With the budget crisis, this is only going to get worse.
Take a look at the following two items from their 2013 fiscal year budget in regards to the F-35C (Navy) and F-35B (USMC).
The USN F-35C:
(click image to make larger)
The USMC F-35B:
(click image to make larger)
The figures labelled "Gross/Weapon System Unit Cost" (what it takes to get a jet into squadron service) make the F-35 unworkable for the USN and USMC. You read it right. That is $279M each for an F-35C and $253M each for an F-35B. With the low order numbers and technical troubles of both of these aircraft types, don't expect a declaration of "full-rate production" in the coming years to help that much.
What can the Navy and USMC do? Both the F-35 and Super Hornet are unable to stand up to emerging threats. It is unlikely that the F-35 will meet its Joint Operational Requirement Document (JORD) minimum goals of having a "significantly" better sortie rate than the aircraft it is to replace. It has also failed the goal of being an instrument for affordable tacair recapitalisation.
For everything else the Super Hornet is superior in all performance areas that matter. (Note to the Navy and USMC: F-35 Blue Sky and Thana Marketing do not represent a capability).
Below are the figures for the F/A-18E/F Navy procurement for fiscal year 2013 (and other years).
(click image to make larger)
Note the "Gross/Weapon System Unit Cost". That is for a real jet that can operate off of carriers and do most of what a joint operational commander wants. And, forget the STOVL hype.
Out of the box. And, legacy Hornet drivers need a short conversion course. For almost a third of the cost per flying hour of an F-35 (source:Boeing) or certainly half (depending on how the USN and USMC perform their maintenance operations).
Putting down a few notes, we, as a nation, could equip our warfighters with something that will be useful:
For FY2014 to FY 2018 (inclusive), we could give the USN 12 Super Hornets per year (total 60) and the USMC 16 Super Hornets per year (total 80). Grand total: 140. For $2.52B per year topping out at $12.6B as a grand total.
This would give carrier aviation a big boost. That and USMC Super squadrons could do carrier cruises.
If this program is seen as successful, it could continue on.
This is affordable inside of shrinking budgets and there doesn't have to be significant pain.
The F-35B and F-35C?
Best to take a few and designate them YF-35B and YF-35C. Then put them in test squadrons as technology learning tools.
For now, we cannot afford to invest more in failed programs.
3 comments:
Where are all the defenders of the JSF faith based folly?
Could it be the penny has finally dropped or is denial behaviour still dominant in their minds?
Let's see....If the US can't sell to foreign customers for less than our Services, how can the partners and others resolve their sub $100M per aircraft cost estimates in the light of US DOD budget figures like these?
Hello Peter Goon (Horde)
"Where are all the defenders of the JSF faith based folly"?
I know there is a lot of JSF defenders in the DoD Buzz and Australian Aviation websites, including Andrew McLaughlin. If they see the 2013 fiscal year budget in regards to the F-35C (Navy) and F-35B (USMC) they wouldn't agree at all and they'll reject it.
These guys don't get the fact that the F-35/Super Hornet/Growler are wrong aircraft for RAAF's requirements.
Post a Comment