Forum: F-35 Lightning II

F-22 and F-35 are very advanced.
however, are they too expensive?

at first, they want to buy 750 F-22s.
at last, they have bought less than 200.

1n 2001, USAF, USN and USMC want to buy more than 2800 F-35s.
NOW, it's about 2400.
in the future,...

F-16.net Sponsor

qwe2008 wrote:

F-22 and F-35 are very advanced.
however, are they too expensive?

at first, they want to buy 750 F-22s.
at last, they have bought less than 200.

1n 2001, USAF, USN and USMC want to buy more than 2800 F-35s.
NOW, it's about 2400.
in the future,...

Well the currently projected numbers have been pretty stable for the last several years(much more so than the F-22's numbers). In a post-Cold War world, the mission of the F-35 is more defensible in terms of recapitalization quantities. There may be more cuts to come, but I don't foresee the kinds of cuts that the F-22 had. As for how expensive they are, the A models are projected to have a flyaway cost of ~$60m(and this is the model that will be purchased in the greatest numbers).

The long stated requirement for the USAF is 1,763 F-35's. Ten wings of F-35's plus an additional 50% training, attrition, etc., is 1,080. Twelve wings would be around 1,300. The QDR lists a grand total of 16 USAF fighter wings. At least 3 1/3 are F-22/F-15C plus roughly 2 2/3rd wings of F-15E's. In addition there is no question mid term the services will be fielding fighter sized strike UCAS.

In my strictly personal view it seems difficult to fit more than 10 F-35's wings in the future USAF force structure and this assumes the 16 tactical fighter air wings remain from the 2010 QDR. In theory if the F-35 eventually replaced all F-15C's and no tactical fighter wings ended up flying a UCAS in the strike role (which is impossible to believe given the USN wants to a strike UCAS in service within this decade) then 12 F-35's would be possible.

Based on this analysis projecting 1,763 USAF F-35's seems unrealistic. The real number will be around 1,100 to perhaps as many as 1,300. What this does to projected costs and total projected numbers produced I'll leave to others but without question a lower buy puts upward pressure on price which tends to lower the total buy.

Finally it's worth pointing out the highest priced version of the F-35 is the C which has only one customer. The chance of the F-35C being canceled is not insignificant.

lb wrote:

The long stated requirement for the USAF is 1,763 F-35's.
The real number will be around 1,100 to perhaps as many as 1,300.

Finally it's worth pointing out the highest priced version of the F-35 is the C which has only one customer. The chance of the F-35C being canceled is not insignificant.

yes, more than 1,500 F-35A is nearly impossible.

USN need F-35C, and no other fighter can replace F-35C.
F/A-18E/F is not VLO, and UAV cannot replace pilots in the next 20 years.
the chance of the F-35C being canceled is less than 1%.

I wonder if any ANG and AF Reserve units are part of the 1763?

The F-35C being cut has been discussed for years in Congress. Some in NAVAIR clearly are lobbying to cut it based on them leaking documents. The USN does not in fact need the C as it currently has the F/A-18E/F in production, has a program for a strike UCAS that will have far more persistence than an F-35 that it wants to put in service within a few years of current projected F-35C IOC, and has another fighter program in the future as well- which used to be called F/A-XX.

This is not say the C will be canceled but merely to list some facts in support of my stated contention that the chance to cut it is "not insignificant". If there is information that exists to support a "less than 1%" chance of the program being cut by all means present it.

It's further worth noting the USN gave up the entire medium strike community (no A-12, no A-6F), the entire fixed wing asw community, all it's dedicated carrier based tankers and ELINT aircraft and operates a much smaller carrier air wing all due entirely to cost constraints. The USN has a firmly established history of operating the carrier air wing it can afford at the expense of various capabilities. For anyone to argue they "need" the C is to ignore history and ignore the fact that if they can not afford to both purchase and operate it they not only don't need it but will not want it. This is exactly what the leaked NAVAIR docs indicate.

This is not say the docs are correct or that the projected operating costs are correct either. It's all projections and the exact facts are not exactly knowable at this time. That said a lot can happen between now and the current projected IOC in 6 years.

lb wrote:

The USN does not in fact need the C

So then, why haven't they (the USN) dumped the jet? They've had many years to do so...

The USN top brass has been very vocal in its support for the F-35C. Surely they know what they want and what they are getting? Why give more credence to some unverified leaked reports of doubtful accuracy?

PoAF is keen to buy F-35's sometime when F-16MLU's are expected to retire (2025). However the request has not been sent to the government yet as we just had spent billions on subs, frigates, tanks and cargo planes and the military programing law has frozen any new contracts to be signed until 2013. Time at which the state of economy will be evaluated for possible new contracts.

The number of planes to be purchased is still unknown but would be likely to be less than the number of current falcons (40). PoAF has 2 full Squadrons of these and studies were made for the possibility of planes to be reduced to 14 for each squadron. Should that happen to thin out an F-35 purchase, the order would likely to be 28-30 planes.

Why F-35?
-We have no tankers
-vast sea ranges
-Portugal's military practically configured for overseas deployments in the scope of its alliances and treaties.
-PoAF's tradition was more torwards A-surface warfare than AA
-2 Engine fighters are out of the current PoAF's doctrine for a front line aviation fighter. Which rules out Rafale, Eurofighter. Gripen has too short legs. Which leaves the F-35 as only option available.
-highly survivable airframe is preferable to buying cheap even if quantity comes out to be less than originally planned (same happened to recent submarine purchase).

qwe2008 wrote:

lb wrote:

The long stated requirement for the USAF is 1,763 F-35's.
The real number will be around 1,100 to perhaps as many as 1,300.

Finally it's worth pointing out the highest priced version of the F-35 is the C which has only one customer. The chance of the F-35C being canceled is not insignificant.

yes, more than 1,500 F-35A is nearly impossible.

USN need F-35C, and no other fighter can replace F-35C.
F/A-18E/F is not VLO, and UAV cannot replace pilots in the next 20 years.
the chance of the F-35C being canceled is less than 1%.

Its 100% if they give the navy a choice between it and NGAD.

SpudmanWP wrote:

I wonder if any ANG and AF Reserve units are part of the 1763?

yes, they are part of the 1763.

bjr1028 wrote:

Its 100% if they give the navy a choice between it and NGAD.

then, a NGAD is more expensive than 2 F-35Cs.
so, NGAD would be cut.

Forum Veteran Joined: Apr 16, 2005 - 03:16 PM Posts: 800

The advantage with a UCAV is that it can be made much more stealthy at an affordable cost. The engine can be reused from old aircraft like the X-47 to reduce costs.

Imagine an X-47 with 6 clipped wing JDRADM internal. With its super stealth it could patrol in enemy airspace and shoot down aircraft as soon as they take off. The JDRADM also gives it a good anti-radar capability against high value target. And not much need for supersonic capability with the range of the JDRADM. Supersonic capability would just increase cost and signature.

The F-35 will certainly be the last manned fighter. For a bomber maybe it would be worth it to keep a crew given the very high cost of the airframe.

lb wrote:

Finally it's worth pointing out the highest priced version of the F-35 is the C which has only one customer. The chance of the F-35C being canceled is not insignificant.

I'd say that there's probably less than a 1% chance that the USN will cancel, so it's not even statistically significant to discuss as a likelihood. The USN is committed to the F-35C, and the F-18s have to be replaced.

SpudmanWP wrote:

I wonder if any ANG and AF Reserve units are part of the 1763?

Ding Ding Ding..... This is precisely the answer to that figure. ANG and AF reserve will need to replace their legacy aircraft as well.

Forum: F-35 Lightning II

How many F-35s will be ordered?