Trump, F35 and the golden F18

[shagrat]

I'm gonna go out on a limb as I am well aware oh how political correctness started being more important than calling out issues for what they really are and say that I see Trump for a much smarter man than most people give him credit. After all he defeated the completely corrupt establishment of rcorporate America running both major parties that also have all of media completely biased and working for them and won the election. He is no perfect but at least he is not one of those (I think at least hes not) politicians that make one speech for their donors and completely different speech for the public.

From what I can see he already negated or outright reverted 50% plus of his pre-election goals.

Last coup he now wants to lower the company taxation... In the vain hope it provides jobs and income for the people that elected him?

 

From my experience here in Germany, where we did this more than once in the last decades, it is debatable if there is the slightest increase, other than the annual dividend payout to the shareholders.

 

But what do I know about politics... ;)

 

Back to topic: as a business man, Trump should be capable of doing a simple TCO calculation. That is why he is obviously having an agenda here.

[SkateZilla]

well if we do the math , considering only the RAAF only has aprox 24 Super bugs in service and the only other user atm of Super bugs is the USN, that means 476 super hornet for the USN.

 

so whats gonna replace the Super bugs when thye everntually start getting aged airframes? more F35C purchases down the line? or are those gonna stick around until the day 6th gen concept aircraft are built?

 

Canada, and another Country are buying Block III Super Hornets.

[Darkbrotherhood7]

Canada, and another Country are buying Block III Super Hornets.

 

Yeah, Canada and Kuwait. :)

[Kev2go]

Canada, and another Country are buying Block III Super Hornets.

 

yea i am aware....

 

the 18 super hornets for Canada are an "interim" solution until 2025 when the rest of our legacy hornet fleet will absolutely have to be replaced. until then Canada will hold a competition between boeing and other manufactures to see what will replace the 77 remaining legacy cf18 hornets.

 

however ... from what was announced they just only put out the orders on them. they have not been produced or delivered yet to the RCAF.

 

same story for Kuwait. they negotiated and placed an order, but no deliveries yet.

Edited January 1, 2017 by Kev2go

[Pipe]

Not sure why Boeing did not pitch the Eagle SE to Canada. The Rhino is not what Canada needs...

I may be somewhat biased though ;)

[Tirak]

Not sure why Boeing did not pitch the Eagle SE to Canada. The Rhino is not what Canada needs...

I may be somewhat biased though ;)

 

Because Streak Eagles have a reputation for being expensive, and this debacle isn't about actual value, it's about public perception.

[probad]

what canadeh needs is the ehrrow mk 2

 

 

 

 

:)

[SkateZilla]

The Silent Eagle Prototype/Program is not Export Eligible Anymore.

 

Lost to F-35/EF2000 Repeatedly, then when a country did apply to purchase F-15SE's Obama Blocked the Sale, and Future Sales. (in 2010 and 2014)

Edited January 3, 2017 by SkateZilla

[Hummingbird]

It's way too late to cancel the F-35, it won't & shouldn't happen. If it did it would be a major and extremely costly mistake, and I don't for a second believe that Trump would get the support needed to do this.

 

Now IMHO the project should've never gotten the go ahead, but it's way too far along now to go back, because we need a new aircraft now - not 20 years from now! Thus the US (and most of its buyers) have to live with what'ever shortcomings the F-35 turns out to have for the next couple of decades, learn from them and do better next time. In the meantime hopefully the F-35's sensor suite proves up to the task.

Edited January 3, 2017 by Hummingbird

[SkateZilla]

It's way too late to cancel the F-35, it won't & shouldn't happen. If it did it would be a major and extremely costly mistake, and I don't for a second believe that Trump would get the support needed to do this.

 

Now IMHO the project should've never gotten the go ahead, but it's way too far along now to go back, because we need a new aircraft now - not 20 years from now! Thus the US (and most of its buyers) have to live with what'ever shortcomings the F-35 turns out to have for the next couple of decades, learn from them and do better next time. In the meantime hopefully the F-35's sensor suite proves up to the task.

 

 

The F-35 Program isnt going anywhere.

 

Trump's Tweet is just another added to the pile of tweets and "expose's" of News Agencies and Journalist that have no clue how an Export Fighter Program Works.

 

Lockheed is already cutting costs, they already cut intermediate Blocks and OFPs and jumped to a higher Unified Final Version, which is significant.

 

F-35 isnt going anywhere, yes, other countries turned to Super Hornets Recently, but they are only ordering small amounts as stop gaps, so they can safely retire their over aged Legacy Hornets.

[JunMcKill]

The question is, all this money spent in the 5th gen technology is to fight againsts who? Russian nor China will never go to war again USA, period!. The atomic states will have proxy wars, etc, but never a direct confrontation. In the proxy wars the enemies are rogue groups like Daesh, etc but really, USA have enought aircraft right now that can be upgraded and can deal with any threat!

Edited January 4, 2017 by JunMcKill

[Hummingbird]

The question is, all this money spent in the 5th gen technology is to fight againsts who? Russian nor China will never go to war again USA, period!. The atomic states will have proxy wars, etc, but never a direct confrontation. In the proxy wars the enemies are rogue groups like Daesh, etc but really, USA have enought aircraft right now that can be upgraded and can deal with any threat!

 

An attitude like that is what can actually lead to a war as one side starts to see a glaring weakness with the other. In other words staying ahead (or atleast competitive) is definitely important, it's just how you do it which really matters - for example making nukes or encircling your foe with an ICBM shield is not the least provoking thing you can do.

[JunMcKill]

An attitude like that is what can actually lead to a war as one side starts to see a glaring weakness with the other. In other words staying ahead (or atleast competitive) is definitely important, it's just how you do it which really matters - for example making nukes or encircling your foe with an ICBM shield is not the least provoking thing you can do.

 

An attitude like yours is what the military-industrial complex uses to justify the defense budget of the United States, which we might call offensive. In a nuclear world there are no winners!

 

Read this article, more trillions for a war than will never happens

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-01-05/new-nuclear-armed-subs-win-pentagon-approval-before-obama-leaves

Edited January 5, 2017 by JunMcKill

[SkateZilla]

a Completely New F/A-18J/K Block III/IV w/ all the Bells and Whistles to Rival the F-35 would cost just as much, if not more.

 

Retro-Fitting/Rebuilding the Block II's to the Block III Standards (ala F-14s) and Buying the CFTs and PODs Might be cheaper, but you'll still have the problem w/ Flight Hours Fatigue...

 

And Basically a Majority of the Block II Super Hornets are either in the RAAF or USN Growler Squadrons, The Majority of the Line E/F Fleet are still Block I or Block I's w/ Upgraded Radar and ECS Systems (i'd say Block 1.5, lol).

 

The Super Hornets are going to still be around for a while, so As the Block I's Start to get Mothballed, might as well Re-Build them or Replace them w/ Block III's

 

Block III's will come w/ all the Wiring and Sensors (minus the AN/ALQ-218 ) of the Growlers off the Line, so You'd have Minimal difference between E/F and G's, as right now the Growlers have significantly more electronic wiring and sensors.

 

The Growlers will continue to Fly after the F-35C takes over, so any Sqns w/ Block III Aircraft can send their aircraft to be converted quickly to Block III Growlers by Fitting the Antennas.

 

Stealthier Growlers w/ CFTs and NGJ/EWP along side F-35s would be the best option for 15 years from now.

Edited January 5, 2017 by SkateZilla

[Emu]

Damn, that is really going to cut into his budget for the wall between the U.S. and Mexico. :D

Not really. They can build it out of aid money.

[shagrat]

An attitude like yours is what the military-industrial complex uses to justify the defense budget of the United States, which we might call offensive. In a nuclear world there are no winners!

 

Read this article, more trillions for a war than will never happens

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-01-05/new-nuclear-armed-subs-win-pentagon-approval-before-obama-leaves

The US just sent a conventional troop contingent to eastern Europe.

Not nukes, just an armored brigade, some F-16 etc.

 

And that was a political decision...

 

EDIT: and Russia just "won" the Krim, in a nuclear world.

What also would "never happen".

 

Just saying.

Edited January 6, 2017 by shagrat

[tflash]

a Completely New F/A-18J/K Block III/IV w/ all the Bells and Whistles to Rival the F-35 would cost just as much, if not more.

 

Retro-Fitting/Rebuilding the Block II's to the Block III Standards (ala F-14s) and Buying the CFTs and PODs Might be cheaper, but you'll still have the problem w/ Flight Hours Fatigue...

 

And Basically a Majority of the Block II Super Hornets are either in the RAAF or USN Growler Squadrons, The Majority of the Line E/F Fleet are still Block I or Block I's w/ Upgraded Radar and ECS Systems (i'd say Block 1.5, lol).

 

The Super Hornets are going to still be around for a while, so As the Block I's Start to get Mothballed, might as well Re-Build them or Replace them w/ Block III's

 

Block III's will come w/ all the Wiring and Sensors (minus the AN/ALQ-218 ) of the Growlers off the Line, so You'd have Minimal difference between E/F and G's, as right now the Growlers have significantly more electronic wiring and sensors.

 

The Growlers will continue to Fly after the F-35C takes over, so any Sqns w/ Block III Aircraft can send their aircraft to be converted quickly to Block III Growlers by Fitting the Antennas.

 

Stealthier Growlers w/ CFTs and NGJ/EWP along side F-35s would be the best option for 15 years from now.

 

I agree. The only issue with the F-35 is that it is 7 years late. This has caused many headaches, for logistics, planning, people's careers ... It also means that the legacy hornet fleet is falling apart and that the stopgap Super Hornet has become the mainstay of the fleet. Adding more, more modern Super Hornets could be a good interim solution to soften the pressure, but is no real surrogate for the F-35. The growler is an asset in its own right that will stay important long after the F-35 has been introduced to the fleet in sufficient numbers. Buying or refurbishing F/A-18E/F's with Growler wiring (as the Aussies did) is a smart move, but is no alternative for the F-35, and certainly not for the USAF.

[SkateZilla]

Like i said, USMC is literally paying for their stubborness and short sightedness.

 

everyone saw the delays in the F35 program, USMC was like, "nah, we got our Harriers and Legacy Hornets, we're fine."

 

Now they are forced to clear out the mothballed inventory just to keep above 60% of Fleet Airworthyness.

 

And those F/A-18C+s they are rebuilding up to arent exactly cheap, or cheaper than Block II Super Hornets by much.

 

The Process Involved is pretty expensive,

-Dismantling them,

-"Crating" them,

-Driving them from AMARG to Cecil Field

-Unpacking/Crating them,

-Completely Stripping them,

-Repairing any Damaged Sections,

-Rewiring/ReRigging the entire airframe,

-Modifying and Re-Building Sections to house new components

-Rebuild the Airframe

-Upgrade the Avionics and Cockpits

 

Basically swapping the building of a Block II Airframe w/ Trucking an Old One from the West coast to the east and completely stripping it and rebuilding it from scratch w/ Block II Electronics and Cockpits.

 

 

 

As for the Super Hornet, Even with every ASH Program Upgrade, it was never a "Stealth" Design, you can reduce the RCS w/ Electronics and Coatings etc, but the Shape itself is not really a Stealthy shape, and if you took a Polygon Modifier to the Shape it would come out looking more like an F-22 than an F-18.

Edited January 6, 2017 by SkateZilla

[Fer_Fer]

The F-35 Program isnt going anywhere.

 

Trump's Tweet is just another added to the pile of tweets and "expose's" of News Agencies and Journalist that have no clue how an Export Fighter Program Works.

 

Lockheed is already cutting costs, they already cut intermediate Blocks and OFPs and jumped to a higher Unified Final Version, which is significant.

 

F-35 isnt going anywhere, yes, other countries turned to Super Hornets Recently, but they are only ordering small amounts as stop gaps, so they can safely retire their over aged Legacy Hornets.

 

There is a difference between cutting costs, and just not fixing the mess they made. Reports to congress keep stating, that in order to keep on track, and cut costs, fixed are either deferred to later blocks, or not fixed at all.

 

Just look at the USAF IOC, the condition was, that the USAF would only take delivery of the frames if 7 key deficiencies were fixed. The report to Congress found that only 1 had been fixed, with 2 in the process of being fixed, while the remainder of the deficiences were not even close to getting a fix. Yet the USAF still took delivery, and is now in the process of wasting 300 million USD on doing field testing of which its is abundantly clear the F-35 will not pass it.

 

So how is deferring fixes, mass production of faulty frames, and a emphasis of getting it done, rather then doing it right cutting costs?

[SkateZilla]

I know Pilots and Crew that work on the F-35s and have not said anything about it Failing any Field Tests.

 

If it was that bad, they would have never accepted delivery.

[Fer_Fer]

I know Pilots and Crew that work on the F-35s and have not said anything about it Failing any Field Tests.

 

If it was that bad, they would have never accepted delivery.

 

because if they did, they'd get their ass sued so hard it would condemn their next 3 generations of families to poverty. (NDA breaches are serious, doubly more so for Defense procurement, and the fact that US Military's image is riding on it), hence, i seriously doubt you will find any of the crews/pilots that are currently working on it, say anything about it that is not approved by Lockheed and the DoD. This is nothing new, and i don't blame em for it.

 

Anyways, i have no problem trusting the congressional reports, especially since it states, Black on White, that the 7 issues had to be resolved before IOC. (page 7)

 

According to the August 9, report, it states, bluntly, that of the 7, 4 have been resolved, 1 wasn't and 2 had some form of improvement. So by the USAF's own standards, it should not have entered IOC, yet it did, with half of the problems it had set as a red line, not fixed or only having a partial fix. So yes, my point with it is that the program, its schedule and its requirements are made to fit the plane, rather then the other way round.

Its this kind of behavior that has turned the program into the mess it is today. It still suffers from large cost overruns, poor planning and a manufacturer that responds to any form of negative news with the phrase, "its not true, the information is incorrect, and we are perfectly on track, and everything is working perfectly, which as the congressional reports show, is patently not true.

 

Link to the Congressional report

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3213376-DOT-amp-E-Concerns-Regarding-JSF-Progress-and.html

[Kev2go]

Like i said, USMC is literally paying for their stubborness and short sightedness.

 

everyone saw the delays in the F35 program, USMC was like, "nah, we got our Harriers and Legacy Hornets, we're fine."

 

Now they are forced to clear out the mothballed inventory just to keep above 60% of Fleet Airworthyness.

 

And those F/A-18C+s they are rebuilding up to arent exactly cheap, or cheaper than Block II Super Hornets by much.

 

The Process Involved is pretty expensive,

-Dismantling them,

-"Crating" them,

-Driving them from AMARG to Cecil Field

-Unpacking/Crating them,

-Completely Stripping them,

-Repairing any Damaged Sections,

-Rewiring/ReRigging the entire airframe,

-Modifying and Re-Building Sections to house new components

-Rebuild the Airframe

-Upgrade the Avionics and Cockpits

 

Basically swapping the building of a Block II Airframe w/ Trucking an Old One from the West coast to the east and completely stripping it and rebuilding it from scratch w/ Block II Electronics and Cockpits.

 

 

 

As for the Super Hornet, Even with every ASH Program Upgrade, it was never a "Stealth" Design, you can reduce the RCS w/ Electronics and Coatings etc, but the Shape itself is not really a Stealthy shape, and if you took a Polygon Modifier to the Shape it would come out looking more like an F-22 than an F-18.

 

 

Well to be fair F16C blk50/52 90s ( depending on production year) are at comparable enough age to the C hornets. the USAF did never have a "super Viper". Well while there is no super viper, but there are more advanced F16C blk 50/52 + airframes that have been sold for export and or the F16E/F aka block 60 that were sold to the UAE, which are more capable than the USAF vipers. USMC only needs aircraft primarily for mud moving & CAS support rather than Air defense ( Should be left to the navy)

 

Ultimately all services are in the same boat, keeping in legacy airframes in service with some avoincs upgrades, and or airframe refurbishment programs to keep it relevant and airworthy into the near future, thanks to F35 delays, and IN the AF case, also partly because F22 production was drastically cut down.

Edited January 6, 2017 by Kev2go

[SkateZilla]

USMC F/A-18s Supplement the USN Sqns on Deployments.

 

Pretty sure the USAF has Since done Service Life Extensions on their F-16s, The USAF Operates More Types and Variants of F-16's than Nabisco Does Oreo Cookies.

 

They Also do not operate in the Saltwater conditions or Stress of Carrier Landings.

[Kev2go]

USMC F/A-18s Supplement the USN Sqns on Deployments.

 

Pretty sure the USAF has Since done Service Life Extensions on their F-16s, The USAF Operates More Types and Variants of F-16's than Nabisco Does Oreo Cookies.

 

They Also do not operate in the Saltwater conditions or Stress of Carrier Landings.

 

Hence my acknowledgment of refurbishment programs meant for Service life extension, but as you said the cost of such is great to the point where its sometimes cheaper to just buy fresh airframes. critiquing the USMC for not buying super hornets.

 

All i was was saying is that its merely USAF's refurbishments on air frame, not so much on avionics or other capabilities. They are not upgraded to block 50/52 + standards which export users may have nor are they Block 60 airframes like the UAE has. OFCS at this point hard to justify with F-35's at IOC, but same goes for the USMC. no point buying Super hornets at this stage.

Edited January 6, 2017 by Kev2go

[SkateZilla]

They are only Upgrading the MothBalled Aircraft to make it worth the effort,

 

Pulling an Old Block Mothballed F/A-18A/C out of AMARG and throwing it back in the line up w/ whatever systems were left in it would be more counter productive than trying to keep the current airframes airborne.

 

the USMC bailed on the Service Programs and Replacement Parts Programs,

 

How long they thought they could keep them flying without any replacement parts or airframe service extensions... shrug... not long obviously, more than half their F/A-18s are grounded.

 

 

The Whole F/A-18C+ Program they are now running is just a way to save face and brag about their upgraded Legacy Airframes that other countries have been flying for years already.