The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - November 25, 2009




New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.Commander: Napoleon at War
3.Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 
Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Fighters, Bombers and Recon Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Impending collapse of U.S. tactical aviation procurement
Phaid    6/6/2009 1:59:31 PM
The U.S. Air Force announced this week that it will "review" its requirement for 1,763 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters during the comprehensive Quadrennial Defense Review which is now under way. According to Air Force Chief of Staff Norton Schwartz, the number of F-35s "could end up being less," he said, but he expects to have "well over" 1,500 F-35s. This nonetheless reflects a potential reduction of 200 or more F-35s from the Air Force procurement alone.

Meanwhile, the JSF program executive officer (PEO)Marine Corps Brig. Gen. David Heinz, stated in an interview with Aviation Week that funding for the F136 alternate engine must be stopped because there is not enough money in the budget to both fund the engine development and produce the expected number of F-35s. According to Heinz, continuing the F136 procurement would "take 50-80 tails out of the program" at a critical early stage of LRIP production, which would cause the unit price to rise, and cause the program to collapse as international partners pull out. "I worry about taking tails out of the program because it will get so expensive the partners will start to pull back", said Heinz.

Heinz's concerns illustrate just how much of a financial knife's edge the F-35 program is already riding. The F136 development contract was awarded in 2005 and is scheduled to end in 2013. This means the F136 development has annual cost of $300 million. According to these numbers, three hundred million dollars per year is the difference between success and failure of a tactical aviation program that has completed less than 5% of flight testing.

But now, even notwithstanding the F136 engine, the Air Force already looking at reducing F-35 procurement numbers, which again means the unit price will necessarily go up. And the Air Force' potential reductions will be much larger, and have far more of an effect on the unit price, than the ones Heinz is concerned about due to the F136. The fewer airplanes are purchased, the more unit price goes up; the more unit price goes up, the less orders will be placed, resulting in a death spiral. And the ripple effects will be devastating: the Navy was criticized this week in Congressional hearings for buying too few F/A-18s in order to make room in their budget for future F-35 purchases. At the same time, the Air Force, which has put off recapitalizing its fighter fleet for two decades, recently decided to retire 250 tactical aircraft ahead of schedule in order to save money to buy more F-35s.

All of those cuts and procurement reductions are based on current F-35 cost estimates and current F-35 production numbers. As testing and budgets impact the F-35 production rates, and the number of airframes purchased continue to dwindle, it is becoming clear that the services are sacrificing their fighter fleets to fund an airplane that will never be procured in enough numbers to meet their needs.
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5   NEXT
Phaid       6/6/2009 2:03:15 PM
Sources:
 
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica       6/6/2009 3:04:29 PM

link background-repeat: no-repeat; background-attachment: initial; background-color: initial; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 4px; padding-left: 15px; margin-top: 20px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 10px; display: block; font-size: 16px; width: auto; background-position: 5px 50%; ">Air Force need for F-35s is under review

Air Force Chief of Staff Norton Schwartz on Wednesday signaled that the service's requirement for 1,763 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters is being examined during the comprehensive Quadrennial Defense Review now under way.

Whether the Air Force ultimately buys more or fewer F-35s than planned depends on that review of military capabilities and requirements, the four-star general told the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee. Indeed, the Air Force's plan to field a total of 2,250 fighters, both old and new, is also under review, according to Schwartz.

"It could end up being less," he said, adding, "if that's the case, we will still have a predominately F-35" force.

Still, Schwartz said he expects to have "well over" 1,500 F-35s.

Also on Wednesday, Air Force Secretary Michael Donley said he is hopeful the Pentagon will have a new request for proposals for its next fleet of aerial refueling tankers ready by this summer. Donley also said the Defense Department had not decided whether the Air Force or the Pentagon would manage the competitive bidding process.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Things are changing fast. The USAF is at a new epoch here and has some tough decisions. Looks like Donley and Schwartz will ultimately sink or swim based on the next few critical decisions and their ability to lay out clear, candid and concise messages.

-DA 


 
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345    What it looks like......    6/6/2009 4:35:51 PM
is that I was RIGHT when I said the F-35 would be next TO BE CUT after that fool, Gates, threw his temper tantrum over the F-22.

P.O.L.I.T.I.C.A.L.

When events match predictions what does that tell you?
 
Maybe that kumquat, who told you so, ACTUALLY knows what he discusses?
 
Thanks for the confirmation, Phaid.  
 
Herald
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica       6/6/2009 5:00:32 PM

is that I was RIGHT when I said the F-35 would be next TO BE CUT after that fool, Gates, threw his temper tantrum over the F-22.

P.O.L.I.T.I.C.A.L.

When events match predictions what does that tell you?

Maybe that kumquat, who told you so, ACTUALLY knows what he discusses?

Thanks for the confirmation, Phaid.  

Herald

If this is some sort of confirmation of ANYTHING for you then you do not have a grasp of what issues we are dealing with in defense. It's possibly more or less depending on the circumstances and it will be a USAF centered on the F-35A just like what was explained in the other threads. 

-DA 
 
Quote    Reply

FJV       6/6/2009 5:10:10 PM
Seems like another long night ahead for Darth and Herald.
 
PS
Al that is needed now is a Duncan Sandys like attitude that in the future only UAV's will be used and that the fighters are obsolete to destroy the US fighter plane industry.
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345    Speaks the amateur.   6/6/2009 5:36:29 PM




is that I was RIGHT when I said the F-35 would be next TO BE CUT after that fool, Gates, threw his temper tantrum over the F-22.



P.O.L.I.T.I.C.A.L.



When events match predictions what does that tell you?




Maybe that kumquat, who told you so, ACTUALLY knows what he discusses?




Thanks for the confirmation, Phaid.  




Herald





If this is some sort of confirmation of ANYTHING for you then you do not have a grasp of what issues we are dealing with in defense. It's possibly more or less depending on the circumstances and it will be a USAF centered on the F-35A just like what was explained in the other threads. 




-DA 


I ran that (red) through the grammar analyzer. It came back "no idea content".
 
When even a stupid machine............
 
Herald
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica    FJV reply   6/6/2009 5:55:50 PM

Seems like another long night ahead for Darth and Herald.

 

PS

Al that is needed now is a Duncan Sandys like attitude that in the future only UAV's will be used and that the fighters are obsolete to destroy the US fighter plane industry.


 
Not interested. I've said all I had to say. Moving on...
 
 ...I don't think UAVs will make them completely obsolete. But they will change things and spawn different operations concept and requirements. Most American jobs have a 40 hour work week. That's spread out that way because obviously our human limits would not allow for much more in that time. Similarly, technology and specifically automation and communications has made Americans today 5 times more productive than a few decades ago. That's like getting 200 hours of work out of the average employee in the same period.

We all ride elevators today. How often do you see elevator operators now? It's the same thing in defense as the technologies mature. 


-DA 

 


 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345    Sp0oken like someone who doesn't know what he discusses.   6/7/2009 1:41:12 AM
Do you actually know what has to happen to make an elevator work?
 
 
You just don't get it poster.
 
 
Why don't yoiu LEARN?
 

 
Quote    Reply

LB    What is an F-35   6/7/2009 8:38:33 AM
The first problem is again what is an F-35 and how much does it cost?  Nobody knows because the flight test program has barely begun.  Nobody knows how much the changes will cost that the test program will indicate need to be made.  According to the GAO the F-35 program office has projected zero cost growth in getting the 8+ million lines of code integrated when typical, but far less complex, aircraft have shown 15 to 35+% cost growth.Nobody knows how cost escalations will impact further development.
 
The USAF is going to obviously decide it requires less force structure for no other reason than cost.  Obviously this means less F-35s and an increase unit cost.  This can spiral if others cut back due to increasing costs. 
 
The situation we are in with the USAF, USN, and USMC very soon only buying 1 fighter (F-22 canceled and F/A-18 to be phased out in favor of F-35) is extremely dangerous given the cost structure of the program.
 
Quote    Reply

Ispose    Not to Worry   6/10/2009 9:45:12 AM
I wouldn't worry about the F-35 program...if it goes to hell Obama will award the Gov't and the Aviation Unions 95% ownership of LockMArt and all will be well in the USSA.
 
Quote    Reply

sentinel28a       6/11/2009 1:43:42 AM
Quick addendum/correction, LB--the F-35 is supposed to replace the early F/A-18A/B variants (and later the C/Ds).  The Super Bug will be around for awhile.  Which is good news, I guess...I suppose the USAF can always buy those.
 
All I gotta say is, people were warned.  The Democrats see the military as two things: 1) social experiment and 2) piggy bank.
 
Quote    Reply

LB    F/A-18E/F   6/11/2009 8:40:06 AM
Yes I realize the F-35 does not replace the E/F but the E/F is not going to be in production for the USN for very much longer and then the only fighter line in the USA will be the F-35- god help us.  The F/A-18G and foreign orders might keep the line open a few years longer but then that's it.  Also before some comments that the F-15 or F-16 line might also be open it's not exactly something in production for the USAF.  The USAF has not bought an F-15 in more than a decade and I believe has not purchased an F-16 in a longer time.
 
That they should have bought more of both given the length of time and cost required to replace them is of course rather obvious.  Then again the best air superiority aircraft in the world, without peer, is seen as too expensive at $140 million so new build F-15s at around $100 million probably don't look like any alternative either.  In any case not only is the USAF going to rue the day it didn't get more F-22s but their cost will be seen as a bargain in just a few years time.
 

Quick addendum/correction, LB--the F-35 is supposed to replace the early F/A-18A/B variants (and later the C/Ds).  The Super Bug will be around for awhile.  Which is good news, I guess...I suppose the USAF can always buy those.

 

All I gotta say is, people were warned.  The Democrats see the military as two things: 1) social experiment and 2) piggy bank.


 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica       6/11/2009 10:45:18 AM

Quick addendum/correction, LB--the F-35 is supposed to replace the early F/A-18A/B variants (and later the C/Ds).  The Super Bug will be around for awhile.  Which is good news, I guess...I suppose the USAF can always buy those.

 

All I gotta say is, people were warned.  The Democrats see the military as two things: 1) social experiment and 2) piggy bank.


Warned? By who and about what? These cuts are bi-partisan, started under Republican SecDefs and have been in progress since the early 1990's. 

Defense procurement changes based on the threat.

-DA 
 
Quote    Reply

sentinel28a       6/13/2009 2:26:29 AM
Obama voters were warned, DA.  By conservatives and people like myself.  The Democrats haven't changed their stripes in 30 years, since Carter tried to kill the B-1 and put military families like my own on food stamps.  The Dems did everything they could to derail Reagan's rearmament program, up to and including predicting imminent nuclear war if we did something like *gasp* come up with ICBMs and SLBMs that weren't 30 years old.  Clinton sliced the military to ribbons, which we paid for in blood in Iraq.  Reid and his cronies showed their confidence in the military by proclaiming a war lost halfway through it.  And that includes your hero Obama, DA--he was one of those being rather loud about the surge not working before it even began.
 
But I suppose you'll come up with some sort of excuse for this.  I wonder if you'll have an excuse when your job gets cut as nonessential by the Obama administration.  Before you say "that'll never happen," explain that to the F-15 pilots in my state's air guard, who now face the choice of retraining as UAV controllers or taking early retirement, because Dianne Feinstein wants F-15s in California to defend against...hmm.  Not exactly sure what California needs F-15s to defend against.  Angry Prop 8 voters, I suppose.
 
Your role as playing apologist for every time Obama farts is wearing thin, DA.  If Obama proposed tomorrow disbanding the entire military in favor of the Black Panthers, why do I get the feeling you'd find a way to support it?
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345    What he said.   6/13/2009 2:44:00 AM

Obama voters were warned, DA.  By conservatives and people like myself.  The Democrats haven't changed their stripes in 30 years, since Carter tried to kill the B-1 and put military families like my own on food stamps.  The Dems did everything they could to derail Reagan's rearmament program, up to and including predicting imminent nuclear war if we did something like *gasp* come up with ICBMs and SLBMs that weren't 30 years old.  Clinton sliced the military to ribbons, which we paid for in blood in Iraq.  Reid and his cronies showed their confidence in the military by proclaiming a war lost halfway through it.  And that includes your hero Obama, DA--he was one of those being rather loud about the surge not working before it even began.

 

But I suppose you'll come up with some sort of excuse for this.  I wonder if you'll have an excuse when your job gets cut as nonessential by the Obama administration.  Before you say "that'll never happen," explain that to the F-15 pilots in my state's air guard, who now face the choice of retraining as UAV controllers or taking early retirement, because Dianne Feinstein wants F-15s in California to defend against...hmm.  Not exactly sure what California needs F-15s to defend against.  Angry Prop 8 voters, I suppose.

 

Your role as playing apologist for every time Obama farts is wearing thin, DA.  If Obama proposed tomorrow disbanding the entire military in favor of the Black Panthers, why do I get the feeling you'd find a way to support it?

I join the I told you so crowd.
 
Quote    Reply
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5   NEXT



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2009StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy