Forum: General F-35 Forum

What should the Americans offer the UK if congress cancels the entire F-35 program or just the F-35b.would congress be willing to give us emcats at greatly decreased price or offer another plane.

F-16.net Sponsor

At this point, there's no way the F-35 can be cancelled... no matter how bad it comes out.

What happens if the F-35 does get cancelled? Let's just say that it would be a greater financial and strategic disaster than the complete failure of the F-35 program.

Greetings warwolf1,

If the F-35 program cancelled, Boeing/Northrop would be glad to offer the congress their completed X-32. They'll proceed to complete the finalize design that they could not deliver on time during the tight schedule JSF competition with Lockheed. I find the JSF competition unfair due to short period of time given to defense contractor to come up with their prototypes. That means the one that stick to traditional or just carry forward whatever existing aircraft would win. Whereas the other that placed much effort in designing an entirely new era aircraft would lose due to time constraint, not because it's not good.

However, the F-35 will not be cancelled as it will bring big profit to Lockheed with the highly overpriced F-35. Tax from revenue helps increase GDP. The congress would approve any products that will bring in profit through export to friendlies. Devil

If the F-35 proven not feasible and a liability to the Air Force, Navy, Marines, they'll probably file complain and request for alternative. I think it happened before back then in the old days where certain aircrafts didn't get to serve for long.

jayraptor wrote:

If the F-35 program cancelled, Boeing/Northrop would be glad to offer the congress their completed X-32. They'll proceed to complete the finalize design that they could not deliver on time during the tight schedule JSF competition with Lockheed. I find the JSF competition unfair due to short period of time given to defense contractor to come up with their prototypes. That means the one that stick to traditional or just carry forward whatever existing aircraft would win. Whereas the other that placed much effort in designing an entirely new era aircraft would lose due to time constraint, not because it's not good.

The X-35/F-35 was the best value jet, Going from X-32 to F-32 would cost billions, and take at least 5 years to get into service. A F/A-18E/F could be delivered within 2 years, possibly with upgraded avionics for less than US$50m

jayraptor wrote:

However, the F-35 will not be cancelled as it will bring big profit to Lockheed with the highly overpriced F-35. Tax from revenue helps increase GDP. The congress would approve any products that will bring in profit through export to friendlies. Devil

I disagree. The Eurofighter and the Rafale are $80+ each. If it was really about Lockheed, we'd see more F-16 orders, along with upgrades to the F-16. Its quite probable the F-16V will see production, as its relatively cheap at $60m each. It probably wont see service in the USAF though.

jayraptor wrote:

If the F-35 proven not feasible and a liability to the Air Force, Navy, Marines, they'll probably file complain and request for alternative. I think it happened before back then in the old days where certain aircrafts didn't get to serve for long.

The other main US jet is the F/A-18E/F, which could be procured by the USAF short term, then transferred to the Navy or Marines.

battleshipagincourt wrote:

At this point, there's no way the F-35 can be cancelled... no matter how bad it comes out.

What happens if the F-35 does get cancelled? Let's just say that it would be a greater financial and strategic disaster than the complete failure of the F-35 program.

Agree with you. In fact 2006 was the point of no return. At this point it is impossible to get out. Even a level 3 partner hardly can get out, for level 1 and 2 no way.
In this stage, production phase, it has become too complicated, not even that, this would lead to politcal consequences (international) as well.

neurotech wrote:

jayraptor wrote:

Greetings warwolf1,

If the F-35 program cancelled, Boeing/Northrop would be glad to offer the congress their completed X-32. They'll proceed to complete the finalize design that they could not deliver on time during the tight schedule JSF competition with Lockheed. I find the JSF competition unfair due to short period of time given to defense contractor to come up with their prototypes. That means the one that stick to traditional or just carry forward whatever existing aircraft would win. Whereas the other that placed much effort in designing an entirely new era aircraft would lose due to time constraint, not because it's not good.

The X-35/F-35 was the best value jet, Going from X-32 to F-32 would cost billions, and take at least 5 years to get into service. A F/A-18E/F could be delivered within 2 years, possibly with upgraded avionics for less than US$50m

jayraptor wrote:

However, the F-35 will not be cancelled as it will bring big profit to Lockheed with the highly overpriced F-35. Tax from revenue helps increase GDP. The congress would approve any products that will bring in profit through export to friendlies. Devil

I disagree. The Eurofighter and the Rafale are $80+ each. If it was really about Lockheed, we'd see more F-16 orders, along with upgrades to the F-16. Its quite probable the F-16V will see production, as its relatively cheap at $60m each. It probably wont see service in the USAF though.

jayraptor wrote:

If the F-35 proven not feasible and a liability to the Air Force, Navy, Marines, they'll probably file complain and request for alternative. I think it happened before back then in the old days where certain aircrafts didn't get to serve for long.

The other main US jet is the F/A-18E/F, which could be procured by the USAF short term, then transferred to the Navy or Marines.

Yep, an Eurofigter > $4.5 billion / 22 (offer Swiss) or $204.5 million per Typhoon
An F18 E/F $50 million ... ask the Aussies what the F18 did cost them.

F16? Not that sure I am right about this, but as far as I know the production line will be closed (2013?)

warwolf1 wrote:

what should the Americans offer the uk if congress cancels the entire f35 program or just the f35b.would congress be willing to give us emcats at greatly decreased price or offer another plane.

So this question shouldn't be taken that seriously because most here are in full agreement that this possibility of project termination is extremely remote.

But let's have fun with it??? I think that by reviewing the possible alternative options with open eyes it will be clear why NOT cancelling the F-35 is such a great idea.

QUESTION: From a historical perspective, is there any precedent to match the current investment loss (and future investment requirements) impact of the 'stone cold' cancellation of the F-35 program?

I don't think that the B-1A is a good comparison at all because it was only for one US service and was only to replace one aircraft. The B-1A's basic supersonic speed design and expected mission profile (subsonic) also had diverted from each other, whereas the F-35 type(s) design and mission profile(s) continue to remain fairly well aligned even with the schedule delays.

Normally I would just ignore such an idiotic post, but it has been a long day and I could use a good laugh. So, Jayraptor, from your post above, obviously you think Lockheed presented a far more "traditional" design than Boeing, and for some reason you appear to suggest that Lockheed had more time to prepare their design proposal. Please dazzle and amaze us all with your bright insight with an explanation of how Lockheed had more time, and more importantly, describe to us how the F35 far more "traditional" in design, particularly in the STOVL propulsion system, than the competitor. A point by point comparison and contrast of the system approach and details should suffice. This should be good!

m wrote:

Yep, an Eurofigter > $4.5 billion / 22 (offer Swiss) or $204.5 million per Typhoon
An F18 E/F $50 million ... ask the Aussies what the F18 did cost them.

LOL, there we go again...
m, EF's cost of ~$200m, is a program cost and probably includes some profit and is the realistic cost a customer has to pay.
You pay it every day when you fill up your gas-tank, buy shoes, or food.
EF's current URF (or possibly weapon system) cost is ~$73m (according to Italians) and even that is overblown by (too) strong €.

So, in the same universe, the F35's program cost is unknown (at least publicly), since the development is, well, not over yet.
Still, according to Congressional report for '12, the cheapest F35 (A) has a program-wide average URF of ~$99m (~$120m WS cost), which is ~36% costlier than EF.
And let's not forget, EF program was less then excellent performing one to put it mildly ( Very Happy

), by four EQUAL partner nations and 4 apparently similar, but still very different requirements that the plane fulfilled.
How's that for a "Joint"?

So, can we finally, stop reading price-wise comparisons between F35 and EF?

Australians got their SHs for ~$50m, apiece? Very Happy

I suppose administrator should put a sticky thread about aircraft cost on this forum, to avoid misconceptions.

The question is: "what would happen if the f35 does get canceled"

The answer is: The sky will fall in.

m wrote:

Yep, an Eurofigter > $4.5 billion / 22 (offer Swiss) or $204.5 million per Typhoon
An F18 E/F $50 million ... ask the Aussies what the F18 did cost them.

F16? Not that sure I am right about this, but as far as I know the production line will be closed (2013?)

The F/A-18E/F has been offered to the USN at $49m with an expanded MYP purchase. The "only" 24 Australian F/A-18F have contracted cost of US$100m.

There has been countless debate on the forum regarding cost of various jets. Wikipedia puts the current flyaway cost at $66m, and the Indian MRCA quoted price was $55m each for 126 jets.

neurotech wrote:

An F/A-18E/F has a contract unit price of $49m with extended MYP contract ($687m for 16 jets) I think that excludes engines, certain add-on avionics, and radar.

Looks like they are mixing F-35 LRIP IV numbers with F/A-18E/F MYP cost.
The line budgeted unit cost for a F/A-18E/F is $80m. The F-35s are not in full rate production, and the CV is the least produced variant at this point in the test program, and has a line budget unit cost of $300m. The F-35B line budget cost is $237m.

The FY2017 budget cost of a F-35C is $125m. Taking a F/A-18E/F, allowing for inflation (& no further discount from Boeing) is ~$95m. The F/A-18E/F is cheaper in MYP, but unless the F-35C has a major increase in costs, it wont be half the cost.

The F-16 production shutdown and the F-16V expanded capability, is still not confirmed either way. The F-16V is a considerable step-up from the F-16C Block 52+ jets, and it'd still be cheaper than a F-35, for budget constrained countries, especially in Europe.

cola wrote:

EF's current URF (or possibly weapon system) cost is ~$73m (according to Italians) and even that is overblown by (too) strong €..

Suggest you read the British audit reports, this will give you facts about the prize of a Typhoon. When it is a much lower prize in your opinion, no probem with that.

cola wrote:

So, can we finally, stop reading price-wise comparisons between F35 and EF?

Australians got their SHs for ~$50m, apiece? Very Happy

I suppose administrator should put a sticky thread about aircraft cost on this forum, to avoid misconceptions.

When I get time, I'll try and get definitions and known pricing and post it.

The MRCA figures were apparently as close to apples-to-apples as anywhere;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_MRC ... e_aircraft

As noted before, the contracted cost for the Australian F/A-18Fs is $100m. If Boeing wants the USAF to purchase the jets for a large MYP order, almost certainly it'll involve a steep discount.

I'm not sure that the $73m is the unit flyaway cost for the EF.
Edit: Are you sure it wasn't €73m instead?

Last edited by cola on Aug 20, 2012 - 09:30 PM; edited 1 time in total

m wrote:

Suggest you read the British audit reports, this will give you facts about the prize of a Typhoon. When it is a much lower prize in your opinion, no probem with that.

I read it and NAO's report gives PROGRAM costs (not URF) and these are ones that include R&D, OT&E, support systems and eventually procurement, which comes out at roughly $170m per plane and is called program price.
URF is just a cost to produce the plane (materials, manhours, etc...), when you already got the blueprints, tools and such, already in place and ready for production.

neurotech wrote:

When I get time, I'll try and get definitions and known pricing and post it.

Well, that would certainly help understanding the issue, here.

Quote:

As noted before, the contracted cost for the Australian F/A-18Fs is $100m. If Boeing wants the USAF to purchase the jets for a large MYP order, almost certainly it'll involve a steep discount.

Of course, no one but Navy can buy F18 for $50m, apiece.

Quote:

I'm not sure that the $73m is the unit flyaway cost for the EF.
Edit: Are you sure it wasn't €73m instead?

My bad, it's $79m per plane > http://theaviationist.com/2012/02/08/f35-typhoon/ (can't find original article on Flightglobal IIRC, but these are the same figures).

neurotech wrote:

cola wrote:

So, can we finally, stop reading price-wise comparisons between F35 and EF?

Australians got their SHs for ~$50m, apiece? Very Happy

I suppose administrator should put a sticky thread about aircraft cost on this forum, to avoid misconceptions.

When I get time, I'll try and get definitions and known pricing and post it.

The MRCA figures were apparently as close to apples-to-apples as anywhere;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_MRC ... e_aircraft

As noted before, the contracted cost for the Australian F/A-18Fs is $100m. If Boeing wants the USAF to purchase the jets for a large MYP order, almost certainly it'll involve a steep discount.

I'm not sure that the $73m is the unit flyaway cost for the EF.
Edit: Are you sure it wasn't €73m instead?

Suppose this will help

Website:
http://www.nao.org.uk/publications/1011 ... oject.aspx

Report by the Comptroller and AuditorGeneral
HC 755SesSIon 2010–2011, 2 march 2011 (PDF file)

http://www.nao.org.uk//idoc.ashx?docId= ... version=-1

Last edited by cola on Aug 20, 2012 - 09:45 PM; edited 1 time in total

m wrote:

http://www.nao.org.uk//idoc.ashx?docId=5cbfd09a-929d-4e8a-b210-a240f8767bc6&version=-1

Well, if you read PDF page 25 with understanding, we wouldn't be having this conversation now.

And then, there's this and the forecasts are significantly lower, than the previous year >[url] http://www.2shared.com/document/BgNTXym ... html[/url]

Hope, this helps putting things into perspective.

Forum: General F-35 Forum

What would happen if the F-35 does get canceled?