Vervanging huidige F-16's, deel 5

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

Neem het theoretische geval dat de Britten daadwerkelijk de F35C zullen loslaten (waar rook is...of het is een proefballonetje om rook te creëren) en een keuze maken voor de F18E voor de nieuwe carrier(s)...

Zou het dan een punt van aandacht zijn voor de Klu (net als bij de Deense en Zwitsere luchtmachten) om de F18E block III of III toch nog eens op de kandidatenlijst te plaatsen?

Los van de infrastructuur aanpassing (want de F18E past immmers niet in de shelters... wat niets uit maakt voor de politiek want we worden immers nooit meer aangevallen op eigen bodem)

De F18E is immers wel een prima MR kist al zal deze in een dogfight het onderspit delven tegen de EF en de Rafale.

Kosten F18E volgens Wikipedia:

The flyaway cost can be meaningfully compared to another cost metric: the weapons system cost. The weapons system cost (often referred to as the procurement cost) is the total price of the aircraft. A good way of looking at the difference is the flyaway cost is the cost of making the aircraft, but the weapons system cost is the cost of buying the aircraft. Weapons systems costs may include ancillary equipment costs, one time non-recurring contract costs, and airframe, engine and avionics support costs. For example, the flyaway cost for the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet up to 2009 (for the 449 units built) was US$ 57.5 million per, but the weapons system cost was 39.8% higher, at US$ 80.4 million per unit. [4] Not surprisingly, advocates who want to minimize the costs of an aircraft will often report the "flyaway cost" as the purchase price.

[Elzenga]

''Like Australia, the armed forces of [Britain] are likely to continue to push for the most sophisticated equipment they can get, which in this case would be the JSF,'' the Australian Strategic Policy Institute's Andrew Davies told the Herald yesterday.

gek, ik zou toch echt voor het meest effectieve, werkbare en betrouwbare systeem gaan dat ik voor mijn centen kan kopen....in plaats van het meest geavanceerde. Prachtig al die technologie..op papier. Maar in de praktijk moet het gewoon werken...zo vaak mogelijk....en in stand te houden zijn met de (financiële) middelen die er beschikbaar zijn. Anders krijgen we zo meteen prachtige plaatjes als hier eerder geplaatst...maar is dat wel het dominante beeld...mooie toestellen die echter vooral op de grond staan.

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

JSF plane project in more flak

Dan Oakes
August 4, 2011 .

OFFICIALS in Britain's Defence Ministry are pushing to scrap their country's plans to buy a variant of the Joint Strike Fighter, reports from Britain say, potentially raising the cost for other customers such as Australia.

Media reports claim officials want the Royal Navy to buy older, less-capable F-18 jets, rather than pay higher prices for 138 JSF aircraft designed to be flown from aircraft carriers.

Australia has committed to buy 14 of the fighters so far and has indicated it will end up buying 100 of the planes for about $13 billion. But if nations such as Britain - which intends buying a lot of the planes - cut back, the cost for other countries could rise.

Advertisement: Story continues below

The reported scepticism within the Defence Ministry follows big spending cuts to Britain's defence budget forced by the global financial crisis.

Last year, the British Government scrapped plans to split its purchase between the vertical-take-off JSF model and the conventional model.

It concentrated instead on the latter, cheaper variant, a development the Australian Defence Department admitted at the time would have an effect - although minimal - on the cost of Australia's planes.

''Like Australia, the armed forces of [Britain] are likely to continue to push for the most sophisticated equipment they can get, which in this case would be the JSF,'' the Australian Strategic Policy Institute's Andrew Davies told the Herald yesterday.

''But Britain's financial position is causing them to have to look at other alternatives.''

On a visit to Washington last week, the Defence Minister, Stephen Smith, warned US budget cuts could affect the price of Australia's planes and canvassed the possibility of buying more Super Hornet fighters to plug any gap left by the JSF program's troubles.


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/national/jsf-plane-project-in-more-flak-20110803-1ibpi.html#ixzz1Tymsgiei

[Elzenga]

Verstandig dat de Britten naar alternatieven voor de F-35 kijken en daar blijkbaar intern ook voor wordt gelobbyd...ondanks alle mooie plaatjes die ik eerder plaatste...van een mooi maar peperduur en complex toestel....wat misschien in de basis nu redelijk functioneert en vliegt...maar waar nog bergen werk en problemen te verzetten zijn om het ook te laten doen wat het zou moeten en kunnen doen. Met kan dit uitsmeren richting de toekomst en zo de hoge kosten verdoezelen..maar dit blijkt geen succes-formule. Zeker niet in een tijd dat er toenemende vraag is naar gevechtsvliegtuigen.

Jammer dat de Britten ook de Gripen NG niet bekijken in de sea Gripen versie. Gewend als ze zijn aan compacte eenmotorige toestellen zouden ze zo een groter aantal toestellen kunnen meenemen op hun enkele operationele vliegdekschip...een flink samenwerkingsproject met andere Europese landen kunnen aangaan en ook Brazilië zo bij dit project kunnen betrekken..als andere landen die hun Harriers of lichtere gevechtsvliegtuigen willen vervangen. Bovendien stampt de Gripen af van het eigen Britse project ter vervanging van de Harrier..

Een stap met veel politieke waarde zou de aanschaf van de Rafale M zijn...passend in de intensivering van de samenwerking tussen Frankrijk en Groot-Brittannië. Dit zou ook zo nog maar eens een verrassende wending kunnen worden in dit dossier.

[Lynxian]

Misschien niet helemaal de juiste plek, maar aangezien er net zulke mooie plaatjes zijn gepost: nu de JSF een paar jaar achterloopt op de planning, het budget met een paar miljard is overschreden en de unit prijs hoger ligt dan van de F-22; kan dat ding nou eindelijk eens een fatsoenlijke bocht draaien en 't winnen van een 4e generatie jet in een dogfight of wat?

Er is besloten dat dat niet meer nodig is



(iemand F4?)

Hoe geruststellend. 

Ben ik een eikel als ik hoop dat die dingen bij de eerste dogfight bij de bosjes uit de lucht vallen (de piloten in veiligheid door hun schietstoel, natuurlijk) zodat al die idioten eens leren dat je air supremacy niet bereikt door stealth en een goede radar?

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

Bolstering Japan's Defenses with F-35s

By Drew Brown and Hidetoshi Azuma
August 2, 2011, 8:29 am
A A A


This December, the Japanese Air Self-Defense Force (JASDF) plans to announce which of the three competing aircraft will replace its antiquated F-4s, aircraft that were first purchased back in the late 1960s. In the running for the 45 or so fighters to be acquired are Boeing's F/A 18, the Eurofighter Typhoon, and Lockheed Martin's F-35—the stealthy "Joint Strike Fighter" currently in the final stages of development. Although either the F-18 or the Typhoon would be a substantial and needed upgrade for the Japanese air fleet, the acquisition of the F-35 would present an opportunity for Japan to acquire a transformational military capability, begin to address the growing imbalance in air power in the region as a result of China's own military modernization program, and to reaffirm alliance ties with the United States.



However, the current slash and burn budget environment in Washington has placed the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program squarely in the sights of those willing to balance the nation's books on the backs of the U.S. military. Senator John McCain, the ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, recently referred to the program as a "train wreck" and urged the Defense Department to consider other options if Lockheed Martin cannot control rising costs. Left unsaid was what other options exist, with the administration and Congress already having agreed to end procurement of the other, stealthy, fifth-generation fighter, the F-22, several hundred planes short of what the Air Force believed was necessary.

Of course, the good news is that, should Japan elect to acquire the F-35s, it would apply downward pressure on the cost per unit for both the U.S. military and the allied countries, such as Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom, who are participating in the program. Also of importance would be the interoperability of the JASDF with U.S. Air Forces based in Japan and the Pacific; the purchase of F-35s would lead to even closer strategic and tactical cooperation.

Because the Japanese people have renounced the threat or use of war as a means for settling international disputes in Article 9 of their Peace Constitution, the capabilities of the F-35 (it can serve in an air defense or a ground-attack role) that make it attractive to some allies is not a selling point to the Japanese, politically or publicly. But Japan's leaders and military have also gradually come to realize that "defending Japan" might require more than protecting Japan's home waters, air space, and the island itself. For example, in April 2010, the JASDF began operating KC767 cargo aircraft equipped with a midair refueling boom in its tail. While members of the JASDF will assure anyone who enquires that Japan does not endeavor to use the capability to project power, tankers plus stealthy F-35s provide Japan with a capability to meet threats further afield and, in the case of North Korea, an ability to preempt a North Korean missile attack.

The expansion of Japan's understanding of Article 9 will only occur through a gradual process of reinterpretation of constitutional restraints. The military bureaucracy is heavily colonized by civilians and its ethos is decision-making by consensus, ensuring this process is labored and incremental. But in a region whose balance of power is rapidly changing and where threats continue to grow, Japan must build flexibility into its range of military capabilities to ensure its own safety.

With the cost of recovery from this year's tsunami weighing heavily on Japanese policy makers, there will be understandably be arguments in favor of acquiring less capable planes as a way of managing a very difficult fiscal situation. That said, over the long term, the savings will count far less than bolstering the defense of Japan itself and deepening its alliances.

http://blog.american.com/2011/08/bolstering-japans-defenses-with-f-35s/

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

MoD urged to buy cheaper Navy jets

By Michael Powell
Published on Tuesday 2 August 2011 14:00

THE Ministry of Defence is facing internal pressure to pull out of buying F-35 Joint Strike Fighter jets for the Royal Navy's new aircraft carriers, The News can reveal.


A number of MoD officials are understood to be calling for Britain to withdraw from the under-fire Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) programme, which has faced criticism in America and Australia as costs run into hundreds of billions of pounds.

A 'Plan B' has emerged for the UK to equip HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales with a fleet of older, less-capable F-18 jets, rather than buying 138 state-of-the-art F-35 planes.

An MoD source said: 'F-35s will cost millions more than we thought and may not even be ready when we need them in 2020. F-18s already exist and will cost us peanuts, so why should we take the risk?'

Britain has already sunk £1.4bn into the US-led JSF programme since it began in 2002 and an MoD spokesman said the ministry was '100 per cent committed' to the F-35s.

But insiders say F-18s, which have been around since 1978, are a reliable, cheaper option as Britain attempts to plug a £38bn black hole in the defence budget.

'The argument is like saying: "I haven't got enough money to buy a Porsche 911 right now so I'll buy an Audi TT instead,'" said a source.

Since last year's defence cuts left the Royal Navy without its Harrier jump jets, three navy pilots have been out in America training with F-18s and are understood to be singing the aircraft's praises.

More navy pilots are set to go to the US ahead of the new carriers coming into service in Portsmouth in 2020.

At an estimated total cost exceeding £300bn, JSF is the most expensive military-industrial programme ever.

The F-35 jets built by global defence firm Lockheed Martin promise to do everything from stealth missions to aerial combat, with variants tailored to ground or sea-based operations. But costs have soared by more than 40 per cent from US estimates of $80m per plane in 2002 to $113m per jet today.

A 'risk management' programme is ongoing between the US Defense Department and Lockheed Martin to drive costs down amid criticism of the project, which was blasted as a 'train wreck' by former US presidential candidate John McCain.

Just last week, the Australian government – which is looking to buy 100 F-35 jets – said it may withdraw from JSF if it does not get on track.

However, Paul Livingston, the UK aero director of Lockheed Martin, told The News JSF has turned a corner.

He said: 'Last year was a bit of a shambles financially and we had some issues. But testing is going really well now and I'm confident we will come out of probation soon.'

He said JSF creates thousands of British jobs and the MoD should stick with F-35 as F-18s are becoming outdated.

He said: 'There are people within the MoD, particularly the navy, who have been out and flown on exchange programmes flying on F-18s who say they would like them instead but it is not something that stands the financial test or the test of time.

'Whilst we understand some people wanting to be financially conservative and think about F-18, it really is the right answer for a whole bunch of reasons, politically and financially, to have F-35.'

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/local/east-hampshire/mod_urged_to_buy_cheaper_navy_jets_1_2923801?commentspage=1#commentsSection

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

AUSTRALIAN AIR FORCE CHIEF BACKS LOCKHEED MARTIN JSF FIGHTER


Asia Pulse
August 2, 2011


Australian air force chief Air Marshal Geoff Brown is confident the new Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) will be the RAAF'S principal combat aircraft, despite well publicised delays and cost increases.

Air Marshal Brown said that at this stage the plan was for the RAAF to have an all-JSF combat fleet by 2020, although there did need to be options if things changed.

"JSF has had a pretty good year as far hitting its test milestones are concerned and it is tracking pretty much to plan at the moment," he told AAP.

Air Marshal Brown said US Admiral David Venlet, the Pentagon's JSF program manager, had done a good job at re-baselining the JSF program.

He said Admiral Venlet had created a very realistic delivery schedule which allowed for it to remain on track even if something did go wrong.

"I have got a lot more confidence in the schedule than I had ... before it was baselined," he said.

"I am still comfortable with where we are sitting at the moment."

Air Marshal Brown said the USAF was set to introduce its first JSFs into training and operational testing over the next couple of months.

"It's now 2011. We have still got a few years up our sleeve the moment," he said.

The RAAF will acquire up to 100 JSF aircraft in a deal worth some A$16 billion (US$17.49 billion), with the first due for delivery in 2014-15 and entry to operational service in 2018. Australia has so far contracted to buy an initial 14 aircraft.

Air Marshal Brown said no JSF would be in Australia until 2017-18, although the RAAF will take delivery earlier in the US for initial aircrew training.

He said initial operational capability - a squadron able to undertake operations - would be achieved around 2018.

"There'll be variables on that from here," he said.

Air Marshal Brown said aircraft production would accelerate once the low rate initial production phase was concluded.

"I think we will see the costs continue to drive down as we get more aircraft on that production line," he said.

Considerable development still remains, particularly in the difficult area of integrating all the various electronic systems.

Air Marshal Brown said the advanced AESA radar was performing well on aircraft while individual systems were working to specification.

"The issue now is to knit it all together and that gives you the full capability. That's always a challenge on any sort of aeroplane, whether it's a (Boeing) 787 or a fighter," he said.

(AAP)

Copyright 2011 Asia Pulse Pty LimitedAll Rights Reserved

Asia Pulse

[VandeWiel]

Misschien niet helemaal de juiste plek, maar aangezien er net zulke mooie plaatjes zijn gepost: nu de JSF een paar jaar achterloopt op de planning, het budget met een paar miljard is overschreden en de unit prijs hoger ligt dan van de F-22; kan dat ding nou eindelijk eens een fatsoenlijke bocht draaien en 't winnen van een 4e generatie jet in een dogfight of wat?

Er is besloten dat dat niet meer nodig is



(iemand F4?)

[VandeWiel]

De gebruikskosten van de EF zijn volgens de Britten:

Sending 4 Tornado GR4 bombers, 3 Europe Typhoon jet fighters and support aircraft costs ₤3.216 million daily. One hour of operation of Tornado plane costs ₤33,000, including fuel, maintenance and crew training. Typhoon costs ₤80,000 per hour. Italy's Defense Minister Ignazio la Russa announced that his country had reduced costs on participation in the operation in Libya from €142 million to €60 million).

By September 30, that total costs on the operation in Libya are expected to reach $1.1 billion.

http://en.rian.ru/international_affairs/20110802/165517054.html

Als je dit zo leest zou je als Britse belastingbetaler stevig moeten balen dat je niet ook wat goedkope F16's hebt die de klus in Libie prima klaren en maar een schijntje kosten vergeleken met de EF en Tornado.

[Lynxian]

Misschien niet helemaal de juiste plek, maar aangezien er net zulke mooie plaatjes zijn gepost: nu de JSF een paar jaar achterloopt op de planning, het budget met een paar miljard is overschreden en de unit prijs hoger ligt dan van de F-22; kan dat ding nou eindelijk eens een fatsoenlijke bocht draaien en 't winnen van een 4e generatie jet in een dogfight of wat?

[Elzenga]

en meer..
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lockheedmartin/with/6001425845/

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

De gebruikskosten van de EF zijn volgens de Britten:

Sending 4 Tornado GR4 bombers, 3 Europe Typhoon jet fighters and support aircraft costs ₤3.216 million daily. One hour of operation of Tornado plane costs ₤33,000, including fuel, maintenance and crew training. Typhoon costs ₤80,000 per hour. Italy's Defense Minister Ignazio la Russa announced that his country had reduced costs on participation in the operation in Libya from €142 million to €60 million).

By September 30, that total costs on the operation in Libya are expected to reach $1.1 billion.

http://en.rian.ru/international_affairs/20110802/165517054.html

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

Nelson concerned about RAAF jet fighters

August 2, 2011 - 7:04PM .
NetApp cloud solution allows you to deploy services quickly. Learn more

Former coalition defence minister Brendan Nelson says the biggest threat to the new Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) is that its financing might become hostage to US politics.

Dr Nelson said that risk topped technical challenges and potential delays to the multi-billion-dollar project.

He said many of the key technical issues had been resolved with the advanced Lockheed-Martin/Boeing F-22 Raptor, regarded as the world's most advanced combat aircraft.

Advertisement: Story continues below

"My concern was that it had the potential to be held hostage in the US Congress and US political systems in terms of financing for the program," he said.

Dr Nelson's comments appear in a new book, Air Force, by News Ltd defence correspondent Ian McPhedran, launched in Canberra on Tuesday by Defence chief Air Marshal Geoff Brown.

Dr Nelson is credited with near sole responsibility for the decision to acquire 24 Boeing Super Hornet aircraft to fill a looming capability gap between the retirement of the RAAF's ageing F-111 strike bombers in 2010 and the entry to service of the first JSF squadron in 2018.

The RAAF will acquire up to 100 JSF aircraft in a deal worth some $16 billion, with the first due for delivery in 2014-15 and entry to operational service in 2018. Australia has so far contracted to buy an initial 14 aircraft.

The project has faced strong criticism for delays and cost blowouts.

The US political system has been in the spotlight amid a standoff over lifting the debt ceiling. Defence Minister Stephen Smith, in Washington last week, warned of cuts in defence spending as the US tries to rein in its soaring budget deficit.

In the book, Dr Nelson said he faced a "conspiracy of optimism" within the defence organisation when he questioned the anticipated retirement date for the F-111 - crucial to any decision to acquire Super Hornets as a bridging capability.

Initially, he was told no later than mid-2012, and then 2013.

"I thought to myself, 'Hang on, there is a conspiracy of optimism at play here,'" he said.

"And I thought, 'Right, these guys are desperate to make absolutely sure that no one, no outsider, particularly no minister, is going to fiddle, start playing, with all the tapestry of the new air combat capability."

Dr Nelson said his decision to buy the Super Hornet gave Australia another five years to acquire JSF.

For each year of delaying the Joint Strike Fighter, Australia saved half a billion in 2007 dollars, so the nation bought time and leverage in terms of our bargaining, he said.

© 2011 AAP

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/nelson-concerned-about-raaf-jet-fighters-20110802-1i9n2.html

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

Mother of all weapon deals is set to get costlier

http://www.rediff.com/news/slide-show/slide-show-1-iaf-mmrca-fighter-jet-deal-set-to-get-costlier/20110802.htm