Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning and F-22 'Raptor' : News & Discussion

[_Anonymous_]

I mean consider doesn't mean going to do.

The original idea was to replace the F-16 with the F-35 . So if they've already commissioned a study , I'd think there was definitely a rethink in the USAF otherwise the logical thing to do is place orders with LM for replacements of the F-16 & that too on a yesterday basis given the sheer quantum of orders for the JSF

 

[Innominate]

I never claimed the DoD or Congress initiated the King Snake program did I ? Yes the designation as well as the pennant number is coined by the media but the program does exist within the USAF.

My query , for the benefit of dyslexics , which I shall repeat here , is why's it that the USAF has chosen to replace the F-16 with a clean sheet 4.5 Gen design instead of persisting with the F-35 as originally planned ? What's wrong with the F-35 & more importantly what's wrong with the USAF , TEEHEE ?

For the benefit of autistic dyslexics , here are a few excerpts from a popular US journal :

The Air Force is launching a study into what mix of tactical aircraft the service should field in the 2020s, Air Force Chief of Staff C.Q. Brown recently said at a media event, per Breaking Defense. The study should be complete by 2023.

The Air Force will consider a “clean sheet design” for a new “four-and-a-half-gen or fifth-gen-minus” fighter as a direct replacement for the F-16s currently in service, Brown said.


This is curious news, considering the Air Force has insisted for decades the replacement for the F-16 was the F-35A Joint Strike Fighter. The Air Force has also insisted it would never buy another non-stealthy fighter jet again.

The Air Force May Build a 4.5-Generation Fighter Jet to Replace the F-16

This wasn't supposed to happen.

www.popularmechanics.com

May, could, consider and study.

Like I said headlines meant for the gullible.

 

[_Anonymous_]

May, could, consider and study.

Like I said headlines meant for the gullible.

What about the internal study the USAF has launched , TEEHEE ? Didn't you see the statement made by USAF CoS C Q Brown ?

 

[zinswinsin]

Lockheed's F-35A could face first price rise in years as inflation bites

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -Lockheed Martin Corp said future F-35A fighter jets could be more expensive as rising inflation and customer demands halt a 64% drop in price since the jet was first introduced in 2007. Since then, production quantities and know-how have increased, helping the price of the...

finance.yahoo.com

By Mike Stone
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -Lockheed Martin Corp said future F-35A fighter jets could be more expensive as rising inflation and customer demands halt a 64% drop in price since the jet was first introduced in 2007.
The first F-35A cost $221 million when it came off the production line in 2007. Since then, production quantities and know-how have increased, helping the price of the stealthy fifth-generation fighter drop to $79 million today as it gained appeal and buyers in 15 countries.

That trend may be over for the jet which has been criticized for its cost since the day it first took flight. A price increase will open Lockheed to complaints from U.S. lawmakers who will not want to see more money spent on the Pentagon's most expensive program. Moreover, the news comes as Lockheed negotiates its next contract with customers including the Pentagon.
Kenneth Possenriede, Lockheed's CFO, told analysts in a conference call that "due to where we are in learning, due to where we are with inflation and due to where we are with the added capabilities that they want on the aircraft, it is likely you'll see an increase in prices, a modest increase in prices of where we are today."
The F-35 comes in three configurations, the A-model for the U.S. Air Force and U.S. allies; an F-35 B-model, which can handle short takeoffs and vertical landings; and carrier-variant F-35C jets for the U.S. Navy.
Possenriede said the price for B and C variants would likely "either stay where it is or continue to come down the learning curve."
Lockheed raised its full-year earnings per share guidance as the U.S. weapons supplier's space business boosted revenue in the second quarter, while a $225 million loss in a classified aeronautics development program caused the company to miss analyst's earning per share estimates."

 

[Innominate]

What about the internal study the USAF has launched , TEEHEE ? Didn't you see the statement made by USAF CoS C Q Brown ?

You know how many "internal studies" the USAF has a year? Puh-leeze.

 

[_Anonymous_]

You know how many "internal studies" the USAF has a year? Puh-leeze.

Let me rephrase my question then TEEHEE : why hasn't the USAF placed orders with LM for the F-35s as replacements of the F-16 ? Besides why have they commissioned this study to replace the F-16s with a "clean sheet 4.5 Gen or minus 5th Gen " Fighter Aircraft in Air Chief Brown's own words ? Why this regression ? Aren't 4.5 Gen aircrafts meant to be operated by 3rd world countries who can't afford the 5th Gen Winged Pegasus ? Are you saying the US is broke ?

 

[Innominate]

Let me rephrase my question then TEEHEE : why hasn't the USAF placed orders with LM for the F-35s as replacements of the F-16 ? Besides why have they commissioned this study to replace the F-16s with a "clean sheet 4.5 Gen or minus 5th Gen " Fighter Aircraft in Air Chief Brown's own words ? Why this regression ? Aren't 4.5 Gen aircrafts meant to be operated by 3rd world countries who can't afford the 5th Gen Winged Pegasus ? Are you saying the US is broke ?

Because they are waiting for blcok 4. USAF wanted 72 F-35's per year but have to settle for low 40's due to everything that happened with slowing of production. Upgrading their F-35-blk3f to 4 will come out of their budget so they have slowed down purchasing and once blk 4 is ready they will increase their purchase. By 2030 USAF will have over 1000 F-35As the F-16 is not going to last too much longer.

 

[_Anonymous_]

Because they are waiting for blcok 4. USAF wanted 72 F-35's per year but have to settle for low 40's due to everything that happened with slowing of production. Upgrading their F-35-blk3f to 4 will come out of their budget so they have slowed down purchasing and once blk 4 is ready they will increase their purchase. By 2030 USAF will have over 1000 F-35As the F-16 is not going to last too much longer.

Still doesn't explain why they would initiate a study for a "clean sheet 4.5 Gen or minus 5th Gen " Fighter Aircraft in Air Chief Brown's own words as a replacement for the F-16s more so when the USAF swore not so long ago that all future procurements of the USAF would be 5th Gen Fighter Aircrafts & beyond.

I mean there's already so much experience that the USAF has with 4.5 Gen & older aircrafts , why this new study ? It'd make sense if the USAF was planning a Checkmate like low cost variant of the F-35 but that's clearly not the aim of this study program. They specifically are studying a 4.5 Gen minus 5th Gen replacement for the F-16 . They couldn't be more explicit & clear about their requirements.

 

[Saaho]

Lol. F-16 lost due to politics and not wanting to fly the same fighter that Pakistan flies including same weapons. It also doesn't understand net-centric warfare which the F-16 and F-18 was going to have.

No, F-16s and F-18s were simply not up to the task against Rafale and is a dead end fighter. USA was not going to invest in it at all with F-35 on horizon. Rafale on the other hand was being constantly updated. Besides who wants to fly a 70s fighter in 2010s?

The moment India is offered the same equipment as Pakistan, you pretty much know it’s going to be rejected. Although, India had no hesitation buying the same manufacturer’s C-130 transport aircraft, which Pakistan also operates. However, the IAF, instead of looking at how its aircraft perform in combat situations, seems to be obsessed about fitting them with one particular missile: the European Meteor. The Meteor missile’s long range outclasses the F-16’s primary long-range air-to air weapon, the AMRAAM.

Well, see first shoot first. Dont bring sword to a gunfight, am i right?

 

[Innominate]

Still doesn't explain why they would initiate a study for a "clean sheet 4.5 Gen or minus 5th Gen " Fighter Aircraft in Air Chief Brown's own words as a replacement for the F-16s more so when the USAF swore not so long ago that all future procurements of the USAF would be 5th Gen Fighter Aircrafts & beyond.

I mean there's already so much experience that the USAF has with 4.5 Gen & older aircrafts , why this new study ? It'd make sense if the USAF was planning a Checkmate like low cost variant of the F-35 but that's clearly not the aim of this study program. They specifically are studying a 4.5 Gen minus 5th Gen replacement for the F-16 . They couldn't be more explicit & clear about their requirements.

It was a threat by Brown to keep cost low Brown never brought up F-36 Kingsnake. "F-36 Kingsnake" is literary a fictional aircraft whimsically created by the staff at a magazine for clicks on the internet, that is completely unofficial. even the name should have tipped you off.

-
Senior U.S. Air Force leaders recently reemphasized their support for the F-35, calling the 5th Generation fighter the “cornerstone” of the Air Force’s tactical capability. The remarks were intended to clarify recent erroneous media coverage claiming that the “Air Force has admitted the F-35 program has failed.”

During a Feb. 25 news conference at the Air Force Association’s Aerospace Warfare Symposium, Gen. Charles Q. Brown, Jr., Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force, debunked this claim, stating that “the F-35 is the cornerstone of the U.S. Air Force fighter fleet” today and in the future.

Brown, the U.S. Air Force’s top uniformed officer, confirmed that the Air Force’s program of record is 1,763 F-35As, and clarified that the Air Force is “not going to take money from the F-35” to fund the Air Force’s Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) plans.

On Feb. 26, Acting Secretary of the Air Force John Roth added that the F-35 is “the core airplane going forward.”

U.S. Air Force: F-35 is the ‘Cornerstone’ - Breaking Defense

"The F-35 is the cornerstone of the U.S. Air Force fighter fleet” today and in the future, said Chief of Staff Gen. Charles Brown.

breakingdefense.com

 

[_Anonymous_]

It was a threat by Brown to keep cost low Brown never brought up F-36 Kingsnake. "F-36 Kingsnake" is literary a fictional aircraft whimsically created by the staff at a magazine for clicks on the internet, that is completely unofficial. even the name should have tipped you off.

-
Senior U.S. Air Force leaders recently reemphasized their support for the F-35, calling the 5th Generation fighter the “cornerstone” of the Air Force’s tactical capability. The remarks were intended to clarify recent erroneous media coverage claiming that the “Air Force has admitted the F-35 program has failed.”

During a Feb. 25 news conference at the Air Force Association’s Aerospace Warfare Symposium, Gen. Charles Q. Brown, Jr., Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force, debunked this claim, stating that “the F-35 is the cornerstone of the U.S. Air Force fighter fleet” today and in the future.

Brown, the U.S. Air Force’s top uniformed officer, confirmed that the Air Force’s program of record is 1,763 F-35As, and clarified that the Air Force is “not going to take money from the F-35” to fund the Air Force’s Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) plans.

On Feb. 26, Acting Secretary of the Air Force John Roth added that the F-35 is “the core airplane going forward.”

U.S. Air Force: F-35 is the ‘Cornerstone’ - Breaking Defense

"The F-35 is the cornerstone of the U.S. Air Force fighter fleet” today and in the future, said Chief of Staff Gen. Charles Brown.

breakingdefense.com

I observed you seem to have the choicest of abuses to utter when anyone quotes a source contrary to your held beliefs but you yourself have no qualms quoting an article by Lockheed Martin on a defense portal & linking it here to boost your position. Are you insulting our intelligence or yours?

I wanted to ask you this TEEHEE - Are you Irish by any chance? You argue like one. I certainly hope you don't think you're engaging with an Irishman here.

Let me repeat my question .
Read it S-L-O-W-L-Y.
I'm sure you won't commit the same errors that autistic dyslexics normally do which you would if you don't read it S-L-O-W-L-Y .

Still doesn't explain why they would initiate a study for a "clean sheet 4.5 Gen or minus 5th Gen " Fighter Aircraft in Air Chief Brown's own words as a replacement for the F-16s more so when the USAF swore not so long ago that all future procurements of the USAF would be 5th Gen Fighter Aircrafts & beyond.

I mean there's already so much experience that the USAF has with 4.5 Gen & older aircrafts , why this new study ? It'd make sense if the USAF was planning a Checkmate like low cost variant of the F-35 but that's clearly not the aim of this study program. They specifically are studying a 4.5 Gen minus 5th Gen replacement for the F-16 . They couldn't be more explicit & clear about their requirements.

Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning and F-22 'Raptor' : News & Discussion

I mean consider doesn't mean going to do. The original idea was to replace the F-16 with the F-35 . So if they've already commissioned a study , I'd think there was definitely a rethink in the USAF otherwise the logical thing to do is place orders with LM for replacements of the F-16 & that too...

www.strategicfront.org

As you may have noticed ( if you've read it S-L-O-W-L-Y ) there's absolutely no mention of the word King Snake or the pennant number in this post.

Further, you've mentioned Brown issued this threat to keep the cost of the JSF low. It's already down to some 80 million USD today from the 300 million USD at which the first procured JSF flew in 2007 . Further the LM chairman is on record stating that on account of inflation & other factors the price of the F-35 A would see an escalation which would be moderate. However, the other variants won't see any change in it's price tag.

If Brown intended to scare LM , I'd say he did a good job. Which brings me back to my query . Pls read the highlighted text in this post once again. That's right. S-L-O-W-L-Y


P. S - If you don't know the answer, pls be honest enough to admit your ignorance rather than sticking your head up your Rosebud & typing with both feet firmly in your mouth.

 

[Innominate]

I observed you seem to have the choicest of abuses to utter when anyone quotes a source contrary to your held beliefs but you yourself have no qualms quoting an article by Lockheed Martin on a defense portal & linking it here to boost your position. Are you insulting our intelligence or yours?

I wanted to ask you this TEEHEE - Are you Irish by any chance? You argue like one. I certainly hope you don't think you're engaging with an Irishman here.

Let me repeat my question .
Read it S-L-O-W-L-Y.
I'm sure you won't commit the same errors that autistic dyslexics normally do which you would if you don't read it S-L-O-W-L-Y .

Still doesn't explain why they would initiate a study for a "clean sheet 4.5 Gen or minus 5th Gen " Fighter Aircraft in Air Chief Brown's own words as a replacement for the F-16s more so when the USAF swore not so long ago that all future procurements of the USAF would be 5th Gen Fighter Aircrafts & beyond.

I mean there's already so much experience that the USAF has with 4.5 Gen & older aircrafts , why this new study ? It'd make sense if the USAF was planning a Checkmate like low cost variant of the F-35 but that's clearly not the aim of this study program. They specifically are studying a 4.5 Gen minus 5th Gen replacement for the F-16 . They couldn't be more explicit & clear about their requirements.

Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning and F-22 'Raptor' : News & Discussion

I mean consider doesn't mean going to do. The original idea was to replace the F-16 with the F-35 . So if they've already commissioned a study , I'd think there was definitely a rethink in the USAF otherwise the logical thing to do is place orders with LM for replacements of the F-16 & that too...

www.strategicfront.org

As you may have noticed ( if you've read it S-L-O-W-L-Y ) there's absolutely no mention of the word King Snake or the pennant number in this post.

Further, you've mentioned Brown issued this threat to keep the cost of the JSF low. It's already down to some 80 million USD today from the 300 million USD at which the first procured JSF flew in 2007 . Further the LM chairman is on record stating that on account of inflation & other factors the price of the F-35 A would see an escalation which would be moderate. However, the other variants won't see any change in it's price tag.

If Brown intended to scare LM , I'd say he did a good job. Which brings me back to my query . Pls read the highlighted text in this post once again. That's right. S-L-O-W-L-Y


P. S - If you don't know the answer, pls be honest enough to admit your ignorance rather than sticking your head up your Rosebud & typing with both feet firmly in your mouth.

THERE IS NOT ENOUGH F-35A'S THAT CAN REPLACE THE F-16 WHICH ARE STARTING TO WEAR DOWN WHICH IS WHY THERE'S A STUDY ABOUT REPLACING F-16'S WITH 4TH GEN FIGHTERS JUST LIKE THE F-15EX IS REPLACING F-15C BUT A LOT "CHEAPER" BUT IT'S JUST A STUDY THAT WILL GO NOWHERE!!

You get it now? It has nothing to do with the F-35's capabilities which you are sneakily implying. If USAF could they would replace the F-15c and F-16 with F-35A's but because of delays due to many reasons including covid they can't.

It's a study that will go nowhere and you will go back being miserable that the F-35 is here to stay, getting selected by nations that don't want Rafail.

 

[SammyBoi]

It's a study that will go nowhere and you will go back being miserable that the F-35 is here to stay, getting selected by nations that don't want Rafail and that you live in India which would make me suicidal if I live in a country known for pooping in public.

Really @WHOHE, you're gonna abuse us like that, with that crappy argument that has been non-existent for years now? In a defense forum, seriously? Do you even have any idea how much stuff we've bought from you guys this past decade, brushing aside other competitors? And just 'cuz we don't buy the F-35, the IAF become a bunch of bungling fools? And then, your government expects us to help 'em corner the Chinese...... Jeez!!

 

[_Anonymous_]

THERE IS NOT ENOUGH F-35A'S THAT CAN REPLACE THE F-16 WHICH ARE STARTING TO WEAR DOWN WHICH IS WHY THERE'S A STUDY ABOUT REPLACING F-16'S WITH 4TH GEN FIGHTERS JUST LIKE THE F-15EX IS REPLACING F-15C BUT A LOT "CHEAPER" BUT IT'S JUST A STUDY THAT WILL GO NOWHERE!!

You get it now? It has nothing to do with the F-35's capabilities which you are sneakily implying. If USAF could they would replace the F-15c and F-16 with F-35A's but because of delays due to many reasons including covid they can't.

It's a study that will go nowhere and you will go back being miserable that the F-35 is here to stay, getting selected by nations that don't want Rafail and that you live in India which would make me suicidal if I live in a country known for pooping in public.

So you're of Irish origin. Just as I suspected. How did I find out , you ask ? You're cock eyed reasoning gave you away TEEHEE. Your rant which I've quoted with & without the CAPS is another manifestation of your intelligence or lack of it.

Here you were a few posts ago hectoring India on what a wonderful bird the F-16 is only to now admit the F-16 is breaking down & that too rapidly which prompts the question that if the USAF could order the F-15 EX, surely the F-21s could replace the aging & rapidly wearing F-16s. It could serve the purpose of the USAF till such time as the latest blocks of F-35s came in or the NGAD or some other alternative. Yet all manufacturing of the F-16s has ceased & the factory shut down.

I'm not sneakily implying anything. I'm openly questioning your grand assumptions & declarations of the F-35s being the next best thing in the world to your mom's apple pie or to be more precise, given your ethnicity - Irish Shepherd's Pie with Guinness in your case.

In any case the study commissioned by the USAF is to be submitted by 2023 & I assume it'd take a couple of years to pass thru the Pentagon bureaucracy to make it's way to the Congress for a sanctioned budget in case the USAF accepts the findings which translates to a clean sheet "4.5 Gen or Minus 5th Gen Fighter design" taking to the skies by 2030 at the very minimum. From there on to the first squadron roll out should be another 5 yrs.

Hence, whichever way you look at it, the F-16s would be phased out by mid 2030's even if we take into account the " severe delays in the production of F-35s due to Covid 19 & other factors " resulting in the replacements for F-16 with F-35s by around the same timelines, assuming we go by your contention that the F-35s will eventually replace the F-16s.

Hence, as is obvious the study is well timed. The USAF is keeping all it's options open which can't be good news for LM & certainly doesn't show the F-35 in good light.

 

[Innominate]

Really @WHOHE, you're gonna abuse us like that, with that crappy argument that has been non-existent for years now? In a defense forum, seriously? Do you even have any idea how much stuff we've bought from you guys this past decade, brushing aside other competitors? And just 'cuz we don't buy the F-35, the IAF become a bunch of bungling fools? And then, your government expects us to help 'em corner the Chinese...... Jeez!!

Sorry dude but it's not at you and nobody says anything when he calls me a hillbilly so I give as he gives.

And it's not about India buying F-35's it's about the BS claims that some in here who happen to be Indians spew out about the F-35. It's like they can't live with the fact the F-35 is vastly superior to the Rafale. It really drives people nuts.

 

[Lolwa]

I mean consider doesn't mean going to do. It's just standard business tactics threaten a competitor so they drop costs.

Also even if this is true, it doesn't seem surprising as the Digital Series Plan is to pump out way more aircraft types fast. NGAD as the same time as an F-16 replacement does seem weird.

Nah what f35 experienced is a typical case of "Pentagon Wars". The plane was made to do too many things and in the process was mediocre in most. The good part is that Americans made a solid tech base so that they can just use these components for a future system. F35 is just expensive to maintain even for the U.S
It's actually quite logical for going for a 4.75+ gen plane since the Americans don't have something in that class except maybe the Super-hornet. But They need a cheap plane for air-policing,interception. That's what the su-75 is designed for. It's designed as a f16 a/b type fighter but in fifth gen formant .Cheap plane but with fifth gen capabilities and basically used for interception and airspace defence. Though I know it's more of marketing than anything else..Americans just need a supercruise capable single engined fighter that can replace there f15 and f16 from air policing and interception and other cheaper mission sets where f35 is an overkill..

 

[SammyBoi]

It's like they can't live with the fact the F-35 is vastly superior to the Rafale.

I think its a painfully obvious fact that the F-35 is superior to the Rafale F3R, in the present configurations, atleast. Just by virtue of the former being a true 5th gen aircraft. But maybe, just maybe, the F4.2 will surpass the Lightning II.

 

[randomradio]

F-35 was never offered to India. Infact, F-16 was offered with F-35 as a carrot dangling.

The F-35 was offered to India, but as part of GTG instead of a tender, since the Americans did not want to enter a tender with the Russians in it. Their offer was for India to make the purchase first and they will show off the technologies after that. It obviously wouldn't work out. Plenty of F-35 presentations have been made in India.

F-35 Lightning II Presentation to IAF - Livefist

After a first-level-of-detail presentation to the Navy in 2005 on the F-35C Lightning II, a top team from Lockheed-Martin gave the Indian Air Force a classified presentation on the F-35A Lightning II on Tuesday at Vayu Bhawan. The team, led by Tom Green (VP, Business Development), gave the IAF a…

www.livefistdefence.com

You don't make classified presentations to a country when you have no interest in making an offer. Even the F-22 was offered, when the plan was to restart the production line and offer it for export.

The US had also positively responded to IN's request for F-35Bs and Cs for the carrier. But the carrier being Russian, it was a problem. A better option would be to convert western helicopter carriers for small fleets of F-35Bs instead, but we do not have that kind of money yet, so maybe in the future.

The F-35 wasn't offered for ToT and Indian production, this according to the Americans could be done only after India produced F-16s, which is merely a marketing ploy. They will come running the minute we restart negotiations for Su-57's production. So people tend to confuse this with the GTG offer.

So, if we want a small fleet of F-35s directly from American lines, we can get it. Since we have STA-1 status, we can buy anything we want from the US that's been earmarked for exports to any NATO country.

India third Asian nation to get STA-1 status from U.S.

India is the 37th country to be designated the STA-1 status by the United States.

www.thehindu.com

We simply don't have enough money to make use of this clearance.

 

[Saaho]

The F-35 was offered to India, but as part of GTG instead of a tender, since the Americans did not want to enter a tender with the Russians in it. Their offer was for India to make the purchase first and they will show off the technologies after that. It obviously wouldn't work out. Plenty of F-35 presentations have been made in India.

Lockheed Martin denies offering India fifth-generation F-35 fighter

US firm sticks with older F-16 in Indian "single-engine fighter" tender

www.business-standard.com

It was never offered as is to India. It was an eventuality. BTW, that presentation is 13 year old. At that point of time, India would have been joining at the end of the line to recieve F-35s because founding partners would have recieved the fighter first. Hence, take F-16 now to address your immediate requirement and then buy F-35s in due time.

You don't make classified presentations to a country when you have no interest in making an offer. Even the F-22 was offered, when the plan was to restart the production line and offer it for export.

Its always "Condition applies".

Either first buy F-16 and buy F-35 in 10-15 years OR pony up for massive cost to "upscale" your infra and personnels to use "Cutting Edge American Technology".

We simply don't have enough money to make use of this clearance.

Well, if you have enough money. Unless you are China, most of American weapons are up for sale.

Good luck convincing Finance ministry to pay 300M for 1 fighter and another 100M for arms and consumables.

 

[Saaho]

So, if we want a small fleet of F-35s directly from American lines, we can get it. Since we have STA-1 status, we can buy anything we want from the US that's been earmarked for exports to any NATO country.

It will be "Conditions applies" OR "pay massive upfront cost".

If India is ready to pony up $500 billion, I am sure LM will be more than happy to part with its engine technology as well.