Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
True Cost Of Modern Jet Fighters  
User currently offlineQB001 From Canada, joined Apr 2000, 2053 posts, RR: 4
Posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 21207 times:

I'm surprised no one has posted this before (unless I missed something).

Well, it seems that the best jet fighter, in terms of value, is the ... Rafale ! A close second is the Gripen. The F-22 costs more than its weight in gold !

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/dae...uniques/FighterCostFinalJuly06.pdf


Never let the facts get in the way of a good theory.
17 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineMigfan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 21200 times:

If you were to ready some of the posts regarding procurement, you would see that this topic often comes up.

Basically, it boils down to development costs / the number acquired. The more "new technology" involved raises the price and development time. The amount of technology in modern fighters is so complex that their development life-cycles are almost constant.

/M


User currently offlineTugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5628 posts, RR: 8
Reply 2, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 21153 times:

Quoting QB001 (Thread starter):
Well, it seems that the best jet fighter, in terms of value, is the ... Rafale ! A close second is the Gripen. The F-22 costs more than its weight in gold !

But, I with the F-22a could kick the Rafale's and Gripen's butt and take your gold to pay for it!

Provided the US does not go backrupt first......

Tug



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlineRAPCON From Puerto Rico, joined Jul 2006, 671 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 21137 times:

Quoting QB001 (Thread starter):
Well, it seems that the best jet fighter, in terms of value, is the ... Rafale !

Well somebody forgot to tell the Singapore AF about the "value" of the RAFALE! According to Defence Analysis and Flight Daily News, the Singapore evaluation reportedly revealed problems with RAFALE's reliability and availability, and that the aircraft failed to demonstrate claimed radar performance or its claimed ability to supercruise. Singapore was also reportedly unimpressed by RAFALE's much vaunted "Omni role" capability.

It seems that RAFALEe, even though it has the best so-called "value" has come up short in the following sales:

-Singapore (lost to F-15K)
-South Korea (lost to F-15K)
-Algeria (lost to MiG 29)
-Saudi Arabia (lost to EF2000)
-South Africa (lost to JAS39)
and
a whole bunch of countries that are buying the F-35.

Well....at least India has not yet made her decision, eh? Maybe they'll appreciate the "value" of the Rafale!!



MODS CAN'T STOP ME....THEY CAN ONLY HOPE TO CONTAIN ME!!!
User currently offlineDw747400 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 1260 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 21005 times:

Its an interesting comparison, but value would be the effectiveness of the aircraft in combat versus its cost--not how it compares to caviar on a pound per pound basis.

It seems to me the author of this document wants to bring attention to the cost of aircraft in general; not provide any sort of useful comparison on the value of different aircraft.



CFI--Certfied Freakin Idiot
User currently offlineBlrsea From India, joined May 2005, 1423 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 21001 times:

Quoting RAPCON (Reply 3):

It seems that RAFALEe, even though it has the best so-called "value" has come up short in the following sales:

-Singapore (lost to F-15K)
-South Korea (lost to F-15K)
-Algeria (lost to MiG 29)
-Saudi Arabia (lost to EF2000)
-South Africa (lost to JAS39)
and
a whole bunch of countries that are buying the F-35.

Arms sales are not just based on capabilities but on the prevailing political situation too. Especially big ticket items!!


User currently offlineCF188A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 20938 times:

I like how my superior said it... The United States is no brains with big guns! w which is what wins wars in today's world. We are "Lucky" to have the US as our neighboring country for not only safety, but its a partnership. The F-22A I was told at the Joint Services Open House, that it was indeed an EXPENSIVE, and not fully successful design. Any technologically advanced nation can build a stealth fighter (aiming more towards democratic ) Canada, UK, Germany, France, etc etc. The only problem is ........ $$$ . It would be interesting to know how much the F22 project is worth. The next comment is a rumor/ statement from a USAF pilot. "We believe that when the F-35 starts into full production, you will possibly see the termination of the F22"

It does make sense somewhat... and when it comes to selling to neighboring countries.... Canada and RAF for example, the F-35 is basically the dream fighter of all nations. Give it 10-15 more years Smile . I am not 100% qualified to compare the F-22 and F-35, but I know if one (the F-35) can accomplish all landmarks set down by the F22 , while keeping the VTOL capability, all for a cheaper more resourceful use, then I can automatically key together the F-35 is soon to be the most technological, useful fighter aircraft in the sky.


User currently offlineZkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 4836 posts, RR: 9
Reply 7, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 20914 times:

Quoting CF188A (Reply 6):
The next comment is a rumor/ statement from a USAF pilot. "We believe that when the F-35 starts into full production, you will possibly see the termination of the F22"

It does make sense somewhat... and when it comes to selling to neighboring countries.... Canada and RAF for example, the F-35 is basically the dream fighter of all nations. Give it 10-15 more years . I am not 100% qualified to compare the F-22 and F-35, but I know if one (the F-35) can accomplish all landmarks set down by the F22 , while keeping the VTOL capability, all for a cheaper more resourceful use, then I can automatically key together the F-35 is soon to be the most technological, useful fighter aircraft in the sky.

The F35 is a great aircraft, but it is not as capable a fighter as the F22.
1) Does not have supercruise or is anywhere near as fast
2) Is not as manueverable
3) Is not as stealthy as the F22
4) Doesn't carry the same load as the F22, or as far.
5) Single engine vs 2 engine F22

Whilst you are most likely right about the F22 program being canned once the F35 is in production, the remaining F22's will be the best fighter in the world for probably the next 25 years, by which time UCAV will be the mainstay of the most powerful airforces.  Smile



56 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
User currently offlineMigFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 20898 times:

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 7):
The F35 is a great aircraft, but it is not as capable a fighter as the F22.

 checkmark  I am onboard with that statement 100%.

Think of the F-35 as an "F-22 Lite". V/STOL capability detracts a great deal from an aircraft's overall performance. Not all versions of the JSF will be configured in that way, the USAF and USN versions will be conventional takeoff versions.

/M


User currently offlineChecksixx From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1099 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 20870 times:

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 7):
The F35 is a great aircraft, but it is not as capable a fighter as the F22.
1) Does not have supercruise (WRONG) or is anywhere near as fast (WRONG)
2) Is not as manueverable (FUNNY HOW YOU SAY THAT YET NO ONE HAS SEEN ONE FLY YET)
3) Is not as stealthy as the F22 (WRONG)
4) Doesn't carry the same load as the F22, or as far. (TWO LESS AAM'S)
5) Single engine vs 2 engine F22 (WHO CARES)

Whilst you are most likely right about the F22 program being canned once the F35 is in production (WRONG-THE NEXT 3 LOTS OF RAPTORS ARE ALREADY PAID FOR AND FYI, BY THE TIME THE F-35 HITS LRP, THE RAPTOR PROCUREMENT WILL ALMOST BE COMPLETE), the remaining F22's will be the best fighter in the world for probably the next 25 years, by which time UCAV will be the mainstay of the most powerful airforces.


User currently offlineAirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 20863 times:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/07/16/business/rairfight.php

Quote:

Pricing combat aircraft is notoriously complex, with deals often involving industrial offsets and seldom reflecting full aircraft development costs. While Dufour put the average cost of a Rafale at €50 million, or $64 million, and the Typhoon - a collaboration grouping Italy, Germany, Spain and Britain - at about £65 million, or $120 million, Kemp said both aircraft had been offered to Singapore and South Korea at about $95 million each, compared with a basic price tag of $45 million to $50 million for the Gripen.

Combat aircraft technology "costs what it weighs," Kemp said. "The Typhoon is basically twice the weight of the Gripen - and costs twice as much."


User currently offlineZkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 4836 posts, RR: 9
Reply 11, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 20817 times:

Quoting Checksixx (Reply 9):
WRONG-THE NEXT 3 LOTS OF RAPTORS ARE ALREADY PAID FOR AND FYI, BY THE TIME THE F-35 HITS LRP, THE RAPTOR PROCUREMENT WILL ALMOST BE COMPLETE)

Your point? As I said by the time the F35 is in production the F22 production will most likely be canned (since it will be almost complete as you mentioned).



56 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
User currently offlineMigFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 20804 times:

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 7):
by which time UCAV will be the mainstay of the most powerful airforces.

That is a scary outlook. Although, most likely to be true, it stinks...

/M


User currently offlineHaveBlue From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 2112 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 20756 times:

The F-35 will be to the F-22 what the F-16 and F-18 were to the F-15 and F-14, respectively.. that is, a Hi Lo mix. We couldn't afford all the F-15/14/22's that we want/need, so a cheaper but superb fighter that could be purchased in greater numbers fills the void.


Here Here for Severe Clear!
User currently offline747400sp From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3649 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 20727 times:

Quoting HaveBlue (Reply 13):

The F-16 and F-18 was cheap, but I can not say they are superb, but that is my opinion. The F-14,F-15 and F-22 is what a real fighter support to be.


User currently offlineFredT From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2002, 2185 posts, RR: 26
Reply 15, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 20645 times:

First of all, it is very hard to even pin a unit procurement cost on an aircraft. That study makes a good attempt at it.

If you want the bang for the buck figure, it gets even harder. How do you evaluate the value of an aircraft out on the battlefield? On what kind of battlefield, for starters? How much is swing-role capability worth to you? To customer A? To customer B? What is the availability figure if you spend x1 dollars on spares, x2 dollars on maintenance crew training? If you instead spend x3 and x4 dollars, respectively?

How much are spares? How much fuel does it burn? How much maintenance is required to keep the aircraft in the condition you want them (with the corresponding availability)? How much support is there for training pilots without firing live missiles every two weeks? How are the evaluation possibilities and what does that do to the number of hours required to keep your pilots' trained to the desired level?

Life cycle cost is the really interesting figure, and it gets terribly complex fast if you want to look at it in any depth at all. That report even specifies that it did not even consider LCC.



I thought I was doing good trying to avoid those airport hotels... and look at me now.
User currently offlineEBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (8 years 2 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 20472 times:

Quoting CF188A (Reply 6):
The next comment is a rumor/ statement from a USAF pilot. "We believe that when the F-35 starts into full production, you will possibly see the termination of the F22"

Was he talking termination of production or termination of operations ... or both? I can see termination of production, but given the fact the F-35 doesn't have the top end performance the F-22 has, I can't see terminating operations. But then there have been and still are times when what the Defense Department does doesn't make a bit of sense.



Dare to dream; dream big!
User currently offlineEBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (8 years 2 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 20471 times:

Quoting 747400sp (Reply 14):
The F-16 and F-18 was cheap, but I can not say they are superb, but that is my opinion. The F-14,F-15 and F-22 is what a real fighter support to be.

I suspect your definition of a "real fighter" is one that is designed and used for air superiority and, that being the case, your examples are pretty much right on ... though you have to allow that all three airplanes have been modified to perform the mud moving mission in some of their variants.



Dare to dream; dream big!
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic True Cost Of Modern Jet Fighters
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...
Cost Of Modern Fighters posted Mon Mar 18 2002 12:16:47 by Saintsman
Comparison Jet Fighters T-50, J-20, & F-22 ... posted Mon Aug 26 2013 12:35:05 by Bogi
Cost Of Next Usaf Bomber? posted Mon Apr 9 2012 08:58:23 by Revelation
C-17 Operating Cost 1/3 Of C-5 On Par With C-130 posted Wed Sep 7 2011 11:39:30 by PolymerPlane
Jet Fighters With Most Kills posted Sun Nov 8 2009 12:23:18 by CheetahC
Strange Picture Of A Romanian Jet Landing posted Sun Aug 31 2008 00:07:02 by N14AZ
The Cost Of Air Refueling posted Mon Feb 26 2007 00:17:29 by KC135TopBoom
"A Deal For Jet Fighters Opens The Door To India" posted Sat Apr 16 2005 23:06:00 by STT757
Choice Of Weapon: Cannon Vs Guns For Fighters posted Wed Sep 4 2013 18:47:33 by celestar
Loss Of A True Aviator posted Thu Apr 5 2012 06:15:44 by F4U

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format