Its not upgradeable.

Herald

In the second batch, like the titanium forgings problem, they fixed that problem as well. Its not something I thought the LM idiots would let go public. Backfix is too expensive.

Herald,

 

I kind of figured that part out, what I would like to know is why. What sets it apart from F-15/16/18 series upgrades and will those first 63 be training/research aircraft. I really can't see the AF getting their moneys worth out an non-upgradeable aircraft. Sounds like another reason why 60-80 more would extend the fleet's capabilities.

there are multiple issues here.  one is the example now publicly hilighted that the block upgrades have hardware delimitations to consider.

the second is that the latter block upgrades still have "hardware embuggerances" that effect the entire fleet.  to gte around this requires a fundamental redesign of some critical components. - the issue for Lockmart is how they want to continue spiral development - or do they bite the bullet and self fund a new development which would impact on all assets.

in very real terms, that would mean 3 different F-22's based on hardware issues.  that also means that doing a fourth variant for export is highly unlikely - even if someone else agreed to share the tab.  at a logistics and support level, its a headache waiting to happen.

again, I can't provide open source detail - but I'd point out that for the last 9 months I've been alluding to development and future build issues with the F-22.  Some of that how now publicly come to pass albeit under the spin of enhanced capability (which in rough terms is true) - but the public sleight of hand demonstrates an engineering issue if people bypass the fluffery of the media release.

 

As far as I can tell the only thing we really disagree about is the JSF program. We both seem to think more F22s would be a good idea for the US and that exports of the F22 are not going to happen. Where as I believe the JSF program will be cut and you seem to believe it is too important to cut significantly, owing to the international participation the program is supposed to be based upon. The very reasons you and I dislike Gates (and by extension his masters in the White House and Congress) is why I have every confidence the JSF program will be functionally destroyed within 12 months. They will make it look like our partners pulled out or find another excuse to justify the termination, but terminate it they will, IMV.

 

A political administration whom would turn on its international partners like these have will consider themselves to be under no obligation to live up to the JSF program's agreements. We will see as it plays out. I can tell you it looks an awful lot like 1976 right now with a socialist US Congress and White house utterly gutting the US military because they don't like them and they believe the use of force is always the problem and not ever the solution.

 

Allot of good work will be rolled back and allot of people around the world will die or be enslaved because of this.

 

Check Six

 

Rocky

rocky,

I fundamentally agree with youm except for as you say, which way JSF will go.  From a partners perspective,  and from what we see from the USAF overall program manager, they're fully committed. UAS is a golden mile away from fulfilling core missions, and the integration issues are not trivial.  getting UAS to operate in prescriptive sanitised space is not the same as effecting potitive prosecution in complex battlespace.  Manned is here for a while.  IMO, JSF will be 2015-2030's F-16, F15, F/A-18 etc....

at the human level, I can't but help thinking that we're looking at an updated version of Carter.  I'd like to be wrong, as I have personal high hopes that Obama can rebuild some of the relationship malaise that has occurred over time with other countries.  But, people, like countries have motive, and political intent is often far removed from public portrayal.

It's difficult to imagine F-35 being canceled just from a US point of view.  The USN could buy more F/A-18E/Fs short term but the USMC has serious issues with it's V/STOL Harrier force and it's fleet of F/A-18s (does not fly E/F) and EA-6Bs.  The requirement for a new aircraft to replace the entire fighter and attack aircraft fleet exists now.  That is 450+ USMC F/A-18s and AV-8Bs.

 

For the USAF the issue is even more compelling.  They have not bought a new F-15 or F-16 in more than a decade.  There is already an avalanche of aircraft retirements in the pipeline.  Killing the F-35 would mean the USAF getting much smaller rather quickly and shedding many hundreds and then thousands of F-15 and F-16 aircraft.  There would be no choice in buying more F-22s and a new program would then have to be created.

 

The F-35 actually is what the US Army tried to do with FCS- create a program too big to be canceled.

 

What probably will happen is the cost will rise to the point where nobody can afford the numbers of airframes they originally wanted.  The F-22 at $140 million will be seen as a bargain compared to the F-35 especially given relative capability in the areas the F-22 excells.

 

In any case producing hundreds of these before the test program is completed was really quite beyond foolish.  Any problems that do arise have to be redesigned, retested, and then the production can be modified to produce the new change and they can mull over backfitting the change to the hundreds already produced.

 

The Administration is not going to kill a program so central to the future of the USAF, USMC, and many of our allies and make itself look like it's destroying the future of US military aviation.  Hell they're trying to accelerate the program and buy even more before the test program is completed.  Even were the Administration feeling politically suicidal and really wanted to kill the program it's a Congressional non starter.  It's not even turning out to be that easy to kill the F-22.

 

All this aside if not F-35 then a new program has to start from scratch.  We don't have that luxury of time nor any certainty the new program will be more cost effective than this one.  The USMC would in any case make a VERY strong effort to keep the F-35B given it's bet the entire farm on it and intends to have no other fighter or attack aircraft in it's inventory.  Good luck killing Marine Aviation.  There are 20 years worth of articles predicting the MV-22 would be killed. 

 

 

 

 

again, from an outsiders perspective who has the advantage/disadvantage of not being polluted by a comprehension of internal politics, the issue with the block development problems of the F-22 reinforce that the USG/USAF will parallel the "USN 1000 ship navy" concept into JSF.

each day makes it more likely....