- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
First F-35 Thread of 2017
Posted on 1/1/17 at 4:01 am
Posted on 1/1/17 at 4:01 am
I'm starting this because I think the plane will become an even bigger topic in 2017. This is meant to be reality focused, not political.
Due to the lackluster development of the plane and the gross costs, I think Trump will just about refuse to take delivery of additional units. He'll have the authority to do this due to contract violations because the govt has allowed standards to be re-written and hand-waved time after time with this plane. The govt does have the right to say 'ok enough is enough'.
I think this has the potential to just about destroy Lockheed as they will have to honor field service requirements, warranty, and parts manufacturing for units already delivered; as well as the careers of many generals and top DoD civilians.
It's the biggest acquisition project in the history of the DoD and because it's such a disaster I think it will end up changing the nature of that process forever. I also wonder if it may cause ripple effects in the branches themselves. It's ironic they named it Lightning. It's certainly a lightning rod for controversy.
Just curious if others think this thing is going to get really heated in 2017 and create some large shifts in acquisitions and DoD overall.
Due to the lackluster development of the plane and the gross costs, I think Trump will just about refuse to take delivery of additional units. He'll have the authority to do this due to contract violations because the govt has allowed standards to be re-written and hand-waved time after time with this plane. The govt does have the right to say 'ok enough is enough'.
I think this has the potential to just about destroy Lockheed as they will have to honor field service requirements, warranty, and parts manufacturing for units already delivered; as well as the careers of many generals and top DoD civilians.
It's the biggest acquisition project in the history of the DoD and because it's such a disaster I think it will end up changing the nature of that process forever. I also wonder if it may cause ripple effects in the branches themselves. It's ironic they named it Lightning. It's certainly a lightning rod for controversy.
Just curious if others think this thing is going to get really heated in 2017 and create some large shifts in acquisitions and DoD overall.
17
Posted on 1/1/17 at 4:06 am to UF
Trump already has Boeing pricing out F-18s. I have no doubt Boeing will come out on top. While there are a few hundred on order/planned from other countries, we have just over 2000 planned for the US alone. If they end up being dropped for Boeing, it could sink the whole project.
Now, upgrading the F-18s to stealth capability could cost as much as if not more than the F-35 program, and Obama's defense dept just sank 400m more dollars into it yesterday. I'm not sure what Trump's end game is, but its clear this whole project was such a failure that we can't crawl out of.
Now, upgrading the F-18s to stealth capability could cost as much as if not more than the F-35 program, and Obama's defense dept just sank 400m more dollars into it yesterday. I'm not sure what Trump's end game is, but its clear this whole project was such a failure that we can't crawl out of.
Posted on 1/1/17 at 4:21 am to UF
I opened this thread b/c thought for sure is was a joke or sarcasm...
but damn, y'all are serious up in here
but damn, y'all are serious up in here
Posted on 1/1/17 at 5:59 am to UF
Not only the F18, but also looking into modernizing the F15 as well... This is do two things. One make our older platforms viable for years to come, and two drive the price of the F35 down significantly. Benefits the military and more importantly the tax payers.
Problem that a lot of people don't realize is that airframes have life exspcectancy to them. To "rebuild" the airframes while at the same time modernize them may be cost prohibitive. Why put 30-40 million into something that is still old, still not stealth? While yes it is cheaper it is still a used plane. If Trump can get the price down to 75-80 million on a brand new, fully stealth F35 it's a no brainier to go with the F35.
The interesting side of things is the Raptor!! Rumors stirring around they are already looking into figuring out the cost to start the production line back up on it with the modern avionics of the F35, but also into adapting the heavier duty landing gear, flight arrest, foldable wings for navy use. The navy has always required/wanted the dual engine redundancy. The F35 does not provide that. Furthermore you can thank the Marine Corp for many of the cost over runs with the F35.
ETA: Nothing against the Leathernecks in the least!!! Much respect for all of them. Have many friends and family that are and always will be marines!!!
Problem that a lot of people don't realize is that airframes have life exspcectancy to them. To "rebuild" the airframes while at the same time modernize them may be cost prohibitive. Why put 30-40 million into something that is still old, still not stealth? While yes it is cheaper it is still a used plane. If Trump can get the price down to 75-80 million on a brand new, fully stealth F35 it's a no brainier to go with the F35.
The interesting side of things is the Raptor!! Rumors stirring around they are already looking into figuring out the cost to start the production line back up on it with the modern avionics of the F35, but also into adapting the heavier duty landing gear, flight arrest, foldable wings for navy use. The navy has always required/wanted the dual engine redundancy. The F35 does not provide that. Furthermore you can thank the Marine Corp for many of the cost over runs with the F35.
ETA: Nothing against the Leathernecks in the least!!! Much respect for all of them. Have many friends and family that are and always will be marines!!!
This post was edited on 1/1/17 at 6:53 am
Posted on 1/1/17 at 6:14 am to biohzrd
quote:
Problem that a lot of people don't realize is that airframes have life exspcectancy to them. To "rebuild" the airframes while at the same time modernize them may be cost prohibitive. Why put 30-40 million into something that is still old, still not stealth? While yes it is cheaper it is still a used plane. If Trump can get the price down to 75-80 million on a brand new, fully stealth F35 it's a no brainier to go with the F35.
Agreed, although I think he isn't looking to rebuild old airframes, as he is modernizing a new F-18 design and ordering new planes from Boeing, rather than the F-35s.
Posted on 1/1/17 at 6:32 am to GEAUXmedic
To me that is a very viable option if they can keep the cost down. The Growler has proven to more than effective in its ability to jam and confuse enemy radar to no really necessitate true stealth. Make subtle changes similar to the F15 Silent Eagle and reel in the benefits if you can keep the cost lower.
Hell the Growlers can shield multiple planes from lock-on capability as opposed to each individual aircraft needing stealth. Although I would imagine all the new 5th gen fighters may have similar capabilities.
Hell the Growlers can shield multiple planes from lock-on capability as opposed to each individual aircraft needing stealth. Although I would imagine all the new 5th gen fighters may have similar capabilities.
This post was edited on 1/1/17 at 6:49 am
Posted on 1/1/17 at 6:34 am to biohzrd
Today I Learned I need to watch more of the American Heroes Channel.
Posted on 1/1/17 at 6:47 am to GEAUXmedic
This type of info doesn't really come from American Hero's Channel. Lots of research bc of my families occupations, and just a personnel interest in the subject.
Posted on 1/1/17 at 7:00 am to GEAUXmedic
quote:
Agreed, although I think he isn't looking to rebuild old airframes, as he is modernizing a new F-18 design and ordering new planes from Boeing, rather than the F-35s.
I love the way he is pitting the different manufacturers against each other when it come to cost!!! In all truth the "old" F15/F18/f16 still have not many matches throughout the rest of the world in the more modern variants.
The more updated versions are still way ahead of the rest of the other countries. This includes the Typhoon/Eurofighters.
Posted on 1/1/17 at 8:29 am to biohzrd
quote:
n shield multiple planes from lock-on capability as opposed to each individual aircraft needing stealth. Although I would imagine all the new
Whiow that may theoretically possible, in real world scenarios its impossible. In ACM, to do as you say, the Groowler would have to be close enough to cover it in its umbrella which would be fine if it were flying straight and level, but not during extreme maneuvering.
Posted on 1/1/17 at 8:31 am to biohzrd
I recall the F/A 18 was a further development of the YF-17 that competed against the F16. It was an extremely close decision and it makes me wonder if we should take another look at the YF23 or further develope it as it too, fell along those lines.
Posted on 1/1/17 at 9:00 am to GEAUXmedic
quote:
Trump already has Boeing pricing out F-18s. I have no doubt Boeing will come out on top.
I believe the F-18 started as McDonnel Douglas and Northrup and now Boeing absorbed them. If this happens with the F-18, I wonder if that will almost give Boeing monopoly status.
Posted on 1/1/17 at 9:09 am to UF
Gross Nepotism in that business for starters they should have dumped the PW t135 engine vs the ge engine &'yes the dod good ole boy network is about to get gutted
Posted on 1/1/17 at 9:14 am to biohzrd
quote:
Not only the F18, but also looking into modernizing the F15 as well... This is do two things. One make our older platforms viable for years to come, and two drive the price of the F35 down significantly. Benefits the military and more importantly the tax payers.
What puzzles me here is why not bolster F22 numbers, render the F-35 a research platform, and modernize appropriately after that?
quote:
If Trump can get the price down to 75-80 million on a brand new, fully stealth F35 it's a no brainier to go with the F35.
But some people have put together compelling cases asserting that the F-35 is a bit of a scheme where contractors are using it as a way to do R&D "for free", knowing the plane will not meet performance objectives. The conspiracy theory behind the scenes states that this is known and eventually the platform will be scrapped, a new one developed, and the free R&D to make the stuff inside and attached to the F-35 will already be available, and thus huge profit; and, that the gadgets developed now with have utility on many different platforms. The point is that the F-35 may never reach an "affordable" price and may not deliver on performance goals. Thus it may not actually possess the capabilities that will make it a no brainer.
As for a Navy Raptor - I'm not sure stealth planes are ready to go to carriers without VTOL capability. Launch and arrest puts a lot of force and vibration on planes. It only takes one fastener to come undone and stealth is gone. In the book 'Skunk Works' they mention this with regard to the F-117. It was awesome then radar signature blew up. They went and checked and one fastener came loose, created a 90 degree angle and signature blew up.
quote:
Furthermore you can thank the Marine Corp for many of the cost over runs with the F35.
I was under the impression the F-35 was forced upon them. Maybe I'm incorrect.
Posted on 1/1/17 at 9:17 am to biohzrd
quote:
To me that is a very viable option if they can keep the cost down. The Growler has proven to more than effective in its ability to jam and confuse enemy radar to no really necessitate true stealth. Make subtle changes similar to the F15 Silent Eagle and reel in the benefits if you can keep the cost lower.
Hell the Growlers can shield multiple planes from lock-on capability as opposed to each individual aircraft needing stealth. Although I would imagine all the new 5th gen fighters may have similar capabilities.
Is the Growler a step up from the EA-6B?
This concept is fascinating. If you can put a robust EW platform out there, why develop an F-35 at all, especially considering rumors the S400 system, allegedly, cracked the code on tracking stealth platforms.
Posted on 1/1/17 at 9:21 am to UF
quote:
I was under the impression the F-35 was forced upon them. Maybe I'm incorrect.
well the premise was faulty initially, "forcing" the proposed plane on all the branches
the MC just demanded what it needed, which made the faulty premise even worse
Posted on 1/1/17 at 9:24 am to Cracker
quote:
Gross Nepotism in that business for starters they should have dumped the PW t135 engine vs the ge engine &'yes the dod good ole boy network is about to get gutted
That engine is derivative of the powerplant in the F-22 I believe.
The DoD / acquisitions network is in need of a purging from top to bottom.
Posted on 1/1/17 at 9:27 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
well the premise was faulty initially, "forcing" the proposed plane on all the branches
the MC just demanded what it needed, which made the faulty premise even worse
Well said.
Posted on 1/1/17 at 9:39 am to UF
You have almost 2000 posts in two months.
Who's alter are you?
Who's alter are you?
Posted on 1/1/17 at 9:40 am to UF
No matter what people think or want the F-35 is turning the corner and it's here to stay. Maybe not in the kind of numbers of F-16's and F-18's in the inventories but the capabilities of the F-35 are needed.
Remember when the AF cancelled the F-22 at only 180?
Remember when the AF cancelled the F-22 at only 180?
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News