via YNETnews.
While declining to go into detail about the closed-door discussions, Steinitz cited misgivings about whether the F-35's range, payload and manoeuvrability would suit Israel's needs. The Israelis are also husbanding a defense budget which, though buoyed by some $3 billion in annual US grants, faces cuts.I've been getting bombed with the news that the F-35 was going to be bought in fewer numbers than the Israeli Air Force wanted.
Other concerns include the fact the jet's electronic systems are American-made, and Israel will not be able to equip it with Israeli-made systems. This would also have ramifications on exports of the Israeli Military Industry to foreign air forces.
The Americans can also supervise the use made of the plane, which led Britain to threaten to cancel its purchase.
The decision is a blow to the security establishment and to the Air Force. According to ministers who took part in the discussions, this is the first time in years the ministerial committee refuses to automatically approve a defense purchase request.
The ministers were angry that the defense establishment announced the purchase as a "done deal."
Considering the way that the Obama Administration has acted toward the Israeli State...the fact that the Israeli Prime Minister would probably like to toss another brick in the window of the administration...I initially blew this off to politics.
Then I re-read the article.
"...Misgivings about whether the F-35's range, payload and manoeuverability would suit Israel's needs..."That is a damning indictment of the F-35.
Additionally though it adds to the confusion surrounding the program. If this is how they really feel about the airplane then what is prompting them to purchase any of them?
My guess? Politics. Supposed ties to the US military and intel communities. And probably a desire to get their hands on one so that they can do an accurate assessment of capabilities that will be in the hands of Turkey and possibly other Muslim nations in the region.
It's a basic struggle between the people who will use it (the IDF) and the people who allocate the budget. The budget planners there have already stated their misgivings over committing such a large chunk of the annual budget over such a short period of time for a single program.
ReplyDeleteNote that this is a reduction to a previously unplanned second buy of F-35s. Once the F-35 starts strutting it's stuff publicly then I am sure that we'll see a third order.
The idea of F-35Bs on Canberra class shot down.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.9news.com.au/national/2014/11/17/20/06/carrier-jets-don-t-stack-up-study-finds
F-35 jump jets for navy landing ships not worth the cost, study finds
"Therefore, the 2015 Defence White Paper should not announce a decision or intention to acquire jump jets for the Australian Defence Force," it said.
The STOVL is also the most expensive F-35 with the shortest range and lowest weapon load. ASPI calculates 18-24 of these aircraft would cost $5 billion plus another $7 billion of through-life costs.
um, You are aware that you posted to a thread that has NOTHING to do with the F-35B, Canberra, or even Australia. :)
DeleteAmazing ship. They should buy some Marine's Harriers.
Deletehttp://youtu.be/NnHGlxfstfQ
Nobody's Harriers are for sale and if you could find any, then they have no flight hours left on them.
Deleteyou're smoking crack. the USMC has over 100 ex-brit harriers sitting in the desert that were basically brand new that are waiting to be parted out. we can fly the harrier till 2030 if the air wing wasn't bent on destroying the Marine Corps.
DeleteThose Harriers could use Amraams, Aim-9X, LRASM etc and could be covered by the Growlers like they did in Lybia.
DeleteWith an arrest cable I don't see any problem to landing them, they have enough space and with the ship at 30 knots they could take off using the ski ramp. Whatch the video, how much space they need for landing. They don't need to carry bombs. That's the job of the harriers.
http://youtu.be/qpIq1RQ7jJM
http://youtu.be/bZZONR-pN74
http://youtu.be/FDNJnIbNlLA
The USMC bought the Brit Harriers in order to keep theirs flying, hence the part of my response saying "none for sale". If the USMC sold them then they would have to radically rework their F-35B acquisition plans.
DeleteThose ex-Brit Harriers are parts to cannibalize, not much more. Even if they were in a "for-sale" condition Australia would be buying an aircraft that's wouldn't be up to the task of going against the air defenses of a modern opponent.
DeleteHell the Canberra already has a ski-jump on it, it's a waste to not take advantage of that sort of ship, and the Aussies will already have a logistics base set up for the F-35A so they won't need new-everything.
One think-tank's thoughts does not doom the idea, especially with tensions rising in the pacific region.
Also the F-35C was the most expensive variant last I checked, not the F-35B.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Delete""...Misgivings about whether the F-35's range, payload and manoeuverability would suit Israel's needs...""
ReplyDeleteThis is a very interesting point
The F35 kinda sucks if theres a decent radar scanning the runway, all that stealth is great when the radar are far away, but close in, no dice.
It has uses for Israel, but even at brochure spec, its in trouble if it gets bounced on the runway.
Radar is LOS, so what radar can see Israeli runways?
DeleteIt is also a "basic problem" of the aircraft not working very well (faulty design and project management).
ReplyDeleteHalf the F-35s? That ought to mean they only get half of that extra money we're going to give them.
ReplyDeleteRange payload and maneuverability concerns? I hate to break it to Israel but the fighter with the range and payload they want (probably close to the old F-111) doesn't exist. A long range strike aircraft like that also isn't going to have 1st class maneuverability. F-15E variants (like those they already have) are about the best they can do for that mission. As it is the F-35A will compare well enough to their F-16I so what sort of maneuverability are they looking for?
Looking a gift horse in the mouth as it were.
no. they're looking at the airplane as its being marketed. currently they have F-16's that can do the same job but costs less. additionally if they need a long range striker then they can develop a stealth UAV.
Deletethis was a brilliant move. a move that the USN is trying to get across to the money barons in Congress.
Israel is still worried about Iran even if they've fallen off the radar due to conflicts elsewhere. Saying "develop a stealth UAV" is a lot easier than actually doing it. At the moment the United States, Europe, and other major powers are only testing "next-gen" UCAV demonstrators and not flying them operationally.
DeleteI wouldn't be surprised if we have some classified UAVs like the RQ-170 (but with some weapons capability) in service. Yet bombing targets in Pakistan is a lot easier than a theoretical strike on an Iranian nuclear complex. That needs a significant self-protection capability, advanced ESM, and AI advanced enough to do the mission in case communications are lost. You're talking about a sensor suite comparable to whats on the F-35 and that isn't a cheap or easy undertaking.
If all they're worried about are their close neighbors then the range and payload concerns don't seem to have much merit. Nor does maneuverability unless they've decided they really want something like the F-22.
"As the U.S. services near their F-35 operational debuts, the program office and Lockheed Martin are planning to propose a discounted price for international partners willing to participate in a “block buy” of the jets from low-rate, initial production lots 11-13, which will deliver aircraft beginning in 2019. This will be key to stabilizing the supply chain, says Lorraine Martin, executive vice president of F-35 for Lockheed. Notionally, it would include about 50 international aircraft per year for three years; deliveries would be spread across three years, but the commitment would come upfront. “We will expect that block buy to yield them savings,” Bogdan says. “It is a motivation to keep people stable in the program.”"
ReplyDeleteSo, foreign buyers will get a better price than US DoD? I thought that was illegal. And why are we starting to hear from Bogdan about motivating customers to stay "stable" in the program? Someone (s) is having second thoughts?!?
http://aviationweek.com/defense/redesigned-tailhook-tests-well-f-35-sea-trials
It's not illegal because LM would offer the USG if they also bought in bulk.
DeleteUpdate:
ReplyDelete(Source: Yeshiva World; posted Nov 17, 2014)
Members of the Ministerial Equipment Committee opposing the purchase of 31 US-built F-35 next generation fighter planes explain “we will no longer simply be a rubber stamp for purchase requests”.
The committee voted against the request for 31 of the planes, which cost $142 million each, only approving the purchase of 12-15 of them. There is a stipulation that in three years, after the first F-35s are delivered to Israel, the committee will be willing to reexamine the purchase of additional planes.
Officials add that this marks the first time in a number of years that the committee failed to automatically approve a shopping list presented by the Israel Air Force or the defense establishment.
Committee members were angered at media reports that the deal was approved before the committee convened to give its verdict, signaling the defense establishment took a stamp of approval for granted. (end of excerpt)
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/headlines-breaking-stories/271894/ministerial-committee-nixes-f35-purchase.html#sthash.UEnWwuBK.dpuf