It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

DoD awards $743M for LRIP 9

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 05:46 PM
link   
While a final contract still hasn't been signed for lots 9 and 10 of the F-35 production, Lockheed was just awarded $743M for lot 9 production.

This includes not to exceed amounts of $385M for US aircraft, to include "redesign and development of components with diminishing manufacturing and material services. The funds also pays for post-production concurrency changes on the 57 aircraft ordered in Lot 9."

It includes another $333M for one A and one B for an unidentified non-US customer that almost has to be Italy. And $25.4M for state specific requirements for FMS aircraft bound for Japan and Israel.

www.flightglobal.com...
edit on 10/17/2016 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 06:12 PM
link   
Did they work all the bugs out? Do they have a prototype that's ready to fly, as in we could send one out now for live action? This craft is a technical marvel but man three quarters of a billion dollars is a lot of mula. I sure would like to see an article released before this one that states 'new budget to include full coverage of all costs, including medical, post-inury treatment, funeral expenses, and mental health care for all vets. I wonder what the sum of that would be by comparison to half a trillion overall defense budget?

No I'm not a hippie, and I value a strong military. I admit to being ignorant to how all this works in detail. As a taxpaying observer, I'm just trying to make sense of continued budgeting of a machine that has so many issues.

I feel like they just have to have some degree of measured success to continue funding and I wonder if that measurement is fair and sensible or more of a commitment that has to be followed through to honor contractual obligations, regardless of practicality.
edit on 17-10-2016 by waftist because: punctuation



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 06:19 PM
link   
a reply to: waftist

The A and B have both reached IOC, and on the last carrier qualification test the C model had a 100% trap rate. In fact the carrier borne tests went so well they finished them early, and hit every test point, out of something like 622 planned.



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 06:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Thanks, that is comforting. Sorry to be the first poster and whining a bit. I have both family and friends suffering from vet benefit issues. This seems to be a beast of a craft that will surely give advantages to our soldiers, and I am grateful for that.



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 06:26 PM
link   
a reply to: waftist

The -A I watched yesterday sure looked operational, they didn't really pull any punches with its flight routine.



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 06:28 PM
link   
a reply to: waftist

There's a lot of information about the problems in the program, and not much about the positive. Mostly because the test team is more concerned about getting it right, rather than fighting the propaganda war.

Now that it's in the hands of the people developing tactics and the best way to use it, its real capabilities are coming to light. For example, when testing against surface threats, attacking F-35s had to turn their transponders on, because no one could track them.

Another example is the Marine dog and pony show for the Commandant, where they flew half the aircraft with external stores, because the planned test wasn't hard enough. They hit every target in five minutes.



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 06:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Quick question , do the earlier built planes get upgraded to the latest standards or is it just tough luck .



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 07:57 PM
link   
a reply to: hutch622

That's what part of this money will go to. They'll upgrade the systems and software of existing aircraft, but if there's an issue with, say the RAM, it's kind of catch as catch can.



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 08:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

My question is where is the money fueling the anti-35 propaganda war coming from, anyways?

Is it really just Boeing just being sour about the fact that the F-35 makes the Rhino obsolete in the strike/ECM role while making the F-15 obsolete as an air superiority platform, and in the process has effectively destroyed the overseas market for non-Russian (and possibly non-eurocanard) 4th gen fighters, and has hit them especially hard?



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 08:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

So that smart move may have been to come late to the party , get the latest ( as in RAM ) and i believe the later planes are cheaper as well .



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 08:14 PM
link   
a reply to: hutch622

Yeah, they're dropping with every LRIP. The A is down to something like $120M with engine as of LRIP 8, and by the time they hit full rate production they'll be around $100M with engine.



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 08:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Barnalby

A lot of the official stuff is Boeing doing whatever they can to try to prop up their fighter line as long as possible.



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 09:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

What makes Italy so special?



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 09:05 PM
link   
a reply to: HarumphHarumph

They're the only country, besides the US to be getting both the A and B model, and are one of two countries outside the US that will assemble the aircraft and perform pre delivery testing for finished aircraft.



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 09:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

That says they're capable, yes. But why do they get the ok beyond that. What is Italy's need for them?



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 09:41 PM
link   
a reply to: HarumphHarumph

The same as everyone else. What they have is getting old, and less and less capable. They chose what they deemed the best option to update and upgrade their capabilities.



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 10:52 PM
link   
a reply to: HarumphHarumph

Pretty much every new "affordable" NATO-built 4th gen fighter costs in the vicinity of $80-100 million/piece, from the F-16, to the Gripen, to the Rafale, to the F/A-18E/F, so if you're looking to upgrade, that's your price baseline. If you want Eurofighters or F-15's, you might as well multiply that price by 150%

The F-35 costs right around the same price as a well-outfitted Rhino, but brings you 5th-generation avionics and sensor fusion, not to mention that little "stealth" detail.

If you're interested in buying a new western fighter, the F-35 pretty much the only game in town at this point, and it has an absolute monopoly on STOVL, which should matter for countries like Italy and Spain.



new topics




 
4

log in

join