Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
F-35 Software To Be At Least 4 Years Late  
User currently offlinekanban From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 3487 posts, RR: 27
Posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 7656 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

An article today indicates the software scheduled to be done this year will not be ready until 2015.. The author is generous but I sense that is a target moving away rather than coming closer.

"Each of the remaining three blocks” needed for full war- fighting capability “are now projected to slip more than three years” compared with the current schedule, set in 2006, Michael Sullivan, the GAO director of acquisition management, told the panel. The final block, originally scheduled for this year, isn’t anticipated until 2015, he said. "

“After more than nine years in development” including four years of overlapping low-rate production, “the program has not fully demonstrated the aircraft design is stable, manufacturing processes are mature and the system is reliable,” said GAO.

Only 4 percent of the aircraft’s capabilities have been completely verified by flight tests, laboratory results, or both, GAO said. “The pace of flight testing accelerated significantly in 2010 but overall progress is still much below plans forecast several years ago.”

Total labor hours required to produce test aircraft have increased instead of diminished -- an indication of “lingering management inefficiencies,” said GAO. Hours to complete assembly of test aircraft last year “exceeded budgeted hours by more than 1.5 million,” for example.


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-0...re-delays-gao-says.html?cmpid=yhoo

20 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineoly720man From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 6698 posts, RR: 11
Reply 1, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 7516 times:

I really do wonder at times whether all the high-tech is worth the protracted pain of actually getting it working. It's all very well having an aircraft that's at the forefront of technology (or technologies), but is it technology for the sake of technology rather than for what's actually needed?

And eventually you end up with a plane that's too expensive to be bought because of all the development work that went into it.



wheat and dairy can screw up your brain
User currently offlinefaro From Egypt, joined Aug 2007, 1540 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 7210 times:

Flight Global reporting that the Canadians will be paying an average price of USD 148.5 million per unit for 65 aircraft. That's the price of a 763ER. Patently ridiculous. Add the cost of the late software and God knows what other unforeseen costs/delays and the F-35 will soon be as expensive as an A332. That is just plain out of control for a fighter which is to be mass produced for NATO and other air forces. It seems there are simply no limits anymore...

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...cost-estimate-soars-66-report.html

Faro



The chalice not my son
User currently offlineDEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4798 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 7154 times:

Countries wanting stealth fighters but can't get those at the moment have four options.....

1) Settle for any of these 4.5 Gen fighters.....

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_ja676MG45Zg/S7Ci_sG3yGI/AAAAAAAAC5g/MNYxpMNTf4w/s1600/rafale-front-section.jpg
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_ja676MG45Z...f4w/s1600/rafale-front-section.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_JcIe4EsmDYA/TVHbbK2CS3I/AAAAAAAABKk/ygjpXPKWz-4/s1600/Eurofighter+Typhoon.jpg
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_JcIe4EsmDY...Wz-4/s1600/Eurofighter+Typhoon.jpg

.
http://themoderatevoice.com/wordpres.../dr-e/f-15-silent-eagle-boeing.jpg

2) Hope others who have the program complete their projects and buy from them.....

3) Curb their desires and maintain the status quo.....

4) Or if they really need and could afford it - just wait for the F-35 a little bit longer.

No, the Raptor is not an option.  

[Edited 2011-03-16 11:57:25]


"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlineKiwiRob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 7251 posts, RR: 5
Reply 4, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 6931 times:

I think the F35 coffin in Norway is about to be rolled out, if opposition parties have there way it will be nailed shut sometime soon. It looks like the price has gone up 8 times 2008 when the decision was made, ironic when one of the govts stated reason for chosing the F35 was that it's cheaper than Gripen NG.

Quote:
Norwegian politicians are once again deeply concerned by reports of soaring prices for the US-made fighter jets that the government has agreed to buy. Newspaper Dagsavisen reported Tuesday that the price may have jumped from the NOK 18 billion approved by the Parliament, to an astonishing NOK 144 billion.
http://www.newsinenglish.no/2011/03/...ncerns-fly-over-fighter-jet-costs/


User currently offlinefaro From Egypt, joined Aug 2007, 1540 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 6917 times:

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 4):

I think the F35 coffin in Norway is about to be rolled out, if opposition parties have there way it will be nailed shut sometime soon. It looks like the price has gone up 8 times 2008 when the decision was made, ironic when one of the govts stated reason for chosing the F35 was that it's cheaper than Gripen NG.

You sometimes wonder whether the people who are willing to press ahead with the F-35 regardless of cost are bona fide politicians or teen-age aviation enthusiasts...8x initial cost estimate is just farcical...

Faro



The chalice not my son
User currently offlinesebolino From France, joined May 2001, 3681 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6837 times:

Quoting faro (Reply 5):
8x initial cost estimate is just farcical...

I guess the plane had 8 price raises, but the price wasn't multiplied by 8 ...

[Edited 2011-03-17 06:42:51]

User currently offlinekanban From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 3487 posts, RR: 27
Reply 7, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 6729 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting sebolino (Reply 6):
I guess the plane had 8 price raises, but the price wasn't multiplied by 8 ...

there is a plan to make it an 8 seater to keep the cost per seat mile down around the original spec....      


User currently offlinetommytoyz From Tonga, joined Jan 2007, 1353 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 6565 times:

I think this program is in gander of being canceled. If many nations cut their orders or cancel outright due to the increases, it will further spiral the [rice upward for those still in to the point where it is ridiculous and also cancel, etc...

F-15 4.5 anyone?

And who really needs stealth ground attack manned aircraft, when we are getting unmanned ground attack aircraft? We also have Jstars and Awacs that can guide 4.5 and 4.5 gen ground attack aircraft in with stand off weapons. No?


User currently offlineKiwiRob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 7251 posts, RR: 5
Reply 9, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 6536 times:

Quoting sebolino (Reply 6):
I guess the plane had 8 price raises, but the price wasn't multiplied by 8 ...

The original price was 18 billion NOK, now it's apparently 144 billion NOK, 8 times higher.


User currently offlineAgill From Sweden, joined Feb 2004, 1010 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 6520 times:

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 4):

I think the F35 coffin in Norway is about to be rolled out, if opposition parties have there way it will be nailed shut sometime soon. It looks like the price has gone up 8 times 2008 when the decision was made, ironic when one of the govts stated reason for chosing the F35 was that it's cheaper than Gripen NG.

Considering the wikileaks thing surrounding this deal it would be pretty ironic if this happened.


User currently offlineebj1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 6375 times:

What happens next? We go for a new airplane design and the process repeats itself except that the dollar figures are even higher. Fix the management problems! Set realistic goals! The ideas behind the F-35 are great but were they ever realistic, given the time it's taken to get the airplane as far as it's come?


Dare to dream; dream big!
User currently offlinefrancoflier From France, joined Oct 2001, 3741 posts, RR: 11
Reply 12, posted (3 years 5 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 6035 times:

Quoting oly720man (Reply 1):
It's all very well having an aircraft that's at the forefront of technology (or technologies), but is it technology for the sake of technology rather than for what's actually needed?

Good question.

I suppose the political need of an indigenous, or at least partially local, aircraft which would create local jobs and stimulate the country's economy is always a factor. Throw in lobbies from big arms manufacturers and vote-seeking politicians and you get recurring financial fiascos, even if the products are pretty good when they finally come out.

Many of the countries involved in the F-35 could have sourced some much cheaper off-the-shelf fighters like Gripens of F-16/18s which would have more than covered all their tactical needs, especially if you put all of this in the current context of drastic budget cuts and belt tightening for many Western Air Forces.



Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit posting...
User currently offlineKiwiRob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 7251 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (3 years 5 months 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 5924 times:

Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 3):
4) Or if they really need and could afford it - just wait for the F-35 a little bit longer.

I don't think anybody really needs it. Maybe the US, but they could build more F-22's for less so I don't see the point in this aircraft.


User currently offlinesebolino From France, joined May 2001, 3681 posts, RR: 4
Reply 14, posted (3 years 5 months 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 5826 times:

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 9):
The original price was 18 billion NOK, now it's apparently 144 billion NOK, 8 times higher.

OK.
If true, I don't see why a customer would NOT cancel the deal ... It would be stupid.


User currently offlinerheinwaldner From Switzerland, joined Jan 2008, 2222 posts, RR: 5
Reply 15, posted (3 years 5 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 5635 times:

But why is the US/Western fighter industry not able to design a new aircraft?

Assume you start from scratch: what factor would cause another outcome?

The best design, the best company, the country with the largest industry and the project with the highest stakes seem to fail. What and who else could ever design a new fighter? The Chinese?

Some decades ago during a timespan as long as F-35 development takes many completely new fighter generations were fielded to the frontlines and became obsolete when the next new model appeared....


User currently offlinesebolino From France, joined May 2001, 3681 posts, RR: 4
Reply 16, posted (3 years 5 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 5630 times:

Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 15):
But why is the US/Western fighter industry not able to design a new aircraft?

The F-22 is brand new isn't it ? And I had the feeling (maybe wrong) that it was more advanced than the F-35.
So I guess the problem lies in this particular program.
Building a fighter that must be able to do everything while being stealth is perhaps not so easy after all ...


User currently offlinefaro From Egypt, joined Aug 2007, 1540 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (3 years 5 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 5606 times:

Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 15):
But why is the US/Western fighter industry not able to design a new aircraft

Short answer: i) stealth capability, ii) all-embracing sensor suites & iii) software.

Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 15):
What and who else could ever design a new fighter? The Chinese?

With their unexpectedly new stealth fighter, yes.

Faro



The chalice not my son
User currently offlineoly720man From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 6698 posts, RR: 11
Reply 18, posted (3 years 5 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 5600 times:

Quoting sebolino (Reply 16):
The F-22 is brand new isn't it ?

It's new in to service (2005).

YF-22 first flight 1990
F-22 first flight 1997

8 years from first flight to service entry. Quite a long birth, really. Almost double the time for some other earlier aircraft.

Compare with
F-15 1972->1976
F-14 1970->1974
F-18 1979->1983 C/D
F-18 1995->1999 E/F



wheat and dairy can screw up your brain
User currently offlinekanban From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 3487 posts, RR: 27
Reply 19, posted (3 years 5 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 5528 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 15):
But why is the US/Western fighter industry not able to design a new aircraft?



the key problem is not that the manufacturer's can not design and build one, it's that Congress wants to have a say in every piece and assign second-tier suppliers of systems that are superfluous.. then the manufacturer has to make all this garbage work.... the second problem is that there is no clear mission as there was during a war of even the cold war... so the congress insists that it be able to handle everything. In wartime one builds simple single or dual mission planes and builds them quickly and cheaply.. Today's manufacturer has to take into account the Chinese, Russians, Irani9ans, and being able to knock down our own designs now owned by questionable "allies" Israel, Iraq, Venezuela, Pakistan... and be able to operate in a theater no bigger than Andorra


User currently offlinesebolino From France, joined May 2001, 3681 posts, RR: 4
Reply 20, posted (3 years 5 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 5332 times:

Quoting oly720man (Reply 18):
8 years from first flight to service entry. Quite a long birth, really. Almost double the time for some other earlier aircraft.

Compare with
F-15 1972->1976
F-14 1970->1974
F-18 1979->1983 C/D
F-18 1995->1999 E/F

Well it's not that much compared to European programs:

EF typhoon : 1994 -> 2004 (and the first flight was very late)
Rafale : 1986 -> 2001


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic F-35 Software To Be At Least 4 Years Late
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
E-10A (767-400) To Be Delivered At End Of '07 posted Fri Feb 2 2007 14:27:17 by NYC777
RN Carriers To Be Catobar posted Fri Oct 8 2010 22:21:38 by KiwiRob
Cold War Base To Be Private ‘Top Gun’ School posted Tue Aug 31 2010 10:01:50 by SandroMag
USS Ranger To Be Moored In Fairview, Or posted Tue Aug 10 2010 19:17:59 by CGKings317
RAF To Be Cut To WWI Levels. posted Sun Aug 8 2010 10:15:49 by Oroka
Vulcan To Fly At The Royal International Air Tatto posted Wed Jul 7 2010 09:00:16 by readytotaxi
F-35B/C To Be Offered For Indian Naval Fighter RFI posted Tue Jun 29 2010 04:02:41 by Shmertspionem
Sikorsky S-61/SH-3s To Be Re-manufactured. posted Mon May 10 2010 18:09:24 by CX747
Nasa 747s To Be Scrapped After Last Shuttle Flight posted Thu May 6 2010 23:53:11 by columba
Il-96 To Be Offered For KC-X posted Fri Mar 19 2010 18:43:25 by Shmertspionem
Boeing YAL 1A To Be Scrapped? posted Tue Aug 13 2013 06:17:34 by bennett123
NUQ: Hangar One To Be Saved? posted Mon Mar 11 2013 15:20:20 by psa188
An-225 No. 2 To Be Completed posted Tue Nov 6 2012 04:46:59 by KiwiRob
A-10 To Be Used For Atmospheric Research posted Wed Jun 6 2012 10:14:28 by j.mo

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format