JSF Flawed

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by smiff, Feb 5, 2013.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Yes and no. You'll observe that it's not the actual MPs who made thre decision who have 'admitted' it was wrong. They obviously don't watch enough episodes of Grand designs and the like, or they would have worked out that repeatedly changing your mind about the scope of a project is a sure fire way to widdle the maximum amount of time and money up the wall.
  2. Cold_Collation

    Cold_Collation LE Book Reviewer

    Hm. It's not too late to do something about it, though. We could still go with the -C or even F-18. The first carrier's not finished and the airframes are far from started.

    We'd have to get past some things which cost even more than money, mind - such as politicians admitting they****ed up.
  3. true t-m, I just assumed the defence committee now would've been the same people as at the start of the coalition. Definitely a lot cheaper to stick with the product they originally wanted, bought and designed for. So if they had built the carrier for the F35C in the first place then there wouldn't be the £2bn conversion costs and they could buy a few more planes? I meant too late in regard to cost. Anything that did get changed would surely cost more than the initial price. :)
  4. I stand corrected. For some reason I thought the decision to switch was a last-gasp Labour intervention rather than a coalition knee-jerk. Either way an obvious self made money pit.
  5. I beg to differ - we are trialling F35 Lightnings now - so I reckon we[d be liable to some sort of penalty payment if we backed out. The US will be hanging certain costs onto our piece of the project, even if it is tiny by comparison to theirs.

    Not just a lack of Grand Design watching, a lack of inspecting their own history books - every big project they bring in gets delayed, amended, altered and added to, therefore delayed more. When they realise it's been in development for about 10 years, they fold it into something else, which makes it more complicated. Then they bring it into service late, outdated and without a clear through life plan, or cancel it, leaving us with a capability gap.

    Mein gott - as I read that back, it depresses me even more. I need to change jobs, schnellmachen!
  6. Cold_Collation

    Cold_Collation LE Book Reviewer

    We lose workshare for Rolls-Royce if the -B goes west but beyond that the decision to go with it compromises CVF even further in terms of what else can be flown off it (a proper-sized carrier allows more than just a STOVL/whatever it's called this week aircraft and helicopters to be used). The shift to -C was the correct one in terms of options for our own flexibility and cooperation with allies. The shift back to -B was an appalling choice.

    I suspect that LockMart really doesn't give a shit which model we buy, so long as we buy. But the compromise that the -B represents is an example of why we spend so much money and get so little for it.
  7. Im beginning to wonder if politicians are so incompetent at everything they do, that perhaps it'd be a better use of funds to pay them to stay home and do nothing.
  8. The plane simply don't work.

    The helmet don't work, the software don't work, and the plane is experiencing structural cracking before it's even entered service.
    It's supposed, and that was years late, IOC was 2012, now the IOC is 'event driven'… LM/DOD Translation: 'Fucked if we know, things keep going wrong'.
    The operational software is Block 3, they're flying with Block 1, still testing Block 2A, and Block 2B is around somewhereish.

    And a plane called the Lightning that can't fly in lightning?
    You couldn't make it up.
    • Like Like x 1
  9. I was in a recent meeting where the RTS date went from "approx 2014" to "probably later than that" to "2017?".

    Doesn't sound good...
  10. Remember the Powerpoints back in the day with 2007 as the anticipated date for initial deliveries?
  11. Cold_Collation

    Cold_Collation LE Book Reviewer

    Kinda the worrying thing, isn't it? And once we get to Block 2Z, do we go to -2ZA, -2ZB...
    • Like Like x 1
  12. I wonder if Lockheed was up to it's old dirty tricks again a la F104 during the initial selection process and that the Boeing was really the better choice.
  13. Cold_Collation

    Cold_Collation LE Book Reviewer

    That has been suggested...