Pentagon Relaxes Two F-35 Performance Targets;
Interesting report out of InsideDefense.com (free version) says Pentagon officials have relaxed the ground rules the F-35A model, the conventional-takeoff-and-landing version of the Joint Strike Fighter, can meet the minimum range goal for the aircraft -- the minimum, not the desired range.
On Feb. 14, the Joint Requirements Oversight Council -- in a previously unreported development -- agreed to loosen select key performance parameters (KPPs) for the JSF during a review of the program convened in advance of a high-level Feb. 21 Defense Acquisition Board meeting last month, at which the Pentagon aimed to reset many dimensions of the program, including cost and schedule.
Pentagon sources said a memorandum codifying the JROC decisions has not yet been signed by Adm. James Winnefeld, the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the JROC chair.
Sources familiar with the changes, however, said the JROC -- which also includes the service vice chiefs of staff -- agreed to adjust the "ground rules and assumptions" underlying the F-35A's 590-nautical-mile, combat-radius KPP.
Last April, the Pentagon reported to Congress in a selected acquisition report that "based on updated estimate of engine bleed," the F-35A would have a combat radius of 584 nautical miles, below its threshold -- set in 2002 -- of 590 nautical miles. (Editor’s note: The desired or "objective" range was 690 nm).
To extend the F-35A's combat radius, the JROC agreed to a less-demanding flight profile that assumes near-ideal cruise altitude and airspeed, factors that permit more efficient fuel consumption. This would allow the estimate to be extended to 613 nautical miles, according to sources familiar with the revised requirement.
Also, officials agreed to lengthen the minimum short takeoff distance for the F-35B, even though that model already will carry a smaller weapons load than initially planned.
[SIZE=4]Eglin launches first F-35 sortie
[SIZE=2]No matter what uniform they wear, service members of the 33rd Fighter Wing know the launch of the first F-35 Lightning II flight on March 6 is a small step into the next half century of air dominance.
[IMG]http://i41.*******.com/1pbcwy.jpg[/IMG][/SIZE][/SIZE]The F-35A Lightning II JSF lifts off for its first training sortie on March 6 at Eglin AFB. It’s the first flight of any 33rd FW F-35 since their arrival to the base.
[IMG]http://i44.*******.com/1f8f8z.jpg[/IMG][SIZE=2]The F-35A Lightning II JSF taxis out for its first training sortie followed by an F-16 chase aircraft on March 6 at Eglin AFB.
F-16.net[/SIZE]Lt. Col. Eric Smith, the 58th FS director of operations, puts on his helmet as SSgt. Jeremy Houser, 33rd AMXS crew chief, assists prior to the first F-35A Lightning II JSF training sortie at Eglin AFB on March 6, 2012. [USAF photo by Samuel King Jr.]
[SIZE=2]Norway to make F-35 decision within weeks[/SIZE]
Norway's defence secretary Roger Ingebrigtsen and an entourage of military officials visited the F-35 test force at Edwards AFB, California, during the last week of February.
The visit to the desert base comes at a time when Oslo is trying to finalise how many aircraft it will ultimately buy.
"Right now we're in the process where the Norwegian government is about to make a recommendation to their parliament as far as how many F-35s we want to buy and where we should base these aircraft," said Maj Eystein Kvarving, a spokesman for the Norwegian defence ministry, in a press release issued by the US Air Force. "That recommendation is about to four to five weeks out and this is a major issue in Norwegian media and a major issue in the Norwegian public."
The northern European nation has already ordered four aircraft, but might buy as many as 48 conventional take-off and landing examples to replace its Lockheed F-16AM/BM fleet.
Norway is a proponent of NATO's smart defence initiative and has championed pooling together the limited resources available to the European F-35 partners for training and sustainment. Defence minister Espen Barth Eide said during a January visit to Washington DC that discussions for pooling such resources were already underway.
Pictures: Forsvarets Mediesenter
Well it will be intresting to see how much cheaper the F-35 turnes out to be compared to Gripen.
F-35 LRIP 5 Contracts: Unit Cost Tops $200M for First Time
more to read: http://www.defense-aerospace.com/art...C2%A7i%3E.htmlPARIS --- Previously estimated at nearly $160 million, the unit price of F-35 fighters ordered as part of the fifth Low-Rate Initial Production batch (LRIP Lot 5) has now passed $200 million, once additional contracts awarded by the Pentagon since our previous estimate on Dec. 9, 2011 are included.
On that date, when DoD awarded the main Lot 5 Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP 5) contract worth $4,011,919,310 for 30 aircraft, we had estimated average unit costs at $159.7 million.
Not at all: I would better have my own country keep building a real fighter insteadto continue that delirant nonsense in order to cover a foreign failure.
There seems to be quite a lot of missing info from that article:
1. What "Unit cost" are they using (REC, Flyaway, Gross Weapons System Cost, PUC, etc)?
2. The vast majority of the increase has to do with the need to pay for the Long lead items for 42 airframes spread across the now 30 airframes being built as LRIP5.
3. Follow LRIPs will be a little cheaper due to the surplus long-lead items in LRIP5.
Was anyone under the impression that when they cut LRIP5 by 28+ percent that the unit price was supposed to stay the same?
Last edited by SpudmanWP; 03-13-2012 at 07:07 PM.
[LEFT][*******#000000][FONT=arial][LEFT][*******#000000][FONT=arial]OTTAWA — Two years of unwavering Conservative support for the F-35 took a major hit Tuesday as Associate Defence Minister Julian Fantino said the government has not ruled out walking away from the troubled stealth fighter program.[/FONT][/COLOR][*******#000000][FONT=arial]Fantino also revealed a team of defence department officials have been considering "all kinds of contingencies" should the F-35 not be ready to replace Canada's aging fleet of CF-18s and acknowledged the government does not know how much each F-35 will cost.[/FONT][/COLOR][/LEFT]
Read more: http://www.canada.com/technology/jet...#ixzz1p2SLL3zj[/FONT][/COLOR][/LEFT]