USAF wants a new fighter to fill in for the F-35?

[Fox1]

https://www.sandboxx.us/blog/the-air-fo ... -the-f-35/

What is going on? I have seen this mentioned in several places in recent days. Is such an idea seriously being considered? And is the F-35 really so expensive to operate to justify the development of an all new inferior aircraft? I find this very troubling and baffling.

If we need some cheaper aircraft to conduct less pressing missions in more permissive environments, then why not just buy some more F-16s to perform that mission, or even something like the AT-6 or A-29 Super Tucano? If what they are talking about is a legit plan that has any serious backing, then I can't see it accomplishing anything other than screwing up the F-35 program and ensuring we end up with far fewer of them than we need.

This is a real head scratcher.

[krieger22]

Given that you've already posted in the thread discussing it, why would you start a new one? viewtopic.php?f=2&t=57685

[Fox1]

Given that you've already posted in the thread discussing it, why would you start a new one? viewtopic.php?f=2&t=57685

I consider it relevant to the F-35 forum since such a project (if undertaken) would no doubt have an enormous effect on the future of the F-35 as well. Nonetheless, if the forum moderators have an issue with two similar running discussions in separate sections of the forums, then by all means feel free to merge the threads or delete mine entirely.

[steve2267]

If the Biden administration somehow manages to severely cut back the F-35 program, or otherwise neuter it, then I would say that the CeeCeePee invested wisely.

[madrat]

If the Biden administration somehow manages to severely cut back the F-35 program, or otherwise neuter it, then I would say that the CeeCeePee invested wisely.

This.

[Fox1]

But! But! Trump was a meanie and he said things that hurt people's feelings! Orange man bad! So now he is gone...replaced by a guy who appears to have been guilty of doing the things democrats accused Trump of for over 4 years. Yet somehow, nobody in the media seems to care about all of the Biden family's shady dealings with the Chinese. Now everything is all good and happy again and we have restored dignity back to the office of the presidency. Who cares if he's owned by China? He's likable and doesn't say mean things. It is good to see we finally have our priorities straight in this country again. There for a few years, it appears Americans were almost starting to wake up and become wise to the beltway swamp. That was scary!

[spazsinbad]

ENUF with the B/S politics please. THANK YOU.

[weasel1962]

Putting emotion & politics aside.

1. China is currently producing J-10C, J-16, J-15 and J-20s. Any new fighter will need to outmatch these. Will low cost options do so?
2. USAF spent $60b in RDT&E to develop the F-35A. Is it more cost effective to spend more money on RDT&E to develop a less capable plane than buy more capable newbuilds?

The answer to the above makes it obvious why a new fighter is unlikely bar the PCA/NGAD which ticks yes to both questions.

What LM has obtained is a near monopoly on US fighter production. 101 economics demonstrates that a monopoly has the most power to profit maximize. No surprise LM stock prices are doing much better than the rest. Profit maximization means higher price = higher cost = less planes for the same budget. One solution is to create competitors which reduces monopolistic behaviors. The F-15EX is less successful at this because it has the same cost (some argue higher) as the F-35 but still doesn’t have stealth. Hence in my mind, the leadership appear to think the prospect of a substantially lower cost plane (e.g. F-16++) would. Understandable intent imho but maybe wrong (or rather old school) implementation method.

A new approach may be to leverage on fighter UCAVs e.g. Wingman. Rather than load the UAV with expensive sensors that increases the cost, leverage on F-22/F-35 sensors and let the UAVs focus on flight performance. Without pilots, UCAV enjoy less weight design G-force restriction and should in theory cost less than manned fighters, be expendable but more effective. Rather than ditching either manned fighter, it leverages on/enhances both. Not sure whether it works yet but it clearly has the potential, radical as the idea is. I think the technology is approaching a maturity level today that makes this a reality. If all else fails, it’ll serve as a kamikaze drone or absorb aggressor missile fires.

Budget-wise, part of the money can come from the MQ-9 budget which the USAF doesn't want. That reduces budget pressure for the rest. Fund a couple of squadrons, proof the concept then if validated, fund enough to blow past the 386/55 fighter squadron requirement threshold. Another possibility, equip the MQ-9 squadrons with the wingman UAV as well so each squadron can operate either UAV depending on the mission (reducing manpower needs). Numbers itself will be a deterrent.

[magitsu]

How nice. Now that Axe fud spread to MSNBC / Brian Williams.
https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1364964385274396680

[XanderCrews]

How nice. Now that Axe fud spread to MSNBC / Brian Williams.
https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1364964385274396680

Wow they're laying it all on Trump, and the Twitter morons are buying it.

JSF goes back to Clinton obvously, and lots of Talking heads have talked about how "JSF is a democrat airplane and F-22 is a republican airplane" F-22 was iced under obama and the F-35 was brought online during his tenure


I know spaz doesn't want to talk politics, but its going to be hard not to in this particular case.

[XanderCrews]

How nice. Now that Axe fud spread to MSNBC / Brian Williams.
https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1364964385274396680

Wow they're laying it all on Trump, and the Twitter morons are buying it.

JSF goes back to Clinton obvously, and lots of Talking heads have talked about how "JSF is a democrat airplane and F-22 is a republican airplane" F-22 was iced under obama and the F-35 was brought online during his tenure


I know spaz doesn't want to talk politics, but its going to be hard not to in this particular case.

[Fox1]

Yep, unfortunately matters of defense and politics are as intertwined these days as anything could possibly get, at least in this country. You can't do a complete discussion about defense matters without taking into consideration the political factors.

[XanderCrews]

General Brown has created quite the little firestorm



well done, sir LOL

Hats off to Trump who managed to create the F-35 in just 4 years and spend 1.7 trillion dollars on it as well.

[XanderCrews]

Yep, unfortunately matters of defense and politics are as intertwined these days as anything could possibly get, at least in this country. You can't do a complete discussion about defense matters without taking into consideration the political factors.

Honestly its just a sad state of the country and "public discourse" in general F-35 is basically apolitical in the US, its a program of equal republican and democrat blame/victory.

what's scary is that we take a thing that people are ignorant of, throw a false cost number on it, dump it all on the "opposition party" and have so many people rise to the "bait" and go into killer attack mode on whatever false story has come out of thin air. and in 48 hours, there will be some new more important thing to turn the masses onto, to create a scapegoat and launch into the "two days of hate" and then the attention deficit disorder will kick in and they'll need a new machine to rage at. Obviously JSF goes back to the Clinton Era 1990s. Obviously 1.7 trillion dollars was never spent. we aren't even supposed to hit 1 trillion spent until the 2050s. Trump is nothing but the latest of the now 5 presidents that have been around for this program. 60 minutes ran their "big F-35 story" in 2014, before Trump had even won the nomination in 2016.

In the meantime, problems go unsolved and get worse. its like a cat with a laser. its uncatchable and artificially projected. There's no accountability or responsibility or value or morals held up for ones own side.

If the F-35 under Trump makes you mad, why didn't it also make you mad under Obama? and if you were happy with the F-35 under Obama, why weren't you happy with it Under Trump or now Biden for that matter?



This goes beyond fighters, and into much more political topics, but we see it everywhere. Kids in cages were good, then they were bad, now theyre good again. You'll never guess what 4 year period happened when they were "bad" and who was running the show...

Lets stick to F-35, but that's an example of what I mean above. F-35 is great or horrific, depending on who's warming the oval office furniture.

Trump, who has publicly criticized Lockheed on Twitter since his election and called the program costs “out of control” just last month, now says the program is “in great shape” and called the F-35 “a great plane.”

“I appreciate Lockheed Martin for being so responsive,” he said. Citing years of delays and cost overruns, he said, “We’ve ended all of that. We’ve got that program really, really now in great shape.”

Lockheed has been involved in negotiation for the next batch of F-35s for more than a year….Cutting the cost of the F-35 also isn’t new from the Pentagon perspective, either. Late last year the Pentagon announced a $6.1 billion contract for the 57 F-35’s included in the ninth batch of jets. That represented a 3.7 percent reduction in the average price of the airplanes from what it paid in the last order and an overall 58 percent cut from what it paid when the first planes were produced.

In a mere ten days, Trump has whipped the entire F-35 program into “great shape”! What an amazing guy.

Needless to say, Lockheed-Martin is happy to go along with this fiction. They were already planning on a lower price for the tenth batch of jets anyway, and if Trump wants to take a fake victory lap over this, that’s fine with them. They have a keen understanding of the benefits of good relations with Beltway politicians.

careful, you admitted to price drops there.

[spazsinbad]

TacAir Study Will Determine If F-35 Production Surge Needed [HOW WILL AXE / POGO spin this?]
25 Feb 2021 John A. Tirpak

"The Air Force remains committed to the F-35, and it is the “cornerstone” of USAF’s force planning, but the new tactical aviation study will decide if USAF should surge its production of the jet, Chief of Staff Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr. said Feb. 25.

In a press conference at AFA’s virtual Aerospace Warfare Symposium, Brown disputed recent media reports that have pronounced the F-35 a failure.

“The F-35 is the cornerstone of our … fighter capability,” and of USAF’s plans for the future, Brown asserted. The TacAir study he unveiled last week will simply look at what systems will be needed to complement it, he said. The age of most of the fighter force—averaging 29 years—compels USAF to “look ahead … 10, 15 years in the future” at the right mix of aircraft for the missions expected in that timeframe, Brown said. The study will develop “where we think we need to go, and how we get from where we are today to … the future.

He also acknowledged that, at the current purchase rate of 48 to 60 airplanes a year, it will be the mid-2040s before the Air Force’s planned buy of 1,763 F-35s from Lockheed Martin is complete.

“I’m not sure that’s fully appreciated,” Brown said of the long production run. If the service sticks to 1,763, the Air Force may “need to accelerate” the ramp rate, conditional on the funding that Congress will allow.

“I can’t commit” to a surge in production yet, Brown said. “To get there faster, we’re going to have to have a spike” in production, but it will also depend on whether “our … defense industry partners” can produce at the rates USAF needs, he said. “I can’t [decide] this myself.”

He acknowledged there are “cost pressures” related to the F-35—the service has complained about the cost per flying hour—and said this is something the Air Force is “working [on] with Lockheed Martin.”...

...Brown specifically ruled out raiding the F-35 accounts to buy the Next Generation Air Dominance fighter, now in development.

“We’re not going to take money from F-35” to fund NGAD, he said. The NGAD will be financed “from some of the other … parts of the fighter force,” he said, adding that he will continue trying to “bring down … some of the older aircraft” to get the average age of the fighter fleet down, but neither does he want “a big gap in capability as we go forward.”

“We want to keep the F-35 on track,” he said, but he also is keeping an eye on the threat, and won’t permit USAF to “just build something” without trying to overmatch adversary capabilities....

...The TacAir study, which will be done in partnership with the Joint Staff, evaluating all the services’ aviation plans, will also look at what a future fighter squadron looks like, and whether squadrons will be a mix of manned and unmanned aircraft, Brown said."

Source: https://www.airforcemag.com/tacair-stud ... ge-needed/