via the BBC
For the past year defence analysts had been expecting the MoD to order 14 of the new jets.Two things jump out at me.
In February, Newsnight was told that it would be placed "within days". But persistent doubts about the F35's enormously complex software, and an engine fire this summer caused successive delays to the decision.
When the British purchase was announced, last month, it was for just four of the planes. The MoD says that this order will allow trials to start from the Queen Elizabeth on time with "UK F35Bs, flown by UK pilots".
But the slowdown in the expected purchasing rate is bound to delay the aircraft's entry into squadron service, say defence insiders.
Former chief of the defence staff General Lord Richards told Newsnight that asking US jets to fly from the Queen Elizabeth would be a sensible way of bridging the gap between the carrier being completed, and a British squadron of jets being available.
The first is that we keep hearing announcements of purchases of jets that never materialize.
The second is that the Brits are actually considering asking USMC F-35B squadrons to operate off their carrier!
I personally find the idea ludicrous. The USMC is going to have to learn how operating the F-35 off our own LHDs will actually work and then there is the pesky situation of sequester affecting the numbers being bought and the optics of having enough to fly off another country's carrier. All that's ignoring the manning requirements, the deployment schedule etc...
But back to the phantom aircraft purchases. The Brits are one of the biggest supporters of this airplane and they haven't pulled the trigger on this 14 plane purchase.
Why?
Perhaps its because the "real" price isn't decreasing as much as is being portrayed in public! We're being sold a bill of goods on this plane and the program office has reached the point of it not being taken seriously. Every statement, announcement etc...can be considered spin if you're being generous and an outright lie if you choose to be factual.
The death spiral is here and now. Lockheed Martin, the Program Office and the Pentagon missed the window to sell thousands of these planes. Budgets world wide simply can't afford the strain of this airplane now.
Yup. Even if the F-35 works perfectly, USMC-air has enough of their own work to do to field this thing. They do not have the time or resources for this.
ReplyDeleteEven money the current plan is, by any means possible, to stave off anyone sticking a fork in this pig until the next administration can be handed the bag.
ReplyDeleteOtherwise, they would have shanked it last spring.
I have a similar answer in response as Aesop. Us Brits are just about to head into a General Election and a follow on strategic defence review. I suspect the total cost of all 14 jets is going to be somewhat unpalatable to a politician just before running for re-election so we won't see any further progress on that until fall 2015.
ReplyDeleteAs for General Lord Richards well it should be noted that he is a "Former" Chief of the Defence Staff and as such he is expected to be vocal, but ignored...just another talking head on TV. Now if it was the First Sea Lord the yes people might pay more attention.
Truth is of all the non US carrier operators (Yes I know we're not quite there yet) the UK at least has a fall back onto STOBAR as the cheap option. So maybe a sloooooow purchase strategy might pay off. I pity those nations who can only fly VTOL/STOVL off their ships because no F35B means no carrier there is zero alternative.
I for one would much prefer ramp assisted F18's with arrested landing as an option if I can't get a catapult on-board, even if it does mean they can only carrier half their stores.
The reason why the purchase is so slooooow is because the drop in price is not materializing, so the parties involved are stretching things out so it doesn't look like a lot of money. Until large number orders are committed the price can not drop. This is simply simple economics. There are so many issues and new ones cropping up like the engines that the program is looking like a mobius strip which in laymen's terms, is going around and around without end.
DeleteOn a different note the RN should install STOBAR on the QE carriers as a way to make them more effective even if they manage to get enough F-35's. At least with arrestor cables there will be options for "other" air assets at some point. Worst case scenario a USN F-18 or FN Rafale could emergency land on the QE during coalition operations if it really had to.
Wasn't the idea to supposedly sell a lot of F-35s so that the more Lockheed Martin sold the lower the price would be. So by using Lockheed Martin's logic all these countries cutting there orders are actually doing more harm than good and if they had just not been spooked out of buying the planes the price might not be so high.
DeleteI am just being devils advocate here. For some reason I feel like that line of argument is bull shit.
http://m.aviationweek.com/defense/israeli-panel-rejects-proposed-increase-f-35
ReplyDelete"For maintaining stealthiness, this aircraft has compromised maneuverability, shorter operational range and significantly less payload capability," a senior Israeli official told Aviation Week. "We shouldn’t be buying so many of them when it is unclear whether the stealth is effective, or there is a countermeasure that would negate it. There are vast gaps in performance between the F-35 and fourth-generation fighters."
Current main "disadvantages" of F-35 -- range and software. Its rather logical to supply less developed allies with 5th gen fighter with limited capabilities, which can be used only for homeland defense.
DeleteBut its obviously that such "digitally" advanced plane would be eventually capable of unmanned flight and combat, which would allow to replace pilot module with additional fuel tank and solve range problem. Of course such F-35UAV would be available for US only.
It's such a great deal they are buying 4 in the first batch and then 2 every year more for the next five years.....for your grand total of 14. Wow, if that's the best commitment from your number 1 foreign customer, no wonder LMT and Bodgan are desperate to get a multi year buy from the other customers....what was it? 50 JSFs a year from foreign buyers?!?
ReplyDeleteAfter russian bear starting its rampage in Ukraine, F-35 future is safe and sound, at least in Europe scared to hell by a russian bear.
ReplyDeleteSince GB does not have any indigenous alternative to F-35 not to mention F-22, and rossiani bombers started flying near its borders regularly, F-35 is the only option.
Existing 4.5gen aircraft are more then a match for the Russian airforce and in the UK at the very least the F-35 is not seen as an air superiority fighter.
DeleteThe problems MoD is having are that its far more expensive then promised and almost 2 decades late,
this ontop of the fact that performance wise it provides very little in real terms that existing aircraft don't already means that if they weren't being forced to buy it due to poor choices on how the carriers were configured it would probably be dropped next SDSR in favor of re-committing to Typhoon Tranche 3B.
If the carriers hasn't been fitted for V/STOL there would be plenty of far more attractive options out there, cutting edge now is better than bleeding edge later.
GB doesn't have any indigenous alternative? They have the US Navy alternative, keep buying 4.5 gen gets and use a stealth UAS. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/10619378/Successful-test-flight-for-Taranis-stealth-drone.html
DeleteThe Queen Elizabeth doesn't currently have a have a catapult or arrestor gear and that would require a significant investment to fix. And that "US Navy alternative" is NOT a valid alternative for reasons beyond count, the least of which being that these multi-role stealth UCAVs capable of independent operations are at least a decade off!
Deletehttp://asia.nikkei.com/magazine/20141127-Abenomics-on-the-ballot/Politics-Economy/East-Asian-waters-to-be-US-aircraft-carrier-free-for-a-time
ReplyDeleteEast Asian waters to be US aircraft carrier-free for a time
TOKYO -- Defense policymakers in Japan and the U.S. are privately voicing concern about the total absence of U.S. aircraft carriers from East Asian waters for four months next year.
Budget constraints at home, combined with the rise of the Islamic State group in the Middle East, are limiting the American fleet's ability to operate in Asia. Temporarily at least, not a single aircraft carrier will be deployed in East Asia.
Not to worry Slowman, that Australian LHD will Asia safe along with that Japanese Heli Carrier. Along with that Phillipino ship deliberatly stranded in the reefs with 20 men aboard.
DeleteI am kidding offcourse. Even my country has spent years without a working Aircraft Carrier.
Killing it isn't that simple, there's a political credibility issue.
ReplyDeleteThe US is trying to set up a US friendly EATO
China is trying to disrupt it.
If the F35 fails the story China will press is that the US has not only abandoned its former allies, it has actively and deliberatly weakened them.
If you're a Korean government leader, do you rethink your anti China pro US policy?
The UK can walk away from the B, convert to cat trap and buy the C, at the cost of a few billion, we can walk away from the C and buy Rafel for a few more.
In the grand scheme of things its not a lot of money, 'Europe should be spending more on defence anyway' might play In the US, might even be true, but it won't go down well in the pacific, except with China.
TrT
Delete> If the F35 fails the story China will press is that the US has not only abandoned its former allies, it has actively and deliberatly weakened them. If you're a Korean government leader, do you rethink your anti China pro US policy?
Actually Asians prefer that the F-35 dies. This would free them from the intense US pressure to buy F-35s, and spend the money on their own twin-engine fighter jets instead.
Or, you could just pick up the phone and call Putin for the PAK-FA. And the way that program is going, you wont have to spend a dime on development costs. That tab is being picked up by Russia and India. Now imagine getting back some of the hard earned money you lost on Outsourcing and getting Bangalored by not spending on R&D on this plane.
DeleteSarabvir Singh
Delete> Or, you could just pick up the phone and call Putin for the PAK-FA
Korea negotiated for PAK-FA and looks like things didn't turn out so well. In retaliation, Russia's threatening to sell PAK-FA to North Korea, and North Korea's no. 2 toured the PAK-FA factory a couple weeks ago.
As for Japan, Russia and Japan are potential combatants with outstanding territorial disputes, so zero possibility of weapons sale to Japan.
South Korea actually negotiated with Russia on the PAK-FA? Now that is news to me. Could you provide a link or two here for my reference?
DeleteIn a weird way I want Russia to give PAK-FA's to the North. It will be an albatross around their neck and over a period of time they will barely be left with 1 squadrons worth of flyable aircraft. This is one Putin Threat that is more bluster than threat.
Would Putin offer a better deal the to South Koreas now knowing he is economically isolated and too much dependence on China for finances is a bad thing?
Why is the UK still in the security council, when countries like japan or india are left out? The brits cant even operate their own brown water navy anymore,and they want a say in the world order? a mouse with lion attitude, pathetic.
ReplyDeleteThe UN is a post WW2 order organization where the victors sit at the security council. Japan was the loser and India was a colony. This is the reason why Taiwan sat in the UN security council until replaced by mainland China, because the Republic of China was the named victor of WW2.
DeleteThere was talk and i believe intense lobbying by Germany, Japan and India and I think Brazil/South Africa (Not sure on the last country) about getting all 4 in the Permanent Security Council.
DeleteGermany- Cant/doesnt want to be a counter to Russia in Europe or atleast champion a "Contain Russia" strategy.
Japan- Economics and Demographics. Nuff Said.
India- We cant even control Pakistan. 95% of our elected representatives and bureaucrats dont even aspire to be a big international player. Its only a miniscule minority that want what the P5 have and have to manage their time lobbying for it vs. uplifting 300 million people out of abject poverty which we have done over the past decade. Now another 300 million people await.
Brazil/South Africa- Not sure about these countries.
In the current P5 only USA, Russia and China actually deserve to be their based on their aspiration and the ability to act on those aspirations. Putin wants Crimea, Putin gets Crimea. USA wants to outsource Asia-Pacific conflict to its deputies....USA gets to do that. China wants to illegally export nuclear knowhow and reactors, they go right ahead. Unless the rest of the world countries act out like the bullying tyrants that these 3 are acting out to be......you have no right to be in the P5.
Now that is a professional rant. Cheerio.
Sarabvir Singh
DeleteOnly Germany and Brazil may sit at the Security Council. Japan and India faces Chinese veto.
The way things are going right now....leave alone Brazil and Germany, even Britain and France must quit. And it should be called the P3.
DeleteThe basic Idea behind the UN Permanent Security Council expansion plan was to have every continent represented by atleast 2 country. That plan fell apart at planning stages only as in this case we can see that there is no African country here but 2 from Asia. And if the plan did go ahead then there would be 3 countries from Asia with China included. And Europe would go to 4 countries from the current 3 with only one having the balls to do something about it.
Chinese Veto? Lol. Now that is a self inflicted misery. If political, diplomatic and bureacratic records and exchanges of that time are to be believed, India was the front runner for UN chair that China occupies now. Of course this had to win Nehru's approval and that Non-Aligned idiot decided that not only would India not take up that mantle, it would courteously pass it on the Chinese in an everlasting gesture of peace and friendship and blah blah.
But in any case, you dont need the UN when you have economics on your side. Then the UN comes to you.
And to the original question about Britain still being in the Permananet Security Council.....its a free vote for the US on all issues near and dear to the anglo-saxon world. On most world issues, you need to lobby hard before any vote. Britain and maybe France are those countries that will give a 3-2 advantage in the P5 to USA over Russia-China combo.
DeleteAnd for any further expansion of the UN, that anglo-saxon advantage will have to be maintained as regards new countries. In which case-
Germany is advantage West.
Japan is advantage West. Even though it is in the East.
India is advantage "No-One" because of our own twisted voting pattern. Eg.- Ask any Indian Foreign Dept. bureacrat about Iran and its Nuclear situation and India's concrete policy on Iran and the whole dept. will tear itself into pieces fighting each other.
Brazil is also advantage No-One as they are far too removed from the current world hot spots and trouble areas.
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/the-russian-air-forces-super-weapon-beware-the-pak-fa-11742
ReplyDelete“The analysis that I have seen on the PAK-FA indicates a pretty sophisticated design that is at least equal to, and some have said even superior to U.S. fifth-generation aircraft,” former U.S. Air Force intelligence chief Lt. Gen. Dave Deptula told the National Interest. “It certainly has greater agility with its combination of thrust vectoring, all moving tail surfaces, and excellent aerodynamic design, than does the F-35.”
I wonder whether they will show off one of the prototypes or actually fly it in the upcomming Bangalore Air Exhibition. There was talk about it, but nothing concrete as of yet. If that happens, it is going to send a strong message to all potential buyers of this craft at a time when US efforts with the F35 are floundering, F22 is not for sale, Japan has only just begun the race and the Chinese have also not released a lot about its plane. If we lobby hard enough, we can make this plane worthwhile.
DeleteImagine an Anti-Israel country in the mid east. Now imagine their thought process where by in their best case scenario where the F35 struggles and the PAK-FA meets deadlines, they are looking at almost half a decade of Equipment lead over Israel. Pilots offcourse are another story. This theory is built upon some big assumptions but to the petro-dollar rich mullah, does it really matter ?
If the F-35 were the ultimate fighter against the Pakfa or the Chinese 5th Gen fighters, all the European countries should have it. Does Germany is planning to use it? or the French? or Swedish? They don't look particulary worried.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UyOnZEapUk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwXcSrMl-gI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOvAtAX3DT0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXtEmZ3lZvA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3-PeY-heho
http://static6.businessinsider.com/image/53f7b569eab8eab560edb7b3-1200-2579/bi_graphics_f35_02_updated.png
The more I look at the JSF-35 Partner countries the more I get a feeling that like those mega-US banks that knew from the begining that they would get a bailout, these countries are also like that. They know the US cant put all of the "Free Worlds" air forces including its own at risk and loose a huge technology lead. And thats why they are still sticking with the F35, albiet with varying degrees of stickiness. They know that if the F-35 fails, that the US will somehow "Bail" them out. A Marshal Plan for the "free worlds" air forces so to speak. Its too big to fail, stakes to high to just let it go.....they all must be thinking.
DeleteAnd in case the F35 fails and creates atleast another decade of time lag, I would be very interested in seeing what the US bail-out will be. Will it be a new aircraft, a modified F35, a new semi-robotic missile/drone ?