F-35 Program - General Discussion
- Thread starter OPSSG
- Start date
documentation related to the source code is critical if you have to retro fit other functions down the track
I was thinking from the sscurity perspective in cases where a piece of kit may falll into the wrong hands.
which is why source code is highly protected....
depends on how the contract has been established as to how final code is compiled etc....
the road runner
Active Member
Most people see the JSF as just a plane ,that drops bombs and shoots missiles!
And that is where the whole JSF debate is...You never hear the debate talk about Electronic warfare or Electronic Attack or ISR or the sensors that harvest all that info in the battlespace and share it with other assets to give a gods eye view on whats going on...
Its a plane that does not turn ....can not carry enough weapons and is to slow :daz
Merry Christmas fellow forumites !
Thanks. The reason I asked was because I read an article years back about the Chinese claiming to have finally hacked the source code on the Su-27.
if you can build it you can break it - its an immutable fact on any secured artifact
its an ongoing battle of protect and breach
and that is really what starts to separate the serious analysis from the biggles club who can only look at JSF through the prism of speed, traditional agility, max loadout etc..... or worse carry on about unit price when they clearly have no concept of the staged delivery cycle model. again, for the last 8 years RAAFs JSF price has never gone beyond $86m per platform - and even that's with contingency factored in.
I have to say that when the anti-JSF angry debate only revolves around the issues raised in the prev sentence then I'm pretty sure that its parroting someone elses hysteria and its tripped a regurgitation of some pretty silly unsupported technical commentary and considered analysis has been parked in the shed.
geebuz, at the C5-ISR level alone they are putting some dedicated AEW ISR assets in some air forces to shame.
every JSF in the sky is an airborne bearer - something that the F-22 can't do.
MARKMILES77
Active Member
Lots of people here endlessly proclaim how great, fantastic, super duper, whatever the JSF is.
I don't disagree.
I also don't disagree that it is the best option for the USA and it's Allies.
I hope the program continues.
At the moment that is not the point.
The point is, with Trump entering the White House, is that enough to keep the JSF program in it's current form or even alive?
I get the argument that the JSF is so awesome that all you need to do is point out it's "awesomeness" and Trump is a certainty to jump on board.
I am not certain that that is the case.
In fact, if you look at the evidence, Trump has repeatedly, in interviews, Tweets etc, slammed the program and threatened to terminate it.
And he HAS had briefings on it. And he is still highly critical.
I don't disagree.
I also don't disagree that it is the best option for the USA and it's Allies.
I hope the program continues.
At the moment that is not the point.
The point is, with Trump entering the White House, is that enough to keep the JSF program in it's current form or even alive?
I get the argument that the JSF is so awesome that all you need to do is point out it's "awesomeness" and Trump is a certainty to jump on board.
I am not certain that that is the case.
In fact, if you look at the evidence, Trump has repeatedly, in interviews, Tweets etc, slammed the program and threatened to terminate it.
And he HAS had briefings on it. And he is still highly critical.
Like he said, it's a dance. Though it's turning out to be an exercise in interpretive dance with everyone trying to makes sense of his statements and trying to keep up with him... sorta like this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJFD5iyz2ag
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJFD5iyz2ag
He hasn't had full briefings on it - and the ones that count will be when he some of his senior ex USMC (especially as they are ahead of the training curve), ex USN and ex USAF multi stars in the same room
what he's received are covering briefs - NOT the same
I can only hope he actually attends said briefings. His cavalier approach to daily intelligence briefs does not inspire confidence. But maybe he will see the former as an opportunity to show off his negotiation skills and make time cor them.
there's increasing concern coming out of the cyber and INT shops about whats seen as an executive abrogation of responsibility.
one can but hope that the institution is robust enough to check aberrant and what is increasingly potentially cavalier behaviour
sooner or later colour and movement has to be replaced by attention to detail - if it doesn't then we're all in for a rough ride
Agreed. I don't see how Americans, including those who voted for him, will be sleeping more comfortably at night should he continue this behavior once he takes office. And when the inevitable crisis/catastrophe transpires and lives are lost, his excuses will ring hollow.
I came across this article link in another forum. If Trump's teams go into this type of detail in all transition areas, I would not be too concerned. It tends to show Trump is at least hiring people wth an eye for detail... (off topic, but illustrative.)
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/12/10/the-doe-vs-ugly-reality/
I'm in a private distrib group that includes some of those Wash Post editors.... I'd say that they have pretty solid concerns
There is a web site which I tend to recall more than others as it is agnostic, and all the contributors are ex spooks and/or ex INT. They've worked across party divides, so IMO demonstrated multi-partisanship. A number of analysts I know have it tagged as a regular page 1st thing in the morning or at the start of their shifts.
worth looking at as its ties in with quiet concerns that have been articulated well before the election turned into a social football
https://www.thecipherbrief.com/?utm...il&utm_term=0_02cbee778d-ec78ec855d-122474249
anyway, any other traffic round this thats not specific to JSF should really end up elsewhere in another thread - and I'm guilty of inadvertently hijacking so need to take my own advice
Trackmaster
Member
Robert Gottliebsen is at it again in the Australian. His view..the F35 is no good, Air Power Australia are the experts and they have been briefing Trump and the aircraft is a lemon. His solution. .scrap the program. .restart the F22 line and stuff it with F35 technology!Great link GF. Now back to the F-35.
His logic is hard to understand. Take an aircraft developed more than 30 years ago and refit it with technology from and aircraft you consider a lemon. You know it makes sense! ?
John Newman
The Bunker Group
Yes, I always thought Gottliebsen was a tosser, this proves it:
Nocookies | The Australian
Surprisingly I was able to read the article without a login (if the firewall kicks in, here is the article):
Lockheed Martin’s F-35 Joint Strike Fighter project is now in big trouble.
And the vast army of Australia’s Joint Strike Fighter contractors are also in jeopardy because our government, led by Defence Industry Minister Christopher Pyne, has not woken up to what it means to have Donald Trump as US President.
And so, in the lead-up to Christmas, Trump issued a very carefully prepared tweet: “Based on the tremendous cost and cost overruns of the Lockheed Martin F-35 (JSF), I have asked Boeing to price-out a comparable F/A-18 Super Hornet!”
Through that tweet Trump was making three signals:
• That he wants to end the cosy relationship between Pentagon equipment officials and suppliers, like Lockheed Martin, that has seen Joint Strike Fighter half-truths plague the project in the US and Australia. Enlisting Boeing brings competition.
• Highlight the true cost horror of the Joint Strike Fighter (about a sevenfold increase) and make that cost explosion known in the US and in countries like Australia.
• Prepare the US and Joint Strike Fighter buyers, like Australia, to accept that because of the Joint Strike Fighter cost and the failure of the plane to go anywhere near matching its rivals, a complete shutdown of the project should be considered.
Trump has had the JSF in his sights since last year but on *December 12 the sheer *absurdity of what has been going on with the Joint Strike Fighter was dramatically brought home to the Trump team.
On that day, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, his Defence Minister Avigdor *Lieberman and hundreds of VIPs *assembled at Nevatim air base in southern Israel to watch the *arrival of the Joint Strike Fighter.
It was scheduled to arrive at 2.30pm after taking an incredible six days to fly from Texas to Israel. But despite the fact that the JSF had been given those six long days to make the journey the skies over Israel were empty — the strike fighter was late.
The Lockheed Martin public relations machine raced into *action and began offering up excuses — none of which made any sense.
The disgruntled Israeli VIPs eventually left but were assembled back later that evening when *the Joint Strike Fighter *finally arrived. Israel actually knows the Joint Strike Fighter is not up to standard as a fighter so it will use the aircraft for reconnaissance.
But the Israelis are smart — they’re getting the plane for a *peppercorn to help convince countries like Australia to stay in as full-price buyers.
Trump and his people are much closer to Israel than Barack Obama and received the six-day journey and late arrival news loud and clear. Almost certainly that event played a role in Trump *taking the next step before gaining office.
In asking whether Boeing can take over the Joint Strike Fighter from Lockheed, Trump, will of course know that it is unlikely. And he also knows that the F/A-18 Hornets are not fifth-generation fighters so at the very best are a stopgap measure.
Trump’s strategy is all about dismantling the current US *military and industrial defence machine that has been corrupted by power. Trump has discovered that it is a swamp that badly needs draining.
Among the people advising the Trump team are the Canadians who rejected the Joint Strike Fighter and one of the world’s foremost air defence analytics groups — Air Power Australia — founded by Peter Goon and Carlo Kopp.
It is Air Power that has been helping me unveil all the problems that have plagued the Joint Strike Fighter for the past decade. *Accordingly last year I made a submission to the Joint Strike Fighter inquiry, standing committee on foreign affairs, defence and trade.
This submission sets out what any responsible defence minister or defence industry minster should now be working towards given that Trump is going to change the game (I wrote the *submission well before I had any idea that Trump would be the next president).
Nothing illustrates the Joint Strike Fighter rubbish that has plagued the project more than the statements about the cost of the aircraft.
Our gullible politicians were originally told that the Joint Strike Fighter would cost $US40 million ($55.7m) per aircraft. At the time the estimate was obviously flawed.
Now our gullible politicians are being told that each Joint Strike Fighter would cost $US90m per *aircraft. While it is more than *double the first estimate it is just as silly. Both these estimates ignore the total cost of making the Joint Strike Fighter battle ready.
Treasury discovered real outlays would be much bigger than what was being told to the politicians and are now going for a total cost of about $US190m per aircraft in the forward estimates. But that’s still way off the mark. The Trump Joint Strike Fighter cost estimates appear be above $US290m per aircraft and rising — seven times the original floored estimates. We’ve ordered 72 aircraft so the bill is about $300bn but likely to be much higher.
The same sort of money games are being played in the US where monumental figures are coming up. Trump’s nomination of the “no nonsense” General James Mattis as Secretary of Defence means the days of playing games are over.
The Mattis appointment gave Michael Gilmore, the chief Joint Strike Fighter tester, the courage to warn that Pentagon officials have been preparing misleading assessments of progress of the Joint Strike Fighter, Australia’s defence people are too deep in the swamp to help our defence and defence industry ministers wake up to the fact that the days of *Pentagon-inspired half truths ended with the appointment of Mattis.
At the moment there is an option that should save our defence supply industry. But the option will not exist for long. To appreciate the option we must start with Tony Abbott’s statement in 2014 that Australia was buying the Joint Strike Fighter to maintain air superiority in the region.
The then prime minister honestly *believed he was telling the truth but was quickly shown to be talking complete rubbish when it was revealed that the commander of American Air Combat Command, General Mike Hostage, had declared: “The F-35 is not built as an air superiority platform. It needs the F-22”.
The Chinese and Russians base their new aircraft on the F-22 — that’s the aircraft that delivers clout. The Joint Strike Fighter is not worth worrying about in *Russian and Chinese eyes. As part of the cosy arrangement between the Pentagon and Lockheed, the US stopped making F-22s.
Production of the F-22 needs to be restarted and the incredible software that had been developed for the Joint Strike Fighter needs to be incorporated in the ageing F-22.
If we can play a role in that transformation our industry will not be destroyed. But if we keep up the current charade then I fear two ministerial careers will be over because they will be correctly blamed for the industry carnage if Trump just stops the Joint Strike Fighter.
Nocookies | The Australian
Surprisingly I was able to read the article without a login (if the firewall kicks in, here is the article):
Lockheed Martin’s F-35 Joint Strike Fighter project is now in big trouble.
And the vast army of Australia’s Joint Strike Fighter contractors are also in jeopardy because our government, led by Defence Industry Minister Christopher Pyne, has not woken up to what it means to have Donald Trump as US President.
And so, in the lead-up to Christmas, Trump issued a very carefully prepared tweet: “Based on the tremendous cost and cost overruns of the Lockheed Martin F-35 (JSF), I have asked Boeing to price-out a comparable F/A-18 Super Hornet!”
Through that tweet Trump was making three signals:
• That he wants to end the cosy relationship between Pentagon equipment officials and suppliers, like Lockheed Martin, that has seen Joint Strike Fighter half-truths plague the project in the US and Australia. Enlisting Boeing brings competition.
• Highlight the true cost horror of the Joint Strike Fighter (about a sevenfold increase) and make that cost explosion known in the US and in countries like Australia.
• Prepare the US and Joint Strike Fighter buyers, like Australia, to accept that because of the Joint Strike Fighter cost and the failure of the plane to go anywhere near matching its rivals, a complete shutdown of the project should be considered.
Trump has had the JSF in his sights since last year but on *December 12 the sheer *absurdity of what has been going on with the Joint Strike Fighter was dramatically brought home to the Trump team.
On that day, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, his Defence Minister Avigdor *Lieberman and hundreds of VIPs *assembled at Nevatim air base in southern Israel to watch the *arrival of the Joint Strike Fighter.
It was scheduled to arrive at 2.30pm after taking an incredible six days to fly from Texas to Israel. But despite the fact that the JSF had been given those six long days to make the journey the skies over Israel were empty — the strike fighter was late.
The Lockheed Martin public relations machine raced into *action and began offering up excuses — none of which made any sense.
The disgruntled Israeli VIPs eventually left but were assembled back later that evening when *the Joint Strike Fighter *finally arrived. Israel actually knows the Joint Strike Fighter is not up to standard as a fighter so it will use the aircraft for reconnaissance.
But the Israelis are smart — they’re getting the plane for a *peppercorn to help convince countries like Australia to stay in as full-price buyers.
Trump and his people are much closer to Israel than Barack Obama and received the six-day journey and late arrival news loud and clear. Almost certainly that event played a role in Trump *taking the next step before gaining office.
In asking whether Boeing can take over the Joint Strike Fighter from Lockheed, Trump, will of course know that it is unlikely. And he also knows that the F/A-18 Hornets are not fifth-generation fighters so at the very best are a stopgap measure.
Trump’s strategy is all about dismantling the current US *military and industrial defence machine that has been corrupted by power. Trump has discovered that it is a swamp that badly needs draining.
Among the people advising the Trump team are the Canadians who rejected the Joint Strike Fighter and one of the world’s foremost air defence analytics groups — Air Power Australia — founded by Peter Goon and Carlo Kopp.
It is Air Power that has been helping me unveil all the problems that have plagued the Joint Strike Fighter for the past decade. *Accordingly last year I made a submission to the Joint Strike Fighter inquiry, standing committee on foreign affairs, defence and trade.
This submission sets out what any responsible defence minister or defence industry minster should now be working towards given that Trump is going to change the game (I wrote the *submission well before I had any idea that Trump would be the next president).
Nothing illustrates the Joint Strike Fighter rubbish that has plagued the project more than the statements about the cost of the aircraft.
Our gullible politicians were originally told that the Joint Strike Fighter would cost $US40 million ($55.7m) per aircraft. At the time the estimate was obviously flawed.
Now our gullible politicians are being told that each Joint Strike Fighter would cost $US90m per *aircraft. While it is more than *double the first estimate it is just as silly. Both these estimates ignore the total cost of making the Joint Strike Fighter battle ready.
Treasury discovered real outlays would be much bigger than what was being told to the politicians and are now going for a total cost of about $US190m per aircraft in the forward estimates. But that’s still way off the mark. The Trump Joint Strike Fighter cost estimates appear be above $US290m per aircraft and rising — seven times the original floored estimates. We’ve ordered 72 aircraft so the bill is about $300bn but likely to be much higher.
The same sort of money games are being played in the US where monumental figures are coming up. Trump’s nomination of the “no nonsense” General James Mattis as Secretary of Defence means the days of playing games are over.
The Mattis appointment gave Michael Gilmore, the chief Joint Strike Fighter tester, the courage to warn that Pentagon officials have been preparing misleading assessments of progress of the Joint Strike Fighter, Australia’s defence people are too deep in the swamp to help our defence and defence industry ministers wake up to the fact that the days of *Pentagon-inspired half truths ended with the appointment of Mattis.
At the moment there is an option that should save our defence supply industry. But the option will not exist for long. To appreciate the option we must start with Tony Abbott’s statement in 2014 that Australia was buying the Joint Strike Fighter to maintain air superiority in the region.
The then prime minister honestly *believed he was telling the truth but was quickly shown to be talking complete rubbish when it was revealed that the commander of American Air Combat Command, General Mike Hostage, had declared: “The F-35 is not built as an air superiority platform. It needs the F-22”.
The Chinese and Russians base their new aircraft on the F-22 — that’s the aircraft that delivers clout. The Joint Strike Fighter is not worth worrying about in *Russian and Chinese eyes. As part of the cosy arrangement between the Pentagon and Lockheed, the US stopped making F-22s.
Production of the F-22 needs to be restarted and the incredible software that had been developed for the Joint Strike Fighter needs to be incorporated in the ageing F-22.
If we can play a role in that transformation our industry will not be destroyed. But if we keep up the current charade then I fear two ministerial careers will be over because they will be correctly blamed for the industry carnage if Trump just stops the Joint Strike Fighter.
good grief, any goodwill I had generated over the xmas break was shattered by reading that op-ed
what a tosser - not hard to see who has been feeding him
those blokes need to get a life