JSF programme still beneficial to Singapore?
-
Sign up for fighter or pay more later, says US company
By Tom Allard
March 17, 2006
AUSTRALIA has been delivered an ultimatum to sign up for the troubled Joint Strike Fighter project or face financial penalties, and an influential US body has warned of huge cost blow-outs and of the aircraft's untested capability.
The manufacturer of the fighter, Lockheed Martin, made the demand as it confirmed that some countries - possibly including Australia - would get models inferior to those operated by US and British forces.
Yet, according to the US Congress's audit and investigative arm, the much vaunted stealth characteristics of the fighter remain worryingly unproven, even for the premier US variant.
Jane's defence newsletter quoted Lockheed Martin's senior executive on the project, Tom Burbage, as saying the US wanted a commitment to the fighter by the end of the year in a memorandum of understanding that would last through "the life of the program".
If a customer then declined to go ahead "there will be a penalty associated with the disruption of production planning", Mr Burbage said.
Australia had wanted to defer its final decision on the fighter - the world's costliest ever military project and one critical to Australia's future air combat dominance in the region - until 2008. Australia has budgeted to buy as many as 100 of the jets for $15 billion.
The Minister for Defence, Brendan Nelson, did not comment directly on the threat of financial penalties in the proposed memorandum of understanding but said Australia would not sign an unsatisfactory deal. "We are committed to negotiations but we would not sign up to an agreement unless we are satisfied we have all the information we need and it was in Australia's interests," his spokesman said.
The fighter program has received heavy criticism this week amid threats from partner countries, including Australia, that they will pull out if they do not get access to technology. The US Congress's Government Accountability Office said there had been inadequate testing on the fighter for it to be considered a mature design and that production should be slowed.
"Significant development risk remains, and it is likely that current cost and schedule goals will not be met," it said in a report.
"To improve the chances for a successful outcome, we are recommending the JSF program delay production and investments in production capability."
The office has strong influence over US legislators, but the Pentagon and Lockheed Martin have insisted that the aircraft's design is sound. If the Pentagon slows funding and production it will not only increase the price of the aircraft but leave a bigger gap between the scheduled retirement of Australia's fleet of F-111 and FA-18 jets in 2010-12 and the delivery of their replacements.
The Herald also revealed this week that the fighter's ability to elude powerful radar had been downgraded.
The Jane's newsletter said Mr Burbage had told it that different countries would get different versions of the fighter.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/sign-up-for-fighter-or-pay-more-later-says-us-company/2006/03/16/1142098602856.html -
Assuming that all the existing technical and political problems will be resolved, is JSF still for us? We must be prepared that even Australia a staunch military ally of the US will be getting 2nd-grade JSF, what will we be getting? The JSF is not cheap by the way. Will it be wise to pull out of this programme at this point for us? Please comment. Thanks
-
The F-35 JSF was never meant to be a top of the line fighter to begin with. It was meant as a lower cost supplement to the F/A-22 Raptor with an emphasis on ground attack, to replace the current AV-8Bs, A-10s, F-16s and F/A-18s. Its stealth capabilities are similarly reduced, with only frontal RCS being in the same class as the F/A-22.
Weapon payload is decidedly unimpressive as compared to the 4 types it is supposed to replace, with only 2 x 2000lb munitions and 4 x AAMs carried internally, even though underwing hardpoints can be added at an even greater expense to stealth.
The F-35 is more than sufficient for countering current 3rd Generation fighters but unlikely to be capable of countering future threats such as advanced variants of the Su-27/Su-35 Flanker, and certainly not the projected Su-47 or European solutions such as the Rafale F3 or Tranche 3 version of the Eurofighter Typhoon.
The information above applies to the full capability US version. For export versions, paying 45-60M USD for a multirole fighter which has downgraded stealth capability, comparatively short range, no supercruise and the need for full US support on software codes and spares does not seem such a good idea after all.
In the 2010-2015 timeframe when our F-5S/T fleet is being retired, the RSAF should open the replacement competiton to include the Rafale or Eurofighter Typhoon, both of which lost out to the F-15T in the 20 warplane tender. At least an additional squadron of F-15Ts should be bought too. The RSAF's edge would be greatly eroded if it goes for anything less. -
is US tryin to remain dominant after all the research n testin?
when wanna do R&D ask ppl come n invest n u get a share of the tech.
when its done n ready, tell ppl dat they'll get degraded stuffs...wan take it, else leave it... -
I say negative.
Wait till F-22A is allowed to be sold to us (very long time away)
meanwhile, buy more F-15SGs, and possibly F-16E/F Block 60s or JAS-39 Gripens. and procure a new fleet of AWACS aircraft, and invest in any upcoming anti-stealth detection technology (there are already projects running on these) -
Our initial procurement of F-35 is 2010 but seems likeis gonna delay till 2012...hoefully RSAF can find Euro /c as alternatives or get more F-15SG to complement the current fleet now when we want to replace our F-5S/TOriginally posted by sgFish:I say negative.
Wait till F-22A is allowed to be sold to us (very long time away)
meanwhile, buy more F-15SGs, and possibly F-16E/F Block 60s or JAS-39 Gripens. and procure a new fleet of AWACS aircraft, and invest in any upcoming anti-stealth detection technology (there are already projects running on these)
I do agree on your idea also.....the current stance doesn't seem to lead the programme anywhere...... -
E JSF is crap la, e programme is no longer beneficial 2 us except for political reason
-
VF1 would be more beneficial lar.
-
VF-1 is old liao la VF-19 better
-
The Gripen people must be rubbing their hands with glee at this news. It will be interesting to see the outcome of all this. Thanks for the article!
-
My stand is that if all this technical and political problems persist further and cause even further delays then we should maybe withdraw from this mess.
I mean just look at the two main memebers of this program, UK and USA. Until recently these two long-time military allies are still bickering over who should provide which parts in order to generate jobs in their own countries and companies. I can understand this but this may also mean that the end-product quality of the plane may depend more on their economies than actual suitability and reliability.
However, on the other hand there isn't any aircraft currently out in the market or the pipeline with the same level of stealth and interoperational potential as the JSF. Ultimately, we may just have to simply wait and see and hope for the best. -
Considering the price, even a full version JSF might not be a good idea. And if its gonna be a watered down version, EVEN MORE its not a good idea!
I would think the Rafale or Eurofighter would be a much better jet instead. F-22A....... nah! It would be decades before US decides to sell to us & even then it'll probably be a watered down version as well. -
It just reminds me of RSAF acquire the F-16/79 1st before switching to F-16A/BOriginally posted by sgf:Considering the price, even a full version JSF might not be a good idea. And if its gonna be a watered down version, EVEN MORE its not a good idea!
I would think the Rafale or Eurofighter would be a much better jet instead. F-22A....... nah! It would be decades before US decides to sell to us & even then it'll probably be a watered down version as well. -
Hmmm AIM-9P
-
I think we still have a few of those aim-9ps... rear-aspect ir homing. Comparable to the... Aphid? Ha
-
Hmmm"few"
-
I learnt something new today! I didn't know that Singapore got some F-16/79 before getting the A/B versions. Btw in the 2nd pic which one is the F-16/79 and F-16B? I am also puzzled at why the USN have F-16s? Are they used as aggressors just like the F-5s in Top Gun training? Thanks
-
yes, if memory serves me right, they're used as aggressors in dissimiliar air trainingOriginally posted by tankee1981:I learnt something new today! I didn't know that Singapore got some F-16/79 before getting the A/B versions. Btw in the 2nd pic which one is the F-16/79 and F-16B? I am also puzzled at why the USN have F-16s? Are they used as aggressors just like the F-5s in Top Gun training? Thanks i'm not sure what it means, but it's something like using your own places to simulate the specs and performance of your opponent's planes 
-
The F-16 J79 ADFs were sold to Singapore because the A/Bs were deemed to be too powerful to be introduced to our region at that time.
-
Yeap, u're right, the F-16s used by the USN was for aggressor training. Specially fitted with lots of other recording and training equipment for training evaluation. Their camouflaged versions got a nice Red Star painted also. =D
But they got actual MiG-29s to do that nowadays i heard. -
Originally posted by duotiga83:
WOW! That's a pretty Rare pic of a F-16/79 in USN colours (not exactly but hey! The 'NAVY' title on the fuslage and the TOP GUN logo on the fin looks good enough!) If the title is not PSed onto the jet, it will definitely qualify into the current thread - " The "But that aircraft never flew with that airforce" in AFM forum!
[b]
Btw Duotiga, I can see that you are a sesoned contributor there yah? -
I'm the f-16.net reader.....
-
I know that our F-16A/B have been upgraded to Falcon One standard by ST and subsequently 'donated' to Royal Thai Air Force for use of their air bases. What happened to the F-16/79 in RSAF then?
-
No, sg did not acquire the F-16/79s, the origninal order of 8 F-16/79s were converted into F16A\Bs when Thailand got US Garhmen approval to buy F16A\Bs.Originally posted by tankee1981:I know that our F-16A/B have been upgraded to Falcon One standard by ST and subsequently 'donated' to Royal Thai Air Force for use of their air bases. What happened to the F-16/79 in RSAF then?
Link for more info :
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_users_article17.html -
if it possible for us to have research on the JSF and upgrade to hell like we did we the super skyhawk?