Hope in the UK that the F-35 program will change...

via BBC

Britain is to speed up the purchase of new fighter jets to step up its "aircraft carrier punch" Chancellor George Osborne says, as the government prepares to outline defence spending.
The move will be part of Monday's Strategic Defence and Security Review.
It means the UK will have 24 F35 Joint Strike Fighter aircraft available on its two new aircraft carriers by 2023.

This has been burning up the conversation on the blog this morning so I spent a few minutes to get the actual article.  But wait.  They're talking by 2023.  That tells me that once again the Brits are "being cheeky".  The program office is still selling the lie that they will "bend the cost curve" so the Brits are being polite and saying that if you can do so then we'll buy the plane...check this part out and note the wording...

"By 2023, we will be able to have these jets - some of the most powerful in the world - the F35, on the decks of these carriers and Britain, second only to the United States, will be able to project power abroad in order to defend ourselves at home."

Well of course they will have the second most powerful carrier fleet...at least for a year or two till the Chinese get their carriers online...no one else except the French operate full size carriers these days and their ship is on its last legs.

But this last portion is what has everyone atwitter...

In Monday's defence review, David Cameron is also expected to commit the UK to purchasing 138 F35 jets overall and over a longer period of time.

This is the part where the Brits are being 'cheeky'.  What is the longer period of time?  Do you really think that a program line will be kept running over a 30 year period for an airplane that has this many problems this early in development and over a period of 20 plus years?

I don't.  Neither do the Brits.  They're practical.  They were simply being polite.  They were being nice.  They didn't want to laugh in the program office's face.

But make no mistake about it.  They know better.  Planes deferred are planes that aren't bought.  But make note about a part that I skipped but should be highlighted...

The 18 others on order will be used in the training fleet or in maintenance,according to the Sunday Times.

This tells us so much.

The planes that the Brits are buying NOW are worthless.  Only as training and maintenance demonstrators do they have value.  This tells us that the upgrade costs will be so high that the Brits balked.

And that's the rub.  Even for the Brits the costs are just too damn much.  Focus is solidly on the price of these planes for our allies now.  They didn't bend the cost curve and  its coming back to haunt.

This isn't good news.  This is hope in the UK that the F-35 will change...and they're backing it up by hedging their bets.... 

Brussels under serious and immediate threat...troops are in the streets...

via CNN

Belgium has placed Brussels at the highest terror alert level, citing a "serious and imminent threat that requires taking specific security measures as well as specific recommendations for the population."
The announcement by the Crisis Centre of the Belgian Interior Ministry is advising the public to avoid places where large groups gather -- such as concerts, sporting events, airports and train stations -- and comply with security checks. The rest of the nation will maintain its current terror level.
If people take the terror alert seriously, Brussels will be "shut down tomorrow," CNN terrorism analyst Paul Cruickshank said.

Here.

Belgium started moving troops into the streets of Brussels yesterday.  The only reason why I didn't post on it was because of the pushback that I was getting on the illegal immigration in Europe issue and my wanting to see what the European/American bloggers were saying about it.

I've seen nada.

People are in the duck and cover mode because they don't want to be caught saying anything inflammatory.  I get it but think about this.  For the second weekend in a row a major European city is endangered.

Personally I wonder about modern society.  Just 20 years ago this would have been reason enough for vigorous and lethal military action.  The assault against ISIS would have been unrelenting.

Today?

The West is in a defensive crouch saying "mommy make the bad man stop".  I'd be disgusted but this evolution to passivity in the face of danger has been bred into the zeitgeist of the populations on both sides of the Atlantic.  Chesty was right (Some say that this quote is racist.  I might be naive but I believe he was talking about the American race.  If I'm  wrong I'll adjust accordingly).

What did the USAF learn from the F-22 debacle with regard to the F-35?

12Bravo, a reader of mine made this statement...

The two planes you just mentioned,(F-15 & F-16) are the gold standard that the others try to meet in performance. With upgrade to the radar, missiles, & EW you have aircraft that are viable for the future. The F-35 has been in development for over Twenty Years, with another 5 to 10 years before it's ready for service. We put a man on the moon in under 10 years. Twentyfive to thirty years for a aircraft program is pathetic. F-35 should have stayed three separate programs. The F-A/F-X shouldn't be an issue, hopefully everyone learned from the JSF

The part I want to focus on is highlighted.

What did the USAF learn from the F-22 debacle?  I'm afraid it wasn't the right lessons.  You would think that they would have learned to clean up the development cycle.  Developed a reasonable upgrade path from the start...not after threatened with cancellation by a SecDef that didn't have the balls to actually carry it thru.

But no.

The USAF along with (sadly) the USMC and aided by partner nations learned nothing that would actually get the plane into service.

What they learned was how to develop a scheme to make it difficult to cancel.  They plotted to make a so called "vital" defense project a jobs program.

Having so many subcontractors in so many states and nations?  That has nothing to do with efficiency.  I would even argue that it helps DRIVE UP costs instead of lower them.

The USAF learned nothing from the F-22 and that's why the F-35 will probably face the same fate....An extremely truncated buy and the promise that next time they'll get it right. 

UK to reassess the number of F-35's required...

Thanks to ELP Blog for the link!

via The Guardian

The MoD has been struggling to find the money for planes for the two aircraft carriers. Anything less than at least 20 planes for each carrier would be viewed at Westminster as a political embarrassment.
The way around this for the MoD is to stress that only one carrier is likely to be operational at any time, with the other being used for training or being refitted, so planes would only be needed for one.
The MoD originally wanted 138, then slashed it to 48. The plan is to buy an initial 16 F-35s and reassess the position when the carriers are in service.

And the hits just keep on coming.

Initial buy of 16 and then a reassessment?  They're all but saying that the 48 number is a pipe dream.  With plans to retain Typhoon and probably assign a batch to only air defense of the islands I would bet that the RAF pulls out all together.

I wonder if they're crunched the maintenance numbers and want no part of the plane?

Regardless, this is rapidly coming to a head.  The F-35 just costs too damn much for us and our allies.  Death spiral?  Its much worse than that.  This plane is in a flat spin headed out to sea...

Word play and the refugee crisis...

I've been in a running debate about the refugee crisis in Europe.  Many of my readers are asking me if I believe my lying eyes.

I've seen video after video of the refugees in Europe and my eyes instantly note that most of these people are male, fighting age and in some cases hostile.

So why the debate?  Because I've called the refugees Syrian.  I constantly state that the Syrian refugees flooding into your country is an issue.

They then hit me with what they think is their trump card.  "Most of the Syrian refugees are women and children"!

Its bullshit.  They're drilling down on a minor quibble.  The people flooding into Europe are from the Middle East and Africa.  They're economic refugees...and they're mostly fighting age males.

I now know why I find some political arguments so tiresome.  Both sides know the issue but one side is being disingenuous.  In this case its the people that are stating that their is no problem.

You people know better, locked on to one minor point and  use to push your flawed point.  Sickening.

M1A2 Sepv2 Abrams Main Battle Tank @ Combined Resolve V in Grafenwoehr, Germany...photos by Markus Rauchenberger

Why that ungainly and tall RWS?  I really wish the Army had found a better solution.  Regardless the USMC is approaching crunch time when it comes to its own Tank Battalions.  Will they workout some upgrade path piggybacking off the US Army or will they allow this much needed form of all weather direct fire, that's at the beck and call of the Ground Combat Element and it alone to fade away?  I don't know if its fair to compare the German solution because it can be argued that it too is tall but it passes the eyeball test...

The Russian example can also be considered tall but again, it passes the eyeball test and appears more compact.  Is this another example of budget constraints dictating weapons fit or is it a difference in operating philosophy?  I guess it doesn't matter.  We have the most experienced tankers in the world thanks to Afghanistan and Iraq (arguably)....maybe the upgrade path is the correct one.

Sea Wars Trailer

vid via Foxtrot Alpha 



Note:  I usually don't post these type vids because to be quite honest they're usually poorly done, not at all funny and tend to depict aspects of our society that I have issues with (haven't seen a female sailor or god forbid a Marine twerking yet but its bound to happen).

Having said all that, maybe its the Star Wars fan in me but this is just funny, well produced, just plain good and shows a bit of the Carrier Air Wing in a magnificent light.  Well done CVN 69 "IKE"!

Shots Fired! The internal Air Force war between the bomber and fighter factions heats up!

via DoD Buzz

..retired Lt. Gen. Michael R. Moeller this week called for the service to buy between 150 and 200 aircraft as part of the Long Range Strike Bomber, or LRSB, program — up from the 80 to 100 aircraft the Air Force plans to purchase as part of the acquisition effort awarded last month to Northrop Grumman Corp.
“In the long term, to maintain the bomber force’s viability, the Defense Department should consider funding additional advanced bombers beyond those 100 aircraft before the last B-1s and B-52s retire in 2045,” he concludes in a paper released on Wednesday and titled, “U.S. Bomber Force: Sized to Sustain an Asymmetric Advantage for America.”
Moeller wrote the paper as a non-resident fellow of the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies, which is affiliated with the Air Force Association, an advocacy group based in Arlington, Virginia.
Of course, doubling the fleet of long-range precision-strike bombers may also significantly increase the program’s estimated cost.

Here.

THIS IS TOO DELICIOUS!  Now we have the bomber and fighter factions inside the USAF competing for those few precious dollars.  Even better?  Make no mistake about it....this is a shot across the bow of the F-35!  Why do I say that?  Easy.  While the public is focused on ISIS, the services are trying to modernize for a probable war with China.

In my opinion you can take the talk about Russia being the number one threat and put it in your back pocket.  Air-Sea Battle (or whatever they're calling it now....they really need to get over all the rebranding nonsense) is designed to fight one enemy...China.

And in the Pacific the USAF is hobbled by distance.  Long range aircraft will be at a premium  and provide the USAF the best chance of contributing to the air part of the battle plan.

Oh and a juicy side benefit of buying more LRSBs?  You might be able to offset a SMALL portion of the cost by reducing the number of new tankers you have to buy (on this I could easily be wrong...I would imagine the same death spiral scenario that the F-35 is caught in would apply but I don't know enough about procurement and the Tanker contract to be sure).

Regardless.  The budget war is here.

5 Things the Media Won't Report About the Refugee Crisis

Thanks to T.Rob for the link!



Uh....wow.

Rebuttal anyone?

The USAF's reversal on buying F-15's...is it about cost or capability?

Thanks to Mobius for the link!

via The Diplomat.

Interestingly, a senior U.S. Air Force official revealed that “the last time we looked, this was more expensive than buying F-35s in bulk.” However, he confirmed that the option of purchasing 72 aircraft is nevertheless still on the table.
The U.S. Air Force has already asked for cost estimates on procuring new F-15s and life-extension/upgrade options. “Also under consideration is a plan to augment U.S. Air Force electronic attack capabilities by fitting some F-15Es with a version of the Raytheon Next Generation Jammer pod,” the article states.
Overall, the Pentagon is planning to procure 2,457 aircraft by 2038. Total acquisition costs are estimated at over $400 billion making it the U.S. military’s most expensive acquisition program. Operation and support costs throughout the aircraft’s lifetime are estimated at over a $1 trillion.

Here.

We have to ask a serious question.  Is this about cost or capability?  Note that the unnamed USAF official said that the last time he looked buying the F-15 was more expensive.  Of course he could be talking about the fairytale cost estimates that the program has put out or he could be actual and factual.  We don't know.

What we do know is this.  The USAF, USMC and USN have talked about the F-35 acting as a sensor node.  Additionally the USN has always planned on using the F-35 in conjunction with the Super Hornet with the Lightning 2 performing the electronic  attack/ISR mission.  In essence they talked about the plane clearing the way.

Now in this article we not only hear about buying F-15's but also fitting them with Next Generation Jammer Pods.

The F-35 was suppose to render the EA-18Gs obsolete.

So again.  What gives?  Is this about cost or capability?