This was not the only hint about classified programs in the April 17 hearing. RAdm Bill Moran, director of the Navy’s air warfare division, noted that as well as funding APG-78 active electronically scanned array radar retrofits to all early Block 2 Super Hornets, “there are several other programs that I’d be happy to come back and talk about in a classified setting. They are very significant, fully funded in 2014 and will keep the Super Hornet credible through the late 2020s and early 2030s.”
Wednesday, April 24, 2013
Super Hornet mentioned with other programs of interest
Story here:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I think this is good news, as the Super Bug is a viable tacair option for many reasons, but, it shouldn't be the only viable option. 180 F-22s, given thier maitance requirments and stunted growth, will provide only so much and for only so long: The Eurofighter and Rafale are only somewhat affordable, while the Gripen NG has too little political backing to be considered for the many roles it might play. The F-15 and F-16 are getting old, and there support and training budgets are being drained for the sake of escaliting our commitment to the F-35.
We need to cut our loses regarding the JSF. We should invest in the three teen series and reverse some of the downward trends. We should put as many A-10s into front line service as possible, while looking for a cheaper replacement and embracing the LAS/FAC prop plane. We need small programs to cheaply increase Support missions, such as fixed wing gunships like an AC-27 or something snaller, modest after the Harvest Hawk program. If the USMC really needs more forward based tac air assets than C-27, super Tacanos and iits proven helos can provide, the Gripens deployability, cost, and its maitenance and basing requitements should be a no brainer. Rather than providing small carriers, the Marines should focus on being able to quickly set up small air bases.
Some of this is stop gap, and its all US focused, but our allies arent getting stronger by us wasting thier money. They would be better served with more diverse American Tac Air creating a healthier Tac Air marlet. If we keep the teen series going, and growing, we will havw more roles filled for years to come, we will have 3 planes that might evolve into a long term option, and we have 3 planes to develop technologies on for a new platfotm in the future. Best of all, we would have a few known quantities to plan with.
F-35 is not going away - even its most vocal critic on the HASC has said so. What will happen is fewer will be purchased per year - mainly because of cost - leaving a shortfall in tactical fighters if total force numbers remain as planned, or if certain missions are not transferred to other platforms. The Navy expects to have deficit of 18 airframes by 2020 or so, even if current F-35C and SLEP plans are met - which means room for more Super Hornet purchases. The Navy increased its order for Growlers - reflecting the importance of EA as a complementary technology to physical stealth (and rejecting the USAFs unreasonable total reliance on expensive and perishable airframe shapes that cannot be readily upgraded - unlike electronic systems.) None of this addresses the main problem with either F-35C or F/A-18s - which is range. Only a new design will solve that.
The decision for a one-off FY14 Growler buy was not calculated or prudent in my opinion.
The Unit Procurement Cost bump up was huge (unacceptable), due to a brilliant single year buy plan and due to no additional F-18E or F variants being part of the procurement.
Boeing has said too that the cost would go back down if a MYB was placed and if the minimum number required to meet economies of scale were placed (IIRC, it's at least 25 total airframes (mixed variant) procured).
FY15 should absolutely include a multi-year 30+ combined variant buy. It would be prudent and strategic if USMC placed an additional order on top of that, but that's not going to happen. But FY15 should definitely include a MYB of at least 30 jets per year.
If not, it would most likely be very difficult not to mention expensive to skip a year then decide to start back up again in FY16 once it's finally capitulated by USN that F-35C will NOT be affordable in sufficient numbers and that replacement must be augmented with a mix of cheaper Supers in the interim.
Besides, the Super is just now starting to approach it's next-gen upgrade track, with potential for new level of capacities. This is when the cost-effectiveness in the acquisition of the Program reaches it's best value and is most efficient. It simply wouldn't make sense to cancel new orders now, just as it's starting to reach a new level of capability and value and especially when the F-35C is about to reveal it's inherent unsustainability as an affordable modernization platform.
Post a Comment