That's the whole point -- F-35 requires more people and thus additional costs. It also has infrastructure requirements that are more demanding than a 4. gen or 4.5 gen platform. Further driving costs.
F-35 actually has demonstrably fewer "infrastuctrues" it goes from a 3 high level maitaince structure to just 2.
That's gonna completely depend dude. You're talking out your a$$. Marine F-35 squadrons are actually smaller in size. Its easier to work on than what the USMC has now, and the high level maintaince and overhead is reduced.
BAS 60 and roadside operations cost more, thats why they stopped doing them.
youre talking about something you have no clue about. I know Gripen fans think theyre experrs on maint. and cost, but I assure, thats not the case. Marines deploy on the boat with just pieces of the squadron. When we come back from the det, we have far more people to service the airplane. and it can flex throughout the year. thats why people look even beyond annual cost and look at blocks of years. So years you fly more, some less. some more deployments, some fewer. Sometimes the squadron is fat, and sometimes its slim. sometimes we get chopped into other groups. some things require more personnel, some fewer.
Again you really have no idea what the hell you're talking about. in the US Military you get paid year round. We don't "clock in and clock out" you get paid whether you sleep all day or work all day. no overtime either. Sometimes we drag people along just to have extra hands. it really varries
So what did loke do wrong? he took one narrow example and applied it to the whole. You can't make an assessment on maint. cost in such a fashion. The USMC is going to have 30 percent fewer Marines needed to Maintain a force of F-35Bs than if we kept the current structure of Prowler, harrier, f-18. We have a net savings.
its really too complicated because you have to be able to look at the
entire picture. and make judgements from there. heres a hypothetical: imagine my deployment takes a larger proportion of people to deploy, but the squadron overall is smaller everyday, of every year forever? less than say a Prowler unit. Did I save money? the answer is yes.
if my CPFH went up 10 percent, but thanks to simulators I can fly ten percent less, did my cost go up? You have to know these things to make an assessment. Even if everyone was using the exact same and honest measure of CPFH, its still not an accurate comparison because some airplanes fly more. Harriers take a lot more practice, they fly more. Same with landing on ships in a hornet. If a harrier costs 10 percent less than an F-35 CPFH, but I have to fly it 20 percent more, do I save money?
so in order to make an overall, actual cost comparison you need more data than a deployment with a "fat" security force thats also supposed to be working with and training the host country
some of this stuff is literally unquantifiable. We still don't know what all the F-16 upgrade costs over the decades have actually added up to. then we have to factor in inflation... theres other aspects too. If I'm doing a Red flag, I don't have to bring any security, since the USAF provides it. does that reduce my costs? not really because my squadron gets paid the exact same regardless of Red flag or not, whether we fly or turn a single wrench or not... but does the USAF cost add to it? one of my buddies went to jump school and he has a small stipend for it. our pay also fluctuates on how long one has been in. so if I have yougin's working I'm technically "saving" compared to the salts 9but again not really, because they get paid either way). If a pilot comes out and lends a hand, now our "CPFH" has really gone through the roof. Marines who are married get paid more. if they have kids medical support costs really go thru the roof, but thats not a part of squadron budget. its actually in the Navy's.
This could go on and on endlessly.
Chief of Staff Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr compares the F-35 to a Ferrari, due to the high costs:
Your comparing flight costs with security costs?
its been planned to have reduced hours made up for by the simulators since the start.
Car analogies and airplanes are always bad. Was the F-16 a Honda civic or something?
Swedish air force costs are about to escalate because they're introducing a new type of airplane with Gripen E which shares nearly no parts commonality with whats in service. They're about to go from a single type fighter force to two. means new training, separate logistics and a lack of interoperability, new redundancies, etc. should be fun and with no plans to stop using the older gripen with the new, the costs will stay the same. its not reported on of course.
have a ball
28 Apr 2020, 16:38
