UK considers getting out of the JSF project

mr.bean · Post by **mr.bean** » 28 Sep 2008, 13:22

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/u ... 837746.ece

Post by **Firebird** » 28 Sep 2008, 14:18

Personally, I think that if they chop the F-35s then the carriers will follow, and yes I know that will involve more canx payments.

The only way I can see that it won't is if they can alter the tranche3 Tiffs to naval versions, but that is going to involve a lot of cost and time and I am not sure that this can work.

Then again politicians have been known to make decisions not seen by regular people for the strangest reasons.

Post by **VulcanDriver** » 28 Sep 2008, 14:32

Well the Army want to spend £500 million on new armoured vehicles for the UK forces in Afghanistan. They've got to get the money from somewhere!

nickblack423 · Post by **nickblack423** » 28 Sep 2008, 14:47

Making the Typhoon Navalised will be a massive undertaking. They havent even got enough strength and reliability in the normal undercarriage, never mind to put it on carriers....the only solution would be to let the yanks do that bit. Then it would be EuroDollarFighter Typhoon.

Nick

Post by **VulcanDriver** » 28 Sep 2008, 15:57

Or buy the French Rafale M!

nickblack423 · Post by **nickblack423** » 28 Sep 2008, 16:12

Super Hornet all the way....!

Nick

Post by **BadPvtDan** » 28 Sep 2008, 16:32

nickblack423 wrote:Super Hornet all the way....!

Nick

They have to wait until we get the AI model.

MIKE JG · Post by **MIKE JG** » 28 Sep 2008, 19:59

Hey they can't bail out now, we need that money, our country is going broke......

planejunky · Post by **planejunky** » 28 Sep 2008, 22:26

I personally think it was travesty that they left the suggestion for a radar in the Harrier out in the cold. If we ordered new build Harriers 50% with radar sets installed, we could return a credible AMRAAM air defence to the fleet, as well has maintaining a 1st class aeroplane in the attack role. The added bonus would be keeping the exsisting upgraded carriers, or building smaller vessels (ideally a bit bigger than the Lusty or Ark) than the planned two carriers.

Controversial yes, but the tax payers purse only goes so far, and the Army really do need to replace the snatch as it's bl00dy dangerous! Besides I haven't yet heard of a Talib complaining about the quality of the Harrier's weapon aiming, they didn't live long enough!

GZR_Sactargets · Post by **GZR_Sactargets** » 01 Oct 2008, 15:33

I guess anyone who can remember Robert McNamara's whiz kids and the F-111 have disappeared. A penalty for getting old is remembering failed DoD programs. Looks like the JSF is another "one size fits all" fairy tale.
If I remember correctly, first the NAVY will reject it as unsuitable for carrier operations and that also takes out the USMC. Then the AF will want different mods which are too difficult and take it into a 'specialized' version of the airframe(FB-111). The ground attack version also becomes a 'red-headed step child.' All the services then dump it after the initial production runs. The Aussies buy a few as an 'interim' aircraft.

Wall Street Journal
October 1, 2008
Pg. 21

Pentagon Aims To Sell Israel Fighter Jets

By August Cole

The Defense Department formally notified Congress that it wants to sell Israel as many as 75 of the latest-model fighter jet, which is being developed under a contract led by Lockheed Martin Corp.

A sale could be worth as much as $15 billion. It would mark the first order from outside the original team of countries working on the jet, the F-35 Lightning II, also known as the Joint Strike Fighter.

The aircraft is intended to replace an array of fighter and attack jets in the American arsenal. Many foreign buyers use those same planes and also are seeking to upgrade. Lockheed is the lead contractor, and the engines for the jets will come from either United Technologies Corp.'s Pratt & Whitney unit or General Electric Co.

According to the Pentagon, the F-35 program will cost almost $300 billion to develop and buy about 2,400 planes, including different versions of the aircraft for the Air Force, Navy and Marines.

Israel has indicated it wants at least 25 jets based on the Air Force version. It may buy an additional 50 jets, which could include a model being developed for the Marines that is capable of short takeoffs and vertical landings. The deal includes spare parts and services.

In its announcement, the Pentagon's Defense Security Cooperation Agency said it told Congress last week about the possible sale. For Israel, the agency said, the planes will "enhance its air-to-air and air-to-ground self-defense capacity." Such a deal won't "affect the basic military balance in the region," according to the agency.

The possible sale, which doesn't require congressional authorization, would be the culmination of years of Israeli interest in the jets.

A Lockheed spokesman said the sale "would be an important first step in expanding interest in the Joint Strike Fighter beyond the U.S. government and eight international F-35 partner nations."

Foreign sales of the F-35 are key for Lockheed and the Pentagon, which hopes to keep costs down by spreading them out over more planes. Eight U.S. allies, including the U.K. and Australia, are involved in developing the plane and likely will buy jets as well.

The U.S. is expected to get the first deliveries in 2010. Other countries would receive them in batches in subsequent years.

The announcement marks the latest in a series of significant U.S. arms sales to the region. Iraq is interested in advanced tanks, fighters and helicopters and has more than $10 billion of U.S. weapons deals lined up. The United Arab Emirates is set to get sophisticated antimissile systems worth more than $7 billion.

Lockheed stands to benefit from other potential sales to Israel. This summer, the U.S. said Israel wants to buy four advanced Lockheed warships, called the Littoral Combat Ship, designed for coastal operations. That deal could be worth as much as $1.9 billion to Lockheed, according to the Defense Security Cooperation Agency.

The longtime U.S. ally is also seeking to buy nine Lockheed C-130 transport planes and related items, worth $1.9 billion. Israel already flies F-16 fighters, which are made by Lockheed.

Post by **VulcanDriver** » 01 Oct 2008, 16:25

I had heard rumours a few months ago that the IDF wanted the F-35 and I assume they will be going for the J model C-130. Theirs a painfully old.

John

lowlevelRAF · Post by **lowlevelRAF** » 04 Oct 2008, 15:10

I agree with keeping and modifing the harriers!!!!! The F-35 is rubbish as it couldn't fit a standard RAF 1000lb'er is the bomb bay!!

The tiffie could be upgraded for carrier use but as many people have said before me that it would take time and cost. Overall, keep and make new harriers!!!

Or for a laugh they could try and make the tonka gr.4 carrier based

lol!!

92rc11 · Post by **92rc11** » 04 Oct 2008, 17:27

keep the harriers for the but buy the super hornet for the navy cause it can fill all roles and with a conventional carrier we can get hawkeye

mr.bean · Post by **mr.bean** » 09 Oct 2008, 22:39

Italians get out of JSF project
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/cgi-bi ... le=release

Jumpshot724 · Post by **Jumpshot724** » 09 Oct 2008, 23:22

I guess anyone who can remember Robert McNamara's whiz kids and the F-111 have disappeared. A penalty for getting old is remembering failed DoD programs. Looks like the JSF is another "one size fits all" fairy tale.
If I remember correctly, first the NAVY will reject it as unsuitable for carrier operations and that also takes out the USMC. Then the AF will want different mods which are too difficult and take it into a 'specialized' version of the airframe(FB-111). The ground attack version also becomes a 'red-headed step child.' All the services then dump it after the initial production runs. The Aussies buy a few as an 'interim' aircraft.

While I wasn't around yet I did study that whole mess quite a bit when I was in AFROTC. The also could be because my Colonel was an F-111 WSO until they retired it....