F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

[topman]

If the risk is so high we wouldn't even be there, your idea although nice, is unaffordable.

If the mere idea of there being a submarine involved in a war is "too high a risk to get involved" then god help the navy.

"Unaffordable" is not the problem. The UK can afford it easily.

The issue is "Outwith budget". Similar, but a crucial difference in root cause.

No your taking my comment out of context, not the idea that a mere hint of a threat would cause havoc, but that if the risk is so high we wouldn't do it. That's just common sense.

Either way we aren't getting the money, so it's moot point.

[ArmChairCivvy]

Everyone including the military top brass has been concentrating on capability since the 1990s and totally ignored that capacity is vital to an effective military.

- well put

If it were such a high risk and couldn't be mitigated any other way, we simply wouldn't turn up.

- we might not have a choice. And we should clarify whether we are building the forces mainly for wars of choice, or for countering (deterring! included) existential threats

definitely is not a remote possibility at all.

- that,
- and the fact that remote possibilities (probabilities) with grave consequences together translate to great risks (exposures)

[seaspear]

My memory does not remember the name of the American general back around 1970 commented on the U.K,s capability and little capacity certainly remember his comment on the numerous marching bands

[sunstersun]

This is the potential of the F-35.

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest ... e-Northrop

[abc123]

My memory does not remember the name of the American general back around 1970 commented on the U.K,s capability and little capacity certainly remember his comment on the numerous marching bands

Soon nothing will be left except marching bands.

[Timmymagic]

Soon nothing will be left except marching bands.

And the bloody horses....

[abc123]

Soon nothing will be left except marching bands.

And the bloody horses....

IIRC, BA allready has more horses than tanks- again...

[Lord Jim]

But we are the world's leading military when it comes to ceremonial capabilities.

[abc123]

But we are the world's leading military when it comes to ceremonial capabilities.

Pretty much.

[R686]

use your imagination to what the tail art should say in the UK

https://scontent-iad3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/ ... e=5A6AB263

[NickC]

The House of Commons Defence Committee report on F-35 published 19th December ~40 pp

The normal concerns, nothing new. MOD so incompetent as unable or unwilling to provide estimates of programme cost or per aircraft which doesn't look good and unable to get clear answers on technical queries from MOD or Lockheed Martin witnesses.

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/c ... 26/326.pdf

[bobp]

The House of Commons Defence Committee report on F-35 published 19th December ~40 pp

Some interesting comments on data linking between Typhoon and F35b and also the Carrier bandwidth. The issue with costs trying to determine the cost of each Airframe still going on.

[Ron5]

Don't you think it's rather dumb for these dimwits to be insisting on firm pricing after 2027 for an aircraft whose program is US owned and in dollars subject to a volatile exchange rate?? The greatest economist on earth wouldn't be so bold as to forecast either.

The Times "investigation" was a joke.

Fixing the datalink issues is just money, a lot of money.

[indeid]

Don't you think it's rather dumb for these dimwits to be insisting on firm pricing after 2027 for an aircraft whose program is US owned and in dollars subject to a volatile exchange rate?? The greatest economist on earth wouldn't be so bold as to forecast either.

The Times "investigation" was a joke.

Fixing the datalink issues is just money, a lot of money.

No the most informed session is it? Then again trying to talk about a lot of that open source can’t be easy.

In terms of the data links with the need to replace the MIDS-LVTs across all platforms quickly approaching, going down the JTRS route would open up new waveforms for Link-16 which could get you part of the way. With TTNT and CMN4 already on the table you get round some of the message set and capacity issues. You would still need a F35 to act as the gateway and data forward but it’s easier than using a BACN type system, which someone giving evidence has obviously read about.....

Long live the Canberra!

[NickC]

Don't you think it's rather dumb for these dimwits to be insisting on firm pricing after 2027 for an aircraft whose program is US owned and in dollars subject to a volatile exchange rate?? The greatest economist on earth wouldn't be so bold as to forecast either.

The Times "investigation" was a joke.

Fixing the datalink issues is just money, a lot of money.

It's all about the "dimwits" keeping control of the executive spending, if I remember correctly we had a civil war over the principle, sadly lacking in other areas of government spend.

To me its the morons in the MOD who are unable to come up with ROM cost based their infamous data bank history of hundreds of overspent programmes.

[Ron5]

Aviation Week is reporting that the UK will cap its F-35B purchase at 48 aircraft, enough to equip 2 squadrons and an OCU.

[SDL]

Where are they getting that from?

[Lord Jim]

It wouldn't surprise me if this was the case as the RAF dies not want all its new toys tied to possible carrier deployment. They might get a shock though if they thing they are going to automatically get the balance of the planned F-35 purchase as "A" models as the whole project could be capped for quite a while at 48 until the Typhoon starts to retire. Part of me is hoping that the MoD has realised that the RAF and RN have had their big budget programmes and more money needs to go to re capitalising the Army, but somehow I don't think this is going to happen.

[Ron5]

The report was all UK F-35 purchases will be capped at 48.

[SDL]

i'd be extremely shocked if that were the case. massive, government ending U-turn IMHO... no way will that be the case

[R686]

Aviation Week is reporting that the UK will cap its F-35B purchase at 48 aircraft, enough to equip 2 squadrons and an OCU.

If there is an official announcement wait for either that one carrier will be sold or mothballed again soon after

[R686]

I was looking on AW interweb can find a article linked to your post, do you have a link by chance?

[Ron5]

In this week's printed edition also available online to subscribers.

As my comment, if correct, why on Earth would the UK government announce it? Be kinda dumb.

[R686]

In this week's printed edition also available online to subscribers.

As my comment, if correct, why on Earth would the UK government announce it? Be kinda dumb.

They could have kicked the can down the road and said nothing, but I'm glad they are being honest if they are cutting, gives us a chance to kick the bastard's some more

[jimthelad]

Unsurprisingly I cant find it either. Using a Google search and Advanced search the last post on F35 is 17/09/17 with respect to flight trials. I used the Boolean "Aviation Weekly"AND "UK F35B" which got 126 results. Given the recent announcements I cant see how they could reverse them unless there is a new Tranche 3 Typhoon order. The mood music coming from the US especially the USN (Office of the Naval Secretary) is very dark regarding the potential cut in numbers vs the production share the UK is getting. If this is the case then BAe would have shot itself in the foot with respect to the value of a few more Typhoon airframes offset against 20% of airframe over the whole F35 run.
Factor in the T26 bid for FFX which would inevitably be compromised then I suspect this is absolute BS.