Andrew is telling me that the negotiations between Lockheed and the government has resulted in a price of 107 million per airplane.
My reaction.
Big fucking deal.
Why? Because sequestration is baked in. Congress and the President aren't only looking at continued sequestration but also the possibility of a government shut down. Add to that the fact that its obvious to everyone that Lockheed Martin is finally feeling the heat for this over priced, under delivering, Pentagon chewing, Marine gobbling master piece and they probably low balled the hell out of the plane.
Call it a loss leader.
They take the pain now and will recoup lost revenues in later blocks.
But lets get back to sequestration. Its gonna continue which means that the number of F-35's that the government will be able to buy is going to--out of necessity be cut.
That means we're looking at the death spiral that they've been teetering on the edge of.
That means that by the time the first F-35 squadron is suppose reach IOC with the USMC, it will be unaffordable.
If my little troll is right then we're already fucked. We're on a road without exit ramps and the cliff is staring us in the eye.
You sound like ELP Sol - LoL, but yeah, the death spiral is coming.
ReplyDeleteno. i haven't heard a peep from any of those guys. not even hate mail. this is just me looking at it from both a political perspective, what limited knowledge i have of business, trying to cut through a ton of spin that i was sucking down and generally being pissed beyond words that the very life blood of the Marine Corps is being sacrificed on the altar of aviation interests and Lockheed profits.
Deletegod damn i'm so pissed with that crew i can't see straight. they've bungled a program and basically fucked the Corps. one program has thrown everything into disarray. quite honestly the whole crew needs to be put up on charges.
think about it. this mismanaged program is causing the Marine Corps to most probably enter a future battle ill equipped to win. you lose one airplane and you lose one pilot (if he doesn't eject). lose one old as the hills AAV and you just tossed 24 Marines away. oh and because they're old as dirt that loss can come from attempting to swim ashore, hitting an ied or getting hit by 50 caliber machine gun fire.
and now some damn wanna be Jarhead comes on my fucking page telling me "how things are"????? FUCK THAT! we're suppose to be Marines, we don't accept the fucking unacceptable. but this office pogue does and wants me to lap it up. his boy AMOS supposedly baby sat this abomination of a program but did he do the same with the ACV or the MPC? NO! the MPC was ready to fucking deliver and instead he canceled the program. the son of a bitch AMOS doesn't even have the balls to come out and say what we all know to be the truth. that he's delaying the ACV rfp so that he can shield the F-35 from cuts. instead he'd rather be seen as a vacillating idiot that keeps pushing back the issue because he supposedly needs more information!
that is what we call leadership now?
i'm so mad i could face shoot, rip out entrails and feed wild pigs the entire lot of them.
rant over.
"and now some damn wanna be Jarhead comes on my fucking page telling me "how things are"????? FUCK THAT! we're suppose to be Marines, we don't accept the fucking unacceptable."
DeleteYeah Marines should just curb stomp the budget, and shoot sequestration in the face while leading a counter attack single handledly on the American Economy and pulling its balls out through its mouth yada yada and other Soloman style writing, that doesn't apply to reality.
"but this office pogue does and wants me to lap it up."
So when I say we are out of money I'm a POG, and when you say it its brilliant blogging I guess. I thought we were Marines, that didn't accept things like being out of money?
"his boy AMOS supposedly baby sat this abomination of a program but did he do the same with the ACV or the MPC? NO"
Well he was responsible for the JSF and EFV from start to finish alright. History is hard
"That means that by the time the first F-35 squadron is suppose reach IOC with the USMC, it will be unaffordable."
Source?
http://elementsofpower.blogspot.com/2012/12/f-35-and-crackpots-of-doom-redux.html
"You sound like ELP"
Deletehttp://elpdefensenews.blogspot.com/2013/07/the-great-m-1-tank-myth.html
ELP is cranking up the stupid. Luckily for us Sol knows ELP is a fucking idiot. Right Sol?
buddy, our IAF chief is in US. Any news from there?
ReplyDeletenot that i've seen but i'll look.
DeleteIs this a 107 million for the "production models" that they are now making? If so then how much more will it cost to put in the modifications to make them combat ready since today's production models are not ready for combat?
ReplyDeleteI found one of the reports on the price for the USAF and I think it's just the F-35A for the Air Force that was bought at this $107 million price last year: www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/15/us-lockheed-f-idUSBRE8BE01G20121215
ReplyDeleteThe fly away unit cost is what I'm using. The F-35C was $186 million last year and it is $199.4 million this year. The F-35B was $172 million last year and it is $196.5 million this year. The Super Hornet was $66.9 million last year and this year it is $65.3 million.
All of these numbers are available on the Department of the Navy's released fiscal 2013 budget. Here's a link: http://www.finance.hq.navy.mil/fmb/13pres/APN_BA1-4_BOOK.pdf
The F-35B is on page 1-43
The F-35C is on page 1-29
and the Super Hornet is on 1-15
Just did the math and found out that the price of 1 F-35C or 1 F-35B is the equivalent of 3 Super Hornets. This is getting ridiculous...
ReplyDeleteWhen you can fly a Super Hornet off a gator, park three in the space taken by one F-35, and operate 3 for the price of one F-35, get back to me. Furthermore, how many of those inferior aircraft will you have left after a couple months of combat? (Not to mention all the dead pilots.)
DeleteYou have just proven to me that you're a complete idiot.
DeleteIt's not so much the same space on board an aircraft carrier that matters. You need to fill up ALL ten or eleven aircraft carriers (however many carriers we will have in the future) with aircraft . You are not thinking of the BIG PICTURE. What's funny is that the cost per flight hour for the F-35C and F-35B is not available. Lockheed refuses to release them. What we do have are the numbers for the F-35A, which is $32,000. The Super Hornet is about $15,643, which is less than half that of the F-35A. The F-35C will obviously be significantly higher than the F-35A because its more complex and has to deal with corrosion at sea, which is something it also has yet to prove to be able to do. Guess what that means? IT'S HIGHLY LIKELY THAT YOU CAN OPERATE 3 SUPER HORNETS FOR THE PRICE OF 1 F-35C FROM THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE.
The USMC will survive just fine without the F-35B as seen from Solomon's other post detailing the cancellation of it. The USMC has the Super Cobra and many other options for the mission set it needs to do. The US Navy can also provide the capabilities they might lack in any situation that requires them. They may not like being reliant on us anymore than they currently are, but under these budget cuts it would be the reasonable measure to take.
As far as the Super Hornet cutting it in combat, it will have the EA-18G Growler with the Next Generation Jammers to help it defeat radar threats. With JSOW and other better ordinance it can handle practically anything. The Navy has also said the Super Hornet has fully funded classified upgrades that will keep it formidable into the 2030s. The Super Hornet is a very upgradable and formidable killing machine that will be more than sufficient for any threat we could face in the future.
By the way, when you can show me a fully functional combat ready F-35 of any variant, get back to me.
THANK YOU! its frustrating getting the point over that an airplane isn't the be all end all for the Marines, not even a stealth one. the problem for all the services is that they're locked into a plan that was conceived with very different assumptions and those have proven false.
Deletedespite knowing that the threat, and economics of things has changed, they continue on the road as if everything has remained static.
it hasn't.
i can't understand why simply acknowledging that concepts, plans and methods of operations that were developed are no longer valid is so hard to do but it must be done. lying to ourselves and wishing that things were different is not what we pay our military to do.
LRIP is not FRP
ReplyDeleteMcDonnell Douglas, er boeing er whatever... needs to come out with a new build Silent/Super/Whatever Harrier and undercut the shit out of this program before the Russians or someone else does. A big part of countries buying F-35's is so they can continue to operate fixed wing birds on their carriers right? Not all of them have china next door and would surely accept some reduced capability for a much reduced price tag right?
ReplyDeleteThey are welcome to try, and they can fund it all themselves. The limiter on the Harrier is the powerplant. Everything is dictated by those margins. So I wish Boeing the best of luck but the Harrier II is about as good as it gets. plus they don't make the powerplants anymore, so thats another pickle.
DeleteIf you look at the first chart in the budget docs (P-40) you also note the services estimate of what the average cost will be for all models. The USN has the F-35C for 321 at $139 million and 290 B's at $144 million (unit flyaway cost). If one goes back to prior year budget docs the trend isn't for the price to decrease.
ReplyDeleteThe F-35 is a game changing strike fighter. It's far more capable than many of it's critics will accept. It's supporters, however, often lose sight of how far it's strayed from being an affordable aircraft. Some of us who suspected an aircraft that was heavier than an F-15C, weighed more empty than the fully loaded AV-8B it was replacing, etc., was never going to affordably replace the F-16, A-10, etc., were dismissed by many of the program's supporters.
Marine Aviation used to contain light attack, attack, fighter, medium attack, and other squadrons. It was a monumental decision to replace everything with a single type of large strike fighter that was also STOVL. It was this decision made years ago that places the Corps where it is today.
In my view there were two major issues with that decision. Firstly, there are many missions where a cost effective light attack aircraft can do the job as well or better than a strike fighter and thus a service that prides itself on getting by with the least isn't well served with an all premium tactical aviation force.
Secondly, STOVL has some useful utility but the vast majority of Marine fighters deploy from fixed bases by air to other fixed bases and operate conventionally. Thus it's a niche capability to operate from the LHD's and occasionally from forward airstrips. It's simply not worth the added cost for every single Marine tactical aircraft to be a large STOVL strike fighter. There was also some appeal in getting out of operating as part of the carrier air wing but that didn't justify an all STOVL force (on cost grounds alone) and the Navy still made the Corps buy some C's anyway.
Over a decade of supposedly well thought out polices and decisions are not suddenly going to be thrown out because the aircraft now looks rather pricey. We're way past what might be better for each individual service. The nation is committed to this program and committed to many other partner nations.
If the F-35 ramps up like the program wants to ramp it up, unit costs will fall as they predicted. Actuals to-date continue to beat B.S. CAPE 'estimates' and even CAPE estimates will continue to fall, if only because the actuals will force them to. Eventually, the estimators will attempt to take credit for whatever reductions did occur, while complaining that it could have been more 'if only' their advice was followed.
ReplyDeleteHey Sol, Any ideas WTF is the guy above (who linked to one of my CAPE BS posts) talking about? Does not compute.