Finnish DefMin Interest in F-35s NOT Gripens

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

steve2267

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2777
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2016, 17:36

Unread post04 May 2021, 07:06

It's pretty simple, really -- the Swedes really don't want the Finns buying the F-35, because they won't see the Finns coming...
Take an F-16, stir in A-7, dollop of F-117, gob of F-22, dash of F/A-18, sprinkle with AV-8B, stir well + bake. Whaddya get? F-35.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7523
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post04 May 2021, 07:09

steve2267 wrote:It's pretty simple, really -- the Swedes really don't want the Finns buying the F-35, because they won't see the Finns coming...



LOL :lmao:
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7523
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post04 May 2021, 07:11

hornetfinn wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:The Finnish Military seem to very much want the F-35. As it's the only option to face down the Russians. Which, they share a long boarder with............So, honestly I don't think the best deal is first on their list???


Sure I agree with that. Finnish geography definitely favours 5th gen capabilities. But I think how this competition is constructed makes this competition even somewhat intresting. If it was just Super Hornet vs. F-35, it's not much of a contest really. But SH+Growler vs F-35 is different, although I strongly favour F-35 even then. Most interesting would be to know how the rest stack up.



I think Finland see's Russia as a very serious threat. Even more so than during the Cold War. So, if they can afford the best. (i.e. F-35) They will buy it....



Let's not forget that the F-35 has sold wildly in Europe. (i.e. Belgium, Denmark, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, and the UK)
Offline
User avatar

steve2267

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2777
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2016, 17:36

Unread post04 May 2021, 13:17

Corsair1963 wrote:
I think Finland see's Russia as a very serious threat. Even more so than during the Cold War.


Russia is not doing herself any favors down in the Crimea or Ukraine. I think the Finns are correct to take such behavior seriously.
Take an F-16, stir in A-7, dollop of F-117, gob of F-22, dash of F/A-18, sprinkle with AV-8B, stir well + bake. Whaddya get? F-35.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7523
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post05 May 2021, 02:42

steve2267 wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:
I think Finland see's Russia as a very serious threat. Even more so than during the Cold War.


Russia is not doing herself any favors down in the Crimea or Ukraine. I think the Finns are correct to take such behavior seriously.


Let's not forget Georgia either....... :shock:
Offline

magitsu

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 826
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2015, 22:12

Unread post07 May 2021, 13:55

VMFA-115 is apparently going to visit Finland next month for a 3 week stint at Karelia Air Command.
10 classic Hornets, 1-2 KC-130 tankers from VMGR-452, 250 staff overall.
They'll be doing air to air maneuvers for the most part.
Previous USMC visit to Finland was in 2019 for Bold Quest 19.1 and ACE 19.
Karelia Air Command will host @USMC F/A-18s from VMFA-115, @2nd_MAW,
at Rissala Air Base from 2 to 20 June 2021. #ilmavoimat #Marines

The squadron-level visit is part of the defence #cooperation between Finland and the United States.

https://twitter.com/FinnishAirForce/sta ... 3426867204

More info: https://ilmavoimat.fi/en/-/united-state ... nd-in-june
Offline

loke

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1186
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2008, 19:07

Unread post14 May 2021, 08:28

High costs and concerns about affordability threaten the future of the F-35 joint strike fighter, the program executive officer for the aircraft warned May 13.

The jet is the most expensive acquisition effort in the history of the Defense Department. Current Pentagon plans call for procuring more than 2,400 of the platforms — including the A, B and C variants operated by the Air Force, Marine Corps and Navy, respectively — at a cost of about $400 billion. The price tag for operations and sustainment is expected to top $1 trillion during the lifecycle of the aircraft.

“I see cost as the program's greatest enemy,” said Lt. Gen. Eric Fick, PEO for the F-35, at the McAleese and Associates annual defense programs conference. “I see high costs as an existential threat to the F-35 as an enterprise. And that cost happens not just in development, not just in production, but in sustainment as well.”

Problems associated with technology refresh 3, or TR3, are impacting the move to Block 4 capabilities which are needed for the jet to be effective in a future high-end fight against advanced adversaries, Fick noted. While a handful of the new capabilities have already been delivered, the tech refresh is needed to enable the remainder of the 70 or so upgrades planned for Block 4, which includes 14 new weapons and a number of software-enabled systems.

“Now we have a cost overrun and we've got some schedule slips on TR3,” Fick said. “As a result of the cost overrun driven by TR3, we've had to slow development and, in some cases, stopped development on some of those Block 4 capabilities.”

Fick did not provide a dollar figure for the cost overruns, which he said are related to the integrated core processor. He noted that the Joint Program Office is working with F-35 prime contractor Lockheed Martin and subcontractor L3Harris to address the issues and try to keep the initiative on track.

The new hardware was slated to be added during Lot 15 production beginning in 2023. The Pentagon and Lockheed are currently in negotiations for Lots 15, 16 and 17, Fick said.

The procurement cost for the F-35A have come down, and are now under $80 million per plane, which is on par with some legacy fighters. However, high sustainment costs continue to plague the program.

The cost per flying hour for the A variant has come down to $33,300 (in base year 2012 dollars), Fick said.

https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org ... at-to-f-35

Wow, pretty strong when the program executive officer for the F-35 is talking about costs being an existential threat to the program!

Also very concerning that TR3 and the block 4 is seeing additional cost overruns, and is being further delayed. It probably explains why an increasing number of politicians are starting to become very impatient regarding the progress and costs of this program.

Does news like this register in Finland?

Anyway, the F-35 program is moving ahead of course, and LM is doing better than ever:
Lockheed Martin is a "solid dividend income company," with an above-average dividend yield that has increased 20 years in a row, William Stamm writes in a bullish analysis posted on Seeking Alpha.

https://seekingalpha.com/news/3696303-p ... est-report

Most likely the LM dividend will keep increasing, and Finland buying F-35 will also help in this respect...
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3213
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post14 May 2021, 11:10

loke wrote:https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org ... at-to-f-35

Wow, pretty strong when the program executive officer for the F-35 is talking about costs being an existential threat to the program!


WOW, pretty strong that you simply don't understand the basic 1-0-1 of what have been told here repetitively year after year and even after you've been proven that things aren't what you say you keep stating the exact same rhetoric year after year... :roll:
Do you know the name of what you're doing here time after time? It's called trolling!

And speaking about 'pretty strong', name me a MODERN fighter aircraft program that didn't have cost overruns? Name me one?!
Because last time I checked your beloved Gripen E/F is currently suffering some major cost overruns or do you think that Saab ever planned to sell each Gripen E at a cost of around $85 Million USD per unit (and not less)?? Let alone that it should have entered in service circa 2017-2019 the latest and here we are in 2021 and no Gripen Es are still in service (let alone the Gripen F) something which of course will have a toll on the Gripen E/F program's overall cost :doh:
And the Rafale?? And the Typhoon?? Do you think that didn't suffer cost overruns?? Why do you think that they are so expensive??
Last edited by ricnunes on 14 May 2021, 12:29, edited 1 time in total.
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline

hythelday

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 669
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2016, 12:43
  • Location: Estonia

Unread post14 May 2021, 11:48

@Loke,

"News like that" don't have to "register" in Finland, because they are running a strict competition with clearly defined operational requirements not constrained by arbitrary parameters. I.e. "64 Gripens and 2 AEWs" vs "50 multirole F/A-18Es and 14x DEAD/EW Growlers" vs "unspecified number of F-35s" should already tell you that they know what they are doing, and that they are looking for a legally-binding package that delivers desired performance in a flexible way.
Still you post some irrelevant news "OMG does Finland know JSF is world's most expensive weqpon system?"

Yes, they know. If F-35 fails to deliver then it will be a major blow to it's reputation in my mind. But ask yourself, what if it does deliver?

Tell me, what will be your excuse if F-35 beats everyone in Finland? I want to know in advance what is your strategy to excuse Gripen failing, once again.
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3550
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post14 May 2021, 12:06

loke wrote:Wow, pretty strong when the program executive officer for the F-35 is talking about costs being an existential threat to the program!

Also very concerning that TR3 and the block 4 is seeing additional cost overruns, and is being further delayed. It probably explains why an increasing number of politicians are starting to become very impatient regarding the progress and costs of this program.

Does news like this register in Finland?


Yes they do and Finnish media is following these events pretty well. Known problems and delays with all contenders has been reported regularly. Problem is that F-35 program and main users reports every problem and delay while others do not. That creates a disparity in reporting. But there are media articles about Gripen's drawbacks and known problems (no stealth, still at prototype stage, lowest payload/range, delays).

Otherwise I'd say that F-35 cost target is also extremely ambitious for the capabilities of the aircraft. We are also interested in how it compares to other conteders and how much capability we get for our money. It doesn't matter it F-35 costs more than what USAF wants it to, if it's not significantly more expensive to acquire and operate than other contenders If it is more expensive, it doesn't matter if we get more capability out of it. Of course it didn't offer significantly more capability, then we choose something else. However I doubt that it's much more expensive than competitors and I don't see any way it doesn't offer significantly more capability.

We know that Finnish requirement was that O&S costs stay within 10 percent of the defence budget, meaning about 270 million euros or about 327 million dollars a year. Our current Hornets fly about 9000 hours a year, so 36,300 USD or less is acceptable (at current euros/dollar). F-35A is currently less than that in USAF and Australian service, so I don't see operating costs being a big problem. Currently it seems like all contenders managed to fit their proposals to within Finnish cost limits for both acquisition and O&S costs.
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3213
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post14 May 2021, 12:35

hornetfinn wrote:Yes they do and Finnish media is following these events pretty well. Known problems and delays with all contenders has been reported regularly. Problem is that F-35 program and main users reports every problem and delay while others do not. That creates a disparity in reporting. But there are media articles about Gripen's drawbacks and known problems (no stealth, still at prototype stage, lowest payload/range, delays).

Otherwise I'd say that F-35 cost target is also extremely ambitious for the capabilities of the aircraft. We are also interested in how it compares to other conteders and how much capability we get for our money. It doesn't matter it F-35 costs more than what USAF wants it to, if it's not significantly more expensive to acquire and operate than other contenders If it is more expensive, it doesn't matter if we get more capability out of it. Of course it didn't offer significantly more capability, then we choose something else. However I doubt that it's much more expensive than competitors and I don't see any way it doesn't offer significantly more capability.

We know that Finnish requirement was that O&S costs stay within 10 percent of the defence budget, meaning about 270 million euros or about 327 million dollars a year. Our current Hornets fly about 9000 hours a year, so 36,300 USD or less is acceptable (at current euros/dollar). F-35A is currently less than that in USAF and Australian service, so I don't see operating costs being a big problem. Currently it seems like all contenders managed to fit their proposals to within Finnish cost limits for both acquisition and O&S costs.


DITTO and excellent post there, hornetfinn! :thumb:

Unfortunately loke will just ignore your post and a few weeks or a month from now will just type another post with the exact same kind of rant/rhetoric. :roll:
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline

loke

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1186
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2008, 19:07

Unread post14 May 2021, 13:12

hornetfinn wrote:
loke wrote:Wow, pretty strong when the program executive officer for the F-35 is talking about costs being an existential threat to the program!

Also very concerning that TR3 and the block 4 is seeing additional cost overruns, and is being further delayed. It probably explains why an increasing number of politicians are starting to become very impatient regarding the progress and costs of this program.

Does news like this register in Finland?


Yes they do and Finnish media is following these events pretty well. Known problems and delays with all contenders has been reported regularly. Problem is that F-35 program and main users reports every problem and delay while others do not. That creates a disparity in reporting. But there are media articles about Gripen's drawbacks and known problems (no stealth, still at prototype stage, lowest payload/range, delays).

Otherwise I'd say that F-35 cost target is also extremely ambitious for the capabilities of the aircraft. We are also interested in how it compares to other conteders and how much capability we get for our money. It doesn't matter it F-35 costs more than what USAF wants it to, if it's not significantly more expensive to acquire and operate than other contenders If it is more expensive, it doesn't matter if we get more capability out of it. Of course it didn't offer significantly more capability, then we choose something else. However I doubt that it's much more expensive than competitors and I don't see any way it doesn't offer significantly more capability.

We know that Finnish requirement was that O&S costs stay within 10 percent of the defence budget, meaning about 270 million euros or about 327 million dollars a year. Our current Hornets fly about 9000 hours a year, so 36,300 USD or less is acceptable (at current euros/dollar). F-35A is currently less than that in USAF and Australian service, so I don't see operating costs being a big problem. Currently it seems like all contenders managed to fit their proposals to within Finnish cost limits for both acquisition and O&S costs.

Thanks for a good and informative post. It's good to hear that the Finnish media is covering this topic.

Just a minor comment regarding F-35 sustainment costs, according to the article I quoted they are now USD 33,300 per flight hour for the A model, but that's in 2012 USD not today's USD. Not sure what kind of inflation rates they have been using, but using inflation calculator based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics consumer price index, this should correspond to roughly 38,700 USD today.

As I have said before, F-35A most likely will win in Finland. It will be interesting to see how many they manage to fit within the budget.
Offline

pron

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 163
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2014, 19:28

Unread post14 May 2021, 13:52

loke wrote:
hornetfinn wrote:
loke wrote:Wow, pretty strong when the program executive officer for the F-35 is talking about costs being an existential threat to the program!

Also very concerning that TR3 and the block 4 is seeing additional cost overruns, and is being further delayed. It probably explains why an increasing number of politicians are starting to become very impatient regarding the progress and costs of this program.

Does news like this register in Finland?


Yes they do and Finnish media is following these events pretty well. Known problems and delays with all contenders has been reported regularly. Problem is that F-35 program and main users reports every problem and delay while others do not. That creates a disparity in reporting. But there are media articles about Gripen's drawbacks and known problems (no stealth, still at prototype stage, lowest payload/range, delays).

Otherwise I'd say that F-35 cost target is also extremely ambitious for the capabilities of the aircraft. We are also interested in how it compares to other conteders and how much capability we get for our money. It doesn't matter it F-35 costs more than what USAF wants it to, if it's not significantly more expensive to acquire and operate than other contenders If it is more expensive, it doesn't matter if we get more capability out of it. Of course it didn't offer significantly more capability, then we choose something else. However I doubt that it's much more expensive than competitors and I don't see any way it doesn't offer significantly more capability.

We know that Finnish requirement was that O&S costs stay within 10 percent of the defence budget, meaning about 270 million euros or about 327 million dollars a year. Our current Hornets fly about 9000 hours a year, so 36,300 USD or less is acceptable (at current euros/dollar). F-35A is currently less than that in USAF and Australian service, so I don't see operating costs being a big problem. Currently it seems like all contenders managed to fit their proposals to within Finnish cost limits for both acquisition and O&S costs.

Thanks for a good and informative post. It's good to hear that the Finnish media is covering this topic.

Just a minor comment regarding F-35 sustainment costs, according to the article I quoted they are now USD 33,300 per flight hour for the A model, but that's in 2012 USD not today's USD. Not sure what kind of inflation rates they have been using, but using inflation calculator based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics consumer price index, this should correspond to roughly 38,700 USD today.

And how relevant are the number from USAF in Finland for CPFH?
Do you also think the numbers for legacy F-18 are relevant to Finland?
“Due to the extremely high projected cost per flight hour (+$44,000) of these ‘Legacy Hornets,’ the Navy is accelerating divestment from the F/A-18A-D aircraft,” the admiral said. “VFC-12’s transition from the F/A-18A-D Hornet to the Block I FA-18E/F Super Hornet in [fiscal 2021] is the first step towards accelerating Legacy Hornet divestment.”
https://seapowermagazine.org/navy-reser ... iral-says/
Offline

magitsu

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 826
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2015, 22:12

Unread post14 May 2021, 13:58

Hornet flight hour cost for FiAF was 8200 euros (10k usd) in 2018 or 2019. BAe Hawk trainer 4700 euros for comparison.
https://www.mtvuutiset.fi/artikkeli/lei ... la/7439792
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7063
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post14 May 2021, 15:11

loke wrote:Wow, pretty strong when the program executive officer for the F-35 is talking about costs being an existential threat to the program!



wow The trick to concern trolling Loke is to not be so obvious :wink:

I mean WOW-- if thats the worst you've heard, I have to wonder if your less informed than those Finns youre pretending to be so concerned for.

"wow"

Also very concerning that TR3 and the block 4 is seeing additional cost overruns, and is being further delayed. It probably explains why an increasing number of politicians are starting to become very impatient regarding the progress and costs of this program.


oh how concerning!!!

Image

Now I'm concerned too!! I sure hope someone explains this like I'm 3 so I can back to sucking my poor scared thumb.


Does news like this register in Finland?



No, they live in ice caves. You should run over and tell them. Once you tell one cave word will spread. Get going quick!

but remember its an old Finnish custom that when yelling into an ice cave in a concerned fashion, you must be naked and wearing a gorilla mask. its critical that the mask be worn, or they won't take your concern seriously.

Anyway, the F-35 program is moving ahead of course, and LM is doing better than ever:


Great news! no need to be so concerned then. its good to see what a secure program F-35 is compared to the Gripen E

Wow

Lockheed Martin is a "solid dividend income company," with an above-average dividend yield that has increased 20 years in a row, William Stamm writes in a bullish analysis posted on Seeking Alpha.
https://seekingalpha.com/news/3696303-p ... est-report

Most likely the LM dividend will keep increasing, and Finland buying F-35 will also help in this respect...


Yeah Loke when you sell fighters you make money. Saab should try that sometime.

And what are you trying to imply Loke? That when the world's largest defense contractor sells weapons they'll make money? is this a new concept for Saab fans?

I'm glad you mentioned the Stock prices Loke, Saab had a ROUGH year last year, and the market reflected that, good to see LM is a far more stable, reliable company for warfighters and investors alike.

I wish you showed equal "concern" to your "Everything is awesome Gripen" that "always Blue Skies" even when its let you down based on your own personal measures.

Saab to insource Gripen E work as supply chain falters
By Craig Hoyle20 October 2020

Gripen Es Brazil Sweden

Saab will insource some work on its Gripen E/F fighter programme from undisclosed suppliers who are struggling to maintain services through the coronavirus-driven downturn, and has announced a potentially SKr1.5 billion ($170 million) impact on its Aeronautics business unit.

The coronavirus pandemic has continued to impact the world negatively and not least the global aviation industry. For Saab, the uncertainty surrounding COVID-19 has mainly been associated with supply chain disruptions within the company’s business areas and the market conditions for the civil business. Due to the ongoing pandemic and drawn-out global recovery, Saab now sees an increased risk related to the effects of COVID-19.

In recent assessments, the future risks have increased foremost for business area aeronautics. The prolonged pandemic and slow recovery is primarily affecting subcontractors and material supply for the Gripen E/F program, with consequences for development, verification and production work.

The Gripen program is characterized by long lead times and small series where components must be certified for airworthiness, which means the assessment of future possible economic impact within aeronautics has become increasingly uncertain. Saab has managed the increased risks by adjusting the project estimates, which affected the operating income negatively by SEK 1.1 billion in the quarter. Our view is that the risks in the supply chain for other business areas have also increased, but to a lesser extent, why an additional SEK 0.4 billion has been allocated for adjustments in other project estimates. Our assessments assume that the effects of the pandemic will continue during 2021.




Image


No concern that the Gripen E is still not in service? No concern about Saabs stock drops, increased costs, delays, supply problems, faltering on its own merits, a collapse in sales goals? They've produced not even dozen, when you were telling us all 10 years ago what a world beater this would be.

No concern for that? nearly half wat through 2021, still not in service?

No concern that Gripen doesn't meet HX requirements and has sent Saab scrambling to create contract work to fix that?
Choose Crews
PreviousNext

Return to Program and politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 29 guests