F-35 Program - General Discussion

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Well, pollies being pollies, veracity needs to be bent at times, especially with large defence acquisitions that usually aren’t popular with the electorates. Once completed, a slow leak of reality is manageable.

A F-16 looks like a bargain now but in next decade they won’t be viable in contested airspace against 5th Gen let alone 6th Gen which will probably arrive in 20 years or less.
 

John Newman

The Bunker Group

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Defense-aerospace are long term, well known F-35 haters.

Over the years they’ve written many stories with their anti F-35 twist added.
I guess Giovanni got a loan from some anti F-35 group to restart his website. Hadn’t realized until today the site is active again.
 

StingrayOZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
Over the years they’ve written many stories with their anti F-35 twist added.
Yes they are active again.

Looks like he is surprised that "fly away costs" are different from actual operating costs.

However, the Finnish budget does seem a bit thin and ambitious. 64 F-35A's for $12.5b seems like an absolute steal if its doable.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Yes they are active again.

Looks like he is surprised that "fly away costs" are different from actual operating costs.

However, the Finnish budget does seem a bit thin and ambitious. 64 F-35A's for $12.5b seems like an absolute steal if its doable.
If they're getting them for that I want some of that action.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
I guess Giovanni got a loan from some anti F-35 group to restart his website. Hadn’t realized until today the site is active again.
Looks as if it's "pay for almost everything" now - 299 euros for an individual subscription. I thought he was good at finding interesting news & if you ignored the opinions the site was worth looking at for that, but certainly not worth £250 a year!
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Looks as if it's "pay for almost everything" now - 299 euros for an individual subscription. I thought he was good at finding interesting news & if you ignored the opinions the site was worth looking at for that, but certainly not worth £250 a year!
Agree there was some decent content at times but at £250 a year, that’s like hearing a starting pistol, run!
 

Boagrius

Well-Known Member
There are definitely cheaper ways to be misinformed about the F35. IIRC APA's website is still up, and quite free to use.
 

StingrayOZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
There are definitely cheaper ways to be misinformed about the F35. IIRC APA's website is still up, and quite free to use.
Hasn't been updated for quite a while now. I think they have lost the will the fight. Last updates were ~2016 I think..
Obviously in an Australian context, there is no point of fighting the F-35 acquisition, they are here, delivered, operational.

The greatest threat to F-35's acquisitions now are from unmanned platforms. But IMO I see those as more complimentary than replacement.
 

Boagrius

Well-Known Member
Hasn't been updated for quite a while now. I think they have lost the will the fight. Last updates were ~2016 I think..
Obviously in an Australian context, there is no point of fighting the F-35 acquisition, they are here, delivered, operational.

The greatest threat to F-35's acquisitions now are from unmanned platforms. But IMO I see those as more complimentary than replacement.
I think they have re-branded via the Best Fighter For Australia Facebook page. Agree that it's all fairly meaningless now - their favourite hobby horse (the F22) was fielded in penny packets, is out of production and staring down the barrel of replacement, while the RAAF's F35 fleet is a fait accompli. All that remains for them to run on is concentrated bitterness ;-p
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
The Plan to Raise, Train & Sustain not on track

1. By 2036 the Pentagon services buying the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) face nearly USD6 billion in sustainment cost overruns that they project as unaffordable because of increasing sustainment expenditures.

Q: Why do you think Singapore delayed buying the F-35B for so long (and that the contract signed is limited to 4 F-35Bs with an option for 8 more)?

I would speculate the in 2026, Singapore is likely to receive block 4.2 or 4.3 aircraft, when the 1st four are delivered.
2. Affordability concerns are a constant for Singapore, as it affects the total fighter fleet size we can afford. The 2020 JPO estimate of the F-35A sustainment cost per tail per year in steady state is USD7.8 million, up from the USD7.1 million cost estimate in 2018. The F-35A affordability constraint for sustainment cost per tail per year is USD4.1 million, representing a gap of USD3.7 million between projected cost and affordability constraint. THAT IS BAD news from a sustainment perspective. USAF officials told the GAO "[its] only available remaining options ... are to reduce the total number of F-35A aircraft they plan to purchase, or to reduce the aircraft’s planned flying hours."

3. House Armed Services Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., unveiled his “chairman’s mark” of the FY22 National Defense Authorization Act, which included provisions that would pose affordability constraints on how many F-35s the military can buy or maintain at a time. If the military does not meet the affordability targets for “cost per tail per year” — which measures the average price of operating, maintaining and upgrading a single aircraft — the services will not be able to procure the number of F-35s planned as part of the program of record.

4. A Lockheed Martin video on the Electro-Optical Targeting System (EOTS) for the F-35. They are trying to keep taffordable, and high-performance by working with the US Navy maintenance depot at Jacksonville, Florida.
 
Last edited:

SolarWind

Active Member
OPSSG, please let me ask you if these cost overruns can be attributed to inflation, unexpected technical issues, or poor planning. I know that US lawmakers often do not take into consideration inflation for long term projects, and defense budgets have to be created and passed every year anyway. So is the overrun rather an accounting planning problem that may have not taken inflation into consideration or a real problem?
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
The CPFH has been an issue along with the ALIS fiasco. The planned software upgrade development costs have not been realistic. This is not only applicable to the military but just about every sector. If the 2450 jet fleet costs too much to sustain then what size fleet be will be the big question. Smaller fleet gives a reduced sustainment budget but the acquisition cost goes up if only 1000-1500 jets are ordered, vicious circle.
 

SolarWind

Active Member
Fleet size would not affect total software development costs without affecting the software itself. Software cost overruns are very common in general and not a reason for concern on such an important project.
 
Last edited:

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Fleet size would not affect total software development costs without affecting the software itself. Software cost overruns are very common in general and not a reason for concern on such an important project.
I would be very surprised if LM would sell 1000 software upgrades at the same price as 2000. but perhaps the development price is independent of the number of installs, a rarity in the software vendor universe.
 

SolarWind

Active Member
I am not familiar with who the IP owner is. Ultimately, we are talking about different things, as price per unit vs total development cost.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
I am not familiar with who the IP owner is. Ultimately, we are talking about different things, as price per unit vs total development cost.
True, at the end of day, someone at LM had to cost the development out and decide on a price which would be the same no matter what the number of jets is. Spending 5 billion upgrading 2000 jets looks better than 5 billion on 1000 jets, the electorate likes the appearance of value for money.
 
Top