Australian lawmakers confident in F-35's future

[Dragon029]

IIRC they're not going to be fully differentiating between FRP and LRIP; what was "FRP-1" will be "Lot 12", etc.

On top of this (and again, IIRC), there was still going to be an LRIP 12 and 13 due to the Italian and Japanese FACOs not being as ready as Fort Worth for FRP. How those orders would have been done (separate to FRP-1, or in place of it, if at that point "FRP-1" had already been semantically killed) I'm not sure.

[optimist]

http://www.9news.com.au/national/2016/02/24/15/16/f-35-challengers-to-be-shot-from-the-sky

Dissapointing:

Later on Wednesday, General Bogdan's planned private briefing of the Senate committee inquiring into the F-35 was cancelled because of a clash with the launch of the defence white paper.

Greens defence spokesman Senator Peter Whish-Wilson, who instigated this inquiry, said he was disappointed the briefing, at least a month in the planning, had been cancelled at the last minute.

how is soloman, did he have something like this? ...so he chickened out, did he. he knew apa clown club and Co. had him on the ropes and their submissions are proved correct by his refusing to attend and answer the hard questions.

[hornetfinn]

"I have the data," he said. "I have the pilots who are flying the airplane. Here is what I will tell you: there is not an airplane in the world today anywhere that, if put up against an F-35 in an air-to-air environment, we would not see them first, shoot them first, and kill them first."

That was interesting. I wonder if this includes F-22...

[quicksilver]

"I have the data," he said. "I have the pilots who are flying the airplane. Here is what I will tell you: there is not an airplane in the world today anywhere that, if put up against an F-35 in an air-to-air environment, we would not see them first, shoot them first, and kill them first."

That was interesting. I wonder if this includes F-22...

One writer, pondering the same question came to the conclusion that, yes it did/does. I'm agnostic on the matter; good that the US will have both of those machines, and international/allied/coalition players to match w F-35. And we're only talking about an IOC jet...

Saw a thing from AFA where AFRL is talking about smaller missiles (and others have as well, eg Cuda). Imagine an F-35 with internal carriage of 8-10 missiles, a bigger motor, some other gadgets. This is going to be a whup-a$$ machine for a long time.

[meatshield]

Amen to that

[spazsinbad]

JSF’s Program Chief fronts Senate Inquiry - almost
26 Feb 2016 Katherine Ziesing

"As required by the Senate inquiry into the Joint Strike Fighter, head of the JSF program LTGEN Chris Bodgan made one of his regular trips out to Australia to give a statement to inquiry and general update to the Australian program office about the state of the program....

...“All of the facts and figures in that report are accurate,” LTGEN Bodgan confirmed. “I know they are accurate because every piece of information in that report came from my program office. We are transparent in what we do. So we provide all the information to both the partners and all the government agencies on the US side. So, having said that, there were absolutely no surprises in that report for me, for my partners, or for my leaders in the Department of Defense or Congress. We knew about every single issue in that report.”

That being said, LTGEN Bogdan explained earlier this week at a dinner presentation to the Sir Richard Williams Foundation that the program was audited or reviewed by 30 different agencies or bodies last year, both from the US and from partner nations.

“What that report fails to do, however, is give you the rest of the story,” LTGEN Bogdan continued. “It lays out issues and problems that we have on the program, which are accurate, but instead of putting a comma after that it puts a period at the end of the sentence. Well, what I would like to do is put a comma there and tell you okay, we have that problem but it's either fixed or we're in the process of fixing it, or we're in the process of implementing the fix already, so you get a better sense of where the program is. The report doesn't quite do that, so it leaves you with a perception that maybe the program is far worse off than it really is.”

LTGEN Bogdan went through every single issue raised in the report and past issues that have been raised in regard to the program. The moral of the story is yes, the F-35 is complex, yes, things in the past could have been done better, and yes, the program has hit every milestone since 2012 when the program was rebaselined. He also pointed out that people forget how hard it is to birth a new aircraft. People forget how many times the F-16 crashed, that two F-22s crashed, and the F-111 was seven years late arriving in Australia.

“In fact, what I've told folks is that in my 25 plus years of acquisition experience, running many, many programs, I do not think I've ever seen a program where the misperceptions and inaccuracies are so far from the reality of the program. I think that gap is pretty big on the F-35 program.”

In answering the numerous criticisms raised by a number of commentators on the program, LTGEN Bogdan is calm in his comment that “they don’t have the data; I do”...."

Source: http://www.australiandefence.com.au/new ... iry-almost

[spazsinbad]

Hang on to your hats - the GOON is back: Submission No.36 And to give a teaser...

"Peter Goon, BEng(Mech), FTE (USNTPS) T&E Professional Design Engineer; CASA CAR 35 & 36 Authorised Person and, inter alia, a Victim of Defence Abuses (one of many)"

WHAT ARE PEOPLE’S MOTIVATIONAL IMPERATIVES AND AGENDAS RE THE PLANNED ACQUISITION OF THE F-35 LIGHTNING II JSF AND RELATED MATTERS?
16 Feb 2016 Peter Goon

...2. Why are the voices of those who have demonstrated they know and understand these things being ignored and drowned out by those who, by their words and actions, apparently don’t and why is this being done with such disdain, prejudice and malice?..." [This submission is composed of an APA NOTAM + annexes & no other 'abuse' references]

APA NOTAM: 'JSF Alternate Realities: …and from whence they come' 2009 amended 2010 [so they are up to date]

Source: http://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ash ... bId=409514 (PDF 0.34Mb)

[optimist]

It's getting to the point of feeling compassion for the guy, he doesn't seem very well.

[mk82]

Ahh...Goon....the ever delusional Goon (in more than one way ). 2010!? Hello, 2016 is calling you back!

Yes, Goony Goon...let's send some outdated and often blatantly false submission to the Ozzie Senate. That should do be a recipe for success. Those in the know eh....LMAO!

Save your compassion for someone else Optimist. F*ck Goon....he is a lost cause.

[hornetfinn]

I'd really like to attend APA meetings nowadays....

[spazsinbad]

Four more submissions to make forty total at the Inquiry website - last four not significant - although YMMV.

[popcorn]

No doubt they will get the consideration they merit.

[spazsinbad]

Heheh. Now there are another three for forty-three submissions total.... SUB No.41 is about the F-35 & it is fun to read!:

"...Stealth, Radars, Electronic Warfare, Hacking and Spies [ Thank You Mr. James Hicks - for the LOLs ]
It’s possible, given that the CIA’s budget is over a quarter the size of Russia’s entire military, that every once in a while a CIA agent in eastern Europe sobers up, drags himself from the casino, staggers into his sports car and drives off to pose as a weapons dealer and buy a Russian radar.

It’s equally possible, that when the stolen / legitimately purchased radar arrives at Area 51, that the operatives there park the flying saucers, tell ET to phone home for a while and play “point the Russian Radar at the F35”, which after Flying Saucer Football, is everybody’s favourite game there....

...We shouldn’t picture the F-35 pilot madly tapping away at a keyboard to hack her enemies. The aircraft’s computers will have pre-prepared exploits for vulnerabilities, be able to identify the make, model, and likely even software version of the enemy radar, and apply the appropriate jamming, spoofing and even hacking techniques....

...Assessing a Classified Aircraft – Without the Classified Data
I have performed an exhaustive search and study of everything I can find about this aircraft. I’m fascinated by the whole F35 saga, an extraordinary story of an aircraft that virtually everyone I speak to regards as a complete dud, and yet mysteriously the western world plans to bet the farm and buy 3,000 of them. How could this happen?

In my search, I’ve read the writings of Bill Sweetman of Aviation Week, of Peter Goon of Air Power Australia, every article that mentions it on Breaking Defence, everything linked from the Wikipedia article about the airframe itself, its weapons, its engine and its equipment, the accounts of pilots who have flown it, the accounts of officers whose pilots have flown it (and flown against it), the opinions of many former pilots, maintainers, designers, electronics specialists, air combat geeks and opinionated internet people of all stripes. I watched the US 60 minutes special, every documentary made about it, that Canadian show where they interview Pierre “It’s a turkey!” Sprey yet again. I’ve read the DOT&E reports, and occasionally with a sense of immense guilt, I read what Lockheed have to say. [Ozzie Humour ]

And having been over all over that in detail, I can’t tell you to buy, or not to buy, this aircraft. Not even close...."
&
"...Originally we were buying “not the same aircraft the US would fly, [QUE? out of left field with that - canard is dead] but still the stealthiest thing we could buy”. Are we still getting second rate downgraded export quality stealth? Or are we getting the astonishingly stealthy F35 that General Mike Hostage admitted last year to be Stealthier than the F22?..."
&
"...I find it somewhat extraordinary that most Australians wouldn’t seriously consider buying a Chinese Ute, [utility vehickle] but are willing to believe that the J-20 will fly rings around the F-22 and F-35. A bit improbable....

...There are just fifteen T-50’s on order so far, with 5 prototypes built (and one burned to a crisp from an engine fire). It’s nothing short of hyperbole to present this aircraft as a threat. Perhaps those fifteen aircraft will close to dogfighting range with and gun down 3,000 F-35’s, but also, perhaps not...."
&
"....A Farcical Narrative
Fresh from designing and building the F-22 Raptor, an air superiority fighter so lethal that not only can no aircraft currently flying match it, but no air craft currently being designed is expected to match it, Lockheed Martin set out to design and build, and foist upon the entire western world, a complete dud of an aircraft....
&
"...Conclusion
I can’t claim to draw a conclusion. I recommend that this Senate Committee:
a) Ignore the sensationalist mis-reporting about this fighter
b) Obtain access to the necessary classified performance parameters as listed above, and
c) Draw its own conclusions" [THANKS HEAPS! ]

[spazsinbad]

DefDept submission numbered 55 so I guess there are more to come with inbetween numbers 44 to 54? Dunno. Attached.

Senate Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Inquiry into the Planned Acquisition of the F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter
26 Feb 2016 (one week late) Department of Defence Written Submission

"...68. The F-35 Program has stabilised and remained within the approved budget since the program was re-baselined in 2012. The Australian F-35 Program remains within budget and on track to deliver an F-35A capability to meet Australia's 2020 initial operational capability.

69. As at December 2015, Australia’s F-35 Program total approved budget is A$17.8 billion (adjusted for exchange rates as at January 2016). This includes the cost of the 72 F-35A aircraft as well as support systems, including information systems support, training, weapons, and contingency funding. The total approved budget also includes A$1.5 billion for F-35 facilities at RAAF Bases Williamtown and Tindal and other forward operating and support bases....

...71. Australian aircraft unit recurring flyaway cost is reducing significantly. This is largely due to production progress along the learning curve and the increasing economies of scale from rising production. As a result, contracted costs have been reducing by three-four percent annually and this will be further amplified when the program achieves full rate production in 2020. The contracted costs are currently tracking at around nine percent less than US Government estimates. Based on current projections, the expected average unit cost of an Australian F-35 is US$90 million. This is similar to the price of the latest version of the F/A-18 Super Hornet, a less capable fourth-generation aircraft based on an airframe first developed in the 1990s....

...Testing the F-35 capability
82. The significant capability of the F-35 means the complexity of the test and evaluation process cannot be underestimated. The infrastructure, assets and supporting equipment required to be available to test the spectrum of capability is complicated and poses some schedule risk. Only the US Department of Defense is capable of harnessing all of these resources.

83. Developmental test and evaluation is the process by which aircraft capability is tested against program contract specifications. Operational test and evaluation is the process by which the operators test the capability against their operational requirements. The System Development and Demonstration phase is scheduled to be completed in 2017 and is linked to the completion of developmental test and evaluation. This milestone signifies the delivery of a specified level of warfighting capability across the suite of F-35 systems.

84. The F-35 test and evaluation program is currently employing a “fly-fix-fly” approach. While this methodology is appropriate to the complexity of the F-35 software, it has introduced some schedule risk to the program. The US Department of Defense acknowledged this risk in 2014 and curtailed and rationalised the F-35 test and evaluation program to better focus resources on the testing of the final software to be delivered under the System Development and Demonstration phase in 2017. Notably, in 2015, the program achieved all planned test points, some 1,374 test flights and 9,582 test points....

...89. Recent media reports around flight test highlighted an event which occurred during the conduct of the F-35 test and evaluation program and related to the manoeuvring performance of the F-35. This reporting was in regard to one test flight taken out of context from a larger test and evaluation program. Again, an experienced Australian F/A-18 pilot now flying F-35A at Luke Air Force Base drew this observation.

“In my experience flying more than 140 hours in the F-35 so far, it is better in performance and manoeuvrability than a representatively configured F/A-18 while remaining easy to fly.” Squadron Leader Andrew Jackson; F-35A pilot and instructor and F/A-18 Hornet pilot"

90. Australia will leverage the US developmental and operational test and evaluation programs to the maximum extent. Australia has had test and evaluation expertise embedded in both these programs. This insight has enabled Australia to understand the implications of issues as they arise and to put them in the broader context of the test and evaluation program. More importantly, this insight is helping to inform the development of the Australian operational test and evaluation program, which will focus on demonstrating the suitability of the F-35 capability in the Australian environment.

91. The Defence Science and Technology Group (DST Group) has played a key role in managing and providing insight into technical risk. DST Group personnel have been embedded in key risk areas across the program and have been very influential in resolving a range of issues, detailed at Annex D. In particular, DST Group has played a key role in conducting independent modelling and simulation, which has supported Defence’s understanding and choice of the F-35 capability. In 2010, DST Group assessed that there were 140 technical risks of which 30 were assessed as high. Today only two high risks remain and these risks are tracking towards resolution, in particular the Helmet Mounted Display System...."

Source: http://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ash ... bId=409757 (PDF 0.3Mb) also attached below

[spazsinbad]

Never Ending Submissions now total umpty ump with LM providing a 12.7Mb PDF tome No.46 amongst others yet to arrive:

http://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ash ... bId=409405