Many thanks to Tim for his note.
I disagree with him wholeheartedly but this is a view from across the pond...
Sol,I won't parse and refute each of his points. We've done that to death. I'll simply say I think you're wrong Tim. We've spent enough. My country can't afford this plane. Your's can't and neither can our allies.
Though I admire your change of direction, and indeed a niggle in my stomach tells me you could be right, I have to outline a couple of things that make this a project that stands above the rest that you are talking about. If find it very difficult to collate thoughts on such a huge subject, as it encompasses the whole defence project issue….
Bear with my rambles and see it from a guy who served in RN for many years, and now has son on “Bombers” in RN
Cost.
Cost is now more analysed than ever before in any airframe. But the arguments to continue usually outweigh the cancellation. We only need to look so far as the initial “Fly off” between Boeing and Lockheed to see that the cheaper option of Boeing with the Harrier technology engine sucked in hot air and was unable to land reliably in a vertical manner.
Therefore the issue we would see is that to go back to the drawing board would only cost more, and put us back in the “Unknown”.
Specification.
The airsystem Lockheed are delivering does exceed specification in many areas and fail or meet revised specification in others. It never was going to be able to do what the Sukhoi and Pak do in manoeuvre. But it would have a more modern databus and capability in electronics. This we are all reliably informed will give us the system we need. This is possibly the most contentious issue. Will the F35 do what they are asking of it, or is the expectation set to high. The only area I find disturbing is the removal of the A10. No airsystem in my opinion can replace the A10 in the role it performs. But A10 are old, and the airframes are getting stressed and I guess now dangerously in need of replacement. At what cost…. (Back to that argument)
Alliance.
This is the real jewel in the crown that the F35 presents. F35 if it is able to do what they say it can do, will give all allies that sign up to it a shared capability. It means the logistics and abilities are known to each ally. Maintenance issues, commonality of spares etc etc make this airsystem easier to support. Allies will be able to cross deck (Whether F35A to airfields) or F35B to ships. The capability of a British carrier will be enormous, when we have USMC F35B and Japanese, Italian also. No nation can go it alone, and alliance is what the world WILL be built on in the future. That has to be good for UK and especially good for the US who has shouldered responsibility of policing the world for to long. F35 brings forwards a better standard of airforce. More nations will participate in “Red Flag” type exercises, with shared purpose and experience of the air system.
Decisions Made.
This is a contentious comment, but we “reap what we sow”.
For good or bad the 3 forces of US and RAF/RN agreed to a single airsystem. Compromise was made on the whole product. USMC and RN / RAF stipulated a single engine design. US Navy wanted a twin engine, but settled for the single engine. USMC/USAF and RN/RAF can not just leave the project as they “Forced it” on the USN. The costs are totally lost, yet we have an airsystem that is flying and testing successfully.
Way forwards.
Perhaps the way forwards is actually to step up production. To call Lockheed/BAE/Pratt and Whitney. TO watch the price come down. TO be able to plan for a cheaper airsystem and then call foul if they do not meet targets. I do not believe based on watching of Typhoon, F14, F15, F22, PAK, even Airbus and Boeing that a new airsystem can be built to cutting edge without delays and cost overruns.
In summary I think we have to step up production to make the airsystem cheaper and more viable as an exported airsystem. We need to keep a hold on costs, but realise that the costs that are thrown around on the Internet are costs that will be incurred regardless of the system that is flying. So in comparison with the most numerous of airsystem (F16) the F35 will be more capable and cheaper. No reskins required and life extensions and re-engine.
We also need to review the requirements for Large Carrier capability. Just looking at the cost of the Ford class makes the eyes water. Finally an acceptance of slightly less for more quantity would also be wise decision on the next weapon system design. I am not convinced our Western desire for technology is best for us.
Regards
