F 35 Too Good

[aquietguy]

http://www.businessinsider.com/f-35-too-stealthy-2016-8

I wonder how the F 35 haters are going to spin this.

[squirrelshoes]

Anything can be spun since there is always the catch-all "propaganda" tag to be thrown at anything communicated by the military or LM.

At this point one would have to believe an every growing but already massive collusion among pilots and staff from different branches of service and various countries, yet you still see people trying to imply the gaudy statistics from exercises and glowing reviews from pilots are nothing but a PR campaign.

[ricnunes]

Yes, squirrelshoes is absolutely right.

I even remember having discussions on the web about the F-35 where I managed to make my point and prove to the F-35 critics that they were wrong about what they were saying about the F-35 and that the F-35 was the best choice (in these case for Canada) and you know what was the "counter-argument" of some of those F-35 critics??

-They accused me of working for Lockheed Martin! Or resuming they accused me of being a Lockheed Martin employee doing propaganda over the web

After which all I could reply was:
- No I don't work for Lockheed Martin but I surely wouldn't mind, that's for sure!

[nutshell]

At least they could practice by turning on their transponders. The last time they attempted an exercise with AA threats, the F35 spotted the fake menace and was like this "ehy what's that!? LOL, fake!.see ya later"

[alloycowboy]

Yes, squirrelshoes is absolutely right.

I even remember having discussions on the web about the F-35 where I managed to make my point and prove to the F-35 critics that they were wrong about what they were saying about the F-35 and that the F-35 was the best choice (in these case for Canada) and you know what was the "counter-argument" of some of those F-35 critics??

-They accused me of working for Lockheed Martin! Or resuming they accused me of being a Lockheed Martin employee doing propaganda over the web

After which all I could reply was:
- No I don't work for Lockheed Martin but I surely wouldn't mind, that's for sure!

You know for the amount of blogging some of us have done defending the F-35 online especially in the Canadian media you would think Lockheed Martin could at least throw the occasional pizza party at the local aerospace museum.

[pmi]

I wonder how the F 35 haters are going to spin this.

Be prepared for the "If they're so good, then why are we buying so many?" push.

[uclass]

Be prepared for the "If they're so good, then why are we buying so many?" push.

Time constraints of war. There's only so many targets that so many planes can hit in a given space of time regardless of how good they are (unless they can Dr. Manhattan about the place).

[uclass]

Just to add, I got one guy on another forum trying to compare F-35 LRIP unit costs to Rafale FRP unit costs.

[ricnunes]

You know for the amount of blogging some of us have done defending the F-35 online especially in the Canadian media you would think Lockheed Martin could at least throw the occasional pizza party at the local aerospace museum.

LoL

By reading your post it reminded me of what in my personal opinion is Lockheed Martin's weakest point specially around the F-35 program:
- Lockheed Martin's PR (Public Relations) department leaves a lot to be desired.

[ricnunes]

Just to add, I got one guy on another forum trying to compare F-35 LRIP unit costs to Rafale FRP unit costs.

That's a huge LOL.

The "problem" is that even a FRP Rafale (and not only) already costs more than the more recent LRIP F-35 aircraft (and I'm not even talking about the latest LRIP 10!).
For example if you read here:
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /82377564/

Qatar purchased 24 Rafale aircraft at total cost of $7.5 Billion USD which makes it an insane amount of $321.5 Million USD per each Rafale!
Of course and as you can read in the article above, the total cost of this deal includes the training of 36 pilots and 100 mechanics plus some missiles (I'm assuming air-to-air missiles). Even if half of the cost of that deal covered the costs of pilot/mechanic training plus the missiles - which honestly I doubt very much - you would still have a cost for the Rafale at well above $150 Million USD each.
Heck, even the "super cheap" Gripen NG (note this is sarcasm) will cost to Brazil an amount of $130 Million USD per unit (acquisition cost only).
Speaking of Brazil, during their fighter competition the Rafale was initially the favourite aircraft and the only reason why it wasn't selected was its price (too expensive) which left the Super Hornet and the Gripen NG (which were both less expensive than the Rafale) competing with each other. The Super Hornet was then eliminated because of a well known a "espionage scandal" and this left the Gripen NG as the winner.
Since we know that the Super Hornet's cost is currently around the same (and some sources even say that's a bit more expensive) compared to the F-35A, we don't need to be geniuses to understand that the Rafale is more expensive than the F-35!

[uclass]

Just to add, I got one guy on another forum trying to compare F-35 LRIP unit costs to Rafale FRP unit costs.

That's a huge LOL.

The "problem" is that even a FRP Rafale (and not only) already costs more than the more recent LRIP F-35 aircraft (and I'm not even talking about the latest LRIP 10!).
For example if you read here:
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /82377564/

Qatar purchased 24 Rafale aircraft at total cost of $7.5 Billion USD which makes it an insane amount of $321.5 Million USD per each Rafale!
Of course and as you can read in the article above, the total cost of this deal includes the training of 36 pilots and 100 mechanics plus some missiles (I'm assuming air-to-air missiles). Even if half of the cost of that deal covered the costs of pilot/mechanic training plus the missiles - which honestly I doubt very much - you would still have a cost for the Rafale at well above $150 Million USD each.
Heck, even the "super cheap" Gripen NG (note this is sarcasm) will cost to Brazil an amount of $130 Million USD per unit (acquisition cost only).
Speaking of Brazil, during their fighter competition the Rafale was initially the favourite aircraft and the only reason why it wasn't selected was its price (too expensive) which left the Super Hornet and the Gripen NG (which were both less expensive than the Rafale) competing with each other. The Super Hornet was then eliminated because of a well known a "espionage scandal" and this left the Gripen NG as the winner.
Since we know that the Super Hornet's cost is currently around the same (and some sources even say that's a bit more expensive) compared to the F-35A, we don't need to be geniuses to understand that the Rafale is more expensive than the F-35!

In the India deal it was €3.42bn base-price for 36 Rafales, minus the India specific changes, weapons, support and infrastructures etc. At the time that equated to $110m per aircraft, which is nearly 20% higher than LRIP 10, never mind FRP.

http://www.defensenews.com/articles/ind ... ghter-jets

[ricnunes]

In the India deal it was €3.42bn base-price for 36 Rafales, minus the India specific changes, weapons, support and infrastructures etc. At the time that equated to $110m per aircraft, which is nearly 20% higher than LRIP 10, never mind FRP.

http://www.defensenews.com/articles/ind ... ghter-jets

Yes indeed.
And to that total price (€3.42 Billion) you should also add a €1.7 billion which will be spent to meet India-specific changes to the aircraft. So the real cost for those 36 Rafale aircraft to India is in fact €3.42 billion + €1.7 billion, or more precisely €5.12 Billion.

[uclass]

In the India deal it was €3.42bn base-price for 36 Rafales, minus the India specific changes, weapons, support and infrastructures etc. At the time that equated to $110m per aircraft, which is nearly 20% higher than LRIP 10, never mind FRP.

http://www.defensenews.com/articles/ind ... ghter-jets

Yes indeed.
And to that total price (€3.42 Billion) you should also add a €1.7 billion which will be spent to meet India-specific changes to the aircraft. So the real cost for those 36 Rafale aircraft to India is in fact €3.42 billion + €1.7 billion, or more precisely €5.12 Billion.

Indeed, I wouldn't be surprised if €3.42bn is the price with PESA radar and old DDM MAWS.

[halloweene]

In the India deal it was €3.42bn base-price for 36 Rafales, minus the India specific changes, weapons, support and infrastructures etc. At the time that equated to $110m per aircraft, which is nearly 20% higher than LRIP 10, never mind FRP.

http://www.defensenews.com/articles/ind ... ghter-jets

Yes indeed.
And to that total price (€3.42 Billion) you should also add a €1.7 billion which will be spent to meet India-specific changes to the aircraft. So the real cost for those 36 Rafale aircraft to India is in fact €3.42 billion + €1.7 billion, or more precisely €5.12 Billion.

Indeed, I wouldn't be surprised if €3.42bn is the price with PESA radar and old DDM MAWS.

Except that you are comparing non recurring costs with unknown quantity (indian Rafales) check costs of LRIP 7 here for example...

http://www.portail-aviation.com/2017/03 ... -f-35.html

If you add the 3 contracts and there modifications, 191 M$. Now one can add dev and industrialization costs, or delete retrofits or bases costs etc. Your choice...

[ricnunes]

Yes indeed.
And to that total price (€3.42 Billion) you should also add a €1.7 billion which will be spent to meet India-specific changes to the aircraft. So the real cost for those 36 Rafale aircraft to India is in fact €3.42 billion + €1.7 billion, or more precisely €5.12 Billion.

Indeed, I wouldn't be surprised if €3.42bn is the price with PESA radar and old DDM MAWS.

Except that you are comparing non recurring costs with unknown quantity (indian Rafales) check costs of LRIP 7 here for example...

http://www.portail-aviation.com/2017/03 ... -f-35.html

If you add the 3 contracts and there modifications, 191 M$. Now one can add dev and industrialization costs, or delete retrofits or bases costs etc. Your choice...

We are comparing the exact same thing, the cost of each aircraft to the customer.
Also, we are comparing the cost of LRIP 10 (and I also hinted in my previous posts, LRIP 9 as well) F-35, namely the -A variant or F-35A with the Rafale (also land based variant).

And then you come up with LRIP 7?
It's well known that with each advancing LRIP things such as manufacturing techniques/skills and supply chains to and from the manufacturers improve and become much more effective and last but not the least the number of manufactured F-35 per each LRIP increases this will drastically bring down the cost per unit of each F-35 for each successive LRIP! And that does this mean?
- It means that a LRIP 7 F-35 is more expensive than a LRIP 8 F-35 which by its turn is more expensive than a LRIP 9 F-35 which by its is more expensive than a LRIP 10 F-35 and so on.

I don't understand French much but from what I gather, yes it's possible that a certain variant of the F-35 (probably -B or -C) cost around $191 Million USD during LRIP 7 but these costs have drastically done down with each subsequent LRIP where currently each LRIP 10 F-35A costs around $94 Million USD.

Also in other to be fair when comparing the F-35 versus Rafale in terms of costs we should compare a FRP (Full Rate Production) F-35 with the Rafale since a F-35 LRIP aircraft is basically a "pre-production" aircraft and Rafale as long passed that phase.
However no FRP F-35 have been build so using LRIP 10 aircraft as a comparison base for cost evaluation on the F-35 is even "unfair for the F-35" since a FRP F-35 will be quite cheaper than a LRIP 10 F-35 - It's estimated that a FRP F-35A will cost something between $80 to $85 Million USD which again is far cheaper than the Rafale will ever be!

Finally in order to be really fair when comparing an LRIP F-35 to the Rafale, perhaps we should use prototype and/or "pre-production" of the Rafale instead (and of course adjust the inflation to today's money)?