F-35 program to double in cost

MikeD

MikeD

Administrator
Staff member
thus making the F-35/JSF program the costliest Pentagon weapons program ever, at an estimated $113 million per aircraft with over 2,400 of them desired by the services.

The F-35 program cost overrun triggered the Nunn-McCurdy law, which requires the Pentagon to tell Congress of significant cost increases. The law forces the Pentagon to justify continuing with the program.

The Pentagon's director of cost assessment and program evaluation, Christine Fox, told the senators she expects the Pentagon will officially notify Congress under the Nunn-McCurdy regulation by April 1.
Click to expand...

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/03/12/pentagon.f35/index.html?hpt=T2
 
Is it because we're ordering less so there are fewer units to spread out the R&D cost or, well, just politicos making sure their constituents nose in to the trough? :)
 
Doug Taylor said:
Is it because we're ordering less so there are fewer units to spread out the R&D cost or, well, just politicos making sure their constituents nose in to the trough? :)
Click to expand...

I think it's just program overruns due to a variety of problems encountered. There hasn't been any reductions in units ordered that I've seen. As demonstrated by the numbers we're ordering, as well as the foreign countries with orders, this is primarily an F-16 replacement for all the Air Forces that utilize that airframe.

Then again, you second assertion isn't likely far off either......
 
Spending more money we don't have, woohoo!

Cost overruns are bad but expected. I just think it's pitiful that we can send a man to the moon in less than ten years but a company with a reputation like Lockheed still can't deliver a new plane in the same amount of time. Judging by their performance you would think this is the first time they'd landed a military contract. What happened to the days of Kelly Johnson, the U-2, and SR-71. Guess contracting, sub-contracting, and sub-sub-contracting et al is catching up with them.

"But the Air Force and Navy are expecting their first aircraft to be delivered by 2016, a two year delay for the Navy and a three year delay for the Air Force, according to Pentagon officials." :(
 
But wait!! The F-35 is the saviour...and the rationale for killing the Raptor.

:whatever:
 
Superfly7XAF said:
"But the Air Force and Navy are expecting their first aircraft to be delivered by 2016, a two year delay for the Navy and a three year delay for the Air Force, according to Pentagon officials." :(
Click to expand...

You know whats funny? I remember when I was in the A-10 long ago, I sat through two briefings (one from the Wing leadership, the other from AF Personnel Center) detailing how Davis-Monthan AFB will be reduced to one A-10 squadron, as the other two squadrons changeover to the F-35 in 2007, and we had to think about whether we wanted to stay in the Hog, or go to the new aircraft.

Kinda reminds me of the briefings A-10 squadrons were getting prior to Desert Storm, with their being replaced by the up and coming A-16.

:)
 
This really doesn't surprise me! It seems that every new program has cost overruns and and then the product doesn't perform as advertised, or cost of maintaining the program is shocking! Anyone read Chuck Spinney's article on the Defense Dept Death spiral. This sort of thing has been going on for years in the pentagon.
 
I'm guessing the F-35 will go the way of the Commanche. All the kinks worked out, production line tooled up and ready to start spitting them out and THEN they decide to scrap the program.
 
Speed Pilot said:
I'm guessing the F-35 will go the way of the Commanche. All the kinks worked out, production line tooled up and ready to start spitting them out and THEN they decide to scrap the program.
Click to expand...

I doubt it. The level of international involvement in this program probably ensures that won't happen.
 
Doug Taylor said:
Is it because we're ordering less so there are fewer units to spread out the R&D cost or, well, just politicos making sure their constituents nose in to the trough? :)
Click to expand...

Hacker15e said:
But wait!! The F-35 is the saviour...and the rationale for killing the Raptor.

:whatever:
Click to expand...

The whole argument back 5 years ago about the raptor was unit cost. Many in the fighter mafia pointed out correctly that "sunk cost" or R&D etc be excluded and only look at the additional per unit cost. Looks like the same stupid argument is going on here.

I think they should finish these birds, and start spending money on UCAVS. You lose one of those and there are no LT Goodman incidents with Jesse Jackson coming to the rescue. Give the commander in chief a lot of whup ass without risking a pilot, a lot cheaper and more ordance than a sub or cruiser launching tomahawks. On the other Now you go to war, have enough raptors or Super Hornets for air superiority or total dominance, whatever buzz word we are using today...
 
RynoB said:
Serious question. Did the F-20 ever go into production?
Click to expand...

No it got canned.

The F35 is extremely ugly, hope I never have to sit on one. It's 2010 and the best thing they can come up is a fan in the middle of the fuselage? wow.
 
PGT said:
No it got canned.

The F35 is extremely ugly, hope I never have to sit on one. It's 2010 and the best thing they can come up is a fan in the middle of the fuselage? wow.
Click to expand...

It's alot better looking than that flying walleye Boeing had for the JSF.
 
RynoB said:
Serious question. Did the F-20 ever go into production?
Click to expand...
Yes and no. short answer is no but the few prototypes were pretty well tested.
Well the Navy was going to buy them but they got F-16 at below cost. Also some legislation problems for export issues. But it was a cheap and :)decent fighter for the time, and it didnt cost the government a dime. So now, you see very few contractors fund prototypes. serious answer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top