Go Back   DefenceTalk Forum - Military & Defense Forums > Global Defense & Military > Air Force & Aviation

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures
Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence


F-35 - International Participation

This is a discussion on F-35 - International Participation within the Air Force & Aviation forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; ...


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old September 18th, 2013   #61
Just a bloke
Major General
No Avatar
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,214
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vivendi View Post
Dutch to purchase 37 F-35 fighter planes - sources | Reuters

The Netherlands will get only 37 F-35 (including trainers).

How many will they use for training?

The numbers are disapointingly low, and it seems other parts of the Dutch defense forces are being hit even harder -- OPSSG perhaps you need to revisit some of "101" texts. It seems the Netherlands Air Force will be very limited in the future (but still very capable I am sure).

The good news is of course that they did go for the F-35 and not a cheaper alternative.
The Netherlands have included a 10% contingency reserve in their available 4.1B budget. 37 is the indicative planning number of F-35 aircraft they believe they can afford, not including this reserve, so once again Giovanni de Briganti has made a fool of himself.

If the F-35 proves cheaper than planned and/or if the 10% reserve is not expended in this project, than those funds will be put towards additional aircraft as explained by the Dutch Ministry of Defence. 410m would likely purchase 4-5 extra F-35 aircraft, which depending on the existing 2 SDD aircraft, means we could see as many as 45 F-35 aircraft in Dutch service in years to come.

What is not yet mentioned is whether the existing 2 SDD F-35's The Netherlands have already purchased (and received one, which will soon be flown by Dutch pilots I expect) are included in that 37 aircraft figure, given they have been purchased with earlier provided funds, or whether they are included in the 37 aircraft total.

There are a few idiots around the place who seem to think that the Dutch could have saved money by purchasing another fighter. The Dutch have made clear however that the budget expended on F-35 was the approved budget no matter what and the only things that might have changed, would be the type and numbers of new fighters acquired. The Netherlands wouldn't have saved a Euro Cent with any other fighter.

That budget is also not coming at the expense of any other capability. Cuts are being made in the Dutch military, but those cuts are being re-invested elsewhere. This project remains un-touched.

Edit: Of note and contrary to many "internet based" opinions, with the confirmation of the Dutch, only Denmark and Canada of the original partner nations have yet to order F-35...

Interesting, no?

Last edited by ADMk2; September 18th, 2013 at 10:23 AM.
ADMk2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 18th, 2013   #62
Defense Enthusiast
Captain
No Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 784
Threads:
More interest from outside the consortium. No mention so far of possible competition but commonality with it's security partners is a big plus for the F-35.

Belgium considers Lockheed F-35 to replace F-16s - Latest - New Straits Times

Belgium considers Lockheed F-35 to replace F-16s

WASHINGTON - U.S. government officials have briefed the Belgian government about the capabilities of the Lockheed Martin Corp F-35 fighter jet, as Brussels prepares to replace its aging fleet of 60 F-16s, a source familiar with the matter told Reuters.

The source, who was not authorized to speak publicly, said Belgium was considering buying 35 to 55 of the new radar-evading F-35 jets. No decisions are expected until late 2014 at the earliest...
colay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 19th, 2013   #63
Defense Aficionado
Major General
John Fedup's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,180
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADMk2 View Post
The Netherlands have included a 10% contingency reserve in their available 4.1B budget. 37 is the indicative planning number of F-35 aircraft they believe they can afford, not including this reserve, so once again Giovanni de Briganti has made a fool of himself.

If the F-35 proves cheaper than planned and/or if the 10% reserve is not expended in this project, than those funds will be put towards additional aircraft as explained by the Dutch Ministry of Defence. 410m would likely purchase 4-5 extra F-35 aircraft, which depending on the existing 2 SDD aircraft, means we could see as many as 45 F-35 aircraft in Dutch service in years to come.

What is not yet mentioned is whether the existing 2 SDD F-35's The Netherlands have already purchased (and received one, which will soon be flown by Dutch pilots I expect) are included in that 37 aircraft figure, given they have been purchased with earlier provided funds, or whether they are included in the 37 aircraft total.

There are a few idiots around the place who seem to think that the Dutch could have saved money by purchasing another fighter. The Dutch have made clear however that the budget expended on F-35 was the approved budget no matter what and the only things that might have changed, would be the type and numbers of new fighters acquired. The Netherlands wouldn't have saved a Euro Cent with any other fighter.

That budget is also not coming at the expense of any other capability. Cuts are being made in the Dutch military, but those cuts are being re-invested elsewhere. This project remains un-touched.

Edit: Of note and contrary to many "internet based" opinions, with the confirmation of the Dutch, only Denmark and Canada of the original partner nations have yet to order F-35...

Interesting, no?
I don't know about the outlook for the F-35 in Denmark but in Canada the failure of the Tories and especially DND to explain why this jet is needed leaves me to believe nothing will be purchased until after the next election in 2015. These players couldn't even explain all the different pricing models (capital, combined capital and support, operational costs etc). Worse still, everyone was throwing around different timeframes (20,30 and even 40 years). A simple comparison of a 30 year lifecycle cost for 60 Superhornets versus 60 F-35s (purchased at peek production) would show the F-35 to be only marginally more expensive. Superior performance and industrial benefits for Cdn parts suppliers could justify the difference. If the Liberals get the next mandate the F-35 is in trouble. The best hoped for outcome would be 30 F-35As but more likely it would be 50 SHs. Then again, Trudeau Jr. might opt for no fighters at all.
John Fedup is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 24th, 2013   #64
Defense Enthusiast
Captain
No Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 784
Threads:
South Korea Rejects F-15SE

In the end, pragmatism prevailed and South Korea realized that the Boeing jet did not satisfy their long-term security interests. This should open the way for the F-35 to pick up another order down the road.

AFP: S. Korea rejects Boeing bid for $7.7 bn fighter deal
S. Korea rejects Boeing bid for $7.7 bn fighter deal


SEOUL South Korea decided Tuesday against awarding a $7.7 billion jet fighter deal to Boeing Co. for 60 F-15 Silent Eagles, saying it would re-tender its largest ever defence contract.

The deal was aimed at replacing the air force's ageing fleet of F-4s and F-5s and had initially attracted bids from Boeing, US rival Lockheed Martin and the European aerospace consortium EADS.

Boeing, with its offer of 60 F-15 Silent Eagles, had ended up the sole eligible candidate after proposals from the other two came in over South Korea's stated budget, and the firm was expected to be named the winner on Tuesday.

But the state Defense Acquisition Programme Administration apparently decided the F-15 did not meet the air force's current requirements, especially in the light of the nuclear threat from North Korea.

"A majority of the (DAPA) committee members agreed to reject (the F-15) and restart the project," said Defense Ministry spokesman Kim Min-Seok.
colay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 24th, 2013   #65
Just a bloke
Major General
No Avatar
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,214
Threads:
Nice. Good to see SK announce that the F-35 was scored higher across the evaluation points then it's competitors.

Nice to see defence-aerospace try to spin this once again, arguing the ROKAF "doesn't understand stealth".

Some people...

ADMk2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 2nd, 2013   #66
Defense Enthusiast
Major
the road runner's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 884
Threads:
Just curious as to why Japan will get to produce parts for the JSF even tho it was not an International Participant in the original JSF Team?

Japan awards first contracts to local companies for F-35 JSF production :: Strategic Defence Intelligence

I was under the impression if you did not contribute $$$ to the project ,you would just purchase a finished JSF.

cheers
the road runner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 2nd, 2013   #67
Defense Enthusiast
Captain
SpudmanWP's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: United Socialist Cities of California
Posts: 667
Threads:
Each Partner nation has a set amount of work that it will do for the Program, as well as LM and P&W.

Parts for FMS sales are not guaranteed to goto Partner nations per the MOU but to remain price competitive they normally are. FMS countries that build parts for their F-35s are not allowed to build parts for Partner F-35s without the Partner's consent.

LM and P&W gave up some of their own guaranteed production cut to Japan to seal the deal. The Partner's production "offsets" were not affected.
SpudmanWP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 3rd, 2013   #68
Senior Member
Colonel
No Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,318
Threads:
One thing that confuses me is the balance of the work share benefits associated with the various partner nations, looking at Australia, Canada and Turkey for example, all Level 3 Partners.

The balance between three things: the money paid to be a L3 partner / the number of aircraft planned to be purchased / the industrial participation benefit, I find it a bit 'odd' looking at the published figures, for example (in $US):

* Australia committed $144m - 100 aircraft - $5.5b in possible benefit to industry
* Canada committed $160m - 65 aircraft - $10b in possible benefits to industry
* Turkey committed $195m - 100 aircraft - $12b in possible benefits to industry

(The figures on each partners $ commitment to the program is from Wiki and the $ benefits to industry are from LM's F35.com website).


Assuming my figures are correct and assuming the numbers of planned aircraft are eventually purchased by each of the three nations above, I find it very strange as to how the potential benefits to industry vary so wildly.

For example Australia and Turkey are planning to procured the same number of aircraft, Turkey committed $50m more than Australia, but the potential benefits to industry are more than double, why?

Canada paid $16m more than Australia, is planning to procure 35 less aircraft, but the industrial benefits to Canada are almost double that of Australia's, again, why?

I'd really appreciate it if someone can explain it me.
John Newman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 3rd, 2013   #69
Grumpy Old Man
General
gf0012-aust's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 17,997
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Newman View Post

Canada paid $16m more than Australia, is planning to procure 35 less aircraft, but the industrial benefits to Canada are almost double that of Australia's, again, why?

I'd really appreciate it if someone can explain it me.
Canadian industry jumped in early to seize opportunities. Who dares wins.

I went to an AIDN meeting in Victoria in 2002 where industry tried to tell Bronwyn Bishop that the Australian Govt should mandate workshare as a condition of purchase.

When you have broader industry thinking along those lines then you have to wonder how they were in business in the first place.

The aggressive and keen Australian companies that went in and negotiated ahead of Govt decisions scored large contracts. Who dares wins.

The pie is only so big.
________________
A corollary of Finagle's Law, similar to Occam's Razor, says:

"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity"
http://au.linkedin.com/pub/gary-fairlie/1/28a/2a2
http://cofda.wordpress.com/

gf a.k.a. ROBOPIMP T5C

Last edited by gf0012-aust; October 3rd, 2013 at 02:47 AM. Reason: date correction after checking personal docs
gf0012-aust is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 3rd, 2013   #70
Senior Member
Colonel
No Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,318
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by gf0012-aust View Post
Canadian industry jumped in early to seize opportunities. Who dares wins.

I went to an AIDN meeting in Victoria in 2002 where industry tried to tell Bronwyn Bishop that the Australian Govt should mandate workshare as a condition of purchase.

When you have broader industry thinking along those lines then you have to wonder how they were in business in the first place.

The aggressive and keen Australian companies that went in and negotiated ahead of Govt decisions scored large contracts. Who dares wins.

The pie is only so big.
Thanks for that, yes that does make sense.

So would I be correct to say, we are probably likely to get our guaranteed 'minimum' share of the work, and the others have no doubt get their minimums too, 'plus' some of the work that LM would have done, but was prepared to negotiate away?

Sort of like what Spudman said above about LM and P&W giving up some of their work share to Japanese industry to seal the deal with them.

Yes indeed, who dares wins!
John Newman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 3rd, 2013   #71
Defense Enthusiast
Captain
No Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 784
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpudmanWP View Post
Each Partner nation has a set amount of work that it will do for the Program, as well as LM and P&W.

Parts for FMS sales are not guaranteed to goto Partner nations per the MOU but to remain price competitive they normally are. FMS countries that build parts for their F-35s are not allowed to build parts for Partner F-35s without the Partner's consent.

LM and P&W gave up some of their own guaranteed production cut to Japan to seal the deal. The Partner's production "offsets" were not affected.

Interesting to note that right after Japan announced it would buy the F-35, high government officials warned that the US should stick to the bid price, seeming to imply a hard price ceiling. Now such concerns seem to have evaporated and the government is quite content on paying a premium in support of domestic industry.

Japan-made parts to push up price of F-35 fighter jets for ASDF - AJW by The Asahi Shimbun
colay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 17th, 2013   #72
Defense Enthusiast
Master Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: central obamastan
Posts: 304
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by colay View Post
Interesting to note that right after Japan announced it would buy the F-35, high government officials warned that the US should stick to the bid price, seeming to imply a hard price ceiling. Now such concerns seem to have evaporated and the government is quite content on paying a premium in support of domestic industry.

Japan-made parts to push up price of F-35 fighter jets for ASDF - AJW by The Asahi Shimbun
Guys, AUS-1 is on the line in FT. Worth, they are in the process of "mating" the fuse and center section, mods if someone has already posted this, feel free to edit or??, I would love to see someone post a link, and share your thoughts, I am quite excited and in large part thanks to you gentlemen have finally come to appreciate our little Thunder Hogge II as quite an airplane in its own right, and a very strategic "piece" of the puzzle, I am also excited that for your investment in the F-35, you should be seeing some economic benefit as well from your strategic partnership. cheers brat
Air Force Brat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 17th, 2013   #73
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
King Wally's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 216
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Air Force Brat View Post
Guys, AUS-1 is on the line in FT. Worth, they are in the process of "mating" the fuse and center section, mods if someone has already posted this, feel free to edit or??, I would love to see someone post a link, and share your thoughts, I am quite excited and in large part thanks to you gentlemen have finally come to appreciate our little Thunder Hogge II as quite an airplane in its own right, and a very strategic "piece" of the puzzle, I am also excited that for your investment in the F-35, you should be seeing some economic benefit as well from your strategic partnership. cheers brat
Thanks Brat! I was excited to see this the other day as well.

https://www.f35.com/news/detail/firs...-in-fort-worth
^ Story link as requested

As an Australian It's quite exciting to see, delivery next year I heard although these 2 F-35's will stay in the states for testing and training I believe.

Next step for the RAAF will be to order the next batch of 12. Our previous gov deferred this decision and even went onto announce plans to order 12 Growlers as something of a capability gap fix. With a election and change of government here though these things may evolve soon. It wouldn't surprise me for example if the Growler idea got canned and the 12 F-35's got organised and actioned sooner. Maybe someone here could enlighten me about where all this is sitting contract wise?
King Wally is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 18th, 2013   #74
Defense Enthusiast
Master Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: central obamastan
Posts: 304
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by King Wally View Post
Thanks Brat! I was excited to see this the other day as well.

https://www.f35.com/news/detail/firs...-in-fort-worth
^ Story link as requested

As an Australian It's quite exciting to see, delivery next year I heard although these 2 F-35's will stay in the states for testing and training I believe.

Next step for the RAAF will be to order the next batch of 12. Our previous gov deferred this decision and even went onto announce plans to order 12 Growlers as something of a capability gap fix. With a election and change of government here though these things may evolve soon. It wouldn't surprise me for example if the Growler idea got canned and the 12 F-35's got organised and actioned sooner. Maybe someone here could enlighten me about where all this is sitting contract wise?
I agree Wally that the Growlers, as capable as they are, would be nearly as expensive as the F-35s, and not nearly the game changer, it certainly didn't take the South Koreans very long to ash-can the F-15SE, when the bean counters tried to force the issue, with the helmet finally looking good, and the alternate canceled, I would say the F-35 situation has vastly improved in the last two years. I believe you are right about the first two going to the schoolhouse at Egland AFB, but if I'm not mistaken, I think some of your instructors have already been flying the A model???? Anyway, we are getting maintainers and aircrews up to speed, and with the Navy activating VMA-101 for the Cs, all of the US operators are gearing up. I am certainly glad that your first bird looks to be coming along, and the partners who are all in-- are getting a little well deserved consideration, it might not have happened??? without the very faithfull push of the Australian Partners and Subcontractors. Thank-you all. brat
Air Force Brat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 8th, 2013   #75
Grumpy Old Man
General
gf0012-aust's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 17,997
Threads:
Dutch Parliament has cleared a JSF purchase - 37 platforms
________________
A corollary of Finagle's Law, similar to Occam's Razor, says:

"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity"
http://au.linkedin.com/pub/gary-fairlie/1/28a/2a2
http://cofda.wordpress.com/

gf a.k.a. ROBOPIMP T5C
gf0012-aust is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:39 AM.