Dutch Cancel Order for F-35 JSF

Program progress, politics, orders, and speculation
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

sextusempiricus

Banned

  • Posts: 266
  • Joined: 17 Aug 2009, 05:26
  • Location: Mexico City, Mexico

Unread post21 May 2010, 18:24

Oh, happy, happy day! There are few things better in life than seeing a company like LM finally suffer the effects of its incompetence, arrogance and malfeasance. Hopefully others will follow the Dutch lead, and LM will lose billions of dollars in future business. Today, for a change, the truth and common sense won out.

Let there be no mistake about it, this is a HUGE development. This is more than just a chink in the F-35's formerly impregnable armor - this is a deep wound through which the program, while it may not hemorrhage to death, may bleed enough so that it never fully recovers. Oh, blessed, blessed day!

Dutch Cancel Order for F-35 JSF
Posted by Christina Mackenzie at 5/21/2010 10:40 AM CDT

The Dutch parliament voted last night by 79 votes against 71 to cancel the order for the first F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and to end Dutch participation in the program's Initial Operational Test and Evaluation phase.

The vote on a motion proposed by the Labor Party was based on the fact that price estimates made by Lockheed Martin in response to the Netherlands' original Request for Information and the Supplemental Request for Information of 2008 are not reliable.

However, Minister of Defense Eimert van Middelkoop said the vote was Labor Party “election rhetoric” prior to the June 9 general election and was quoted by Dutch News as saying that dropping out of the trials would still cost Dutch taxpayers €20 million, after having spent €800 million (some say more than €1 billion) to date.

The Netherlands has been run by a caretaker Labor/Christian Democrat government since the previous government lost a vote of confidence in February over the army's deployment in Afghanistan. Van Middelkoop said in a statement issued on May 20 that he was neither willing nor able to act on Parliament's vote as he believed the government's temporary status means it cannot take such irreversible decisions before the election.

But Labor MP Angelien Eijsink says it is irresponsible to continue with the JSF program. She cites delays, the Nunn-McCurdy cost breach, the 2-year delay of the IOT&E and poor progress in flight testing. She also mentioned that Parliament was still awaiting vital data on noise levels and said the industrial business case for JSF participation was no longer valid given the much lower than anticipated number of orders for the aircraft.

Labor says it wants to continue Dutch participation in the System Development and Demonstration (SDD) phase but other parties want to end it.

The Royal Dutch Air Force currently operates 90 F-16s, 18 of which are scheduled to be sold to Chile towards the end of this year. Originally the Netherlands was planning to buy 85 F-35s.

If the decision is implemented it won't exactly be a surprise. Dutch politicians have been rumbling for months that the JSF is far too expensive and the Netherlands' participation in the program is now in the hands of the electorate. But given the general economic doom and gloom in Europe right now, chances are high that the Dutch will vote for a party that is not going to be spending for something that many do not see the need for.

If the Dutch do withdraw could this be the encouragement other wavering European participants need to pull the plug too?
Offline

stereospace

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 686
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 17:35
  • Location: Columbia, Maryland, USA

Unread post21 May 2010, 18:32

I'm most interested in seeing if there's a domino effect, especially given the current economy. Oddly, I don't see this as a final decision for the Dutch. They may simply wait outside for a few years to see how things develop, and if things are going well on the program, they'll buy back in. We'll see. This is one scene, not the whole drama.
Offline

bumtish

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 376
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2008, 15:59

Unread post21 May 2010, 19:02

sextusempiricus wrote: This is more than just a chink in the F-35's formerly impregnable armor - this is a deep wound through which the program, while it may not hemorrhage to death, may bleed enough so that it never fully recovers. Oh, blessed, blessed day!


You'll get tired of predicting the pending doom. It usually takes less than a year of celebrating "final straws" before a poster recognizes that he's into frothing wishful thinking ;)
Last edited by bumtish on 21 May 2010, 19:15, edited 2 times in total.
Offline

LMAggie

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 579
  • Joined: 12 Aug 2007, 07:43

Unread post21 May 2010, 19:12

Sextus, you are a sick person.

All they said is that they are canceling their first airplane (1 airplane) and that airplane was meant for their operational test program, which is why they are canceling their operational test program. The two go hand-in-hand. The decision does not mean they will not buy F-35's in the future, and as the article points out, this is largely political gesturing. Also, it BARELY passed. Although, I do understand if a country can't afford a LRIP F-35 right now, as we all know the economic situation in Europe is getting tense.

The Dutch are one the biggest partners in JSF. They played a pivotal role in electrical harness development, and are currently the SOLE source for F-35 external doors. The Dutch are going nowhere, this is just political posturing due to a tense economical climate. It will affect the program, but it will not "bleed to death". Sextus, you are such a drama queen. I guess we should expect nothing else from someone with a liberal arts degree.
“Its not the critic who counts..The credit belongs to the man who does actually strive to do the deeds..”
Offline

cfg

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 52
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2008, 23:02

Unread post21 May 2010, 19:12

sextusempiricus wrote:Speaking of flesh wounds, can't wait for all the undoubtedly forthcoming Black Knight-like excuses and justifications for this development F-35 apologists and fanboys will offer up...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhRUe-gz690


Would you like to discuss politics? Because the announce is about politics ...
Offline

Guysmiley

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1496
  • Joined: 26 May 2005, 19:39

Unread post21 May 2010, 19:33

Oh, happy, happy day! There are few things better in life than seeing a company like LM finally suffer the effects of its incompetence, arrogance and malfeasance. Hopefully others will follow the Dutch lead, and LM will lose billions of dollars in future business. Today, for a change, the truth and common sense won out.

Let there be no mistake about it, this is a HUGE development. This is more than just a chink in the F-35's formerly impregnable armor - this is a deep wound through which the program, while it may not hemorrhage to death, may bleed enough so that it never fully recovers. Oh, blessed, blessed day!

Troll's gotta troll.
Offline

rivetspacer

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 88
  • Joined: 23 Dec 2008, 03:51

Unread post21 May 2010, 19:55

He's a moron. Even if the Dutch fitch, there are plenty of others ready to gobble up those jets in line, not to mention the workshare.
Offline

AJAX

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 68
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2004, 21:02

Unread post21 May 2010, 20:01

Talk about false advertising in a thread title....
Offline

cywolf32

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 623
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2005, 12:04
  • Location: USA

Unread post21 May 2010, 20:27

Sextus, are you related to Perez Hilton? Just sayin'!
Offline

dragorv

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 98
  • Joined: 20 Nov 2009, 03:47
  • Location: East Coast, USA

Unread post21 May 2010, 20:28

Why, again, do we want a company to loose billions of dollers which could result in a loss of jobs and dely or push up the cost of the F-35 and future/current products? The F-35 is a good fighter and if you want the company to die or suffer, the program is going to suffer as well.
Offline

sextusempiricus

Banned

  • Posts: 266
  • Joined: 17 Aug 2009, 05:26
  • Location: Mexico City, Mexico

Unread post21 May 2010, 20:42

Okay, so let's see what this is really about rather than throwing insults about, shall we?

From Sandilands' "Plane Talking" blog:

http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking ... ikey+Blogs)

But first, to The Hague.

The motions were tabled by the SP (Socialist Party), PvdA (Labour) and GL (Green Left) and may be summarised as follows:

Proposal 1 (SP):

The government not be permitted to contract any new obligations with the JSF program

Proposal 2 (Labour)

Cancelling the contract for the First LRIP3 test aircraft and get the money back from the US for the long lead items. Not buying/ signing contract for the Second LRIP4 test aircraft. Cancelling the participation in the MOU-IOT&E (Initial Operational Test and Evaluation)

Proposal 3 (Green Left)

Because the Evaluations of the F16 replacement in 2002 and in 2008 were based on wrong estimates and unreliable data, there needs to be a new evaluation done with new RFPs (Requests for Proposal).

All three proposals were approved by the Netherlands Parliament.

This development follows two highly critical audit reviews of the JSF project in the US, the firing and replacement of the military head of the project, and most recently the triggering of the Nunn-McCurdy law under which defence projects that exceed cost increase limitations must be revalidated by Congress to receive continued funding. That Congressional review is underway.


So no, LMAggie, they aren't just canceling their order for their first LRIP aircraft, they're also NOT BUYING the second. Moreover, what's most critical is this: "Because the Evaluations of the F16 replacement in 2002 and in 2008 were based on wrong estimates and unreliable data, there needs to be a new evaluation done with new RFPs (Requests for Proposal)."

Fact is, LM prevailed in Holland and elsewhere over competition like the Grippen NG earlier in the 2000s based on cost estimates and a schedule that have been torn to shreds, and are demonstrably at worst willfully false and at best totally disingenuous. The Dutch are exactly right in, given that the procurement conditions for the F-35 have so radically changed, wanting to recompete and ask for new RFPs from all comers. Simply, LM has not delivered, and the Dutch are completely within their rights, and completely sane, to say, "You know what, we're feeling a little gipped over here, we think it's time we consider other options anew."

Also, LMAggie, these measures didn't "barely pass." A 79 to 71 vote is not that close at all.

That's not all, of course, but the subject of another thread: the fact that PAK-FA is looking more impressive every day, and the prospect that many F-35 foreign customers who will be buying it as their principal air-superiority fighter (unlike the U.S.) will find themselves thoroughly outmatched by potential enemies flying PAK-FA. The Israelis, for instance, come to mind. Don't doubt for one second that Iran and Syria will want and get PAK-FA eventually. Is the F-35 up to snuff to go up against PAK-FA in air-to-air combat? I'm not sure at all, and this is a question LM needs to answer forthwith.

Also, U.S. intelligence is now estimating that China will field a 5th Gen fighter roughly equivalent to the F-22 by 2018, much earlier than anticipated. Are we now thinking it was a huge mistake to curtail F-22 production to only 188 airframes? Again, will limited numbers of F-22, backed by upgraded but ancient "Golden Eagles", be sufficient to cope with a China with oodles of cash available to buy a hell of a lot more than 188 F-22-equivalent fighters?

The rationale behind buying lots of poor-man's F-22s (F-35s) at F-22 prices is looking more idiotic every day...
Offline

shep1978

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1395
  • Joined: 04 Apr 2009, 16:00
  • Location: UK

Unread post21 May 2010, 21:06

Calm down people, it's only the Dutch who are not remotely imporant so it doesn't matter. Means some other countries will get their deliveries a tad quicker too i'd assume.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 22261
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post21 May 2010, 21:06

How does the Dutch not buying two LRIP aircraft put a dent in JSF?
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

shep1978

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1395
  • Joined: 04 Apr 2009, 16:00
  • Location: UK

Unread post21 May 2010, 21:22

spazsinbad wrote:How does the Dutch not buying two LRIP aircraft put a dent in JSF?


LOL! I don't know, so all this hullabaloo here and on other forums is all over just two aircraft? I didn't realise it was just two jets. :lol: :shock:
Offline

aeroxavier

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 6
  • Joined: 12 Mar 2010, 18:01

Unread post21 May 2010, 21:26

don't forget f-35 have win this contract by 0.01% more against the rafale. /10
GB have reduce
and others like italy who will take 120 plane for 60million each can make that to
Next

Return to Program and politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 101spider and 18 guests