Forum: Program and politics

m wrote:

Total Orders (2012, Febr.)
LRIP 1: 2
LRIP 2: 12
LRIP 3: 17 (UK: 2 / NL: 1)
LRIP 4: 32 (UK:1 / NL: 1
Total: 63 F35`s

LRIP 5: 32 (US: Long Lead items ordered)
LRIP 6: 32 (US: Long Lead items ordered)
Total: 64 F35`s

IOT&E Phase: Level 1 + 2
UK: 3 (LRIP 3 + 4)
NL: 2 (LRIP 3 + 4)

Other level partners
Italië: 4 (LRIP 6)
Australia: 2 (LRIP 6)
Turkey: 2 (LRIP 7)
Norway: 4 (LRIP 8 )
Total: 12 F35`s

Associated Partners
Israel: 19
Japan: 42
Total: 61 F35`s

Total ordered:
63
64
12
61
Totaal: 200 (Minus F35’s LRIP 5? / 32>30? )

Foreign countries: Total ordered + start delivery (Febr 2012)

UK
2011: 1
2012: 2

Netherlands
2012: 1 (Delivery: Aug. 2012)
2013: 1 (Delivery: March (?). 2013)
2020: 10 (LRIP 11 - Last LRIP series / When authorised by Dutch Parliament, delivery in 2020)

Australia and Italy2014: 4 (Italy)
2014: 2 (Australia)

Turkey and UK2015: 2 (Turkey)
2015: ? (UK: more F35’s expected)

Norway, Israel and Japan
2016: 4 (Norway)
2016: 19 (Israel)
2016: 42 (Japan)

Total ordered: Febr. 2012
88 (UK + 10 F35’s NL not included))

LRIP-5 total should be 30 (for the US): 21-CTOL, 6-CV, 3 STOVL

F-16.net Sponsor

@ maus92. Thanks ... wasn't sure about LRIP-5

1st503rdsgt wrote:

Given that the F-35 is the obvious choice for anyone looking to buy "top-of-the-line" over the next 30 years or so, I'm somewhat bumfuzzled that no one has come up with a viable international competitor (T-50 and J-20 have a rather limited potential-customer-base due to their size and interoperability/support issues). Many of the F-35's likely customers have little need for so much offensive capability, and it's not hard to imagine that they would prefer a lighter and simpler VLO platform. Then again, I guess it's nearly impossible for an American company to turn a profit on an all-new 5th generation design unless the USAF buys it in large numbers, and Europe doesn't appear to be up to the challenge anymore.

Some other point of view. Are smaller European countries really doing that bad?

Norway:56
Denmark: 30
Netherlands: 85? (May be less?)
Total: 171

Total population of these countries: 25 million

Compare this with other countries: Population
o Nortern countries combined: 25 million / 171 F35's
o Canada: 33 million / 65 F35’s
o Australia: 22 million / 100 F35’s
o US: 312 million / 2,443 F35’s

F35 per civilian:
o US: 1 F35 per 127,711,82 civilians
o Combined Norway, Denmark, Netherlands: 1 F35 per 146,198.8 civilians
o Canada: 1 F35 per 507,692.3 civilians
o Australia: 1 F35 per 220,000 civilians

1st503rdsgt wrote:

Given that the F-35 is the obvious choice for anyone looking to buy "top-of-the-line" over the next 30 years or so, I'm somewhat bumfuzzled that no one has come up with a viable international competitor (T-50 and J-20 have a rather limited potential-customer-base due to their size and interoperability/support issues). Many of the F-35's likely customers have little need for so much offensive capability, and it's not hard to imagine that they would prefer a lighter and simpler VLO platform. Then again, I guess it's nearly impossible for an American company to turn a profit on an all-new 5th generation design unless the USAF buys it in large numbers, and Europe doesn't appear to be up to the challenge anymore.

There are a couple of reasons. The biggest one is the structure of the international cooperation scheme. The subcontractor model was seen to be more attractive to partner companies than the traditional offset structure... even if it meant less money up front. Second, the scale of the project meant that there would be over 1000 aircraft produced... which means near maximum efficiency during production and the lowest per-unit cost. Most programs struggle to get to 500. Finally was the capabilities offered and interoperability. The F-35 was a stealthy aircraft with bleeding edge avionics and communication technology. Those two characteristics cost billions in development and really unachievable outside the US. Boeing can't even fund a competitor alone; it must rely on warmed up rehashes of the Super Hornet and the Strike Eagle in cometing market.... and failing badly.

hb_pencil wrote:

Boeing can't even fund a competitor alone; it must rely on warmed up rehashes of the Super Hornet and the Strike Eagle in cometing market.... and failing badly.

Except for the Saudi F-15 deal...

maus92 wrote:

hb_pencil wrote:

Boeing can't even fund a competitor alone; it must rely on warmed up rehashes of the Super Hornet and the Strike Eagle in cometing market.... and failing badly.

Except for the Saudi F-15 deal...

yeah, but that's not really a bonafide deal... there wasn't anything approaching an open competition to look a for a replacement. They are doubling their airframes and refurbishing current ones. Furthermore deals to Saudi Arabia are very different... offset arrangements are typically lower than in other nations and there is a history of corruption.

I don't think its really contestable to say that the F-35 have been cleaning up the competitions its been involved in. Part of that is the result of the very attractive offset arrangement and the sequence of the events over the past decade. Korea might be the first loss, but then again it too seems weighted to the F-15.

Forum: Program and politics

LM: Foreign investors will offset F-35 program