
bumtish:
Re your F-15K price quote of $125m?? Can you please list a source for that estimate? That's the most definitive price I've seen. And as usual, please specify... which price is this exactly? The Weapon system cost? The Total Flyaway? The REC flyaway? Thanks in advance. (note: I would quit all support for an F-15E procurement if it can be verified that an F-15K/F-15SG's REC flyaway was as much as LRIP-4's REC - I'm thinking more likely that would be the current Total Flyaway, or the initial Weapon sys cost from early 2000s).
Re: Partner purchases through the USAF, I can't find it the press release at the moment but recall reading of at least one Partner nation wanting to buy from USAF lots, at least during LRIP, it might have been RNLAF? That was the context in which the conjecture was made and if the case, that was the point which raised the question... 'who would pay the difference in such an arrangement if the DoD and Contractor were splitting F-35 cost overruns?'
Regarding that 2010 SAR sheet listing REC 'estimates'... we can already pretty much throw that SAR out the window as just about all estimates 'pre-Summer of 2010', are obsolete going forward. So unfortunately, those are old, pre-conceived Schedule and price estimates which will continue to see revisions in both orders and prices over the duration.
For one thing, even 2012's REC cost quoted there is a little shy of the likely final REC flyaway portion of the Total Procurement. Procurement costs have been HIGHER than originally estimated in 2008. If anything I've been conservative in my estimates.
I recall back in 2010 when awaiting Lot-4's released 'fixed + incentive' revision, I was stating $200m as the eventual PUC. Man, the heck I caught here for even speculating such an absurd and outrageous unit cost. Well, Lot 4's latest official PUC estimate is for over $220m!
For FY14? Expect reduced orders and substantially higher than estimated costs, probably still over $100m for REC. FRP? The whole definition of FRP will be fundamentally changed very soon, watch. Notional FRP, under austere budget environments going forward, will unfortunately be construed very differently than any current expectation is still promoting. Expect substantial revisions to both long-term total buys, annual rates by 2013
It's about acknowledging that the original and current estimates for schedule and price going forward are simply unsustainable and will not be hit - not on the front-end, not on the back-end... nada. Very unfortunate indeed, but it should be evident to any critical analysis - that's where I'm critical... on officials and policymakers missing it so bad and making policy based on miscalculated expectations.
Re your F-15K price quote of $125m?? Can you please list a source for that estimate? That's the most definitive price I've seen. And as usual, please specify... which price is this exactly? The Weapon system cost? The Total Flyaway? The REC flyaway? Thanks in advance. (note: I would quit all support for an F-15E procurement if it can be verified that an F-15K/F-15SG's REC flyaway was as much as LRIP-4's REC - I'm thinking more likely that would be the current Total Flyaway, or the initial Weapon sys cost from early 2000s).
Re: Partner purchases through the USAF, I can't find it the press release at the moment but recall reading of at least one Partner nation wanting to buy from USAF lots, at least during LRIP, it might have been RNLAF? That was the context in which the conjecture was made and if the case, that was the point which raised the question... 'who would pay the difference in such an arrangement if the DoD and Contractor were splitting F-35 cost overruns?'
Regarding that 2010 SAR sheet listing REC 'estimates'... we can already pretty much throw that SAR out the window as just about all estimates 'pre-Summer of 2010', are obsolete going forward. So unfortunately, those are old, pre-conceived Schedule and price estimates which will continue to see revisions in both orders and prices over the duration.
For one thing, even 2012's REC cost quoted there is a little shy of the likely final REC flyaway portion of the Total Procurement. Procurement costs have been HIGHER than originally estimated in 2008. If anything I've been conservative in my estimates.
I recall back in 2010 when awaiting Lot-4's released 'fixed + incentive' revision, I was stating $200m as the eventual PUC. Man, the heck I caught here for even speculating such an absurd and outrageous unit cost. Well, Lot 4's latest official PUC estimate is for over $220m!
For FY14? Expect reduced orders and substantially higher than estimated costs, probably still over $100m for REC. FRP? The whole definition of FRP will be fundamentally changed very soon, watch. Notional FRP, under austere budget environments going forward, will unfortunately be construed very differently than any current expectation is still promoting. Expect substantial revisions to both long-term total buys, annual rates by 2013
It's about acknowledging that the original and current estimates for schedule and price going forward are simply unsustainable and will not be hit - not on the front-end, not on the back-end... nada. Very unfortunate indeed, but it should be evident to any critical analysis - that's where I'm critical... on officials and policymakers missing it so bad and making policy based on miscalculated expectations.
The Super-Viper has not yet begun to concede.