, in an effort to address the country's budget deficit, delayed the purchase of twelve F-35s for two years. The continued delay and cost overruns in this program will no doubt have a detrimental effect on our allies' ability to remain committed to the F-35.

Recognizing the difficulties inherent in any cutting edge program of this nature, in the past I have counseled patience with the F-35 program. But Congress and the American people, not to mention the warfighter for whom this aircraft was designed, deserve to know when, if ever, this aircraft will provide a return on our investment.

Rep. Todd Akin of Missouri is chairman of the House Armed Services seapower and projection forces subcommittee, as well as a senior member of the House Budget Committee. His district is near the Boeing plant where the F-18 is built. EDS. note: Corrected to reflect that F-18 plant is not in Akin's district. His district abuts Rep. Lacy Clay's, in whose district the plant sits.

http://defense.aol.com/2012/05/23/why-doesnt-the-f-35-program-follow-the-rules/

French leader's Brazil visit could hasten decision on jets

French President Francois Hollande's visit to Brazil next month for the Rio+20 summit could help hasten Brasilia's decision on a contract to buy 36 next-generation fighter jets, a government official said Wednesday.

The Rafale fighter, made by French firm Dassault Aviation, is competing against the US F/A-18 Super Hornet and Swedish manufacturer Saab's Gripen for the contract valued at between $4 billion and $7 billion.

The government official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Hollande's attendance at the June 20-22 UN summit on sustainable development "could untie the knot", with Brasilia hoping for clarifications on the French offer.

"We are not happy with any of the proposals" right now, the official said, explaining that the French price was deemed too high while Brasilia does not trust US assurances on technology transfer.

Brazil, Latin America's dominant power and the world's sixth-largest economy, is insisting on technology transfer in all its defense agreements.

Last month, US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta visited Brazil and pledged US advanced technology transfers if Brasilia chooses the Boeing's F/A-18.

France has offered full technology transfers in its bid to win the contract.

Another factor is India's recent tentative decision to buy 126 Rafales in a contract valued at $12 billion, a more attractive price than that proposed to Brazil.

Brazilian Defense Minister Celso Amorim traveled to India in February to discuss prospects for a "technical military accord."

© 2012 AFP

£500m jump jets may melt the decks of aircraft carriers: Latest MoD plan shambles

Tests found the fumes which blast out of the £500million Joint Strike Fighters when they land damage the ships' decks

NEW Harrier-style jump jets set to fly from Navy aircraft carriers could melt their decks, US trials show.

Tests found the fumes which blast out of the £500million Joint Strike Fighters when they land damage the ships' decks.

Now the UK will have to go cap in hand to the Americans, who are developing a new super-tough, heat resistant deck coating to deal with the problem.

The flaw is the latest problem to hit the Ministry of Defence's shambolic plan for two aircraft carriers, costing £6.2billion.

David Cameron intervened to cancel the Harrier-style jets that can land and take off vertically.

But he was forced to make a U-turn after adapting the carriers with "catapult and trap" technology for normal Joint Strike Fighters proved too costly.

The blunder cost Britain £250million.

An MoD spokesman said: "the cost of deck paint was relatively small".

The UK will be without aircraft carrier cover for a decade after the Harriers were sold and Ark Royal scrapped in 2010.

"The new carriers will carry 12 jump-jets from 2020.

Shadow Defence minister Kevan Jones said: "Only this Government could melt aircraft carriers."

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/joint-strike-fighters-may-melt-ships-845478

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 24/05/2012 | 09:01 uur
£500m jump jets may melt the decks of aircraft carriers: Latest MoD plan shambles

Straks zijn de kosten van de nieuwe deck-laag natuurlijk veel duurder dan de begrote "normale" deck-coating, dus weer een kostenoverschrijving

of gaan ze weer 180 graden draaien en voor de C-versie kiezen (wel de beste keuze uit de B of C-versie, vind ik)

Denken ze daar in de UK wel na over de conseqenties van bepaalde keuze's ? ....

(ach... dat doen ze in meer landen niet...  :hrmph:)   

F-15C/D Eagle Upgrades Are 'A Moving Target'

Written by: Robert F. Dorr on May 24, 2012

The U.S. Air Force won't be putting any more F-15 Eagles out to pasture.

This report covers the F-15C/D fighters used primarily in the air-to-air role and provides an update on the current fleet. The Air Force also operates 224 dual-mission F-15E Strike Eagles that are outside the scope of this narrative.


The service is now seeking to upgrade as many of its currently serving F-15C/D Eagles as possible with Raytheon AN/APG-63 (V)3 Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radars. Because of funding, it's a slow process. The exact number of Eagles to receive the new radar is "a moving target," said an official, because of long-term funding uncertainties.

The new radar, known in shorthand as the (V)3, has been operational at Kadena Air Base, Okinawa and with the Florida Air National Guard since spring 2010. One Air Force goal is to have all 58 Eagles on Okinawa fitted with (V)3 by the end of 2014, subject to budgeting decisions.

The 123rd Fighter Squadron of the Oregon Air National Guard, known as the "Redhawks," now has the (V)3 on some of its 18 F-15Cs at Portland. "The F-15C is a formidable air-to-air weapons platform," said Lt. Col. Rick "Ammo" Morris, the 123rd squadron commander. "With the new radar, it's a particularly capable aircraft."

"The fielded APG-63(V)3 air-to-air capabilities put the F-15C/D in a class by itself and ensure that the Air Force and Air National Guard F-15C/D fleets remain capable, maintainable and affordable," said Todd Burns, F-15C AESA program manager for Boeing in a company press release. When four aircraft were delivered to Florida guardsmen, added Burns, the delivery demonstrated "Boeing's commitment to ensuring the F-15 remains a world-class multi-role fighter."

The AESA radar deploys a very agile beam that provides nearly instantaneous track updates and enhanced multi-target tracking capability.
 
Eagle Fleet Changes

The past few years have been painful for Air Force tactical aviation. In the Combat Air Forces Restructuring Initiative, known in shorthand as "CAF Redux," the service sent 252 legacy fighters to the boneyard between 2009 and 2011, including 112 F-15C single-seaters and F-15D two-seat fighters. CAF Redux was an economy move involving hardware that was not matched by a corresponding drawdown in personnel or by the closure of any installations. A significant part of the fighter force today is committed to homeland defense, flying the Aerospace Control Alert (ACA) mission, formerly known as Air Sovereignty Alert.

While the retirements were taking place, officials used the term "Golden Eagles" to refer to F-15C/Ds that would be retained and "Silver Eagles" to distinguish those being shelved. Today, airmen use the term "Golden" to refer to those retrofitted with the (V)3 radar and "Silver" for aircraft that would still require upgrades before the end of their useful life, but were not part of the long-term fleet. Daryl W. Mayer of Air Force Materiel Command (AFMC) said, " The terms 'Golden' and 'Silver' are no longer in use," and "were never formal [names of] programs," but that message seems not to have reached everyone in the field.

Production of the original APG-63, which is also called the (V)0 today, ended  in 1986, with more than 1,000 units installed on F-15s used by the United States, Israel, Japan, and Saudi Arabia. Most F-15 radars in the U.S. fleet were later upgraded to (V)1 status. The term (V)2 refers to a "beta" AESA unit fitted on just 18 F-15Cs before the (V)3 came along. Planemaker Boeing is currently conducting tests to determine if the service life of the F-15C/D can be extended from 9,000 flying hours to 18,000.

The Air Force entered "CAF Redux" intending to reduce its F-15C/D Eagle fleet from 499 aircraft to 178, with all in the latter group being equipped with the (V)3 radar. Now, said AFMC official Mayer, "The drawdown ... was stopped," leaving 249 Eagles in service. Said Mayer: "All 249 jets are now part of the F-15C/D long-term fleet. The Air Force has no plans to reduce this number." The total includes 214 F-15Cs and 35 F-15Ds.

One-time hopes for an Eagle fleet equipped entirely with (V)3 radars are being held at bay by the sluggish pace at which funds are becoming available. For the foreseeable future, the Air Force will have Eagles with all four versions of the APG-63 radar. Boeing says it expects contracts in fiscal year 2013 to upgrade 27 Air Force and 18 Air National Guard Eagles with the (V)3 radar.

Other ongoing F-15C/D upgrade efforts include a new flight data recorder and modifications to the missile warning system.

http://www.defensemedianetwork.com/stories/f-15cd-eagle-upgrades-are-a-moving-target/

Citaat van: www.defensemedianetwork.com Vandaag om 07:10
F-15C/D Eagle Upgrades Are 'A Moving Target'

The past few years have been painful for Air Force tactical aviation. In the Combat Air Forces Restructuring Initiative, known in shorthand as "CAF Redux," the service sent 252 legacy fighters to the boneyard between 2009 and 2011, including 112 F-15C single-seaters and F-15D two-seat fighters.

En zie hier, de interim oplossing voor de KLu, 68 F15C/D voor een prikkie, het ombouwen kost dan wel een paar euro, naar dan hebben we wel een prima  Klu tot 2040.

Voor weinig veel capaciteiten waar je ook nog enige indruk mee kunt maken.

Svp nu niet beginnen te roeptoeteren over twee motoren en te kleine hangaars daarnaast weet ik dat het niet Europees is.

Laat ik dan roeptoeteren over slijtage. Zouden ze daar in de u.s. niet ook gewoon de oudste toestellen met pensioen gestuurd hebben? Ik vraag me sterk af of je daar nog bijna 30 jaar mee zult kunnen vliegen.

Citaat van: dudge op 24/05/2012 | 19:27 uur
Laat ik dan roeptoeteren over slijtage. Zouden ze daar in de u.s. niet ook gewoon de oudste toestellen met pensioen gestuurd hebben? Ik vraag me sterk af of je daar nog bijna 30 jaar mee zult kunnen vliegen.

Geen idee hoe oud de C en D zijn. Het zou ook een waardeloos idee kunnen zijn.

Dat weet ik ook niet. Maar lees wel zo nu en dan berichten dat ze daar in de us bang zijn dat hun oude toestellen sneller slijten dan de nieuwe, f35, kan instromen, en dat dat een probleem is. Met hoopies vliegers die een toestel vliegen dat ouder is dan zij zelf. Zal vermoed ik vooral bij bombercommand veel voorkomen. :p

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 24/05/2012 | 19:20 uur
Voor weinig veel capaciteiten waar je ook nog enige indruk mee kunt maken.

op wie?

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 24/05/2012 | 19:20 uur
Svp nu niet beginnen te roeptoeteren over twee motoren en te kleine hangaars daarnaast weet ik dat het niet Europees is.

ok ok.... ;)

Citaat van: Elzenga op 24/05/2012 | 19:46 uur
op wie?

Ehhh ook weer zo iets  :crazy:

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 24/05/2012 | 19:28 uur
Geen idee hoe oud de C en D zijn. Het zou ook een waardeloos idee kunnen zijn.

Ik denk dat we sowieso niet aan de interim hoeven, wat dat ook mag betekenen. Een interim zou iets tijdelijks zijn, in 2040 mag er misschien al langzaam gezocht gaan worden naar de 'f16-vervanger-vervanger', al zou het kunnen dat de F35 dan net een jaar of 10 operationeel is :mad:.

De enige optie voor interim zie ik in een lease deal. Al zal dat heus niet zo goedkoop zijn. Op dit moment zijn er gewoon goede toestellen te koop, die voldoende groei potentieel hebben om de huidige te voorziene ontwikkelingen het hoofd te kunnen bieden.
Het geheel zou binnen een kader, een visie moeten plaatsvinden, en dat is het nu niet. Al wordt er wel over gesproken, is overduidelijk dat er geen werkelijke langetermijnvisie aan ten grondslag ligt.Maar daar is dat andere topic voor.

Wat meer opvalt en on-topic is:

Citaat van: Defensemedianetwork op 24/05/2012 | 19:10 uur
The Air Force entered "CAF Redux" intending to reduce its F-15C/D Eagle fleet from 499 aircraft to 178, with all in the latter group being equipped with the (V)3 radar. Now, said AFMC official Mayer, "The drawdown ... was stopped," leaving 249 Eagles in service. Said Mayer: "All 249 jets are now part of the F-15C/D long-term fleet. The Air Force has no plans to reduce this number." The total includes 214 F-15Cs and 35 F-15Ds.

met andere woorden, 71 F15's zijn dus 'gered'. Wéér een 'teken aan de want' voor de te bestellen F35 aantallen.....?

Citaat van: dudge op 24/05/2012 | 20:34 uur
met andere woorden, 71 F15's zijn dus 'gered'. Wéér een 'teken aan de want' voor de te bestellen F35 aantallen.....?

Dat lijkt een zekerheid, elke F "tiener" die een update/endlife update krijgt zodat ze binnen de USAF nog tot 2030/35 mee kunnen zal wellicht afgaan van het toaal te bestellen F35's in de diverse varianten.

En waarom zou de USAF de opgewaardeerde "oudjes" tegen die tijd gaan vervangen door de JSF als dan ook de LM F/X en de Boeing FA/XX operationeel beschikbaar zijn?

Daarnaast is afgelopen week bekend geworden dat de USAF geen F35 wil als A10 vervanger (ik heb even geen idee om welk aantal dit gaat), dit aantal kan al vast in mindering wordengebracht.

Think Tank Calls for Major U.S. Defense Reductions

http://www.defensenews.com/article/20120523/DEFREG02/305230008/Think-Tank-Calls-Major-U-S-Defense-Reductions?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

hieronder de consequentie's voor het JSF-prgramma :

- The Air Force should slash its planned buy of 1,763 F-35A Joint Strike Fighters to between 1,000 and 1,200
- The Navy should reduce its carrier strike force to 10 ships and nine carrier air wings, and reduce by half the current planned inventory of 369 F-35C carrier variants of the JSF.
- continuing current plans for the F-35B short-takeoff, vertical-landing JSF aircraft, but would eliminate Marine F/A-18 C and D Hornet and EA-6B Prowler squadrons from regular carrier operations.

Dus sterke reductie voorstellen in het JSF-programma zijn er wel

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 24/05/2012 | 20:49 uur
Dat lijkt een zekerheid, elke F "tiener" die een update/endlife update krijgt zodat ze binnen de USAF nog tot 2030/35 mee kunnen zal wellicht afgaan van het toaal te bestellen F35's in de diverse varianten.

En waarom zou de USAF de opgewaardeerde "oudjes" tegen die tijd gaan vervangen door de JSF als dan ook de LM F/X en de Boeing FA/XX operationeel beschikbaar zijn?

Daarnaast is afgelopen week bekend geworden dat de USAF geen F35 wil als A10 vervanger (ik heb even geen idee om welk aantal dit gaat), dit aantal kan al vast in mindering wordengebracht.

die nieuwe Raytheon AN/APG-63 (V)3 Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar zijn ook ingebouwd in de F-15SG (singapore) en worden ook in de nieuwe F-15SA toestellen voor de Saudi's ingebouwd, waarom dan 2de hands en niet aansluiten in de productie van de SA en in 2035/40, rond gaan kijken hoe dan de ontwikkelingen zijn.
Zo ben je verzekerd van goede begeleiding/opleiding/onderhoud/reserveonderdelen tot zeker 2040, omdat zowel de toestellen in de US als die in  SA, Korea, Singapore, Taiwan door vliegen.
En je heb gewoon een bewezen toestel, wel nieuw en van de plank, met veel minder risico (zowel materieel als financieel).

Citaat van: Harald op 24/05/2012 | 21:18 uur
Think Tank Calls for Major U.S. Defense Reductions

http://www.defensenews.com/article/20120523/DEFREG02/305230008/Think-Tank-Calls-Major-U-S-Defense-Reductions?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

hieronder de consequentie's voor het JSF-prgramma :

- The Air Force should slash its planned buy of 1,763 F-35A Joint Strike Fighters to between 1,000 and 1,200
- The Navy should reduce its carrier strike force to 10 ships and nine carrier air wings, and reduce by half the current planned inventory of 369 F-35C carrier variants of the JSF.
- continuing current plans for the F-35B short-takeoff, vertical-landing JSF aircraft, but would eliminate Marine F/A-18 C and D Hornet and EA-6B Prowler squadrons from regular carrier operations.

Dus sterke reductie voorstellen in het JSF-programma zijn er wel

Dat zeker. Echter, wanneer zal dat naar buiten komen. Zelfs als de aankoop word gehalveerd, kunnen de productieruns voor de komende tijd nog gevuld worden. Tegen de tijd dat er dan bijvoorbeeld 1400 zijn geproduceerd voor de VS, plus een paar honderd voor bondgenoten, kan de vs dan beslissen de stekker er uit te trekken.

Citaat van: Harald op 24/05/2012 | 21:30 uur
die nieuwe Raytheon AN/APG-63 (V)3 Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar zijn ook ingebouwd in de F-15SG (singapore) en worden ook in de nieuwe F-15SA toestellen voor de Saudi's ingebouwd, waarom dan 2de hands en niet aansluiten in de productie van de SA en in 2035/40, rond gaan kijken hoe dan de ontwikkelingen zijn.
Zo ben je verzekerd van goede begeleiding/opleiding/onderhoud/reserveonderdelen tot zeker 2040, omdat zowel de toestellen in de US als die in  SA, Korea, Singapore, Taiwan door vliegen.
En je heb gewoon een bewezen toestel, wel nieuw en van de plank, met veel minder risico (zowel materieel als financieel).

Ik ben absoluut voor, waarbij het mij werkelijk niet boeid dat deze kist twee piloten heeft, 2 motoren heeft, niet Europees is en te groot voor een Nederlandse shelter is.

Daarnaas is hij (een beetje afhankelijk van de euro dollar koers) nauwelijks duurder in aanschaf dan de Saab Gripen NG (naar verwachting €70 mjn+ en goedkoper dan EF en Rafale)

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 24/05/2012 | 22:05 uur
Daarnaas is hij (een beetje afhankelijk van de euro dollar koers) nauwelijks duurder in aanschaf dan de Saab Gripen NG (naar verwachting €70 mjn+ en goedkoper dan EF en Rafale)

Dan mogen ze 'm wel snel bestellen, want de euro gaat hard naar beneden t.o.v. de dollar.

Citaat van: Kapitein Rob op 24/05/2012 | 22:07 uur
Dan mogen ze 'm wel snel bestellen, want de euro gaat hard naar beneden t.o.v. de dollar.

Ik heb het gezien.... beetje jammer wel.

Citaat van: Kapitein Rob op 24/05/2012 | 22:07 uur

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 24/05/2012 | 22:05 uur
Daarnaas is hij (een beetje afhankelijk van de euro dollar koers) nauwelijks duurder in aanschaf dan de Saab Gripen NG (naar verwachting €70 mjn+ en goedkoper dan EF en Rafale)

Dan mogen ze 'm wel snel bestellen, want de euro gaat hard naar beneden t.o.v. de dollar.

Moeten we dan maar eens even bellen met Boeing voor een offerte ? ...  :P
Misschien hebben ze ook wel een fixed-price met ondersteuning voor de komende 30 jaar ?

Citaat van: Harald op 24/05/2012 | 22:28 uur
Moeten we dan maar eens even bellen met Boeing voor een offerte ? ...  :P
Misschien hebben ze ook wel een fixed-price met ondersteuning voor de komende 30 jaar ?

Als ze LM een hak kunnen zetten.....  vast wel!  ;D

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 24/05/2012 | 19:20 uur
En zie hier, de interim oplossing voor de KLu, 68 F15C/D voor een prikkie, het ombouwen kost dan wel een paar euro, naar dan hebben we wel een prima  Klu tot 2040.

Voor weinig veel capaciteiten waar je ook nog enige indruk mee kunt maken.

Svp nu niet beginnen te roeptoeteren over twee motoren en te kleine hangaars daarnaast weet ik dat het niet Europees is.

Jurrien van 1954 tot 1994 was er op soesterberg een F15 Squadron met de naam  Wolfhounds 32nd Tactical Fighter Squadron aktief en deze hadden shelters nu is er een firma met de naam Mammoet aktief die alles zo´n beetje kan verplaatsen dan moet het toch een uitdaging zijn voor mammoet om de shelters van soeterberg naar vonkel te verplaatsen?

(https://www.defensieforum.nl/Forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm4.staticflickr.com%2F3625%2F3407303436_e0e4dff468_z.jpg&hash=a398df6fd35ca9d6a77f70140951ac1952759356)

(https://www.defensieforum.nl/Forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm4.staticflickr.com%2F3109%2F3242085121_4301ed0277.jpg&hash=67e4c05e18ee85ca1c8ae2dede249584de312929)

Citaat van: Ace1 op 24/05/2012 | 23:10 uur
Jurrien van 1954 tot 1994 was er op soesterberg een F15 Squadron met de naam  Wolfhounds 32nd Tactical Fighter Squadron aktief en deze hadden shelters nu is er een firma met de naam Mammoet aktief die alles zo´n beetje kan verplaatsen dan moet het toch een uitdaging zijn voor mammoet om de shelters van soeterberg naar vonkel te verplaatsen?

Ik weet het, daarnaast was het het enige Amerikaanse Koninklijke squadron en onder Nederlands commando!  ;D

Een shelter verplaatsen lijkt me bijna duurder dan nieuwbouw, daarnaast zou de vraag kunnen zijn: hoe zinvol zijn shelters is deze tijd nog?

Citaat van: Ace1 op 24/05/2012 | 23:10 uur
(https://www.defensieforum.nl/Forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm4.staticflickr.com%2F3109%2F3242085121_4301ed0277.jpg&hash=67e4c05e18ee85ca1c8ae2dede249584de312929)

Wat heeft ss Rotterdan hiermee te maken?

Citaat van: Lex op 24/05/2012 | 23:33 uur

Citaat van: Ace1 op 24/05/2012 | 23:10 uur
(https://www.defensieforum.nl/Forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm4.staticflickr.com%2F3109%2F3242085121_4301ed0277.jpg&hash=67e4c05e18ee85ca1c8ae2dede249584de312929)

Wat heeft ss Rotterdan hiermee te maken?

De kranen die je ziet bij  ss Rotterdam zijn van Mammoet, lex. ;)

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 24/05/2012 | 23:15 uur
Een shelter verplaatsen lijkt me bijna duurder dan nieuwbouw, daarnaast zou de vraag kunnen zijn: hoe zinvol zijn shelters is deze tijd nog?

Shelters kunnen nog wel nodig zijn. Maar verplaatsen van de shelters van SSB roept de vraag op waarom en voor welk toestel?

Citaat van: Ace1 op 24/05/2012 | 23:36 uur
De kranen die je ziet bij  ss Rotterdam zijn van Mammoet, lex. ;)

Volgens mij waren die ingehuurd. Maar in de geest van het topic is dit totaal irrelevant.

Citaat van: Lex op 24/05/2012 | 23:37 uur
Shelters kunnen nog wel nodig zijn. Maar verplaatsen van de shelters van SSB roept de vraag op waarom en voor welk toestel?

  Als  men shelters van SSB verplaats naar vonkel of leeuwarden kun je daar F15´s inzetten en hoef je niet aan nieuwbouw te doen, waardoor je weer kosten kunt besparen.

Citaat van: Lex op 24/05/2012 | 23:39 uur
Volgens mij waren die ingehuurd. Maar in de geest van het topic is dit totaal irrelevant.

Lex de slogan van Mammoet is Geen opgave te groot, geen opdracht te klein

Citaat van: Lex op 24/05/2012 | 23:37 uur
Shelters kunnen nog wel nodig zijn. Maar verplaatsen van de shelters van SSB roept de vraag op waarom en voor welk toestel?

Oké een paar voor QRA.

We hebben het hier over de F15.

Met de huidige bunkerbuster technologie (natuurlijk niet beschikbaar voor baarden op een ezel en een RPG) is een shelder, mijns inziens, wat minder spannend en gedateerd.

Volgens mij staat geen enkele B2 of F22 in de VS in een traditionele shelter. En als ik kijk naar de militaire aktiviteiten van de laatste 20 jaar, dan zijn vrijwel alle shelters in Joegoslavië, Irak en lybië met één projectiel volledig uitgeschakeld.

Een versterkte hangaar lijkt voldoende zodat een SP, GL of GreenPeace aanhanger geen bijl in een toestel kan zetten of dat een gek met een RPG e.d. schade kan veroorzaken.

F-22 In A Dogfight as Panetta Crimps Its Flight Envelope

By Winslow Wheeler

You may have noticed that the Air Force's prized F-22 fighter — the crown jewel of American air dominance — has had some negative press lately. The bad news peaked Tuesday when Defense Secretary Leon Panetta ordered flight restrictions on the $400 million warplane. Unfortunately for the F-22, the airwaves have been filled with flak capable of hitting and damaging even the nation's stealthiest aircraft:

– On May 2, ABC News' Nightline addressed the mysterious oxygen deprivation and/or toxins that F-22 pilots get from their "on-board oxygen generating systems" (OBOGS) and that cost one pilot his life.

– Then, on May 6, CBS' 60 Minutes interviewed two F-22 pilots who refused—temporarily, it turns out — to fly the F-22 because of the serious safety problem. The troubles were widely reported in the press and summed up at the Project on Government Oversight (POGO).

The F-22 quickly engaged its onboard defenses.

The Air Force complained to ABC, and its non-profit booster group, the Air Force Association (AFA), let rip with both barrels. The Air Force distributed "Talking Points" on Capitol Hill reaffirming that:

– the pilot caused a fatal crash of an F-22 in 2010 in Alaska when he was starved of oxygen.

– the Air Force is refusing to divulge, for "privacy reasons," what, if anything, it is doing in response to the pair of pilots who went on 60 Minutes.

– adding no new evidence (and ignoring other information) about the F-22′s problem, now increasing according to the Air Force's own data, that is poisoning its own pilots — and ground crews.

The Air Force also added some silly policy-wonk language  asserting that the F-22′s presence in the Persian Gulf is keeping the peace there. It's almost as if the Air Force thinks it can change data, rearrange minds and cause things to happen–and not happen–simply by issuing press releases.

Panetta apparently wasn't impressed. On Tuesday, he imposed flight restrictions on the F-22, allowing it to fly only "within proximity of potential landing locations," and requiring the Air Force to speed up the installation of a backup oxygen system aboard each plane. The order from the Pentagon's civilian chief — and not the Air Force's top civilian or officer — suggests Panetta doesn't think the service has given the F-22′s problems the concentrated attention they warrant.

The Air Force's earlier statements leaping to the F-22′s defense included several rhetorical attacks and a few factual declarations to prove how wrong ABC was. Some of the latter were extremely misleading.  Because they have been so often repeated over the years, they need to be put to rest at long last.

For starters, AFA President Michael Dunn, a retired Air Force three-star general, said, "The flyaway cost for the last block of F-22s was $142M each." This sort of whopper—trying to proclaim a lowball F-22 unit cost—has been around for a long time: for years, the Air Force's official "Fact Sheet" on the F-22 has similarly claimed a "unit cost" of $143 million.

Dunn is citing something called "flyaway" costs, which incorporates only part of the funds appropriated late in the F-22 production run, to portray generic F-22 unit costs. He is excluding prior year production funding, known as "long lead" money to jump-start the subsequent year's production. He is also dismissing ongoing annual modification costs for the entire F-22 fleet and virtually all research and development (R&D)—that continues today, still increasing the unit cost.  When the Air Force pumped out the same horse-feathers about the $143 million unit cost in a press release in 2009 after an F-22 crashed in California, I wrote a piece detailing the cost elements of the F-22 that the $143 million claim disregards, even if you drop the initial R&D.

But don't take my word for it: take GAO's.  In 2011, the Government Accountability Office identified the F-22′s unit cost: $411.7 million. That estimate was in 2011 dollars; a year later, data from GAO made possible a more up to date calculation: $421.0 million.

Dunn's assertion of a unit cost of $142 million was not just a bit wrong and slightly misleading; it was off by a factor of almost three.

Dunn also said "The last block of F-22s came off the production line without any defects ... and on time and budget." He hasn't been reading the same materials I have.  The GAO reports cited above, and many others, measure the huge cost growth in the F-22 program in past years and the additional, future expenses to address deficiencies in maintenance and stealth, as well as adding upgrades, including for the "last block of F-22s."

In its letter to ABC News, the Air Force itself asserted "...the 80% Mission Capable rate of the F-22s at Langley [Air Force Base] was comparable to similar fighter aircraft, specifically Block 50 F-16s."  The statement was clearly intended to impress that the F-22 is combat-ready.  Contrast that to GAO's statement: "Last year, the F-22A fleet achieved a 55.5 percent materiel availability rate. Stealth-related maintenance, system component reliability problems, and lack of spare engines were factors contributing to the fleet not achieving the goal." (GAO explained that "Material availability is defined as the percentage of the fleet available to perform assigned missions at any given time.")

It is unclear precisely how the Air Force is gaming its definition of "Mission Capable," but it would seem that it is doing so. Moreover, one would hope that F-16C readiness is not as disastrously low as that of the F-22.

Both the Air Force and AFA President Dunn also tried a little intimidation, mixed with complaints that they weren't allowed to dominate the discussion. They did so notwithstanding that the official Air Force position got a lot more play in the televised reports than the Air Force or the Air Force Association gives to objective and authoritative analysts, such as GAO's. The Air Force and AFA statements were heavily populated with declarations like the following:

"Instead, your network chose to air a sensationalized, biased report that demeans the service, sacrifice, and dedication to duty of the Airmen who fly, maintain, and support the F-22 in defense of the United States."

"You did not interview a single individual capable of presenting an objective assessment regarding the role of the F-22, the problems associated with the onboard oxygen generation system, and airpower's overarching contribution to national security."

"We also think the serious nature of this issue requires responsible reporting that is informed by a balanced presentation of facts, not biased opinions that devolve into an attack on America's Airmen."

I have been on more than my share of military service and contractor-guided tours of military units, assembly lines and contractor facilities (including those for the F-22, F-18, F-117 and many other aircraft).  Unless you come loaded for bear with information, accompanying experts and/or precisely-informed questions, you will be laden with more half-facts and vapid assurances than you will get in a used car lot.  Participants in those minder-minded exercises do not get information; they get disinformation.

On the other hand, I was delighted to see both the AFA and the Air Force take a firm stand against unbalanced dog-and-pony shows. Their initiation of that commendable policy for themselves will be a refreshing change.

Read more: http://battleland.blogs.time.com/2012/05/16/f-22-gets-into-a-dogfight/#ixzz1vrADaPqE

Eurofighters Take Full Responsibility Defending Italian Airspace: Replacing F-16s

14:58 GMT, May 24, 2012 Two Italian Air Force Typhoons fly over Northern Italy on QRA duties
Eurofighter Typhoons of the Italian Air Force (ItAF) have replaced the last of the air forces' F-16 jets to leave the Typhoon solely responsible for the defence of Italian airspace. Entering into service in 2004 and now operational with four Typhoon Squadrons (Gruppi) across both northern and southern Italy - two at Grosseto air base and two at Gioia del Colle - Eurofighter is, from today onwards, the only air defence asset in the Italian Air Force.

Replacing the F-16 as a more modern weapon system, the Typhoon aircraft will bring to the air force operational benefits thanks to better effectiveness and capabilities of the new fighter as well as offering logistics benefits due to the standardisation of having only one operational line for air defence duties.

The ItAF leased 34 F-16s from the USAF for a period of five years, followed by an additional five years under the programme "Peace Caesar". The aircraft has been effectively used to fill a gap during the transition from the F-104 and the Eurofighter.

62 Typhoon aircraft have been delivered to the Italian Air Force to date and during operations in Libya in 2011, the Italian Air Force fleet completed over 200 missions and flew 1294 flying hours from their Forward Operating Base (FOB) in Trapani, Sicily.

http://www.defpro.com/news/details/35789/?SID=35fb436471d4e7f54fda283de38e67d2

Gaan LM dreigen ??  .... No buy, ... No companie-contracts !! ...... gaan LM het zo spelen ?

F-35 Debate: Canadian Firms Will Lose Out If Government Ditches Jets: Lockheed Martin (excerpt)

OTTAWA --- F-35 manufacturer Lockheed Martin is warning that Canadian companies will lose out if the Conservative government decides not to purchase the stealth fighter.

"Right now we will honour all existing contracts that we have," Lockheed Martin vice-president Steve O'Bryan told Postmedia News on Thursday. "After that, all F-35 work will be directed into countries that are buying the airplane."

But O'Bryan also said his company has not received any indication Canada won't buy the aircraft.

"What we have is the official statement out of the government and we're working with the government," he said. "They're committed to the F-35, they've selected it, and we haven't had any change in that official position."

That will likely come as a surprise to many Canadians as the Conservative government has said since last month that it has not committed to purchasing the F-35 and that all options are still on the table when it comes to replacing Canada's aging fleet of CF-18 fighters.

O'Bryan said Lockheed Martin is working on the understanding that it will begin producing Canada's first F-35s in 2014, with delivery by 2017. To do that, the company is looking to increase production capabilities now so it is ready to start work in time.
While O'Bryan acknowledged Canada's 65 F-35s will represent a fraction of the total number of stealth fighters produced in the coming years, he indicated Canada-specific investments are being made.

"We've received a commitment from the Canadian government," he said. (end of excerpt)

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/article-view/release/135495/lockheed-threatens-to-axe-canadian-contracts-if-no-f_35-buy.html

http://www.canada.com/business/debate+Canadian+firms+will+lose+government+ditches+jets+Lockheed+Martin/6674686/story.html

F-22's Oxygen Issues Raise Questions About F-35 (excerpt)

Lockheed Martin remains mum about whether an oxygen system flaw on its F-22 fighter might also plague its sibling, the F-35, but defense analysts say there are reasons to worry.

After a dozen incidents of F-22 pilots losing consciousness mid-flight, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta placed restrictions last week on the Air Force's Raptor fleet amid safety concerns. Panetta has restricted the distances the advanced jets can fly and ordered a fleet-wide installation of an automatic backup oxygen system.

While defense insiders say those restrictions aren't that confining, military experts say similar problems might hit the F-35 fighter, also made by Lockheed.

Richard Aboulafia, a tactical aviation expert at the Teal Group, says "it sounds like there is commonality between them," referring to the F-22 and F-35 fighters.

"This would imply that any lessons learned from testing the F-22 [oxygen] system should be migrated over to the F-35 as quickly as possible," Aboulafia says.

Whether Lockheed Martin and Pentagon officials already are taking such steps is unclear. Lockheed officials did not respond to multiple requests for comment. Defense trade publications have reported the fighters' oxygen systems, made by a subcontractor, are indeed similar, but not carbon copies. (end of excerpt)

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/article-view/release/135493/f_22-oxygen-issues-raise-questions-about-f_35.html

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/dotmil/2012/05/24/f-22s-oxygen-issues-raise-questions-about-f-35

De ontwikkeling gaan misschien niet zo snel als iedereen hoopt... maar ik vind het er wel hoopvol uit zien!  ;D

http://vimeo.com/42805692

Citaat van: Harald op 25/05/2012 | 16:09 uur
Gaan LM dreigen ??  .... No buy, ... No companie-contracts !! ...... gaan LM het zo spelen ?

Tegen Canada misschien, tegen ons kunnen ze dat niet doen. Toen wij zo'n tien jaar geleden besloten een miljard te investeren in de ontwikkeling van dat toestel, was ook nog helemaal niet duidelijk wat we zouden kiezen, nu is er nog geen keuze gemaakt. Dus, is het contract zo opgesteld dat het voor ons niet uitmaakt, en dat we ongeacht de keuze een tiental miljard aan orders kunnen terug verwachten.......

althans.......... :neutral:

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 25/05/2012 | 16:33 uur
De ontwikkeling gaan misschien niet zo snel als iedereen hoopt... maar ik vind het er wel hoopvol uit zien!  ;D

http://vimeo.com/42805692

Tja, het ding kan zelfs al (v)liegen, wordt met de dag beter  :lol:

Citaat van: dudge op 25/05/2012 | 17:17 uur
[Tja, het ding kan zelfs al (v)liegen, wordt met de dag beter  :lol:

Wie weet... en wordt het toch nog iets vanaf 2019 (vwb prijs én prestatie)

S. Korea says to pick weapons suppliers in October

Friday, 25 May 2012

South Korea will select suppliers of military aircraft worth billions of dollars in October, a spokesman said Friday, despite calls from the main opposition party for further studies to be carried out.

The spokesman for the state Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) said purchases will include 60 stealth fighters, 36 attack helicopters and eight navy helicopters.

"We plan to announce the names of the suppliers in October," the spokesman told AFP, as tensions between the North and the South and its allies remain high over the North's nuclear and missile program.

The contract for the stealth fighters is worth eight trillon won ($6.7 billion), he said. Lockheed Martin's F-35, Boeing's F-15 SE, the Eurofighter Typhoon and Russia's Sukhoi PAK-FA are reportedly competing for the deal.

Some 1.8 trillion won will be allocated to acquire 36 attack helicopters, with Boeing's Apache, Eurocopter's Tiger and Turkey's T129 in competition, the spokesman said.




The massive weapons acquisition plans being pushed through in the last year of President Lee Myung-Bak's presidency have sparked opposition criticism.

The Democratic United Party (DUP) urged the government not to rush through the program.

"Further study and review are needed before the government goes ahead with the purchase of weapons. If necessary, this project should be handed over to next government," it said in a statement this week.

South Korea has already bought 60 of Boeing's non-stealth F-15 fighter jets since 2002 under the first two stages of a fighter modernization program.

The North and South are still technically at war. A peace treaty was never signed after the 1950-53 war ended in an armistice.

http://english.alarabiya.net/articles/2012/05/25/216391.html

Citaat van: english.alarabiya.net Vandaag om 06:05
The spokesman for the state Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) said purchases will include 60 stealth fighters, 36 attack helicopters and eight navy helicopters.

En met bovenstaande uitspraak zijn de kansen voor EADS (Eurofighter) verkeken (al zal het wel herroepen worden)

Ik verwacht een package deal als keuze (Boeing F15SE en Boeing  Apache) met als runner-up de F35A.

Combat Engine Demo Plan Troubles F135 Supporters

By Guy Norris

Source: Aviation Week & Space Technology

May 28 , 2012

Guy Norris/Los Angeles and Jen DiMascio and Graham Warwick/washington

General Electric and Rolls-Royce's decision to abandon their fight for an alternate engine to power the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter finally put an end to a long, politically charged battle with incumbent Pratt & Whitney. Or did it?

No, the GE-Rolls F136 is not rising from the dead. But a U.S. Air Force demonstrator program, in which GE, Rolls and Pratt are competing separately to develop fuel-saving propulsion technology for combat aircraft, could conceivably produce an alternate engine sized for the JSF as early as 2020. That possibility has sent jitters through Pratt and its allies on Capitol Hill.

The issue surrounds the adaptive engine technology development (AETD) program, a new effort that is rapidly gaining traction within the Pentagon because of its potential to save up to 25% in fuel burn over state-of-the-art engines. The Pentagon—which actively opposed the F-35 alternate engine plan for five years—supports the initiative run by the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) and sees it as a key part of an energy-saving strategy to keep the Air Force's annual fuel use below 2.4 billion gal.

Sensing the longer term threat, Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.), the senator most associated with the moves to counter the F136, is leading efforts to limit any possible impact of AETD on the F-35. But Lieberman, who leads the Senate Armed Services air-land subcommittee in charge of tactical aircraft, says he will not stop the Pentagon program aiming to develop engines that vastly improve fuel efficiency.

Despite these reassurances, according to insiders, military planners are taking a dim view of what they consider political attempts to emasculate the evolution of U.S. combat engine technology for the benefit of an incumbent manufacturer. However, of more concern to Pratt is that Deputy Defense Secretary Ashton Carter—an open critic of the company's F135 program—is thought to have asked AFRL to outline provisional schedules for making a production-standard engine available as early as 2020. This is well within the extended procurement schedule of the F-35, and early enough to make a significant impact on the production run of the F135.

Yet the Air Force officially downplays any suggestion of either linking the AETD directly to the F-35 or accelerating its development to make it a possible contender before the early 2020s. Testifying to Congress earlier this year, Steven Walker, deputy assistant secretary of the Air Force for science, technology and engineering, said the official target for AETD is for "follow-on final design, engineering manufacturing development [EMD], and ground and flight-test qualification of a production-ready engine early in the next decade for integration into legacy and future aircraft systems."

The Pentagon has requested $214 million for the AETD in fiscal 2013. Lieberman would not divulge the details of the subcommittee's just-completed draft of the fiscal 2013 defense authorization bill, but says he is trying to "put some parameters" around the program. "I'm going to do everything I can, not to stop this program, but to make sure that it doesn't become a second engine, because that would be a waste of taxpayer money."



The Air Force—which is understood to have conducted a low-level study projecting the cost savings in the F-35 if an AETD-based engine were used—defends the project and insists the focus is on future developments. During a subcommittee hearing this month, Lieberman asked Lt. Gen. Janet Wolfenbarger, military deputy at the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, whether the advanced engine program was indeed an effort to resurrect a competing engine.

"No, sir, it is not," Wolfenbarger told him, adding that the program is trying to capitalize on advances in AFRL's Advent (adaptive versatile engine technology) initiative. "This engine could be used in a whole host of platforms should it ever reach the point of being a development program. Right now it's just a question of ensuring that we are ready to go, should we as an Air Force decide that we want to embrace this opportunity to really reduce the fuel consumption in future generations of strike aircraft, bomber aircraft [and] tactical aircraft."

The demonstrator builds on Advent, which has been developing a suite of technologies for variable-cycle architectures to reduce fuel consumption by up to 25% and increase range by 30%. Advent architectures add a third stream of relatively cooler air flow, in addition to the standard high-pressure core flow and second stream of bypass air. The third stream is used for high power extraction and better thermal management; it also reduces installed drag and improved inlet recovery. The cooler air mass can also be mixed with the outlet flow to reduce exhaust system temperatures and infrared signature.

AETD will go even further in terms of better efficiency and power, and take the Advent concept to a pre-full-scale EMD level. Unlike the smaller cores used in the initial Advent effort, the AETD engines will be built around a larger core theoretically sized to enable future projects—such as the U.S. Navy's F/A-XX and Air Force's F-X sixth-generation fighters—to supercruise, or fly supersonically without afterburner. The size requirement also happens to match that of the F-35.

Responses to AFRL's request for proposals are due May 31 and cover Phase 1 contracts that will be awarded in August for two rival engines. This will include initial concept evaluations by February 2013, compressor rig tests in 2014, fan and core tests by mid-2015 and full engine tests as early as 2016.

GE and Rolls, which are competing against each other in the Advent program, are submitting variable-cycle growth concepts for the AETD. GE, aiming to run the first full Advent engine late this year or early 2013, says it "has been approached by Senate and House defense appropriators regarding AETD funding because they are highly interested in the program's fuel-efficiency goals and timetable, and whether they are both achievable. We believe they are achievable based on our Advent efforts over the past five years. AETD will be a sporty competition for the three engine makers."

Pratt, which lost out in the initial round of advanced concept awards, is in the bidding for AETD with a variable-cycle solution of its own despite having reservations about the approach dictated by the Air Force. Paul Adams, Pratt & Whitney operations and engineering senior vice president, says: "We are not enamored with three-stream configurations because we don't think it offers any benefits on aircraft that operate below Mach 2.6. We were surprised AFRL required a third stream to participate in that product because we think it is easier to deliver those requirements without a third stream than with it."


http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/AW_05_28_2012_p24-461473.xml&p=2

In Zwitserland is de Gripen E/F zijn leven nog lang niet zeker!

"Dem schwedischen Kampfjet Gipen droht der Absturz"

Voor de liefhebbers van een Duitse tekst.

http://www.20min.ch/schweiz/news/story/FDP-Praesident-will-Gripen-abschiessen-12359366

Check out other jets

By Peter E. Greene, The Windsor StarMay 28, 2012 4:03 AM

As someone who has worked in production and overhaul of military aircraft, I have been avidly reading the various letters and opinion/guest columns that have appeared in your paper, for and against the Canadian government's decision to buy the F-35 aircraft for the Royal Canadian Air Force.

The latest salvo condemning the F-35 program comes from retired colonel Paul Maillet, an aerospace engineer and former fleet manager for Canada's CF18 fleet.

Paul Maillet called the F-35 a "serious strategic mismatch" to Canada's military needs.

The drawbacks mentioned were the F-35's single engine, low range, low payload and low manoeuvrability .

The F-35 has been shrouded in controversy, cost overruns and delays, yet the Canadian government and Department of National Defence are adamant to go ahead with this aircraft deal.

Auditor General Michael Ferguson gave a highly critical report of the Defence Department's handling of the F-35 project. Why doesn't the Canadian government follow a tendering and evaluation process for new aircraft that it wants to purchase?

No doubt the military industrial complex in North America has a powerful lobby which will bring pressure on our government and DND to buy this aircraft. Canada should be looking at other aircraft that several countries have to offer.

It is interesting to note that rising superpower India, which was looking to buy a medium multi-role combat aircraft for the Indian air force, started a tendering process and evaluated six aircraft from different countries over a period of five years.

They evaluated the U.S.-made F/A-18 Super Hornet and F-16 Super Viper jets, the Rafale made by Dassault Aviation of France, The Eurofighter Typhoon made by a European consortium, the Russian MiG-35 aircraft and the Saab Gripen made by Sweden.

U.S. President Barack Obama made a special visit to India to lobby its government to buy the F/A-18 Super Hornet. It was a hotly contested race of strict technical and commercial evaluation and the two finalists were the Rafale of Dassault Aviation and the Eurofighter Typhoon.

The final clincher was the cost evaluation and the Rafale aircraft was selected. President Obama was disappointed and offered the F-35 aircraft to India.

The Indians rejected the F-35 and went ahead with their deal to buy 126 MMRCA Rafale fighters from France for $20 billion. Dassault will supply the first 18 aircraft by 2015 and the rest will be manufactured under licence by India.

This will be the longest opentender military aviation deal in the world.

Rafale is a twin-jet, semi stealth combat aircraft capable of carrying out a wide range of short-and long-range missions, including ground and sea attacks, reconnaissance, high-accuracy strikes and nuclear strike deterrence. Rafale can carry payloads of more than 9t on 14 hardpoints for the air force version, with 13 for the naval version.

The range of weapons includes: Mica, Magic, Sidewinder, ASRAAM and AMRAAM air-to-air missiles; Apache, AS30L, ALARM, HARM, Maverick and PGM100 air-toground missiles and Exocet/ AM39, Penguin 3 and Harpoon anti-ship missiles. The Rafale is a NATO-compatible aircraft and has flown in NATO operations over Tajikstan, Afghanistan and Libya.

Canada should evaluate more aircraft under a tendering process rather than making a hasty and costly mistake by going for the overpriced and untested F-35 aircraft. The Rafale aircraft offers high value for money.

It is high time that our defence department jettisoned the canopy, ejected and bailed out of the F-35 project.

Peter E. Greene lives in Windsor.

© Copyright (c) The Windsor Star

Read more: http://www.windsorstar.com/news/Check+other+jets/6688597/story.html#ixzz1w9amX200

Citaat van: The Windsor Star Vandaag om 11:10
Canada should evaluate more aircraft under a tendering process rather than making a hasty and costly mistake by going for the overpriced and untested F-35 aircraft. The Rafale aircraft offers high value for money.

Ik zie mogelijkheden, optimist als ik ben.

Een interessante samenwerkings mogelijkheid zou kunen ontstaan tussen de Klu en de RCAF, beide hebben de noodzaak/wens voor ongeveer een gelijk aantal fighters.

Tel hierbij de schaalvergroting van het Rafale concept in India en wellicht in Brazilië en de oplossing ligt klaar...

Alleen die cursus Frans, dat is dan wel weer balen.

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 28/05/2012 | 11:39 uur
Ik zie mogelijkheden, optimist als ik ben.

Een interessante samenwerkings mogelijkheid zou kunen ontstaan tussen de Klu en de RCAF, beide hebben de noodzaak/wens voor ongeveer een gelijk aantal fighters.

Tel hierbij de schaalvergroting van het Rafale concept in India en wellicht in Brazilië en de oplossing ligt klaar...

Alleen die cursus Frans, dat is dan wel weer balen.

Jurrien, als er europese jet wordt aangeschaft dan graag de  Typhoon of de Gripen NG geen frans spul aub

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 28/05/2012 | 11:39 uur
Ik zie mogelijkheden, optimist als ik ben.

Een interessante samenwerkings mogelijkheid zou kunen ontstaan tussen de Klu en de RCAF, beide hebben de noodzaak/wens voor ongeveer een gelijk aantal fighters.

Tel hierbij de schaalvergroting van het Rafale concept in India en wellicht in Brazilië en de oplossing ligt klaar...

Alleen die cursus Frans, dat is dan wel weer balen.

Fransen spreken ook prima Engels, althans, die waar ik in professionele zin mee te maken heb gehad. In Canada is Frans een officiële taal, dat wordt daar denk ik meer en beter gesproken dan hier. De handleiding kan wel vertaald worden.

Canada blijft gewoon wel een interessant land om mee samen te werken. Samen een Rafale aanschaffen lijkt me een slimme zet, al denk ik dat het in beide landen niet zo ver gaat komen. Als wij de Rafale kopen, ben ik er vrij zeker van dat de Belgen ook overstag gaan.

Citaat van: Ace1 op 28/05/2012 | 11:42 uur
Jurrien, als er europese jet wordt aangeschaft dan graag de  Typhoon of de Gripen NG geen frans spul aub

De Typhoon is een geweldige kist, in de tranche 3 uitvoering, en is in aanschaf en exlpoitatie duurden dan de F35. De NG moet het eerst ook nog maar zien waar te maken.

Citaat van: dudge op 28/05/2012 | 11:45 uur
Fransen spreken ook prima Engels, althans, die waar ik in professionele zin mee te maken heb gehad. In Canada is Frans een officiële taal, dat wordt daar denk ik meer en beter gesproken dan hier. De handleiding kan wel vertaald worden.

Canada blijft gewoon wel een interessant land om mee samen te werken. Samen een Rafale aanschaffen lijkt me een slimme zet, al denk ik dat het in beide landen niet zo ver gaat komen. Als wij de Rafale kopen, ben ik er vrij zeker van dat de Belgen ook overstag gaan.

Ik denk dat je gelijk hebt in zowel dat het niet zo ver zal komen maar ook in als het wel het geval zou zijn de Belgen ook voor de Fransoos zouden kiezen.

Het zou de Rafale opeens in een ander daglicht plaatsen.

Citaat van: dudge op 28/05/2012 | 11:45 uur
Canada blijft gewoon wel een interessant land om mee samen te werken. Samen een Rafale aanschaffen lijkt me een slimme zet, al denk ik dat het in beide landen niet zo ver gaat komen. Als wij de Rafale kopen, ben ik er vrij zeker van dat de Belgen ook overstag gaan.

Jurrien, Poleme had het in de topic vervanging Vervanging huidige 11 CH47D chinooks ipv upgrade, over de problemen van de opleiding van Cougar MK2. posting 68

http://www.defensieforum.nl/Forum/vervanging_huidige_11_ch47d_chinooks_ipv_upgrade-t23114.45.html

Verder heeft Poleme het er over gehad dat al veel klu ers tijdens het afscheid van generaal janssen al de voorkeur voor de Gripen NG hebben en bovendien is de Klu trendsetter binnen de Navo als men de Gripen NG aanschaft volgen er meer Navolanden.

Citaat van: Ace1 op 28/05/2012 | 11:55 uur
Verder heeft Poleme het er over gehad dat al veel klu ers tijdens het afscheid van generaal janssen al de voorkeur voor de Gripen NG hebben en bovendien is de Klu trendsetter binnen de Navo als men de Gripen NG aanschaft volgen er meer Navolanden.

Kan mij goed voorstellen, want die F35 zal voor extra ontslagen leiden bij de Klu. Met minder vliegtuigen heb je ook minder crew nodig. Misschien dat ze dit ondertussen zijn gaan realiseren. "Leuk" als de F35 in de hangaar staat en jezelf thuis op de bank zit....  :sick:

USN developing new Super Hornet upgrades

By:   Dave Majumdar Washington DC

A new distributed targeting system (DTS) for the US Navy's fleet of Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornets is scheduled to enter operational testing this summer, says a senior service official.

The new targeting system should enter into service with the fleet by early next year, says Captain Frank Morley, the service's programme manager for the F/A-18E/F and EA-18G.

"The distributed targeting system allows you to self-generate GPS-quality mensurated coordinates onboard the airplane autonomously," Morley says.

That means that the Super Hornet will be able to use coordinates generated by its sensors, for example its Raytheon APG-79 active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar or its Raytheon AN/ASQ-228 Advanced Targeting Forward-Looking Infrared (ATFLIR) pod, and compare that to a precise onboard imagery database to generate precise weapons quality coordinates.

Every Super Hornet and EA-18G Growler will eventually be retrofitted with the new technology, Morley says.

Meanwhile, the Boeing is about one year into a development programme to field a new infrared search and track (IRST) pod that should be fielded on the Super Hornet fleet by late 2016, Morley says. Developed in conjunction with Lockheed Martin, the new sensor is an evolution of the Northrop Grumman F-14D Tomcat's AN/AAS-42 IRST camera. Boeing upgraded the Tomcat's camera technology for foreign F-15 sales, Morley says. The variant of the sensor that will be added to the Super Hornet is a further development of Boeing's F-15 developments.

"It's an evolutionary development path," Morley says. "So it's not just the same sensor being thrown in, but certainly you're not starting from a clean sheet of paper either."

For the Super Hornet, the USN opted for a podded-solution. A pod avoids retrofit costs, Morley says. An internal system would require modifications to the aircraft's outer mold-line and avionics hardware changes, which would require extensive testing. Nor does the USN need the pod for every mission, Morley says. The IRST is only required for air-to-air focused missions like fleet air defence or air superiority. As such, the USN will only buy about 170 pods, which it will use only as needed, Morley says. That should save the USN a considerable sum of money.

One of the unique design features of the new IRST pod is that it is built into an external fuel tank. Because the aircraft's centerline station is the optimum position for the IRST pod, it has to take the place of the Super Hornet's ever-present drop-tank.

"It's really the best place to put a podded solution for an IRST mouth on an airplane," Morley says.

The centerline station is far enough forward that it affords a podded-sensor an unobstructed up and down view, Morley says, which is critical for the sensor to be effective. In order to preserve the Super Hornet's range, the USN opted to have the sensor built into the forward half of the fuel tank. That way, some two-thirds of the fuel is still available for use.

Pilots can still jettison the pod for the sake of safety, but they would only do so in the most extreme of circumstances, Morley says.

In the future, the USN is hoping to further exploit the capabilities of the APG-79 while adding further combat identification methods, electronic attack and electronic protection upgrades on to the jet.

But one of the most important planned capabilities will be better multi-sensor integration (MSI). The aircraft will eventually be able to correlate all of the disparate information generated by the radar, ATFLIR, electronic warfare systems and data-links into one clear tactical picture, Morley says.

"One thing we are actively doing is modifying in a somewhat fundamental way the way we display a lot of the information," Morley says. "Because there is a significant amount of information coming on the airplane."

The USN is looking at programmes like the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor and elements of the F-35 programme for ideas. But the USN is not limiting itself--there are other concepts found within industry that are compelling, Morley says.

That could lead the USN to consider installing new cockpit displays into the Super Hornet in the future. One possibility is Boeing large area display technology, Morley says.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/usn-developing-new-super-hornet-upgrades-372392/

Citaat van: dudge op 28/05/2012 | 11:45 uur
Fransen spreken ook prima Engels, althans,

:crazy:

Ik citeer: "Welcome in France, it is good to see so many gendarmes from all over Europe. I'm aware not everybody speaks French or only basic, but we are in France, so I speak French"

"Welcome at this department, I know not everybody understands French, but I won't speak the language of Shakespeare in my own country."

Zo heb ik er nog wel een paar gehoord.

France-UAE talks over Rafale stalled -report

PARIS | Tue May 29, 2012 11:21am EDT

May 29 (Reuters) - Negotiations between France and the United Arab Emirates over the potential sale of 60 Rafale warplanes to the Gulf nation have "stalled", La Tribune newspaper reported on Tuesday.

The on-off negotiations have been under way for more than a year and were given high-profile support by former French president Nicolas Sarkozy, who mounted a diplomatic campaign to win the first firm export order for the Dassault-built jet.

Talks hit an obstacle in November when Abu Dhabi publicly criticized Dassault Aviation over the price of the multi-role combat jet and sought information on the competing Eurofighter Typhoon . It has also had contacts with U.S. Boeing over the F-18 warplane.

But talks were reported to have taken off again ahead of the recent French elections.

Citing unidentified French industry and government sources, La Tribune said Abu Dhabi's leadership now appeared less hurried to close a deal and would be gauging the diplomatic engagement of President Francois Hollande, a Socialist who replaced Sarkozy earlier this month.

Dassault declined to comment.

India selected the Rafale to enter exclusive negotiations for a potential 126-plane order in late January, beating the Eurofighter, but analysts say the $10 billion deal could also be influenced by the outcome of arms talks between France and UAE. (Reporting by Tim Hepher and Cyril Altmeyer; Editing by Jon Loades-Carter)

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/29/dassault-rafale-idUSL5E8GTCP720120529

Brazil, India and the Global Fighter Market

by Robbin Laird

2012 is perhaps a turning point year in the global fighter market.  India's downselect of the Rafale and the possible selection by Brazil of the same aircraft could have some game changing qualities.

First, if this were to occur, this would mean that the US is down in the fighter market to global support of already sold legacy aircraft, FMS sales of legacy aircraft and the F-35.  And the way Inside the Beltway has been supporting the F-35, the program could become globally challenged.  The President has made it clear that he wants to see a doubling of US exports in the next five years; but the fighter world will not contribute much to this effort if the Administration does not accelerate its OWN purchases of the F-35 and reducing fly away cost by so doing.  Just having more layers of oversight domestically over a program ready to build combat aircraft is hardly a way to promote exports.

Second, both the Indians and the Brazilians have one core objective in common in making their fighter selections: to add capability for now and to build domestic capacity to shape a global product.  In many ways, Embraer is better placed than Indian firms to sort out the globally exportable Rafale or son of Rafale.  The purchase of the current product is simply a down payment in shaping a global export product.

Third, one needs to be perfectly clear – this is NOT an export of aircraft from France to India and/or Brazil.  Currently, Dassault builds only 1 ½ Rafales per month and has done so at this level because of reductions on French government orders.  There is little real capacity to provide the kind of significant technology transfer FROM France that either India or Brazil would wish for.

Fourth, what the SALE of Rafale to India and/or Brazil would really amount to is the crafting of capabilities in both India and Brazil to build this aircraft and then shape a globally effective export strategy for the next round.  No one should doubt the ability of Embraer to know markets or to shape an effective export strategy.

As Reuben Johnson commented in an interview on the website:

I will tell you right now and I have seen in my lifetime many, many, many, many briefings by aerospace companies about what they think the market is.  Embraer is by far the smartest company I've ever seen about looking at a market and saying, okay over the next X number of years there's going to be so many opportunities to sell X-type of aircraft.  And we think realistically we can get this percentage of it and that works out to so many numbers.

They're not like American companies that no matter what you ask them, they always say that they can get 50% of anything.  Which is just not realistic.  They're very smart about that, they've been very smart about the way they develop the airplane.

http://www.sldinfo.com/assessing-the-evolution-of-the-global-market-a-conversation-with-reuben-johnson/

One real possibility is that Embraer works with Indian firms to shape an evolving air combat product and or product line.  The Indians clearly have an opportunity working with European firms and Embraer to shape a migration path to build a modern infrastructure for developing and manufacturing modern combat aircraft.  And make no mistake about it, the suppliers for military aircraft will migrate along with the market.

It is important to note that the firms supplying or supporting the air combat systems houses often are more important than those houses themselves.  With regard to India, it is clearly the case that THALES India, a key enabler for the Rafale, was the key to success for Dassault.

There will be a need as well for aeronautical engineers who speak English and perhaps those folks in Europe and the US who cannot find a good fit for their skills can enjoy life in Brazil or India.

This would mean that a product produced in the BRICS would join those of China and Russia in shaping a robust and capable global combat aircraft market for the next thirty years.

This would mean that comments such as those made inside the beltway that the "F-35 will be the last combat aircraft ever built" would be reduced to vaporware.

Why are these countries so misinformed when coming to meeting their own future needs?

Perhaps it is that having looked back at the last decade, they have seen how significant and FLEXIBLE combat air is to operate.

Perhaps it is because of the capability, which a fleet of combat aircraft can deliver, due to the power plants carried onboard.

Perhaps it is because virtually any combat aircraft is more survivable than an unmanned vehicle.

Perhaps it is because these folks don't want to simply own flying data nodes, but real combat capabilities.

And perhaps they look at the real costs of ownership of the larger UAVs and recognize the VERY significant manpower, survivability and ops costs.  Given the loss rates of larger UAVs in Afghanistan, it is clear to most folks that replacement costs are part of real operational costs.

In other words, if Washington does not accelerate its support for the F-35 as a global product, others will meet the global fighter market.  There is no plan B in the United States; there certainly is outside of the United States.

(For a view of the French Chief of Staff of the Air Force on the impact of the sale to India see

http://www.sldinfo.com/fr/2012/vente-de-rafale-en-inde-le-point-de-vue-du-cemaa/)

http://www.sldinfo.com/brazil-india-and-the-global-fighter-market/

Lockheed begins hiring 'temporary' workers to fill in for strikers

Lockheed Martin ratcheted up the pressure on striking Machinists union members Thursday by announcing that it will hire temporary workers to fill aircraft production jobs.

But the action seemed not to faze union leaders and some members, who are adamant that the strike will continue until Lockheed negotiates better contract terms.

Ninety-four percent of the union members voted to strike, "and only about 5 percent have crossed the picket lines. It shows the resolve they have over this issue," said Paul Black, president of Machinists District Lodge 776 in Fort Worth.

A few skilled aircraft workers are being brought in from a temporary employment service and a few dozen more will be added next week, Lockheed spokesman Joe Stout said.

"We will add people incrementally each week as we need to," Stout said, with the goal of boosting production until the strikers return to work.

The action comes as the strike by about 3,600 members of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers ends its fifth week.

Although no new negotiations have occurred since the April 22 strike vote by the Machinists, union leaders said they have met with Lockheed and agreed to suspend their picket line operation outside the company's gates over the Memorial Day weekend, from Saturday morning until Tuesday.

Union officials played down the move by Lockheed to bring in temporary workers, saying it will not weaken support for the strike.

"What they're trying to do is get a whole bunch of people to cross the line on Tuesday," Machinists spokesman Robert Wood said.

The strike is close to becoming the longest in the history of the west Fort Worth aircraft plant. There was a six-week strike against Convair, the plant's operator in 1946.

A walkout in 1984 against General Dynamics lasted three weeks, and the union went on strike against Lockheed for two weeks each in 2000 and 2003.

Union members overwhelmingly voted down Lockheed's final contract offer, which called for 3 percent annual pay raises over three years, a $3,000 signing bonus and a 13 percent increase in future pension benefits for current employees.

The union balked primarily at a plan to eliminate a traditional pension for new hires and to limit the number of available health insurance plans.

Lockheed has proposed replacing the traditional pension with a company-funded retirement savings plan, in addition to the existing 401(k) plan funded by employee and matching company contributions.

Robert Oliver, an aircraft mechanic with 22 years at the plant, said he strongly supports the union's position.

"Our people have taken a stand that we need a defined pension because a 401(k) can go away at any time and not recover," he said. "I understand Lockheed needs to cut costs ... but the place to cut is in their layers of management."

The company will likely find a ready pool of workers with aircraft experience. The aerospace industry historically has large numbers of skilled and experienced workers -- job shoppers as they're known -- employed through temporary agencies that can be used for varying periods.

Lockheed has already drawn on temporary workers to fill some union-represented jobs, including janitors and plant maintenance personnel.

In a memo Thursday announcing the hiring of temporary workers, Lockheed Executive Vice President Larry Lawson said the company wants the striking workers back on the job.

"We feel strongly that we made a fair and generous offer to the IAM members, but we have a fundamental disagreement on retirement savings," he wrote.

"The transition to a defined-contribution pension plan for new hires is an industry standard, which we have successfully implemented in a number of recent labor agreements, and is a necessary action that will help us deliver greater affordability to our customers."

As Pentagon budgets tighten -- a roughly $50 billion cut looms in January -- the military services and defense contractors are under pressure to hold down or reduce costs.

Lockheed is the prime contractor on the F-35 joint strike fighter, the largest and most expensive weapons program ever. The F-35 is years behind schedule and badly over budget and has been a prime target for defense-spending critics.

The union, in a blog post on goiamtexas.com, challenged Lockheed's cost-benefit calculations on bringing in temporary workers.

"It's surprising how Lockheed Martin demands to slash our healthcare and go after our pension plans to 'save money for the customer,' but they can waste all kinds of money during this strike," the union stated.

Lockheed says it has maintained production and, in some cases, has improved efficiency during the strike by assigning some 1,700 salaried workers -- many with previous experience -- to production and testing jobs normally filled by union members.

Those employees have been working six days and 72 hours a week since the strike began, all while not performing their usual jobs, company officials said.

Lockheed received formal government acceptance of an F-16 fighter jet for a foreign customer Thursday, Stout said, the second since the strike began.

It has also delivered three F-16s and three F-35s.

Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/05/24/3985462/lockheed-begins-hiring-temporary.html#storylink=cpy

Thursday, May. 24, 2012

Dit bericht is een week oud, maar ik heb nog nergens gelezen dat de staking ten einde is. :angel:

Lockheed Martin awarded $19.8 million contract to study JSM integration onto F-35

The US Navy has awarded Lockheed Martin a $19.8 million modification to a previously awarded fixed-price-incentive-fee F-35 Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) IV contract.

The contract modification is for a Kongsberg Joint Strike Missile (JSM) risk reduction study for the Norwegian Ministry of Defence.
Lockheed says that Norway is paying for the study with its own funds.
No US monies are being put towards the JSM effort, the company emphasizes.

The study will include physical fit checks, wind tunnel tests, engineering analysis, and designing and building of an emulator and adapter "to determine next steps in integrating the JSM into the F-35" according to the US Department of Defense.

The study should be completed by May 2014.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/lockheed-martin-awarded-198-million-contract-to-study-jsm-integration-onto-f-35-372546/

Ja, ook voor de Noren is de F35 een kip met gouden Eieren. (of is het toch pyriet?)

Gripen Sees Brazilian Fighter Decision Soon

By Robert Wall

Source: Aerospace Daily & Defense Report

June 01, 2012

LINKOPING, Sweden — After years of delay, Gripen International believes Brazil is nearly ready to make a decision in its fighter competition, in which the company's single-engine fighter is in competition against the Boeing F/A-18E/F and Dassault Rafale.

"We get the feeling it is the endgame," notes Eddy de La Motte, vice president for marketing for Gripen International, the joint venture of Saab and BAE Systems that markets the Swedish fighter to export customers.

Saab could deliver the first Gripen E/F (also called the NG) fighter four years after contract award, but it is still unclear if that is the schedule Brasilia will insist on or whether it will join the combined Swiss/Swedish Gripen E/F development schedule, which would see the first fighter handed over in 2018.

The first Gripen E/F prototype is due to fly late next year if the Swiss and Swedish governments can agree on the development path forward. The effort would likely require some Saab funding too.

Meanwhile, the Selex Galileo Raven ES-05 active, electronically scanned array radar is to fly on the Gripen NG demonstrator soon, during which time the cockpit displays and sensor will be put through their paces.

The Swedish government has an offer on the table to potential export buyers to accelerate its purchase if another country wants the Gripen E/F early, but does not want to be the lead buyer. That offer remains on the table, de La Motte says.

A win in Brazil could open the door to other fighter deals in South America, adds Frederik Gustafson, regional director for Gripen exports in the Americas. "There is a huge need for new fighters in the region and the economies are growing," he tells reporters on the sidelines of Aerospace Forum Sweden 2012. There are more than a handful of countries that are looking to buy in the next five years, he adds.

But that is not the only region where the manufacturer is working to meet its target of selling 300 fighters over the next decade. In Thailand, where it has already sold 12 Gripens (six are delivered and six will follow next year), it hopes for additional deals. Malaysia, the Philippines, Indonesia and, "in a couple of years," Vietnam may be opportunities, de La Motte says.

Efforts also continue to extend the fighter lease deal with the Czech Republic and secure orders in places such as Bulgaria, Romania, Croatia and Slovakia. Gripen also still hopes to convince Denmark and the Netherlands to defect from the F-35A Joint Strike Fighter program to which they are committed.

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/asd_06_01_2012_p03-01-463804.xml

Citaat van: AviationWeek op 02/06/2012 | 10:49 uur
Gripen Sees Brazilian Fighter Decision Soon

Ben benieuwd. Want dit hebben we best wel een paar keer eerder gehoord.

Citaat van: dudge op 02/06/2012 | 11:35 uur
Ben benieuwd. Want dit hebben we best wel een paar keer eerder gehoord.

Ik ook, uit recente persberichten komt naar voren dat de Brazilianen in de eerste helft van 2012 een keuze wil maken, ze hebben inmiddels hun rondje gedaan bij de belangrijkste spelers en de nieuwe Franse president is geinstalleerd.

Gezien de wens om te komen tot een nog meer innige samenwerking met de Fransen en het recente Brazilaanse bezoek aan India (o.a. met betrekking tot de Rafale) om hier iets gezamelijks mee te gaan doen lijken (!) de kansen voor de Gripen en de F18E kleiner te zijn dan die voor de Rafale.

Of we ze de keuze nog voor 1 juli maken valt nog te bezien, maar ik verwacht toch voor 1 september duidelijk te hebben over welke koers de Brazilianen gaan varen.

China stealth combat jet videos pose defence questions

June 3, 2012 – 9:02 pm, by Ben Sandilands

Link met diverse video's

http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/2012/06/03/china-stealth-combat-jet-videos-pose-defence-questions/

Voor de Duitstalige Gripen fans.

03. Juni 2012 - 12:48  
Bern und Stockholm wollen in Armeefragen enger zusammenarbeiten

http://www.swissinfo.ch/ger/news/newsticker/international/Bern_und_Stockholm_wollen_in_Armeefragen_enger_zusammenarbeiten.html?cid=32824398

En nog een in het Duits voor de Gripen idolaten

Wird der Gripen etwa teurer?

03.06.2012

http://www.tagesanzeiger.ch/schweiz/standard/Wird-der-Gripen-etwa-teurer-/story/17563740

Saudis are upgrading their F-15's : Latest update: We need pods NOW

May 31/12: Boeing in St. Louis, MO receives an $18.4 million addition to a firm-fixed-price contract, to pay for the "urgent requirement for limited integration of the DB-110 Reconnaissance Pod System" on 8 RSAF F-15S aircraft. The April 13/12 contract will add pods to the upgraded F-15SAs, but this urgent contract will improve Saudi Strike Eagles immediately. Those DB-110 pods would certainly help the F-15S Strike Eagles at Khamis Mushayt keep an eye on Yemen, for instance.

Work is to be complete by July 2013. The ASC/WWQ at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH manages the contract on behalf of their Saudi Foreign Military Sale client (FA8634-12-C-2651, PO 0004).

http://www.goodrich.com/Goodrich/Businesses/ISR-Systems/Products/Airborne-Products/DB-110-Reconnaissance-Sensor

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/A-2010-Saudi-Shopping-Spree-06520/

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 04/06/2012 | 06:43 uur
En nog een in het Duits voor de Gripen idolaten

Wird der Gripen etwa teurer?

03.06.2012

http://www.tagesanzeiger.ch/schweiz/standard/Wird-der-Gripen-etwa-teurer-/story/17563740

Dat zou ik voor Nederland ook wel willen. Nauwe banden met één partnerland of een groep gelijkgezinde partnerlanden. En dan niet voor iedere partner weer zelf de eisen voor de Ambulance op willen stellen. (zoals nu gebeurde bij de Boxer ambulance, er is een Duitse en een Nederlandse versie.....)

Nederland heeft best veel gemeen met Zweden, CV90 (wij de 35), de Leopard 2A6 (zij gebruiken hun tanks nog altijd....) We hebben allebei ook een beetje dezelfde maatschappij, en maatschappelijke belangen. Ook kunnen we elkaar zeer goed aanvullen. Zweden heeft de kennis om straaljagers en onderzeeboten te bouwen en te ontwikkelen. Nederland heeft de kennis om fregatten en Amfibische transportschepen te bouwen.

Ik zie de mogelijkheden. Zeker als we een wereldwijd netwerk van partnerlanden zoeken, zoals Zuid-Afrika, Brazilië, Singapore, Australië. etc.

Dilemma, waar dit artiekel te plaatsen in "Int. Fighter ontwikkelingen" of in "Contract for Detail Design and Construction of LHA 7"?

Navy, Marines Bet Big on Carrier for Troubled Stealth Jets

By David Axe,  June 4, 2012

The U.S. Navy just dropped another $2.4 billion on a class of new light aircraft carriers specifically designed to carry the U.S. Marines' F-35B stealth jump jet. Just one small problem: the F-35B is still plagued by design problems — and there's no guarantee if or when they'll be resolved.

The Navy and Marines run the risk of deploying miniaturized aircraft carriers without aircraft. And they're not alone. The planeless-carrier problem is afflicting a number of Western militaries.

On Friday the Navy awarded a $2.38 billion contract to Huntington Ingalls Industries in Pascagoula, Mississippi, to build the future USS Tripoli (LHA-7), the second and last vessel of the America class of big-deck amphibious assault ships. The future USS America (LHA-6), also under construction at Huntington Ingalls, is scheduled to leave the builder's yard in June. "LHA-7 will be a great ship," Ingalls president Irwin Edenzon crowed.

Technically, the America class are amphibious assault ships meant to carry Marines and their equipment on dangerous beach assault missions, while also launching planes and copters from topside flight decks. But unlike many of the Navy's roughly 30 assault ships, America and Tripoli don't have a floodable well deck for launching landing craft, swimming vehicles and gun-armed riverboats. Instead, the two new ships have extra aviation facilities including an extended hangar deck plus additional storage for missiles, bombs and jet fuel. In other words, the America class is optimized for the aerial aspect of assault missions.

The idea behind the America class is to take advantage of the Marines' growing arsenal of high-tech aircraft, including the MV-22 Osprey tiltrotor and the "fifth-generation" F-35B Joint Strike Fighter, the latter built by Lockheed Martin. The V-22 and F-35B need more deck space than the old-school helicopters and Harrier jump jets they replace. In optimizing America and Tripoli for aviation, the Navy and Marines blur the distinction between assault ships and the Navy's 11 full-size, nuclear-powered aircraft carriers.

Except, of course, the Navy's super-carriers are far bigger — 100,000 tons displacement versus 45,000 tons for the America class. And the America class can sail into shallower waters than the super-carriers because the former have flat-bottom hulls. What the ships have in common is that both will carry variants of the F-35.

The blurring between the big and small carriers is deliberate, according to Marine commandant Gen. James Amos. "Big-deck [nuclear] carriers ... we've got 11 of those, and we've got 11 large-deck amphibious ships," Amos said last year. "And those are the ones that look like a smaller carrier; they look exactly like a carrier, only they don't have an [angled] deck." Amos pointed out that the only U.S. carrier operating off the Libyan coast during the NATO attacks in early 2011 was an assault ship carrying Harriers. With the America-class ships hauling Marine F-35s, in the future the Corps will be able to carve out new air-power responsibilities once reserved for the Navy alone.

But that's assuming the F-35 enters service as planned. The trillion-dollar JSF program — history's biggest weapons development — has been beset by delays, cost overruns, slipping performance standards and warnings of potential production cutbacks. The Marines' vertical-launching B-version has been by far the most troubled of the three F-35 variants. In 2010 then-Defense Secretary Bob Gates placed the B-model on probation, threatening to cancel it if it didn't perform better.

As it stands, the Marines will likely possess both America-class carriers before the F-35B is ready for combat. Harriers can fill in temporarily, but until the Joint Strike Fighter is fully functional, the two new carriers will fall far short of their combat potential. That gap places the Navy and Marines in the same camp as the British and the Italian navies, both of which have or are building aircraft carriers but are betting on the problematic F-35B to fly off them.

There are reasons to hope the carrier woes will be resolved. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta ended the B-model's probation in January and has since praised the jet as "meeting requirements." The first F-35B training jet took off for its inaugural flight from a Florida base in late May. Despite much hand-wringing over cost, the Pentagon has not yet cut back F-35 production plans. "The Marines need a fifth-generation fighter for the future, and they will have it," Panetta said.

Two multi-billion-dollar aircraft carriers are counting on it.

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/06/marine-aircraft-carrier/

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 04/06/2012 | 21:08 uur
Dilemma, waar dit artiekel te plaatsen in "Int. Fighter ontwikkelingen" of in "Contract for Detail Design and Construction of LHA 7"?

Het artikel is nmbm hier op zijn plaats.  :cute-smile:

een LHA7 van 45.000 ton dan heb je een schip wat qa grote vergelijkbaar is met met Charles de Gaulle toch?
Mocht de F35B niet doorgaan dan reffit met een hoekdek en  2 katapults en remkabels  en je heb 2 lichte carriers die je heel goed kan gebruiken met de dreiging van china in de toekomst, zoveel grote carriers heeft de VS niet meer.

http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/americaclassamphibio/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_aircraft_carrier_Charles_de_Gaulle_(R91)

Languishing in Arizona, our once-mighty fleet of Harriers... sold for the price of just ONE of their US-made replacements

By Adam Luck

PUBLISHED: 23:16 GMT, 2 June 2012 | UPDATED: 23:16 GMT, 2 June 2012
They were once the pride of Britain's RAF and Royal Navy – but now these stripped-down Harrier vertical take-off jump jets sit like skeletons in the famous US aircraft 'Boneyard' in the Arizona desert.
The once iconic aircraft – whose original versions first saw active  service more than 40 years ago – are among some of the 72 Harriers  that Britain prematurely scrapped and then sold to America for a knockdown £116 million last November.
They are now used for spare parts for US Harriers, which America still consider viable fighting planes.

Zie link voor de rest van het verhaal en de foto's

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2153741/Languishing-Arizona-mighty-fleet-Harriers--sold-price-just-ONE-US-replacements.html#ixzz1wwQwIjAR

Die Britten hebben hetzelfde virus als ons te pakken, dit zal helemaal blijken als ze de 2e carrier schrappen (geruchten gingen/gaan in de rondte)  :crazy:

Citaat van: fly3rguy op 05/06/2012 | 20:21 uur
Die Britten hebben hetzelfde virus als ons te pakken, dit zal helemaal blijken als ze de 2e carrier schrappen (geruchten gingen/gaan in de rondte)  :crazy:

Inderdaad, dat ene virus dat het lange termijn denken aantast  :'(

Senaatscommissie VS kritisch over JSF

woensdag 06 juni 2012 

WASHINGTON - De defensiecommissie van de Amerikaanse Senaat maakt zich zorgen over de kwaliteit van het productieproces van de F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF).

De gezaghebbende commissie vraagt zich af of het toestel straks nog wel voor een 'betaalbare' prijs geleverd kan worden. Dat blijkt uit een woensdag gepubliceerd verslag.

Minder toestellen
Het Amerikaanse defensieconcern Lockheed Martin ontwikkelt de JSF voor de krijgsmachten van diverse landen, waaronder Nederland. Verschillende landen hebben al gewaarschuwd dat ze bij een stijgende prijs mogelijk minder toestellen afnemen.

Het baart de Senaatscommissie onder meer zorgen dat Lockheed al toestellen bouwt terwijl het testen nog in volle gang is. Dat kan ertoe leiden dat vliegtuigen later moeten worden omgebouwd.

http://www.bndestem.nl/nieuws/algemeen/buitenland/11162795/Senaatscommissie-VS-kritisch-over-JSF.ece

Air force chief wants major military spend

June 6, 2012 - 3:30PM

A hawkish Chief of Air Force, Air Marshal Geoff Brown, has called for a major spend on Australia's air warfare capability to counter possible regional instability.

Heading his wish list for the 2020s are at least 100 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters and 12 Growlers - the electronic warfare equipped version of the F/A-18 Super Hornet.

The former fighter pilot told guests at an Australian Strategic Policy Institute dinner on Tuesday night the alternative was to be like New Zealand.

Advertisement: Story continues below

``We're a pretty wealthy country, we're actually one of the wealthiest countries in the world - we've just got to make a decision whether we want to control our environment to a certain respect,'' he said.

``Our other choice is to go down the New Zealand route - it's pretty simple.''

The Air Marshal indicated New Zealand had given up on funding its own defence and hoped that in the event of a crisis its friends would come to the rescue.

He said Australia needed the JSF because by the mid-2020s the Super Hornet just wouldn't cut it against the planes our neighbours are considering buying.

And, if we stick with the stealth fighter, quantity has a quality all its own.

``Capacity matters - and anything less than 100 JSFs severely limits the options available to government and only provides a boutique capability,'' Air Marshal Brown said.

``You could buy more Super Hornets (instead of JSFs) but I'd argue (that) by 2025 or somewhere around that it becomes an uncompetitive fighter. You can be the best fighter pilot in the world but if the other guy has got some significant capability advantages over you you just don't fundamentally stand a chance.''

That said, he believes the current combination of a new generation of sophisticated, low-observability, standoff air to surface missiles with the 71 ``classic'' Hornets and the 24 Super Hornets gives Australia a strike capability that would make any potential adversary think twice.

``I'd argue the AGM-158 Joint Air To Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM) equipped (classic) Hornets with the KC-30 (multi-role tanker) is a far superior strike capability than we ever possessed with the F-111,'' he said.

``JASSM achieved its initial operating capability with the classic Hornet in December last year.''

The 4.2 metre long guided missile has a range of almost 400km, carries a 500kg war head and can be retargeted in flight. A subsonic missile, it is slower than the jets that carry it and relies on its low observability to sneak up on the foe.

With a radar cross section said to be about the same size as a golf ball, JASSM lets pilots attack targets well outside the range of ground-based anti-aircraft defences.

Sources indicate each of the missiles - which are fractionally too large to fit into the internal weapons bay of the JSFs expected to be in service with the RAAF by the end of the decade - cost about $700,000 US.

An extended range version that can travel more than 900km after launch has been developed but is not in service with the RAAF.

Despite the government's recent decision to defer the purchase of the next 12 JSFs as part of the Defence cuts in the budget Air Marshal Brown says the fifth generation fighters are still affordable and could be in service with the RAAF before the end of the decade.

``We signed on for the JSF back in 2003 - about 10 years ago,'' he said. ``We decided on a budget, an amount for the joint strike fighter. That hasn't changed. 100 JSFs are still affordable within that original budget range established in 2003.''

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/air-force-chief-wants-major-military-spend-20120606-1zvy6.html#ixzz1wzNaN5jS

Duels In The Sky
Jun 3, 2011 By Bill Sweetman

The European fighter development community's views on the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) have become more negative since 2005-06, and this is not, primarily, the result of marketing. The commentary expressed in offline meetings at conferences and shows is much more negative than on-the-record statements suggest.

[...]

The non-competitive selections of the JSF by the Netherlands, Norway and Canada are attributed to three main factors: political pressure by the U.S. (suspected for years but confirmed in 2010 by WikiLeaks), U.S.-oriented air forces, and political vacillation enabled by the fact that full-rate production JSFs are not available for order.

This worldview underpins the Europeans' determination to keep their programs alive until the JSF program runs its course, or unravels, as they expect it to.

[...]

Full article: http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/ ... line=Duels In The Sky

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-15657.html

De kleding voor de huidige vliegers die overstappen naar de JSF worden vervangen, door een nieuw

New G-suite voor JSF- jockey's

Foto's en info :
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-19232.html

Pilots to Get Next-Gen Flight Suits

The new generation of Nomads will have a new generation of flight suits. Joint Strike Fighter pilot instructors were fitted for their new gear in Nomad Hall during a press conference.

Representatives from the suit and helmet manufacturers fielded questions. They shared the number of measurements taken to fit pilots into the gear and safety measures taken to make the suits. They also detailed features of everything, including the socks.

But they would not talk prices.

"It costs more than your house," said Bob Foote, chief technology officer of helmet manufacturer Vision Systems International.

Rumor had it the helmets cost about $250,000 each, but Foote would not confirm it.

The flight suits were a greater mystery. Because they are being bought and produced in a small batch for the instructors, the initial cost per uniform is more than it will be in the future, said Dale Hensley, JSF support equipment logistics lead at Lockheed Martin. He did not offer an estimate.

Graham Robertson, JSF trials and integrated logistics manager for RFD Beaufort, helped design the flight suits. He said a lot of money was saved on the project but did not know how much.

"We're just engineers," he said. "We're just trying to tailor our equipment to the needs and we know there will be many needs."

The suits will be worn by pilots from the Navy, Air Force and Marines and student pilots from allied countries.

Each branch of service and country can tailor the suits according to its use. For example, the U.S. Navy and British pilots will fly over water more often than the Air Force. They will have options, such as integrating life preservers into the suits.

RFD Beaufort took a flight suit already in production and made improvements based on F-35 specifications and trial runs.

Those improvements included tailoring the sleeves for safer ejections during an emergency and creating two different g-force protection suits that would keep pilots from blacking out in an emergency.

A pilot who tested the g-protection suits during flight demonstrations showed a notable improvement to current suits.

"When in the Legacy suit (worn flying F-16's), he was fatigued after one display," Robertson said.

The pilot then changed into the new protective gear. "After three displays, he was fresh as a daisy," Robertson said.

Socks are sewn into thermal suits and create a barrier against water in case a pilot ejects and lands in water. Other garments whisk away summer heat and have coolants pumping in them.

Pilots will wear flame retardant undergarments that Roberts said would have saved thousands of lives had they been used years ago

"This equipment will protect and give the pilots a chance to get out," Roberts said. "It integrates with the ejection seat and helmet."

Fitting and issuing the gear is a two-day process that includes testing the gear in a cockpit to ensure pilots can function safely and comfortably.

The most advanced step in the fitting process is the personalized helmet fitting. A laser scanner maps the head of each pilot and creates padding tailored to the individual in a matter of hours.

The fit of the helmets impressed Maj. Eric Smith, assistant director of operations for the 58th Fighter Squadron. He said it felt like the helmet was suctioned to his head.

"They also have noise reduction. They're very nice," he said.

The technology in the 4-pound helmet does not stop at the fitting. The helmets make flying the F-35 seem like flying an invisible aircraft. When pilots look down, they see the view under the aircraft. A glance to each side also shows them the view outside the aircraft.

"It's like playing a virtual reality game," Foote said. "The plane helps a little. But I prefer to think they built the plane to the specifications of this helmet."

http://www.military.com/news/article/pilots-to-get-nextgen-flight-suits.html

Advies Amerikaanse denktank: schrap komende jaren 800-900 JSF's

Gepubliceerd door JSFNieuws.nl om 19:28 onder Andere JSF landen

Kesteren – De Amerikaanse defensiedenktank CNAS heeft vorige week een rapport uitgebracht voor een "duurzame defensiebegroting" gebaseerd op de actuele toestand van de Amerikaanse economie en overheidsfinanciën.

Het rapport stelt vast, dat de nationale schuld samen US$ 11.000 miljard bedraagt. Deze schuld zal snel en exponentieel toenemen indien er niet snel drastische maatregelen worden genomen om het overheidstekort flink terug te schroeven. De groeiende schuldenberg is een steeds grotere beperking bij het ten uitvoer brengen van grote militaire verwervingsprojecten, zoals aankoop van vliegdekschepen, bommenwerpers, gevechtsvliegtuigen.

Immense defensiebezuinigingen komende 10 jaar

Dit heeft er al toegeleid dat in januari 2012 bezuinigingen zijn aangekondigd op defensieaankopen voor de komende 10 jaar ter hoogte van US$ 487 miljard (!) in het kader van 2011 Budget Control Act.
In deze wet is tevens afgesproken dat indien een aantal bezuinigingen bij de uitgaven niet kan worden overeengekomen tussen Republikeinen en Democraten dit volautomatisch leidt (vastgelegd in een wet reeds) tot een aanvullende pakket meerjaren bezuinigingen van nog eens US$ 950 miljard met ingang van 2013. Tot op heden is tussen de partijen nog geen overeenstemming in zicht. De defensie industrie ziet deze plannen met angst en beven tegemoet.

Na januari 2013: F-35 belangrijk doelwit

Een recent Pentagon rapport stelde vast dat meer dan 70% van het investeringsbudget van de US Air Force het komende decennium zal worden besteed aan slechts twee projecten: de F-35A en de nieuwe KC-46A tankervliegtuigen (de huidige zijn circa 45 jaar oud).
Denktank CNAS geeft aan dat daarnaast geld vrij gemaakt zal worden voor een nieuwe strategische bommenwerper ter vervanging van de circa 50 jaar oude B-52's. Dit zal in verband met de ontwikkelingen in Azië en de toenemende sterkte van China prioriteit krijgen.
Mede omdat toestellen als de F-35 een te gering vliegbereik hebben, op zich zijn ze wel onzichtbaar voor de radar (stealth), maar de benodigde tanktoestellen, die redelijk in de buurt moeten komen, zijn dat zeker niet. Daarom is er meer behoefte aan stealth lange-afstands bommenwerpers, dan aan de F-35.
Door de omvang van het F-35 programma is hier serieus veel geld weg te halen, in combinatie met de voortdurende problemen vormt de F-35 daarmee een belangrijk doelwit.
Niet alleen CNAS, maar ook meerdere andere denktanks verwachten, dat direct na de presidentsverkiezingen in januari 2013 bekend wordt dat de luchtmacht met hooguit 1000-1100 F-35's genoegen moet nemen (circa 700 minder dan nu gepland) en dat voor de US Navy eveneens enkele honderden toestellen geschrapt zullen worden.
Het rapport wijst erop dat schrappen van F-35's ten gunste van lange-afstands bommenwerpers als bijkomend voordeel heeft dat er minder tankers nodig zijn.

Aanbeveling CNAS voor US Air Force

De letterlijke aanbeveling van denktank CNAS voor de US Air Force luidt:

Strike Aircraft: Due to strategic and cost concerns, the Air Force should reduce the number
of F-35As it plans to procure from 1,763 to 1.000-1.200 in part by reducing its inventory
requirements for trainer and Air National Guard aircraft.

The F-35 is highly expensive and lacks the longer range important in overcoming some A2/AD threats. In future combat scenarios, including high-end engagements against China or Iran, the U.S. military will not need a 100 percent stealthy manned fighter fleet. Instead, an aggregate capability joint mix of F-35s, F-22s, F/A-18s, F-16s, F-15s, B-52s, B-2s, B-1s, long-range strike bombers, cruise missiles, advanced ISR and UAS will provide sufficient options to conduct echeloned attack operations and succeed in any realistic configuration
of potential contingencies.

Furthermore, the opportunity cost of the F-35 is tremendous. The Air Force plan to purchase 1.763 F-35As has caused the service to defer investments that may lead to greater capabilities in the future.


Aanbeveling voor US Marines Corps

The Marine Corps should reduce its fixed-wing aviation inventory and focus instead on STOVL F-35B strike fighters and a more select group of support aircraft. The Marine Corps
should eliminate its F-18C/D Hornet and EA-6B Prowler squadrons aboard Navy carriers, a major redundancy given that carrier-based strike fighter operations are a primary mission of Navy aviation.

Aanbeveling voor US Navy

Strike Aircraft: The Navy should reduce its planned buy of 369 F-35Cs by 50 percent and
continue to procure additional F/A-18s after 2014, when the production line is scheduled to close, to make up some of its inventory requirements.

Due to its short range, the F-35C requires aircraft carriers to get dangerously close to enemy coasts or necessitates frequent aerial refueling. While external fuel tanks can extend the F-35C's range, such tanks compromise its stealth and thereby sacrifice an essential attribute. By buying fewer F-35s more quickly, the Navy will revitalize its strike fleet sooner and free up resources it can use in the 2020s and 2030s to buy combat-capable UAS, which by then should be more technologically advanced if DOD accelerates development now.


Conclusie: toenemende kans op flinke reductie aantal JSF's

Gelet op de enorme problemen met de Amerikaanse overheidsbegroting en staatsschuld zijn enorme bezuinigingen op defensie onontkoombaar. Het gaat hierbij om vele honderden miljarden dollars in een betrekkelijke korte tijd. Aangezien de F-35 veruit het grootste investeringsproject is, en er door de steeds hogere kosten, vertragingen en technische problemen in toenemende mate ernstige kritiek is vanuit het Amerikaanse Huis van Afgevaardigden en vanuit de Senaat is de kans op aanzienlijke reductie van aantallen uiterst aannemelijk. Een nieuw rapport van denktank CNAS geeft het advies het aantal Joint Strike Fighters in totaal met circa 800-900 te reduceren. Verwacht wordt dat in januari 2013, na de presidentsverkiezingen, daadwerkelijke serieuze stappen op dit punt zullen volgen.

Bron:
CNAS; May 2012; rapport "Sustainable Pre-eminence. Reforming the U.S. Military at a Time of Strategic Change
By Lieutenant General David W. Barno, USA (Ret.), Nora Bensahel, Matthew Irvine and Travis Sharp

Auteur: Johan Boeder

JSFNIEUWS120605-JB/jb

http://www.jsfnieuws.nl/?p=811

Hoe kan Hillen zo positief blijven als de US senators zelf ernstige bedenkingen hebben over de voortgang en prijsstijgingen ??.....

Hillen moet eens de werkelijkheid vertellen ... en geen gedraaierij en desinformatie

US Senators concerned about JSF software and modifications

Williamsburg, VA - The U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) questioned the Joint Strike Fighter Program during the preparations and debate about the National Defense authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013.
Key items were serious concerns about "potentially serious issues with its electronic warfare capability", about the production quality and the ever increasing pricelevel. Also the high modicifaction costs caused by overlap between development and production (US$ 18 to US$ 25 millionmodification costs per aircraft) is a growing concern.
The SASC promised continuation of "strong oversight of the F–35 program, including concurrency, software development, production, and testing"

Pentagon: F-35 Acquisition malpractice

The report writes at Page 32 and Page 33 about the Joint Strike Fighter Program:

Department of Defense (DOD) officials have testified that the F–35 ''Lightning II'' Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program is the most concurrent program in DOD recent experience. Concurrency refers to the overlap between system development and testing, and production.
Excessive concurrency arises when a program's development and production overlap to the extent that major, expensive changes identified in testing have to be made in production items after they are on the production line or after they are delivered.
According to JSF's Program Executive Officer, ''Fundamentally, that was a miscalculation . . . You'd like to take the keys to your shiny new jet and give it to the fleet with all the capability and all the service life they want. What we're doing is, we're taking the keys to the shiny new jet, giving it to the fleet and saying, 'Give me that jet back in the first year. I've got to go take it up to this depot for a couple of months and tear into it and put in some structural mods, because if I don't, we're not going to be able to fly it more than a couple, three, four, five years.' That's what concurrency is doing to us.''
The Acting Under Secretary of Defense of Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics was considerably more pointed in his assessment, referring to the decision made years ago to put JSF into production before flight testing had started as ''acquisition malpractice.''
He noted that the program was started with ''the optimistic prediction that we were good enough at modeling and simulation that we would not find problems in flight test . . . That was wrong, and now we are paying for that.''
The committee agrees with these appraisals and views them as a valuable starting point that may help ensure that the additional 33 months and $7.9 billion that DOD has added to the previous JSF development plan will result in a sustainable program capable of delivering the required capability to the warfighter. The committee remains concerned that, even with these
changes, the level of concurrency risk that still resides in the program may be excessive.

Growth of cost overruns in first production series

Because of concern about the lack of a coherent concurrency change management strategy in the JSF program, the committee declined to approve DOD's request to reprogram funds from other programs to cover part of a roughly $771.0 million cost overrun in low-rate initial production lots (LRIP) lots 1 through 3.

Unfortunately, the cost growth problem persists. As of March 2012, DOD estimates total concurrency costs (caused by overlap of development and production) for:
- LRIP–1 at $50.1 million (2 aircraft);
- LRIP–2, $300.3 million (12 aircraft);
- LRIP–3, $319.1 million (14 aircraft);
- LRIP–4, $523.3 million (28 aircraft).


Average modification costs (pay before you fly):
- LRIP-1: US$ 25 million
- LRIP-2: US$ 25 million
- LRIP-3: US$ 23 million
- LRIP-4: US$ 18 million

The committee does not find this trend encouraging and believes that the program must ensure that these costs are managed more effectively and that the prime contractor share equitably in them.

Software problems major concern

As stated before at this website the most important and threatening problem for the F-35 to get an IOC in 2019 is software and software and software. The SASC agrees:

In addition to concurrency change management, the committee is concerned about the JSF program's lack of progress in software development.
The most recent Selected Acquisition Report for this program identified this issue as ''a significant area of focus,'' Challenges facing efforts to develop and integrate software Block 1B and Block 2A appear to be affecting the successful delivery of Block 2B capability. While the program has built capacity in the integrated master schedule for discovering and dealing with problems in the development of Blocks 2 and 3, the potential cascading effect of failures to deliver software capability on the balance of a major developmental program like JSF can be particularly pernicious.
The committee, therefore, believes that the contracting strategy for this program should target improved performance in the development of software to ensure that the Block 2A schedule will be met. To ensure the dependable delivery of needed software capability, the Joint Program Office (JPO) and the prime contractor must work collaboratively to properly assess software maturity for readiness to proceed to flight-testing and for production-release; provide for sufficient schedule capacity to support the production and delivery of unscheduled software builds; move towards automatically generated, data-driven capability maturity metrics across the entire air-system; and structure the program's management of software development to enable premeditated trades among capability, cost, and schedule.

Production quality needs attention

While Lockheed Martin faces the seventh week of a strike of about 3.200 workers over health care benefits and pension, and L-M has hired about 200 temporary workers to keep production of the F-35 on schedule, the SASC shows its concerns about the quality of the production:

The committee is similarly concerned about production quality and whether it is sufficient to ensure the delivery of JSF aircraft to the U.S. and its allies at an affordable price. The average rate of scrap, rework, and repair at the prime contractor's main manufacturing facility from 2009 through the first 2 months of 2012 gives rise to concern. Inattention to production quality also appears to have contributed to discovery of a potentially serious issue with an aperture on the aircraft critical to its electronic warfare capability.
While the full extent of this problem is presently unknown, it underscores the fact that DOD and the contractor team must rigorously manage production quality.
With the foregoing in mind, the committee is hopeful about an approach that DOD has taken to try to address some of the issues described above. Under this approach, called a 'development dial'' or ''dial-up'' approach, DOD would modulate its purchase of future
aircraft for which funding has been authorized and appropriated based on how the prime contractor performs in the areas of concurrency risk reduction, software development, flight-testing, and durability.
While the committee believe this approach holds merit, it also believes that the approach's success in incentivizing desired contractor performance will require that DOD identify a very clear, specific, and realistically achievable set of performance criteria upfront.
The specificity of these criteria should be sufficient to convey to the prime contractor what constitutes desired performance and how its performance, once rendered, would be assessed. The committee directs DOD to provide these criteria to the congressional defense committees before they are actually implemented so that the committees may assess their efficacy.

Corrosion problems F-22 and F-35

At page 53 some attention for the specific corrosion problems of the 5th generation fighter jets:
The committee has recommended a provision that would amend the DOD reporting requirements to Congress by requiring additional information on corrosion projects, including validated returns on investment for completed corrosion projects, activities, and information on how corrosion funding is used for military projects, the Technical Corrosion Collaboration pilot program, and other corrosion-related activities. Additionally, the Government Accountability Office has stated that the Corrosion Policy and Oversight Office within the DOD Corrosion Program delivers at least a 14 to 1 ratio return on investment to the taxpayer through corrosion project opportunities and activity requirements. Ensuring proper corrosion prevention and control plays a major role in the sustainment costs and life cycle range of many current and future weapon systems including the F–22, F–35, and various ground vehicles, ships, and aircraft.

US Navy fighter gap and FY2014

Some quotes from the Report (page 14) about the US Navy F-35C's:
The committee recommends a provision that would express the sense of the Senate that, if the budget request of the Department of the Navy for fiscal year 2014 for F–18 aircraft includes a request for funds for more than 13 new Boeing F–18 Super Hornet aircraft, the budget request of the Department of the Navy for fiscal year 2014 for F–35 aircraft should include a request for funds for not fewer than 6 F–35B aircraft and 4 F–35C aircraft, presuming that development, testing, and production of the F–35 aircraft are proceeding according to current plans.

The budget request included $3,063.6 million to purchase 26 F/A–18E/F aircraft and 12 EA–18G aircraft. The budget also included US$ 30.3 million for advance procurement of 13 F/A–18E/F aircraft in fiscal year 2014. Fiscal year 2014 would represent the final year of production for the Department of the Navy. Throughout the past several years, the committee has expressed concern that the Navy is facing a sizeable gap in aircraft inventory as older F/A–18A–D Hornets retire before the aircraft carrier variant (F–35C) of the Joint Strike Fighter is available.
This year, the Navy says that the maximum shortfall is now projected to be around 56 aircraft. The Navy claims that the estimated shortfall has not increased much since last year even though the Department removed a total of 64 F–35B and F–35C aircraft from the future-years defense program (FYDP). The Navy's estimate of the shortfall is based on conducting intensive management of the current inventory, making some reduction in force structure within Marine Corps aviation, and pursuing a service life extension program (SLEP) of 150 F/A–18 aircraft.
The Navy intends that a SLEP would extend the life of select legacy F/A–18s from 8,600 to 10,000 flight hours. As yet, the Navy does not have sufficient data to predict the failure rate for aircraft being inducted into the SLEP program. Too high a failure rate could leave the Navy with too few aircraft that could benefit from the SLEP program, which would exacerbate the shortfall projections.

Source:
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal year 2013, report 2012 112-173

JSFNIEUWS120606-GK/jb
http://www.jsfnieuws.nl/

Controversy erupts over simulation test of F-35 in fighter jet purchase

SEOUL, June 7 (Yonhap) -- A plan to conduct performance tests of Lockheed Martin's F-35 using simulators, not an actual test flight by a South Korean pilot, has stirred up controversy here as Seoul prepares to buy an advanced fleet of stealth fighters.

   Boeing's F-15 SE, Lockheed's F-35 and EADS Eurofighter are competing to win a huge deal worth upward of 10 trillion won (US$8.5 billion) to sell 60 combat fighters to South Korea, which will choose a supplier in October.

   On-site performance tests will be held in June for the F-35, in August for the F-15 SE and in September for the Eurofighter, according to officials at the Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA), South Korea's state arms procurement agency, on Thursday.

   While Boeing and EADS agreed to carry out performance tests through actual flights with a Korean pilot on board, Lockheed refused to do so, saying the radar-evading warplane is not in service and still under development.

   The flight-test schedule of the single-seat F-35 has been delayed, raising concerns over rising costs and that the aircraft may not be available until 2020.

   "Because the F-35 is now under development, only F-35 pilots can fly it," a DAPA official said.

   Instead, the DAPA asked Lockheed to conduct performance tests with simulators and a Korean pilot on board a different fighter jet and tracking the F-35, the official said.

   The plan, however, has raised questions about proper performance tests.

   The U.S. government is the main customer and financial contributor for Lockheed's F-35 program, valued at more than $300 billion. Also, eight countries, including Britain, Canada and Turkey, are taking part in the largest weapons program in history by shouldering some development costs.

   South Korea has purchased 60 of Boeing's F-15 fighter jets since 2002 under the first two stages of the fighter modernization program, code-named "F-X."

http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/national/2012/06/07/46/0301000000AEN20120607004200315F.HTML

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 07/06/2012 | 19:58 uur
   "Because the F-35 is now under development, only F-35 pilots can fly it," a DAPA official said.

   Instead, the DAPA asked Lockheed to conduct performance tests with simulators and a Korean pilot on board a different fighter jet and tracking the F-35, the official said.

   The plan, however, has raised questions about proper performance tests.

Komt nu wel goed uit van LM om te zeggen dat de F-35 nog in ontwikkeling is .... ja ja..., maar een simulator vergelijking wordt deze wel eerlijk gehouden ?.

In een simulator kun je veel parameters wijzigen, dus ook verhogen. zo zouden ze de performence van de F-35 op een niveau laten vliegen wat pas in 2030 als standaard upgarde beschikbaar is, zoals met 360 graden view en alle EW systemen....
Hopelijk zullen ze voor de juiste vergelijking met de parameters/performence vliegen zoals het toestel in 2017 zou (kunnen) zijn.

Als de Zuid-Koreanen slim zijn laten ze zich niet "inpakken" bij de F35 en gaan voor de F-15SE of Eurofighter. Die Noord-Koreaanse luchtverdediging stelt toch weinig voor naar moderne maatstaven, dus de stealth-eigenschappen van de F-35 lijken mij minder belangrijk. Daarbij kan ik me voorstellen, dat men snel de raket/artillerieinstallaties van de Noord-Koreanen wil uitschakelen die Zuid-Koreaanse steden bedreigen...maar misschien daar ook beter vooral raketsystemen voor kan inzetten in combinatie met goede waarnemingsmiddelen (satelliet en UAVs). Het onderscheppen en uitschakelen van de Noord-Koreaanse gevechtsvliegtuigen en vele raketten lijkt me een belangrijkere taak voor de Zuid-Koreaanse luchtmacht. En dus zou ik focussen op een goede luchtoverwichtsjager die vooral erg veel AAM's kan meenemen (en niet alleen inwendig dus!!) en daarbij langdurig kan rondvliegen. Lijkt me de F-15SE de betere papieren te hebben. Zeker gezien het al beschikken over oudere modellen van dit toestel.

Citaat van: Elzenga op 07/06/2012 | 21:58 uur
Als de Zuid-Koreanen slim zijn laten ze zich niet "inpakken" bij de F35 en gaan voor de F-15SE of Eurofighter. Die Noord-Koreaanse luchtverdediging stelt toch weinig voor naar moderne maatstaven, dus de stealth-eigenschappen van de F-35 lijken mij minder belangrijk. Daarbij kan ik me voorstellen, dat men snel de raket/artillerieinstallaties van de Noord-Koreanen wil uitschakelen die Zuid-Koreaanse steden bedreigen...maar misschien daar ook beter vooral raketsystemen voor kan inzetten in combinatie met goede waarnemingsmiddelen (satelliet en UAVs). Het onderscheppen en uitschakelen van de Noord-Koreaanse gevechtsvliegtuigen en vele raketten lijkt me een belangrijkere taak voor de Zuid-Koreaanse luchtmacht. En dus zou ik focussen op een goede luchtoverwichtsjager die vooral erg veel AAM's kan meenemen (en niet alleen inwendig dus!!) en daarbij langdurig kan rondvliegen. Lijkt me de F-15SE de betere papieren te hebben. Zeker gezien het al beschikken over oudere modellen van dit toestel.

Vergeet voor het gemak ook niet de enorme externe wapenlast die de F15 kan mee torsen, een waarlijke alles kunner tegen een acceptabele prijs.

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 07/06/2012 | 22:03 uurVergeet voor het gemak ook niet de enorme externe wapenlast die de F15 kan mee torsen, een waarlijke alles kunner tegen een acceptabele prijs.

Voor de Zuid-Koreanen lijkt me dit een zeer belangrijke factor...naast de standaardisatie....

(Voor Nederland helaas niet Jurrien ;))

Citaat van: Elzenga op 07/06/2012 | 22:08 uur
(Voor Nederland helaas niet Jurrien ;))

Waar ik het niet mee eens ben maar dat is een ander verhaal.

42 F15SE/NE versus 42 Gripens.... ANY-TIME

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 07/06/2012 | 22:19 uur
42 F15SE/NE versus 42 Gripens.... ANY-TIME

Zeker weten !!

Citaat van: Elzenga op 07/06/2012 | 21:58 uur
Als de Zuid-Koreanen slim zijn laten ze zich niet "inpakken" bij de F35 en gaan voor de F-15SE of Eurofighter. Die Noord-Koreaanse luchtverdediging stelt toch weinig voor naar moderne maatstaven, dus de stealth-eigenschappen van de F-35 lijken mij minder belangrijk. Daarbij kan ik me voorstellen, dat men snel de raket/artillerieinstallaties van de Noord-Koreanen wil uitschakelen die Zuid-Koreaanse steden bedreigen...maar misschien daar ook beter vooral raketsystemen voor kan inzetten in combinatie met goede waarnemingsmiddelen (satelliet en UAVs). Het onderscheppen en uitschakelen van de Noord-Koreaanse gevechtsvliegtuigen en vele raketten lijkt me een belangrijkere taak voor de Zuid-Koreaanse luchtmacht. En dus zou ik focussen op een goede luchtoverwichtsjager die vooral erg veel AAM's kan meenemen (en niet alleen inwendig dus!!) en daarbij langdurig kan rondvliegen. Lijkt me de F-15SE de betere papieren te hebben. Zeker gezien het al beschikken over oudere modellen van dit toestel.

Maar zij kunnen ook net zo goed voor de laatste versie van de F-16 kiezen, goedkoper !..en de NoordKoreaanse luchtmacht steld echt iets voor klopt. Maar om een aanval met op iedere meter een kanon uit te schakelen, moet je heel veel vliegtuigen hebben !

CitaatMaar zij kunnen ook net zo goed voor de laatste versie van de F-16 kiezen, goedkoper !..en de NoordKoreaanse luchtmacht steld echt iets voor klopt. Maar om een aanval met op iedere meter een kanon uit te schakelen, moet je heel veel vliegtuigen hebben !

Ik zeg: Clusterbommen!!! 8)

Citaat van: tentara71 op 08/06/2012 | 12:09 uur
Ik zeg: Clusterbommen!!! 8)

en Napalm nowwwwwwwwwwwww !!!!!!!!!!!!

Citaat van: Oorlogsvis op 08/06/2012 | 11:26 uur
Maar zij kunnen ook net zo goed voor de laatste versie van de F-16 kiezen, goedkoper !..en de NoordKoreaanse luchtmacht steld echt iets voor klopt. Maar om een aanval met op iedere meter een kanon uit te schakelen, moet je heel veel vliegtuigen hebben !

Op de een of andere manier dringt het niet door bij veel van de forum deelnemers: veel landen kijken niet naar goedkoper maar naar de voor hun beste oplossing.

Israel: Second F-35 deal is in the cards

June 9, 2012

Israel's military leaders are expected to give the green light to buying more of Lockheed Martin's F-35 Lightning Joint Strike Fighters to equip a second squadron when they meet this month to finalize the military's procurement plan.

The contract for as many as 20 of the fifth-generation stealth fighters is "one of the key elements" in the multiyear program, known as "Oz" -- Hebrew for "strength" -- The Jerusalem Post reported Friday.

The procurement plan, which covers the weapons other military systems Israel will need for the next decade or so, will go before the government for approval once the General Staff signs off on it.

The Israelis appear to be determined to go ahead with the long-mooted deal for a second F-35 tranche despite major setbacks in Lockheed Martin's development program.

These and cost overruns are pushing up the price of the single-engine multi-role fighter, considered the most advanced fighter in the world.

Israel ordered 20 F-35s in October 2010 at a cost of $2.75 billion, although it's unclear whether it will actually receive 20 aircraft because of the constantly rising price tag for the F-35.

First deliveries are scheduled for some time in 2017. The F-35 is intended to replace the Israeli air force's main strike jets, Lockheed Martin F-16I Sufas and Boeing F-15I Ra'ams.

Under a second contract, Israel would begin receiving those aircraft in 2020. Meantime, Israeli pilots are expected to begin training on the F-35 in the United States in 2016.

Despite the plethora of problems Lockheed Martin is facing with the F-35 program, the indications are that Israel's chief of staff, Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz, and the new air force commander, Maj. Gen. Amir Ashel, former head of the military's planning directorate, are staunch supporters of acquiring the JSF.

Eshel's predecessor air force chief. Maj. Gen. Ido Nehushtan, whose term expired in April, was a driving force behind the initial F-35 contract despite stiff opposition from within the defense establishment amid major cuts in Israeli defense spending.

In view of the sale of 72 advanced F-15 Eagles to Saudi Arabia and the advanced aviation technologies the kingdom and other Arab states are acquiring from the United States and Europe, the Israelis see a pressing need to maintain their long-held Qualitative Military Edge, a status the Americans have pledged to maintain.

At present, the Israeli air force has 100 Sufas and 25 Raams, backed up around 185 lower-performance F-16s and F-15s.

The Sufas and Raams are the air force's strike spearhead and would carry out any long-range strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities that the Israeli government has threatened to unleash.

The F-35s would take over that mission once they become operational with the Israeli air force.

"The second contract would likely be for a similar number of aircraft and could mean -- depending on when the second deal is signed -- that the Israeli air force could have 40 operational aircraft by the end of the decade," the Post's military editor, Yaakov Katz, reported.

Whether the price tag, around $113 million per aircraft, would remain the same is questionable, given the problems the F-35 program has had over the last few years.

"Senate questions over the quality of production of the F-35 will compound the mounting woes of the $396 billion Pentagon program, which has already been restructured three times in recent years to extend the development phase and slow production," Katz observed.

On Tuesday, the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee questioned the quality of production of the aircraft, citing a "potentially serious issue" with its electronic warfare capabilities.

"The committee is concerned about production quality and whether it is sufficient to ensure the delivery of JSF aircraft to the United States and its allies at an affordable price," the committed declared in a report.

Senior Israeli officers have voiced concerns about the continuing F-35 delays, which some say could push the military to consider possible alternatives, such as new F-15 Eagles or F-16 Fighting Falcons to bridge the gap if the first JSF deliveries are pushed back beyond 2017.

Even the U.S. Air Force fears that F-35 production orders will be cut back of the aircraft doesn't enter service soon.

The Americans are already upgrading several hundred of their Block 40/50 F-16s as a stopgap.

Copyright 2012 U.P.I.

Super Hornets Could Launch Their Own UAVs

Jun 08, 2012

by John Reed

SAINT LOUIS -- Engineers here with aerospace titan Boeing are considering a number of improvements to the company's F/A-18 Super Hornet fighter to keep it competitive on the international market for at least another 10 years, officials said. One idea is to give a Super Hornet some aircraft of its own.

Among the potential upgrades to the E and F-model jets is the ability to launch and control unmanned aerial vehicles. Boeing engineers are working on developing avionics that would allow Super Hornets to carry a drone similar to the latest version of Insitu's ScanEagle UAV, dubbed the "compressed-carriage Scan Eagle," in a canister on the jet, said Mike Gibbons, the company's vice president of operations for its F/A-18s and E/A-18G Growlers.

A Super Hornet's pilot could someday release the drone from a safe distance away from a ground target, tell the ScanEagle where to go and access real-time targeting data from the drone, Gibbons said.

Boeing wants to add these and other novel capabilities to ensure its aircraft appeal to customers increasingly concerned about the survivability of older fighter designs in fights against enemies equipped with 21st century fighter jets and advanced air defenses, known as anti-access and area denial weapons.

Other potential upgrades to the Super Hornet could include the installation of a stealthy weapons pod; conformal fuel tanks along the upper fuselage that give the jet more than 3,500 gallons of additional fuel; enhanced General Electric engines that would provide increased fuel efficiency and up to 20 percent more thrust; and a bevy of avionics and sensor upgrades designed to improve the plane's ability to collect and share data as well as jam enemy sensors. All the information gathered by these sensors would be displayed in the cockpit on a giant, color touch screen resembling a large iPad.

While Boeing has no official contracts to install these features on any of its Super Hornets, it is conducting research and development work to ensure that it can do so, should a customer request them.

"As international customers buy Super Hornets, they can tailor it to their needs" as they evolve by taking advantage of the new features that Boeing is researching, said Chris Chadwick, head of Boeing's military aircraft division, during a June 7 meeting with reporters.

Boeing hopes this upgrade, "Flight Plan" will keep the jet a "high-performance, low-cost" option for countries looking to replace their existing fleets of F/A-18 Hornets -- or new customers in the Middle East and Asia.

Chadwick said Boeing continues to talk with current buyers of Lockheed Martin's F-35 Lightning II, reminding them of the capabilities and low cost of the Super Hornet in light of the F-35's delays and cost increases, he said.

In the near-term, the Chicago-based firm remains focused on winning the long-running F-X2 fighter contest in Brazil, pitting the Super Hornet against the Swedish Saab Gripen and the French Dassault Rafale to supply the Brazilian air force with around 35 fighters. That contest is supposed to wrap up this month.

The Rafale was falsely reported to have won that contest several times in the past during the administration of former Brazilian president of Lula da Silva. However, current Brazilian leader Dilma Rousseff appears to want to put her own stamp of approval on the deal. Brasilia has been reaching out extensively to the United States, sending "lots of positive vibes" in light of Washington giving Boeing permission provide Brazilian industry with access to Super Hornet technology and Boeing's agreement to purchase supplies from Brazilian firms under a so-called "offset agreement."

A victory in Brazil's relatively small F-X2 contest would allow Boeing to lay the foundation of a long-term relationship with Latin America's largest economic power and a rising star on the international stage -- opening the door for future business as the nation grows, Chadwick said.

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2012/06/08/super-hornets-could-launch-their-own-uavs.html

BAE Systems ready to bid again for fighter jet deal with India

By Lisa Buckingham And Tom Mcghie

PUBLISHED: 20:04 GMT, 9 June 2012

Britain's BAE Systems is preparing a fresh bid for the world's biggest fighter jet order despite India's rejection of its Eurofighter Typhoon for France's Dassault Rafale.

The company, which employs 38,000 in Britain, has been working quietly on a new bid since India's top brass chose the French fighter last January in a £12.9billion order for 126 aircraft.

BAE believes that when India scrutinises the Rafale and assesses the French submission, it will realise the Eurofighter is a superior aircraft that will be cheaper overall.

Flying high: The Eurofighter is built in partnership with the German and Spanish arms of defence giant EADS and Italy's Finmeccanica
If the Indians are willing to look again at the Eurofighter – and there are indications that is happening – a revised bid will be ready for them.

BAE has even come up with designs for a marine version of the Eurofighter in case the Indians want to fly it from aircraft carriers.

More...WPP rebels set to force cut in Sorrell's £29m pay award
Price war threat to profit for Tesco and Morrisons

Ian King, BAE chief executive, has not ruled out reducing the price of the Typhoon.

The Eurofighter, which is built in partnership with the German and Spanish arms of defence giant EADS and Italy's Finmeccanica, lost out because it was about £3.5million a plane more expensive than the Rafale. And the French, according to the Indians, offered better after-deals, including technology upgrades and the latest weaponry.

David Cameron was particularly disappointed when the Eurofighter was not chosen as he had just led a delegation of top businessmen to cement relations with the Indians.

It is understood that BAE executives were very happy with the Prime Minister's efforts on their behalf.

International Development Secretary Andrew Mitchell said last December that Britain's foreign aid programme was partly designed to help win the bid. Britain is sending £280million to India for each of the next four years.

Last year the Eurofighter lost out in a £5billion contract battle after the Japanese air force opted for American Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning jets.

The danger is that without more orders, there will not be enough work to keep all the European factories working on the jet and this would inevitably mean closures and redundancies.

BAE recently announced it was ending some aircraft manufacturing at its Brough factory in East Yorkshire and said it was also closing its tank-making operation in Newcastle upon Tyne.

Read more: http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-2156820/BAE-Systems-ready-bid-fighter-jet-deal-India.html#ixzz1xMwNZrHu

Lockheed F-35 scrap rate at 16 percent - Pentagon

Sat Jun 9, 2012 3:29am IST

* Pentagon working with Lockheed to improve quality

* Company said rate to improve as program matures

* Senate committee had raised concerns

By Andrea Shalal-Esa

WASHINGTON, June 8 (Reuters) - The rate of scrap, rework and repair on production of Lockheed Martin Corp's F-35 fighter jet is currently around 16 percent, higher than on other military aircraft programs at similar stages of production, the Pentagon said on Friday.

Both the Pentagon's F-35 program office and Lockheed Martin Corp "recognize this is an area that needs improvement, and are working together to achieve world-class levels of quality," said

Navy Commander Kyra Hawn, a spokeswoman for the program office.

Hawn said the other military programs had scrap, rework and repair rates in the mid to high single digits when they reached a production level of 100 aircraft. The F-35 is nearing production of its 100th jet.

Lockheed spokesman Michael Rein said the company's scrap, rework and repair rate was "commensurate with historical programs at the same stage of production" and should continue to improve as the program continues to mature.

The Senate Armed Services Committee said this week it was troubled by the quality of production on the $396 billion F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program, but did not provide any details.

The committee questioned the overall quality of production on the program and cited a "potentially serious issue" with the plane's electronic warfare capability.

Questions over the quality of production of the F-35 will compound the mounting woes of the program, which has already been restructured three times to extend the development phase and slow production.

The quality concerns are being raised as a strike by 3,300 union workers at the company's Fort Worth, Texas, plant over pension and healthcare benefits is moving into an eighth week.

Lockheed has hired about 200 temporary workers to keep production of its F-35 and F-16 fighters on track at the plant.

Lockheed says the new workers are being carefully trained, but union officials have questioned whether the quality of production - already an issue - would be maintained by workers with less experience on the complex weapons system.

Lockheed is building the new radar-evading fighters for the U.S. military and eight foreign countries helping to fund its development: Britain, Norway, Canada, Denmark, the Netherlands, Turkey, Australia and Italy.

Japan and Israel have also ordered the fighters for their militaries. The U.S. government expects to finalize the sale with Japan this month.

Lockheed also will soon submit a proposal to sell the aircraft to South Korea, with Seoul officials due to visit the United States this summer for F-35 simulator flight testing and visits to various production, flight test and training sites.

The Senate committee noted in a report accompanying its fiscal 2013 budget bill that a potentially serious issue had been discovered with an aperture on the aircraft that was critical to its electronic warfare capability.

The committee said the full extent of the problem was not known, but it underscored the need for the Pentagon and Lockheed to "rigorously manage production quality," it said.

Sources familiar with the program said the issue centered on the placement of a sensor at the tip of the plane's wing and was a design matter and nothing to do with production quality.

They said the previous placement had reduced the sensitivity of a small part of the electronic warfare sensor, but affected only jets in the first three production batches and had already been resolved in jets now under production.

Retrofits would be done as needed, but only a small number of aircraft would be affected, the sources added.

http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/06/08/lockheed-fighter-idINL1E8H8GO520120608

South-Korea: Controversy grows over F-35 flight test

Korea Herald reports that controversy is growing in South Korea about the fact that South Korean evaluators will not be able to fly the jet. They will have to base their evaluation on simulations only.
Lockheed confirmed that the F-35 are fully occupied in 2012 for training and testing and there is no possibility to use them to win the possible multi-billion order of South Korea.

Korea Herald reports:
"Even if we were not able to test-fly any high-level aerial maneuvers, we, at least, need to feel and check it firsthand. Testing it only with a simulator is not sufficient," said Yang Uk, a senior research fellow at Korea Defence and Security Forum.

(....)

The only completed fighter is the Eurofighter Typhoon. Boeing's F-15SE is expected to use its existing F-15 platform for the test flight, sources said. Critics say that it would be unfair to test only the F-35 using the simulator.

Read more (source): Korea Herald - Controversy grows over F-35 flight test
http://news.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne%2BNews/Asia/Story/A1Story20120611-351808.html

http://www.jsfnieuws.nl/

Citaat van: Harald op 11/06/2012 | 09:07 uur
South-Korea: Controversy grows over F-35 flight test

Korea Herald reports that controversy is growing in South Korea about the fact that South Korean evaluators will not be able to fly the jet. They will have to base their evaluation on simulations only.
Lockheed confirmed that the F-35 are fully occupied in 2012 for training and testing and there is no possibility to use them to win the possible multi-billion order of South Korea.

Korea Herald reports:
"Even if we were not able to test-fly any high-level aerial maneuvers, we, at least, need to feel and check it firsthand. Testing it only with a simulator is not sufficient," said Yang Uk, a senior research fellow at Korea Defence and Security Forum.

(....)

The only completed fighter is the Eurofighter Typhoon. Boeing's F-15SE is expected to use its existing F-15 platform for the test flight, sources said. Critics say that it would be unfair to test only the F-35 using the simulator.

Read more (source): Korea Herald - Controversy grows over F-35 flight test
http://news.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne%2BNews/Asia/Story/A1Story20120611-351808.html

http://www.jsfnieuws.nl/

Als er nou een 2-zitter was van de F-35 dan hadden ze nog wat kunnen laten zien, maar nu alleen in de virtuele wereld

Een voordeel voor de F-15SE en EF ?

Citaat van: Harald op 11/06/2012 | 10:18 uur
Een voordeel voor de F-15SE en EF ?

Absoluut een voordeel voor de F15.

Ik verwacht geen enkele kans voor de EF, deze kist word mijns inziens gebruiks als "staking horse" al zou ik me wel graag positief willen laten verrassen.

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 11/06/2012 | 10:20 uur
Absoluut een voordeel voor de F15.

Ik verwacht geen enkele kans voor de EF, deze kist word mijns inziens gebruiks als "staking horse" al zou ik me wel graag positief willen laten verrassen.

Maar een F-35 in de virtuele wereld kan alles veel beter, dan de andere kandidaten in de "real world", toch ....  :hrmph:

Citaat van: Harald op 11/06/2012 | 11:03 uur
Maar een F-35 in de virtuele wereld kan alles veel beter, dan de andere kandidaten in de "real world", toch ....  :hrmph:

De echte kwaliteiten van de F35 zullen nog moeten blijken, ik geloof niet dat het een verkeerde kist wordt, anders zouden de Amerikanen niet al hun kaarten op dit model zetten.

De tijd zal het leren!

De vraag is alleen of de Koreanen willen wachten tot 2020 (of later). Ik gok op de keuze voor de SE (al moet deze ook nog bewijslast leveren)

Boeing expects winner to be picked in Brazilian FX-2 competition this year

By:   Dave Majumdar Washington DC

Boeing expects Brazil to pick a winner for its FX-2 fighter competition later this year, a top company official says.

"The original intention was to make a decision in the June timeframe," says Chris Chadwick, president of Boeing's military aircraft division. "We believe that as with all international sales, those dates tend to fluctuate."

But that being said, Chadwick says there are indications that the contest will not be significantly delayed.

"We are getting a lot of very positive vibes in terms of a decision sooner rather than later," Chadwick says. He adds that there are good indications that Brazil will decide on a winner this year.

Boeing believes it is in a good competitive position in Brazil, Chadwick says. The company's F/A-18E/F Super Hornet is in competition with the Swedish Saab Gripen and the French Dassault Rafale fighters to supply the emerging South American economic powerhouse with 36 aircraft.

Chadwick says Boeing has had "unprecedented" support from the US government in its quest to secure the Brazilian tender. "They are leaning forward and allowing us to meet all capability requirements of the Brazilian air force," he says.

Additionally, Boeing has verbal and written assurances from the US government and the Congress that they will meet Brazil's technology transfer requirements, Chadwick says.

Meanwhile, the company and its subcontractors have made lots of headway in securing local partners to meet Brazil's industrial offset requirements.

Other than Brazil, the Chadwick says that there are opportunities for the F/A-18E/F in the Middle East and Asia.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/boeing-expects-winner-to-be-picked-in-brazilian-fx-2-competition-this-year-372883/

nieuwe Flight suite's voor F-35 piloten

http://www.militarysystems-tech.com/files/militarysystems/supplier_docs/JSF%20Flight%20Suit%20Brochure.pdf

Public will see F-35 cost estimates after independent analysis: Ambrose

By: Murray Brewster, The Canadian Press

12/06/2012 4:28 PM | Comments: 0

OTTAWA - Just how much the Harper government trusts National Defence in the wake of the F-35 fiasco was drawn into question Tuesday.

Defence Minister Peter MacKay acknowledged he's not sure who will carry out an independent analysis of the stealth fighter program.

The frank confirmation came on the same day Public Works Minister Rona Ambrose suggested it could be months before the latest price estimate for the radar-evading jet is tabled for public consumption.

In the wake of a scathing report April 3, in which auditor general Michael Ferguson accused National Defence of hiding the true cost of the plane, the Harper government promised to release an updated figure within 60 days.

That hasn't happened, and Ambrose said it won't until she's satisfied with the numbers.

"We will not table cost estimates from the Department of National Defence until they are independently validated," the public works minister told the House of Commons.

"The secretariat needs more time to do that. We respect that. They will take as much time as they need to get it right."

Even though Ambrose wouldn't commit to a timeline, indications are it will likely be the fall when a full analysis of Canada's participation in the troubled program is expected to be final.

The extent to which Defence is isolated was evident when MacKay was later asked about the outside expert that will measure the program.

"Yeah, I'm not sure. That's something you'd have to ask Minister Ambrose," he said.

Interim Liberal Leader Bob Rae jumped on the comments, saying it was an illustration of how the government didn't trust MacKay, or his department, to get it right.

Arguments over the cost of the radar-evading jet have been at the centre of a political storm for the last 18 months as both the air force and the Harper government insisted they would pay $75 million for each aircraft, despite of mounting evidence in the U.S. that it would be higher.

The Tories drew up a seven-point plan to answer the auditor's criticisms and promised the F-35 procurement would start from scratch with independently verified estimates and assumptions.

Defence planners get their data and costing estimates from the Pentagon's joint strike fighter office, which oversees the entire program for the U.S. and its allies.

New Democrat procurement critic Matthew Kellway said adding up the number shouldn't be a complicated exercise given that since 2006 the federal government has received 15 formal briefings from the U.S. Defence Department and Canadian officers work at the program office in Washington.

"This should be easy," he said. "The Americans post their costing information on line, but we will accept a hard copy."

New costing figures, which take into account delays and declining orders, were provided to Canadian defence officials last month, but the government wants to see a review of the entire program before proceeding.

The price tag of the F-35 is expected to vary year to year, depending the number of orders received by the manufacturer, Lockheed Martin. MacKay and Associate Defence Minister Julian Fantino have said Canada intends to order most of its 65 jets at peak production time, when the cost per aircraft is the lowest.

But development delays and other setbacks have pushed that high cycle off until at least 2020, the time when the Canadian air force's current fleet of CF-18 jet fighters is to begin retiring.

http://www.brandonsun.com/national/breaking-news/public-will-see-f-35-cost-estimates-after-independent-analysis-ambrose-158626365.html?thx=y

Wel "electronic attack" mogelijkheden voor de F-35 ?? .... dit zou een goede toevoeging zijn

EW :
The Next Generation Jammer and Distributed Electronic Warfare
http://www.defensemedianetwork.com/stories/the-next-generation-jammer-and-distributed-electronic-warfare/


Airborne Electronic Attack Efforts Gain Momentum By Robert Wall 04 June 2012

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.asp ... 458484.xml
&
http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.asp ... ml&p=2

"...Another shift in communications jamming is taking place in the U.S. Marine Corps. Late last month the service was on the verge of deploying its ALQ-231(V)1 Intrepid Tiger II electronic attack pod, an in-house development to equip Harriers with a communications-jamming capability. The technology is supposed to be an even more effective communications jammer than the USQ-113 operational on the service's EA-6B.

The pod has several modes. In one, the pilot can operate a set program but—more critical—in networked mode, troops on the ground can selectively jam particular bands. Unlike some of the broadband jamming now taking place, Intrepid Tiger II is to provide a precision electronic strike capability, says Lt. Col. Jason Schuette, head of the EW branch at the Marine Corps' Combat Development and Integration Command.

Signals intelligence personnel also can monitor the effect of jamming on an adversary and, potentially, make changes to reflect tactical realities. Uploading new jamming techniques may also be possible.

To minimize the need for integration, the Harrier treats the pod as a Maverick missile, with no changes to the operational flight program required.

Further developments are already underway, and upgrades to the current system will incorporate an electronic surveillance capability. Furthermore, Intrepid Tiger II Version 2 will be a two-pod configuration that will be carried on the RQ-9 Shadow UAV. The system will have 100% of the same software and 85% of the same hardware as the Harrier model, to reduce cost.

So far, the price tag for eight pods has been around $8 million. The Marines also have adopted an unusual development approach, acting as an integrator and working on an open-systems design where hardware components can easily be replaced when more capable or reliable ones become available. The work has been done at the Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Div., Point Mugu, Calif.

Integration on the F-35 is also being considered. Intrepid Tiger II and its follow-ons should give the Marines long-term electronic attack capabilities even after the EA-6B is retired in 2019...."

Best to read entire post from the FIRST URL above. Tah.

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-19261.html

USAF Raptors train with Eurofighters at Red Flag-Alaska

By:   Dave Majumdar Washington DC

The US Air Force's Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptors are participating in their first Red Flag-Alaska war-games with German Eurofighter Typhoon fighters and other foreign aircraft.

Poland is flying its first Red Flag with its new F-16C/D Block 52 aircraft while Japan has brought its Boeing F-15J Eagles.
Pilots from the 3rd Wing's 525th Fighter Squadron and its reserve associate unit, 477th Fighter Group, are flying the Raptors during the exercise. The Typhoons, Raptors and Eagles are all flying as friendly "Blue forces" during the exercises.

"They are never on the Red side," says Major James Mixon, an exercise planner with the 353 Combat Training Squadron referring to the Raptors. The idea is to teach the visiting forces how to interact with the stealthy fifth-generation fighter, he says.

For the exercise, the Luftwaffe brought over eight Typhoons from Jagdgeschwader 74 to Eielson AFB, Alaska, says unit commander Col Andreas Pfeiffer.

For the Germans, the exercise affords a unique opportunity to training over the vast ranges found in Alaska. The ranges at the base offer the ability to replicate the latest surface-to-air threats while the USAF's 18th Aggressor squadron replicates enemy aircraft like the Russian Su-27, Su-30 and Chengdu J-10.

Pfeiffer says flying with the Raptor was an interesting experience.

"Its unique capabilities are overwhelming," Pfeiffer says.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/usaf-raptors-train-with-eurofighters-at-red-flag-alaska-372957/

Indian aircraft carrier enters sea trials as navy eyes Rafale

Russia has commenced sea trials involving the Indian navy's refurbished aircraft carrier the INS Vikramaditya, as sources suggest the service could consider a future acquisition of the Dassault Rafale.

Originally built for Russia as the Admiral Gorshkov, with a maximum displacement of 43,500t, the refitted and modernised vessel left Severodvinsk in the north of the country on 8 June for open-sea trials, preceeding its delivery to India in December. Once operational, the Vikramaditya will be capable of carrying 30 to 34 aircraft, including RSK MiG-29K deck-based fighters.

Sources say the Indian navy is considering the carrier-capable Rafale M as a possible acquisition, with a potential cost benefit to come from the air force's pending deal for 126 of the type to meet its medium multi-role combat aircraft requirement.

Already operational with the French navy and similar in size to the MiG-29K, the Rafale M could potentially be operated from India's future ski-jump-equipped domestic aircraft carriers and offer a greater operational capability than current Russian aircraft and India's Aeronautical Development Agency Tejas naval fighter.

India's interest in new naval fighters stems partly from China's ongoing test work with the aircraft carrier Shi Lang, which will be capable of deploying locally-built versions of the Sukhoi Su-30.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/indian-aircraft-carrier-enters-sea-trials-as-navy-eyes-rafale-372925/

Thailand Buying JAS-39 Gripens, AWACS

June 9/12: American interference.
The 2nd set of Gripen fighters and their accompanying S340 SEW plane are delayed by American games.
According to the Bangkok Post, delivery:

"...has now been put off because an American parts supplier has refused to sell some key products to the Swedish manufacturer for reasons that are unclear, said the source.... "Certain key items of the jet parts and the radar system produced by the US firm have not been granted permission to be sold to other countries," said the source. "And that has resulted in a delay in [the Swedish company's] assembling of the aircraft which I really have no idea when will be completed. "I'm not sure if this is a game or not because the Royal Thai Air Force chose the Gripen from Sweden over the F series aircraft from the United States...." Air force commander Itthaporn Subha-wong travelled to Sweden late last month to discuss the delivery with Saab but to no avail, said the source."

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/thailand-buying-jas-39-gripens-awacs-04022/

Citaat van: defenseindustrydaily.com Vandaag om 07:51
"...has now been put off because an American parts supplier has refused to sell some key products to the Swedish manufacturer for reasons that are unclear, said the source.... "Certain key items of the jet parts and the radar system produced by the US firm have not been granted permission to be sold to other countries," said the source. "And that has resulted in a delay in [the Swedish company's] assembling of the aircraft which I really have no idea when will be completed. "I'm not sure if this is a game or not because the Royal Thai Air Force chose the Gripen from Sweden over the F series aircraft from the United States...." Air force commander Itthaporn Subha-wong travelled to Sweden late last month to discuss the delivery with Saab but to no avail, said the source."[/i]

Lijkt sterk op concurrentje pesten.

Een reus tegen kleinduimpje, dit soort akties zouden maar zo aan de basis kunnen staan van het uit de markt drukken van de Gripen (NG).

Als de Zweden slim zijn dan gebruiken ze voor de NG geen General Electric F414G motor maar de Eurojet EJ200 en zo zijn er tal van Europese systeem alternatieven te verzinnen die een Amerikaanse torpedo in het Gripen project kan verhinderen.

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 13/06/2012 | 20:13 uur
Lijkt sterk op concurrentje pesten.

Een reus tegen kleinduimpje, dit soort akties zouden maar zo aan de basis kunnen staan van het uit de markt drukken van de Gripen (NG).

Als de Zweden slim zijn dan gebruiken ze voor de NG geen General Electric F414G motor maar de Eurojet EJ200 en zo zijn er tal van Europese systeem alternatieven te verzinnen die een Amerikaanse torpedo in het Gripen project kan verhinderen.

Precies, genoeg goede Europese alternatieven.
Enne, stonden er in de wikileaks niet precies dit soort zaken? Tactieken die de Amerikanen ook toepasten om de Nooren en de Nederlanders van de Gripen af te houden....?

Ik weet niet om wat voor onderdelen het precies gaat, maar als SAAB iets met Stork-Fokker kan regelen, dan kan hen dat mogelijk ook helpen.

Former AG joins F-35 watchdog group

By Daniel Proussalidis

June 13, 2012 1:55pm

Former auditor general Denis Desautels will help the federal government reboot the F-35 fighter jet acquisition through the country's new fighter jet procurement secretariat.

Desautels, who held the post between 1991 and 2001, and McMaster University economics professor Kenneth Norrie are two outside voices brought in to help civil servants buff up the Conservatives' credibility on the troubled effort to replace Canada's aging CF-18 fighters.

"I am very pleased that Mr. Desautels and Dr. Norrie will assist with this important work," said Public Works Minister Rona Ambrose in a statement. "Their considerable experience providing informed, independent points of view on matters of public policy is welcome and will result in additional due diligence in support of the project."

Also staffing the new secretariat are deputy ministers from the public works, national defence, and industry departments.

This all comes as part of the response to auditor general Michael Ferguson's April report that found the government bent procurement rules and underestimated the costs of buying the F-35 to replace the current fighter fleet.

"Canada will not purchase replacements until further due diligence, oversight, and transparency are applied to this acquisition," said Ambrose.

On Tuesday, Ambrose all but admitted the new secretariat will not be able to meet the goal of providing Parliament with updated cost estimates for the F-35 within 60 days of getting fresh numbers from the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program in the U.S.

With new JSF numbers released in May, that would have meant a new Canadian cost estimate in July.

http://www.lfpress.com/news/canada/2012/06/13/19873246.html

Citaat van: Enforcer op 13/06/2012 | 20:27 uur
Ik weet niet om wat voor onderdelen het precies gaat, maar als SAAB iets met Stork-Fokker kan regelen, dan kan hen dat mogelijk ook helpen.

Belangrijke Saab leveranciers:

http://www.airframer.com/aircraft_detail.html?model=JAS_39_Gripen (http://www.airframer.com/aircraft_detail.html?model=JAS_39_Gripen)

Setbacks for New Russian Fighter Plane in India

Anatoly Isaikin, head of Rosoboronexport, Russia's state arms exporter, was once again forced to address the string of setbacks plaguing Russian arms manufacturers in India over the past 12 months. This includes the long-suffering Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-35 fighter, whose future on the domestic and foreign markets remains unclear.

"The situation with these tenders has nothing to do with any systemic problems," Isaikin told the Vedomosti newspaper. "To my mind, the MiG-35 fighter plane has lost the tender in India because it was not mass-produced. At the same time, French and U.S. companies were able to submit their production versions," Isaikin added.

Some time ago, India announced its Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) tender for the purchase of 126 multi-role medium fighters, which should completely replace the rundown MiG-21 Fishbed fighter planes used by the Indian Air Force.

The tender involved the United States with its Lockheed Martin F-16IN Super Viper and Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet fighter planes; France with its Dassault Rafale fighter; the European Aeronautic Defense and Space Company (EADS) with its Eurofighter Typhoon; Sweden with its Saab JAS-39NG Gripen fighter plane; and Russia with its Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-35 Fulcrum-F fighter. The tender's results were announced in the winter of 2012, with the contract going to Dassault Rafale.

Initial deliveries were estimated at almost $11 billion. It's not for nothing that the media referred to this as "the mother of all tenders". Having opted for Dassault Rafale, India will not be able to buy the 126 warplanes for this sum. Analysts note that either purchasing volumes will have to go down or the contract's end price will reach $16-18 billion.

Causes of the MiG-35's setbacks

Explaining the MiG-35's setbacks by citing the fact that it is not mass-produced is a stretch. Although the Dassault Rafale fighter is currently being mass-produced, it had failed to win all recent tenders. It has only flown with the French Air Force pending the results of the MMRCA tender.

Leaving aside for the moment the Indian principles of diversifying supplies and striking balance among the main market investors, which are regarded as sacred and indisputable by Indian generals, let's assume that this Russian-made fixed-wing aircraft fits into the concept guiding New Delhi's military contracts.

In its time, India had ordered two virtually non-production warplanes from Russia – first, the Sukhoi Su-30K Flanker-C and then the Su-30MKI Flanker-H. Both fighters eventually struck gold during Russian military aircraft exports. In the mid-2000s, New Delhi ordered the revamped MiG-29K Fulcrum-D carrier-borne fighter.

It is hard to argue with the fact that aircraft production runs and the popularity of specific warplanes with the manufacturing country's air force influence the choice of clients during the purchase of foreign weapons systems. As for the MiG-35, its specifications and performance, rather than its production run, are the main problems.

The MiG-35 is a descendant of the above-mentioned MiG-29K in many respects. India had no qualms about buying the MiG-29K. In fact, the Indian Navy has ordered 45 of these fighters to date. Of this number, 16 MiG-29Ks have already been shipped to India. At any rate, the production MiG-29K is not as good as the well-known Su-30MKI, which is quite popular in India.

However, the MiG-35 has been and remains substandard. The three MiG-35s being used for demonstration purposes are, in fact, a "flying offer" for prospective clients who must submit a request for proposal (RFP) in line with specific objectives.

Under the state arms procurement program through 2020, the Russian Air Force is to buy an estimated 50 MiG-35 fighter planes or so. However, the specifications and performance of the domestic fighter, due to be adopted by the country's air force, have not been clarified to date.

The previous high command of the Russian Air Force was leery of the very idea of buying these warplanes and the possible modernization of operational MiG-29s. So far there is no reason to believe that the new Air Force commanders will drastically change their approach.

Some analysts openly claim that the fighter has no future. They believe that the MiG-35 is quite expensive, that it has numerous drawbacks and an unclear tactical designation. Moreover, prospects for its production remain vague against the backdrop of the brilliant T-10 fighter family, including the Su-30MKI/MK2 and the Su-35 Flanker-E, whose production poses no problems whatsoever.

Other analysts believe that the MiG-35 has export potential but add that the Russian Aircraft Corporation MiG should build some of these aircraft for the country's air force. For its part, the Russian Air Force faces numerous internal problems, and support for national exports is not among its priorities.

Problematic growth model

All this does not amount to mistakes and failures on the part of Rosoboronexport, the Federal Service for Military Technical Cooperation or the aircraft industry. The unique fates of "non-production" export aircraft, including their unexpected successes and setbacks, are a consequence of the Russian defense industry's growth model, which had evolved by the late 1990s, and which continues to influence the situation.

For 20 years, the state did not award major long-term contracts for the delivery of military products. The Soviet defense industry had existed as a highly specialized state within a state, even if its enterprises sometimes had to turn out civilian products. Devoid of contracts, since 1992 entire industries were unable to manufacture weapons systems and other military products. Consequently, they lost their competitive advantages and proved unable to implement modernization programs.

Exports proved to be the only source of revenues. But this implied the frugal reinvestment of the profits obtained, as well as cost-effective corporate governance and management. Some enterprises were able to assess market trends and to sell the most popular Soviet technologies following the break-up of the USSR. By so doing they managed to preserve their R&D and production potential without suffering any major setbacks.

One can therefore disagree with Anatoly Isaikin because this is a system-wide problem. However, this problem has nothing to do with the work of Rosoboronexport, which should not tackle such issues as industry development strategies or those of specific arms production facilities.

Currently, the government is trying to move away from the defense industry's export-oriented funding model and to award more domestic contracts. This process has just been launched. The most cost-effective industries, including tactical aircraft or helicopter enterprises, signed major contracts two or three years ago, and the first products are being delivered to the Russian Armed Forces. However, all other enterprises will have to boost their production until 2020, the final deadline for implementing the state arms procurement program.

This will at least partially eliminate the need for a nerve-racking search for foreign clients wishing to buy substandard products. Such products are subsequently upgraded with the help of advance payments and loans for future projects. However, it is foreign clients who dictate the relevant policies in such cases. Setbacks seem inevitable in such situations. The concerned parties try to provide for such setbacks in any state defense contract just to compensate for the losses incurred.

Well-balanced and regular funding from diversified sources, including real-life defense industry conversion, will make it possible to calmly implement current and future R&D projects, making full use of Russia's remaining engineering potential.

The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.

http://en.ria.ru/analysis/20120614/174015160.html

Boeing and the U.S. Navy have successfully completed an in-flight demonstration of a satellite communications

ST. LOUIS, June 13, 2012 -- Boeing [NYSE: BA] and the U.S. Navy have successfully completed an in-flight demonstration of a satellite communications (SATCOM) system that, if implemented, will enable F/A-18E/F Super Hornet aircrews to conduct two-way, secure voice and data communications with other SATCOM-enabled aircraft, ships, ground forces and command centers.

The test took place May 23-30 at the Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division's Advanced Weapons Lab at China Lake, Calif., and was conducted by Air Test and Evaluation Squadron VX-31.

The SATCOM system was installed on a Navy EA-18G Growler -- a variant of the F/A-18F that includes a SATCOM antenna.

During the flight testing, the VX-31 aircrew conducted satellite-enabled secure voice and data transmissions with a ground-based team at China Lake and at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Md.

"Using the existing EA-18G architecture allowed Boeing and the Navy to demonstrate this capability less than 90 days after the initial request," said Mike Gibbons, Boeing F/A-18 and EA-18 Programs vice president. "This approach significantly reduced risk, cost and testing schedule, while demonstrating this important communications capability for the Navy."

The Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet is a low observable, multirole aircraft that performs virtually every mission in the tactical spectrum, including air superiority, day/night strike with precision-guided weapons, fighter escort, close air support, suppression of enemy air defenses, maritime strike, reconnaissance, forward air control and tanker missions. Boeing has delivered more than 480 F/A-18E/Fs to the U.S. Navy. The F/A-18E/F has logged more than 166,000 combat flight hours supporting operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=2290

Fourth T-50 Stealth Fighter to Fly This Year

KORENOVSK, June 14 (Russia's United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) is to introduce a fourth Sukhoi T-50 stealth fighter into its test and development program this year, the company's President Mikhail Pogosyan said on Thursday.

"We are now testing three aircraft. A fourth will be brought in this year," he said.

Pogosyan had said earlier this year that the firm would introduce a fourth aircraft into the test program but did not disclose when.

The first production standard T-50 is due to enter service with the Russian Air Force by 2015, and the first evaluation example by 2013. The service plans to acquire 60 of the fifth-generation fighters.

The T-50, also known as project PAK-FA, first flew on January 29, 2011 and was first publicly revealed at the Moscow Air Show in August that year. India will also acquire an advanced fighter aircraft based on the T-50.

http://en.ria.ru/mlitary_news/20120614/174028701.html

Norway orders first F-35; secures JSM integration support
Norway today commenced the largest public procurement project in its history.

F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and Joint Strike Missile.

The event was marked by Minister of Defence Espen Barth Eide authorizing the order for the first F-35A Lightning II for the Norwegian Armed Forces. The decision to move forward was reached following an extended dialogue with the US Department of Defence aimed at securing opportunities for Norwegian industry.

- We have today made two critical decisions. For the first time in three decades we are now ordering new combat aircraft for the Armed Forces. Additionally, we will begin preparations for the final phase of Joint Strike Missile (JSM) development after receiving confirmation from US authorities of their support for the integration of the missile into the F-35, says Norwegian Minister of Defence Espen Barth Eide.

- This marks a key milestone in the Norwegian F-35 programme and the beginning of the largest public procurement in Norwegian history. The F-35, which Norway selected in 2008, represents a completely new generation of combat aircraft that will form a corner stone of the future Norwegian Armed Forces, says Minister of Defence Espen Barth Eide.

Confirmation of JSM integration support was provided in a letter from US Secretary of Defence, Leon Panetta to Norwegian Minister of Defence Espen Barth Eide earlier this week.

- Securing such support has been an important precondition for many of our partner nations before they would themselves commit to supporting the JSM. With such support finally in place there is now a significant potential for the missile among future operators of the F-35. Preparations for the final phase of procurement will therefore begin now, says Minister of Defence Espen Barth Eide.

The Norwegian-developed JSM represents one of the most advanced weapons available within its category, and will further enhance the operational capabilities of the F-35. Total market potential for the JSM is estimated to be between NOK 20 and 25 billion/USD 3.3 and 4.2 billion.

The two aircraft authorized today are expected to be joined by a second pair in 2016, and will be based in the United States as part of a joint partner training centre. They are to be followed by up to 48 additional aircraft from 2017 that are to be based at Ørland Main Air Station in central Norway. A small forward operating base will also be based at Evenes in northern Norway to provide quick reaction alert (QRA) services in the high north. An estimated 10% of the overall force generation will also be carried out from the Evenes FOB.

The overall cost of the procurement phase of the project is estimated at NOK 60 billion/USD 10 billion (2012 value) in real terms.

The decision to centralise the combat aircraft force at Ørland was approved when the Norwegian Parliament approved the new Defence White Paper on the 14th of June. This paper also confirmed the overall ambition for up to 52 F-35s for the Norwegian Armed Forces. Norway will over the coming years see a budget increase of 7% by 2016 through redistribution of funds freed up by the withdrawal from Afghanistan and the addition of significant supplementary funds for the F-35 purchase.

- Norway's parliament yesterday approved a significant increase in defence spending in order to finance the purchase and to increase the general operating budget of the Armed Forces. At the same time, the Parliament has shown courage in making tough but necessary decisions in order to continue the work to rationalize the base infrastructure. This means that the positive development we have seen in the Norwegian Armed Forces over the past four years will continue, concludes Minister of Defence Espen Barth Eide.

http://www.tnp.no/norway/panorama/2994- ... on-support

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-19270.html

GAO'S Latest F-35 Report; 2011 Performance 'Mixed'


http://defense.aol.com/2012/06/14/gaos- ... nce-mixed/

JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER
DOD Actions Needed to Further Enhance Restructuring and Address Affordability Risks June 2011

1.1Mb PDF report here: http://hss-prod.hss.aol.com/hss/storage ... report.pdf

"The drumbeat of mostly negative news about the F-35 from the Government Accountability Office continues. Here's what GAO said in its latest report, just released:

"The new program baseline projects total acquisition costs of $395.7 billion, an increase of $117.2 billion (42 percent) from the prior 2007 baseline.

Full rate production is now planned for 2019, a delay of 6 years from the 2007 baseline."

http://nosint.blogspot.com.au/2012/06/g ... -2011.html

"The new program baseline projects total acquisition costs of $395.7 billion, an increase of $117.2 billion (42 percent) from the prior 2007 baseline. Full rate production is now planned for 2019, a delay of 6 years from the 2007 baseline. Unit costs per aircraft have doubled since start of development in 2001. Critical dates for delivering warfighter requirements remain unsettled because of program uncertainties."

"Overall performance in 2011 was mixed as the program achieved 6 of 11 important objectives. Developmental flight testing gained momentum and is now about 21 percent complete with the most challenging tasks still ahead. Performance of the short takeoff and vertical landing variant improved this year and its "probation" period to fix deficiencies was ended after 1 year with several fixes temporary and untested. Developing and integrating the more than 24 million lines of software code continues to be of concern. Late software releases and concurrent work on multiple software blocks have delayed testing and training. Development of critical mission systems providing core combat capabilities remains behind schedule and risky."

Perhaps the most damning statistic about the program: "Since 2002, the total quantity through 2017 has been reduced by three-fourths, from 1,591 to 365."

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-19271.html

Noorwegen koopt 52 JSF's

Van onze redacteur
vrijdag 15 juni 2012, 14:30

Noorwegen gaat 52 Joint Strike Fighters kopen. Het besluit valt samen met een brief van de Amerikanen waarin steun wordt uitgesproken aan de integratie van een nieuwe Noorse raket in de JSF.

'Dit is de grootste publieke aanschafprogramma uit de Noorse geschiedenis', zei de Noorse Minister van Defensie Espen Barth Eide. De Noren kopen eerst twee toestellen die in een Amerikaanse trainingscentrum zullen worden gestationeerd. In totaal is met de aanschaf van de 52 toestellen een bedrag van €8 mrd gemoeid.

Noorse raketten

Naast de aanschaf van de JSF's, begint Noorwegen ook aan de laatste fase van de ontwikkeling van een nieuwe raket, de 'Joint Strike Missile' (JSM), die aan de JSF kan worden gehangen. Dit gebeurt nadat de Amerikaanse Minister van Defensie zijn steun heeft uitgesproken voor de integratie van de JSM in de JSF. Door die toezegging denkt Noorwegen enkele miljarden te kunnen verdienen aan de raketten.

Nederland

Nederland besloot eerder tot de aanschaf van twee test-JSF's, maar heeft nog niet besloten of het daarna verder wil met de JSF. Een eventuele aanschaf van de JSF is omstreden, omdat de kosten sterk stijgen. GroenLinks riep eerder deze week al op tot een parlementaire enquete over het JSF-project.

www.fd.nl

Weinig verstandige keuze van de Noren strategisch gezien. Maar zie wel in dat de Noren andere afwegingen hebben dan Nederland in deze wat betreft de specifieke eisen van hun toestellen (gezien ligging Noorwegen). Al komen daar weer grote vraagtekens bij te staan als je ziet dat een buurland diezelfde "eisen" heeft en dus rustig anders invult met een toestel dat Noorwegen vanuit strategisch oogpunt mijns inziens beter had kunnen aanschaffen. Je kunt die eisen immers ook anders invullen. 

Citaat van: Elzenga op 15/06/2012 | 22:07 uur
Weinig verstandige keuze van de Noren strategisch gezien. Maar zie wel in dat de Noren andere afwegingen hebben dan Nederland in deze wat betreft de specifieke eisen van hun toestellen (gezien ligging Noorwegen). Al komen daar weer grote vraagtekens bij te staan als je ziet dat een buurland diezelfde "eisen" heeft en dus rustig anders invult met een toestel dat Noorwegen vanuit strategisch oogpunt mijns inziens beter had kunnen aanschaffen. Je kunt die eisen immers ook anders invullen.  

Tja, een buurland vult dit in met de F18, ook niet voor niets.

Ik ben best voor Europees maar dan moeten ze ook iets te bieden hebben wat 30 á 40 jaar mee gaat, dat gaat misschien best lukken maar ik zie het Saab nog niet doen. (zie Saab fighter historie)

We kunnen altijd nog voor een Zuid Afrikaanse of Nieuw Zeelandse oplossing kiezen, iets wat past bij de 16e of 17e wereld economie.

F-22's oxygen-deprivation problem worse than previously reported

Posted Friday, Jun. 15, 2012

By Larry O'Dell

The Associated Press

RICHMOND, Va. -- Two members of Congress said Thursday that new information provided by the Air Force shows that an oxygen-deficit problem on F-22 fighter jets is worse than previously disclosed.

Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., and Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., said the Air Force reported about 26 incidents of apparent oxygen deprivation per 100,000 flight hours through May 31. That's a rate at least 10 times higher than that involving any other Air Force aircraft, they said.

Warner and Kinzinger said that as recently as this week, the Air Force maintained that the rate of F-22 oxygen-related problems was "relatively low."

"I don't want to say they're hiding anything, and I don't believe there's a cover-up or anything like that," Kinzinger, a former Air Force pilot, said in a teleconference with journalists. But he said he would like to see the Air Force "just be very open with the American people" about the seriousness of the problem and plans for fixing it.

An Air Force spokesman did not immediately respond to a voice message seeking comment.

The Air Force grounded its F-22s for about four months last year because of the oxygen-deficit problem.

In May, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta ordered new flight restrictions on the F-22 and directed the Air Force to enlist the help of Navy and NASA experts to determine why some pilots continue to experience dizziness and other symptoms while flying.

Warner and Kinzinger said the new information came from the Air Force in response to questions they submitted last month after a CBS 60 Minutes report featured two F-22 pilots from the Virginia Air National Guard who said that they and other pilots had experienced oxygen deprivation, disorientation and other problems during some flights.

The lawmakers said they are concerned that disciplinary measures are still pending against one of the pilots for going public.

"They should not be penalized for expressing those kinds of concerns," Kinzinger said. He said 10 others have since come forward to talk about the hypoxialike symptoms they experienced aboard the F-22.

Warner and Kinzinger also said that in response to one of their questions, the Air Force said an early 2011 survey found that a majority of F-22 pilots did not feel confident with the aircraft's oxygen system.

The Air Force ordered installation of new charcoal filters before returning the F-22 to full operations in September 2011, but that seemed to make matters worse -- an outcome verified in testing by the Boeing Co., which recommended discontinuing their use. The Air Force complied.

Now, attention is directed to an upper pressure vest -- part of the survival gear worn by F-22 pilots. Navy tests have shown a high failure rate for the vests, Warner said. But he said it's too early to pin the blame entirely on that equipment.

Kinzinger and Warner said they will continue pressing the Air Force to correct the problem.

The lawmakers stopped short of saying the F-22 fleet should be temporarily grounded again and praised Panetta for last month's directive, which said F-22 flights must remain "within proximity of potential landing locations" so pilots can land quickly if they experience an oxygen-deficit problem.

The F-22 was manufactured by Lockheed Martin, with the midfuselage built in Fort Worth. Production of all F-22 aircraft has been completed

Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/06/14/4033776/f-22s-oxygen-deprivation-problem.html#storylink=cpy

BAE Systems gets bigger role as hopes grow on £13bn deal

By Tom Mcghie

PUBLISHED:21:12 GMT, 16 June 2012 British defence giant BAE Systems is expected to play a more prominent role in potential renegotiations over the world's biggest fighter-jet order.

BAE is part of the consortium that builds the Eurofighter Typhoon, which lost out to France's Dassault Rafale in a bid to win a £12.9billion order from India for 126 jets.

Hopes that the European consortium might get a chance to submit a refreshed offer have risen with signs that the Indian Ministry of Defence is becoming bogged down in its talks with the French.

New hopes: The consortium, which includes BAE, that builds the Eurofighter Typhoon might get a chance to submit a refreshed offer

Until now, negotiations with India have been handled by the consortium's German and Spanish arms of EADS and Italy's Finmeccanica. But now it is expected that BAE Systems will play a more influential role.

India awarded Dassault the contract in January but it has yet to be signed; the Indian military are still examining the paperwork as well as the side offers over maintenance, training and upgrades that the French made to win the contract.

Normally negotiations move towards a conclusion more quickly, and the delays are being interpreted as India having second thoughts.

The Eurofighter consortium also believe that there is considerable disquiet in the Indian establishment about the decision to go with the French fighter.

Recently, Dassault has initially won important contracts for the Rafale in competitions in Brazil and the United Arab Emirates, but has subsequently been unable to clinch the deals.

In case the Indians change their minds, the Eurofighter team has finalised a new bid, which is expected to cut the £120million-plus price of the Typhoon by £3.5million.

BAE Systems said: 'We fully respect the process adopted by the Indian government and we and our partners have made it clear that, should we be invited, we stand ready to engage.

'Ahead of any opportunity to re-engage or clarify the offer, it would seem sensible for us to review the bid to ensure that it is as competitive and compelling as possible.'

Read more: http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2160278/BAE-Systems-gets-bigger-role-hopes-grow-13bn-deal.html#ixzz1y2PV2QUs

Citaat van: www.thisismoney.co.uk Vandaag om 10:38
In case the Indians change their minds, the Eurofighter team has finalised a new bid, which is expected to cut the £120million-plus price of the Typhoon by £3.5million.

India lijkt ijdele hoop voor EADS/BAE. Wel interessant is de constatering dat er met het grootste gemak £3.5miljoen per EF van de prijs af kan.

De honger is blijkbaar groot! (hier zijn lessen uit te trekken voor de BV NL)

EADS to propose joint production of Eurofighter with S.Korea: official

SEOUL, June 17 (Yonhap) -- European aerospace and defense group EADS is set this week to propose joint production of its Eurofighter Typhoon with South Korea, a proposal that would sweeten its bid to win Seoul's multi-billion dollar tender offer for combat fighter purchases, a company official said Sunday.

EADS is set to make the offer at a military forum to be held on Tuesday at the War Memorial in Seoul, the official said on the condition of anonymity.

http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/news/2012/06/17/0200000000AEN20120617001900315.HTML

drag chute voor Noorse F-35's

June 15/12: First 2 authorized. Norway takes the next step, and formally authorizes the purchase of 2 F-35A fighters, which are intended for delivery in 2015. They will be based in the United States as part of a joint partner training center, which almost certainly means Eglin AFB, FL. The 2 aircraft authorized today are expected to be joined by a second pair in 2016. They are to be followed by up to 48 additional aircraft orders from 2017, which will be based at Orland AB and Evenes FOB in Norway.

This is not a contract yet, but one can be expected fairly soon. Meanwhile, American support for internal F-35 integration of the JSM strike missile allows Norway to begin preparing it for deployment.

The overall cost of the F-35's procurement phase is estimated at NOK 60 billion/ $FY12 10 billion n real terms.

June 15/12: Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $489.5 million advance acquisition contract to provide long lead-time parts, material and components required for the delivery of 35 low rate initial production Lot VII F-35. The order involves 19 USAF F-35As, 3 F-35As for the government of Italy, 2 F-35As for the government of Turkey, 6 USMC F-35B STOVL, 1 F-35B for Britain, and 4 F-35Cs for the US Navy.

This contract also funds long lead-time efforts required for the incorporation of a drag chute in Norway's F-35As. Drag chutes are especially useful when landing in cold climates, where runways and tires may fail to provide the same level of traction.

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/f35-lightning-ii-faces-continued-dogfights-in-norway-03034/

Boeing, Lockheed, Eurofighter Bid for South Korean Fighter Deal


By Sangwon Yoon and Kyunghee Park on June 18, 2012

Lockheed Martin Corp. (LMT) (LMT), Boeing Co. (BA) (BA) and Eurofighter submitted bids in a $7 billion South Korean fighter contest as U.S. and European defense contractors look to Asian markets to counter slower spending at home.

Boeing's F-15 Silent Eagle, Lockheed's F-35 Lightning II and the Eurofighter Typhoon will compete for the tender, South Korea's Defense Acquisition Program Administration said in an e- mailed statement on its website. Today was the deadline for submitting bids.

The contest follows similar contracts in India and Japan as Asian nations step up defense spending amid rising wealth, compared with cuts in the U.S. and Europe. The Asia-Pacific region is expected to increase spending on defense products by 4.2 percent annually until 2016, according to Frost & Sullivan.

South Korea plans to make a decision on the 60-fighter order in October and has said it expects to spend about 8 trillion won ($7 billion) for the purchase of the new aircraft. A Presidential election scheduled for December may cause a delay, local newspaper Hankook Ilbo said on June 16, citing industry officials it didn't name.

Lockheed, based in Bethesda, Maryland, won an order from Japan for 42 F-35 fighters in December. The jets may cost 1.6 trillion yen ($20 billion) to buy, operate and maintain over 20 years, according to the nation's defense ministry. India picked Dassault Aviation SA for exclusive negotiations on a deal for 126 fighters in January.

South Korea ordered a total of 60 F-15s from Chicago-based Boeing in 2002 and 2007.

In the U.S., the defense budget is due to cut by about $487 billion over the next 10 years. There may be an additional $500 billion in reductions if Congress and the White House don't agree by year-end on a plan to shrink the U.S. deficit.

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-06-18/boeing-lockheed-eurofighter-bid-for-south-korean-fighter-deal

Swedes And Swiss Move Toward Joint Gripen

By Bill Sweetman

Source: Aviation Week & Space Technology

Provided nationally endorsed plans in Sweden and Switzerland survive political or economic upsets, the JAS 39E/F, the product of the Gripen Demo and Next Generation programs, will be delivered to customers in 2018. This will mean that Saab and its supplier team will have created what is in most respects an entirely new aircraft, compared to the original JAS 39A/B, since development of the in-service C/D started in June 1997.

This has been done so far under fixed-price contracts for development, new production and retrofits, according to a presentation by FMV, the Swedish defense procurement organization. After the delivery of the last Gripen C/D, Saab returned an unspecified sum of money to the Swedish government because costs were lower than predicted.

More details of the JAS 39E/F emerged at an aerospace conference hosted by the Swedish air force and Saab earlier this month at Malmen air base, and attended by current and prospective Gripen operators.

The schedule is set by two interlocking commitments. The Swedish government has decided to replace the C/D with the E/F and has committed to developing the aircraft in time to support Switzerland's requirements. The Swiss government has selected the E/F as the sole affordable replacement for the F-5E/F, and subject to a referendum and negotiations will sign a contract in 2014, triggering a full-scale go-ahead by Sweden.

Some development work will continue to lay the foundation for the four-year program. As long as the political process stays on track, the first of two built-from-the-ground-up E/F development aircraft, identified as 39-8, will fly in late 2013. The Gripen Demo has been equipped with a prototype of the Selex Raven ES-05 active, electronically scanned array radar and will be used to test the E/F's revised avionics system and weapons.

The E/F airframe will be largely new, although it should be possible to use some major components from existing C/D airframes, including the wings. Mid and aft fuselage sections will be new, to accommodate the General Electric F414 engine (and its larger airflow) and the new landing gear. The blended wing-body sections will be larger, placing the wing attachment points an estimated 30 in. farther apart. The goal is to maintain the same wing loading for the E/F's 2.5-ton increase in gross weight. The body will be slightly longer, maintaining or improving fineness ratio. Sources suggest the design will incorporate F-35-style diverterless supersonic inlets.

The E/F is expected to supercruise with weapons carried. Still under discussion is whether to use the Enhanced Performance Engine (EPE) version of the F414, which could be configured to deliver more thrust, better fuel efficiency or a combination of the two.

A mock-up of the Selex Galileo sensor suite for the E/F was on display at Malmen, confirming important features of the design. The Raven ES-05 features a "repositioner": the AESA is sharply canted and mounted on a rotating bearing, giving it a +-100-deg. field of regard, almost twice that of a fixed AESA. It has a single bearing, unlike the more complex two-bearing design planned for the Eurofighter Typhoon, reducing weight and cost.

The AESA incorporates an identification friend-or-foe (IFF) function that works in conjunction with the SIT 426 IFF. The latter features large active-array antennas on the fuselage sides, behind the radome, providing unprecedented IFF coverage in azimuth and range. Finally, the Skyward-G infrared search-and-track system is air-cooled—reducing weight.

The sensor suite design, focused on low weight, supports part of the E/F strategy, which is to provide a common upgrade path for new E/F customers and current C/D operators by making the new sensors, and the revised avionics system, retrofittable to the C/D.

This in turn supports the economic strategy behind Gripen. While the fighter's flyaway costs are not quoted, a senior Swedish officer notes that "it is not a cheap aircraft" to acquire. On the other hand, new Swedish Defense Minister Karin Enstrom said in an interview at Malmen that "the alternatives are not viable, either." This reflects the fact that the operating costs of the Gripen are claimed to be far lower than those of any competitor.

According to Swiss air force Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Marcus Gygax, the national evaluation showed that the Dassault Rafale and Typhoon would have costs per flight-hour within a few per cent of one another—but roughly twice that of the JAS 39E/F. (Gygax also confirms that leaked reports out of Swiss weapons acquisition agency Armasuisse are based on old data and do not reflect the Gripen configuration chosen by Switzerland.)

Norway, in its 2008 evaluation of Gripen against the F-35, penalized the Swedish fighter with life-cycle cost estimates based on high upgrade development costs, spread over a small number of aircraft. However, Swedish leaders point to the C/D—which includes a new cockpit, data link and electronic warfare system, developed at far lower cost than most comparable upgrades. The E/F's new central avionics system is intended to feature an unprecedented degree of partitioning between mission systems and flight-critical functions, reducing development and upgrade times and costs. According to Saab, flight-critical systems take as much time and money in verification and testing as they do in initial design, but the E/F mission systems should be verified in 10-15% of that time. Gygax points out that with a common C/D upgrade path, the E/F operators will be part of the same community as current operators of the type.

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/AW_06_18_2012_p38-465770.xml&p=2

Denel-Built Cheetah Fighters Flying High in Ecuador

15:35 GMT, June 19, 2012

All 12 of the South African Cheetah supersonic fighters sold to Ecuador have successfully completed their test flights and are now ready for deployment by the Ecuadorian air force.

Riaz Saloojee, the Group Chief Executive of Denel, says the sale of the 10 Cheetah C (single seat) and two Cheetah D (dual seat) planes is now complete and has been delivered to the complete satisfaction of the client.

Denel Aviation will continue to provide a comprehensive maintenance and support service to the Ecuadorian Air Force (FAE) for the next five years with an option for renewal.
"This is an exciting business opportunity for Denel Aviation," says Mr Saloojee. "We successfully sold a fighter plane that was designed in South Africa and used locally for many years to a major international client.

"Our future partnership with the Ecuadorian Air Force will provide an important platform to showcase local capabilities for maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO) work to the rest of the world" says Mr Saloojee.

Mike Kgobe, the CEO of Denel Aviation says the agreement to deliver the 12 fighters was signed in the Ecuadorian capital, Quito, in November 2010. The government of Ecuador decided to purchase the Cheetahs as part of a programme to modernise its aircraft fleet.

The Cheetahs were delivered in four batches with the final shipment completed earlier this year. Prior to dispatching the aircraft, they were returned to service and flight-tested before being disassembled locally for shipment and then carefully reassembled and flight-tested in Ecuador.

Denel Aviation provided technical and logistics support to the local teams conducting the tests in Ecuador. Ecuadorian pilots and ground support staff also received extensive conversion training to fly and maintain the South African planes.

"All the stringent tests have now been completed and the Cheetahs were declared ready for operational deployment," says Mr Kgobe.

Mr Kgobe says a significant milestone was reached on 17 May 2012 when seven of the fighters took to the Ecuadorian skies simultaneously during a fly past to mark the handover of command of the country's air force to Brigadier General Enrique Velasco.

Denel Aviation is the design authority of the single-seat fighter that was locally developed as a variant of the Mirage lll in the 1980s. The Denel Cheetahs were retired from active duty following the acquisition by South Africa of its new fleet of Saab Gripen fighter jets.

Negotiations between Denel Aviation, Armscor and the FAE started in 2009. An Ecuadorian team visited South Africa in April 2010 to inspect the Cheetah fleet and to participate in specific evaluation flights.

Denel Aviation subsequently visited FAE facilities to review the infrastructure and technical capability of the Ecuadorian Air Force to accommodate the Cheetah aircraft, to evaluate the level of support required and to identify the need for further training. says Mr Saloojee.
 
http://www.defpro.com/news/details/36611/?SID=136d47b66ff72c6134115f26aaef7d62

F-35: Bouncing Too Much to Find the Enemy: A Look at the F-35's Helmet Woes

(Source: Center for Public Integrity; issued June 18, 2012)
 
A host of problems plague the military's newest jet fighter, the F-35, but one of the simplest yet most troublesome is identified in a new government audit as unreadable "symbology."

The problem exists inside a small item at the heart of what makes the F-35 the world's most sophisticated aircraft — if only it could be made to work. Namely, the pilot's helmet visor. On the world's most advanced, fifth-generation military aircraft, the visor is meant to be much more than a sun shield. It is supposed to do wondrous things.

Acting like a small, see-through movie screen, it is designed to display data showing how the plane is performing, where enemy targets are, and which weapons the pilot can use to handle them. As the pilot swivels his head, the display is meant to adapt, creating a direct link — as in a science-fiction movie — between the pilot and the aircraft's unprecedented computing power.

The visor is, according to the Government Accountability Office's latest annual report on the F-35's development, "integral to the mission systems architecture." In other words, the plane was more or less designed around the unique capabilities of that fancy helmet appendage.

Just one problem: It doesn't work. In flight tests, the visor's "symbology" has evidently been unreadable, because the plane itself has been bouncing up and down in the air more than expected. The effect is probably like trying to read an e-book while riding a bicycle along a boulder-strewn path.

"Display jitter," the GAO report says in a footnote, "is the undesired shaking of display, making symbology unreadable ... [due to] worse than expected vibrations, known as aircraft buffet."

Unfortunately for the plane's designers, jitter and buffeting are only part of the problems undermining the visor's use. The others are a persistent delay in displaying key sensor data — making the visor symbols outdated as the aircraft streaks through the air at speeds up to 1,200 mph — and an inability to show night vision readings properly.

So what's the big deal? It's just a visor. Well, the GAO report says "these shortfalls may lead to a helmet unable to fully meet warfighter requirements — unsuitable for flight tasks and weapons delivery, as well as creating an unmanageable pilot workload, and may place limitations on the [F-35's] operational environment."

In short, if the visor doesn't work, the plane may not be able to do all the impressive things that the Pentagon is spending more than $1.5 trillion — over the next 30 or so years — to make it do. The GAO said this alarm was sounded by the program officials interviewed by its investigators.

A new visor is under development, at an estimated cost of just $80 million, so the Air Force may have a backup if the original visor's kinks cannot be worked out. But according to the GAO, the alternate visor won't be as capable. An Air Force spokesman did not respond to a request for comment, but DODBuzz.com quoted the F-35 program director in March as promising that the helmet troubles are "being addressed," partly through the backup visor.

The director, Vice Adm. David Venlet, told a defense conference that the plane was just having "normal teething problems."

A few things went well for the F-35 program last year. A version being made for the Marines, capable of short takeoffs and landings, "performed better than expected" in flight tests. And the Air Force was able to double the number of test flights it performed the previous year. The volume of changes made to engineering drawings of the plane's components every month — even while the plane is in early production — has started to decline.

But there wasn't a lot of other good news in the report. Although the program was extensively restructured by senior Pentagon officials last year, by adding many millions of dollars and stretching out key deadlines, it still managed to meet only six of its eleven objectives for the period. Many of these goals were administrative. Among the uncompleted tasks: an interim upgrade of the plane's software and a redesign of its tailhook.

The plane has had no difficulty being launched by catapults, a key prerequisite for its use by the Navy aboard aircraft carriers. But so far, it has not been able to use its tailhook to catch a cable and stop suddenly — which is also, well, crucial for operations on an aircraft carrier. Generally speaking, Navy pilots need a place to land when their missions are complete.

Venlet has called the tailhook troubles "a damping-bouncing issue" that could not have been foreseen. It is being redesigned, but the GAO warns that "other aircraft structural modifications may also be required." The discovery of cracks in the plane's bulkhead, an upright wall in its fuselage, will require costly repairs, and other parts are showing unexpectedly early signs of wear. Flight tests so far have shown "different structural loads than predicted," the GAO disclosed, a sure sign that unplanned work lies ahead. "Aircraft reliability and parts shortages" contributed to testing shortfalls last year.

In an October report, a special testing team of Air Force, Navy, and British officers found shortcomings in "aircraft handling characteristics and shortfalls in maneuvering performance," according to a GAO summary of the officers' report. Besides flagging the troubled helmet, they complained about poor management of spare parts supplies, excessive repair time for the plane's delicate radar-absorbing skin, and "poor maintainability performance."

The Pentagon has increasingly been at loggerheads with the chief contractor, Lockheed Martin, over the work ahead. Already, cost overruns on four early production contracts have totaled $1 billion, with the government on the hook to pay just over two-thirds this amount. But Uncle Sam's ambition is still to buy 365 of the planes (out of 2,457) at a cost of $69 billion, before completing so-called developmental flight tests — the spins in the sky that are needed to make sure everything is operating properly.
Until those tests are finished, the GAO said — repeating a theme the government watchdog has sounded for the past seven years — the F-35 program is "very susceptible to discovering costly design and technical problems after many aircraft have been fielded." The auditors expressed worry as a result that the Pentagon may not be able to afford the program in its current form and urged that it conduct a study now of the impact of future budget cuts.

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/feature/5/136124/a-look-at-the-f_35%E2%80%99s-helmet-woes.html

Citaat van: defense-aerospace op 19/06/2012 | 18:33 uur
..... because the plane itself has been bouncing up and down in the air more than expected. The effect is probably like trying to read an e-book while riding a bicycle along a boulder-strewn path.

Het zal puur toeval zijn geweest en ik dacht er verder ook niks over, maar het viel me op, dat een F-35 tijdens de vlucht in een promotie-video nogal "hobbelde" leek het. Vond ik een beetje gek voor zo'n modern toestel...terwijl het begeleidende toestel van een ander model rustiger rondvloog. ;) En nu blijkt zoiets dus een probleem te kunnen zijn. Weer iets geleerd.

US GAO report about F-35: mixed performance, major concerns

Gepubliceerd door JSFNieuws.nl om 20:44

Canadian newspaper The Hill Times summarises the latest US GAO report (50 pages):. "U.S. government spending watchdog raises more red flags about F-35's soaring costs, delays and major failures".

This year's issue of the US Government Accountability Office F-35 report contains a continued story of mostly negative news about the F-35 program, but some positive developments mentioned also.

Some quotes from the US GAO report (50 pages, PDF download here).

Development costs:
2001: US$ 34,4 billion and development length 10 years
2012: US$ 55,2 billion (plus 61%) and development length 16 years

Acquistion costs (unit cost estimates):
2001: US$ 81 million
2012: US$ 161 million (plus 99%, inflation corrected)

Initial Operational Capability (planning):
2001: planned 2010-2012
2012: to be decided, possibly in 2019 (7-9 years delay)

Test flights: 21% completed, and US GAO reports "the most challenging still lies ahead." IOT&E of a fully integrated and capable JSF not possible before spring 2017.

First four production contracts show cost overruns of between 7.1% and 14.4%. On average US$ 11 million has to be paid for the first 63 aircraft under contract (including UK and Dutch jets).

Affordability Challenges ahead

Overall program affordability—both in terms of the investment costs to acquire the JSF and the continuing costs to operate and maintain it over the life-cycle—remains a major challenge. As shown in figure 4, the annual funding requirements average more than $12.5 billion through 2037 and average more than $15 billion annually in the 10-year period from fiscal years 2019 through 2028. The Air Force alone needs to budget from about $6 to $11 billion per year from fiscal year 2016 through 2037 for procurement of JSF aircraft. At the same time, the Air Force is committed to other big-dollar projects such as the KC-46 tanker and a new bomber program.

Cost growth since 2007: 42 percent

"The new program baseline projects total acquisition costs of $395.7 billion, an increase of $117.2 billion (42 percent) from the prior 2007 baseline. Full rate production is now planned for 2019, a delay of 6 years from the 2007 baseline. Unit costs per aircraft have doubled since start of development in 2001. Critical dates for delivering warfighter requirements remain unsettled because of program uncertainties."

Software main risk, and growing risk.......

As often reported already (since 2007) by JSFNieuws.nl the software is one of the main risks in the F-35 program. "
Overall performance in 2011 was mixed as the program achieved 6 of 11 important objectives. Developmental flight testing gained momentum and is now about 21 percent complete with the most challenging tasks still ahead. Performance of the short takeoff and vertical landing variant improved this year and its "probation" period to fix deficiencies was ended after 1 year with several fixes temporary and untested. Developing and integrating the more than 24 million lines of software code continues to be of concern. Late software releases and concurrent work on multiple software blocks have delayed testing and training. Development of critical mission systems providing core combat capabilities remains behind schedule and risky."

Bad news for the industry

Amazing statistic about the program and the threatening lack of orders (and lower return on huge industrial investment in the whole global supply chain): "Since 2002, the total quantity through 2017 has been reduced by three-fourths, from 1.591 to 365."

Development missions systems risky and far behind schedule

Development of critical mission systems providing core combat capabilities remains behind schedule and risky. To date, only 4 percent of the mission systems required for full capability have been verified. Deficiencies with the helmet mounted display, integral to mission systems functionality and concepts of operation, are most problematic. The autonomic logistics information system, integral technology for improving aircraft availability and lowering support
costs, is not fully developed.

Acquistion malpractice: Concurrent development and production

Most of the instability in the program has been and continues to be the result of highly concurrent development, testing, and production activities. Cost overruns on the first four annual procurement contracts total more than $1 billion and aircraft deliveries are on average more than 1 year late...The manufacturing process is still absorbing higher than expected number of engineering changes resulting from flight testing, changes which are expected to persist at elevated levels into 2019, making it difficult to achieve efficient production rates. More design and manufacturing changes are expected as testing continues, bringing risks for more contract overruns and concurrency costs.

JSFNieuws120618-JB/jb

http://www.jsfnieuws.nl/?p=823

RM12b Eurofighters among five bids to replace combat jets

By Shannon Teoh

June 20, 2012

BAE was reported in March to be "bullish" about securing the Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MRCA) replacement deal, but Defence Minister Datuk Seri Zahid Hamidi today said, "Everyone says they are bullish."

"It is still under evaluation. There are four other bids but there is no deadline for the decision," he told a press conference.

BAE suffered a setback when India rejected its Eurofighters in February while Malaysia also signed a RM110-million deal with Russia in April to supply missiles for its 16 MiGs and 18 Su-30MKM fighters, the last of the latter only having arrived in Malaysia last year.

Irkut Corp, which manufactures the Su-30MKM planes, is also in talks for the MRCA deal. Zahid had visited the Russian state-owned firm at the end of last year.

Zahid also said last October the government will not proceed with plans to jointly develop navy ships with BAE due to "financial constraints."

British newspaper The Times reported in September that Malaysia was considering a number of defence joint ventures with the UK including the development of warships with BAE.

The UK paper reported, however, that the Malaysian government would want assurances that it would be protected from the type of budget overruns that had hit previous BAE projects.

BAE, together with Turkey's Nurol, had also won a contract in 2010 to supply 250 armoured vehicles to Malaysia, in a deal reportedly worth RM1.72 billion.

BAE is considered Europe's largest defence contractor and had sales of about RM111 billion in 2010.

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/rm12b-eurofighter-among-five-bids-to-replace-fighter-jets

Citaat van: Elzenga op 19/06/2012 | 23:12 uur

Citaat van: defense-aerospace op 19/06/2012 | 18:33 uur
..... because the plane itself has been bouncing up and down in the air more than expected. The effect is probably like trying to read an e-book while riding a bicycle along a boulder-strewn path.

Het zal puur toeval zijn geweest en ik dacht er verder ook niks over, maar het viel me op, dat een F-35 tijdens de vlucht in een promotie-video nogal "hobbelde" leek het. Vond ik een beetje gek voor zo'n modern toestel...terwijl het begeleidende toestel van een ander model rustiger rondvloog. ;) En nu blijkt zoiets dus een probleem te kunnen zijn. Weer iets geleerd.

Dat "hobbelen" zou dat te maken hebben met de vliegeigenschappen van de F-35 in relatie met de software/computers ?

Wat ik hiermee bedoel is dat de F-35 van nature niet kan vliegen zonder computers die de sturing e.d. zo regelen dat het toestel dezelfde kant opgaat als de kant welke de piloot ook op wil. Tevens moeten de computers ook regelen dat het vliegtuig blijft vliegen.
Is de F-35 dan zo onstabiel van zichzelf dat de computers niet snelgenoeg zijn om alles te kunnen regelen en tevens de reactietijd van de diverse spoilers, flaps, roeren e.d. te lang duurt ?   

Citaat van: Harald op 20/06/2012 | 08:56 uur
Dat "hobbelen" zou dat te maken hebben met de vliegeigenschappen van de F-35 in relatie met de software/computers ?

Wat ik hiermee bedoel is dat de F-35 van nature niet kan vliegen zonder computers die de sturing e.d. zo regelen dat het toestel dezelfde kant opgaat als de kant welke de piloot ook op wil. Tevens moeten de computers ook regelen dat het vliegtuig blijft vliegen.
Is de F-35 dan zo onstabiel van zichzelf dat de computers niet snelgenoeg zijn om alles te kunnen regelen en tevens de reactietijd van de diverse spoilers, flaps, roeren e.d. te lang duurt ?   

Dus een computercrash op grote hoogte betekent automatisch dat die kist mechanisch niet meer aan de grond komt, behalve dan loodrecht en in vele stukjes?

Citaat van: Enforcer op 20/06/2012 | 10:19 uur
Dus een computercrash op grote hoogte betekent automatisch dat die kist mechanisch niet meer aan de grond komt, behalve dan loodrecht en in vele stukjes?

Voor zover ik heb begrepen is dat met de meeste kisten zo. Zelfs voor de '70's F16.
En kan me dus niet voorstellen dat als een computer uit de '70's dat ding in de lucht kan houden, dat een onmetelijk krachtigere computer van vandaag de dag moeite zou hebben met de F35. Tenzij fout/log geprogrammeerd.

S. Korea 'could delay $6.9 bln fighter deal'

South Korea could delay awarding an eight trillion won ($6.9 billion) contract for 60 advanced fighter planes, the arms procurement agency said Wednesday after setting a new deadline for bids.

The makers of Boeing's F-15 Silent Eagle, Lockheed Martin's F-35 Lightning II and the Eurofighter Typhoon had submitted bids when the original deadline expired Monday.

But the Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) reopened bidding Tuesday, citing what it called errors in the relevant documents, and set a new date of July 5 for submissions.

"Our plan to make a decision by the end of October is not a deadline, but a target," DAPA commissioner Noh Dae-Rae told Yonhap news agency in comments confirmed by a spokesman for the agency.

"We could delay the timing of selecting a supplier at any time if it is necessary for the national interest."

Controversy has erupted over plans to assess the performance of Lockheed's F-35 using simulators rather than actual test flights with the South's pilots.

Boeing and EADS, maker of the Eurofighter, agreed on real flights, but Lockheed refused to do so, saying its aircraft is still being developed, Yonhap quoted DAPA officials as saying.

They said DAPA had asked Lockheed for more Korean involvement in tests on the F-35.

Noh said the two sides have been discussing the proposal and the US firm would give its answer Friday.

"If the US side rejects our request, we will have no choice but to give a zero point in the criteria of flight-testing (of the F-35)," he said.

South Korea has bought 60 of Boeing's earlier-version F-15s since 2002 under the first two stages of its fighter modernisation programme.

Tensions with North Korea have been high in recent years. The North and South remain technically at war because a peace treaty was never signed formally to end their 1950-53 conflict.

http://news.malaysia.msn.com/business/article.aspx?cp-documentid=250291843

F-16 co-designer blames stealth 'skin' for F-22 problems

June 19, 2012 05:29:36 PM

TYNDALL AIR FORCE BASE — A man who helped design the F-16 says the problem that grounded the F-22 for several months last year isn't the oxygen system.

Pierre Sprey, who helped develop the A-10 and F-16 jets, said he believes the glues that hold the F-22 stealth "skin" in place is emanating chemicals that are making the pilots sick.

According to Sprey, the Air Force has overlooked, or ignored, the potential stealth skin problems because it has not been able to test successfully for adhesive toxins in the pilot's bloodstream. He said the Air Force doesn't talk about the stealth adhesives because the chemical makeup of the compounds that make up the stealth skin are considered "classified information."

The Air Force confirmed the stealth adhesive compound used in the F-22 is classified material and exclusive to the F-22, but it has downplayed Sprey's accusations, saying the adhesives were included in a recent investigation into problems impacting F-22 pilots.

"We are aware of the theory regarding stealth coatings and other chemicals used in the production and maintenance of the F-22, and that has been rolled into our analysis," said Heidi Davis, an Air Force spokeswoman.

Sprey said the reason the Air Force doesn't want to reveal any problems with the adhesives' coatings is it would severely impact the F-22, each of which cost more than $412 million, according to the Government Accountability Office.

Dealing with the F-22's glues, which provide the F-22 its stealth, would mean a "major rebuild of the airplane," Sprey said.

"The F-22 and the F-35 are three-fourths of the Air Force budget, and that is what is at stake," he said.

The 170 F-22 jets are stationed at six U.S. bases, including Tyndall Air Force Base, where F-22 pilots are trained.

Sprey said when the F-22 reaches speeds above Mach 1.6, which is about 1,200 miles and hour at sea level, the adhesive sets off gases that can cause the same symptoms of dizziness that have plagued the F-22 pilots. When the F-22 is in for repairs to its "stealth coating," the adhesive is re-spread across the plane.

"The adhesive has to be reapplied," Sprey said. "When it is, it increases the risk to the pilots."

According to Sprey, the pilot is exposed to diisocyanates, which are found within the polyurethane glues that comprise the stealth coatings, at a number of times because the adhesives are reapplied in the upkeep of the plane. Sprey said diisocyanates are well known as an industrial hazard that can cause both severe lung and neurologic problems.

But, Davis said Sprey's theory cannot be considered a leading line of inquiry at this point because it would need to be reconciled with contrary evidence related to the absence of toxins in life-support system components, cockpit air samples, or post-incident pilot blood samples.

Sprey vehemently disagreed.

He said polyurethanes are used in the Lockheed Martin stealth coatings, which also contain diisoycanates, and are one among several potential sources of poisoning of pilots that Lockheed and the Air Force should have been testing for toxicity long before they flew the first F-22. The Air Force said diisoycanates have not registered in the blood of F-22 pilots.

Lockheed Martin declined to comment for this report.

According to the Agency for Toxic Substances & Disease Registry, after being inhaled most of these toxins react with the lungs and/or the blood very quickly, meaning by the time a pilot landed and had his blood sample drawn, the toxin would have disappeared.

Also, there's the problem of whether the blood measurement protocols themselves are sensitive enough to detect the sub-part-per-million concentrations known to be toxic, according to the agency.

The agency did note the exposure by pilots should be minimal because the pilots most likely would be exposed beyond the manufacturing process. But, as Sprey noted, the continual use of the product during the repairs of the plane could have an impact in the pilot.

"They are constantly reapplying this stuff," Sprey said.

Dina Rasor, of the Bauman Rasor Group Inc., a team of investigators dealing in federal fraud, has been investigating military issues and fraud for decades. She said there is a culture in the military that has a "circle-the-wagons" mentality when it comes to their stealth fighter, the F-22.

She also said Lockheed Martin is one of only a few contractors left who produce such aircraft and the Defense Department is reluctant to penalize the contractor.

"It is almost as if they are married," she said.

Rasor said since the contractors, in this case Lockheed Martin, have such a close relationship with the Defense Department, no single person in the military will challenge them.

U.S. Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., and Sen. Mark R. Warner, D-Va., recently released information obtained from the Air Force that said pilots had experienced about 26 incidents of apparent oxygen deprivation per 100,000 flight hours — a rate at least 10 times higher than for any other Air Force aircraft. The Air Force had said there was less than half that number.

Who is Pierre Sprey?

Pierre Sprey was a consultant for Grumman Aircraft's research department from 1958 to 1965, and then joined Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara's "whiz kids" in the Pentagon. In 1967, he teamed with Air Force Col. John Boyd and collaborated on the design of the F-16 air-to-air fighter.

Sprey headed up the technical side of the Air Force's concept design team for the A-10 close support fighter. He also served as special assistant to the assistant secretary of defense for systems analysis during the Johnson and Nixon administrations.

After leaving the Pentagon in the 1970s, he continued to consult for the government on fighter jets and anti-tank weaponry. He also was part of the Congressional Military Reform Caucus, which concentrated on military reform legislation.

Sprey recently worked with former military officials and journalists on military reforms. Sprey was included in a recent report by Dina Rasor, founder of the Project On Government Oversight and the Bauman & Rasor Group Inc., on the toxicity problems in the F-22.

Rasor, of the Bauman Rasor Group Inc., said working with a legend like Sprey brought a wealth of information to the subject of stealth aircraft. "He is amazing," Rasor said.

Read more: http://www.newsherald.com/articles/force-103546-problems-air.html#ixzz1yQxkz7ka

First Operational Evaluation Firing of ASMPA Missile

(Source: French Air Force; issued June 20, 2012)
 
The French air force has carried out the first operational evaluation of its new ASMPA supersonic nuclear stand-off missile seen here on the centreline pylon of a Rafale fighter. (French AF photo)
On Tuesday, June 19, 2012, France's strategic air force command successfully carried out the first operational evaluation launch of the integrated weapon system comprising a C135 tanker, a Rafale strike aircraft, and the ASMPA nuclear stand-off missile according to a scenario representative of a real mission.

The crew of the fighter, belonging to the 1/91 "Gascogne" squadron, took off from Saint-Dizier air base. During five hours, the mission brought together all the important phases of flight: high altitude cruise, low altitude penetration, terrain following, in-flight refueling from tanker aircraft ... The C135 tanker, belonging to the 2/91 "Bretagne" in-flight refueling squadron, provided the range extension needed for a strategic mission. After five hours of flight, the crew launched the ASMPA, which was not fitted with a nuclear warhead.

Civil and military authorities tracked the missile's trajectory and mission profile, which complied in every respect to the expected flight profile from the missile test center of the Directorate General of Armaments (DGA) located at Biscarrosse, in south-western France.

This complex operation that brings together staff and resources of the Air Force, the DGA, industrial MBDA, the Atomic Energy Commission and Alternative Energies and the Navy (for the surveillance of the neighboring area, including the sea) is a success that validates the performance of this weapon system.

By guaranteeing the technical and operational credibility of the airborne deterrent, the EFT test demonstrates the ability of this strategic resource to carry on with the nuclear deterrent mission which has been continuously provided, for nearly fifty years, by France's strategic air forces.

Zie link voor de foto.

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/article-view/release/136192/rafale-fires-asmpa-nuclear-missile-in-first-operational-test.html

Sweden to Fund Next Generation Gripen
^{June 21, 2012. 10:02 am • Section: Defence Watch}

Radio Sweden is reporting that Sweden's government will finance a fleet of new JAS Gripen fighter jets, despite a previous parliamentary decision not to fund the project without foreign involvement.

The Swedish military faces the prospect of major cutbacks to fund the JAS Gripen 'Next Generation' jets, also known as the 'Super JAS'.

The air force estimates it needs about 80 new planes – at an estimated cost of around US$8 billion. Sweden's two main political parties have agreed to buy the planes from Swedish-based Saab.
But until now that consensus was based on a condition that Sweden finds another foreign buyer to share the multi-billion dollar development costs.
Switzerland agreed last year to buy about 20 planes.

"We hope that several countries will buy Gripen. But until Switzerland or Croatia or other countries have done that Sweden will upgrade Gripen on its own," says Staffan Danielsson, defence spokesperson Centre Party, part of the government coalition.
"There will be a proposal from the government quite soon. It's obvious that we need a good air defense. Will the present Gripen be good enough to match aircraft from other countries such as Russia in 2030, 2040? No."
A government working group will report in the coming months on cutbacks to the military which could help fund the air force upgrade

http://blogs.ottawacitizen.com/2012/06/21/sweden-to-fund-next-generation-gripen/ (http://blogs.ottawacitizen.com/2012/06/21/sweden-to-fund-next-generation-gripen/)

(Yonhap Feature) F-35, gem for Lockheed amid shoestring defense budget

By Lee Chi-dong

FORT WORTH, Texas, June 21 (Yonhap) -- While striking workers wave picket signs at the main gate, a contingency workforce is busy putting together wings and other parts for F-35 fighter jets.

   The competing scenes at the Lockheed Martin plant in Fort Worth, Texas, apparently represent both challenge and opportunity for the world's largest defense company as it braces for the impact of massive Pentagon budget cuts.

   Seeking relief, Lockheed is hoping for a contract with South Korea for the supply of 60 F-35s.

   Lockheed is eager to expand exports of the F-35 Lightning II, known as the most advanced fifth-generation multirole stealth aircraft, to give a boost to the program, the U.S. military's biggest project. But technical difficulties have delayed production.

   The F-35 is competing with Boeing's F-15SE Silent Eagle and the Eurofighter Typhoon for the US$6.9-billion contract with South Korea.

   Seoul aims to pick a winner by the end of October but the schedule has been called into question again due to some procedural problems and the political environment.

   The acquisition is surely crucial to South Korea's air defense in the coming decades. It may also turn into a hot political topic ahead of the presidential elections in December.

   Lockheed officials express optimism.

   "International support for this (F-35) program does continue to grow," Christopher Kubasik, president and chief operating officer, said in a recent media-day event in Arlington, Va., to mark the 100th anniversary of the company's founding. He was promoted in April to CEO, effective Jan. 1.

   He cited some "positive momentum" from a series of contracts on the sale of the F-35 with Israel, Japan and Norway.

   "Volume will ultimately drive the affordability of this program. We think we have a very good offering (for South Korea)," he said, without elaborating. "I think people know the technical capabilities of the program."

   He admitted the grim reality for Lockheed and other defense firms as the Pentagon may face $500 billion in spending cuts on top of the $487 billion already being implemented.

   He raised the possibility of a round of mergers in the defense industry.

A two-month strike by Lockheed's workers, who demand continued pensions for new hires and better health insurance, is adding to the gloom.

   Just three to four F-35s are rolled out a month in the final assembly line here. Lockheed said monthly production will go up to 17 once the strike ends and the expansion of facilities is complete.

   Indeed, the smaller military spending and the strike, if protracted, would deal a further blow to the F-35, the new flagship product of Lockheed, with some of its high-technology software still being developed.

   A deal with South Korea would help Lockheed's efforts to cushion the impact of its growing financial burdens.

   Initially, the F-35 was seen as a favorite, given the South Korean Air Force's long pursuit of stealth fighter jets that can pass through North Korea's complex web of radars. The F-35 is one of the best radar-evading warplanes.

   But Boeing's F-15 Silent Eagle has better weapons-loading capabilities and it has a competitive edge for interoperability with South Korea's existing F-15K fleet. The ability of a European consortium's Typhoon has been proven by actual deployment.

   "The F-35 is an ideal aircraft," Bill Gigliotti, who served as a Navy pilot for 14 years, said at a hangar at the Fort Worth facility. "In legacy (earlier) fighters, I had to operate with the assumption that they can see me and they can shoot me. My impression is that legacy aircraft had to be defensive. But with the one right here I go with a different mindset -- completely offensive."

   He was preparing for another test flight of a F-35 jet. A total of 481 test flights were conducted in the first five months of this year, more than the originally planned 358, according to Lockheed.

   However, Lockheed's pitch has hit a snag.

   South Korean taxpayers remain angry by the company's refusal to allow South Korea pilots to test the F-35 on their own. Lockheed insists only simulation-based testing is possible since the F-35 is a single-seat jet that can't carry untrained aviators.

   Critics point out that it makes no sense to buy such expensive fighter jets without hands-on testing.

   Lockheed says it understands the public concerns but insists it follow the practice of contracts with other nations.

   Steve O'Brien, Lockheed's vice-president for F-35 business development, said Japan and Israel were satisfied with top-secret simulation testing.

   "All of them did their evaluation based on that simulation," he said.

   He also emphasized the prospects for significant industrial cooperation, saying Lockheed's proposal includes not only partnerships for the production of 60 jets but also technology transfer that will allow South Korea to become "part of the worldwide supply chain for the F-35."

   He disputed a view that the price of F-35 is exorbitant. He said prices are on a steady decline due to increased production.

   The current average price tag for a F-35 jet is $70 million, but the price varies, depending on options such as simulators and other features, O'Brien said.

   All in all, Lockheed has a daunting task in overcoming the simulation controversy and building up public trust in South Korea.

   Another possible setback is renewed uncertainty in the bidding timeline.

   Lockheed, Boeing and Eurofighter submitted initial bids before the original deadline of June 18. South Korea's Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) reopened bidding later, citing "translation-related errors" in the documents of Lockheed and Eurofighter, and set a new date of July 5 for submissions.

   South Korean opposition parties are also calling for the postponement of selecting a winning bidder until after the presidential polls.

http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/n_feature/2012/06/21/98/4901000000AEN20120621004600315F.HTML

The parallel reality of F-35 Flight Test Progress

One of the advocates for the F-35, Lockheed Martin consultant and lobbyist Loren Thompson wrote about the F-35 at Forbes.com June 13, 2012:

"Flight tests. Let's start with the flight tests that are steadily verifying all the performance features of the aircraft. The program has surpassed its goals for flight testing in each of the last three years, doing 15 percent better than planned in 2011 and 20 percent better than planned so far in 2012. Collectively, the three versions of the F-35 have now flown well over 2,000 times, accomplishing more than a quarter of the planned tasks in a comprehensive testing regime. By the end of this year, the most common version of the plane (F-35A) the one that will be used by the Air Force and exported to most foreign customers will be 45 percent of the way through all its flight tests."

Getting test points is not the same as making progress

Mr. Loren Thompson is living in a kind of parallel reality, not in real world. May be, what he wrote is true, but it is incomplete. However, this incomplete truth JPO is telling to defence organisations and parliaments in Norway, The Netherlands, Canada, Australia, etc.

We will explain why it is important to know the other side of the truth:

(1) A lot of the testing being done is "regression testing:". Due to a lot of design changes and configuration changes it's mandatory "do over" testing.
(2) Compared to the original test plan the F-35 testingt is way behind, and the current test plan is a repeatedly reduced one that the Pentagon imposed in the several recent restructures of the program.
(3) The F-35 testforce ise not executing the 2012 plan as planned. Source near the testforce mention the fact that they are "pulling" test points from upcoming years because of what the testers call "engineering blocks" on the testing they have planned. In this way the testforce is still doing the easy part of the tests, getting a lot of "easy" test points. Difficult issues, like weapons release, high angle of attack flights, more complex mission profiles, ship deployments, and much more, are yet to come.
(4) The real questions are: "Has the testing produced the results needed to move ahead at the expected rate?" and "Is the program proving what it had planned to prove through flight test at this point in time?". That questions are not answered by Mr. Thompson.

What US GAO tells us from "real world" about F-35 test progress

The US GAO report of June 2012, page 16 tells another side of the truth, and yes, not commercial driven, but from real world.

Some quotes from the US GAO Report about the real world F-35 test progress facts:
(1) Even with the progress in 2011, most development flight testing, including the most challenging, still lies ahead. Through 2011, the flight test program had completed 21 percent of the nearly 60,000 planned flight test points estimated for the entire program.
(2) According to JSF test officials, the more complex testing such as low altitude flight operations, weapons and mission systems integration, and high angle of attack has yet to be done for any variant and may result in new discoveries of aircraft deficiencies.
(3) Initial development flight tests of a fully integrated, capable JSF aircraft to demonstrate full mission systems capabilities, weapons delivery, and autonomic logistics is not expected until 2015 at the earliest. This will be critical for verifying that the JSF aircraft will work as intended and for demonstrating that the design is not likely to need costly changes.
(4) Initial dedicated operational testing of a fully integrated and capable JSF is scheduled to begin in 2017.
(5) The JSF operational test team assessed system readiness for initial operational testing and identified several outstanding risk items. The test team's operational assessment concluded that the JSF is not on track to meet operational effectiveness or operational suitability requirements.
(6) Flight training efforts were delayed because of immature aircraft.
(7) Durability testing identified structural modifications needed for production aircraft to meet service life and operational requirements. Analysis of the bulkhead crack problem revealed numerous other life-limited parts on all three variants.
(8 ) DOT&E also found that, although it is early in the program, current reliability and maintainability data indicate that more attention is needed in these areas to achieve an operationally suitable system.

What is your choice: parallel reality or reality?

Author: Johan Boeder

Background/Source:
(1) Forbes; 11-jun-2012; Loren Thompson; Pentagon's Best-Kept Secret: F-35 Fighter Is Progressing Nicely
(2) US GAO; report 12-437, June 2012 "JSF: DOD Actions Needed to Further Enhance Restructuring and Address Affordability Risks"

JSFNIEUWS120621-JB/jb
http://www.jsfnieuws.nl/

Romania can only afford in use F-16 jets: PM

BUCHAREST, June 22, 2012 (AFP) — Romania can only afford to buy F-16 combat jets currently in use due to budgetary constraints, Romanian Prime Minister Victor Ponta said on Friday.

"In my opinion, the only realistic option is to buy already in use aircraft", Ponta told the foreign media in Bucharest.

The Netherlands and Portugal have offered to sell Romania F-16 jets, he added.

Ponta said he was favourable to a regional plan to buy new F-16s together with Croatia and Bulgaria but the option seemed "unrealistic at the moment".

Romania had announced in March 2010 its decision to acquire 24 F-16 aircraft from the US air force at a cost of $1.3 billion (1.1 billion euros) to replace its ageing, Soviet-made MiG Lancer jets.

The announcement triggered criticism from European groups Eurofighter and Saab, which stressed authorities should have issued a call for tenders.

But a few months later, struggling with a deep economic crisis, the government announced it would not be able to finance the buy in 2010.

In September, President Traian Basescu admitted Romania could not afford the F-16 unless granted a long-term financing plan.

When joining NATO in 2004, Romania committed to equipping the armed forces with 48 fighter jets compatible with the Alliance's.

http://vancouverdesi.com/news/romania-can-only-afford-in-use-f-16-jets-pm/

Portugal die zijn F16's wilt verkopen?
Portugal heeft naar mijn weten niet zo heel veel F16's; een stuk 26 (??) Hoeveel zou Roemenië dan willen kopen?

Citaat van: Reinier op 22/06/2012 | 20:03 uur
Portugal die zijn F16's wilt verkopen?
Portugal heeft naar mijn weten niet zo heel veel F16's; een stuk 26 (??) Hoeveel zou Roemenië dan willen kopen?

The Portuguese Air Force (Força Aérea Portuguesa) operates a total of 45 F-16A/B block 15 aircraft. Twenty of these have been upgraded to MLU standard.

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_users_article16.html

Zo maar eens een schatting: 15 van NL een 9 van Portugal?

Another shot of the possible Chinese fifth-gen fighter (mock-up?) from Shenyang:

(https://www.defensieforum.nl/Forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fd3j5vwomefv46c.cloudfront.net%2Fphotos%2Ffull%2F603395699.jpg%3Fkey%3D600538%26amp%3BExpires%3D1340392202%26amp%3BKey-Pair-Id%3DAPKAIYVGSUJFNRFZBBTA%26amp%3BSignature%3DS0lljyKWn20IcfzG7cdN0zfstpAE7JnPvKHdOpqQ-2qVwl9M9awCCiyIkyjsDmaScta75WvzUmObhVZM2XqZcTMVan8JtVho92epj97aGMOhowBaxMhRYo791KaPoP7uXnu63FSpaiTELwloqRJz%7EDdb34A2XO3P3%7EOvTDqL4Ws_&hash=9cbb8ff7ef6eef50a73da7b47022bad7656da8e4)

Bron: http://twitpic.com/9z8v3n

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 22/06/2012 | 20:07 uur
The Portuguese Air Force (Força Aérea Portuguesa) operates a total of 45 F-16A/B block 15 aircraft. Twenty of these have been upgraded to MLU standard.

Zo maar eens een schatting: 15 van NL een 9 van Portugal?

Thanks!
Ik heb elders gelezen dat Portugal begin jaren '90 20 nieuwe F16's heeft aangeschaft en later nog eens 25 overtollige van de Amerikanen heeft gekregen. Vijf daarvan worden/ zijn gebruikt voor de reserve onderdelen. Dus Portugal heeft er nog 40 over, waarvan nu x aantal op de verkooplijst staan.

Geen idee hoeveel Nederland nog in de verkoop heeft. Ben het overzicht kwijt na reorganisatie, na reorganisatie en afstoting campagnes voor een sterke en strijdbare defensie

Roemeense interesse in F-16's

Roemenië heeft interesse in overtollige Nederlandse F-16 jachtvliegtuigen. Het gaat om vijftien toestellen.

Het ministerie van Defensie wil af van de F-16's omdat het een miljard euro moet bezuinigen. Ook andere landen, waaronder de VS, hebben tweedehands F-16's in de aanbieding. Roemenië kijkt nog waar de toestellen het voordeligst zijn.

In verband met de bezuinigingen heeft de luchtmacht ook acht gebruikte Cougar-helikopters in de aanbieding. Chili heeft al interesse getoond, maar volgens Defensie is het overleg nog in de verkennende fase. Daarnaast heeft het ministerie vanwege de bezuinigingen Fokker-vliegtuigen en pantservoertuigen te koop gezet.

Leopard

De Tweede Kamer buigt zich vandaag over een andere wapenverkoop. Minister Hillen doet een nieuwe poging om tachtig overtollige Leopard-tanks aan Indonesië te verkopen. De tanks moeten zo'n 200 miljoen euro opbrengen.

Een Kamermeerderheid van PvdA, SP, PVV, GroenLinks en ChristenUnie is tot nu toe tegen de verkoop. Ze vinden dat de tanks niet verkocht moeten worden aan een land dat de mensenrechten schendt.

http://nos.nl/artikel/386476-roemeense-interesse-in-f16s.html[/i]]http://nos.nl/artikel/386476-roemeense-interesse-in-f16s.html (http://[i)

Geen idee of deze 15 overtollige (voorlopig) de laatste zijn sinds afgelopen jaar toen we naar totaal 67 F16's zijn gegaan.

Citaat van: NOS op 22/06/2012 | 21:26 uur
Roemenië heeft interesse in overtollige Nederlandse F-16 jachtvliegtuigen. Het gaat om vijftien toestellen.

De BV-NL heeft er 18 in de verkoop staan, teneinde terug te gaan van 87 naar 68 toestellen.
Het verschil van stuks 1, is de afgeschreven kist, na de buiklanding in België.

Citaat van: Reinier op 22/06/2012 | 21:28 uur
Geen idee of deze 15 overtollige (voorlopig) de laatste zijn sinds afgelopen jaar toen we naar totaal 67 F16's zijn gegaan.

We gaan binnenkort van 67 naar 42, 69-42= weer 27 erbij voor de verkoop  :sick:
Ik dacht eigenlijk dat we ze gingen kannibaliseren?

Citaat van: fly3rguy op 22/06/2012 | 22:03 uur
We gaan binnenkort van 67 naar 42, 69-42= weer 27 erbij voor de verkoop  :sick:
Ik dacht eigenlijk dat we ze gingen kannibaliseren?

;D Dan kunnen we in 2014, na de vermoedelijk, kabinetsverkiezingen van dat jaar het topic sluiten, immers dan gaan er van de resterende 42 weer 36 af. Lang leven de losers die de politiek in gaan!

Norway's JSF Deal Bolsters JSM missile

By Robert Wall

Source: Aviation Week & Space Technology

Robert Wall/London

For all the talk about fifth-generation-this and stealth-that, for most countries signing up to become F-35 partners there is a more basic calculation at play: The industrial return warrants the financial outlays.

Norway has now taken a big step toward potentially making the bargain work. After prolonged lobbying and badgering, Oslo secured a firm U.S. commitments to have Kongsberg's Joint Strike Missile (JSM) integrated early on the F-35.

The commitment—made in a letter from U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta to his Norwegian counterpart, Espen Barth Eide—promises that JSM integration will take place. "The decision to move forward was reached following an extended dialogue with the U.S. Department of Defense aimed at securing opportunities for Norwegian industry," the Norwegian defense ministry says in announcing the move to buy the initial two aircraft.

Several other F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) partners have shown interest in the weapon, which is still in development, with even the U.S. Navy viewed as a potential customer. Norway sees a potential of $3.3 billion to $4.2 billion in sales for the missile.

The F-35A commitment is for the first two out of a total of 52 to be bought by Norway over the duration of the program. (Oslo was going to buy 56 aircraft, but cut the number in March and stretched its production profile.) Norway estimates it will spend around $10 billion on the F-35.

The missile, to be carried inside the F-35's weapons bay, is to be integrated on JSF starting with the Block 4 configuration standard. Missile development is expected to be completed before then. Critical design review for the weapon is planned for mid-2013, with the final development phase to begin soon after, says Paal Bratlie, executive vice president at Kongsberg Defense Systems. Pre-integration studies on the fighter go back as far as 2008, with development to wrap up around 2018 or 2019, according to a Norwegian defense ministry official.

JSF flight trials are set to begin in early 2014. The JSM is derived from the in-service Naval Strike Missile, although the air-launched version uses a dual-intake and dispenses with the booster motor. Kongsberg also plans to retrofit the seeker being developed for JSM on NSM, which uses INS/GPS guidance. JSM will have land-attack and anti-ship capabilities and is being designed to have a range exceeding 150 nm even when fired at low attitude. The missile will deliver a 120-kg (265-lb.) warhead.

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/AW_06_25_2012_p32-469614.xml

Missteps Plague South Korean Fighter Jet Contest

SEOUL, South Korea — South Korea's multi-billion-dollar project to acquire 60 new combat aircraft is facing delays following controversies over the fighter jet evaluation methods and mistakes in how the bids were submitted.

In the latest fiasco, the 8.3 trillion won ($7.2 billion) contest was postponed June 19, just one day after the three bidders — Lockheed Martin, Boeing and EADS — submitted their proposals for the F-X III contest, whose winner is to be announced in October. That's because the proposals by Lockheed and EADS failed to meet translation requirements, according to South Korea's Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA).

Lockheed is offering the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, Boeing the F-15SE Silent Eagle and EADS the Typhoon.

Four of the 24 files Lockheed submitted, related to offset programs and the prices of key equipment, lacked documents translated into Korean, while EADS' 32 files were mostly in English with only an executive summary in Korean, the agency said in a statement.

The decision fanned the possibility that the fighter procurement plan would not meet its schedule.

"The F-X III selection will be two weeks behind schedule inevitably, due to the translation problem, which means DAPA's fighter evaluation, set to begin early July, is to be postponed," said Kim Dae-young, a research member of the Korea Defense & Security Forum, a private defense think tank here. "We already don't have much time for evaluation and price negotiation."

Earlier, the contest came under controversy over the evaluation methods planned for the F-35, which has long been considered the front-runner due to its "fifth-generation" capability.

DAPA's evaluation team decided to test the F-35 through the use of simulators, since the U.S. government doesn't allow pilots from potential customers to fly the single-engine stealth plane, which is still about 20 percent of the way through its testing program.

Critics argue, however, that simulator evaluations cannot prove the performance of a fighter jet in a proper manner, especially since the aircraft is still being developed.

Rumor and speculation also arose that the administration of President Lee Myung-bak is trying to give preference to the U.S. fighter jet over the Typhoon, the product of Eurofighter, a four-nation European consortium.

"Unlike the simulation of a commercial airplane, it's almost impossible to demonstrate high-mobility features and technologies of a fighter jet," said Shin Bo-hyun, head of the Weapons System Concept Development and Application Research Center at Konkuk University here.

Shin, a retired South Korean Air Force major general, said, "A big question is what functions are to be evaluated through simulation, even though the F-35 program development is still in limbo."

Facing a barrage of public criticism over the "rough-and-ready" fighter competition, Noh Dae-rae, commissioner of the DAPA, backed down, saying the fighter selection schedule could be delayed.

"Making a decision by October is our goal, not an obligation, for effective negotiations," Noh said. "But if we need more time to verify candidates and negotiate with bidders, we're not really obliged to that timeline."

He also hinted that his agency would demand that the U.S. government allow a South Korean pilot to fly an actual F-35.

Lockheed officials still have confidence that their high-fidelity simulators, including the F-35 manned tactical simulator and handling qualities simulator, will offer a great deal of access to the F-35 system.

"In the past, when we have a fighter aircraft with two seats, the second seat was required to be used for training purposes, but today's technology allows us to build a single-seat airplane because today's simulators are very precise and accurate," Randy Howard, director of Lockheed's F-35 campaign in South Korea, told Defense News.

"We're confident that South Korean pilots can fly our simulators and fully understand the aerodynamics and operational capabilities of the F-35," he added.

Boeing has yet to firm up its arrangements for the F-15SE evaluation, with doubts hanging over the twin-engine plane's ability to perform both traditional and stealthy functions.

"Many of the key capability elements of the Silent Eagle are already well along with the development as part of the F-15 international programs that are ongoing," said Howard Berry, Boeing's vice president for sales. "In that point, Korea is actually in a tremendous position, giving the timing of their acquisition to leverage other ongoing development activities funded by other F-15 customers worldwide."

EADS is confident in the F-X III testing and evaluation procedures, since hundreds of Typhoon fighters have already entered service.

"You can feel a large gap obviously between flying an actual aircraft and testing simulator programs," an EADS official said. "We're confident in the deal, as long as the competition is to proceed with fairness."

The European aerospace giant is proposing that South Korea become the world's fifth nation to produce the twin-engine, multirole combat aircraft, following Britain, Germany, Italy and Spain.

The company links the F-X deal to Seoul's fighter development plan codenamed KF-X, aimed at producing more than 200 multirole, stealthy aircraft.

"Key technology challenges related to the KF-X development are common to F-X key technologies and enhancement roadmaps," Thomas Linkenbach, vice president of air systems portfolio management and sales for Cassidian, the EADS unit leading the Typhoon campaign in South Korea, said in a June 19 forum. "F-X procurement offers the best opportunity for the Republic of Korea to pave the way towards the technological challenge a fighter development imposes."

He referred to several fighter technologies that could be transferred to South Korea. Among them are developing low-observable configurations, radar signature analysis and testing, radar-absorbing structure technology, advanced fighter control law design, and the integration of active electronically scanned array radars.

http://www.defensenews.com/article/20120623/DEFREG03/306230002/Missteps-Plague-South-Korean-Fighter-Jet-Contest?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

DoD's cost-cutting strategy faces first big test

he Pentagon is putting its new weapons cost-cutting strategy to its first big test as it negotiates with Lockheed Martin over the price of the next batch of Joint Strike Fighters.

Contract negotiations for the production of 32 JSFs began earlier this year. This will be the first opportunity for Pentagon officials to see how well their so-called "should cost" approach to setting weapons prices works.

Under this approach, a team of Defense Department experts reviews the program's technical requirements, production and testing processes, and staffing to arrive at what they think the price should be, based on reductions that could be made in those areas and efficiencies that should come over time with the program, such as improved supply chain management.

An independent office in the Pentagon — called the Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation (CAPE) , and before that, the Cost Analysis Improvement Group (CAIG) — already assesses the cost of weapons systems for budgeting purposes using sophisticated models that consider past weapons costs. Historically, the budget figure is the floor from which costs rise, not the ceiling under which costs are contained, Defense officials have said.

"We're trying to say, 'OK, we understand this is the budgeted amount of dollars, but can we execute to a lesser amount so we can use that difference between what was budgeted and what we think we can execute in some other way to buy some other good or service,'" said Shay Assad, who oversees the Pentagon's "should cost" effort.

As for the JSF contract talks, it remains to be seen how big of an effect this will have.

Lockheed Martin officials say they have yet to be told what the Pentagon calculates the upcoming production lot should cost.

Assad said that, during the contract talks, Pentagon officials will share with Lockheed Martin elements of the department's "should cost" calculation — namely, areas where savings are expected. But the department will not share its internal "should cost" figures, he said.

The new contract will define the costs of 32 JSFs: 22 F-35As for the Air Force, 3 F-35Bs for the Marine Corps and 7 F-35Cs for the Navy. Experts estimate the costs of the planes will be in the range of $80 million to $120 million each.

Lockheed has provided historical cost data and other information to support the department's "should cost" estimate and has cut costs to make its proposal for this round of procurements lower than the last, said Tom Burbage, Lockheed Martin's executive vice president and general manager of the F-35, in an interview.

"We're [cutting costs] as aggressively as we know how," he said.

But Lockheed does not know if its proposal for the next group of F-35s will meet the price point that DoD is seeking, said Bruce Tanner, Lockheed Martin's chief financial officer, in an interview.

And while DoD has said that it would also find ways to improve its processes and create savings, Lockheed has not seen that effort, Tanner said. Instead, the department seems to have based its "should cost" estimate on what the program would cost if everything was working under optimal conditions, which could be risky, he said.

"It serves no purpose to either side to negotiate to a level you can't perform and then overrun to a level that you expected when you began the contract and call that overrun," Tanner said. "It's frustrating to both sides."

Many experts are skeptical Acquisition experts are anxious to see how well the effort performs, but some are skeptical it will succeed at containing costs on large programs.

"It's an interesting way to try to impose discipline on what has become an undisciplined process. But I don't think it gets at the core problem here," said Todd Harrison, senior fellow of defense budget studies at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.

The major cost driver on weapons programs is requirements that are added over time with little regard for costs, Harrison said.

"Until they get that process under control — and [until] they develop a rational way to understand the cost they're imposing on the system with every additional requirement they put on it — I don't think they're going to be successful," he said.

Weapons systems also tend to run over their projected costs because they require innovation and new technology that is unpredictable, said Michael O'Hanlon, who specializes in defense policy at the Brookings Institution.

"It's not just bad management or profit-hungry corporations or performance-crazed military services that always put added capability ahead of costs," Hanlon said. "The fundamental reason why weapons cost more is because we're usually inventing something new as we build them."

Another major cost driver on the Joint Strike Fighter has been the Defense Department's push to field plans as they are still being tested, Harrison said. As problems are found in testing, contractors not only have to revise the design of new planes, they have to fix the planes that have already been produced, he said.

"Should cost" estimates would be more useful as DoD decides which weapons systems to buy, Harrison said. Defense officials could compare their "should cost" estimates to the proposals they receive from contractors to see if it's worth pursuing, he said.

But when programs are already in production, the "should cost" is more like a "wish it would cost," Harrison said.

Assad said the Pentagon has developed ways to measure any savings the "should cost" initiative yields.

"We have specific targets for program execution, very specific targets for the size of a program office or other areas that program managers will have defined," Assad said. "So we can measure that, we can examine that and we can know at the program level whether or not we accomplished it."

http://www.federaltimes.com/article/20120624/DEPARTMENTS01/306240007/DoD-8217-s-cost-cutting-strategy-faces-first-big-test?odyssey=tab%7Ctopnews%7Ctext%7CFRONTPAGE

Lockheed says more orders key to cutting F-35 cost

By Andrea Shalal-Esa

WASHINGTON | Tue Jun 19, 2012 7:52pm EDT

(Reuters) - Senior executives at Lockheed Martin Corp (LMT.N) said they were working hard to reduce the cost of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program, the Pentagon's biggest weapons program, but ultimately needed bigger order volumes to make the program affordable.

"Volume will ultimately drive the affordability of this program," Lockheed Chief Operating Officer Chris Kubasik told reporters on Tuesday, adding that recent foreign orders for the radar-evading warplane from Japan and Norway had given the program some "positive momentum."

Lockheed submitted a proposal on Monday to build 60 of the planes for South Korea, Kubasik said, noting that winning that order would further help lower the price of the airplane.

Lockheed Chief Executive Bob Stevens said the company was "fully dedicated" to lowering the cost of the F-35, but told Reuters that it was not clear that Lockheed could meet the Pentagon's expectation of an 18 percent price cut from the fourth to fifth batches of production planes.

Stevens said Lockheed had offered the Pentagon a lower price in its proposal to build a fifth batch of 32 F-35 fighters, even though the order number was not rising, as initially projected. The negotiations have dragged on for over six months, and neither side is projecting when an agreement may be reached.

A new report by the Government Accountability Office released last week cited continuing concern about the high level of overlap between development, testing and production on the program, despite a third Pentagon restructuring this year that slowed the program to allow more time for development.

The report noted that since 2002, the total quantity through 2017 has been reduced by three-fourths, from 1,591 to 365.

Stevens last month told investors that the Pentagon's demands for ever more cost data were adding to the very overhead the government wants to see lowered because Lockheed needed more workers to process the requests.

On Tuesday, Stevens said the requests were continuing even though Lockheed had already provided 7,000 pages of additional data on top of 6,000 pages submitted in the company's proposal for the fifth batch of production planes.

He said the government's expectations were not "entirely aligned with what we're able to do as an industrial team."

He reiterated the company's resolve to drive down overhead costs and make the F-35 program more efficient, but he said some of the government's expectations were unprecedented.

"There is no precedent for some of the expectations that people have as a result of the 'should cost' conversations," Stevens told Reuters. "I know what the airplane costs, I know what the industrial base is capable of doing."

The company is also grappling with a nine-week strike by 3,650 members of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers at the Fort Worth, Texas plant where it builds the F-35, and at two military bases in California and Maryland.

Lockheed and the union are due to meet with federal mediators on Wednesday afternoon to try to resolve the strike, which was largely triggered by Lockheed's bid to scrap a defined benefit pension plan for future workers.

Larry Lawson, head of Lockheed's aeronautics division, told Reuters in a separate interview that the company could not back off its demand to halt defined benefit pension plans for future workers, a policy already implemented in nearly every other corporate sector. "We're not out of line with the national trends," he said.

Stevens told reporters on Tuesday that Lockheed had used the strike to think about making certain parts of the F-35 assembly line "more efficient." He did not elaborate.

Lawson said Lockheed was also working hard to lower the current rate of 16 percent for scrap, rework and repair on the F-35 production line, although he rejected the Pentagon's view that the rate exceeded that of other aircraft programs at this point in their development.

"I don't want to leave anybody with the impression that we're satisfied with 16 percent non-conforming. It's not a satisfactory place to be," Lawson said.

He said the scrap, repair and rework rate had not risen as a result of the strike, despite the use of temporary workers.

Lawson echoed Kubasik's remarks about needing larger order volumes to drive down production costs, calling it "the most powerful leverage" to meet cost targets on the program.

He said the government's own cost models showed that cost of the plane would go down as orders increased, noting that Lockheed had beat the government's cost estimates for each successive batch of production planes.

He said the company could not back off its demand to halt defined benefit pension plans for future workers. "We're not out of line with the national trends," he said.

Lockheed is developing and building the next-generation F-35 fighter for the United States and eight development partners - Britain, Italy, Turkey, Denmark, Norway, Canada, Australia and the Netherlands - plus two other countries, Israel and Japan.

The Pentagon projects it will spend $396 billion to develop and buy 2,443 of the new radar-evading, supersonic warplanes, with projected operating and maintenance costs likely to drive the program's total lifetime cost to $1.51 trillion.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/19/us-lockheed-fighter-f-idUSBRE85I1VL20120619

Northrop Grumman's F-35 DAS and Radar Demonstrate Ability to Detect, Track, Target Ballistic Missiles

LINTHICUM, Md., Jun 26, 2012 (GlobeNewswire via COMTEX) -- Northrop Grumman Corporation /quotes/zigman/236055/quotes/nls/noc NOC -1.01% recently demonstrated the ballistic missile detection, tracking and targeting capabilities of the company's AN/AAQ-37 distributed aperture system (DAS) and AN/APG-81 active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar, both of which are featured on the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) aircraft.

A video accompanying this release is available on YouTube at http://youtu.be/qF29GBSpRF4 .

Leveraging NASA's Science Mission Directorate-sponsored Anomalous Transport Rocket Experiment launch operation, the demonstration was coordinated with NASA and the U.S. Air Force to ensure that it did not impact NASA's primary science mission goals. The systems were demonstrated in flight onboard the company's BAC1-11 testbed aircraft.

Northrop Grumman's DAS and APG-81 autonomously detected, tracked and targeted multiple, simultaneous ballistic rockets. The DAS autonomously detected all five rockets, launched in rapid succession, and tracked them from initial launch well past the second stage burnout.

"Northrop Grumman demonstrated these ballistic missile tracking modes with only minor modifications to the baseline F-35 JSF radar and DAS software," said Jeff Leavitt, vice president of Northrop Grumman's combat avionic systems business unit. "Since DAS is always staring simultaneously in every direction, an operator does not have to point the sensor in the direction of a target to gain a track. The F-35 pilot could continue the primary mission while the sensors automatically observe ballistic missile threats."

The APG-81 AESA radar demonstrated the ability to provide acquisition and weapons quality tracks independently, and also via pointing cues from DAS for expedited and extended range target acquisition. The radar maintained each track from initial acquisition until the rocket exited the radar's field of view.

Leavitt added that Northrop Grumman is currently exploring how the existing DAS technology could assist in several additional mission areas, including irregular warfare operations.

The multifunction AN/APG-81 AESA radar is capable of the full range of air-to-air and air-to-surface capabilities complemented by significant electronic warfare and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance functions. The AN/AAQ-37 DAS provides passive spherical awareness for the F-35, simultaneously detecting and tracking aircraft and missiles in every direction, and providing visual imagery for day/night navigation and targeting purposes.

Northrop Grumman is a leading global security company providing innovative systems, products and solutions in aerospace, electronics, information systems, and technical services to government and commercial customers worldwide. Please visit www.northropgrumman.com for more information.

This news release was distributed by GlobeNewswire, www.globenewswire.com

SOURCE: Northrop Grumman Corp.

Boeing Completes Wind Tunnel Tests on Silent Eagle Conformal Weapons Bay

ST. LOUIS --- Boeing recently completed wind tunnel tests on the Silent Eagle Conformal Weapons Bay (CWB). The tests, conducted at the company's St. Louis facility, validated the aerodynamics of the CWB design. CWBs are integral to the adaptable configuration and balanced survivability of the Silent Eagle.

"Boeing and its partners have advanced to the next phase in the development of the Silent Eagle, an evolved derivative of the combat-proven F-15 family of aircraft," said Roger Besancenez, F-15 Program vice president for Boeing. "We are now testing production-representative hardware as we continue to validate our affordable and low-risk design."

Boeing is partnering with Korea Aerospace Industries to design, develop and manufacture the CWB. The Silent Eagle is Boeing's offer in the F-X competition for the Republic of Korea's multirole fighter aircraft.

The wind tunnel tests used a scale model of the Silent Eagle to determine the effect of various air speeds and flight angles. The tests assessed enhancements made to the initial CWB design and confirmed the team's modeling analysis.

More detailed tests later this year will focus on the aerodynamic effects of multiple weapons loads, as well as opening and closing the upper and lower CWB doors.

Boeing this year also completed the final phase of Radar Cross Section (RCS) reduction tests to validate the aircraft's production configuration.

The Silent Eagle is designed with advanced technologies that provide an unprecedented balance of survivability and lethality to meet warfighters' needs in all phases of air combat. The CWBs can be reconfigured to Conformal Fuel Tanks (CFTs) to optimize the aircraft for longer ranges and increased weapons loading, making the Silent Eagle a flexible platform with unmatched range, speed, payload and persistence.   :big-smile: The reconfigurable CWB-CFT concept is unique in the fighter aircraft world and contributes to the overall RCS reduction package while the aircraft maintains both air-to-air and air-to-surface capabilities.

The Silent Eagle also features enhanced avionics such as an integrated Active Electronically Scanned Array radar and Digital Electronic Warfare Suite that provide the aircrew with increased lethality and exceptional situational awareness.

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/release/3/136313/boeing-advances-silent-eagle-development.html

Foto's :
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/pictures-wind-tunnel-tests-for-f-15-silent-eagle-cwb-completed-373389/

Ik herhaal het nog maar een keer, hopelijk lezen politici mee!

Indien de F35 het niet gaat halen in Nederland en als de BV NL slechts een luchtmacht ambieert met 42 toestellen (ongeacht het type) dan is wat mij beteft de F15SE of F15E hét alternatief voor de Klu.

De reden hiervoor zijn simpel: een alles kunner tegen een accpetabele prijs met een capaciteit die elke concurrent overstijgt.

Twee piloten per kist vind ik met 42 toestellen geen argument, te kleine shelters ook niet immers je kan de vraag stellen of shelters nog werken in 2018 of is een simpeler versterkte behuizing voldoende? Een aantal nieuw shelters voor QRA kost ook niet de wereld.

+1 Jurrien

Bigger, Better And Not The Same At All
   
June 27, 2012:

The Swedish Air Force recently got the go-ahead to build prototypes of the new JAS 39E Gripen fighter. This happened mainly because Switzerland has agreed to buy it. The Swedish Air Force hopes this will persuade their own government to buy some of these aircraft. Formerly known as the Gripen NG (Next Generation) fighters, the JAS 39E will be heavier (17 tons), have better electronics, a heavier payload (over four tons), and be a two seater version better able to handle ground attack and electronic warfare duties. The Swedish Air Force already has 120 JAS 39C Gripens in service and the prospect of more defense budget cuts made the purchase of 60 Gripen NGs (at a total cost of nearly $5 billion) seemingly impossible. But the JAS 39E excited several export customers and that made all the difference.
Sweden is describing the 39E as a "new aircraft" compared to the earlier JAS 39 models. There's some truth to that, as the 39E is a little longer and heavier, but still looks like a Gripen, The 39E is full of more expensive, and capable, electronics, but that's not obvious by just looking at the new model. The first 39E is expected to fly next year and enter service in 2018.

The Gripen has already undergone one major enhancement to the JAS 39C model. Improvements included inflight refueling, better electronics, and improved ground attack capability. The C model was also compliant with NATO standards for warplanes. This was necessary for export sales. There was also a two seat D model for training.

The 14 ton JAS-39C is roughly comparable to the latest versions of the F-16. The Gripen is small but can carry up to 3.6 tons of weapons. With the increasing use of smart bombs this is adequate. Often regarded as an also-ran in the current crop of "modern jet fighters", the Swedish Gripen is proving to be more competition than the major players (the F-16, F-18, F-35, Eurofighter, Rafale, MiG-29, and Su-27) expected. Put simply, Gripen does a lot of little (but important) things right and costs about half as much (at about $35 million each) as its major competitors. More importantly, Gripen also costs about half as much, per flight hour, to operate. In effect, Gripen provides the ruggedness and low cost of Russian aircraft with the high quality and reliability of Western aircraft. For many nations this is an appealing combination. The Gripen is easy to use (both for pilots and ground crews) and capable of doing all jet fighter jobs (air defense, ground support, and reconnaissance) well enough.

The JAS 39 entered active service in 1997 and has had an uphill battle getting export sales. Sweden does not have the diplomatic clout of its major competitors, so they have to push quality and service. Swedish warplanes and products in general have an excellent reputation in both categories. Nevertheless, the Gripen is still expected to lose out on a lot of sales simply because politics took precedence over performance.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htairfo/articles/20120627.aspx

PICTURES: MBDA sharpens Spear missile design for F-35 integration 27 June 2012 by Craig Hoyle

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... on-373453/

"European manufacturer MBDA has unveiled a UK-developed design for a next-generation air-to-surface weapon suitable for internal carriage by the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

To be shown for the first time as a full-scale mock-up at the Farnborough air show, the Spear concept would use a turbojet engine and a wing kit to provide a stand-off range of about 100km (54nm). "Speed and range are the two main drivers" behind this configuration, says Rob Thornley, export working group leader for MBDA UK.

"Another key requirement is to provide multiple load-out on the F-35," says Thornley. The company expects to be able to fit up to four Spear weapons and one Meteor beyond visual-range air-to-air missile in each of the F-35's two weapons bays.

( Dus Intern : 8x Spear en 2x Meteor )

Firm decisions have yet to be made on the final Spear configuration, but MBDA says it will be about 2m (6.5ft) long, carry a multi-effect warhead and use a multimode seeker. The high subsonic-speed weapon will also feature INS/GPS guidance, and be able to receive mid-course updates via an onboard datalink.

The basis of the concept is now in an assessment phase study for the UK Ministry of Defence's Spear Capability 3 requirement. This activity is due to conclude in 2014 with an airframe and propulsion system demonstration using a representative weapon design.

"We are on track, and continue to mature the technologies," says business executive Adrian Monks. However, MBDA acknowledges that the UK's recent decision to revert to the short take-off and vertical landing F-35B "brings some challenges", as the type's weapons bays are shorter than those found on the carrier variant F-35C previously favoured by London...."

MORE at the JUMP!
http://www.flightglobal.com/assets/geta ... emid=46445

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-19503.html

Lockheed: F-35 Partners Won't Suffer Unduly from Production Slowdown AIN Defense Perspective » February 17, 2012 by Chris Pocock

"...Under F-35 procurement procedures, the partners pay the same unit recurring flyaway cost as the U.S. for the aircraft that they order in each annual or (eventually) multi-year buy. Smaller order quantities should mean higher unit prices, but countering this trend, Scott told AIN, is the fact that "as we refine the supply chain and the production processes, the price will continue to reduce."

Scott noted that six of the eight partners now have committed to or ordered aircraft. "They're all in it together, and have been for 10 years now," he said, referring to the system design and development phase in which all of them made contributions. These ranged from $2 billion from the UK, a Level 1 partner, to $1 billion from Italy and $800 million from the Dutch as Level 2 partners to $125 million to $175 million from the remainder, as Level 3 partners.

The British (three) and the Dutch (two) have already ordered aircraft, Scott noted. Australia (two) and Italy (four) are placing their first orders in Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) Lot 6, and have already funded long-lead production items. Turkey is following in LRIP 7, and Norway (four) in LRIP 8. Canada and Denmark are the two partners who have yet to commit. The first deliveries to Israel and Japan will be from LRIP 8...."

[...]

Source: http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/ ... n-slowdown

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-18343.html

De 'test' toestellen?

Citaat van: dudge op 28/06/2012 | 10:13 uur
De 'test' toestellen?

klopt, die 2 zijn de test toestellen, maar .... als LM zijnde en een media-bericht de wereld insturende moet je natuurlijk niet noemen dat het "test" toestellen zijn.
Nu lijkt het net dat 2 volwaardige toestellen besteld zijn en de rest van de bestelling in een andere LRIP volgen.

F-35 fighters part 2 - the Money Pit

By Stuart Smallwood

As bad as this airplane's performance has been, the cost overruns have been even worse. Lockheed Martin originally stated the jets would costs between $60-70 million. However, production costs per jet have stabilized at around $160 million for the JSF F-35 air force version that Seoul is targeting and $200 million or more for the navy's version.
Lockheed Martin argues the airplane's cost will lower as more countries buy the planes and demand increases. However, Wheeler and Freeman both agree costs are likely to go up.
Seoul wants a guarantee from the U.S. that each of the 60 airplanes it purchases will be no more than $118.3 million.
Freeman thinks Washington may give the guarantee to Seoul with the hopes that more international purchases will keep costs down at home. He says Washington may make American taxpayers cover the remainder of the bill for South Korea and Lockheed Martin.
Wheeler disagrees with Freeman, arguing that, though Seoul is an important ally to Washington, the price is just too high, even for the air force variant.
"Like us, they will have to just wait and see how bad this really gets before committing," he says.
Even if Seoul successfully secures a guarantee from Washington, there will be crippling costs for flight and maintenance after South Korea purchases the airplane.
The DOD currently estimates every hour in sky costs over $35,000. Freeman says his organization thinks these estimates are low.
"Even so, they are going to fly over 300 hours per year. You're talking about $11 million per year, per plane. It could cost $660 million a year for South Korea to keep these planes in the sky."
The costs of flying the planes could limit training hours and, in turn, compromise pilots' ability to operate an already questionably capable airplane.
"Pilots work and operate best when they're flying. It's like anything, you have to stay sharp on whatever you do," Freeman says. "A plane is only as valuable as the pilot that's flying it."
He says South Korea needs to consider the possibility that these costs alone could hinder the efficiency and performance of their air force.
The overpriced F-35
Wheeler says he expects the F-35 program will be the lowest hanging fruit on the vine of budgetary cuts next January when the second round of defense cuts will be addressed, though he doesn't think it will be dealt with as decisively as it should be.
The navy has shown signs of backing out of their version of the F-35. Countries around the world are also beginning to express concern about the costs and performance of the program and may back out. If this occurs, the price tag for a single unit is likely to rise.
"[The fewer units are sold], the more the unit costs are going to go up and that's going to affect our foreign and domestic purchases all the same," Freeman says.
Japan recently announced plans to purchase the F-35, but they have not signed a delivery contract. Unless South Korea wants to pay an inflated price for the jet after signing a contract, Wheeler says it would be wise to wait to see what happens in the next few years.
If South Korea purchases the airplanes they must do so through Foreign Military Sales, a U.S. government-run middle group that deals with weapons sales abroad. The catch: if the prices go up after the agreement, or if the jets don't work as promised, South Korea will be powerless to seek redress from Lockheed Martin. Seoul will be forced to pay full price.
Costs may go up so high that even if the U.S. government does provide a $118.3 million price limit guarantee it may simply be too expensive to honor.
"The cost history has a long ways to go and its going nowhere but up," Wheeler says.
As for the people who get stuck with the F-35 : "They'll have an airplane that is high cost, difficult to maintain, won't fly frequently and won't perform its missions very well," he said.
New F-16s would do for South Korea
If Seoul is arming itself to against North Korea, Chuck Spinney - an author and former military analyst for the Pentagon who has testified before the U.S. Congress on many occasions - says they simply don't need high-tech stealth airplanes.
Spinney says even if stealth did work, it would be unnecessary against North Korea because they don't have the air defense capability to justify the purchase. He says South Korea would be better off if they simply purchased new F-16's.
"The F-35 will be an inferior alternative to the F-16," Spinney says. "They could negotiate for a stripped down air superiority version of the F-16, which would be an outstanding aero performer, and if it made the North Korea 'strategists' feel better, they could have a few F-16's configured for deep-strike bombing of North Korean airfields and missile sites."
Freeman, Wheeler and Spinney all agree South Korea should not try to put all of their money into one plane. The country should also purchase a ground support airplane like the A-10, which is considered a world-class bomber. They say it would improve their capacity to deal with North Korea in the event of a conflict.
By avoiding the F-35 and opting for a more efficient air force with more aircrafts the opportunity for Seoul could be immense.
"With a low-cost, high-effectiveness force mix like this, South Korean pilots could afford to train aggressively at proper flying hour rates," he says.
"With proper combined arms training with the South Korean army, South Koreans could have the most capable military in Asia and then perhaps American soldiers could come home."

http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_international/540022.html

F-35 fighters part 1 - US Defense Analysts: purchasing the F-35 would be a huge mistake for South Korea

By Stuart Smallwood

U.S. defense analysts and strong critics of Lockheed Martin's F-35 Lightning II Joint Striker Fighter say if South Korea purchases the F-35 they will be stuck with an increasingly expensive airplane that will fail their air defense program.
Seoul is currently considering purchasing 60 F-35s to serve as its "fifth generation" airplane upgrade. Winslow Wheeler, Director of the Straus Military Reform Project in the United States, says the JSF F-35 is destined to be a little-used aircraft, even by the United States, and will be the butt of military industry jokes for decades to come.
"It's a failed design from the get-go and it's proving itself to be completely unaffordable," Wheeler said. "Even if the airplane lives up to every performance specification it will be a huge disappointment."
Wheeler says the F-35's capability has been exaggerated by both its production company, Lockheed Martin, and certain media who have overlooked design flaws for the sake of wishful thinking.
"If you believe the brochure level stuff you can easily become a wild-eyed advocate of this airplane and come to the conclusion that it's obviously gigantically expensive but it's such a wonderful airplane and we should buy it," says Wheeler. "But you have to close your eyes to a lot of things to come to that conclusion."
Failed design
Ben Freeman, a National Security Investigator for the Project on Governmental Oversight (POGO) in the United States, says it is due to its design as an all-purpose, three-in-one airplane that the F-35 has been a failure from the beginning.
"The F35 is designed to do all these different things - air-to-air, air-to-ground, and some surveillance as well. You have all these functions and it sounds great on paper," says Freeman.
Freeman says the roles of air-to-air (fighter) and air-to-ground (bomber) airplanes are totally different.
"When you put these things into practice, it's sort of like a Swiss army knife," says Freeman. "Yeah it can do all these things, it just can't do any of them well."
Wheeler says due to complex radar systems and stealth coating the aircraft is simply too heavy and has too much drag to be a close-up fighter airplane. It has other flaws that affect its maneuverability including an insufficient thrust-to-weight ratio and wings that are too small for its weight. As a bomber its payload is much smaller than world-class bombers, it is too fast to find targets or distinguish enemies from friends on the ground and doesn't have the necessary fuel capacity to stay above troops on the battlefield for long.
"For survival against enemies in the air, the F-35 will depend on the same technological dream of BVR (Beyond Visual Range) combat," Wheeler wrote with co-author Walter Sprey in Jane's Defense Weekly. "It has to - as a close-in dogfighter, it is a disaster."
The "fifth generation" myth of BVR and stealth
The most widely praised performance capabilities of the F-35 are its "stealth" and Beyond Visual Range (BVR) components. Both Freeman and Wheeler argue that stealth is nothing more than hype.
"Man has yet to develop anything that is completely invisible to radar all the time," said Freeman.
During the Kosovo air war in 1999 an F-117, a former stealth-reliant airplane, was shot down by Serb forces and another was severely damaged by a radar missile using Long Wavelength Radars (LWR). Wheeler says using this technology allows enemies to see a stealth airplane from long distances. All the Serbs had to do was figure out how to get the missile to the target without using tracking radar - a problem they solved.
"In [the U.S.] a lot of people keep their eyes closed toward this and the Air Force doesn't run exercises where these 1950s Soviet-vintage radars are able to see the F-22 and F-35," Wheeler says. "They're not being required to change their tactics accordingly."
"They seem to think everything is going to run in warfare just the way they want it to."
Ben Freeman also questions why Seoul needs 60 stealth airplanes that don't have the same performance capabilities as other far cheaper models.
"Even if everything Lockheed says is true and they really are some kind of James Bond-type weapon - just completely invisible - you send a dozen, two dozen in, you knock out the enemy radar and boom, your fine."
Wheeler says the long-range BVR-based combat system that the F-35 must rely on (because it is so poor as a fighter up-close) is also nearly worthless.
Beyond Visual Range is a technique designed to be used by an airplane to target and attack an enemy aircraft well before it is in visual range of that aircraft. But BVR radar has not yet proven to be reliable even though it has been pushed by the U.S. Air Force since the Cold War.
There are still methods capable of distinguishing if a target is a friend or a foe. Further, the special radar signal emitted by BVR actually alerts the enemy, giving it ample time to maneuver away from an incoming missile.
Lockheed has completed only 21 percent of testing
Many of the F35s problems are incurred in the production process.
In the United States Government Accountability Office's (GAO) report to Congress this month the office discussed myriad problems the developers are still experiencing with development of the F-35. The report concludes, "Much of the instability in the JSF program has been and continues to be the result of highly concurrent development, testing, and production activities."
Concurrent development is essentially mass-production of airplanes while testing is still in early stages. Even today, a decade into the program, Lockheed Martin has only completed 21 per cent of developmental flight testing (not including flight testing the finished product).
"It is phenomenal idiocy the way this program has been run," says Freeman. "What a normal person would do - what the military was doing throughout most of its history - is to have a design, make a prototype and then test the heck out of it and figure out what it can and can't do. Then you make all these changes to it."
It was only after testing, and realizing what works and what doesn't, that traditional programs went into large-scale assembly production. Freeman says F-35 production has been the exact opposite of this.
"We said, 'I've a general idea of what I want this plane to do and I'm going to build a bunch and while I'm building that bunch I'm going to tack-on all these other new requirements.'"
The results are a lot flaws in production, the need to restructure planes already made and much higher costs than initially predicted by the developers.
"Unless you've got a very basic design you can't just go straight to the production line," Freeman says. "By definition - fifth generation - they are very complex. What we have isn't the final product, yet we still keep producing them and that is costing a ton of money."
The GAO report says only four per cent of the systems required to run the airplane have been completed. Recently, the airplane has been grounded due to problems with the headgear system, which the report says is integral to the operation of the F-35's complex system.
Production continues despite lack of testing
The GAO report also says even when developmental flight testing is complete the "most challenging tasks" related to the program will still be unfinished.
Wheeler says an earlier report from the GAO indicated only 17 per cent of the airplane's actual performance characteristics will be fully completed at the end of this testing. The rest will be examined, not by actually flying the plane, but through computer simulation and desk studies.
"The jury won't even be in when developmental testing is complete in 2017," he says. "We will have to go through some operational testing and deployment periods before we understand what the hell this horrible airplane really is."
Technical issues have been a major concern with the airplane, but even worse, there is the possibility that flying these airplanes makes pilots sick. Several incidents have occurred with the F-22 where pilots have had to abort flights due to dizziness and nausea. Some analysts have expressed concern the sickness may be caused by the stealth coating on the F-22. Freeman says the very similar stealth technology on the F-35 has led to some public concerns about the safety of these jets for the pilots flying them.

http://www.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_international/540021.html

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 28/06/2012 | 12:57 uur
"The F35 is designed to do all these different things - air-to-air, air-to-ground, and some surveillance as well. You have all these functions and it sounds great on paper," says Freeman.
Freeman says the roles of air-to-air (fighter) and air-to-ground (bomber) airplanes are totally different.
"When you put these things into practice, it's sort of like a Swiss army knife," says Freeman. "Yeah it can do all these things, it just can't do any of them well."
Wheeler says due to complex radar systems and stealth coating the aircraft is simply too heavy and has too much drag to be a close-up fighter airplane. It has other flaws that affect its maneuverability including an insufficient thrust-to-weight ratio and wings that are too small for its weight. As a bomber its payload is much smaller than world-class bombers, it is too fast to find targets or distinguish enemies from friends on the ground and doesn't have the necessary fuel capacity to stay above troops on the battlefield for long.
"For survival against enemies in the air, the F-35 will depend on the same technological dream of BVR (Beyond Visual Range) combat," Wheeler wrote with co-author Walter Sprey in Jane's Defense Weekly. "It has to - as a close-in dogfighter, it is a disaster."
The "fifth generation" myth of BVR and stealth
The most widely praised performance capabilities of the F-35 are its "stealth" and Beyond Visual Range (BVR) components. Both Freeman and Wheeler argue that stealth is nothing more than hype.
"Man has yet to develop anything that is completely invisible to radar all the time," said Freeman.

waarvan akte

CitaatEven if Seoul successfully secures a guarantee from Washington, there will be crippling costs for flight and maintenance after South Korea purchases the airplane.
The DOD currently estimates every hour in sky costs over $35,000. Freeman says his organization thinks these estimates are low.
"Even so, they are going to fly over 300 hours per year. You're talking about $11 million per year, per plane. It could cost $660 million a year for South Korea to keep these planes in the sky."
The costs of flying the planes could limit training hours and, in turn, compromise pilots' ability to operate an already questionably capable airplane.

Oeps...

UK commits funds to buy its first production JSF

By Tim Ripley

6/29/2012

Only a month after UK Defence Secretary Philip Hammond announced a change in F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) variant the first orders have been placed for long lead items for a single F-35B short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL) variant, initiating serial purchases of the UK's next generation of combat aircraft.

The commitment of USD13 million towards the purchase of a single F-35B as part of the Lot 7 order of low-rate initial production (LRIP) aircraft moves the UK from the purchase of operational test and evaluation aircraft to buying aircraft to be used to train front-line personnel.

A UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) spokesman told IHS Jane's on 26 June it was envisaged that "the full-build contract for Lot 7 aircraft is scheduled to be signed in 2013".

"The UK contribution to long lead material for the one aircraft we intend to procure in Lot 7 is USD13 million," he said. "The final cost of the aircraft within Lot 7 is still to be negotiated."

Lot 7 aircraft are scheduled to be delivered in 2015-16. This will allow the MoD to meet the 2016 target set by Hammond on 10 May for the delivery of the first production JSF.

200 of 659 words

http://www.janes.com/products/janes/defence-security-report.aspx?ID=1065969116&channel=defence&subChannel=business

Japan buys F-35 stealth jets despite price rise

Tokyo, Fri Jun 29 2012, 14:17 hrs

Japan will buy four US-made F-35 stealth jets despite a sharply higher price tag, it said today, in Tokyo's first confirmed order for the next-generation aircraft which has been plagued by delays.

An official from the defence ministry said Japan would now pay 9.6 billion yen (USD 120 million) per aircraft, up from the USD 110 million originally earmarked.

He added US officials had said the price rise was unavoidable and Tokyo accepted the situation.

"We learned that the reason for the price hike is because the United States decided to postpone its domestic procurement of 179 aircraft in the next five years due to its tight budget," the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

"We accepted it as it is understandable. It would be hard for them to offer a lower price only to Japan, given that the jet was co-developed by nine countries," he said.

The defence ministry last year picked the Lockheed Martin jet to replace its ageing fleet of F-4s over the rival Boeing-made F/A-18 Super Hornet and the Eurofighter Typhoon, despite a series of technical setbacks.

The F-35, co-developed with British defence giant BAE Systems, was the most expensive among the three candidates.

In February, Japan's then defence minister Naoki Tanaka threatened to cancel the whole USD 4.7 billion, 42-jet order amid continued cost and time slippages.

Today, Tokyo signed a Letter of Offer and Acceptance for four fighter jets at USD 120 million each, along with two simulators and other accessories for a total cost of 60 billion yen.

The planned purchase of the other 38 jets has yet to be formally confirmed.

The F-35 is the most expensive weapons programme in Pentagon history and has been plagued by cost overruns and technical delays.

Last year a leaked memo revealed an array of problems exposed by flight tests, including with the landing gear and issues over airframe fatigue and vibration.

The United States touts the F-35 as a technological wonder that will slip past enemy radar and allow allied forces to keep operating in the skies alongside US warplanes.

But the programme's costs have skyrocketed just as governments around the world are facing severe budget pressures and austerity measures.

Italy has reduced its planned purchase from 131 to 90 aircraft and lawmakers in the Netherlands voted to limit their order to two, while an initial plan for 138 aircraft in Britain has been dropped without a firm number announced.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/japan-buys-f35-stealth-jets-despite-price-rise/968308/0

Japan Nails Down Purchase Of First Four F-35s

By Colin Clark

Published: June 28, 2012

WASHINGTON: A letter formally committing Japan to buy the first four of 42 F-35s is expected to land in the hands of Lockheed Martin and U.S. government officials today or tomorrow. We heard this from two very well informed sources.

While Japan has formally announced its intention to buy -- and then warned the U.S. it would cancel the deal should the price rise too much -- this is the first official action by Japan that will result in the purchase of aircraft.

The four planes would be delivered in fiscal 2016.

The Japanese press has pegged the full life cycle costs of the 42 F-35As at just shy of $13 billion. The Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress at the end of April about the potential for a $10 billion sale to Japan for the first four Joint Strike Fighters, with an option for an the other 38. The truth is somewhere in there.

South Korea is expected to announce its intention to buy F-35s quite soon. Some F-35 critics went on the record in a South Korean paper today warning that purchase of the fifth generation aircraft would be a major mistake.

The story in the progressive newspaper, The Hankyoreh, quoted AOL Defense Board of Contributor member Winslow Wheeler to this effect: "It's a failed design from the get-go and it's proving itself to be completely unaffordable."

We will point out that the Japanese government was extremely skeptical of buying the F-35 until they were granted a highly classified briefing about its capabilities and the results from exercises such as Northern Edge. We understand that the Japanese were deeply impressed with what they learned at that briefing and that is what tipped the scales in their decision making. Of course, the Chinese J-20 didn't hurt.

http://defense.aol.com/2012/06/28/japan-nails-down-purchase-of-first-four-f-35s/

Yak-130 pilot training aircraft

http://en.rian.ru/infographics/20120621/174128331.html

Voor $ 15 mjn per stuk.... We kopen er voor Nederland gewoon 300, zijn we ook weer klaar met de discussie Amerikaans of Europees en we hoeven het ook niet meer te hebben over kwaliteit versus kwantiteit.  :angel:

Citaat van: http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_international/540022.html op 28/06/2012 | 12:54 uur
Spinney says even if stealth did work, it would be unnecessary against North Korea because they don't have the air defense capability to justify the purchase.

Nu heb ik het idee dat het artikel wel klopt. Toch is dit wel een lastige uitspraak. Het upgraden van de air defense is een stuk simpeler dan het aanschaffen van een nieuwe jachtvliegtuigvloot. Al maakt het eerste deel van de zin ook al weer een hoop duidelijk: 'Als het zou werken'.

Die yak is een geweldig toestel, heel erg stevig en ook 'goedkoop'.
Ik zie het wel zitten om er 150 van te kopen voor CAS, COIN, patrouille, training en voor een display team, ook gelijk 30 in de west.
Maarja we mogen al bijna geen Amerikaanse kisten kopen van onze EU vrienden, laat staan Russische (ook niet zo leuk t.o.v. onze navo vrienden).
Deze keuze zou veel te doordacht en logisch zijn voor de politiek...

Citaat van: fly3rguy op 01/07/2012 | 22:29 uur
Die yak is een geweldig toestel, heel erg stevig en ook 'goedkoop'.
Ik zie het wel zitten om er 150 van te kopen voor CAS, COIN, patrouille, training en voor een display team, ook gelijk 30 in de west.
Maarja we mogen al bijna geen Amerikaanse kisten kopen van onze EU vrienden, laat staan Russische (ook niet zo leuk t.o.v. onze navo vrienden).
Deze keuze zou veel te doordacht en logisch zijn voor de politiek...

Dan hebben we nog wel een stevige A2A kist nodig.

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 01/07/2012 | 22:35 uur
Dan hebben we nog wel een stevige A2A kist nodig.

Je hoort mij niet klagen als dat ook een Rus is, maar i.v.m. NAVO compatibilities denk ik dat het handig is dat het een Amerikaan is of een European.

Citaat van: fly3rguy op 01/07/2012 | 22:48 uur

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 01/07/2012 | 22:35 uur
Dan hebben we nog wel een stevige A2A kist nodig.

Je hoort mij niet klagen als dat ook een Rus is, maar i.v.m. NAVO compatibilities denk ik dat het handig is dat het een Amerikaan is of een European.

Veel opties zin er dan niet al ik kijk naar een volbloed A2A kist...

Citaat van: fly3rguy op 01/07/2012 | 22:48 uur
Je hoort mij niet klagen als dat ook een Rus is, maar i.v.m. NAVO compatibilities denk ik dat het handig is dat het een Amerikaan is of een European.

De Italianen bouwen een afgeleide, de Alenia Aermacchi M-346.

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 01/07/2012 | 23:29 uur
Veel opties zin er dan niet al ik kijk naar een volbloed A2A kist...

Veel opties heb je ook helemaal niet nodig. Alleen 1 goede  ;)

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 01/07/2012 | 23:29 uur
Veel opties zin er dan niet al ik kijk naar een volbloed A2A kist...

Jurrien dan nemen we deze toch?

Citaat van: dudge op 02/07/2012 | 00:22 uur
De Italianen bouwen een afgeleide, de Alenia Aermacchi M-346.

Zou het een levensvatbare optie voor de Klu en de politiek kunnen zijn, een combinatie van nieuwe Alenia Aermacchi M-346 aangevuld met occasions (tranche 2) Eurofighters?

als voorbeeld: 60 x M-346 + 24 x Eurofighters?

Als de politiek blijft "vasthouden" aan het getal van 42... dan kan deze gedacht wat mij betreft meteen door naar de prullenbak.

Citaat van: dudge op 02/07/2012 | 00:23 uur
Veel opties heb je ook helemaal niet nodig. Alleen 1 goede  ;)

Een snelle wendbare 2 pitter...  :angel:

85x Gripen en dan 45x aeromacchi met CAS/COIN mogelijkheden en je hoort mij niet klagen.  :angel:

Citaat van: fly3rguy op 02/07/2012 | 08:05 uur
85x Gripen en dan 45x aeromacchi met CAS/COIN mogelijkheden en je hoort mij niet klagen.  :angel:

Mij ook niet.

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 02/07/2012 | 07:01 uur

Citaat van: dudge op 02/07/2012 | 00:23 uur
Veel opties heb je ook helemaal niet nodig. Alleen 1 goede  ;)

Een snelle wendbare 2 pitter...  :angel:

en als we toch wat Amerikaans moeten kopen, dan 36 stuks F-15SE met aanvulling van M-346

36 x € 80 miljoen = € 2,88 miljard
50 x € 20 miljoen = € 1,00 miljard

dus samen ruim binnen het budget van 4,4 miljard

Citaat van: Harald op 02/07/2012 | 09:29 uur
en als we toch wat Amerikaans moeten kopen, dan 36 stuks F-15SE met aanvulling van M-346

36 x € 80 miljoen = € 2,88 miljard
50 x € 20 miljoen = € 1,00 miljard

dus samen ruim binnen het budget van 4,4 miljard

:heart:

Hedenmiddag is Frankrijk een Rafale kwijt geraakt, boven de Middellandse Zee. Het is de vierde.
Zie: http://www.air-cosmos.com/defense/un-rafale-marine-s-abime-en-mediterranee.html
Het artikel is geschreven in het Frans.  ;)

Citaat van: Harald op 02/07/2012 | 09:29 uur
en als we toch wat Amerikaans moeten kopen, dan 36 stuks F-15SE met aanvulling van M-346

Gaat hem sowieso niet worden: F15 heeft 2 motoren --> te duur in onderhoud. Daarom zijn de F18 en Eurofighter ook geen kandidaten als opvolger.

Citaat van: Reinier op 02/07/2012 | 17:29 uur

Citaat van: Harald op 02/07/2012 | 09:29 uur
en als we toch wat Amerikaans moeten kopen, dan 36 stuks F-15SE met aanvulling van M-346

Gaat hem sowieso niet worden: F15 heeft 2 motoren --> te duur in onderhoud. Daarom zijn de F18 en Eurofighter ook geen kandidaten als opvolger.

Rafale was een goede 2de, na de evaluatie in 2008 ....

Citaat van: Reinier op 02/07/2012 | 17:29 uur

Citaat van: Harald op 02/07/2012 | 09:29 uur
en als we toch wat Amerikaans moeten kopen, dan 36 stuks F-15SE met aanvulling van M-346

Gaat hem sowieso niet worden: F15 heeft 2 motoren --> te duur in onderhoud. Daarom zijn de F18 en Eurofighter ook geen kandidaten als opvolger.

Ik denk dat het net in het andere topic thuis hoort, maar lukt me ff niet. Dat de 2 motorige f15 en EF geen kandidaat zijn, heeft denk ik vooral te maken met het gegeven dat het geen F35's zijn.

Citaat van: Reinier op 02/07/2012 | 17:29 uur
Gaat hem sowieso niet worden: F15 heeft 2 motoren --> te duur in onderhoud. Daarom zijn de F18 en Eurofighter ook geen kandidaten als opvolger.

Dat gold nog voor 85 stuks, met de aanschaf van 68 maar waarschijnlijker 42 vindt ik grote en twee mortoren wat minder relevant.

En in het theoretische geval een keuze tussen 42 Gripen NG of 42 F15SE/E vindt ik de keuze niet ze heel erg moeilijk.

Citaat van: Harald op 02/07/2012 | 17:36 uur
Rafale was een goede 2de, na de evaluatie in 2008 ....

En dat is wat mij betreft ook the first runner up (het F15 verhaal kunnen we gewoon uit ons hoofd zetten)

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 02/07/2012 | 18:31 uur

Citaat van: Harald op 02/07/2012 | 17:36 uur
Rafale was een goede 2de, na de evaluatie in 2008 ....

En dat is wat mij betreft ook the first runner up (het F15 verhaal kunnen we gewoon uit ons hoofd zetten)

Maar ook de Rafale is een 2 motorig toestel, dus die kunnen we ook van de lijst halen, toch ... ??

Het 2 motorige verhaal komt bij de politiek diende heren vandaan, zodat er meer afvallers zouden zijn. Want alleen 1 motorige kandidaten, zou betekenen dat de Gripen NG, F-16 Block 52 + / 60 en F-35 nog mee konden dingen naar de eerste plek.

Ik blijf, misschien tegen beter weten in, dat Nederland er goed aan zou doen toestel als de F-15SE (of zonder coating) aan te kopen.
Hij heeft misschien niet de stealth (wat ik een toverwoord vind en al enigzins achterhaald) maar wel een 5th gen. sensoren pakket, AESA radar en multi-roll met alle benodigde wapenmogelijkheden. Zeker in A2A een goed, tot uitstekend toestel en dit geldt ook voor A2G.

Citaat van: Harald op 02/07/2012 | 09:29 uur
Een wendbare 2-pitter.     en als we toch wat Amerikaans moeten kopen, dan 36 stuks F-15SE met aanvulling van M-346
36 x € 80 miljoen = € 2,88 miljard
50 x € 20 miljoen = € 1,00 miljard     dus samen ruim binnen het budget van 4,4 miljard

Levensduurkosten (100%) = aanschafkosten (30%) + exploitatiekosten (70%).

Totale operationele kosten per vlieguur (indirecte + directe kosten) in 2010 bij de US Air Force:
F-16C   :  USD 19.087  (100)
F-15E   :  USD 28.639  (150)   De jaarlijkse jachtvliegtuig vloot begroting blijft komende jaren hetzelfde of wordt zeer waarschijnlijk minder.
                                            Dus reken dan ook niet op 36 of 42 F-15(S)E's,  maar op respectievelijk 24 of 28 F-15SE's.   Met zo een kleine vloot kan je uitstekend de Quick Reaction Alert taak uitvoeren.  Maar een expeditionaire inzet zit er dan niet meer in!  

Onderhouds manuren per vlieguur in 2007 bij de USAF:
F-16C  :  17,75 uur  (100)
F-15E  :  22,75 uur  (128,2)

Daarnaast een aanvals variant van de M-346 invoeren is qua exploitatie 0,0 pecunia voor handen.  En zou je een tweede logistieke 'staart' moeten opzetten, ook al onrealistisch.
Dassault claimt dat de Rafale per vlieguur slechts 15% duurder is dan een Mirage 2000.  Ik schat echter in dat de Rafale exploitatie kosten in de buurt komen van de F-15E.  

Citaat van: Poleme op 02/07/2012 | 21:02 uur
Dassault claimt dat de Rafale per vlieguur slechts 15% duurder is dan een Mirage 2000.  Ik schat echter in dat de Rafale exploitatie kosten in de buurt komen van de F-15E.  

Dat is dan financieel aantrekkelijker dan de expoitatie van de F35A (volgens diverse bronnen variërend van USD 30.000 tot USD  35.000 per vlieguur (als de openbare bronnen correct zijn natuurlijk)

Hoort eigenlijk thuis in het andere topic "vervanger van de F16"
Maar de reden dat de F15 en/of F18 af zijn gevallen, ten eerste dus omdat ze 2 motoren hebben, maakt het onderhoud duurder. En ze zijn te groot voor de huidige shelters, dan moeten die ook vervangen/ verbouwd worden (...)

Citaat van: Reinier op 02/07/2012 | 21:34 uur
Hoort eigenlijk thuis in het andere topic "vervanger van de F16"
Maar de reden dat de F15 en/of F18 af zijn gevallen, ten eerste dus omdat ze 2 motoren hebben, maakt het onderhoud duurder. En ze zijn te groot voor de huidige shelters, dan moeten die ook vervangen/ verbouwd worden (...)

Een shelter vind ik persoonlijk geen argument gezien de resultaten van de moderne oorlogsvoering. Versterkte hangaars lijken mij meer dan voldoende, zodat de eerste de beste activist, zoals Diederik Samsom, niet in staat is om met een bijl of iets dergelijks op de gestalde kisten in te hakken.

Misschien een paar nieuwe QRA shelters en dat lijkt me nu ook niet het einde van het defensie budget.

Daarnaast hebben 42 twee motorige kisten 1 motor minder dan het plan getal van 85 één pitters ;D

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 02/07/2012 | 22:01 uur
Daarnaast hebben 42 twee motorige kisten 1 motor minder dan het plan getal van 85 één pitters ;D

lol ...   :big-smile:

Stealth: Not-So-Secret Secrets

by Taylor Dinerman
July 2, 2012

If major international war really is obsolete, it is mainly due to America's military superiority: it makes adversaries reluctant to take us on.

We are now seeing Russian and Chinese "stealth" aircraft appear, at least in prototype form. The Chinese have prototypes of the J-20 large fighter bomber, which looks as if it may enter service with the Chinese Air Force in 2018. In a recently published report on Chinese military power, the US Department of Defense wrote that the J-20 shows "China's ambition to produce a fighter aircraft that incorporates stealth attributes, advanced avionics and supercruise capable engines." Supercruise in this context means that the aircraft can fly at supersonic speeds for sustained periods of time. This has only been achieved by the now grounded US SR-71 Blackbird reconnaissance jet and the F-22.

Americans should get used to the idea that today's military technological breakthrough will be commonplace on tomorrow's battlefield. It costs a lot to develop and build the best military in the world.

If the pundits are right, and if major international war really is obsolete, it is largely due to America's overwhelming military superiority: it makes adversaries reluctant to take us on. Maintaining this U.S. superiority is what keeps the world more or less at peace.

Russia, meanwhile, is working on the Sukhoi T-80, also known as the PAK-FA -- a supposedly stealthy version of the SU-27 family of fighter bombers. The Russians have negotiated a co-development deal for this aircraft with India, which plans to buy around 200 copies.

Sukhoi has three T-80 test aircraft in operation, and hopes to have 11 more test aircraft flying before the first production model is delivered in 2013. The Russian air force is planning to have the T-80 in service sometime in 2015 or 2016, but its arrival in the Russian Air Force will probably be delayed. How effective the T-80 will be is open to question. Russia has developed some excellent combat airplanes over the years, but it has also built large numbers of fighters that have proven to be less than reliable, such as the 1970s' MiG 23.

Meanwhile, the US F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program, which originated in 1993, grinds ahead. It has already cost US taxpayers more than $400 billion. By the time the last F-35 leaves the production line sometime in the 2030s, the whole program will have cost more than one-and-a-half trillion dollars.

The F-35 was supposed to be the final manned fighter airplane built by the US; after that, all combat flying would be done by drones -- but things may not turn out that way. The US Navy has started preliminary work on a new manned fighter attack aircraft called the FA-XX.

The F-35 was also supposed to be a fine example of multinational cooperation. Certainly the US's European partners, including the British, the Dutch, the Norwegians, the Italians and the Danes, all had memories of successful collaboration with the US Defense Department on projects in the past. America's foreign partners are already suffering from "sticker shock," but as they have already invested considerable sums in the program, probably few of these partners will choose to walk away.

Any real stealth secrets inherent in the F-35 will almost certainly leak out through these foreign partners. They may have already leaked. However since the classified technology dates from the mid-1990s, it can hardly be considered truly "cutting edge."

Many Americans believe that Stealth technology is still an exclusive US military advantage and that the "Secrets of Stealth" must be preserved at all costs. Stealth, or as it is sometimes called, Low Observable Technology, has acquired an almost mythical significance. This myth tends to blind both political leaders in Washington and many media commentators to the true value of what is misleadingly referred to as invisibility. During the 1980 Presidential campaign, the Carter administration announced that it was working on an invisible bomber, which turned out to be the very expensive B-2 bomber, of which the US Air Force managed to buy a grand total of 21.

In the late 1970s, the US Air Force was working on a smaller Stealth aircraft, the F-117 Nighthawk, which secretly entered into service in 1982. Publicly unveiled in 1989, the US Air Force hailed it as a giant breakthrough in its military technology. That was nearly quarter of a century ago, it is hard to see why anyone expects that the secrets of stealth are still secret.

The US had been working on radar-evading and heat-signature-suppressing technologies since the late 1950s. There is nothing either very secret or surprising about this. All military forces try to hide their forces and are willing to spend a lot of money and effort on various forms of camouflage and concealment.

Stealth technology as we know it came into being in the 1970s, thanks in part to work by a Russian mathematician, but mostly thanks to advances in US computer technology. Lockheed was able to build a technology demonstration aircraft for the air force called the "Have Blue," which showed that an aircraft with the new radar-evading technology could penetrate Soviet-style 1970s integrated air defense systems.

"Have Blue" was followed in the early 1980s by the secret F-117 Stealth "Fighter," which was never actually a fighter but, as it was roughly the size of a fighter, the Air Force choose to call it a fighter, even though it would have been more accurate to call it a light reconnaissance bomber.

Although the F-117 was first used during the overthrow of the Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega in 1989, it proved itself during the 1991 Gulf War. The Iraq air defense system, which at the time was the best that Saddam's oil wealth could buy, was unable to shoot down a single F-117, even though they flew dozens of missions over the most heavily defended parts of Iraq, especially over Baghdad. The F-117s were able repeatedly to hit Iraqi headquarters and other critical targets such as bridges and industrial facilities. It was this that crippled Saddam's ability to continue the war.

At the same time in the early 1990s, the Air Force was introducing its new strategic bomber, the B-2. This was, and is, an extraordinary aircraft that combines stealth with a long range. The B-2 can fly more than 5000 miles on a single fuel load, as well as anywhere in the world with air-to-air refueling, even with a heavy payload. This bomber was first used against targets in Afghanistan in the fall of 2001.

Since its existence was revealed during the 1980 Presidential campaign, "stealth" has become surrounded by an aura of mystery and invincibility that tends to obscure its value in being able to defeat the most advanced air defense systems. Although talk about invisible and invulnerable airplanes was hogwash, normally skeptical journalists and media commentators bought into the myth, and sometimes used it to propagate a dangerously sterile vision of modern war, especially the idea that wars can be fought with no friendly casualties and almost no casualties on the enemies' side.

In 1999, during the Kosovo operation, an F-117 was shot down over Serbia by an old Soviet SA-3 surface-to-air missile. This seems to have been done by a Serb missile battalion commander who, using basic intelligence methods, analyzed US air operations. Specifically, Serbian intelligence had informers with cell phones around US bases; the informers would phone in the departure times of US aircraft. Using this data the Serbs were able to make educated guesses when and where US aircraft would appear in the skies over their missile launchers.

The pilot ejected and was rescued, but the wreckage of the plane was recovered by the Serbs; it is believed they gave the debris to Russia as a "thank you" for Moscow's political support.

Whatever the next military technological breakthrough is, if it keeps American troops alive and victorious in war and globally respected in peacetime, it will be worth every penny.

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3143/stealth-secrets

IN FOCUS: China awaits fighter export breakthrough

By:   Greg Waldron Singapore

The atmosphere in the Dubai air show briefing room in November 2011 was electric. Journalists occupied every seat and photographers squeezed into the back of the room. Also present were a dozen senior Pakistan air force officials, who were forced to stand along one wall, as well as several Chinese executives in business suits.

The occasion was a briefing about the Chengdu/Pakistan Aeronautical Complex JF-17 Thunder fighter.

Yang Wei, the designer of the JF-17, Chengdu J-10 and China's stealthy J-20, gave a presentation about the JF-17's features and capabilities.

The head of the Pakistan air force used warm words about the aircraft, and commended the close relationship between Islamabad and Beijing.

The good turnout reflected the defence media's love affair with the JF-17 as the successor to cheap, value-for-money Cold War fighters such as the Northrop F-5 and Mikoyan MiG-21. While the new model has yet to make a mark on the world stage, it is the most prominent element in the broader story of China's military aircraft exports.

Although the importance of the JF-17 in China's future export efforts cannot be ­disputed - Pakistani officials take pains to stress the joint nature of the programme - Beijing is quietly trying to sell small numbers of different types of aircraft, including ­advanced jet trainers, utility helicopters and transport aircraft.

The awkwardly named China National ­Aero-Technology Important & Export Corporation (CATIC) is the government-owned ­company tasked with selling China's military aircraft abroad. Over the past 30 years it has sold more than 1,400 aircraft to international customers and boasts 35 representative offices globally.

"In 2011, CATIC's major successes included a follow-up contract for the JF-17 with Pakistan and various contracts for the [Shaanxi] Y-8 transport aircraft, the [Xian] MA-60, and [Harbin] H425 helicopter," says Zeng Wen, vice-president of CATIC.

The company, however, declines to comment on specific deals. So far this year, for example, it has officially announced just a single transaction, the sale of eight Pakistan-made Hongdu K-8P Karakorum intermediate trainer jet trainers to Zambia, which will bring the country's total inventory of the type to 15. In 2011, there were reports of a Y-8 sale to Venezuela, though neither Beijing nor Caracas has officially confirmed them. From time to time emerge sketchy reports of other transactions, usually for a limited number of aircraft, in African or South American nations.

MARGINAL IMPACT

"Hard data [about Chinese fighter exports] is hard to find," says Teal Group analyst Richard Aboulafia. Reflecting the dearth of hard figures, Teal's February 2012 fighter forecast excludes Chinese-made types.

"China is having almost no impact on world markets, except in a marginal way," he adds. "Their niche, if you could call it that, is countries that can't afford anything better. The JF-17 is an obsolete and cheap aircraft, ideal for the Pakistan market, which values numbers over actual combat effectiveness. It doesn't seem to be going anywhere else, and only marginal country markets have been mentioned as prospects - other than Egypt."

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) provides a "very rough estimate" of the value of Chinese military aircraft exports. Between 2001 and 2011, it put exports at a ball-park $3.2 billion, an average of $320 million per year. Reflecting sales of the jointly produced JF-17 in Pakistan, its figure for 2010 is $625 million and for 2011 is $611 million, both sharply higher than the $137 million estimate for 2009. By comparison, SIPRI values US military aircraft exports at $45.8 billion for the same period, and Russian exports at $34.7 billion.

NO BREAKTHROUGH

"The increase in China's aircraft exports for the last few years... does not represent a major breakthrough because the main client remains Pakistan," says Pieter Wezeman, a senior researcher at SIPRI. "If China sold the JF-17 or the J-10 to another country, such as Egypt or Azerbaijan, then it would be a major breakthrough."

Aside from Zambia, Ghana and Sudan have bought small numbers of a weaponised variant of the K-8. These are relatively small sales, however, and the single-engined K-8 is a modest aircraft by international standards. Other important markets are countries where Western manufacturers are forbidden from selling arms.

"The Chinese have had considerable success penetrating the less expensive end of the market, especially countries that have been isolated from other suppliers by political considerations," says Stu Slade, Far East editor at research firm Forecast International. "They have also established a secure position as an aircraft supplier to cash-strapped users. Their position has been limited by the ageing technical standards of the aircraft they have been willing to export. They are still perceived as being the supplier of 1950s knock-offs, even though that has not been true for a decade or more."

CATIC, in close cooperation with its Pakistani colleagues, appears determined to secure the "breakthrough" that Wezeman speaks of. It has told Flightglobal of its hopes of selling 300 JF-17s over the next five years. So far, only Pakistan has ordered the type, with firm orders for 150 examples, although it has said it could eventually buy up to 200. CATIC says key markets for the jet include Asia, the Middle East, Africa and Latin America.

"CATIC sales and customer support teams are highly motivated and CATIC is looking forward to making the upcoming years fantastic for the JF-17 and its users," says Zeng.

An industry source in Pakistan who is familiar with the JF-17 programme says joint Chinese/Pakistan sales efforts have made "considerable progress" following the type's appearance at Dubai.

Joint marketing efforts at air shows are increasingly reminiscent of those mounted by major Western players such as Boeing, Eurofighter and Lockheed Martin. In addition to detailed briefings, in English, about the aircraft and its capabilities, CATIC and Pakistani officials are happy to give journalists one-to-one interviews. They will also discuss the aircraft over the phone and reply to email queries.

While the JF-17's promoters' public relations and marketing efforts may still lack the slick presentation of the big Western players, they are far more adept at marketing than their rivals in third-world markets, the Russians. Rosoboronexport's air show briefings, conducted in Russian by stern officials, are often short on detail and light on news, while efforts to speak with industry executives can be rebuffed with a swift "nyet". Nonetheless, Moscow has a rich history of exporting fighters, with China heavily reliant on types such as the Sukhoi Su-27 and Su-30. And Russian aircraft have enjoyed success in all the regions in which China yet hopes to gain market share.

The theme of JF-17 marketing efforts is summed up by a keychain the Pakistan air force delegation passed out to visitors at 2010's Zhuhai air show in China. This lists five selling points: affordable, survivable, flexible, supportable, lethal.

"The focus is on capability at affordable cost," says the source in Pakistan. "Support is assured, the cost is affordable, and there are no embargoes on our side. We have a forum with China to discuss how we construct the sales teams that go into specific countries. We are comfortable partners."

RESPECTABLE ARRAY

Although it is easy to dismiss the JF-17's capabilities vis-à-vis those offered by more advanced Western types, let alone state-of-the-art aircraft such as the Lockheed F-35 or F-22, on paper it offers a respectable array of systems and capabilities that became common only in Western aircraft in the 1990s. The aircraft can carry a maximum external stores load of 3,600kg (7,930lb), including short- and beyond-visual-range air-to-air missiles. Other weapons and sensors can include the LT-2 laser-guided bomb and WMD-7 day/night laser designation pod, C802A anti-ship missiles and the KG300G SPJ airborne self-protection jamming pod.

"An increasing number of developing countries are likely to welcome the promise of decent-quality Chinese military aircraft at competitive prices," says Andrew Erickson, associate professor in the Strategic Research Department at the US Naval War College.

"Beijing appears willing to offer creative financing and training and other support packages that more established aircraft producers may not offer. Faced with a choice between fewer or no military aircraft and Chinese versions, growing numbers of countries in Africa, the Middle East and Latin America are likely to consider the China option," he says.

In addition, CATIC and Pakistan both appear to be aware of the crucial issue of through-life support for their products. Historically, a major criticism of Russian aircraft is the lack of spares and delays in conducting major repairs. One former Royal Malaysian Air Force logistics officer told Flightglobal at 2011's LIMA air show in Langkawi that it could take one year for a MiG-29 engine to be repaired if were sent back to Russia, adding: "The MiGs are a maintenance nightmare."

China, clearly, sees after-sales support as an important differentiation point.

"CATIC offers high-quality life-span integrated support through its global network for all customers on a continuous basis, including spare parts supply, warranty services, field services, technical training, overhaul and repair, modification and upgrade, engineering consulting, technical documentation management and claims management," it says.

LARGER PROBLEMS

When asked, however, why China has yet to secure a sale beyond Pakistan for the JF-17, Erickson says: "This is probably emblematic of the larger problems in Chinese aircraft production and marketing: unproven systems, lack of reliable Chinese-produced engines and uncertain after-market servicing and support. In addition, some countries have larger geo-strategic concerns and relationships that cause them to pursue suppliers other than China."

One area of particular concern he points to is China's weakness in aircraft engines. This could complicate a purchase decision for potential customers. The K-8, for example, is powered by the Honeywell TFE731, a powerplant originally developed by Garrett for business jets, while the JF-17 is powered by Russia's Klimov RD-93.

"In a worst-case scenario, [customers] must worry not only about maintaining good relations with China, but also with Russia. This substantially reduces China's independent leverage in the lucrative and strategically potent area of military aircraft sales, which competitors are loath to cede to China," says Erickson. He believes China will find it particularly challenging to make headway in Russia's "near abroad" of former Soviet republics, with Moscow using its political clout in the region to ensure sales for Russian airframers.

However, SIPRI's Wezeman notes that potential customers for the type tend to have good relations with both China and Russia.

China is also marketing the Hongdu L-15 lead-in fighter trainer and Guizhou FTC-2000 advanced jet trainer. The L-15 is powered by two Ivchenko Progress Al-222K-25F engines, and the FTC-2000 by a single Chinese-developed powerplant, the Guizhou Liyang WP-13F.

CATIC says six countries have tested the L-15, which it expects to be "exported very soon". Both aircraft types can be purchased with a basic combat capability, offering a degree of flexibility to air forces with limited budgets.

China has also exported small numbers of helicopters, mainly the Harbin Z-9, which is based on Eurocopter's AS365 Dauphin. CATIC says it is suitable for a number of missions, including search and rescue, emergency medical service, medical evacuation, armed patrol and other military and paramilitary operations. "Kenya bought some Z-9s, but only a small number. They have not succeeded in competing with the original supplier," says Wezeman."

Another challenge facing China's military aircraft exports is the larger number of fighters and other systems required to support the rapid modernisation of the Chinese air force at home. "[China's] geographical position means they have to maintain large armed forces, and keeping their own forces up to date absorbs most of their production capacity," says Slade. "Add in the dated and derivative nature of their technology base and it seems as if they will always be one or two steps behind the curve. To a country that doesn't face a top-line threat, this is entirely acceptable, but to somebody facing a sophisticated opponent, it isn't."

Slade believes China could find itself stuck in a relatively unattractive niche of the market - affordable aircraft to cash-strapped customers - that it will have a hard time breaking out of. "Historically, China has always been one of the '10 years time and it'll be a dominant market player' countries and never has fulfilled that projection," he says.

The key, then, is for China - with strong Pakistani support - to secure that first major overseas deal for the JF-17. The goal of selling 300 within five years may seem fantastic, but Beijing and Islamabad are determined.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/in-focus-china-awaits-fighter-export-breakthrough-373313/

Rafale : STOBAR compatible

After several simulations conducted by Dassault, the Rafale is able, with no modification, to take-off from a ski-jump carrier.

Obviously, they have something in mind for the Indian Navy, since India is the only country equiped with such a carrier to which we would sell Rafale.

http://rafalenews.blogspot.nl/2012/06/rafale-stobar-compatible.html

UPDATE 1-BAE Systems nears Oman-Eurofighter deal-sources

Tue Jul 3, 2012 9:23am EDT

* Oman deal for 12 Eurofighters could be worth $2 bln

* BAE still believes it can land bigger UAE deal

* Defence contractor battling lower defence budgets

* Also eager to recoup lost orders

By Rhys Jones

LONDON, July 3 (Reuters) - Britain's BAE Systems Plc , battling shrinking European and American defence budgets and eager to recoup lost orders, is close to selling 12 Eurofighter Typhoon jets to Oman, according to sources close to the deal.

Analysts estimate the sale could be worth up to $2 billion to Europe's biggest defence contractor.

"BAE and Oman are close to an agreement for 12 Eurofighters," one source told Reuters on Tuesday.

BAE is also in talks to supply 60 Eurofighters to the United Arab Emirates (UAE) if the Gulf Arab state's deal with France's Dassault falls through, one of the sources said.

The UAE was expected to finalise a $10 billion agreement with Dassault last year but the talks faltered after the UAE said the terms were uncompetitive and unworkable.

"The UAE fighter competition has a long way to run yet," a source close to the talks said.

Earlier this year BAE's Eurofighter consortium lost out on the sale of 126 fighters to India which chose the Dassault Rafale as preferred bidder.

But the Eurofighter consortium, made up of BAE, Italy's Alenia and European aerospace and defence group EADS, has an amended bid ready if the Dassault deal collapses.

It is also bidding to supply fighters to Malaysia.

BAE in May signed a 1.6 billion pounds ($2.5 billion) deal to supply Saudi Arabia with Hawk jets to train pilots to fly the Eurofighter which it has already ordered from UK company. {ID:nL5E8GN3PT]

The deal provided some welcome relief for the British defence giant, whose shares have risen 7.5 percent in the last month and were 0.2 percent down at 290.1 pence by 1250 GMT, valuing the company at around 9.4 billion pounds.

Saudi Arabia - the world's top oil exporter - signed a contract with BAE in 2007 to buy 72 Typhoon aircraft, 24 of which have been delivered to the Royal Saudi Air Force. The Salam deal, as it is known, is worth around 4.5 billion pounds.

Talks between BAE and Saudi over changes to the price of the deal are still expected to be completed in the second half of 2012.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/03/bae-oman-idUSL6E8I38GX20120703

Citaat van: www.reuters.com Vandaag om 05:33
* Oman deal for 12 Eurofighters could be worth $2 bln

Dus bij een NL F35 crash kunnen we altijd nog 36 Typhoons kopen voor € 125 miljoen per stuk.

IN FOCUS: German Eurofighters impress during Red Flag debut

By:   Dave Majumdar Washington DC

The German air force's Fighter Wing 74 (JG74) brought eight of its ­Eurofighter combat aircraft to a Red Flag-Alaska exercise at Eielson AFB in Alaska ­during June, representing its first ever such deployment.

Voor het volledige artikel en de foto's, zie link:

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/in-focus-german-eurofighters-impress-during-red-flag-debut-373312/

Citaat van: Harald op 03/07/2012 | 16:02 uur
Rafale : STOBAR compatible

After several simulations conducted by Dassault, the Rafale is able, with no modification, to take-off from a ski-jump carrier.

Obviously, they have something in mind for the Indian Navy, since India is the only country equiped with such a carrier to which we would sell Rafale.

http://rafalenews.blogspot.nl/2012/06/rafale-stobar-compatible.html

Iets voor de Royal Navy dan? ;)

Citaat van: Ace1 op 03/07/2012 | 17:46 uur
Iets voor de Royal Navy dan? ;)

;D

Citaat van: Ace1 op 03/07/2012 | 17:46 uur
Iets voor de Royal Navy dan? ;)

Die krijgen volgens de huidige planning toch geen STOBAR schip?

Al is de conversie waarschijnlijk goedkoper dan die naar CATOBAR.

Israeli ministers approve purchase of military training jets

2012-7-3

By Agencies

A Israeli ministerial committee on Monday approved a deal to procure Italian training jets for the Israel Air Force (IAF), the Defense Ministry announced in a statement.

The IAF will receive 30 M-346 Master jets, manufactured by Italy's Alenia Aermacchi, in a deal valued at over one billion US dollars.

Delivery of the aircraft is scheduled to begin in 2014.

Under the deal, concluded in February, Italy has committed to purchase over one billion dollars worth of military hardware from Israeli defense contractors, the statement said.

Monday's announcement capped a fierce competition between Italy and the Republic of Korea (ROK) in recent years to win the tender to sell the IAF their next-generation combat trainer, with the leaders of both countries making a personal appeal to their Israeli counterparts.

Seoul, which proposed to purchase advanced Israeli military platforms and armaments for an estimated 1.5 billion US dollars if its trainer is chosen, responded with anger when the final decision was announced in February, accusing Israel of favoring Italy throughout the selection process and claiming that the tender was not conducted according to international standards.

Officials here expressed concerns over the possibility that ROK would go as far as severing diplomatic ties with Israel.

"We hope not to reach that stage. We understand them and it is only natural for them to be upset," The Jerusalem Post quoted a defense official as saying.

The M-346 is due to replace the IAF's aging fleet of A-4 Skyhawks, a Vietnam-era fighter jet for bombing missions which first saw action in the 1973 Mideast war. Since the early 1980s, the IAF has used the aircraft to train cadets during advanced pilot training.

Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak welcomed the deal's approval, saying it would "provide the IAF with the tools to continue training the world's best fighter pilots while injecting hundreds of millions of dollars to local defense contractors."

In a statement, the army's Chief of Staff, Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz, said the deal would "make it possible to train the IAF's future pilots in the face of regional threats and challenges.

http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/718627.shtml

Gripen operational cost lowest of all western fighters: Jane's

The study conducted by IHS Jane's Aerospace and Defense Consulting, compared the operational costs of the Gripen, Lockheed Martin F-16, Boeing F/A-18 Super Hornet, Dassault's Rafale, Eurofighter Typhoon and the F-35 aircraft.

The operational cost of the Swedish Saab Gripen aircraft is the lowest among a flightline of modern fighters, confirmed a White Paper submitted by the respected international defense publishing group IHS Jane's, in response to a study commissioned by Saab.

The paper says that in terms of 'fuel used, pre-flight preparation and repair, and scheduled airfield-level maintenance together with associated personnel costs', "The Saab Gripen is the least expensive of the aircraft under study in terms of cost per flight hour (CPFH)."

The study, conducted by Edward Hunt, Senior Consultant, at IHS Jane's Aerospace and Defense Consulting, compared the operational costs of the Gripen, Lockheed Martin F-16, Boeing F/A-18 Super Hornet, Dassault's Rafale, Eurofighter Typhoon and the F-35 aircraft.

"At an estimated $4,700 per hour (2012 USD), the Gripen compares very favorably with the Block 40 / 50 F-16s which are its closest competitor at an estimated $7,000 per hour," says the report, adding, "The F-35 and twin-engined designs are all significantly more expensive per flight hour owing to their larger size, heavier fuel usage and increased number of airframe and systems parts to be maintained and repaired. IHS Jane's believes that aircraft unit cost and size is therefore roughly indicative of comparative CPFH."

In comparison, the figure for the F/A-18 Super Hornet ranged from USD 11000 to USD 24000, depending on degree of operational capability. The figure for the Rafale was USD 16500 per flying hour and number for the Eurofighter Typhoon, derived from British Parliamentary figures and seeming to cover only fuel usage, was USD 8200. But Jane's estimate of the actual Cost Per Flying Hour for the Eurofighter, keeping in mind supplies and scheduled maintenance raised the figure up to USD 18000.

The cost of operation of the F-35 appears to be in a whole other league. Jane's cites Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) estimates for the conventional F-35 A, assuming operational service over 30 years with 200 hours per year for each aircraft, to amount to USD 21000 per hour of flight. The paper also sources US Navy projections of the cost of operation of the F-35 B & C variants until the year 2029, which come to USD 31000 per flight hour.

The report says the figures were based on data sourced from the respective operating militaries and governments, disclosed international fighter competition cost figures (Rafale, F-18 E / F, Gripen), manufacturer-stated figures (F-35, Rafale, F-18 E / F, Gripen) and IHS Jane's estimates for all aircraft.

There are several caveats to this assessment. "Owing to the differing methods of calculating aircraft operating cost per flight hour and the large number of interlinked factors that affect such a calculation, IHS Jane's believes that any flight hour cost figure can only be regarded as indicative and that there is no single correct answer to such a calculation," says the report, but adds, "However, we believe that our results are of considerable merit and provide a useful benchmark when considering the costs associated with operating contemporary high performance combat aircraft."

The report stresses that 'without access to comprehensive military data over a significant timeframe' the results 'can only be regarded as approximate' and 'are an average cost across an entire fleet'.

The report says it is most confident about the data and its conclusions on the Gripen, F-16 and the F/A-18 'with good primary and secondary source data supported by logical results from our deductive modeling.'

The numbers for the Eurofighter Typhoon and the Rafale are less certain, in comparison, but the report submits that 'the comparative modeling output appears to confirm IHS Jane's estimates' for them.

The report is least sure about the operational cost of the F-35 costs 'owing to the absence of actual in-service data'. "IHS Jane's does not feel that the modeled fuel cost figure is representative of likely CPFH costs," it says.

Besides using primary and secondary sources and their own databases, IHS Jane's also considered data thrown up by a 'modelled assessment of relative cost based on fuel usage'. In the absence of a single global standard for calculating cost per flight hour IHS Jane's arrived upon a list of factors which would determine this cost.

The study took into account, what it called, Basic cost calculations to the exclusion of a set of factors it grouped under the term, Comprehensive cost calculations, to arrive at a figure determined only by the characteristics of individual aircraft rather than complexity of operations, weapons or support elements.

The study 'determined that the Basic CPFH was the more common value stated and that this was therefore regarded as a more accurate and useful indication of the cost of sortie generation for a particular aircraft'.

The other factors, under the Comprehensive cost calculations, were 'more usually considered as part of the platform's capital cost rather than the daily service cost of which the Basic CPFH was felt to be a more useful representation'.

For the purpose of modeling to create a standard or benchmark, the study arrived at the 'aircrafts' fuel usage, hence cost, based on a theoretical one hour sortie at max dry thrust', not 'necessarily reflective of actual fuel consumption and hence fuel cost of a one hour sortie'.

As is evident, the modeled cost pattern is closest to the derived cost pattern in the case of the Gripen, F-16, Rafale, and Eurofighter. The research and the model digress in the case of the F-35 and the F/A-18.

In the case of the F-35, the study says the different 'costs arise from the differing power and specific fuel consumptions of the A / C and B models. The B model is the top figure in both cases'. The study says, "The single P&W F-135 engine is relatively fuel efficient for its power, resulting in a lower fuel burn at maximum dry thrust than might be expected." It adds that, although obviously, 'accurate CPFH for in-service aircraft does not exist', 'the US and Australian forecast costs both suggest it will not offer lower CPFH than current aircraft', considering 'the aircraft itself is an extremely sophisticated design carrying a large number of new and unproven onboard systems'.

The report thinks the digression with respect to the Super Hornet is 'due to the size of the fleet and the experience the US Navy has in operating' it, compared to the 'small fleet of the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) that has yet to reach Full Operational Capability'. It points out that 'RAAF CPFH has fallen significantly as familiarity with the aircraft has grown, and is likely to fall further as this continues to improve'.

But the report also says the Super Hornet has 'relatively high dry thrust ratings while the GE F414 engine is less efficient in specific fuel consumption than the engines of the similar-sized Rafale and EuroFighter aircraft'. And everything else being the same, the F/A-18 E/F 'engines use more fuel and are hence relatively costly' compared to the SNECMA or Eurojet engines, even though the US Navy aircraft have a relatively low CPFH.

Voor de tabellen: zie link

http://www.stratpost.com/gripen-operational-cost-lowest-of-all-western-fighters-janes

Als PDF http://www.stratpost.com/wp-content/plugins/post2pdf-converter/post2pdf-converter-pdf-maker.php?id=6342

Voor een bepaald bedrag laat je dus 4,5 keer zoveel Gripens vliegen als F35's. pfff
EF valt me nog wel mee trouwens, met zo'n 15.000 per vlieguur. Nog veel, maar volgens dit artikel is de F35A dus wel zo'n 18% duurder nog, waar deze in eerdere artikelen gelijkwaardig werden geschat.

De Gripen (NG) lijkt wederom een prima optie als interim-toestel tot zijn opvolger (en die van de EF en Rafale) het levenslicht ziet. En we kunnen er nog een redelijk aantal van aanschaffen. Kwantiteit is ook een belangrijke factor. 

Citaat van: dudge op 04/07/2012 | 14:55 uur
Voor een bepaald bedrag laat je dus 4,5 keer zoveel Gripens vliegen als F35's. pfff
EF valt me nog wel mee trouwens, met zo'n 15.000 per vlieguur. Nog veel, maar volgens dit artikel is de F35A dus wel zo'n 18% duurder nog, waar deze in eerdere artikelen gelijkwaardig werden geschat.

Hou wel rekening met het feit dat de Gripen NG natuurlijk niet is vergeleken, een kist die aanzienlijk hoger zal scoren t.o.v. de huidige Gripen maar naar aanzienlijk prijs vriendelijker is in exploitatie dan de meeste andere concurrenten, wellicht meer in de lijn van de F16C

Citaat van: Elzenga op 04/07/2012 | 14:59 uur
De Gripen (NG) lijkt wederom een prima optie als interim-toestel tot zijn opvolger (en die van de EF en Rafale) het levenslicht ziet. En we kunnen er nog een redelijk aantal van aanschaffen. Kwantiteit is ook een belangrijke factor. 

Ik vindt de Gripen als interim oplossing een prima alternatief, wellicht is leasen dan de betere optie gezien de vage vervangingsplannen van de EF en Rafale rond 2035/2040 (15 á 20 jaar na invoering van een eventuele interimmer).

Betekend wel dat we in 2025 alweer een nieuw topic kunnen starten over de opvolger van de Gripen.

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 04/07/2012 | 15:06 uurIk vindt de Gripen als interim oplossing een prima alternatief, wellicht is leasen dan de betere optie gezien de vage vervangingsplannen van de EF en Rafale rond 2035/2040 (15 á 20 jaar na invoering van een eventuele interimmer).

Betekend wel dat we in 2025 alweer een nieuw topic kunnen starten over de opvolger van de Gripen.

Laten we dit keer maar bescheiden zijn met deelname aan het ontwikkelingsproject....en de toestellen min of meer van de plank kopen...als kinderziekten e.d. er een beetje uit zijn en het toestel goed ontwikkeld is (dus alle taken kan uitvoeren en niet eerst een deel).

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 04/07/2012 | 15:06 uur
Ik vindt de Gripen als interim oplossing een prima alternatief, wellicht is leasen dan de betere optie gezien de vage vervangingsplannen van de EF en Rafale rond 2035/2040 (15 á 20 jaar na invoering van een eventuele interimmer).

Betekend wel dat we in 2025 alweer een nieuw topic kunnen starten over de opvolger van de Gripen.

Dergelijke toestellen hebben ook wat uitrol tijd nodig. Daarbij hoeft NL ook niet vooraan te staan dan om mee te doen met de ontwikkeling. Kunnen we gewoon in 2030 eens om ons heen kijken hoe de projecten lopen, in alle rust. Sowieso ver in de toekomst. Als er nog grote conflicten tussen zitten kan het ook zijn dat we sowieso op zoek moeten naar extra toestellen.

Citaat van: Elzenga op 04/07/2012 | 15:09 uur
Laten we dit keer maar bescheiden zijn met deelname aan het ontwikkelingsproject....en de toestellen min of meer van de plank kopen...als kinderziekten e.d. er een beetje uit zijn en het toestel goed ontwikkeld is (dus alle taken kan uitvoeren en niet eerst een deel).

Dan spreken we niet meer over interim, tel er dan maar 10 jaar bij (niet eerder dan 2045)

Citaat van: Elzenga op 04/07/2012 | 15:09 uur
Laten we dit keer maar bescheiden zijn met deelname aan het ontwikkelingsproject....en de toestellen min of meer van de plank kopen...als kinderziekten e.d. er een beetje uit zijn en het toestel goed ontwikkeld is (dus alle taken kan uitvoeren en niet eerst een deel).

Heb ook nooit begrepen dat wij level 2 partner zijn, en landen als Australie, Canada en Turkije een Level 3 partner. Tenminste, is ook wel te verklaren, maar bedoel meer, daar zit ook best wel wat van de probleem verklaring in vermoed ik.

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 04/07/2012 | 15:13 uur
Dan spreken we niet meer over interim, tel er dan maar 10 jaar bij (niet eerder dan 2045)

En dat is toch ook eigenlijk wel prima? Kunnen we in 2030 eens goede UCAV's kopen...
En dan sluiten we gewoon wat later in de productie lijn aan, zo'n lijn blijft toch altijd wel een tijdje open.

Citaat van: dudge op 04/07/2012 | 15:18 uur
En dan sluiten we gewoon wat later in de productie lijn aan, zo'n lijn blijft toch altijd wel een tijdje open.

Een lijn blijft open tot de laatste order is uitgeleverd.

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 04/07/2012 | 15:25 uur
Een lijn blijft open tot de laatste order is uitgeleverd.

Precies. Maar als we het afzetten tegen de EF, dan kun je er dus wel vanuit gaan dat als de productie begint in 2035, dat de lijn in 2050 nog open is, en dat 2045 ofzo vroeg genoeg is voor NL om te beslissen.

een stukje uit het artikel :

But the report also says the Super Hornet has 'relatively high dry thrust ratings while the GE F414 engine is less efficient in specific fuel consumption than the engines of the similar-sized Rafale and EuroFighter aircraft'. And everything else being the same, the F/A-18 E/F 'engines use more fuel and are hence relatively costly' compared to the SNECMA or Eurojet engines

De GE F414 wordt gebruikt in de F-18, maar ook in Gripen NG.
Of is het een alternatief om de Gripen NG uit te rusten met EJ-200 motoren van de Eurofighter ?.... zuiniger en mogelijkheid van trust vectoring
Of worden de F414 EDE EPE gebruikt, deze heeft een beter vermogen (+20%) ?

An F414 Enhanced Durability Engine (EDE) features both a new high-pressure turbine and new six-stage, high-pressure compressor to offer durability improvement and life-cycle cost savings. The F414 Enhanced Performance Engine (EPE) will generate up to 20% more thrust and provide reduced fuel consumption by adding a new fan design featuring greater air flow to the EDE core.
http://www.geaviation.com/press/military/military_20110620.html

Rated at 22,000 pounds thrust (98 kN), the F414G has performed flawlessly in more than 200 flights in the Gripen NG test aircraft since May 2008. The Gripen NG offers significant increases in fuel capacity, range and payload compared to earlier designs.
http://www.geaviation.com/press/military/military_20111204.html

Citaat van: dudge op 04/07/2012 | 15:15 uurHeb ook nooit begrepen dat wij level 2 partner zijn, en landen als Australie, Canada en Turkije een Level 3 partner. Tenminste, is ook wel te verklaren, maar bedoel meer, daar zit ook best wel wat van de probleem verklaring in vermoed ik.

Oh dat heb ik prima begrepen toen....het maakte het alleen maar moeilijker om de JSF niet te kiezen en de keuze zo snel mogelijk te maken. Dat viel echter tegen...zowel door politieke weerstand als problemen met de JSF zelf.

Citaat van: dudge op 04/07/2012 | 15:33 uurPrecies. Maar als we het afzetten tegen de EF, dan kun je er dus wel vanuit gaan dat als de productie begint in 2035, dat de lijn in 2050 nog open is, en dat 2045 ofzo vroeg genoeg is voor NL om te beslissen.

Of in 2040...ik heb namelijk zo'n vermoeden dat de Zweden niet alle (meer radicale) elementen van de NG overnemen om hun Gripens te upgraden. Zwitserland doet hier aan mee begrijp ik. Nederland zou zich hierbij kunnen aansluiten. Resultaat...meer toestellen voor minder geld en aansluiting bij de Europese gevechtvliegtuig-cyclus. Politiek goeddeels blij en strategisch volgens mij voor Nederland de beste keuze. Maar tja...de JSF-lobby....

Citaat van: Elzenga op 04/07/2012 | 22:00 uur
Of in 2040...ik heb namelijk zo'n vermoeden dat de Zweden niet alle (meer radicale) elementen van de NG overnemen om hun Gripens te upgraden. Zwitserland doet hier aan mee begrijp ik. Nederland zou zich hierbij kunnen aansluiten. Resultaat...meer toestellen voor minder geld en aansluiting bij de Europese gevechtvliegtuig-cyclus. Politiek goeddeels blij en strategisch volgens mij voor Nederland de beste keuze. Maar tja...de JSF-lobby....

De andere kant van het verhaal is dat we eventueel alleen met Zweden en Zwitserland de Gripen NG exploiteren (en wat Oost europese landen met een handje vol B/C)... dit geeft natuurlijk ook te denken....

De fixatie op de F35 is één maar ik proef bij velen een fixatie op de Gripen eigenlijk uitsluitend gebasseerd op prijs.

Waarbij ik niet zeg voor de F35 of de Gripen te zijn, ik constateer alleen maar in deze.

Grappige gelijkenis tussen de aanschaf van EF door Duitsland begin jaren negentig en mogelijke aanschaf van JSF door Nederland.

'The financial burdens placed on Germany by reunification caused Helmut Kohl to make an election promise to cancel the Eurofighter. In early to mid-1991 German Defence Minister Volker Rühe sought to withdraw Germany from the project in favour of using Eurofighter technology in a cheaper, lighter plane. Due to the amount of money already spent on development, the number of jobs dependent on the project, and the binding commitments on each partner government, Helmut Kohl was unable to withdraw; "Rühe's predecessors had locked themselves into the project by a punitive penalty system of their own devising.'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurofighter_Typhoon#Orders (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurofighter_Typhoon#Orders)

Brazil delays F-X2 fighter decision until end of 2012

The Brazilian government has deferred selecting the winner of its F-X2 fighter competition until 31 December 2012, despite repeated assurances a decision would be announced by mid-year.

Disclosing that it has requested bidding companies Boeing, Dassault and Saab to maintain their offers until the year-end date, the government attributed its latest postponement to unfavourable global economic conditions and low economic growth in Brazil.

Local reports suggest Brazilian president Dilma Rousseff held talks with French counterpart François Hollande at the UN's recent Rio +20 conference over a new proposal on the Dassault Rafale.

High acquisition and operating costs remain major stumbling blocks to any possible deal for the type, sources say, and the new proposal is expected to be a talking point again when Rousseff and defence minister Celso Amorim visit France later this month.

Brazilian air force leaders have expressed concern over yet another delay in a programme that should originally have seen the selection of a new fighter in 2000. Nominally, next year should see the retirement of 12 ex-French air force Dassault Mirage 2000C/Bs, acquired by Brazil in 2005 as a stopgap measure after delays affected its original F-X contest.

In addition to the Rafale, the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and Saab Gripen remain in contention for the F-X2 award.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/brazil-delays-f-x2-fighter-decision-until-end-of-2012-373766/

S. Korea to start evaluating fighter bids next week
AFP – 18 minutes ago.. .

South Korea will soon start evaluating bids from US and European firms which are in competition to win a $7.3 billion contract for 60 advanced fighter planes, its arms procurement agency said Thursday.

The Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) said 15 experts would review the bids from July 9 to 14 before air force evaluators conduct flight tests.

The makers of Boeing's F-15 Silent Eagle, Lockheed Martin's F-35 Lightning II and the Eurofighter Typhoon have submitted their renewed bids for the deal worth nearly 8.3 trillion won ($7.3 billion), it said.

The state agency had set an initial June 18 deadline for bids. The three firms tendered their offers, but the agency reopened bidding, cited errors in relevant documents.

South Korea aims to select the winner in November, but officials hinted that the selection could be delayed.

"With the bids having been submitted, we now have to go through testing and negotiations," Oh Tae-Sik, a senior DAPA official, told Yonhap news agency.

"These won't be easy steps. Depending on how long they take, the final decision may be put off until into the next administration (in early 2013)," he said.

The DAPA said earlier that some technical requirements would be tested on simulators because core parts of all three jets are still under development.

South Korea has bought 60 of Boeing's earlier-version F-15s since 2002 under the first two stages of its fighter modernisation programme. It plans to purchase 60 fighter jets by 2021.

Tensions with North Korea have been high in recent years. The North and South remain technically at war because a peace treaty was never signed to formally end their 1950-1953 conflict.

http://sg.finance.yahoo.com/news/korea-start-evaluating-fighter-bids-105921419.html

Citaat van: dudge op 04/07/2012 | 15:15 uur
Heb ook nooit begrepen dat wij level 2 JSF partner zijn, en landen als Australie, Canada en Turkije een Level 3 JSF partner. Tenminste, is ook wel te verklaren, maar bedoel meer, daar zit ook best wel wat van de probleem verklaring in vermoed ik.

Er is maar 1 reden, dat Nederland sinds de zomer van 2002 niveau 2 JSF partner a USD 800 miljoen is: het betekend defacto dat de F-35A (JSF) DE F-16 opvolger wordt. ;)

South Korea Announces Evaluation of F-X Fighter Bids to Begin Next Week

South Korea's primary defense acquisition agency, the Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA), announced that evaluations would begin next week to select the winning bid in the competition for a $7.3 billion contract for 60 advanced fighter aircraft. Previously submitted bids from three defense contractors were found to be lacking relevant details and were resubmitted, at South Korea's request, on 5 July.

Lockheed Martin's F-35 Lightning II, Boeing's F-15SE Silent Eagle, and EADS' Eurofighter Typhoon are all in competition for the multi-billion deal. The winning aircraft is intended as a replacement for the aging fighters now in South Korea's inventory. In 2002, Seoul contracted to procure 60 Boeing F-15s as part of an extensive modernization effort and the present deal is a continuation of that program.

A DAPA statement of 5 July announced that the bids would be evaluated "in accordance with due process." The statement also guaranteed "fair competition" and a "thorough evaluation" to select the aircraft that "most benefits our national interest."

According to DAPA, a hand-picked team of 15 expert analysts will review each of the three bids in an evaluation that assesses 300 different categories. These evaluations will review and grade the operational capability of the three contenders as well as their levels of compatibility and interoperability with existing South Korean forces. This assessment process is scheduled to be conducted between 9 and 14 July.

Beginning in late July, following the technical evaluation, an elite team of 45 Republic of Korea Air Force (ROKAF) experts will conduct flight tests designed to evaluate 500 performance features of the three competitors. These tests will further evaluate each aircraft's performance and will measure how well they fit into the existing South Korean military framework and add measurable value to the nation's warfighting capability.

DAPA announced in June that some evaluations would be performed on simulators since the F-35 Lightning II is still in development. EADS and Boeing are also working on enhancements to the Typhoon and the F-15SE as well.

In earlier statements, DAPA said that final selection of the next-generation fighter would be announced sometime in October. Now, DAPA admits that October is only an optimistic initial target date and the final selection may not be announced until early 2013. DAPA's director of program management told reporters on 5 July that "the final decision may be put off until into the next administration," indicating a date sometime in 2013.

From a purely practical standpoint, the Eurofighter Typhoon is a long shot in this competition. However, EADS is highly motivated to nail this deal down having lost out in several recent high-value contracts. And, with India's recent decision to buy the French Dassault Rafale, hope continues to spring eternal. With this in mind, it's probable to suspect that EADS will heat up the competition with an offer that will be very difficult for Seoul to ignore. In EADS' favor is the Typhoon's proven performance record and the F-35's lack of real-world experience.

Boeing's F-15SE is a strong contender in this competition. The ROKAF currently operates F-16 Falcons and F-15K Slam Eagles as well as other American-made aircraft. South Korea has a long history of flying American aircraft dating back to the Korean Conflict. Saudi Arabia's recent decision to go with a new variant of the F-15 also bodes well for Boeing. Boeing also is planning to introduce an attractive array of new enhancements to make the Eagle deadlier, stealthier, and more tempting since South Korean forces already have accumulated several years of experience operating the F-15.

As for the F-35 Lightning II, as advertised it is a dream machine of claimed performance that would be unmatched by any other fifth-generation combat aircraft in the world today. Although unproven and plagued by technical problems and cost overruns, the F-35 still has strong support from an impressive list of customer nations and still enjoys the backing of the United States. If the F-35 performs as designed, it would give Seoul an immense performance edge over Pyongyang and possibly even Beijing. Selecting the F-35 would also give South Korea a long-term warfighting machine that shares a common airframe with the US, Japan, Australia, and other Western nations. Weapon's commonality and interoperability may also prove to be factors that weigh heavily in Lockheed Martin's favor.

All three defense contractors have a lot riding on this competition. They all need orders to keep their combat aviation production lines humming along in a time of increasingly austere economic forecasts. Let the games begin.

http://defense-update.com/20120706_south-korea-announces-evaluation-of-f-x-fighter-bids-to-begin-next-week.html

The JSF: is it worth the cost?

Date July 8, 2012 Read later

Lockheed Martin's Joint Strike Fighter is hugely expensive and some experts are questioning its efficacy, DYLAN WELCH writes

IN A small carpeted room deep in the labyrinthine bowels of the Lockheed Martin facility in northern Texas, a Joint Strike Fighter takes off, slipping nimbly through the air to destroy two enemy jets before touching down softly on a nearby airstrip.

Though the fast jet - marketed by the arms giant as the future of air superiority - is yet to actually encounter a foe, it is here, in the simulator rooms at the Fort Worth production facility, that Fairfax is introduced to what will be the future of Australia's air warfare capability.

And the simulator room - run by a fussy ex-US Air Force pilot who makes taking the fifth-generation fighter-bomber through a mission look as easy as walking to the corner shop and back - is only one corner of the massive operation that is the development of the F-35 Lightning II, more commonly known as the JSF.

Out in one of the facility's hangars a Lockheed test pilot, Bill ''Giggs'' Gigliotti, has the jet opened to display the remarkably pared-down cockpit. Where in the past you might see dozens of dials and gauges covered in arcane markings and numbers, today there are only two large rectangular touch screens, in size and shape much like a pair of oversized iPads.

The absence of many of the controls is also in part because of the new jet's helmet - which, though still bedevilled by glitches and lags, is expected to one day contain many of the displays traditionally kept on the dash or the heads-up display. Amazingly, Lockheed says the helmet will help pilots turn the jet into something akin to Wonder Woman's invisible jet and allow them a 360-degree view uninterrupted by the jet's walls.

''The best jet I've ever flown,'' says Gigliotti, who has spent the past nine years as an experimental test pilot for Lockheed after 21 years flying jets with the US Navy.

Then again, Gigliotti would say that, given his role as one of the ''faces'' of the Joint Strike Fighter program, which is expected to cost the US the staggering sum of more than $1 trillion over its life. Australia, which in 2002 announced a plan to acquire as many as 100 of the jets, also has a huge amount of money at stake, with $16 billion set aside for the aircraft in what would be the largest defence procurement in the country's history, after the submarine replacement.

Given the astronomical cost of the acquisition - which has climbed about 75 per cent since 2001 - it is worrying, then, that many experts have expressed concerns about the project's progress, and even questioned its efficacy amid the new strategic realities facing Australia in the so-called Asia Pacific century - a period expected to be marked by a strategic tussle between the US and China in Australia's backyard.

Even the nations involved in the JSF project are beginning to lose the enthusiasm they initially expressed for the project. Italy recently cut its planned acquisition from 131 jets to 90. Britain has yet to announce a final number but earlier this year cancelled plans to acquire the aircraft carrier variant. Both the Netherlands and Norway seem to be cooling on the JSF after initial enthusiasm and in Canada the F-35 has become a political football amid claims it is too expensive and that the Canadian Department of National Defence misled Parliament about the jet's true cost.

Australia is also hedging its bets. While expressing interest in as many as 100 jets, so far it is only contractually obliged to buy two and, as part of the deep cuts to the defence budget last month, the decision regarding the purchase of a second tranche of a dozen jets has been delayed by two years, to 2018.

This is why all eyes are focused on the Fort Worth production facility at which the new fighter will be produced.

At the beginning of the remarkable 1.6-kilometre-long production line - an obsessive-compulsive's dream where everything from whole F35 wings to the smallest washer is perfectly labelled and stored - unrecognisable parts of the craft's fuselage hang from a variety of monumental cranes and pincers.

From there Fairfax is driven along the line in a three-car golf-cart train and, while at first the only way to recognise what separates the fuselage from the frames is the colour of the JSF parts' undercoat, a pastel green, the jets slowly take shape until at the far end whole jets sit ready to roll into a hangar.

But while the sheer size and capability of the facility are impressive, not all is going to plan. In fact, Lockheed Martin's much publicised production line is currently being run by a skeleton crew of supervisors and line managers. That is because about 4000 Lockheed machinists and associated workers have been on strike since February, following a failed contract renegotiation between the company and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers.

Lockheed maintains that the five-month strike has yet to affect the schedule but the industrial action by the machinists' union - which is demanding higher base salaries and benefits for its workers - could not have come at a worse time.

Between 2001 and last year, costs per unit have doubled and the program is now $117 billion over budget and delayed by six years.

Simply, the Joint Strike Fighter is now expected to cost the US alone almost $400 billion and full-rate production (when all testing is completed) is now not expected until 2019, when it was originally forecast to begin next year.

These problems have been caused in large part by a series of issues with the program's ''concurrency'', a term referring to Lockheed's attempt to produce units while still developing the plane.

The ambitiousness and complexity of the JSF program - it has three variants, a standard version, an aircraft carrier version and one able to take off and land vertically in the manner of a Harrier ''jump jet'' - as well as the hugely sophisticated helmet, has also added to hiccups and delays .

A US government audit report into the JSF program, released last month, also found that a series of significant concerns remained regarding the concurrent production and testing and further cost hikes and delays were a distinct possibility.

''Developing and integrating the more than 24 million lines of software code continues to be of concern,'' the report, by the US Government Accountability Office, stated. ''Development of critical mission systems providing core combat capabilities remains behind schedule and risky. To date, only 4 per cent of the mission systems required for full capability have been verified.''

All of these concerns must by now be giving the procurement specialists who make decisions on Russell Hill, the Australian Defence Force's headquarters in Canberra, something to worry about. There is no back-up plan if the F-35 turns out to be a lemon.

There remains a lobby inside Australia arguing for the other Lockheed fifth-generation fighter, the F-22, but the last Raptor rolled off the line at Lockheed's Marietta, George facility in May. Though the company will continue to upgrade them for several years, no more will be built.

So the F-35 is likely to remain the only hope for continuing Australian air superiority in our region.

That is one point that the Department of Defence says it's convinced of: the Lockheed Martin fifth-generation fast jet would win if pitted against its main regional competitor, China's in-development answer to the JSF, the Chengdu Aircraft Industry Group-built Jian 20, known more simply as the J-20.

''[The] F-35's combination of stealth, advanced sensors, networking and data fusion capabilities, when integrated with other defence systems, would enable the RAAF to maintain an air combat superiority,'' a Defence spokeswoman said.

Despite such confidence, however, the truth is that no one can definitely say whether the JSF would be a clear winner against the J-20 before the two jets have completed their development phase, set for both planes for some time in the last few years of this decade.

When Fairfax questioned one person involved in Australia's procurement, the source did say that a one-to-one comparison was perhaps not the most accurate gauge, as the Chinese will eventually be able to out-produce any neighbours, guaranteeing them regional air dominance through sheer numbers.

One of Australia's best-informed JSF watchers, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute analyst Andrew Davies, also still has doubts about the JSF program.

While he accepts that there is no viable alternative, he says the fact the strategic locus has shifted from the Middle East towards the Pacific - a region characterised by the need for long-range craft given the large distances involved - means the JSF is less attractive than it was when considering its use in, say, Iraq, Afghanistan or during a Libyan-style intervention.

That is also a concern given that the F-35 has a significantly shorter range than Australia's previous tactical strike jet, the now-retired F-111.

Australia's F-111 variant, nicknamed ''Pig'', had a combat radius of 2140 kilometres, meaning it could take off from Australia's north and be able to strike targets as far away as southern Indonesia.

According to a 2009 Lockheed brochure, the JSF variant Australia will buy has a combat range of less than half that, at 1080 kilometres, meaning its ability to strike targets in the region without basing itself outside of Australian is severely limited.

In response, Defence said that the F-35 is capable of mid-air refuelling, which extends its range, but the F-111 is similarly capable, meaning the JSF is still a shorter range fighter-bomber than its four-decade-old predecessor.

And while countries such as Israel and South Korea - both of which have expressed an interest in the jet - may need the ''stealthy strike'' capability the JSF provides when dealing with their regional neighbours, it is unlikely Australia will ever need it. (It is worth noting that during their almost 40 years of service Australia's fleet of F-111s was never used in combat.)

Defence maintains that the JSF's many other capabilities will all combine to provide an aircraft that will ensure Australia is not only capable of exerting its middle- power status in the region, but will provide the best defence money can buy for the Australian people.

Of course, Defence would say that. As Andrew Davies said in a 2011 assessment of F-35 program: ''The government [needs] to take a hard-headed look at the situation. And it shouldn't rely on Defence for dispassionate advice - their answer will remain 'F-35', pretty much independent of the question.''

Whether or not the Gillard government, beset on so many sides, is able to muster the independent scrutiny that Davies says is needed before next year's white paper remains to be seen.

Read more: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/national/the-jsf-is-it-worth-the-cost-20120707-21nuo.html#ixzz1zwY1HsIg

Brazil jet bid extended 6 months

07/07/2012

The Brazilian air force has asked bidders to renew their offers on a contract to provide 36 next-generation fighter jets, extending for six months a race between US, French and Swedish contestants.

The Rafale fighter, made by French firm Dassault Aviation, is competing against the US F/A-18 Super Hornet and Swedish manufacturer Saab's Gripen for the contract valued at between $4 billion and $7 billion.

The air force asks the bidders to renew their offers every six months. The last bidding window ended on June 30 and the new one will end December 31.

In a statement sent to AFP, the air force said it was a "normal procedure" to extend the offers for the government to study them so long as the winner has not yet been selected.

Dassault's Brazilian unit chief Jean-Marc Merialdo said this marked the fourth six-month extension for the offer, but stressed that "it is a purely administrative move with no further significance."

Brazil, Latin America's dominant power and the world's sixth-largest economy, is insisting on technology transfer in all its defense agreements. It is due to announce the winner this year.

Although France has offered full technology transfers in its bid to win the contract and the Rafale is thus seen as the best placed to finish on top, the F/A-18 is being offered at the best price.

And during a visit to Brazil earlier this year, US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta pledged US advanced technology transfers if Brasilia chooses Boeing's supersonic jet.

http://www.expatica.com/fr/news/french-news/brazil-jet-bid-extended-6-months_236893.html

Misschien heeft Saab een nieuw bod gedaan of kijkt men nog eens goed naar de zwitserse order voor de Saab Gripen NG?

Citaat van: Ace1 op 07/07/2012 | 17:33 uur
Misschien heeft Saab een nieuw bod gedaan of kijkt men nog eens goed naar de zwitserse orden voor de Saab Gripen NG?

Het is maar net de vraag of de Brazilianen kunnen/willen wachten tot 2020 (al hebben de Zweden ook nog wel een voorraadje Gripens die op uitleen basis ter beschikking gesteld kunnen worden)(zie het Zweedse aanbod aan Zwitserland)

Ik blijf gokken op de Rafale, al zou het voor Saab wenselijk zijn om het Gripen progamma lucht te kunnen geven, immers 36 stuks is de eerste bestelling met een optie tot 100 kisten)

En om nog maar eens terug te komen op mijn JSF alternatief, als het definitief de Fransoos in India wordt en uiteindelijk ook in Brazilië dan zie ik interessante mogelijkheden voor de Klu als de JSF alsnog in de prullenbak verdwijnd, al kan ik me ook voorstellen dat in het kader van de verdergaande Europese samenwerking dat de Klu  dan wordt opgescheept met een sur plus van 40 Eurofighters
(tranche 2)

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 07/07/2012 | 17:37 uur
Ik blijf gokken op de Rafale, al zou het voor Saab wenselijk zijn om het Gripen progamma lucht te kunnen geven, immers 36 stuks is de eerste bestelling met een optie tot 100 kisten)

Ik zet ook in op de Rafale...
De Brazilianen hebben al een deal voor hun marine afgesloten met de Fransen (subs en de bouw van een basis met onderhoudsfaciliteiten en mss is er wel interesse voor de FREMMs) en hun LuM zal ook liever een 2-motorig toestel
hebben...

Als de Barzilianen dan Franse vliegtuigen kopen, dan zijn ze wel voor een aanzienlijk deel afhankelijk van Frankrijk. Dat is juist een nadeel.

Citaat van: Enforcer op 08/07/2012 | 10:18 uur
Als de Barzilianen dan Franse vliegtuigen kopen, dan zijn ze wel voor een aanzienlijk deel afhankelijk van Frankrijk. Dat is juist een nadeel.

Vandaar dat ze ook volledige kennisoverdracht eisen.

Ik heb zo het vermoeden dat dit de laatse keer is dat een ander land een gevechtsvliegtuig mag leveren aan de Brazilianen, de opvolger van dit nieuwe toestel (ongeacht het typse) zal een eigen produkt worden iets wat ook zal gelden voor India.

Citaat van: Enforcer op 08/07/2012 | 10:18 uur
Als de Barzilianen dan Franse vliegtuigen kopen, dan zijn ze wel voor een aanzienlijk deel afhankelijk van Frankrijk. Dat is juist een nadeel.

Frankrijk is niet echt het beste jongetje van de klas, maar kijk naar het alternatief, EADS, veel landen die zomaar een nieuwe koers kunnen gaan varen, Boeing zal wellicht niet al haar kennis overdragen en over een paar jaar is het exit F18 productielijn. Blijft over Saab, niets mis mee, maar om politieke reden zie ik die het niet gaan redden.

Citaat van: Enforcer op 08/07/2012 | 10:18 uur
Als de Barzilianen dan Franse vliegtuigen kopen, dan zijn ze wel voor een aanzienlijk deel afhankelijk van Frankrijk. Dat is juist een nadeel.

TOT is onderdeel van het bid. Maar los daar van, bij welk land is het anders? Los daarvan is frankrijk geen onbetrouwbare partner. Het zijn wat dat betreft net russen, als je maar betaald.

Air Force desperate on fighter project

07-08-2012

By Lee Tae-hoon

Senior officials of the Air Force expressed opposition Sunday to a recent move by politicians to delay the country's plan to purchase 60 high-end multirole fighter jets to replace aging F-4 and F-5 jets.

They stressed that the country will suffer a severe loophole in air defense capabilities if politicians decide to scrap or postpone the jet acquisition program ahead of the Dec. 19 presidential election.

"The Air Force no longer cares which of the three competing fighters will win the bid as long as the new jets are delivered on time," a senior military official said asking for anonymity.

He noted that the Air Force cannot accept any decision that would significantly delay the country's latest fighter jet purchase plan, code named FX-III.

According to the 2010 Defense White Paper, North Korea operates some 820 fighters, whereas South Korea has only some 460. Seoul is aimed at maintaining some 430 fighter jets in 2020 as the majority of the country's some 250 F-4s and F-5s are set to retire in several years.

Under the current plan, Seoul will announce the winner of the FX-III program by the end of this year and new jets will be delivered here from 2016 through 2021.

"North Korea will have twice the number of fighters in 2020 if South Korea delays the fighter procurement program due to political pressure and malicious rumors," another Air Force official said.

It has been an open secret that the majority of Air Force officials have long wanted to have radar-evading fighter jets since the country decided in 2007 to buy fifth-generation, stealth aircraft in a meeting of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Air Force officials preferred to buying Lockheed Martin's F-35, whose radar cross section (RCS) is known to be equivalent to a golf ball, rather than other conventional planes.

However, they are now more preoccupied with filling a possible security loophole cause by a delay in the procurement program, rather than which of the three wins the $7.9 billion tender

Currently, the F-35 is competing with two fourth-generation jets ― the F-15 from its U.S. rival Boeing and the Eurofighter Typhoon from EADS in the FX-III race.

Some experts claim South Korea should purchase the F-35 this time as the country has no plan to introduce stealth jets for the next two decades, whereas neighboring nations, including Japan, Russia and China, have already developed or purchased stealth fighters.

"If a stealth fighter from Japan or other country enters Korean airspace without approval, hovering over Dokdo or other sensitive areas, we will not be able to detect them, nor counter them," a pilot said. "But we have given up insisting on having stealth jets due to media protests and as political parties have threatened to halt or suspend the FX-III program."

Rumors have been also rampant that President Lee Myung-bak made a secret deal with U.S. President Barack Obama to purchase Lockheed Martin's F-35, in return for other favors, such as the extension of Korea's ballistic missile range.

The Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) waved two key operational requirements last year ― an internal weapons bay and the RCS size of a large bird ― because none of the bidders, except the F-35 could fulfill the requirements.

http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2012/07/116_114721.html

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 08/07/2012 | 12:19 uur
Air Force desperate on fighter project

Under the current plan, Seoul will announce the winner of the FX-III program by the end of this year and new jets will be delivered here from 2016 through 2021.

Als de levertijd het argument gaat worden voor een kist die operationeel moet kunnen functioneren in Z Korea, dan zou de Eurofighter de nummer één moeten zijn.

En toch zet ik mijn kaarten in op de F15SE.

Seeking To Boost Typhoon Exports

New Radar, Missile, Upgrades In the Works

Jul. 8, 2012 - 09:54AM   |   

By ANDREW CHUTER

LONDON — The four nations behind the Typhoon program have asked the Eurofighter consortium for firm proposals to develop an active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar to be ready for fielding on the combat jet by 2015.

The NATO Eurofighter and Tornado Management Agency (NETMA), the group responsible for overseeing the program for the British, German, Italian and Spanish governments, issued a request for proposals (RfP) to Eurofighter last week.

Development of an AESA radar is deemed critical to Typhoon's ability to compete against export rivals from the U.S., France and Sweden, all of whom either have the capability in service or are committed to gaining it. Officials are also looking at integrating a new air-to-air missile, among other improvements.

One executive said the RfP for the AESA radar "covers an agreed specification from the four partner nations for the AESA requirement."

If the program stays on schedule, the governments and industry could be under contract to develop the radar early next year.

Eurofighter and Euroradar, the Selex Galileo-led consortium tasked with supplying radars for the Typhoon, signed a letter of intent with the nations to develop an AESA radar in mid-2011.

The arrangement, though, was funded by industry rather than the governments. This time around, the nations are committing their own funds to a development plan, with radar specifications agreed on by all four partners.

The AESA move is one of several steps underway to help address some of the capability issues that dogged the jet when it lost a multibillion-dollar face-off with Dassault Aviation's Rafale for a large Indian order earlier this year.

Euroradar already produces the mechanically scanned Captor radar used on the jet and has been working on an AESA system marrying the processing capabilities of the existing unit to an actively scanned front end.

Separately, Selex is well advanced in the development of an AESA radar for the Saab Gripen and continues to work with the British on progressing aspects of the technology.

Details on the RfP are scarce, but executives said they expect the in-service target date for the radar to be 2015, the same timeline as requested by the Indians during the competition with Rafale.Potential export customer requirements remain the driver for the moment. Malaysia, Oman and the United Arab Emirates are among a list of potential new buyers for Typhoon. Saudi Arabia will likely buy a second batch of aircraft on top of the 72 already ordered.

One drawback, though, remains the reluctance of the four cash-strapped European partners to commit to series production at this stage.

But industry executives see the nations' decision to fund the program and specify their detailed technical requirements as a strong statement of intent.

"They may not have given a date to fit the radar in their own aircraft, but they wouldn't be spending scarce cash resources unless they were firmly committed," one executive said.

New Missile, Other Upgrades

In another move to hike capability, the Typhoon partners have agreed to the first test-firing of the new MBDA Meteor beyond-visual-range air-to-air missile from a BAE Systems test aircraft in the final quarter of this year, said Bob Smith, BAE Systems combat air engineering director. No missile integration contract yet exists, and Smith said that will be part of the debate after delivery next year of the second of two upgrades to Typhoon being carried out under the Phase 1 Enhancement (P1E) program.

P1E is the biggest boost to the aircraft's operational capability since it entered service. The first enhancement, known as P1Ea, is due to be delivered to NETMA this month and should be cleared for service by next spring.

The work integrates the Litening III laser designator pod with the Paveway IV and EGBU-16 precision-guided bombs with improved man/machine interface and an expanded communications fit.

The second P1E phase is scheduled to be delivered next year and will allow the aircraft to undertake simultaneous air-to-air and air-to-ground engagements, and other improvements.

Previously, Typhoon had been limited to the use of Enhanced Paveway II in the air-to-ground role. The aircraft made its combat debut in Libya last year and received a further boost in June with the performance of Luftwaffe Typhoon pilots in the exacting Red Flag Alaska exercise.

A Eurofighter spokesman said the "P1E program, the E-Scan radar and the Meteor are important milestones on the way for further enhancements of the Typhoon's operational capabilities."

The Eurofighter consortium consists of BAE Systems, EADS and Finmeccanica for the four governments. Smith said the Eurofighter firms are assessing what more they could do to improve Typhoon's export credentials outside of technology insertions wanted by the four partner nations.

"There is some small amount of industry funding to look at equipment we would like to investigate for the export market. What we are saying is, do the partner nations want this [capability]? If they do, it can be part of a common program; if not, should industry be putting the money in to cover it?" he said.

Rafale gained the nod from India earlier this year to conduct final negotiations for the Asian nation's multirole combat aircraft requirement after it beat Typhoon on price. Those price negotiations remain ongoing, leaving Eurofighter on the sidelines awaiting the opportunity to enter a new bid if Dassault fails to seal the deal.

Industry executives here said the sort of deals won by Rafale are never secured on price alone; other factors are normally involved.

Speaking to the Italian parliament in February, Italian procurement secretary Gen. Claudio Debertolis was downbeat about the Eurofighter program, stating, "Unfortunately, India has shown that the cost of the aircraft — the competition was lost above all on cost — as well as the air-to-ground capabilities, are factors in making the aircraft uncompetitive."

Since the Indian decision, the Typhoon nations and industry have been doingmore than just licking their wounds. The governments and industry have been moving to sharpen their act on price, process, political co-coordination, technology growth commitments and other issues.

Speaking to reporters in June, Brian Burridge, vice president for strategic marketing at Finmeccanica UK, said having the AESA radar on contract and having weapon systems integrated on an earlier timescale, particularly Meteor, would have made a difference in India.

Now the nations are starting to address some of the growth shortcomings.

For some in industry, though, it's much later than it should have been.

"It's great, but it's two years too late. Eurofighter is nearly the best multirole fighter in the world, and it's the 'nearly' bit that's been the problem," one executive said.

Doug Barrie, the senior air analyst at the International Institute of Strategic Studies in London, said the partners had remained focused on the original interceptor capabilities of Typhoon longer than they should have once it became apparent requirements were changing and there were substantial export opportunities available.

"They haven't got there quickly enough. There remain a number of missile types that need to be added.

"The long pole in the tent, though, is the AESA radar. It needs to be integrated as quickly as possible. The Captor mechanically scanned radar they currently use has great capability, but AESA will give you more performance and at a lower through-life cost."

http://www.defensenews.com/article/20120708/DEFREG01/307080001/Seeking-Boost-Typhoon-Exports?odyssey=tab%7Ctopnews%7Ctext%7CFRONTPAGE

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 08/07/2012 | 12:30 uur
Als de levertijd het argument gaat worden voor een kist die operationeel moet kunnen functioneren in Z Korea, dan zou de Eurofighter de nummer één moeten zijn.

En toch zet ik mijn kaarten in op de F15SE.

klopt, maar tegen een "secret deal with U.S. President Barack Obama to purchase Lockheed Martin's F-35, in return for other favors" .. daar kan geen vergelijking/evaluatie tegenop.

Citaat van: Harald op 08/07/2012 | 19:54 uur
klopt, maar tegen een "secret deal with U.S. President Barack Obama to purchase Lockheed Martin's F-35, in return for other favors" .. daar kan geen vergelijking/evaluatie tegenop.

Dat is idd een punt van aandacht.

Citaat van: ARM-WAP op 07/07/2012 | 23:39 uur
Ik zet ook in op de Rafale...
De Brazilianen hebben al een deal voor hun marine afgesloten met de Fransen (subs en de bouw van een basis met onderhoudsfaciliteiten en mss is er wel interesse voor de FREMMs) en hun LuM zal ook liever een 2-motorig toestel
hebben...

Bij de Braziliaanse luchtmacht leiding is men de tijden waarin er een zeer groot gebrek was muntjes, of beter gezegd dat de waarde van Braziliaanse muntjes per dag merkbaar minder werd nog niet vergeten.
Zij gaan dus voor een 1-motorig gevechtsvliegtuig met lage exploitatie kosten, in dit geval de Gripen NG.  Ook Embraer is voor de Gripen NG, want die biedt meer mogelijkheden tot technologie transfer.   Alleen de politiek is voor de Rafale, om zodoende de banden met Frankrijk te versterken.

Citaat van: Poleme op 08/07/2012 | 22:24 uur
Bij de Braziliaanse luchtmacht leiding is men de tijden waarin er een zeer groot gebrek was muntjes, of beter gezegd dat de waarde van Braziliaanse muntjes per dag merkbaar minder werd nog niet vergeten.
Zij gaan dus voor een 1-motorig gevechtsvliegtuig met lage exploitatie kosten, in dit geval de Gripen NG.  Ook Embraer is voor de Gripen NG, want die biedt meer mogelijkheden tot technologie transfer.   Alleen de politiek is voor de Rafale, om zodoende de banden met Frankrijk te versterken.

We zullen het (als het niet weer wordt uitgesteld) voor 31 december 2012 weten... and the winner is...?

July 9, 2012 12:01 am

Cameron in push to export Typhoon

By Carola Hoyos, Defence Correspondent

David Cameron is to announce a big push to export the Eurofighter Typhoon jet by equipping it with the weapons and radar whose absence was partly blamed for its loss in a $20bn contest to supply India with a new fleet.

Typhoon, produced by the UK's BAE Systems, pan-European EADS and Italy's Finmeccanica, this year lost the world's biggest international fighter jet contest to Rafale, made by France's Dassault Aviation.

The Rafale was cheaper, could carry a larger array of weapons and had the latest radar technology. All three factors were cited by executives involved as having contributed to the Typhoon's defeat. Dassault is now in exclusive negotiations with India.

The prime minister, who has lobbied heavily for Typhoon, is to tell executives on Monday that the integration of the Meteor missile, an electronically scanned radar, enhancements of the defensive aids system, further development of the air-to-air and air-to-ground capabilities and integration of new weapons would all boost "the world-beating capabilities of this fantastic aircraft".

Mr Cameron said the four partner nations – the UK, France, Italy and Spain – had agreed the enhancements but did not give details on deadlines or funding.

The plans, announced on the opening day of Farnborough Air Show, will be welcome news to executives who believe there is a chance India's negotiations with Dassault will unravel. BAE told the FT this year that it was willing to lower the price of Typhoon for India while, more recently, Finmeccanica revealed the Eurofighter partners were completely revamping how they price the aircraft, standing on its head a 20-year-long approach seen as uncompetitive now that Typhoon is moving into competitive tenders in Asia and the Middle East.

Eurofighter expects to win an order from Oman and is bidding for contracts from the United Arab Emirates to Malaysia.

"The further development of Typhoon that we have been working on with our partners is good for the RAF who need this capability, good for our export customers, who want it too, and brilliant for the British manufacturers and British workers who are going to benefit," Mr Cameron will say.

Executives have said the UK lags behind France, Italy, the US and Germany in being willing to acquire weapons with capabilities that may not entirely fit the UK's needs, but nevertheless makes the product more attractive to foreign buyers, such as India.

With Europe and the US curtailing defence budgets, buyers from developing and oil-rich nations with more money to spare have become increasingly important to western defence contractors, such as BAE, EADS and Finmeccanica.

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2012.

Lockheed Martin Answers Critics Of F-35 Program

Farnborough Air Show » July 9, 2012

by Bill Carey and Chris Pocock

July 8, 2012, 6:50 AM

"We live in a goldfish bowl," sighed Lockheed Martin F-35 vice president customer engagement Steve O'Bryan. Speaking in London last March, he was referring to the stream of official reports, testimonies and comments that examine the Joint Strike Fighter program. This year alone, five major documents on the F-35 have reached the public domain. In January, a Pentagon operational test and evaluation report surfaced. In March, the latest selected acquisition review was released. Also in March, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) testified to Congress. In April, there was a report by Canada's Auditor General on that country's acquisition of the F-35.

Then came last month's latest report by the GAO to Congress. Its title–"DOD [Department of Defense] Actions Needed to Further Enhance Restructuring and Address Affordability Risks"–set the downbeat tone that prevailed throughout the 50-page document. The GAO described the "relatively poor cost, schedule and performance outcomes" that have dogged the F-35 program. It claimed that recent DOD reviews had endorsed the GAO's oft-repeated warnings about the concurrency of development and production. A new program baseline was established in March of this year, the GAO reported. A total of 2,457 aircraft are to be acquired by the U.S. through 2037, but the total investment is now $395.7 billion. That is a 42-percent increase over the previous 2007 baseline, the GAO said. It said that affordability is a key challenge as pressures on the overall U.S. defense budget increase.

Below, we summarize some of the GAO's comments, and recent responses by Lockheed Martin officials:

•Cost overruns on the first four annual procurement contracts are more than $1 billion, of which the U.S. government is paying $672 million. Deliveries of the 63 aircraft are more than one year late on average. Concurrency costs of at least $373 million have been incurred.

During briefings in mid-June, O'Bryan said the cost of the F-35 has dropped by more than 46 percent from low-rate initial production (LRIP) Lot 1 through 4. An F-35A now costs "around $70 million" in 2012 U.S. dollars when measured by unit recurring flyaway cost, including the F135 engine and mission systems. "I expect to continue to drop it," he said of the jet's cost. "People think the F-35 is costing more and more. It's getting less and less."

O'Bryan said he had not evaluated the GAO's assessment that cost overruns for the first four production contracts exceeded $1 billion. But he suggested that the agency's report to Congress is based on outdated information from 2011. He said the GAO's estimated concurrency cost is a "government number."

The international contribution to the program by the eight F-35 partner nations has saved the U.S. government billions of dollars, O'Bryan said, including $5 billion for the system development and demonstration phase and "a couple billion" for nonrecurring tooling and sustainment costs. Long-term sustainment costs, including shared parts bases and logistics, will yield further savings. "The U.S. government saves about $11 million an airplane just from the contribution of the partners," he said. "We'd expect more savings from Israel, Japan and any other international countries that sign up to the F-35 program."

Chairman and CEO Robert Stevens also focused on the positive on June 19 when asked about the performance of the F-35 program. "We want and would love to see an environment where there is greater convergence around what the expectations are on programs, what their complexity is, what resources are necessary to execute them," he said. "...We've experienced some of the challenges that were predicted and forecast. We've had some headwinds and, frankly, we've done pretty well with some of the other challenges the program had."

•Although developmental flight testing gained momentum and met most objectives in 2011, it is only about 21 percent complete, with the most challenging tasks still ahead.

Lockheed Martin announced in May that the F-35 systems development and demonstration (SDD) fleet surpassed 15,000 test points during the first four months of 2012, reaching roughly 25 percent of the SDD program requirement of 59,585 test points by Dec. 31, 2016.

O'Bryan described 2011 as "all and all, an excellent year" for the flight-test program, with 972 flights completed. Vertical landings by the F-35B short-takeoff vertical-landing (STOVL) variant increased to 268 last year from just 10 in 2010. The BF-2 STOVL test aircraft completed the first shipboard vertical landing on the U.S.S. Wasp off the coast of Virginia on October 3, followed by the first short takeoff the next day.

As of June this year, the program was 35 percent ahead of its 2012 plan, at 546 actual flights versus 546 planned, O'Bryan said. A total of 1,001 test flights are planned. Each of the three F-35 variants–CTOL, STOVL and CV–are ahead of plan in both flights and test points. "I don't want to get into an irrational exuberance on where we are," O'Bryan said. "We're off to a great start. We're doing well and we need to keep focused on the plan."

•Ground testing discovered F-35C tailhook design issues that have major consequences, according to DOD officials. Aircraft structural modifications may be required.

O'Bryan acknowledged that problems with the F-35C tail hook design are delaying the first test flights to an aircraft carrier, but said the plan is to "go to the boat" with a redesigned tail hook in early 2014, "well in time to make" the U.S. Navy's planned initial operational capability for the F-35C carrier variant.

The distance between the main landing gear and the tail hook on the F-35C is the shortest of any naval carrier aircraft, and the hook must be hidden to maintain the aircraft's stealth profile, O'Bryan said, explaining the design challenge.

The redesigned hook shank has a lower center of gravity, or, in effect, a sharper point, to catch the arresting wire on the carrier deck, he said. In addition, a "hold-down damper" is being modified to keep the hook from bouncing or skipping on the deck. "The good part is this whole assembly is a remove-and-replace assembly so any modification that we make to it is an easy fix," he said. The redesigned tail hook is being tested by doing "rolling arrestments" with an F-35C at the Navy's Patuxent River, Maryland and Lakehurst, New Jersey carrier suitability test sites.

•Developing and integrating the more than 24 million estimated lines of software code continues to be of concern. The 9.5 million lines onboard the aircraft has grown 37 percent since the critical design review in 2005. The Block 1 training software was not delivered as scheduled in 2011, and neither was the Block 2A software providing initial war-fighting capability released to flight test. Initial air-to-ground capabilities have been deferred from Block 1 to Block 2 (however, some weapons have been moved from Block 3 to Block 2).

Of 9.3 million lines of Block 2A software code, 87 percent was flying in the aircraft and 94 percent was undergoing lab testing, O'Bryan said. The F-35 Joint Program Office, Lockheed Martin and the U.S. government "believe the variance is small, it's contained and we have adequate schedule and resources to complete the development," he said. Four aircraft had flown 55 flights with Block 2A software at Edwards Air Force Base, California, operating the electro-optical targeting system (EOTS) and AN/APG-81 radar. Test flights were beginning with external stores, and initial weapons separation tests are planned in the fourth quarter.

O'Bryan said additional resources have been brought to bear for software testing, including a laboratory costing $100 million. Also, the modified Boeing 737 avionics testbed known as the CATBird will be used more during testing. "Is the hardest integration testing yet to go? Absolutely," he said. "We believe we are recovering schedule. The test of that will be when we release the complete Block 2A software to flight test sometime this summer."

•The helmet-mounted display is integral to mission systems functionality and concepts of operation, but development remains problematic.

According to O'Bryan, Lockheed Martin is making "lots of progress" with fixes intended to mitigate night-vision, latency and jitter problems experienced by pilots with the current Gen II helmet-mounted display from Vision Systems International, the joint venture of Rockwell Collins and Elbit Systems of America. However, the company continues developing an alternate helmet display from BAE Systems with detachable night-vision goggles. Critical design reviews of both systems are planned in the fourth quarter.

To improve night-vision acuity, an upgraded ISIE 11 electron bombarded active pixel sensor from Intevac of Santa Clara, California, will be mounted on the helmet and in the nose of the aircraft. The higher resolution sensor will be tested this summer at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Lincoln Laboratory, O'Bryan said. Latency in acquiring imagery from the F-35's distributed aperture system, quantified in milliseconds and described as "excessive" in a 2011 review by the DOD, can be improved with "software tweaks," he said. The issue of helmet display jitter, which the DOD said makes flight symbology difficult to read and is "tactically significant" for engaging weapons, will be addressed by incorporating micro-inertial measurement units (IMUs) to stabilize the image. IMUs have been installed in the laboratory and will be tested in flight this summer.

At the same time, Lockheed Martin will continue pursuing the alternate helmet display from BAE Systems, which had not yet flown on the F-35. "Until we are sure that we can meet the needs of the warfighter, we're going to have a dual-path development" with the alternate display, O'Bryan said.

•The autonomic logistics information system (ALIS) is designed to improve aircraft availability and lower support costs, but it is not fully developed and the current configuration is not adequate for deployed operations.

Lockheed Martin executives say the ALIS prognostic aircraft health management system is evolving and accumulating data as the F-35 flight-test program advances. The system is already operating at Eglin Air Force Base in Florida, where the first military pilots and maintainers are undergoing training at an F-35 Integrated Training Center. As of May, 12 low-rate initial production F-35As for the U.S. Air Force and F-35Bs for the Marine Corps had arrived at the air base. O'Bryan said 90 percent of the ALIS system capability at Eglin AFB will be achieved by 2013.

Joanne Puglisi, director of F-35 training at Lockheed Martin's Global Training and Logistics center in Orlando, Florida, said the progress of the ALIS system has not affected the start of F-35 training. "ALIS, like every thing else, is going through its development; the training system is going through its development," she said. "ALIS is down at Eglin today operating. It is supporting the operations that we're doing there today."

http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/2012-07-08/lockheed-martin-answers-critics-f-35-program

Citaat van: The Financial Times op 09/07/2012 | 10:49 uur

•Ground testing discovered F-35C tailhook design issues that have major consequences, according to DOD officials. Aircraft structural modifications may be required.

Dat is deels onze schuld  ;D

http://www.binder-world.com/us/news/fokker-landing-gear-bv/

Fokker landing gear...

Wanneer stopt de regering nu eens met dit nodeloze en geldverslindende project? Het kost miljarden en het levert niets anders op dan ontslagen!  :(

Als zonodig de huidige F-16 vervangen moet worden kijk je als regering toch rond wat er nu bestaat en door loven en bieden koop je een ander toestel? Waarom zoveel geld weggooien?  :mad: :(

Citaat van: Marc66 op 09/07/2012 | 12:44 uur
Wanneer stopt de regering nu eens met dit nodeloze en geldverslindende project? Het kost miljarden en het levert niets anders op dan ontslagen!  :(

Als zonodig de huidige F-16 vervangen moet worden kijk je als regering toch rond wat er nu bestaat en door loven en bieden koop je een ander toestel? Waarom zoveel geld weggooien?  :mad: :(

Omdat je voor de alternatieven ook behoorlijk in de buidel moet tasten.

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 09/07/2012 | 12:45 uur
Omdat je voor de alternatieven ook behoorlijk in de buidel moet tasten.

1. De alternatieven (b)lijken aanzienlijk goedkoper.
2. Er moest zonodig worden meegedaan omdat we weer eens dollartekens in onze ogen zagen. Er kon weer geld verdiend worden door bedrijven, die lachend zagen dat de belastingbetaler de benodigde 800 miljoen euro investeerde en de politiek zich door de KLu liet inpakken. En nu zitten we met de gebakken peren.....

Citaat van: Kapitein Rob op 09/07/2012 | 13:52 uur
1. De alternatieven (b)lijken aanzienlijk goedkoper.
2. Er moest zonodig worden meegedaan omdat we weer eens dollartekens in onze ogen zagen. Er kon weer geld verdiend worden door bedrijven, die lachend zagen dat de belastingbetaler de benodigde 800 miljoen euro investeerde en de politiek zich door de KLu liet inpakken. En nu zitten we met de gebakken peren.....

Ik ben er van overtuigd dat de alternatieven goedkoper zullen zijn/worden dan de F-35. En ik geloof dat het economische motief nooit leidend is geweest om er 800 miljoen in te investeren. Doel was de keuze voor de JSF al zo vroeg mogelijk min of meer onvermijdbaar te maken. Bij de keuze voor de Apache deden ze dat bijvoorbeeld door al vroegtijdig een optie te nemen op een flink bedrag dollars. Dat aanzienlijke "voordeel" zou dan vervallen als we niet voor de Apache gingen. Het zijn allemaal manipulatie-technieken om een vooraf gewenste keuze er door te drukken in de Kamer.

Citaat van: Elzenga op 09/07/2012 | 13:58 uur
Ik ben er van overtuigd dat de alternatieven goedkoper zullen zijn/worden dan de F-35. En ik geloof dat het economische motief nooit leidend is geweest om er 800 miljoen in te investeren. Doel was de keuze voor de JSF al zo vroeg mogelijk min of meer onvermijdbaar te maken. Bij de keuze voor de Apache deden ze dat bijvoorbeeld door al vroegtijdig een optie te nemen op een flink bedrag dollars. Dat aanzienlijke "voordeel" zou dan vervallen als we niet voor de Apache gingen. Het zijn allemaal manipulatie-technieken om een vooraf gewenste keuze er door te drukken in de Kamer.

De F16 Block 50/52/60 en de Gripen zullen goedkoper zijn in aanschaf en exploitatie

Alhoewel in aanschaf: als ik kijk naar de Zwitserse (principe) order...

De rest van de alternatieven lijken ongeveer in de zelfde categorie te zitten (muv de F18E)

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 09/07/2012 | 14:04 uur
......
De rest van de alternatieven lijken ongeveer in de zelfde categorie te zitten (muv de F18E)

Ik geloof daar dus niks van...van die andere toestellen zijn het veel "hardere" prijzen dan bij de F-35...wat vaak nog schattingen zijn. Ik verwacht dat de F-35 veruit het duurste toestel van genoemde alternatieven zal worden en alleen door de F-22 zal worden overtroffen qua aanschaf en exploitatiekosten, zij het niet met zo'n grote marge als oorspronkelijk steeds de bedoeling was geweest (en waarom men de F-35 ontwikkelde...).

Ik vermoed dat de F-35 ook "het kaalste" vliegtuig in de offerte zal zijn. Zoals Elzenga al jaren roept...

Citaat van: Elzenga op 09/07/2012 | 14:18 uur
Ik geloof daar dus niks van...van die andere toestellen zijn het veel "hardere" prijzen dan bij de F-35...wat vaak nog schattingen zijn. Ik verwacht dat de F-35 veruit het duurste toestel van genoemde alternatieven zal worden en alleen door de F-22 zal worden overtroffen qua aanschaf en exploitatiekosten, zij het niet met zo'n grote marge als oorspronkelijk steeds de bedoeling was geweest (en waarom men de F-35 ontwikkelde...).

De tijd zal het leren.

Als ik kijk naar de verwachting rondom een aantstaande Typhoon order voor Oman (12 stuk voor 2 mjd us dollar) dan zijn dat ook fraaie getallen.

(los van expoitatiekosten)

Citaat van: Kapitein Rob op 09/07/2012 | 14:22 uur
Ik vermoed dat de F-35 ook "het kaalste" vliegtuig in de offerte zal zijn. Zoals Elzenga al jaren roept...

inderdaad....waarna hij stap voor stap wordt "aangekleed" via miljoenen kostende deelprojecten. Ook dat is een manipulatie-techniek binnen een besluitvormingsproces.

Citaat van: Kapitein Rob op 09/07/2012 | 14:22 uur
Ik vermoed dat de F-35 ook "het kaalste" vliegtuig in de offerte zal zijn. Zoals Elzenga al jaren roept...

Ook dat zal mij niets verbazen. De ellende is: het ritselt van de getallen.

BAE in aanmerking voor grote Amerikaanse order

Maandag 9 juli 2012

De Britse leverancier van defensieapparatuur BAE Systems meldt vandaag dat het een grote kans maakt op een grote order van het Amerikaanse leger. Met de opdracht voor 350 nieuwe traningsjets is een bedrag van 7,1 miljard pond gemoeid. BAE Systems vestigt haar hoop op het feit dat het Amerikaanse leger door de bezuinigingen vooral interesse heeft in de oudere modellen zoals de Hawk. Van deze jet wordt de helft in Engeland gebouwd en de andere helft in de VS.

Eerder dit jaar ontsloeg BAE Systems door de bezuinigingen van de overheden al duizenden mensen in Engeland en in de VS. Het bedrijf hoopte eerder een grote order van de Franse overheid binnen te slepen maar greep hier naast.

http://www.analist.be/berichten/2012/07/09/11323/BAE+in+aanmerking+voor+grote+Amerikaanse+order

SELEX Galileo Raven ES-05 AESA Radar Flies Into Farnborough in the Gripen NG

(Source: Selex Galileo; issued July 6, 2012)

Delivered to Linkoping on Tuesday 12 June, the SELEX Galileo Raven ES-05 Active Electronically Scanned Array fire control radar, was installed on Saturday 16 June with no difficulty and immediately began integration testing in preparation for its Farnborough debut.

This event, achieved in close collaboration with Saab, marks a major milestone for both the Radar and the aircraft programmes, and is the culmination of an intense period of development by both SELEX Galileo and Saab.

The radar will displayed on aircraft at Farnborough and, on its return to Linkoping, will continue integration testing and then begin flight testing.

"We are immensely proud of this event", said Alastair Morrison, Senior Vice President of SELEX Galileo Radar and Advanced Targeting. "SELEX Galileo and Saab have worked closely together on this advanced fire control radar and on additional innovative features of the aircraft, such as the SELEX Galileo SKYWARD-G Infrared Search and Track. These developments are not without risk and this result demonstrates SELEX Galileo's commitment to deliver, on time and on promise, the best radar and sensors solutions to its customers".

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/release/3/136692/gripen-ng-flies-into-farnborough-with-new-aesa-radar.html

U.K. boosts up-armed Typhoon for Mideast

Published: July 9, 2012 at 11:42 AM

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates, July 9 (UPI) -- British Prime Minister David Cameron has unveiled a major sales push for the Eurofighter Typhoon armed with new weapons systems, with the Persian Gulf states of the United Arab Emirates and Oman as key targets.

The Typhoon is built by the German and Spanish arms of European aerospace giant EADS, BAE Systems, Britain's leading defense contractor, and Italy's Finmeccanica.

Cameron's decision to throw London's weight behind the Typhoon underlines the growing importance of export sales for major defense companies amid severe cutbacks in military spending by the United States and Europe.

Finmeccanica "has revealed that the Eurofighter partners are completely revamping how they price the aircraft, standing on its head a 20-year-long approach seen as uncompetitive now that Typhoon is moving into competitive tenders in Asia and the Middle East," the Financial Times reported.

Cameron, who has lobbied hard for the Typhoon, believes that the "integration of the Meteor missile, an electronically scanned radar, enhancements to the defensive system, further development of the air-to-air and air-to-ground capabilities and integration of new weapons would all boost 'the world-beating capabilities of this fantastic aircraft'," the FT reported.

Cameron's export drive follows the failure of the Typhoon's European consortium to secure a $20 billion contract to supply India with 126 of the jets to replace its fleet of rapidly aging Soviet-era MiG-21s, one third of its combat air strength.

France's Dassault Aviation was named the winner of the contract, one of the biggest military aviation deals ever, in January.

Dassault had submitted the lowest bid in the competition that initially had included Boeing's F/A-18 Lockheed Martin's F-16, Russia's MiG-35 and Sweden's Saab Gripen.

Jane's Defense Weekly observed at the time that losing the Indian deal was "a big loss for Eurofighter. It was widely tipped to be the favorite and had major support from the big beasts of the Eurofighter nations.

"Both Germany and the U.K. invested a lot of time in pushing the Typhoon, so this will hurt."

A month earlier, the Eurofighter lost out in an $8 billion to supply 42 fighters to Japan.

Lockheed Martin's problem-plagued F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, considered the most advanced combat jet in the world, won.

However, in 2007 the Typhoon consortium had secured a $7.21 billion contract to supply Saudi Arabia with 72 aircraft.

Saudi Arabia is currently flush with petrodollars because of high oil prices, that could go higher in the coming weeks amid growing concerns of conflict between the United States and Iran in the Persian Gulf over Tehran's refusal to scale back its contentious nuclear program amid tightening Western economic sanctions.

A European Union boycott of Iranian oil exports took effect July 1, threatening to reduce the Islamic Republic's vital oil sales even further.

Tehran has threatened to block the strategic Strait of Hormuz, the only gateway to the gulf and through which pass some 35 percent of the world's oil supplies, including those of Saudi Arabia and the gulf states.

Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have alternative overland pipelines that could ensure reduced exports are maintained if the strait is closed. They would thus benefit from skyrocketing oil prices as global supplies dwindle.

So as Western defense contractors find their domestic sales plummeting because of budgetary cutbacks, the Middle East remains a key target for increased exports to help keep U.S. and European assembly lines running.

In Britain, defense cuts forced BAE to lay off 3,000 of its 38,000 staff at its military aircraft division in northern England this year. It's also mulling the closure of one of its three shipbuilding yards with 1,500 layoffs.

In the United States, Boeing was reported earlier this year to be planning closing down its military aircraft operations in Kansas by the end of 2013, with some 2,200 layoffs.

The Middle East then is now crucial for Western defense companies.

A recent analysis by Frost and Sullivan, a leading growth strategies consultancy, said Middle Eastern states, particularly Saudi Arabia and the Emirates, the two Arab military heavyweights in the gulf facing Iran, are engaged in major procurement surges.

These are focused building up air power and air-defense capabilities against Iranian missiles.

Most of their military purchases will undoubtedly be from the United States, their main arms supplier. Britain and France are the primary European arms suppliers to the Saudis and their gulf allies.

Read more: http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Security-Industry/2012/07/09/UK-boosts-up-armed-Typhoon-for-Mideast/UPI-76711341848550/#ixzz20CHsJfCl

Citaat van: www.upi.com/Business News Vandaag om 08:08
Finmeccanica "has revealed that the Eurofighter partners are completely revamping how they price the aircraft, standing on its head a 20-year-long approach seen as uncompetitive now that Typhoon is moving into competitive tenders in Asia and the Middle East," the Financial Times reported.

Het zal mij benieuwen, in het kader van een financiële aanpassing, een capaciteits opwaardering en meer politieke inspanning om de EF succevol te verkopen of Nederland hernieuwde aandacht gaat krijgen.

Het is natuurlijk een perfecte timing om de Typhoon weer onder de Nederlandse aandacht te krijgen, immmers de politiek heeft zich recent afgezet tegen de JSF, wil het liefst Europees van de plank kopen en in de pas lopen met verdergaande Europese samenwerking.

Dat de EF ook een aardige duit in de defensieruif doet, in aanschaf en exploitatie zou maar zo door de politiek voor lief genomen kunnen worden, het is tenslotte geen JSF en het voldoet aan de bovenstaande criteria
.
Hou ook in gedachte de oude missie van Wouter Bos om met David Cameron te praten over de overname van een 40 tal Typoons uit het Britse sur plus en het zou maar zo kunnen dat onder (internationale) politieke druk de EF zomaar terug is in de kandidaatvergelijking.

Speculatief: zeker, onmogelijk: steeds minder.

En wat mij persoonlijk betreft: als het geen JSF wordt (ik vermoed dat deze gewoon in de NL kleuren rondvliegt vanaf 2020) dan zou ik 42 Eurofighters prefereren boven 42 Gripens NG.

South-Korea threatens to disqualify F-35

Gepubliceerd door JSFNieuws.nl onder Global F35 News

The journalist Lee Tae-hoon reports in the Korean Times about the South-Korean fighter evaluation. South Korea want to do a realistic evaluation on their own conditions (and not an evaluation like in several JSF partner countries, based only on simulations, criteria and testscenario's set up with assistance of people closely involved with JSF Program Office):

"A top procurement official issued an ultimatum to U.S. defense giant Lockheed Martin Thursday over its refusal to allow Korean pilots to conduct test flights of its F-35 fighter jet.

"Seoul may eliminate the F-35 from its fighter jet acquisition competition if Lockheed Martine does not comply with our demands," Oh Tae-shik, head of the program management agency at the Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA), told The Korea Times."

http://www.jsfnieuws.nl/

Navy Won't Bite Just Yet on F/A-18 Refinements

maar : .... F-18 still is Navy's nr. 1 aircraft......

FARNBOROUGH, England — Remember Boeing's pitch about all the high-speed new refinements and capabilities it wants to add to its F/A-18E and F Super Hornets? It has talked about more efficient engines, conformal fuel tanks and even fighters launching their own unmanned aerial vehicles.

The world's biggest operator of Super Hornets, the U.S. Navy, isn't quite ready to sign up for all that stuff — yet.

The Navy's Super Hornet program manager, Capt. Frank Morley, a career Hornet driver and true believer, said at the air show here Monday that the Navy has not signed up for any of Boeing's next-gen improvements to its Es and Fs. But he phrased his answer to a reporter's question in a very specific way:

"The U.S. Navy has not committed to any of those yet from a domestic standpoint," he said. Morley said Boeing had focused so far on advertising its potential Super-Duper Hornet — our phrase, not his — on international customers, but he acknowledged that he has liked what he's heard.

"We'll see where things go," he said. "They're all enticing in some way."

Although the Navy is a (reluctant) member of Club F-35, Morley's presentation reinforced just how much, and for how long, it will continue to depend on the Superbug. The service is going to extend the lives of some of its A and C model Hornets to 10,000 hours, and one of his charts said the Navy would continue to fly some variety of Super Hornets and E/A-18G Growlers until 2040. Another one of his PowerPoint slides, under the heading "Airborne Networking," included the bullet point: "UAV connectivity."

So even though the Navy will pass on the Super-Duper today, it may not be long before it begins upgrading its fleet with some of the bells, whistles and toys Boeing keeps dreaming up.

Read more: http://defensetech.org/2012/07/09/navy-wont-bite-just-yet-on-fa-18-refinements/#ixzz20CTqRIK4
Defense.org

July 10, 2012, 8:37 AM GMT

Typhoon Fails to Blitz Farnborough

By Alex Delmar-Morgan

As the Typhoon fighter jet thundered overhead at the Farnborough International Air Show Monday, there was little noise about new orders for the aircraft that is made by the Eurofighter consortium of British, German, Italian and Spanish companies.

Agence France-Presse/Getty Images In a file picture taken on March 25, 2011, an Italian Eurofighter prepares to land at Trapani-Birgi airbase in Sicily.
Worse, Spain, one of the four European countries that's behind the aircraft program, is struggling to keep up with payments and the delivery schedule for the remaining 46 of the 87 jets it has ordered. The Spanish government has made up late payments but with €720 million ($886.5 million) due this year, it is keen to slow delivery of the jets, a sign of the broader budgetary squeeze facing defense spending in Europe and other developed markets. It's hardly good news for Eurofighter, whose product has been criticized for being too expensive.

True, the Spanish government finds itself in unusually difficult circumstances as it grapples with a severe banking crisis that has threatened the stability of public finances.

A spokesman for BAE Systems, one of the three companies in the Eurofighter consortium, said Qatar and the United Arab Emirates remain in talks for the purchase of Typhoon jets. "We are talking to the Qataris quite a bit," said a spokesman for U.K.-based BAE Systems PLC. Only last November, the UAE, after protracted talks with France's Dassault Aviation  SA for its Rafale fighter jet, asked Eurofighter to prepare a counter offer. Eurofighter responded to this proposal earlier in the year. It expects evaluation to last "months," the BAE spokesman said.

BAE Systems is also in talks with the Gulf state of Oman to sell Typhoons.

The consortium, also made up of Finmeccanica of Italy and the European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co., or EADS, also said it was standing by to restart talks with India if New Delhi's exclusive negotiations with Dassault to buy Rafale jets collapsed.  Eurofighter suffered a setback in January this year when India selected Dassault to supply it with 126 Rafale aircraft in a deal valued at more than $10 billion.

"Should those talks [between India and Dassault] break down and Eurofighter be invited back in, the consortium has got to be ready to respond with the best possible solution," BAE said.

U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron, who has lobbied the Indian government to reconsider BAE's failed fighter jet bid, said on Monday at Farnborough he would continue to support Britain's fight for lucrative, multi-billion dollar defense contracts. But as impressive as the gravity-defying display of the Typhoon's flying capabilities looked at the Air Show, Eurofighter's new orders remain elusive.

http://blogs.wsj.com/source/2012/07/10/typhoon-fails-to-blitz-farnborough/

FARNBOROUGH: Terma displays F-35 multimission pod

maar ...... heeft de F-35 standaard geen EW systemen ???

"Danish firm Terma is displaying its multimission pod for the Lockheed Martin F-35 fighter aircraft for the first time at Farnborough. The pod can be configured to carry a range of equipment such as an external cannon, additional sensors and jammers.

The carbonfibre pod is optimised for low observability, meaning it will not radically increase the stealthy F-35's radar cross section. The company adds that the pod's light, carbonfibre structure is also good for fuel efficiency.

The company has already delivered 17 of the pods equipped with cannons to the US government for use aboard US Navy F-35Cs and US Marine F-35Bs..."

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/farnborough-terma-displays-f-35-multimission-pod-374017/

The F-35 Pod Enclosure will provide real estate on the F-35, which can be used to expand the F-35 Special Mission functionality, by allowing the F-35 to fly Next Generation EW and ISR systems, such as Jammers and EO sensors...."

http://www.terma.com/media/199994/img_8360_464.png
www.terma.com/media/199692/terma_update_july_2012.pdf

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-19996.html

July 10, 2012

How the F-35 Doubled in Price

by WINSLOW T. WHEELER

On June 14 – Flag Day, of all days – the Government Accountability Office released a new oversight report on the F-35: Joint Strike Fighter: DOD Actions Needed to Further Enhance Restructuring and Address Affordability Risks. As usual, it contained some important information on growing costs and other problems. Also as usual, the press covered the new report, albeit a bit sparsely.

Fresh bad news on the F-35 has apparently become so routine that the fundamental problems in the program are plowed right over. One gets the impression, especially from GAO's own title to its report, that we should expect the bad news, make some minor adjustments, and then move on. But a deeper dive into the report offers more profound, and disturbing, bottom line.

Notorious for burying its more important findings in the body of a report – I know; I worked there for nearly a decade  - GAO understates its own results on acquisition cost growth in its one-page summary, which-sadly-is probably what most read to get what they think is the bottom line.

In that one-page summary, GAO states the F-35 program now projects "costs of $395.7 billion, an increase of $117.2 billion (42 percent) from the prior 2007 baseline."

The summary uses the wrong baseline.  As F-35 observers know, the cost documentation of the F-35 program started in 2001, not 2007.  There has been a lot more cost growth than the "$117.2 billion (42 percent)" stated.

Set in 2001, the total acquisition cost of the F-35 was to be $233.0 billion. Compare that to the current estimate of $395.7 billion: cost growth has been $162.7 billion, or 70%: a lot more than what GAO stated in its summary.

However, the original $233 billion was supposed to buy 2,866 aircraft, not the 2,457 currently planned: making it $162 billion, or 70%, more for 409, or 14%, fewer aircraft. Adjusting for the shrinkage in the fleet, I calculate the cost growth for a fleet of 2,457 aircraft to be $190.8 billion, or 93%.

The cost of the program has almost doubled over the original baseline; it is not an increase of 42%.

Now, you know why DOD loves the rubber baseline. Reset the baseline, and you can pretend a catastrophe is half its actual size.

When assessing the other, even larger, "sustainability" cost implications of the F-35, GAO makes what I regard as a major methodological error.

On page 11, GAO cites DOD's goal for the additional operating, logistics and support costs ("sustainment") of the F-35. GAO focuses on the Air Force's conventional take-off and landing (CTOL) variant and cites the new, March 2012 goal: $35,200 per flight hour, compared to $22,500 for the F-16. For years, DOD has cited the F-16 as the comparison aircraft for calculating costs to operate the F-35; now it is hoping the F-35 will be only 56% more than the cost to sustain the F-16.

GAO, quite properly, offers some skepticism that this goal can be met. It states that the CTOL version is not achieving its own criteria for meantime between failures, falling 30% short in 2011 (page 30); GAO reports that operational testers said "JSF is not on track to meet operational suitability requirements" (page 17), and finally, GAO says the program is experiencing "excessive time for low observable repair and restoration, low reliability, and poor maintainability performance" (page 17).  After all that, GAO politely calls the sustainability cost goal "a significant challenge" (page 31).

GAO is also correct to point out DOD management's declaration that the current F-35 operating cost estimate, "$1.1 Trillion for all three variants based on a 30-year service life," (page 10) is "unaffordable and simply unacceptable in the current fiscal environment" (page 11).

However, comparing the F-35 to the F-16 is a major error; associating those two aircraft is simply implausible. The two have very, very little in common.  While they both are single engine aircraft that were planned to cost less than their contemporary higher cost complements (the F-15 and the F-22 respectively), the basic similarity stops there. The F-16 was conceived as a visual-range air to air fighter in the 1970s; it is a far, far more simple design, and it met its inherent affordability goal. The F-35A is a multi-role, multi-service design with stealth and many other highly complex (so-called "5th Generation") attributes added in. It is a far, far more intricate aircraft and, as a result, failed to meet any affordability goal.

The F-35A has much more in common with its Lockheed stablemate, the F-22. While the F-22 may be more complex in some respects (twin-engine with divertible thrust; earlier generation stealth coatings); in other respects the F-35 is the more complex aircraft of the two (basic multi-role design woven into a STOVL-capable, multi-service airframe, even more complex communications, sensor and display systems, and much more software and complexity of system integration).

The F-35′s fundamentally complicated ("5th generation") design makes its comparison to the F-16 inappropriate in any effort to understand F-35 operating costs. It should be compared to the F-22 where the similarities abound, for the most part. To better predict unknown F-35 costs, we should start with known F-22 operating costs.

The Air Force has been recording costs per flying hour for the F-22 since 2003. Six years after 2005 when the Air Force declared "initial operating capability" (IOC or the presumed ability to deploy and fight) for the F-22, the Air Force officiallycalculated an "ownership" cost per-flying-hour for the F-22 at $128,389. That amount, however, is an outlier: the F-22 was grounded for more than four months that year, thereby distorting upwards the per-flying-hour cost.

There were no F-22 groundings or other significant flight limitations in 2010; the data for that year reflect known sustainment costs, per hour, after five years of deployability, thereby reflecting any learning curve in F-22 maintenance and support.  The Air Force's "ownership" cost per flying hour for the F-22 in 2010 was $63,929: half the 2011 cost.

It is that amount that should serve as the starting point for considering plausible F-35 operating costs. Optimistically speaking, a downward adjustment can be made for the F-35: Lockheed is attempting to reduce the cost and maintenance hours needed for the F-35′s version of stealth coatings, which comprises a large portion of F-22 operating costs, and an allowance should also be made for the single engine design of the F-35.

However, it is currently unknowable whether the lesser stealth cost goal will be achieved (as noted above, GAO found the F-35 is encountering problems), and it is also unknowable if the single engine design compensates, or not, for the added operating costs for the more complex communications, sensors, displays and software integration. While highly optimistic, perhaps a 20% improvement over the F-22 can be analytically useful.

Assuming that 20% cost per-flying-hour improvement over the F-22, the F-35 would cost $51,143 per hour to fly. Rather than an F-35A operating cost that is 56% more than the non-analogous F-16; it is more plausible, and analytically conservative, to calculate an operating cost that is 80% less than the highly comparable F-22-even if the improvement has not yet been demonstrated.  The question should not be whether the F-35 can achieve 156% of the operating cost of the F-16; it should be whether it can achieve 80% of the operating costs of the F-22.

Posing the question in that manner, however, presents a serious dilemma: if the currently projected estimate of operating costs for the complete fleet of all three F-35 variants of $1.1 trillion is "unaffordable and simply unacceptable," what is the meaning of a plausible-even if optimistic-operating cost that is well above that unsustainable $1.1 trillion?

During the nine years I worked in GAO's methodology division, specializing in national-security evaluations, we took very seriously the selection of reasonable criteria for the purposes of comparing DOD systems. When DOD's criteria were biased, we selected more appropriate ones. In this recent report, GAO failed to take that step.

We also used to joke in the cafeteria about the tepid titles senior management would give the reports we wrote. This new GAO report, Joint Strike Fighter: DOD Actions Needed to Further Enhance Restructuring and Address Affordability Risksis a very unfortunate example: it does not simply understate the message the data convey; it misstates what the data say. The cost growth inherent in the F-35 program is huge and still growing:  far more than to "enhance restructuring" and "address affordability" is needed.

The F-35 should now be officially called "unaffordable and simply unacceptable." All that is lacking is a management that will accept – and act – on that finding.

Winslow T. Wheeler is director of the Straus Military Reform Project and editor of  The Pentagon Labyrinth: 10 Short Essays to Help You Through It.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/07/10/how-the-f-35-doubled-in-price/

July 10, 2012, 10:24 a.m. EDT

Lockheed Martin F-35 Flight Test Progress Report

FORT WORTH, Texas, July 10, 2012 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ -- Lockheed Martin's /quotes/zigman/150087/quotes/nls/lmt LMT +0.29% F-35 program accrued the highest number of test points in a single month during June, an accomplishment indicative of the program's ongoing maturation. Additionally, for the 18th consecutive month the F-35 test program remained ahead of plan.

As of June 30, the F-35 Lightning II 5th Generation multirole fighter had conducted 595 test flights in 2012 versus a plan of 445 and accrued 4,830 test points against a plan of 3,901.

In June, the F-35 program accomplished several flight test and production milestones:

During June, the F-35 test program accrued the most test points in a single month, 1,118, in program history.

On June 5, BF-5 became the first F-35B short takeoff and vertical landing (STOVL) jet to fly with Block 2A software.

On June 13, the first F-35C carrier variant (CV) night flight was completed at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Md.

On June 13, F-35A conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL) weapons pit drop testing was conducted for the first time at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif.

On June 14 at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Md., BF-2 completed the first test flight for the F-35B STOVL variant with an asymmetric weapons load.

On June 25, AF-1, an F-35A CTOL test jet, accomplished the first F-35 weapon pit drop from an external station, a GBU-12 from station 2.

On June 27, the program achieved the highest number of F-35 flights in a single day, 12.

Cumulative flight test activity totals for 2012 through June 30 are provided below:

F-35A CTOL jets have flown 260 times.

F-35B STOVL jets have completed 202 flights, 134 of which began with a short takeoff. Additionally, F-35B STOVL aircraft have conducted 55 vertical landings.

F-35C CV jets have flown 133 times.

Cumulative flight test activity totals for the duration of the program through May 31 are provided below:

F-35A CTOL jets have flown 907 times.

F-35B STOVL jets have completed 791 flights, 553 of which began with a short takeoff. Additionally, F-35B STOVL aircraft have conducted 334 vertical landings.

F-35C CV jets have flown 325 times.

Since December 2006, F-35s have flown 2,355 times and accrued more than 3,700 cumulative flight hours. This total includes 91 flights from the original test aircraft, AA-1; 2,023 SDD test flights; and 241 production-model flights.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/lockheed-martin-f-35-flight-test-progress-report-2012-07-10

Citaat van: Harald op 10/07/2012 | 17:33 uur
FARNBOROUGH: Terma displays F-35 multimission pod

maar ...... heeft de F-35 standaard geen EW systemen ???                                http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-19996.html

Electronic Warfare systemen zenden zelf elektro-magnetische straling uit.  Of vergroten de radar doorsnede van een gevechtsvliegtuig door toepassing van decoys ('lokvogels').   Deze decoys worden door het gevechtsvliegtuig gesleept aan een dunne kunststof draad en die simuleren met hun radar echo alsof ze een gevechtsvliegtuig zijn.
Dus hun gebruik druist in tegen de (beperkte) steelse eigenschappen van de F-35.   De Low Probability of Intercept radar van de F-35 beschikt overigens wel over mogelijkheden om andere radar te storen of te misleiden.
Daarnaast moet het ook mogelijk zijn om de Active Electronic Scanning Antenne radar van de F-35A in te zetten als High Power Microwave wapen.
De eveneens in de X-band / centimeter golf LPI AESA radar van de F-22A Raptor kan dat al.  Waarbij met een nauwe en sterke microgolf straalbundel inkomende raketten worden uitgeschakeld of gestoord.

New Gripen to Cost At Least 10% Less Than Predecessor

Buyers of the new Gripen E/F will get a "double digit" percent price saving against the cost of the aircraft's predecessor, the Gripen C/D, the CEO of Saab said on Tuesday.

Speaking at the Farnborough International Airshow, Hakan Buskhe said the new fighter will also offer a 25 percent increase in capabilities.

The price drop and capability hike was a Saab specialty, he said, since the Gripen C/D had cost less than its own predecessor, the Gripen A/B, while offering a 20 percent hike in capabilities.

Explaining the price drop, Buskhe said, "You do that with cars, why not with fighters?"

The Swedish government intends to buy 80 Gripen E/F aircraft, previously referred to as the Gripen NG by Saab. Switzerland has also downselected it for a possible purchase of 22 aircraft.

Buskhe linked Saab's pricing policy to its need to compete globally, adding that only 20 percent of the firm's order backlog was in Sweden. Saab employs 3,000 engineers outside Sweden, he added.

Saab is now setting up a Gripen weapons training school in South Africa, he said.

In an apparent reference to firms that can rely on generous procurements from home governments, Buskhe said, "It is not difficult to build something if you have a ton of money." Saab, he added, expected to see a slight increase in sales in 2012 on 2011.

Bushke said Saab's value-for-money principle affected its view of the European alliances now being mulled for the design of new UAVs. Italy and Germany have reacted angrily to Anglo-French plans to form a bilateral UAV alliance, which they plan to open up to other partners at a later date.

But Bushke appeared unruffled at the prospect of Sweden following an Anglo-French lead. "As long as the cooperation gives a high quality product which is affordable," he said. "We don't do endless discussions. In all other businesses you start by asking what the customer wants."

http://blogs.defensenews.com/farnborough/2012/07/10/new-gripen-to-cost-at-least-10-less-than-predecessor/

Citaat van: blogs.defensenews.com Vandaag om 09:10
New Gripen to Cost At Least 10% Less Than Predecessor

Op zich een spannend verhaal van deze Saab CEO waarbij ik me afvraag hoe jet kan dat Zwitserland dan meer dan 100 mjn US dollar per NG moet betalen...

Het zal wel:

a: een leuke verkoopverhaal zijn?
b: hogere wiskunde zijn?
c: een feit zijn?

Eurofighter's Upgrades: Enough? In Time?

Jul 10, 2012

At the opening of the Farnborough 2012 defense exhibition, British Prime Minister David Cameron discussed the Eurofighter's future:

"Typhoon's growth potential is huge and the four partner nations, Italy, Germany, Spain and the UK have agreed the next steps required to further exploit this. The integration of the METEOR missile, an Electronically Scanned Radar, enhancements of the Defensive Aids System, further development of the air-to-air and air-to-ground capabilities and integration of new weapons."

All of these capabilities will be welcome. Indeed, all are necessary, in order to address key platform weaknesses, and keep the plane competitive in the international marketplace as a multi-role fighter. A short synopsis of each aspect follows.

MBDA's Meteor missile has just finished testing, and Britain has signed a production contract. Meteor will be entering production for the UK by the end of 2012. The Eurofighter has always been one of the initial fielding platforms for this ramjet-powered, Mach 4, long range air-to-air missile, and Meteor-armed RAF Eurofighters are slated for fielding in 2015-2016. This is old news, but good news. Meteor's reach will be an excellent fit with the Typhoon's design intent, and will give the Typhoon a notable edge against American "teen series" fighters. A shorter fielding timeline would be better news.

The AESA radar is becoming a competitive gap for Eurofighter. American fighters have operational AESAs, France is about to start fielding the RBE2-AA on the Rafale, and Sweden's Saab is about to begin flight tests with its ES-05 Raven AESA. Eurofighter hasn't even funded serious development yet (vid. March 22/12), and that needs to change very soon. Reports indicate that the agreement is just agreement over the RFP's details, and that the funded AESA development effort won't begin until 2013, with delivery only by 2015. That's late, and the competitive hole gets deeper every day.

When and if it is fielded, that E-Scan/ CAPTOR-E radar will need to be offered with multiple air-to-air and air-to-ground modes, in order to be competitive in the global marketplace.

Eurofighter's Praetorian integrated defensive system has been marketed as a strength, but was cited as a weakness in Switzerland's evaluation. These systems also need to be upgraded periodically, in order to keep up with evolving threats and operational experience.

Planned near-term weapon enhancements for the Typhoon include the addition of dual-mode laser/GPS guided bombs (Paveway IV in Britain, GBU-16 Enhanced Paveway elsewhere), the aforementioned Meteor missile, and fuller integration of the LITENING III surveillance & targeting pod. Cameron's announcement represents the go-ahead for P1EA, the Phase 1 Enhancement program for Typhoon Tranche 2 fighters. BAE is reportedly beginning to test test-fly a future P1EB package with more software flexibility between air and ground attack. BAE's client Saudi Arabia is said to be looking at similar enhancements, along with Thales' Damocles surveillance & targeting pod.

The program will need to go further than that. As shown by DID's comparison of the Eurofighter vs. Saab's Gripen fighter, the Typhoon's limited weapon & equipment options are a clear weakness for a "multi-role" fighter. That has cost the Eurofighter in competitions like Singapore's (F-15SG won), and hurt its prospects more recently as well. Defense News:

"Speaking to reporters in June, Brian Burridge, vice president for strategic marketing at Finmeccanica UK, said having the AESA radar on contract and having weapon systems integrated on an earlier timescale, particularly Meteor, would have made a difference in India."

That weakness becomes even more pronounced when compared to older American designs like the F-15 Strike Eagle, F-16 Falcon/Viper, and F/A-18 Super Hornet, all of which have much broader weapon arrays and AESA radar options available. Fixing that competitive weakness will require the integration of at least one long-range cruise missile, a long-range guided glide bomb, an anti-ship missile, and an anti-radar missile. "Nice to haves" include offering customers more cruise missile and glide bomb choices, a higher-end reconnaissance pod than the current ReeceLITE, and short-range strike missiles.

With Tranche 3B fading away, and India out as a big export win, upgrades like these may become only way to keep part of the Eurofighter Typhoon's manufacturing base going. They're also that base's best hope for landing significant export orders.

The question is when some of these upgrade "agreements" will become signed contracts, with actual dollars behind them. For the Eurofighter's sake, it needs to be soon.

Zie link voor een (bewapeningstabel) Eurofighter versus Gripen.

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/Eurofighters-Upgrades-Enough-In-Time-07462/

How the F-35 Nearly Doubled In Price (And Why You Didn't Know)

(Source: Time Battleland blog; posted July 9, 2012)
 
On June 14 - Flag Day, of all days - the Government Accountability Office released a new oversight report on the F-35: Joint Strike Fighter: DOD Actions Needed to Further Enhance Restructuring and Address Affordability Risks. As usual, it contained some important information on growing costs and other problems. Also as usual, the press covered the new report, albeit a bit sparsely.

Fresh bad news on the F-35 has apparently become so routine that the fundamental problems in the program are plowed right over. One gets the impression, especially from GAO's own title to its report, that we should expect the bad news, make some minor adjustments, and then move on. But a deeper dive into the report offers more profound, and disturbing, bottom line.

Notorious for burying its more important findings in the body of a report - I know; I worked there for nearly a decade - GAO understates its own results on acquisition cost growth in its one-page summary, which-sadly-is probably what most read to get what they think is the bottom line.

In that one-page summary, GAO states the F-35 program now projects "costs of $395.7 billion, an increase of $117.2 billion (42 percent) from the prior 2007 baseline." The much more complete story is in this table from the report:

Overzicht : kostenvergelijking 2001 en 2012
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/release/3/136749/%E2%80%98rubber-baseline%E2%80%99-understates-f_35-cost-increase.html

The summary uses the wrong baseline. As F-35 observers know and as the table shows, the cost documentation of the F-35 program started in 2001, not 2007. There has been a lot more cost growth than the "$117.2 billion (42 percent)" stated.

Set in 2001, the total acquisition cost of the F-35 was to be $233.0 billion. Compare that to the current estimate of $395.7 billion: cost growth has been $162.7 billion, or 70%: a lot more than what GAO stated in its summary.

However, the original $233 billion was supposed to buy 2,866 aircraft, not the 2,457 currently planned: making it $162 billion, or 70%, more for 409, or 14%, fewer aircraft. Adjusting for the shrinkage in the fleet, I calculate the cost growth for a fleet of 2,457 aircraft to be $190.8 billion, or 93%.

The cost of the program has almost doubled over the original baseline; it is not an increase of 42%.

Now, you know why DOD loves the rubber baseline. Reset the baseline, and you can pretend a catastrophe is half its actual size. (end of excerpt)

http://battleland.blogs.time.com/2012/07/09/f-35-nearly-doubles-in-cost-but-you-dont-know-thanks-to-its-rubber-baseline/

US Navy's Super Hornet AESA radar retrofit enables legacy upgrade

By:   Dave Majumdar Farnborough

06:00 10 Jul 2012 

As the US Navy retrofits its older Block II Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornets with the Raytheon AN/APG-79 active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar, more APG-73 mechanically-scanned arrays will be available to replace the old APG-65s on legacy F/A-18A/B/C/D Hornets.

The USN intends to retrofit every Super Hornet down to the Lot 26 production run aircraft with the APG-79, says Capt Frank Morley, the USN's programme manager for the F/A-18 family. That means there will be a large number of surplus APG-73 radars available to retrofit older legacy Hornets that are still equipped with the APG-65 - both of which are built by Raytheon.

The navy is still working on new modifications for the APG-73, but the focus is on the APG-79.

But not every Super Hornet can be retrofitted with the APG-79. For older Block I aircraft, the USN could potentially retrofit them with the Raytheon Advanced Combat Radar AESA. "The option is on the table," Morley says.

However, he cautions, there may not be a business case to be made for retrofitting older airframes, although it could be considered.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/farnborough-us-navys-super-hornet-aesa-radar-retrofit-enables-legacy-upgrade-374073/

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 10/07/2012 | 08:28 uur
Het zal mij benieuwen, in het kader van een financiële aanpassing, een capaciteits opwaardering en meer politieke inspanning om de EF succevol te verkopen of Nederland hernieuwde aandacht gaat krijgen.    Het is natuurlijk een perfecte timing om de Typhoon weer onder de Nederlandse aandacht te krijgen, immmers de politiek heeft zich recent afgezet tegen de JSF, wil het liefst Europees van de plank kopen en in de pas lopen met verdergaande Europese samenwerking.    Dat de EF ook een aardige duit in de defensieruif doet, in aanschaf en exploitatie zou maar zo door de politiek voor lief genomen kunnen worden, het is tenslotte geen JSF en het voldoet aan de bovenstaande criteria.
Hou ook in gedachte de oude missie van Wouter Bos om met David Cameron te praten over de overname van een 40 tal Typoons uit het Britse sur plus en het zou maar zo kunnen dat onder (internationale) politieke druk de EF zomaar terug is in de kandidaatvergelijking.    Speculatief: zeker, onmogelijk: steeds minder.

En wat mij persoonlijk betreft: als het geen JSF wordt (ik vermoed dat deze gewoon in de NL kleuren rondvliegt vanaf 2020) dan zou ik 42 Eurofighters prefereren boven 42 Gripens NG.

Stelregel:  levensduur kosten (100%) = aanschaf (30%) + exploitatie (70%).
Feit: van de nog 86 KLU F-16AM/BM's zijn er maar 24 a 25 inzetbaar.  En dat doen we met kunst en vliegwerk, want tekorten aan ervaren technici, onderdelen en munitie.  Vorig jaar heeft de KLu het motoren en elektronica onderhoud uitbesteed aan respectievelijk Dutch Aero en Elbit America.   Anders zou dit onderhoud veel te duur worden.
Ik heb al eens eerder voor gerekend dat we inderdaad circa 42 Rafales / Typhoons of F-15(S)E Eagles kunnen aanschaffen met de reservering van EUR 4,5 miljard.  Het probleem zit hem dan ook bij de exploitatiekosten!   (in 2012, direct operating costs)
Gripen  C/D           =  USD   4.700                ( 67)         http://www.stratpost.com/gripen-operational-cost-lowest-of-all-western-fighters-janes
F-16C block 40/50  =  USD   7.000                (100)
F-18E SuperHornet =  USD 11.000 - 24.400   (157 - 349)
Rafale                   =  USD 16.500                (236)
Typhoon                =  USD 18.000                (257)
F-35A                    =  USD 21.000                (300)

Je kunt wel allerlei luchtkastelen bouwen met voorstellen voor te dure 2-motorige jachtvliegtuigen.  Maar die eindigen in een pure air policing luchtmacht a la die van Oostenrijk.   Daar heb je geen Rafale, Typhoon of F-15SE voor nodig, dat is pure (begroting) overkill.

Citaat van: Poleme op 11/07/2012 | 17:19 uur
Je ku6nt wel allerlei luchtkastelen bouwen met voorstellen voor te dure 2-motorige jachtvliegtuigen.  Maar die eindigen in een pure air policing luchtmacht a la die van Oostenrijk.   Daar heb je geen Rafale, Typhoon of F-15SE voor nodig, dat is pure (begroting) overkill.

De conclusie is dan dat de 16e economie ter wereld zich moet beperken tot Gripen NG of F16 block 50/52/60 dit vanwege de simpele beslissing in Nederland dat veiligheid niet meer waard is.

Niets ten nadele van de Gripen en de F16, prima als we daar een Klu mee overhouden met 2 basis en (minimaal) 68 vliegtuigen maar ik twijfel zeer aan het getal van 68.

Nog een paar jaar en de eerst de beste bananenrepubliek streeft ons voorbij.

Er is een directe relatie tussen Bruto Nationaal Product, onze welvaart en defensie bestedingen!
We zijn nu NOG de 16de economie ter wereld, maar dat is geen vast gegeven.    Niets Brengt Niets.
We zitten met een failliet politiek bestel, Achter de Duinen vindt men het eigen ego of eigen partij belang belangrijker dan het nationale belang.
Onder de mensen in het land is er geen wij gevoel meer.    Dus er gaat waarschijnlijk pas iets veranderen, nadat er stront aan de knikker is geweest.
Om onze huidige welvaart vast te houden, zullen we de schouders er onder moeten gooien, anders wordt het armoede lijden en een 'broken arrow' krijgsmacht in Nederland.
Hoe?  Nederland is sterk in innovatie, we staan in de top 10, op de 9de plaats van de meeste patent aanvragen per hoofd van de bevolking.  In 2005 stonden we nog in de top 5.  We zullen ook meer moeten gaan werken en de arbeidsparticipatie verhogen.

Terug komende op de F-16A/B vervanger.  Een vloot bestaande uit GripenNG's, F-16C block50/ 52 / 60, of zelfs Gripen C/D's kan de KLu taken adequaat uitvoeren ;)

Citaat van: Poleme op 11/07/2012 | 18:29 uur
Onder de mensen in het land is er geen wij gevoel meer.    Dus er gaat waarschijnlijk pas iets veranderen, nadat er stront aan de knikker is geweest.

+1
helaas helemaal waar ! ..  :mad:

Citaat van: Poleme op 11/07/2012 | 18:29 uur
Terug komende op de F-16A/B vervanger.  Een vloot bestaande uit GripenNG's, F-16C block50/ 52 / 60, of zelfs Gripen C/D's kan de KLu taken adequaat uitvoeren ;)

Dan maar opteren voor de Saab, in een voldoende aantal, om daarmee in de pas te lopen met de rest van de Europese luchtmachten om deze rond 2040/45 te vervangen door de gezamelijke vervanger (als die er ooit komt) van de Rafale, de EF en de Gripen (en als dat een twee pitter blijkt te worden, dan hebben we dus tegen die tijd weer het zelfde probeem)

Als "we" in 2013 beslissen dan kunnen we wellicht nog mee doen in het Zwitsers-Zweedse verhaal met als eventueel posieve off-spin: de aansluiting van Denemarken en op termijn België en Portugal.

En laat de Noren en Britten lekker de JSF kopen...eigenwijs zijn ze toch al op andere terreinen...hoe meer het ze zal kosten om uiteindelijk aansluiting te maken met de rest van Europa als het eenmaal zover is (want die olie en gas raken ook een keer op en de Amerikanen zullen zich meer en meer op Azie en Latijns Amerika focussen).

Path Clear for Rafale Fighter Deal: Antony

(Source: Hindustan Times; published July 11, 2012)
   
NEW DELHI --- India's hunt for the acquisition of 126 medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) is coming to a close, with the defence ministry giving the green signal to the evaluation process that led to selection of the French Rafale fighter. The plane was chosen as it was the lowest bidder on the basis of its lifecycle cost and technology transfer. The total deal is worth $20 billion (Rs 1.12 lakh crore) with options for further purchases.

Replying to a letter written on February 27, 2012 by TDP Rajya Sabha member MV Mysura Reddy alleging manipulation of the MMRCA evaluation process, defence minister AK Antony said: "The issues raised by you were examined by independent monitors who have concluded that the approach and methodology adopted by the Contract Negotiations Committee (CNC) in the evaluation of the commercial proposals thus far, have been reasonable and appropriate and within the terms of the Request for Proposals (RFR) and Defence Procurement Procedure, 2006."

The Indian Air Force on January 31 had declared Rafale as the preferred bidder, overriding the claims of the multi-nation Eurofighter. According to negotiations, 18 Rafale fighters will arrive in India from mid-2015, with another 108 to be built in India under collaboration.

As reported in the Hindustan Times, Reddy had written to Antony stating: "The alleged manipulation of the evaluation process in picking the (Rafale), which resulted in the decision to procure 126 MMRCA has raised serious apprehensions not only across the country but also worldwide. If a proper decision is not taken, the country's credibility will be at stake."

Two days later, Antony ordered an inquiry into all the points raised by Reddy.

Talking to HT after receiving Antony's final response on Monday evening in Hyderabad, Reddy said he was not satisfied with the reply. "I will wait for the report after the defence ministry has examined the finalised CNC recommendations as promised by the defence minister," he said.

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/article-view/release/136814/path-clear-for-%2420-bn-rafale-deal%2C-indian-minister-says.html

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 11/07/2012 | 17:51 uur
Nog een paar jaar en de eerst de beste bananenrepubliek streeft ons voorbij.

Venezuela is ons al voorbij hoor  :angel:

Citaat van: fly3rguy op 11/07/2012 | 23:23 uur
Venezuela is ons al voorbij hoor  :angel:

We worden samen met Europa een apenrots...  :sick:

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 12/07/2012 | 00:03 uur

We worden samen met Europa een apenrots...  :sick:

Europa, united we fall, devided we stand... :crazy:

Lockheed Dismisses $1 Trillion Estimate For F-35 JSF

Published: July 11, 2012

FIGHTER DEMONSTRATION CENTER, ARLINGTON, VA: Lockheed Martin executives gathered to tout their F-35 Joint Strike Fighter dismissed a widely reported Pentagon estimate that the aircraft would ultimately cost $1.1 trillion to develop, build, and operate over 55 years. In fact, they argued, the F-35 will cost less to operate than the airplanes it will replace -- a highly controversial claim.

"Lockheed Martin believes this aircraft is going to be about the same or even less to operate over the life of the program," said Robert Rubino, a former Navy pilot who now heads the Navy portion of the Lockheed F-35 program. In the DoD estimate, he said, "they were using legacy data, legacy models" that don't account for how the F-35 was designed with ease of maintenance and affordability in mind: "They don't give credit for any of those enhancements."

Stealth aircraft are notoriously expensive to maintain, with the radar-absorbing coatings on the B-2 prone to disintegrate in the rain, but Rubino argued that F-35 is a different animal. "We have learned a whole lot over the last 20 years as far as maintaining stealth," he said. "We built this airplane to be able to have very robust stealth, to the point where you can ding it, you can scratch it" and it does not lose its radar-evading properties.

Even if you dismiss Lockheed's claims about F-35's maintainability, there are still serious questions about the Pentagon's methodology. To get the trillion-dollar figure, Defense Department cost estimators did something they've never attempted before, Rubino told reporters: They tried to calculate the entire cost of the F-35 program, from initial R&D spent years ago, through production now just getting underway, to the cost of the last flight flown by the last F-35 before it is retired sometime in 2065. That includes such variables as the price of fuel, which is hard to predict month to month, let alone 50 years out. Worst of all, the $1.1 trillion is in "then-year" dollars, which means it counts the impact of five decades of inflation. Air Force magazine estimated that just putting the bill in 2011 dollars would cut it in half.

Even if you take the trillion-dollar figure at face value, added Steve Callaghan, the F-35 director in Lockheed's Washington office, "is that a good number or a bad number? It inherently sounds like it's a big bad number, but not necessarily when you look at the alternatives." Applying the same accounting methodology to the planes F-35 is to replace, he said, "if you could take all these legacy airplanes and push them forward 55 years, we think a conservative number is about four times more than to operate the F-35."

Of course, Callaghan added, "you really can't keep these airplanes another 55 years": They'd physically fall apart long before then -- which is the reason the Air Force in particular is desperate to field new planes. Even in the near term, aging aircraft get more expensive to maintain with every passing year, and most of the current air fleet was built during the Reagan buildup.

Lockheed has a point when it argues that projecting operating costs from now to 2065 is an inherently unreliable exercise. But what about something simpler, the cost per flight hour in the near term?

The current Defense Department objective is that the vanilla F-35A, the Air Force model, will cost no more than $35,200 per flight hour, which is still a whopping 56 percent more than the $22,500 per flight hour of the F-16 it's supposed to replace. (This time, by the way, both figures are are 2012 dollars). But former GAO analyst and sometime AOL Defense contributor Winslow Wheeler argues even that figure is optimistic.

"[C]omparing the F-35 to the F-16 is a major error," Wheeler wrote on the Time defense blog, Battleland. "The F-35A has much more in common with its Lockheed stablemate, the F-22" -- the F-22 is a lot larger, but Wheeler argues the F-35 in some respects even more technologically complex -- so the F-22 should be the starting point for cost comparisons instead.

The F-22 cost $63,929 per flight hour in 2010, Wheeler wrote, and while F-35 will be less, it won't be as low as the Pentagon hopes. His guesstimate: F-35 will cost $51,143 per flight hour, 20 percent less to operate than the F-22, but more than double the F-16.

Wheeler is an ardent critic of the F-35 and Pentagon procurement generally, so his estimates are inclined to pessimism, just as Lockheed's are inclined to optimism. But whoever's right, the cost to buy and then operate this airplane will be a major burden on defense budgets for decades to come.

http://defense.aol.com/2012/07/11/lockheed-dismisses-1-trillion-estimate-for-f-35-jsf/

CNO Ready To Cut Back On F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

By Mackenzie Eaglen

Published: July 9, 2012

Chief of Naval Operations Jonathan Greenert's recent article in Proceedings announces in public what many have already known in private: The U.S. Navy is not wholly committed to the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program. Admiral Greenert's controversial -- and, potentially, hugely consequential -- article raises several interesting points, among which is the contention that advances in sensing capabilities and electronic and cyber warfare will increasingly degrade America's stealth arsenal.

This is not news. What is news, however, is the head of the U.S. Navy signaling a tepid commitment to the military's largest acquisition program, not to mention the many allied and partner country participants.

It should not come as too big a surprise given the Navy's objective in last year's 30-year aviation plan a desire to begin investing in a Next Generation Air Dominance Aircraft after 2019. Accordingly, just last month, the Navy solicited concepts (not yet formal bids) from industry for the F/A-XX, a potential sixth-generation replacement for the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet.

http://defense.aol.com/2012/07/09/cno-ready-to-cut-back-on-f-35-joint-strike-fighter/?icid=related1

First LRIP 3 F-35s Finally Ready for Delivery

Posted byAmy Butler1:11 AM on Jul 10, 2012

Lockheed Martin has finally begun delivery of the latest lot of F-35 Joint Strike Fighter aircraft to the Pentagon after a roughly six-month delay.

The Pentagon has accepted delivery of three conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL) variants and one short-takeoff-and-vertical-landing (Stovl) version, says Marillyn (spelling with two Ls) Hewson, the incoming chief operating officer of Lockheed Martin, F-35 prime contractor.

The low-rate-initial-production (LRIP) 3 aircraft were slated for delivery by the end of 2012. All 17 of the aircraft --  two F-35Bs for the UK; one F-35A for the Netherlands, 7 F-35As for the U.S. Air Force and seven F35Bs for the U.S. Marine Corps -- in this lot are off of the company's Fort Worth assembly line. With the Dutch government in "caretaker status" in advanced of national elections, the socialist party has pushed the country to back off of its commitment to the F-35; however, a conservative win would likely reinstate support for the program. Thus, the commitment from the Netherlands remains unfirm. 

The LRIP 3 aircraft had been awaiting official acceptance via the official "DD250" process managed by the Pentagon, says Vice Adm. David Venlet, the F-35 program executive officer.

The four new aircraft, which include the Block 2A software, will joint 12 already at Eglin AFB, Fla., Hewson says. The Block 2A software will feature a new multi-level security package.

Six of the F-35As at Eglin are being used for an operational utility assessment this summer; pilots will fly the aircraft to test out a rudimentary pilot training syllabus. The results of this assessment will determine whether the Air Force is comfortable giving the nod to start official pilot training. That is not expected to happen before 2013.

http://www.aviationweek.com/Blogs.aspx?plckPostId=Blog:c757984d-8899-488d-bc38-5d2824ba71b3Post:60cbef03-4a74-4fc7-825c-6b39eaf9240a

Boeing Leans Toward New-Build Design For U.S. Air Force T-X

By Amy Butler
July 11, 2012

After a long flirtation with the concept of a partnership to offer a foreign fast-jet trainer to the U.S. Air Force as a T-38C replacement, Boeing will forgo an off-the-shelf bid in favor of a new-build design or opt not to bid at all.

"We have looked at a lot of different options. But our belief is the aerospace industry and the defense industry need somebody who can come in and provide disruptive innovation," says Chris Chadwick, president of Boeing Military Aircraft, in an interview with Aviation Week. "By year end, we will have agreed internally how we are going to move forward, and how and if we team for a clean-sheet design."

The field of T-X competitors includes BAE with a Hawk aircraft, Alenia Aermacchi (which is shopping for a U.S. partner) with the M346 (a derivative of the Russian Yak-130) and the Lockheed Martin/Korea Aerospace Industries T-50. The Air Force plans to buy 350 of the trainers as well as ground-based training systems and aids; a competition is unlikely to start before 2013.

Saab is said to also be considering a Gripen-based trainer offering. Despite speculation to the contrary, the Yak-130 will not be in the running, says Konstantin Popovich, head of Russia's Yakovlev engineering center. "Since we have good relations with Aermacchi [which builds a derivative of the aircraft in Italy] . . . we are trying to be realistic," Popovich told reporters during a briefing here July 11. "We understand that is the Western option of the aircraft" for the Air Force's T-X competition.

Air Force officials have indicated they are strongly leaning toward an off-the-shelf purchase owing to a desire to reduce the cost of development.

Chadwick, however, says the company feels it can build a new aircraft without an escalated development price by rejecting the urge to infuse new and unproven technologies into the design.

As the Pentagon continues to feel financial pressure from social program demands on the U.S. budget, military officials should embrace new ways to acquire hardware that allow for reduced cost and time to field, Chadwick says.

In an effort to be more nimble, the company is aggressively pursuing ways to offer systems to the Pentagon at a reduced cost by taking on some of the development risk. A forthcoming T-X design, if it materializes, is one example.

Another is a proposal by Boeing to expand on the work on the Navy's 737-based P-8 maritime surveillance aircraft with a 737-based offering overland and air-surveillance capabilities now provided by Air Force 707s. They say the Air Force can benefit from the nonrecurring engineering already paid for by the Navy and spend precious dollars on tailoring the mission systems for its requirements.

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/awx_07_11_2012_p0-475701.xml

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 12/07/2012 | 07:40 uur
The current Defense Department objective is that the vanilla F-35A, the Air Force model, will cost no more than $35,200 per flight hour, which is still a whopping 56 percent more than the $22,500 per flight hour of the F-16 it's supposed to replace. (This time, by the way, both figures are are 2012 dollars). But former GAO analyst and sometime AOL Defense contributor Winslow Wheeler argues even that figure is optimistic.

"[C]omparing the F-35 to the F-16 is a major error," Wheeler wrote on the Time defense blog, Battleland. "The F-35A has much more in common with its Lockheed stablemate, the F-22" -- the F-22 is a lot larger, but Wheeler argues the F-35 in some respects even more technologically complex -- so the F-22 should be the starting point for cost comparisons instead.

The F-22 cost $63,929 per flight hour in 2010, Wheeler wrote, and while F-35 will be less, it won't be as low as the Pentagon hopes. His guesstimate: F-35 will cost $51,143 per flight hour, 20 percent less to operate than the F-22, but more than double the F-16.

Aankopen is 1, maar onderhouden is veel belangrijker. De 30 / 70 procent verdeling, welke meerdere malen reeds in vergelijkingen is gebruikt.

F-35A, the Air Force model, will cost no more than $35,200 per flight hour, which is still a whopping 56 percent more than the $22,500 per flight hour of the F-16 it's supposed to replace

$35.200 USD = € 28.860 Euro (huidige koers), deze prijs is nog steeds een aanname. De F-16 onderhoudskosten is op basis van jaren lange ervaring !

Maar als we Winslow Wheeler moeten geloven zullen de onderhoudskosten eerder stijgen, naar ca. $ 51.000 USD = € 41.800 Euro

Als dit waarheid gaat worden, dan is een F-35 niet in stand te houden. De kosten voor onderhoud (70%) worden te hoog, dus je exploitatiekosten / vliegwaardig houden zijn/is niet meer te betalen.

Western Arms Pinch Prompts Rethink at Boeing, Eurofighter

By Robert Wall on July 11, 2012

Boeing Co. (BA) (BA) and Eurofighter GmbH are among aerospace companies revising their strategies to win military exports as shrinking weapons budgets in their home markets increase the importance of overseas contracts.

Boeing, the No. 2 defense contractor after Lockheed Martin Corp. (LMT) (LMT), said it's increasingly utilizing the marketing expertise of its commercial aircraft unit, while Eurofighter, the Typhoon warplane maker part-owned by BAE Systems Plc (BA/), is reviewing its bidding strategy after losing out on a series of recent tenders.

Western defense companies are stepping up export drives to help cope with a reduction in arms budgets from Washington to Rome as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan wind down and austerity programs bite. Military spending is still climbing in markets in the Middle East, Asia and Latin America, said Dennis Muilenburg, who heads Chicago-based Boeing's defense unit.

"Opportunities around the globe are there, but we see more of our U.S. competitors being present and also more emerging entrants," he said in an interview at the Farnborough air show outside London.

Eurofighter, reeling from lost bids in India, Japan and Switzerland, is looking at ways to tender for contracts without "additional markups" to the base price in competitions where the specification would normally require them, according to Enzo Casolini, the consortium's chief executive officer.

Money-Maker

With Eurofighter targeting at least 20 percent of the 800 export sales it estimates will come over the next two decades, London-based BAE, European Aeronautic, Defence & Space Co. of Toulouse, France, and Rome-based Finmeccanica SpA (FNC), its three owners, have sanctioned a review that should be completed by the year's end, Casolini said in a briefing in Farnborough.

"The three of us agree we need to find a way to put this airplane on the market at a lower price and win projects," Finmeccanica CEO Giuseppe Orsi said at a briefing in London, adding that the warplane program remains "a good money maker."

Eurofighter is competing for a South Korean order with Boeing's F-15 and the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. It is also targeting Saudi Arabia, which is already buying 72 aircraft, Qatar, with a potential for as many as 36 sales, plus the United Arab Emirates, Malaysia and others, he said.

Upgrades Agreed

U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron said at Farnborough that the integration of newer technology and the addition of a more capable air-to-air missile, considered vital in developing the jet, have the backing of Britain, Germany, Italy and Spain.

"The four partner nations have agreed to take the next steps toward exploring growth potential of Typhoon," he said.

Italy's Finmeccanica has also used acquisitions as a tool to boost exports, Orsi said, adding Poland's PZL-Swidnik in 2009 to establish the country as a "home market" and improve its chances of selling helicopters and training aircraft.

At Boeing, cooperation with the commercial arm was instrumental in securing Indian contracts for P-8 maritime patrol aircraft and C-17 military transports, Muilenburg said.

"Without BCA's strength it would have been difficult to get the deals," he said. "That was a market opening opportunity because of Boeing's global presence and supply chain."

The U.S. company aims to reach at least 25 percent of defense revenue from exports, the executive said. Boeing achieved 24 percent in 2011, and may reach a portion of 30 percent this year, Muilenburg said. That's up from single digit figures only a few years ago.

Hot Spot

Success in fighter campaigns will be central to sustaining that business share, with Boeing Military Aircraft President Chris Chadwick predicting the fighter market to remain "hot." Foreign sales and follow-on orders from the Pentagon should stretch F/A-18E/F Super Hornet production through the end of the decade, matching the F-15 line, he said.

Boeing has also developed partnerships in major markets such as Brazil, where it signed a cooperation with Embraer SA (EMBR3) in April before disclosing plans to develop and market the local planemaker's KC-390 transport. It will also help integrate weapons on Embraer's A-29 Super Tucano, which is being pitched for a Pentagon requirement to supply Afghanistan's government with 20 light-attack aircraft.

Lockheed Martin aims to extend its international business above 20 percent of sales from 17 percent, Chief Operating Officer Marillyn Hewson said. While much of that growth will come from the F-35, F-16 production set to shutter in 2015 will be extended through additional orders.

Single-Engine Boost

Austerity programs may be spurring demand for less costly single-engine fighters such as the F-16, according to Haakan Buskhe, CEO of Sweden's Saab AB (SAABB), which makes the Gripen jet.

"I see a much bigger interest for Gripen now than I did before the crisis," Buskhe said in an interview at the air show.

European missile maker MBDA, owned by Finmeccanica, BAE and EADS, is working with its domestic customers to ensure that specifications are written with foreign buyers in mind, CEO Antoine Bouvier said, with the "exportability of new products an objective in a way which it was not a few years ago."

Overseas markets are driving decisions regarding a new powered bomb MBDA is making for the U.K., while there is a strong export outlook for the Fire Shadow loitering missile, designed to allow army units to effectively provide their own air support before ground attacks, Bouvier said. India and several Gulf states expressing an interest, he said.

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-07-11/western-arms-pinch-prompts-export-rethink-at-boeing-eurofighter

Indian Defence Ministry Brushes Off Objections To Rafale Selection

Thu, Jul 12, 2012 09:55 CET


      Despite allegations of "manipulating" the Rafale selection, India's Defense Ministry has cleared the evaluation process that led to the purchase of 126 French Rafale fighter aircraft.

      The medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) contract was awarded to the lowest bidder, Dassault, on the basis of technology transfer and lifecycle cost. The contract is valued at approximately $20 billion with options for further purchases.

      Earlier in February, allegations suggesting the MMRCA evaluation process was rigged were raised by a member of India's parliament. Defense Minister AK Antony responded to the allegation, saying, "The issues raised were examined by independent monitors who have concluded that the approach and methodology adopted by the Contract Negotiations Committee (CNC) in the evaluation of the commercial proposals thus far, have been reasonable and appropriate and within the terms of the Request for Proposals (RFR) and Defence Procurement Procedure, 2006".

      Member of the Upper House of Parliament, Rajya Sabha member MV Mysura, wrote to Antony, saying, " The alleged manipulation of the evaluation process in picking the (Rafale), which resulted in the decision to procure 126 MMRCA has raised serious apprehensions not only across the country but also worldwide. If a proper decision is not taken, the country's credibility will be at stake".

      The defense minister promptly responded say that an inquiry would be ordered to look into the allegations.

      India will receive 18 Rafale fighters in 2015 with another 108 to be built in India with the French partnership.

http://www.defenseworld.net/go/defensenews.jsp?id=7177&h=Indian%20Defence%20Ministry%20Brushes%20Off%20Objections%20To%20Rafale%20Selection

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 10/07/2012 | 22:25 uur

Citaat van: blogs.defensenews.com Vandaag om 09:10
New Gripen to Cost At Least 10% Less Than Predecessor

Op zich een spannend verhaal van deze Saab CEO waarbij ik me afvraag hoe jet kan dat Zwitserland dan meer dan 100 mjn US dollar per NG moet betalen...

Het zal wel:

a: een leuke verkoopverhaal zijn?
b: hogere wiskunde zijn?
c: een feit zijn?

Volgens mij had ik de gelikte PPT presentaties van saab nog niet op dit forum gezien. dus zet ik ze er maar even in.

Vraag me ook af hoe ze dat precies berekenen. Als de Gripen echt goedkoper zou zijn in aanschaf etc dan zou Zweden er toch zeker 100 blijven gebruiken ipv het aantal verlagen naar 60-80..... Maar goed dat soort retoriek gebruiken alle vliegtuigbouwers nu eenmaal.

Via de link kom je bij interessante saab presentaties: http://www.saabgroup.com/About-Saab/Meet_Saab/2012/Farnborough2012/News/ (http://www.saabgroup.com/About-Saab/Meet_Saab/2012/Farnborough2012/News/)

Over de Gripen NG zelf: http://www.saabgroup.com/Global/Documents%20and%20Images/About%20Saab/Events/Farnborough%202012/Gripen%20presentation%20Farnborough.pdf (http://www.saabgroup.com/Global/Documents%20and%20Images/About%20Saab/Events/Farnborough%202012/Gripen%20presentation%20Farnborough.pdf)

Over de Gripen Fighter Weapons School: http://www.saabgroup.com/Global/Documents%20and%20Images/About%20Saab/Events/Farnborough%202012/Gripen%20Fighter%20Weapon%20School.pdf (http://www.saabgroup.com/Global/Documents%20and%20Images/About%20Saab/Events/Farnborough%202012/Gripen%20Fighter%20Weapon%20School.pdf)

Presentatie over Saab CEO zelf: http://www.saabgroup.com/Global/Documents%20and%20Images/About%20Saab/Events/Farnborough%202012/120710%20Saab%20CEO%20Farnborough.pdf (http://www.saabgroup.com/Global/Documents%20and%20Images/About%20Saab/Events/Farnborough%202012/120710%20Saab%20CEO%20Farnborough.pdf)

Citaat van: Chrisis op 12/07/2012 | 10:53 uur
[Via de link kom je bij interessante saab presentaties

Ik had ze nog niet gezien (Op LinkedIn kon ik ze op de een of andere manier niet openen), maar het ziet er veelbelovend uit.

Citaat van: Chrisis op 12/07/2012 | 10:53 uur

Vraag me ook af hoe ze dat precies berekenen. Als de Gripen echt goedkoper zou zijn in aanschaf etc dan zou Zweden er toch zeker 100 blijven gebruiken ipv het aantal verlagen naar 60-80..... Maar goed dat soort retoriek gebruiken alle vliegtuigbouwers nu eenmaal.

Volgens Wiki:
Sweden
The Swedish Air Force originally ordered 204 aircraft, including 28 two-seaters. Sweden leases 28 of the aircraft, to the Czech and Hungarian Air Forces. In 2007, the Swedish government stated that only around 100 JAS 39C/D Gripens will be kept in an operational state.[149] The SAF has 134 JAS 39s, including 50 JAS 39As, 13 JAS 39Bs, 60 JAS 39Cs and 11 JAS 39D Gripens in service in January 2012.[64]

Citaat van: bergd op 12/07/2012 | 11:44 uur
Volgens Wiki:
Sweden
The Swedish Air Force originally ordered 204 aircraft, including 28 two-seaters. Sweden leases 28 of the aircraft, to the Czech and Hungarian Air Forces. In 2007, the Swedish government stated that only around 100 JAS 39C/D Gripens will be kept in an operational state.[149] The SAF has 134 JAS 39s, including 50 JAS 39As, 13 JAS 39Bs, 60 JAS 39Cs and 11 JAS 39D Gripens in service in January 2012.[64]

Zou het kunnen betekenen dat ze 60-80 nieuwe Gripen E/F bestellen die ze naast de huidige C/D laten vliegen? Of dat ze de C/D in de mottenballen doen en dan alleen in geval van nood operationeel inzetten? Dat zou een mooi alternatief zijn lijkt me als ze voldoende levensduur in de airframes hebben tenminste. Een combi van bijv 1 E/F en een aantal C/D in een geintegreerd netwerk is nog altijd erg effectief.

Citaat van: Chrisis op 12/07/2012 | 13:05 uur
Zou het kunnen betekenen dat ze 60-80 nieuwe Gripen E/F bestellen die ze naast de huidige C/D laten vliegen? Of dat ze de C/D in de mottenballen doen en dan alleen in geval van nood operationeel inzetten? Dat zou een mooi alternatief zijn lijkt me als ze voldoende levensduur in de airframes hebben tenminste. Een combi van bijv 1 E/F en een aantal C/D in een geintegreerd netwerk is nog altijd erg effectief.

Volgens mij betekend dit een verdere reductie van het aantal gevechtsvliegtuigen voor de Zweedse luchtmacht.

Van 200+ besteld Gripens AB/CD naar +/- 100.

De NG bestelling is voor zover mijn kennis toekrijkend is ter vervanging van de Ç/D's welke ongetwijfeld als occasion op de markt worden gebracht na 2020.

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 12/07/2012 | 13:12 uur

Volgens mij betekend dit een verdere reductie van het aantal gevechtsvliegtuigen voor de Zweedse luchtmacht.

Van 200+ besteld Gripens AB/CD naar +/- 100.

De NG bestelling is voor zover mijn kennis toekrijkend is ter vervanging van de Ç/D's welke ongetwijfeld als occasion op de markt worden gebracht na 2020.

Om precies te zijn 204 Zweedse Gripens besteld waarvan 186 in actuele diens en daarvan 66 in het buitenland (geleast/gekocht) Als ik wiki een beetje goed gelezen heb.

Zou het geen mogelijkheid voor Nederland zijn om er een aantal te gaan leasen van de Zweden, zodat wij F16's kunnen verkopen en zodoende de onderhoudskosten naar beneden kunnen bijstellen. Tevens kunnen we in het Jsf project blijven zitten. Waarschijnlijk zal dit logistiek een uitdaging zijn, maar is dit het onderzoeken waard?

Citaat van: bergd op 12/07/2012 | 16:26 uur
Om precies te zijn 204 Zweedse Gripens besteld waarvan 186 in actuele diens en daarvan 66 in het buitenland (geleast/gekocht) Als ik wiki een beetje goed gelezen heb.

Zou het geen mogelijkheid voor Nederland zijn om er een aantal te gaan leasen van de Zweden, zodat wij F16's kunnen verkopen en zodoende de onderhoudskosten naar beneden kunnen bijstellen. Tevens kunnen we in het Jsf project blijven zitten. Waarschijnlijk zal dit logistiek een uitdaging zijn, maar is dit het onderzoeken waard?

Wat mij betreft zou dat een prima optie zijn. Nu een Saab vloot leasen tot 2020 en in tussentijd kijken naar de NG en of LM zijn verhaal over de F35 waar maakt.

Het lever dan iig een goede keuze mogelijkheid (en je knikkerd niet de JSF investering over de plint).

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 12/07/2012 | 16:42 uur


Wat mij betreft zou dat een prima optie zijn. Nu een Saab vloot leasen tot 2020 en in tussentijd kijken naar de NG en of LM zijn verhaal over de F35 waar maakt.

Het lever dan iig een goede keuze mogelijkheid (en je knikkerd niet de JSF investering over de plint).

Ik denk dat het voor politiek Den Haag acceptabel compromi is tussen de partijen. Stel dat het uitvoerbaar is dan is het wel een interresante tussen oplossing. Eventueel maak je een deal met zweden dat zij de NG gaan aanschaffen zodat wij een behoorlijk aantal kunnen leasen. En als het 2020 is dan is er vast meer duidelijkheid over de JSF

Waarom moeilijk doen. de NG is meer dan genoeg toestel voor de taken de wij willen en vooral gaan uitvoeren. En dan samen met o.a. de Zweden kijken en onderzoek doen naar de opvolger 2040. In de tussentijd meedoen met de U(C)AV ontwikkelingen. Al heeft Nederland daar helaas ook al voor de Amerikaanse optie(s) gekozen.   

Saab to Invest In Gripen Fighter Weapon School In South Africa
 
Saab is to invest in an advanced training centre for experienced fighter pilots initially from Gripen countries and its user air forces, at Air Force Base Overberg in South Africa.

The Gripen Fighter Weapon School is an initiative from Saab in co-operation with the Gripen Air Forces user group. The Gripen Fighter Weapon School will hone the fighting skills of experienced Gripen pilots from all over the world. The custom-built facilities on the southern tip of Africa will provide exceptional training with extensive airspace over mountain ranges, desserts and the Indian and Atlantic Ocean.

The course will be run during the South African summer which offers favourable metrological conditions. The training will focus on different multirole aspects every year and the advanced airborne exercises will be mixed with academia and survival training in an African context.

"Gripen is now operative and in service in five countries world-wide, and the system is continually under development. Saab now believes there is a need to establish an advanced training centre for experienced Gripen pilots with the aim to increase their operational capabilities, provide an opportunity to operate in an environment different from their own and a chance to train in a region that mirrors a realistic future potential deployment scenario," says Magnus Lewis-Olsson, President Saab in South Africa, and adds:

"The Gripen Fighter Weapon School will increase our understanding between different Gripen operators and our own efforts to create a common software baseline as the pilots will cross reference their experience of Gripen."

Supporting Gripen customers in Sweden, South Africa, Hungarian, Czech and Thailand, the first course is scheduled to take place late 2013.

New threat scenarios and new requirements will drive the course syllabus at the school and the need for more in depth training on the Gripen aircraft and its systems. It will also increase the students' operational capabilities by providing a possibility to experience a tactical behavior that differs from their national SOP's (Standard Operating Procedures) and thereby broaden their skill.

By Saab on Thursday, July 12th, 2012

Citaat van: Elzenga op 12/07/2012 | 18:40 uur
Waarom moeilijk doen. de NG is meer dan genoeg toestel voor de taken de wij willen en vooral gaan uitvoeren. En dan samen met o.a. de Zweden kijken en onderzoek doen naar de opvolger 2040. In de tussentijd meedoen met de U(C)AV ontwikkelingen. Al heeft Nederland daar helaas ook al voor de Amerikaanse optie(s) gekozen.    

Prima optie (en zolang er geen tank verkocht is zullen die 4 UAV ook wel op zich laten wachten).

Maar ik vind het we een prima idee om bij de ontwikkeling van de JSF te blijven zonder verder gaande verlpichtingen zodat er ook wat te keizen valt. (het klinkt als een utopie, maar voor het zelfde geld hebben we in 2020 een pro defensie kabinet)  :angel:

The F-35 is indeed our fighter of the future

posted at 12:04 pm on July 12, 2012 by Bruce McQuain

Yesterday I had the opportunity to visit the Lockheen Martin Flight Demonstration Center in Crystal City near Washington DC and be updated on the progress of the Joint Strike Fighter.

The briefing was very well done and speared some of the criticisms that have been heard concerning the advanced 5th generation fighter.

Trillion dollar airplane.

It has almost become a cliche, with people who have no concept of what it means, throwing this around as a negative. Yes, a trillion plus dollars is a lot of money, make no mistake about it. But some of the facts behind its use, but routinely ignored, are pretty important.

1. The F-35 is going to replace every fighter aircraft in 3 services, an unprededented occurrance.

2. The "trillion dollar" figure covers every single possible cost for those aircraft over a 55 year span. That is also unprecedented. DoD has never done that for any other program in its history.

3. The cost figure is done in "then year" dollars. What that means is they are making assumptions about inflation, the cost of fuel, any number of vairables 55 years out. That's most likely not a very accurate number.

4. Even if it is, when using the same assumptions with the same variables and applying it to the jet fighters we have now (with the assumption we'll dump the F-35 and keep them) the cost is 4 times higher. Yes, that's right, if we keep what we have and continue to upgrade and use them, the comparative cost would be 4 times higher using the same model.

Not something we need, because all our future wars will be like Afghanistan.

We seriously do a lousy job of figuring out what our next war will be like. For instance, if you look at global hot spots, you'd have to put Iran right up there at the top. We keep creeping military assets closer and closer to that country. But obviously, should we engage Iran, it would be nothing like Afghanistan.  For one thing, airspace would be hotly contested.  And an F-35 would be extremely useful in an Iranian scenario, much more so than our current fighters because of the F-35′s stealth capabilities which allow it to operate much more freely in heavily defended airspace.

Along with Iran, we know that China and Russia are pursuing 5th generation stealth fighters with a vengence. Russia has the T-50, China has shown the J-20 and it appears China may have another entry into the field, the F-60.

The point, of course, is we've grown accustomed to controling or dominating any airspace we fight in. That may or may not be a given in the future. And where airspace is contested, survivability is the key. Which brings us to another criticism

The F-35 isn't as good as the competiton.

Well actually it is. In fact, it it likely much better. And it is far better than any of the current generation of fighters around the world.

The Pentagon estimates the J-20 will be operational by 2018, but Aboulafia isn't impressed.

"It looked like a textbook example of how you shouldn't design a stealth airplane," he said.

He says the Dragon is "absurd" because it's oversized and has large, obvious fins behind the cockpit.

But will either jet be comparable to the jack-of-all-trades F-35?

"I don't think either aircraft can really compete with the F-35," said Dr. Richard Bitzinger, defence specialist at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore.

He says neither the Russian nor the Chinese stealth jet will have sensors as advanced as the F-35 or have the jet's ability to collect and use tactical data from satellites or allied planes.

The point about the sensors is critical. The sensor array, networking capability and sensor fusion that takes place in the F-35 is second to none. It is even more powerful and effective than that found in the F-22.

All in all, what I saw yesterday at the Lockheed Martin demonstration center was the latest example of American ingenuity and cutting edge technology fused toward making one of the most powerful fighter aircraft in the world.  Flight testing is going very well and is ahead of schedule.

Will it cost us a good bit of money. Yes, but the alternative is worse and, by the way, don't those we plan on putting in harm's way both in the air and on the ground deserve the best?

If so, the F-35 is the answer and we owe it to our military to put them in the best possible equipment to ensure their survivability and those who they fly to support.

http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2012/07/12/the-f-35-is-indeed-our-fighter-of-the-future/

Citaat van: Elzenga op 12/07/2012 | 18:40 uur
Waarom moeilijk doen. de NG is meer dan genoeg toestel voor de taken de wij willen en vooral gaan uitvoeren. En dan samen met o.a. de Zweden kijken en onderzoek doen naar de opvolger 2040. In de tussentijd meedoen met de U(C)AV ontwikkelingen. Al heeft Nederland daar helaas ook al voor de Amerikaanse optie(s) gekozen.   

Ten eerste je weet niet hoe de ontwikkeling van de NG verder gaat, dus dan is dit de veiligste oplossing + je houdt voor het bedrijfsleven de deelname tot verdere ontwikkeling van de JSF in stand.

Je weet niet of de NG genoeg toestel is voor de taken die uitgevoerd moeten worden. De Zweden mogen zich bewijzen en wij doen iig de nodige ervaringen op met de C en D variant. Vervolgens wordt het een echte competitie tussen de NG en JSF.

Maybe This Really Is China's New Stealth Jet

Read more: http://defensetech.org/2012/06/25/maybe-this-really-is-chinas-new-stealth-jet/#ixzz20Qtx5EPq
Defense.org

AESA Radar Could be on Typhoon by End of 2013

Posted by Andrew Chuter | July 11th, 2012

Eurofighter expects to have an active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar flying on a Typhoon multi-role fighter by the end of 2013, consortium executives said at the Farnborough International Airshow.

Senior Eurofighter executives confirmed that they received a request for proposals last week from the NATO Eurofighter and Tornado Management Agency, which is the agency for the four nations behind the development of Typhoon.

Proposals have also been made to the customer nations for the integration by 2015 of the MBDA-developed Meteor beyond visual range air-to-air missile.

The first firing of a Meteor from a Typhoon has been authorized by partner nations Britain, France, Germany and Italy for the final quarter of this year.

Austria and Saudi Arabia are the only export customers, with Oman possibly joining the list by the end of the year.

Eurofighter boss Enzo Casolini said discussions are ongoing as to whether export customer Saudi Arabia might be part of the funding arrangements for the AESA development.

The Eurofighter executives said they expect to respond to the request for radar proposals later this year and be under contract to complete development of the system by mid-2013.

For the moment none of the four nations has publicly committed to a timetable to buy the AESA radar to replace the mechanically scanned Captor sensor on the Typhoon.

The Eurofighter officials said the partner nations have "more or less harmonized their requirements."

The radar design will use a modular approach to meet all the national requirements, the Eurofighter executives said.

The Selex Galileo-led Euroradar consortium responsible for Typhoon radar supply has been working on the AESA radar design for several years using industry funding in what it calls a pre-financing arrangement with the partner nations.

The original target of having a radar ready for market by 2015 is being maintained. The date was paced by the competition for an Indian order for a multi-role fighter that was secured earlier this year by Dassault Aviation, which offered its Rafale fighter.

That deal remains to be signed, leaving Eurofighter with the hope that Typhoon might get invited back in if the French fail to seal the deal.

http://blogs.defensenews.com/farnborough/2012/07/11/aesa-could-be-on-typhoon-by-end-of-2013/

If You Did It, It's Not Bragging

Posted byBill Sweetman2:19 AM on Jul 13, 2012

Collaboration between Sweden and Switzerland on the new JAS 39E/F version of the Saab Gripen is expected to firm up in August with the signature of a framework agreement between Swiss defense procurement agency Armasuisse and Sweden's defense export organization. That follows the signature of a ministerial-level letter of intent in Switzerland on June 29.

On the same day, Saab hosted a business-to-business meeting to start the process of placing offset work in Switzerland, in advance of a formal development contract that is expected in 2014.

Saab's head of Gripen export, Eddy de la Motte, said at Farnborough that customer interest in Gripen has never been higher. This is not surprising, for a few reasons.

First, the JAS 39E/F looks increasingly real, although a Swiss referendum precedes a full development contract. The initial operational capability date is set for 2018 by a customer and contractor with a strong record of meeting such targets.

The Gripen Demo's appearance at Farnborough with its new radar installed is an indicator of solid progress, and Saab has just been awarded a contract (fixed price) to support continued development work.

Second, the new Gripen is breaking Ernie Fitzgerald's Law, which states that the first things you hear about a new program are also the best things you will ever hear. The Farnborough presentation added a widescreen cockpit to the jet, and Saab has also unveiled upgrade packages for JAS 39C/Ds.

Third (and most important) is that all air forces are finally realizing that operating costs are more important than acquisition costs. The debate over JSF costs - from the Navair leaks of 2010, through program director VAdm Dave Venlet's "it makes their knees go weak" quote in April 2011 to Lockheed Martin's recent assaults on the competence of Pentagon accountants - revolves around operating costs, and that is a fight that Gripen wins.
Saab says that the E/F will cost under $5,000 per flight hour - one-third to one-quarter of its estimates for Eurofighter, Rafale or JSF (Saab uses Australian numbers for the latter, which are lower than some).

The more conservative Swiss estimate was half the cost per flight hour of the European twins - which may reflect Dassault or Eurofighter guarantees or different assumptions. Either way, the margins are huge.

Saab is not in a position to trumpet blue-sky estimates - because for a potential customer, they are not hard to check, and because there is not that much all-new hardware on the JAS 39E/F. Airframe, systems, accessibility and design-for-maintenance are similar to the C/D. The engine has been in service for a decade and 1,000 of them are flying, and Selex Galileo radar modules are in full production.

http://www.aviationweek.com/Blogs.aspx?plckBlogId=Blog:27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog%3A27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3A16f384d9-46ab-4299-bd55-0f03086bcbb0

Mooi stukje van Bill Sweetman over de  Gripen NG

En hier nog de volledige presentatie van de Gripen NG in Farnborough.

http://www.saabgroup.com/Global/Documents%20and%20Images/About%20Saab/Events/Farnborough%202012/Gripen%20presentation%20Farnborough.pdf

Jammer dat andré herc geen foto's heeft hiervan?

Citaat van: Ace1 op 13/07/2012 | 22:14 uur
Mooi stukje van Bill Sweetman over de  Gripen NG

Ik begin zelfs meer enthousiast te worden.  :angel:

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 13/07/2012 | 22:20 uur
Ik begin zelfs meer enthousiast te worden.  :angel:

Jurrien ben je nu bekeerd? ;)

Gripen NG  flying with Raven ES 05 AESA radar

9 July 2012, in News
The Gripen NG test aircraft is now flying with a SELEX Galileo Raven ES-05 AESA radar installed, following extensiv testing with an earlier AESA prototype.

Raven ES-05 is a high performance Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) fire control radar designed for the Saab Gripen NG multi role fighter that builds on over 60 years of SELEX Galileo's fire control radar experience. It has been designed in close collaboration with Saab and is a vital part of the Gripen next generation multi functional sensor system.

The sensor suite includes active and passive sensors, integrated for central sensor command and sensor fusion. This will significantly increase the multirole capability and sensor performance against future threats and more complex scenarios.

The Raven ES-05 AESA radar features an innovative roll-repositionable AESA antenna to provide a full ±100º field of regard that improves the capability for maximum situational awareness and platform survivability. This allows the pilot to maintain the missile datalink and turn away whilst the scenario continues and the ES-05 aquires other targets and tasks.

The highly reliable AESA transmit-receive module technology incorporated in Raven ES-05 significantly improves system availability leading to reduced lifecycle costs. SELEX Galileo AESA Radars delivering greater performance and higher reliability than comparable mechanically scanned radars and offers all the advantages of multi-function AESA arrays with significant through life cost savings.

The Raven ES-05 Radar has been designed from the outset to meet worldwide fire control radar detection and target tracking needs combined into one efficient modular system. It builds on common modular units for a scaleable system architecture to meet the needs of fire control and intercept radar operational requirements whilst remaining resistant to radar countermeasures.

The AESA antenna is coupled to fully digital multi-channel exciter/receiver and processor Line Replaceable Units (LRUs). These provide a comprehensive mode suite which includes air-to-air, air-to-surface, interleaved and support functions which can be readily adapted or extended in software to meet future needs.

The radar makes use of AESA alert-confirm techniques to confirm targets on first detection. This combined with optimised AESA waveforms results in increased track initiation ranges, whilst simultaneously maintaining situational awareness. The instantaneous scanning ability of the AESA also provides a comprehensive suite of interleaved air and surface modes, thus providing the pilot with all round situational awareness.

At the core of the AESA radar design is the ability to tolerate individual item failure. Component failures in the array result in graceful performance degradation rather than complete system failure, delivering high operational availability when compared with conventional radar systems. Significant cost benefits over the life of the system are realised due to the high reliability, increased availability and reduced maintenance requirements.

http://www.saabgroup.com/en/About-Saab/Newsroom/Press-releases--News/2012---7/Gripen-NG-flying-with-Raven-ES-05-AESA-radar/

Citaat van: Ace1 op 13/07/2012 | 22:21 uur
Jurrien ben je nu bekeerd? ;)

Dat nog niet, ik vind het nog steeds een "DinkyToy" vliegtuig maar ik begin langzaam maar zeker hier de voordelen van in te zien.

Ik vind de JSF nog steeds de betere optie, maar al dit de Klu decimeerd tot < 30 toestellen, dan zie ik in deze het faillissemet van de Klu en daar zit ik niet op te wachten.

Ik zie absoluut de meerwaarde van de JSF, maar ook in een mix van kwaliteit en kwantiteit.

Op het gevaar van.... ik zie de meerwaarde in een Klu voorzien van 4 sqn. 3 x Gripen NG en 1 x F35A of 4 combi sqn bestaande elk uit 4 F35A en 12 Gripen NG.

De logistieke trein rondom de F35 zou dan gedeeld kunnen worden met de Europese samenwerkingspartners.

Totaal: 20 x JSF en 54-60 Gripen NG

(Ik denk dat de poitiek dit compromis zou accepteren)

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 13/07/2012 | 23:30 uur

Totaal: 20 x JSF en 54-60 Gripen NG

(Ik denk dat de poitiek dit compromis zou accepteren)

Ik kan me hier ook wel in vinden. Ookal lijkt het een poldelmodel ;)
Er zullen dan natuurlijk ook oplossingen bedacht moeten worden aangezien de JSF en NG op 2 verschillende soorten brandstof vliegen. Ik hoop niet dat dat een probleem is.

Citaat van: bergd op 14/07/2012 | 00:12 uur
Ik kan me hier ook wel in vinden. Ookal lijkt het een poldelmodel ;)
Er zullen dan natuurlijk ook oplossingen bedacht moeten worden aangezien de JSF en NG op 2 verschillende soorten brandstof vliegen. Ik hoop niet dat dat een probleem is.

Aangezien de NG dezelfde motor heeft als de F18E lijkt mij dat niet een groot probleem.

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 13/07/2012 | 23:30 uur
Ace1: Jurrien ben je nu bekeerd?
Dat nog niet, ik vind het Gripen bul nog steeds een "DinkyToy" vliegtuig maar ik begin langzaam maar zeker hier de voordelen van in te zien.

Ik zie absoluut de meerwaarde van de JSF, maar ook in een mix van kwaliteit en kwantiteit.

Op het gevaar van.... ik zie de meerwaarde in een Klu voorzien van 4 sqn. 3 x Gripen NG en 1 x F35A of 4 combi sqn bestaande elk uit 4 F35A en 12 Gripen NG.

De logistieke trein rondom de F35 zou dan gedeeld kunnen worden met de Europese samenwerkingspartners. Totaal: 20 x JSF en 54-60 Gripen NG
(Ik denk dat de poitiek dit compromis zou accepteren)

KLu vliegers vonden in de jaren 60 en 70 de goedkope NF-5 Freedom Fighter ook een Dinky Toy tegenover de machtige maar dure '104', die zelfs meer capabel was dan zijn vervanger, de F-16A block 5.   Toch bleek deze Dinky Toy een geduchte dogfighter en een goed jachtbommenwerper.  Daarnaast was het een heel betrouwbare kist.

De F-35A LightningII wordt ook een (zeer) goede jachtbommenwerper.  Maar stel je voor, als de politiek samen met de Nederlandse industrie in de jaren 60 had gekozen voor een KLu jachtvliegtuig vloot alleen maar bestaande uit (zeer) goede F-105 Thunderchiefs of A-7 Corsair jachtbommenwerpers.
En eind jaren 70 had gekozen voor zeg allleen 106 Panavia Tornado jachtbommenwerpers a NLG 90 miljoen, in plaats van 213 F-16's a NLG 40 miljoen per stuk, inclusief alle toebehoren.    Had boven voormalig Joegoslavie nog leuk kunnen aflopen tegen die MiG-29.  Maar ook tegen die vermaledijde SA-3 Goa (S-125) en SA-6 luchtdoelraketten.  Deze werden vaak ontweken, door gebruik te maken van de grote wendbaarheid van de F-16. ;)   Daarnaast, is het onmogelijk, dat we in 1999 met een Tornado only vloot van dan ongeveer 65 kisten hetzelfde aantal jachtvliegtuigen zouden kunnen inzetten boven voormalig Joegoslavie

Wederom Luchtkastelen, Jurrien.  Een KLu jachtvliegtuig vloot bestaande uit 2 verschillende types en een totale omvang van 74 - 80 kisten.
Absoluut onrealistisch.                                  ('Laat die oorlammekes toch es stoan, vat es een kear un worstuh-brooike of iets dergeluks')
Wil je toch een realistische mix van gevechtsvliegtuigen, dan moet je gaan voor een mix van 48 Gripen's en 18 COIN / CAS kisten zoals de Super Tucano of Pilatus PC-21.

Citaat van: Poleme op 14/07/2012 | 19:31 uur
Wil je toch een realistische mix van gevechtsvliegtuigen, dan moet je gaan voor een mix van 48 Gripen's en 18 COIN / CAS kisten zoals de Super Tucano of Pilatus PC-21.

Zodra men de PC-7 gaat vervangen, zouden de Tucano of de PC-21 aangekocht moeten worden, zodat ze zowel als lestoestel alsmede als CAS toestel ingezet kunnen worden. Dat is de enige redelijke en betaalbare manier om 2 toestellen te handhaven die ook nog eens beide effectief kunnen zijn. Door te lessen in de PC21 of Tucano, is iedere vlieger binnen de KLu vervolgens ook uitwisselbaar op die kist, zodat dit tot minder inzetproblemen leidt. Immers, er is dan een grote pool vliegers beschikbaar. Heb je ook meteen iets meer ruimte om een paar fighters extra aan te schaffen.

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 14/07/2012 | 00:24 uur

Citaat van: bergd op 14/07/2012 | 00:12 uur
Ik kan me hier ook wel in vinden. Ookal lijkt het een poldelmodel ;)
Er zullen dan natuurlijk ook oplossingen bedacht moeten worden aangezien de JSF en NG op 2 verschillende soorten brandstof vliegen. Ik hoop niet dat dat een probleem is.

Aangezien de NG dezelfde motor heeft als de F18E lijkt mij dat niet een groot probleem.

Dank je voor de terecht wijzing

Boeing sweetens Brazil fighter jet offer: report

July 14, 2012

SAO PAULO (Reuters) - U.S. aerospace company Boeing Co has offered to transfer more technology to Brazil if the government upgraded its Air Force fighter fleet with the firm's F-18 Super Hornet jet, a local paper reported on Saturday.

Boeing vice president of the F/A-18 program, Mike Gibbons, said his company would offer Brazilian "companies the opportunity to construct components for the new Super Hornets and other future projects of Boeing," according to O Estado de S. Paulo newspaper.

He did not go into detail about the expanded technology deal Boeing was offering, if the government chooses to award the American company Latin America's most coveted multi-billion-dollar defense contract.

In February, government sources told Reuters that Brazil was very likely to award the contract to France's Dassault for its Rafale fighter. Dassault is offering unrestricted technology sharing to win the contract.

But since 2011, Boeing has been tipping the scales back in its favor by expanding its business ties with Brazil.

In June, Boeing and Brazilian aerospace designer Embraer said they would collaborate on some aspects of developing Embraer's KC-390 military transport and refueling jet, tightening relations between the two countries' defense industries.

And on July 10, Embraer announced plans for Boeing to supply a new weapons system for its light attack fighter, strengthening its offer in a fiercely contested bid for a U.S. Air Force contract in Afghanistan.

(Reporting by Reese Ewing; Editing by Philip Barbara)

Copyright © 2012, Reuters

[Exclusive] Russia pulls out of Korea fighter project

Sweden mulls taking part in FX-III race with Gripen

By Lee Tae-hoon

Russia will not enter Korea's advanced jet acquisition project as none of its aircraft manufacturers including Sukhoi expressed their intent to join the heated competition, officials here said.

The Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) listed Sukhoi's T-50 PAK-FA in July last year as one of the four contenders to have expressed an interest in joining the open bidding worth 8.29 trillion won ($7.3 billion) along with Boeing, Lockheed Martin and the European Aeronautic Defense and Space Company (EADS).

``No Russian firm submitted an application to attend the program's explanatory session, which was a prerequisite to participate, by the Friday registration deadline," a spokesman of DAPA said.

He noted that a representative from Swedish company Saab, which has been searching for additional export orders for its Gripen multirole fighters, successfully filed an application for the mandatory session along with Boeing, Lockheed Martine and EADS.

"It is too early to tell whether Saab is serious about joining the race, or the European company will be attending the session out of curiosity and have a peek at Korea's demands," a senior DAPA official said.

``What appears certain is that the Swedish firm's aircraft, including the Gripen, does not meet many of the Air Force's requirements."

DAPA announced that only those participating in the explanatory session slated for today will be eligible to participate in the FX-III, the third and final phase of the multi-billion dollar fighter jet procurement program.

The state-run arms procurement agency made it clear that the request for proposal (RFP) detailing the FX-III requirements will only be distributed to participants of the explanatory session.

Officials at the Trade Representation of the Russian Federation in Korea acknowledged that Sukhoi has pulled out of the race, considering that the aircraft manufacturer had not sought Moscow's approval, nor his agency's help to participate in the fighter bid.

"Both the Russian government and its trade delegations here have yet to receive any proposal from any Russian aviation companies," a senior trade representative from Russia said.

Sukhoi lost in the FX-I bid, the first phase of Korea's fighter program in the early 2000s, due largely to concerns over the interoperability of its proposed SU-35 fighters with the Air Force's existing fleet of American aircraft.

The Russian aerospace firm refrained from making any official comment over the possibility of competing in the FX-III, through which Korea wants to purchase 60 high-end aircraft with stealth capability in October this year.

Meanwhile, Shin Myung-ho, a representative from Saab, confirmed his company has yet to make a decision on whether to compete with the two U.S. defense giants and the European consortium.

"To my understanding, Saab will discuss possible participation in FX-III after receiving the RFP," he said. "It will, however, take a while before Saab makes any official announcement about its next move on Korea's jet acquisition bid."

Korea has purchased 60 F-15s from Boeing, which won both the FX-I and II projects in 2002 and 2008.

Seoul plans to receive proposals from the four possible bidders, for the FX-III project by June 18 and carry out testing and evaluations until September before selecting the winner in October.

Seoul eliminated two key compulsory requirements initially set for FX-III in an attempt to allow more companies to enter the competition for the nation's largest-ever arms deal.

http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/art/2012/01/113_103661.html

Aircraft barriers

Cameron facing new ships humiliation

DAVID Cameron could be forced into a SECOND multi-billion pound U-turn on the design of Britain's new aircraft carriers.

The PM will have to dump his revised plan for jump-jets to fly off the two giant ships if there is no quick resolution to the US budget crisis.

Chopping of the American-led programme to build the F35B Joint Strike Fighter is "likely" under automatic spending cuts, a US Congress report has revealed.

That would push the MoD into a third complete redesign for the HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales.

The ships' decks would have to be torn up again to fit catapults and traps so conventional jets that don't hover could take off and land.

That could delay the vessels' arrival by years. And the cost, topping £2billion, would leave the newly-balanced defence budget in tatters.

Only two months ago, Mr Cameron and Defence Secretary Philip Hammond were humiliated when they had to tear up their initial design change.

The F35B jump jets were replaced with conventional jets in the October 2010 defence review, only for the F35B plan to be revived in May as costs and delays began to soar.

The Sun's revelation comes as Mr Hammond flies to America this week to take receipt of Britain's first F35B.

In their report Congressional committee officials warned the F35B programme faced "likely elimination" under January US defence cuts.

Labour said the F35Bs' scrapping would be a disaster.

Shadow Defence Secretary Jim Murphy said: "A second U-turn would throw the carrier programme into jeopardy and blow a hole in the Government's defence budget plans."

A MoD spokesman said: "We remain firmly committed to the JSF programme."

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/4431570/PM-David-Cameron-could-be-facing-fresh-humiliating-U-turn-on-new-aircraft-carrier-designs.html

Spokesman reaffirms CNO's faith in F-35

By Joshua Stewart - Staff writer
Posted : Sunday Jul 15, 2012 10:05:07 EDT

Despite what's circulating in the blogosphere, Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jon Greenert is firmly committed to the F-35C Lightning II, a Navy spokesman said.

http://www.navytimes.com/news/2012/07/navy-cno-greenert-reaffirms-faith-f35-071512/

More problems for F-22 beyond mysterious oxygen loss issue

July 16th, 2012
By Mike Mount

Two recent in-flight emergencies involving troubled oxygen systems in the F-22 "Raptor" are unrelated to other, more worrisome breathing problems pilots have experienced for more than a year when flying the plane, according to U.S. Air Force officials.

The Air Force has been investigating why a number of F-22 pilots have experienced a mysterious loss of oxygen while in the air, causing dizziness and confusion known as hypoxia, since spring 2011.

But two recent incidents related to the F-22 oxygen system are considered regular mechanical issues not connected to the oxygen deprivation investigation, according to Air Force Lt. Col. Tadd Sholtis, a spokesman for the Air Force's Air Combat Command.

"The recent incidents that have resulted in new expressions of concern are of a different kind than the ones we have been focused on in recent months," Sholtis told CNN's Security Clearance.

Air Force officials have labeled the number of unexplained F-22 breathing incidents as "cause unknown," while labeling the two recent incidents as "cause known.

The latest problems prompted two members of Congress, Sen. Mark Warner, D-Virginia, and Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Illinois, to send a letter to the Air Force secretary last week demanding answers.

In an e-mail response to Security Clearance, Sholtis sent information on what Air Force initial investigations found in the two recent incidents. Sholtis said the mechanical issues were "not specific to the F-22 aircraft."

One of the incidents, an oxygen system malfunction on July 6, is still under investigation by the Air Force and the plane remains grounded, according to the Air Force information provided by Sholtis, but the incident is still listed as a "cause known" problem.

While returning from a training mission, the pilot from the 154th Wing of the Hawaii Air National Guard received a warning indication that the Onboard Oxygen Generating System (OBOGS) was malfunctioning and declared an in-flight emergency.

"The pilot experienced a hypoxic symptom in conjunction with the aircraft warning and activated the emergency oxygen system," according to the information given to Security Clearance. The pilot recovered and landed the plane without a problem after receiving emergency oxygen.

"The pilot has no lingering physiological effects and has returned to flight status. More details will be available when the investigation is complete, but we're confident the annunciation of the OBOGS warning during the flight points to the cause, which was a malfunction within the OBOGS," according to the information.

On June 26, an F-22 pilot from the 1st Fighter Wing was conducting routine flight operations out of Langley Air Force Base in Virginia. The pilot reported a "temporary restriction," in breathing and "was not receiving the normal flow of oxygen through the hose," to his face mask as he was on final approach. The pilot was able to land the plane safely, according to the information.

After parking the plane, the pilot remained in the cockpit and was instructed to engage the emergency oxygen system, the information said. The emergency system shoots pure oxygen into a pilot's mask as part of a safety protocol.

While the pilot was breathing the emergency air, he reported tightness in his chest for a short time, according to the information from Sholtis. It was later diagnosed as atelectasis related to breathing a high concentration of oxygen, the statement said. Altelectasis is defined as a partial or total lung collapse.

The unnamed pilot has since returned to flying and has flown five times since the June 26 incident with no aftereffects, according to the statement.

An investigation and analysis into what happened to the aircraft's oxygen system revealed a stuck valve. Audio recordings during the flight also registered the sounds of a stuck valve, the according to the information.

"To correct the mechanical issue, maintenance personnel removed and replaced the Breathing Regulator Anti-G (BRAG) valve, pilot breathing hoses, the Emergency Oxygen System (EOS) Regulator and the EOS shutoff valve," according to the statement.

Sholtis said the plane has since returned to service and the incident is listed as "cause known."

Warner and Kinzinger also asked about a May 31 incident where a F-22 crash landed when its wheels failed to extend upon landing. That incident was attributed to "a pilot new to the aircraft that involved no physiological symptoms and had no relation to the life support system," Sholtis said.

The Air Force has not released more information on the May incident, including details of how much damage was done to the service's most expensive aircraft.

Since the onset of the F-22 problems, the Air Force has taken a number of steps to mitigate more in-flight mystery incidents. Those steps include barring pilots from wearing an inflatable vest that assists their breathing during intense G-forces, as well as reducing the altitude the aircraft can fly.

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta also ordered the air service to keep F-22 flights to a limited area so pilots could safely return to a base if they experienced a problem with their oxygen systems.

Warner and Kinzinger also asked the Air Force for updated statistics on the number of hypoxia incidents on top of numbers already given to them by the Air Force.

Last month, the two members of Congress released numbers by the Air Force that showed pilots flying the F-22 Raptor reported illness from oxygen deprivation incidents 10 times as often as pilots of other fighter jets.

The data showed Raptor pilots have reported 26.43 hypoxia and hypoxia-like incidents per 100,000 flight hours. While that represents a mere fraction of total flight hours, it is far higher than incidents from other Air Force aircraft, including the A-10, the F-15E and the F-16.

But the two demanded new information when they saw higher numbers reported in media that did not reflect the earlier numbers they were given.

Sholtis said the Air Force was validating the numbers in response to the lawmakers' request, but said it does not look like there is an increase in the statistics already given.

http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/07/16/more-problems-for-f-22-beyond-mysterious-oxygen-loss-issue/

CNO Reiterates Support for F-35, Ending Latest Tempest

(Source: Lexington Institute; issued July 13, 2012)
 
Lightning may seldom strike twice in the same place, but Lockheed Martin's F-35 Lightning II manages to be struck on a regular basis in the media -- often for fanciful or downright foolish reasons. The latest tempest now blowing out to sea was spawned by a think piece Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Jonathan W. Greenert authored in the current issue of the U.S. Naval Institute's magazine Proceedings. Greenert didn't actually mention the naval version of the F-35 fighter that will one day populate aircraft-carrier flight decks, but some observers thought they detected waning support for the plane in a passage about low-observable ("stealth") technology:

It is time to consider shifting our focus from platforms that rely solely on stealth to also include concepts for operating farther from adversaries using standoff weapons and unmanned systems -- or employing electronic-warfare payloads to confuse or jam threat sensors rather than trying to hide from them.

This is not a new line of reasoning. In fact, Admiral Greenert's footnotes on stealth reference a Bill Sweetman article that appeared in Popular Science 11 years ago. However, caution about relying too heavily on stealth could be applied just as easily to submarines as aircraft, and it merely states the obvious point that the joint force shouldn't depend too much on any "silver bullet" technology.

The same could be said about relying too heavily on electronic warfare or unmanned systems. The Navy's next-generation jammer will have to cope with a vast array of new electronic threats when it is fielded at the end of the decade, and unmanned aircraft will be too vulnerable to survive in contested air space for the foreseeable future (unless they're stealthy).
Admiral Greenert's representatives have now reiterated his support for the naval version of F-35 and said that the Proceedings article was not intended as a criticism of the program. However, there has always been a faction within the naval-aviation community that thought the Air Force was relying too heavily on stealth to protect its next-generation fighters and bombers. The aviators voicing that view argued that tactics and jamming were just as important as stealth.

Ironically, when a first-generation stealth fighter was shot down by Serbian defenders during the Balkan air war in 1999, it was mainly because the pilot used poor tactics and a Navy jamming aircraft was not where it was supposed to be. If an F-35 had flown that same mission, it would have escaped unscathed despite the pilot's mistake in exiting the target area and despite the absence of effective off-board jamming.

The CNO's think piece was only being sensible in saying that stealth is no panacea for future operational challenges, and other ideas need to be investigated too. At the rate new technologies are spreading around the world, the Navy will probably need to use all the innovative concepts at its disposal to cope with potential adversaries like China. On the other hand, people who understand how stealth works realize that the Navy's F-35 will provide a much more powerful deterrent to Chinese aggression than its current fighters ever could.

(EDITOR'S NOTE: If the author of this piece is to be believed, the F-117 was shot down over Serbia because it was not accompanied by a "Navy jamming aircraft."
What does say about the effectiveness of the aircraft's "stealth" capabilities, if it needed an escorting jammer to survive?
Also, if "tactics and jamming [are] just as important as stealth, why do we keep hearing all these claims that the F-35's stealth will ensure its future dominance?
As to whether the F-35 would have survived the same mission, that is extremely unlikely, given that the aircraft's enormous exhaust plume would attract all heat-guided missiles in the area.)

-ends-

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/release/3/136922/cno-voices-support-for-f_35%2C-ends-speculation.html

Brazilie stap dichter bij Gripen??

Quote:
STOCKHOLM (Reuters) Brazil's Air Force chief, Brigadier General Juniti Saito, inspected a prototype of the Gripen E / F at year Farnboroughmässa a week and seemed impressed with the new AESA radar system of type (active electronic scanning array).
It says Eddy de la Motte, director of Gripen export at Saab, told news agency Direkt after being held out to the fighter aircraft for the Brazilian Air Force Commander, who was there at the head of a large 22-man delegation - bigger than before.
"We exhibited the development of aircraft such as NG that we have to test the avionics (aviation electronics), with AESA radar are in focus. He was impressed and thought it was good that the program is moving forward," says Eddy de la Motte with a view to radar development program that Saab is conducting jointly with the Scottish company Selex but finance themselves.
An AESA radar was, according to Eddy de la Motte is one of the requirements that Brazil has set for its future purchasing decisions of combat aircraft. The radar is different from traditional radar including the antenna moves electronically rather than mechanically.
According to Eddy de la Motte offer competitors for Gripen on Brazil's order also AESA radar systems.
"But there are many elements of the contract: Brazil is interested in technology transfers, that is, transferring both the product and the technology around it. We are very willing to at Saab, and experience are the U.S. and France are not as willing to" says Eddy de la Motte.
According to export manager is the Brazilian Air Force chief well versed on the Gripen fighter plane and probably self-test flown it.
"I think he has done that. His evaluation team has anyway been flying both C/D- and NG-plane, it's part of their evaluation, and it is based on these flights that we have been chosen as one of three candidates, "says Eddy de la Motte.
By Brigadier inspected Gripen were not AESA radar are in place, said Eddy de la Motte, who will not say anything about any changes in attitude to the Gripen in the key figure during the fair.
"We had a constructive and interesting dialogue, but it would be wrong to speak on his behalf," says Eddy de la Motte, reiterating instead the Saab is often said to have a competitive bid for the ability of the product, its price, and any industrial cooperation.

Google translated from http://www.di.se/finansiell-information/telegram-details-page/?NewsId=d26acb81-8252-493b-8997-0ce0e6c473a5

Citaat van: bergd op 16/07/2012 | 20:53 uur
Brazilie stap dichter bij Gripen??

Ik verwacht van niet, dat ze onder de indruk zijn van de nieuwe mogelijkheden dat is ongetwijfelt wel het geval.

Ook Boeing maakt behoorlijk indruk met het nieuwe samenwekingsprogamma  met Embraer en de Fransen zitten ook niet echt stil.

Ik verwacht nog steeds een Fransoos als winnaar aan het einde van dit kalenderjaar. (maar ik laat me graag verrassen)

Citaat van: bergd op 16/07/2012 | 20:53 uur
Brazilie stap dichter bij Gripen??

Quote:
STOCKHOLM (Reuters) Brazil's Air Force chief, Brigadier General Juniti Saito, inspected a prototype of the Gripen E / F at year Farnboroughmässa a week and seemed impressed with the new AESA radar system of type (active electronic scanning array).
It says Eddy de la Motte, director of Gripen export at Saab, told news agency Direkt after being held out to the fighter aircraft for the Brazilian Air Force Commander, who was there at the head of a large 22-man delegation - bigger than before.
"We exhibited the development of aircraft such as NG that we have to test the avionics (aviation electronics), with AESA radar are in focus. He was impressed and thought it was good that the program is moving forward," says Eddy de la Motte with a view to radar development program that Saab is conducting jointly with the Scottish company Selex but finance themselves.
An AESA radar was, according to Eddy de la Motte is one of the requirements that Brazil has set for its future purchasing decisions of combat aircraft. The radar is different from traditional radar including the antenna moves electronically rather than mechanically.
According to Eddy de la Motte offer competitors for Gripen on Brazil's order also AESA radar systems.
"But there are many elements of the contract: Brazil is interested in technology transfers, that is, transferring both the product and the technology around it. We are very willing to at Saab, and experience are the U.S. and France are not as willing to" says Eddy de la Motte.
According to export manager is the Brazilian Air Force chief well versed on the Gripen fighter plane and probably self-test flown it.
"I think he has done that. His evaluation team has anyway been flying both C/D- and NG-plane, it's part of their evaluation, and it is based on these flights that we have been chosen as one of three candidates, "says Eddy de la Motte.
By Brigadier inspected Gripen were not AESA radar are in place, said Eddy de la Motte, who will not say anything about any changes in attitude to the Gripen in the key figure during the fair.
"We had a constructive and interesting dialogue, but it would be wrong to speak on his behalf," says Eddy de la Motte, reiterating instead the Saab is often said to have a competitive bid for the ability of the product, its price, and any industrial cooperation.

Google translated from http://www.di.se/#!/finansiell-infor...7-0ce0e6c473a5

bergd ik zie op de link nergens dat nieuws van de Gripen NG terug?

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 16/07/2012 | 21:00 uur

Ik verwacht van niet, dat ze onder de indruk zijn van de nieuwe mogelijkheden dat is ongetwijfelt wel het geval.

Ook Boeing maakt behoorlijk indruk met het nieuwe samenwekingsprogamma  met Embraer en de Fransen zitten ook niet echt stil.

Ik verwacht nog steeds een Fransoos als winnaar aan het einde van dit kalenderjaar. (maar ik laat me graag verrassen)

Ook daar zal de industrie bij de keuze een dikke vinger in de pap hebben.. En ik geef ze daarbij geen ongelijk.. Maar of het dan ook de beste keuze wordt, we zullen het zien.

Citaat van: Ace1 op 16/07/2012 | 21:05 uur

bergd ik zie op de link nergens dat nieuws van de Gripen NG terug?

Link inmiddels aangepast: http://www.di.se/finansiell-information/telegram-details-page/?NewsId=d26acb81-8252-493b-8997-0ce0e6c473a5

16 July 2012

Ministers 'confident' over aircraft carrier fighter planes

The government has said it is confident there will not be a second U-turn on the type of fighter planes to be used on the navy's new aircraft carrier.

In May, the coalition said it was changing from its proposed "catapult and trap" planes to jump jets.

But newspaper reports say problems with the US-led Joint Strike Fighter project could force another change on the UK.

However, Defence Secretary Philip Hammond said he had had reassurances at the "highest level" in Washington.

In its defence review in 2010, the coalition announced that it was cancelling the previous Labour government's decision to purchase jump-jet version of the Joint Strike Fighter (the F35-B) and opt instead for the catapult and trap (F35-C) type, which required a different set-up on deck.

But, in May this year, it performed a U-turn, saying it would revert to the F35-B, as costs had increased. It added that the price of this change of mind would amount to £100m.

'Mothball'

Now the Sun newspaper reports that another alteration is likely. It says the US - which is leading the F35-B project - is likely to cancel its orders, as Washington struggles with a government debt crisis.

The newspaper adds that this could force another change on the UK government.

But Mr Hammond told MPs: "We've made a decision to revert to the Stovl [short take-off and vertical landing] system. We are quite confident of the delivery."

He added: "We've had the highest-level discussions with US officials who support the programme."

Fellow defence minister Nick Harvey said people "shouldn't believe everything" they read in the press, adding: "We have every confidence that it will come into service as planned."

As part of its defence spending review in 2010, the government decided to "mothball" one of the two aircraft carriers, HMS Prince of Wales and HMS Queen Elizabeth, ordered by Labour.

Abandoning the plan to fit the "catapults and traps" needed by the F35-C to one of the carriers while mothballing the other, opened up the possibility that both could eventually become operational, it argued.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18861904

S. Korea approves bid proposals for three fighter jets

2012-07-17

South Korea's arms procurement agency said Tuesday it has approved bid proposals by three foreign defense companies for a multi-million dollar fighter jet project and will start flight tests from next week.

The F-15 Silent Eagle by U.S. firm Boeing, the F-35A by another American company Lockheed Martin, and the Eurofighter by Europe-based multinational defense group EADS are in the running to win the deal worth upward of 8.3 trillion won ($7.3 billion).

South Korea plans to purchase 60 fighter jets by 2021 to replace the Air Force's aging fleet.

The Defense Acquisition Program Administration said Air Force evaluators will conduct flight tests and enter into negotiations with company officials from Monday.

After the process, South Korean officials plan to visit production facilities of Boeing, EADS and Lockheed next month for data-gathering and simulator tests, the DAPA said.

To conduct the flight tests later this month, Seoul sent requests to the bidders asking whether South Korean evaluators could use telemetry and a pursuit plane to measure the function of their planes.

According to a senior government official, Boeing and EADS replied that they will allow South Korean Air Force pilots to test run the planes, while Lockheed Martin has not yet confirmed whether it will allow use of the testing methods.

"In a written answer, the U.S. Air Force said it will consult with senior officials about the use of telemetry for test flights (on the F-35A)," the official said on the condition of anonymity citing sensitivity of the issue.

Regarding South Korea's request to use the pursuit plane, the U.S. Air Force said it will "positively review" the request, without elaboration.

The DAPA had earlier said it will not conduct tests on flights that fail to meet South Korean government's demands for flight tests.

The government earlier said it will announce the winner of the bid later this year, but the fate of the mega project is uncertain as it has faced challenges ahead of the presidential election slated for December.

Pointing out that President Lee Myung-bak's single five-year term ends in February, leading presidential contenders in the ruling and opposition camps said the final decision on the fighter jet deal should be left to the next administration. Government officials reiterated their plans to go ahead with the project to replace the old fighter planes.

South Korea has already purchased 60 of Boeing's F-15 fighter jets since 2002 in the first two stages of its fighter modernization program.

http://view.koreaherald.com/kh/view.php?ud=20120717001400&cpv=0

Extensive French Rafale Upgrade Programme Begins

First Rafale Arrives in Clermont-Ferrand

July 18, 2012

On 12 July 2012, the first Rafale fighter landed at the Aeronautical Industrial Workshop (Atelier Industriel de l' Aéronautique, AAI) at Clermont-Ferrand. This is the first outcome of the contract to upgrade French Air Force Rafale fighters, which was awarded to the AAI in February 2011.

Until now, related modifications were carried out by a detachment of technicians from Clermont-Ferrand at the Mont-de-Marsan air base, in south-western France. After an initial phase-in, the single-seat Rafale serial no C106 will become the first of 52 similar aircraft to instead be modified and upgraded at the AAI's Clermont-Ferrand facility.

Following on to the work carried out to bring the French Navy's first 10 Rafale Ms to the latest standard, which the AAI began in November 2011, this facility is fast becoming the focal point for maintenance and upgrade work on the French armed force's latest generation of aircraft.

Upgrade work on the French Air Force Rafale fleet began in February 2011 at Mont-de-Marsan and, since then, thirteen aircraft have already been modernized. Today, to increase the pace of the upgrade, and after a training period, the AIA will begin a four-year upgrade cycle of Rafale two-seaters and single seaters.

The modifications will give Rafale enhanced capabilities in the field of communications, interoperability and data exchange with ground troops.

The AIA at Clermont-Ferrand is one of the facilities Aeronautical Industrial Service (SIAé) along with those located at Bordeaux, Cuers-Pierrefeu Ambérieu, in Brittany. The service is headquartered in Paris.

The main tasks assigned to the AIA are conducted for the benefit of the French armed forces. They consist in the maintenance of aircraft (Mirage 2000, Mirage F1, AlphaJet, Transall, Puma, Gazelle), of related equipment, and the modernization of aircraft and of special installations for the three services.

(Issued in French only; unofficial translation by defense-aerospace.com)
 
http://www.defpro.com/news/details/37588/?SID=804fe9887bcea2c313845666269e83fb

Irkut To Add Attack Capabilities To Yak-130 Trainer

By Maxim Pyadushkin

July 17, 2012

MOSCOW — Russia's Irkut Corp. is working on improvements to its Yakovlev Yak-130 combat jet trainer that may turn it into a light attack aircraft.

The first stage of modernization includes the installation of an inflight refueling system and optronic pod, says Irkut Vice President Komstantin Popovich. This work should be completed in 2013, he adds.

In the next stage, designers plan to equip the aircraft with radar. Three options are being evaluated, says Popovich. The first is from Phazotron-NIIR. Earlier, Phazotron's chief designer, Yury Guskov, told Aviation Week that his company had started developing a slot array antenna radar, dubbed FK-130, for this aircraft.

The other options are an onboard radar from Tikhomirov-NIIP or a radar pod from St. Petersburg's Leninetz plant. According to Popovich, the radar designer and supplier is to be selected by the end of the year; development efforts are planned for 2013-14.

Popovich says the radar installation will provide the Yak-130 with target detection for air-to-ground missiles like the Kh-31 (AS-17 Krypton), Kh-38 and Kh-29 (AS-14 Kedge). "We understand now that the aircraft's stability allows us to use such heavy missiles," he says, adding that all these improvements are being made without the Russian air force's request.

The aircraft can currently carry up to 3,000 kg (6,600 lb.) of combat payload including the short-range R-73 (AA-11 Archer) air-to-air missile with infrared seeker, KAB-500 guided bombs, free-falling bombs, unguided rockets or a pod with 23-mm GSh-23L twin-barreled cannon. The weapons can be fixed at nine external hardpoints: six underwing, two wingtips and one under the fuselage.

Irkut suggests that the Yak-130 attack version could be used in low-intensity conflicts to engage point-surface targets and low-speed air targets.

The Russian air force selected the Yak-130 in 2002 as its new jet aircraft for basic and advanced pilot training to replace the aging fleet of Soviet-era Czech L-39 trainers. It is equipped with a glass cockpit and a reprogrammed fly-by-wire system that can replicate the characteristics of various Russian fighters, fourth-generation and higher.

The basic Yak-130 variant completed government evaluation trials in 2009. The Russian air force now operates 12 aircraft from the initial production batch. In 2011 the air force placed an order for 55 trainers with the option for 10 more. The first batch of 15 under the deal is slated to be handed over this year; the total deliveries should by complete by 2012.

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/asd_07_17_2012_p03-01-477252.xml

PH eyes 4 countries to supply 12 attack aircraft

By Ben Cal | Posted on July 18, 2012 | 12:02am | 11 Comments

The government is eyeing four foreign companies from as many countries to provide it with 12 new surface attack aircraft to start the Air Force's long-delayed modernization program.

Those are the KAI TA-50 "Golden Eagle" of South Korea, the Alenia Aermacchi Agusta M-346 Master of Italy, the Yak-130 of Russia, and the BAE Hawk of the United Kingdom.

The Air Forces says it needs to immediately procure surface attack aircraft as those will serve as lead-in attack planes and as trainer aircraft for prospective jet fighter pilots.

The Air Force was left with no jet fighters after it decommissioned the F-5A/B interceptors in 2005 because they were obsolete and their parts were no longer available in the international market. The Navy is in the same dilemma as many of its ships are of World War II vintage.

The Air Force and the Navy failed to intercept 26 foreign ships that intruded into Philippine territory during the first quarter this year. They have also failed to break their standoff with China at the Scarborough Shoal, where scores of Chinese fishing vessels were found to have been poaching since April this year.

The military has welcomed the announcement by Defense Secretary Voltaire Gazmin that the Aquino administration is determined to modernize the Armed Forces.

"The upgrade and modernization program for our Armed Forces is presently in full swing," Gazmin said recently.

He said the Defense Department was working double time to approve contracts for 138 projects to be implemented over the next five years.

"These projects would surely provide the Philippine Air Force with brand-new and reliable assets for its operations, along with the operational requirements of the Philippine Navy and the Philippine Army," Gazmin said.

The military has said it plans to acquire a surface attack aircraft, a lead-in fighter trainer, attack helicopters, a light transport aircraft, and a medium transport aircraft to be delivered in 2014.

South Korea's T-50 Golden Eagle is a jet trainer and light attack aircraft designed to provide pilot training for current and next-generation fighters such as the F-15, F-16, F-18, F-22, F-35, the Tornado, the Kfir and the Mirage supersonic jet interceptors.

The Air Force says the T-50 is a trainer jet but can be used as an interceptor as it has a maximum speed of 1,837 kilometers per hour. The range and service ceiling of the aircraft are 1,851 kilometers and 16,764 meters, respectively. Its service life is 10,000 hours.

The Alenia Aermacchi M-346 Master is a military transonic trainer aircraft that has a top speed of mach 1.15 or 1,255 kilometers per hour.

The M-346 Hawk can be armed with air-to-air missiles, air-to ground missiles, cannons and bombs. It can also be deployed as a light attack aircraft.

The British-made BAE Hawk MK 127/128 Lift lead-in fighter is in the service of several countries.

http://manilastandardtoday.com/www2/2012/07/18/ph-eyes-4-countries-to-supply-12-attack-aircraft/

Beijing's Raptor Knockoff

China shows off second new stealth jet development in two years

BY: Bill Gertz - July 17, 2012

American intelligence agencies recently obtained new information on China's second new stealth fighter-bomber revealed on the Internet in the past two years, according to U.S. officials.

The new jet, dubbed the F-60, is a fifth-generation warplane; a prototype was disclosed in photographs posted on two Chinese military affairs websites beginning June 21.

Officials familiar with intelligence reports said the shape and design of the F-60 appears similar to the U.S. Air Force's F-22 Raptor, the U.S. military's most advanced stealth fighter, although it is smaller in size.

The similarities are raising concerns in counterintelligence circles that China obtained design details for its new jet from the F-22 through espionage or cyber-spying, as occurred with the Chinese compromise of F-35 data by suspected intelligence hackers several years ago.

A Defense Intelligence Agency spokeswoman declined to comment on the new Chinese stealth jet.

According to the U.S. officials, intelligence analysts recently conducted detailed analyses of photos that show the first prototype of the new jet being transported on the back of a flatbed truck along the Beijing-Shenyang highway under escort by vehicles and officials of the Ministry of State Security, China's political police and intelligence service.


Chinese Internet photo showing what U.S. intelligence agencies believe is a new Chinese stealth fighter enroute to a stress testing facility.

The new jet was shown at a rest stop during its transport during what Chinese websites said was transfer to a stress testing facility.

The twin-engine jet was shown without its tail stabilizers or cockpit canopy, leading some analysts to conclude it was an L-15 trainer aircraft.

However, analysis of the photos revealed that the new jet is larger in size and has different wing shapes and engine intakes than the trainer, and therefore is likely the new F-60.

The photos and commentary were posted on Tiexue (www.tiexue.net), a military website in Beijing that reports on People's Liberation Army developments; and Feiyang Junshi, (www.fyjs.cn), another military website based in Yancheng City, Jiangsu Province.

No mention was made of the F-60 in recent unclassified Pentagon annual reports to Congress on China's military.

The 2011 report stated that development of the J-20 stealth jet and long-range conventional missiles "could improve the PLA's ability to strike regional air bases, logistical facilities, and other ground-based infrastructure."

The F-60 jet is under development by the Shenyang Aircraft Corp., which analysts say lost out several years ago to the manufacturer of China's first stealth fighter, the J-20, which is being built by the Chengdu Aircraft Design Institute.

The J-20 was first shown in a test flight during the visit to China in January 2011 by then-Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates in what was widely viewed as anti-U.S. political posturing by China's communist government and military.

Gates had canceled production of the Air Force's F-22 months earlier claiming that large numbers of F-22s were not needed because China would not field a comparable jet until 2020.

It now appears that China will have two new fifth-generation stealth fighters capable of challenging the U.S. Air Force in Asia years before the U.S. intelligence estimate of 2020.

The Pentagon considers stealth jet fighters key "anti-access, area denial" forces that China is developing as part of a strategy of forcing the U.S. military to operate further from Chinese shores.

The arms have prompted a new Pentagon doctrine called the Air Sea Battle Concept that calls for new U.S. forces and upgraded alliances in Asia to better assist U.S. forces in coming to the aid of democratic friends and allies in any future conflicts in the region.

Other high-tech forces being built by China for use against the United States include anti-ship ballistic missiles; anti-satellite missiles and lasers; large numbers of submarines; cyber warfare capabilities; and anti-missile defenses.

Some U.S. intelligence analysts are viewing the disclosure of the F-60 as an official leak by the Chinese military. Evidence for that view was one photo of the jet that shows an Audi A6 parked next to the truck transporting it. The parked Audi appears designed to provide foreign or domestic observers with a vehicle of known dimensions that will allow analysts to make calculations on the size and shape of the new jet.

China in the past has revealed new military developments on the Internet through similar official leaks. For example, China's new Yuan-class attack submarine was built entirely in secret until photos of the submarine appeared on the Internet in 2004.

Retired Air Force Lt. Gen. David Deptula, a former deputy chief of staff for intelligence, said the disclosure of the new Chinese stealth jet "should not come as a surprise."

"The PLA [air force] has a very comprehensive planning process, and may have several advanced aircraft in various stages of design and development," Deptula told the Free Beacon.

Larry Wortzel, a former Army intelligence officer, said it would be difficult to determine if the Chinese obtained secrets on the F-22 for the new jet.

"We know the F-35 had a major cyber penetration," Wortzel told the Free Beacon. "But even without a penetration, there have been enough opportunities to see F-22s to assist a manufacturer in trying to copy the external design. Xian and Shenyang were working parallel programs for stealth fighter aircraft."

Richard Fisher, a specialist on China's military program, said in addition to the rest stop photos, later pictures showed the new jet at a People's Liberation Army Air Force test center near the city of Xian.

"The F-60 has been reported by Chinese sources as a possible 'private' program that it hopes it can sell to the PLA later," Fisher said in an interview.

"This has happened numerous times before, as in the case of the Hongdu K-8 trainer. What we see on the truck could also be a full-scale model headed for a wind tunnel, electronic or stress testing facility. We do not know yet if a flying prototype has been built."

However, Fisher said image analysis shows the new jet to be a possible smaller fifth-generation fighter that could be promoted by Shenyang as a lower cost fighter than the Chengdu J-20.

"It is just slightly longer than the F-35, has twin engines but clearly uses stealth shaping as would a fifth-gen fighter," Fisher said. "It may also employ internal weapon carriage and most likely has a modern [active electronically scanned array] radar. If this is a real program, it will also be developed into a carrier capable version. The size and twin-engine configuration is correct for usage on China's carriers."

China is currently conducting sea trials for its first aircraft carrier, the Soviet-era Varyag, and U.S. intelligence officials have said two additional carriers are under construction at a shipyard near Shanghai.

"The bottom line here is that as Washington can't figure out whether it can afford just one fifth-gen fighter program, China may be pursuing up to three or more," Fisher said.

The Chinese fighter buildup comes as the Navy is having second thoughts about purchasing large numbers of the naval version of the F-35, which was designated the mainstay future U.S. fighter jet after Gates killed off the F-22.

"When fighter programs start this kind of dive before production and deployment, the ending is usually bad," Fisher said. "If the Shenyang fighter program is real, this only serves to compound the disaster of having ended F-22 production, which has to rank as one of the most shortsighted and dangerous acts of U.S. unilateral disarmament since the end of the Cold War."

If the Navy cuts its plans to buy large numbers of F-35Cs and rely more on jets from the Air Force, there are concerns that the Air Force with about 120 F-22 will not be able to do the job, Fisher said.

The second new Chinese stealth fighter development further undermines the decision made by Gates in 2009 to limit production of the F-22 to 187 aircraft and to instead produce several thousand F-35s.

Gates said on July 16, 2009 that by 2020 the United States would have 1,100 fifth generation F-35s and F-22s, but that China was projected to have none, and that the gap of U.S. to Chinese advanced fighters would widen by 2025 with 1,700 advanced U.S. jets to Beijing's "handful" of jets capable of penetrating strongly defended airspace and the ability to fly long distances.

Fisher said in response to Gates' 2009 assessment: "With delays being compounded by further cutbacks and production reductions, it does not seem possible that the United States will have 1,700 fifth-generation fighters in 2025 while the Chinese may only have a handful."

"The Chinese may have two hundred to several hundred by 2035, which in their neighborhood will go far to deter the United States," he said.

To meet the Chinese jet fighter imbalance, "it is imperative that we revive production of an improved version of the F-22," Fisher said. "Otherwise we condemn ourselves to either a slow retreat from Asia or a 'Pearl Harbor' that will be delivered by China."

The Pentagon's 2011 report on China's military said, "In January 2011, initial images of China's fifth generation J-20 stealth fighter were posted on the Internet."

"Although the appearance of this prototype underscores the level of PRC investment in advanced defense systems, the Defense Department does not expect the J-20 to achieve an effective operational capability prior to 2018," the report said. "China faces several hurdles as it moves toward J-20 production, including the mastery of high-performance jet engine production."

The report also said "the J-20 will eventually give the PLA Air Force a platform capable of long range, penetrating strikes into complex air defense environments."

http://freebeacon.com/beijings-raptor-knockoff/

New Chinese Stealth Fighter F60

http://combatace.com/topic/73575-new-chinese-stealth-fighter-f60/

Als zo Rusland/China...en het westen beide stealth jagers hebben....dan zien ze mekaar pas op 10km afstand althans als de piloot zijn ogen openheeft...en komt het gewoon aan op een ordinary dogfight en niet op een kill op afstand zoals Dick Berlijn beweerd over de F-35 die op grote afstand zijn vijand uitschakeld...de F-35 ziet zijn tegenstander in de toekomst pas als die al dichtbij is !

En dan gaat het aankomen op de klasse van de F-35 en zijn piloot in een luchtgevecht.

Citaat van: Oorlogsvis op 18/07/2012 | 11:35 uur
Als zo Rusland/China...en het westen beide stealth jagers hebben....dan zien ze mekaar pas op 10km afstand althans als de piloot zijn ogen openheeft...en komt het gewoon aan op een ordinary dogfight en niet op een kill op afstand zoals Dick Berlijn beweerd over de F-35 die op grote afstand zijn vijand uitschakeld...de F-35 ziet zijn tegenstander in de toekomst pas als die al dichtbij is !

En dan gaat het aankomen op de klasse van de F-35 en zijn piloot in een luchtgevecht.

De hoogste tijd dat de Amerikanen het export verbod op de F22 opheffen en deze kist weer in productie nemen (wel even het zuurstof probleempje oplossen).

De klanten staan immers in de rij (Israel, Japan, Australië), daarnaast zou het niet verkeerd zijn als de Amerikanen extra Raptors zouden bestellen, voorstanders van deze optie hebben berekend dat bij een voldoende aantal de aanschaft prijs van de F22 zou kunnen dalen tot 100 á 150 mjn dollar.

Tejas Fighter Jet Won't Be Combat-Ready Before 2015

(Source: India Times; published July 18, 2012)

NEW DELHI --- At a time when the US is fast-developing hypersonic bombers capable of flying at 20 times the speed of sound, India's largely home-grown Tejas light combat aircraft will "not be ready to go to war" any time before 2015.

The latest assessment of Tejas, which has now clocked close to 2,000 flights in its almost three-decade-long developmental saga, holds the lightweight fighter will be capable of firing guns, rockets and BVR (beyond visual range) missiles as well as air-to-air refuelling only by 2015 at the earliest, say defence ministry sources.

That is when the single-engine Tejas will become fully combat-ready after getting the final operational clearance (FOC). The review suggests that the fighter is again headed to miss a deadline in its convoluted tale that began in 1983 as an endeavour to replace the ageing MiG-21s.

So far, Tejas has achieved only initial operational clearance-I (IOC-I) to certify it's airworthiness. "The IOC-II for the fighter, which also includes integration of some weapons like laser-guided bombs, was pushed back to December 2012. But now, it will only be possible by July, 2013, or so after over 200 more sorties. FOC will come only two years after that," said a source.

India will eventually spend over Rs 25,000 crore in the entire Tejas programme, including the naval variant and trainer as well as the failed Kaveri engine, as earlier reported by TOI. But more than the cost, it's the time taken to develop a fully-tested, weapons-ready fighter that underlines how critical defence projects should not be run.

While it is true that developing a supersonic fly-by-wire fighter from scratch was never going to be easy, the entire project could have been managed much better. IAF, on its part, is supporting the fighter programme since it knows the country's need to have indigenous weapon systems is strategically critical.

Plans are underway to upgrade the Sulur airbase in Tamil Nadu, which will house the initial Tejas squadrons inducted in the IOC-II configuration, at a cost of Rs 524 crore. While the first 20 Tejas will be powered by the American GE-404 engines, the next six Mark-II squadrons (16-18 jets in each) will have the more powerful GE F-414 engines. The $822-million deal for 99 GE F-414 engines is likely to be inked soon, with additional engines being ordered at a later stage.

The number of fighter squadrons in IAF will further dip to 31 over the next three to four years with phasing out of the aging MiG variants, further impacting IAF's combat capabilities, before it slowly begins to pick up with new inductions. Projections show IAF will have the required 45 squadrons only by 2032.

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/article-view/release/136999/foc-for-india%E2%80%99s-tejas-fighter-slides-to-2015.html