Letter Raises Possibility U.K. Could Return to STOVL F-35 in The Royal Navy Forum

RSS
Email

0 Points

Letter Raises Possibility U.K. Could Return to STOVL F-35

Author	Comment
John Civie		#61	[-]
Posts: 124 Mar 11 12 6:22 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	The B wouldn't cover a 2015 - 2020 gap would it? if were putting off the big desicions untill after the next election and SDSR in that brave way MPs do we wouldn't order anything before late 2015 and then it'd be a few years for delivery and work up to a deployable number, meaning no differance in ordering either B or C with the intention of getting them to sea ASAP to operate off either the QE or PoW. I know the powers at be aren't giving firm statements to on this story and the RAF and RN are keeping quite but if we need a workhorse tornado replacment wouldn't B be an obviosly poor choice to those within the services as it lacks the range and payload of its conventional and carrier stablemates. But with 3+ years to any serious orders i doubt the thinking today will match that of the goverment who eventually has to bite the bullet and order the F35 and however world events have changed by that time. have we not given up a lot of our LRIP places to the Australian and Israli orders as they want their A's and I's pre 2020?
	Remove this ad
Thorvicson		#62	[-]
Posts: 302 Mar 11 12 6:33 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Ian The decisions are next year, the only hint this year is the budget needs to be set in place to order them when they are scheduled to be ordered. The same goes for the formal carrier conversionits not due till 2013, they could probably order now and no doubt the ACA are working towards being ready to go once they get the official nod but they are awaiting till the Jubille is well out of the way before doing anything that may favour the HMS PoW over HMS QE as they just know the Press will get the wrong end of the stick with that story before even getting to talk about the Carriers themsleves !!! BTW it will be more than a couple of years for a CATOBAR carrier and F-35C, we're completely dependent on the USN getting IOC and the F-35C, and with the deferral of 179 F-35s to after 2017 it means the USN program will be delayed also. The knock on effect with the production ramp up being delayed is that the F-35 is just not going to be available in the numbers required until production gets into full swing by 2020 (ish) so all customers are going to be awaiting the bulk of their orders till at least the middle to end of the next decade. The plan was the UK would have 18 by 2020 with 6 earmarked for FAA and the remaining aircraft appearing in the next few years to bring up the first carrier squadron to full strength. Those numbers are going to take a hit now and its the impact of that which is what the govt is looking at now, even an F-35B as an alternative isn't much better as its also effected by the US draw down.
Zx81		#63	[-]
Posts: 573 Mar 11 12 8:00 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	A split B/C purchase is a non starter on funding grounds. The UK is trying to reduce fleet types accross the spectrum, not introduce them. Is all this speculation coming from Jim Murphys letter?
istobie		#64	[-]
Posts: 2749 Mar 11 12 9:27 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Thorvicson wrote: Ian The decisions are next year, the only hint this year is the budget needs to be set in place to order them when they are scheduled to be ordered. The same goes for the formal carrier conversionits not due till 2013, they could probably order now and no doubt the ACA are working towards being ready to go once they get the official nod but they are awaiting till the Jubille is well out of the way before doing anything that may favour the HMS PoW over HMS QE as they just know the Press will get the wrong end of the stick with that story before even getting to talk about the Carriers themsleves !!! BTW it will be more than a couple of years for a CATOBAR carrier and F-35C, we're completely dependent on the USN getting IOC and the F-35C, and with the deferral of 179 F-35s to after 2017 it means the USN program will be delayed also. The knock on effect with the production ramp up being delayed is that the F-35 is just not going to be available in the numbers required until production gets into full swing by 2020 (ish) so all customers are going to be awaiting the bulk of their orders till at least the middle to end of the next decade. The plan was the UK would have 18 by 2020 with 6 earmarked for FAA and the remaining aircraft appearing in the next few years to bring up the first carrier squadron to full strength. Those numbers are going to take a hit now and its the impact of that which is what the govt is looking at now, even an F-35B as an alternative isn't much better as its also effected by the US draw down. That step to the right in LRIP numbers by the US is the major fly in the ointment - and a lot of customers are insisting they get their aircraft at their quoted UFR point. We could still just order more F35 at the LRIP prices as far as I understand it as the aircraft will be there and available to order, it'll just cost more for the period in the production run they're ordered at. B would be slightly easier to get in time but is more expensive anyway I think? I think that reluctantly the only answer is to take this one on the chin, stick with C as it's the better jet for the country - more payload, more fuel, better Tornado replacement and of course, it's born for carriers. We might have a fairly empty set of decks for a bit but the F35 looks sound. Running around buying odd bits to fill in doesn't work.
bgile		#65	[-]
Posts: 3569 Mar 12 12 7:49 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Unfortunately the USN/USMC don't feel quite as much pressure to get these aircraft in service, because they have aircraft now that will do the job as long as it takes, even if not quite as well. They've even ordered more F/A-18s.
Anthony58	ANALYSIS: F-35 LRIP 5 Contracts: Unit Cost Tops $200M for Fi	#66	[-]
Posts: 4099 Mar 12 12 8:46 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	ANALYSIS: F-35 LRIP 5 Contracts: Unit Cost Tops $200M for First Time (Source: defense-aerospace.com; published March 12, 2012) By Giovanni de Briganti Even before the latest FY2013 cut in production numbers, the average unit cost of F-35 aircraft ordered as part of the fifth LRIP batch will exceed $200 million. (JSF PO photo) PARIS --- Previously estimated at nearly $160 million, the unit price of F-35 fighters ordered as part of the fifth Low-Rate Initial Production batch (LRIP Lot 5) has now passed $200 million, once additional contracts awarded by the Pentagon since our previous estimate on Dec. 9, 2011 are included. On that date, when DoD awarded the main Lot 5 Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP 5) contract worth $4,011,919,310 for 30 aircraft, we had estimated average unit costs at $159.7 million. However, after recent claims by US Air Force and program officials that F-35 acquisition costs are being reduced as better prices are negotiated with contractors, we updated our cost estimate. Unsurprisingly, F-35 prices in fact show no sign of decreasing, and the total cost of LRIP Lot 5 further increased after two additional contracts awarded in late December. Intriguingly, the Pentagon picked December 27 – two days after Christmas, in what is arguably the slowest news week of the year – to award two additional LRIP 5 contracts. Had it wanted to hide these awards, it would hardly have acted differently. One contract, worth $485,000,000, is for LRIP 5 “non-recurring requirements,” which adds $16.6 million to the price of each of 30 LRIP 5 aircraft. The second contract, awarded to Pratt & Whitney, is for production of 30 F135 engines for the LRIP 5 aircraft, and is worth $1.12 billion; it adds an average of $37.4 million to the cost of each aircraft. We also identified a further LRIP 5 contract not previously included in our LRIP 5 estimate: it was awarded May 10, 2010, and covers F135 engine long lead items for this batch to the value of $138.8 million. At the time, LRIP 5 included 42 aircraft, so the contract’s cost works out to $3.3 million per aircraft. Including these three, the Pentagon has awarded five contracts, together worth $6,280 million, to fund 30 LRIP 5 aircraft, whose average unit cost – engines included -- is thus $203.4 million. Here is an updated breakdown of this estimate: There are two caveats, however, to the above unit cost: 1. It does not include the cost of the modifications, retrofits and upgrades that will be necessary to bring all LRIP aircraft to their nominal configuration, once flight testing and development are completed. The estimated cost of these modifications, known as concurrency costs, varies between $5 million (Lockheed Martin) and $10 million per aircraft (US Senate panel). The JSF program office has not released its own estimate, but Venlet in December said the bill for fixing concurrency ills was so high it "sucks the wind out of your lungs." 2. Several of these LRIP 5 contracts include cost escalation clauses (“cost plus incentive contract line items”; “fixed-price-incentive (firm target)”; “cost-sharing/no-fee basis,” and “not-to-exceed cost-plus-fixed-fee”), so their actual cost will increase before they are completed. It is thus inevitable that LRIP 5 costs will increase further, and by a substantial margin, as major re-design and modifications will be required, for example to fix the non-functional F-35C tail-hook and other design flaws. Cost Varies Substantially by Version Originally set at 42 aircraft, the F-35 Low Rate Initial Production Lot 5 now comprises 30 aircraft: -- 21 Conventional Take Off and Landing (CTOL) aircraft for the US Air Force; -- 6 Carrier Variant (CV) aircraft for the US Navy, and -- 3 Short Take Off and Vertical Landing (STOVL) aircraft for the US Marine Corps. Given the information provided in each Lot 5 contract announcement, it is possible to compute, with a degree of accuracy, the cost of each version of the F-35. If the average cost is $203.4 million per aircraft, it in fact varies substantially according to the version: -- F-35A: $172 million per aircraft; -- F-35B: $291.7 million per aircraft; -- F-35C: $235.8 million per aircraft. This is a breakdown of LRIP 5 contracts and resulting unit costs, by version. While these are the projected unit costs for the LRIP 5 aircraft, there is no implication that production aircraft would cost anywhere near these amounts. However, costs will not begin to decrease until the F-35 enters full-scale production, and this is unlikely to happen for some years yet, especially since the Pentagon has now decided to further reduce LRIP production until flight tests demonstrate that the aircraft is meeting its performance and reliability goals. Delaying orders for 179 LRIP aircraft for five years, part of the Pentagon’s FY2013 budget request, will save over $15 billion in the short term, but will ultimately further increase unit costs for the remaining aircraft. F-35 Low-Rate Initial Production Lot 5 Contracts: The Pentagon has awarded five main contracts for the Lot 5 Low-Rate Initial Production, listed below. These should have been fixed-price contracts, following former Defense Secretary Robert Gates’ decision to stop cost-plus contracts for this program. However, this is not the case, as we have highlighted in bold characters below. This allows for a further increase in contract costs if the contractors incur higher than expected costs. 1. Long-lead items (F135 engine): May 6, 2010 United Technologies Corp., Pratt & Whitney Military Engines, East Hartford, Conn., is being awarded an advance acquisition contract with an estimated value of $138,800,000 for long lead components, parts and materials associated with the Lot V low rate initial production of 22 F135 conventional take-off and landing propulsion systems for the Air Force; 13 short take-off and vertical landing propulsion systems for the Marine Corps; and 7 carrier variant propulsion systems for the Navy. Work will be performed in East Hartford, Conn. (70 percent); Bristol, United Kingdom (19 percent); and Indianapolis, Ind. (11 percent), and is expected to be completed in April 2011. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was not competitively procured. This contract combines purchases for the Air Force ($51,300,000; 37 percent); Marine Corps ($65,600,000; 47 percent); and Navy ($21,900,000; 16 percent). The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Md., is the contracting activity (N00019-10-C-0005). http://www.defense.gov/contracts/contract.aspx?contractid=4275 2. Long-lead items (airframe): July 6, 2010 Lockheed Martin Corp., Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co., Fort Worth, Texas, is being awarded an advance acquisition contract with an estimated value of $522,200,000 to provide for long-lead efforts and materials associated with the production and delivery of 42 low-rate initial production Lot V F-35 Joint Strike Fighter aircraft. This contract provides for 22 conventional take-off and landing aircraft for the Air Force; 13 short take off and vertical landing aircraft for the Marine Corps; and seven carrier variant aircraft for the Navy. Work will be performed in Fort Worth, Texas (35 percent); El Segundo, Calif. (25 percent); Warton, United Kingdom (20 percent); Orlando, Fla. (10 percent); Nashua, N.H. (5 percent); and Baltimore, Md. (5 percent). Work is expected to be completed in May 2011. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was not competitively procured. This contract combines purchases for the Navy ($329,100,000; 63 percent) and Air Force ($193,100,000; 37 percent). The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Md., is the contracting activity (N00019-10-C-0002). http://www.defense-aerospace.com/article-view/release_ar/116224/lockheed-wins-initial-%24522m-for-production-of-jsf-lot-v.html 3. Main LRIP 5 contract (airframes): December 27, 2011 Lockheed Martin Corp., Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co., Fort Worth, Texas, is being awarded a $4,011,919,310 fixed-price-incentive (firm target) (FPIF) modification to a previously awarded advance acquisition contract (N00019-10-C-0002). This modification provides for the manufacture and delivery of 30 Low Rate Initial Production Lot V F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Aircraft for the U.S. Air Force (21 Conventional Take Off and Landing (CTOL) aircraft); the U.S. Navy (6 Carrier Variant (CV) aircraft) and the U.S. Marine Corps (3 Short Take Off and Vertical Landing (STOVL) aircraft). In addition, this modification provides for associated ancillary mission equipment and flight test instrumentation for those aircraft, and flight test instrumentation for the United Kingdom. All effort will be contracted for on a FPIF basis, with the exception of work scope for the incorporation of certain specified concurrency changes that will be contracted for on a cost-sharing/no-fee basis. Work will be performed in Fort Worth, Texas (67 percent); El Segundo, Calif. (14 percent); Warton, United Kingdom (9 percent); Orlando, Fla. (4 percent); Nashua, N.H. (3 percent); and Baltimore, Md. (3 percent), and is expected to be completed in January 2014. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract combines purchases for the U.S. Air Force ($2,644,270,340; 65.9 percent); the U.S. Navy ($937,374,286; 23.34 percent); the U.S. Marine Corps ($426,190,013; 10.6 percent); and the United Kingdom ($4,084,671; 0.1 percent). The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Md., is the contracting activity. http://www.defense-aerospace.com/article-view/release_ar/131154/f_35-unit-cost-nears-%24160m-as-lockheed-wins-%244bn-for-lrip-5-lot.html 4. LRIP 5 (production non-recurring requirements): December 27, 2011 Lockheed Martin Corp., Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co., Fort Worth, Texas, is being awarded a $485,000,000 not-to-exceed cost-plus-fixed-fee undefinitized modification to a previously awarded advance acquisition contract (N00019-10-C-0002). A total of $131,500,000 is being obligated at time of award. This modification provides the F-35 Lightning II, Joint Strike Fighter Low Rate Initial Production Lot V production non-recurring requirements inclusive of special tooling/special test equipment and subcontractor technical assistance for the Air Force, Navy, and the Cooperative Partner participants. Work will be performed in Fort Worth, Texas (30 percent); El Segundo, Calif. (20 percent); Wharton, United Kingdom (20 percent); Turin, Italy (15 percent); Nashua, N.H. (8 percent); and Baltimore, Md. (7 percent). Work is expected to be completed in December 2013. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract combines purchases for the Air Force ($186,725,000; 38.5 percent); the U.S. Navy ($186,725,000; 38.5 percent); and the Cooperative Partner participants ($111,550,000; 23 percent). The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Md., is the contracting activity. (ends) http://www.defense-aerospace.com/article-view/release_ar/131560/lockheed-wins-extra-%24738m-for-f_35-lrip-5.html 5. Main LRIP 5 contract (engines): December 27, 2011 United Technologies Corp., Pratt & Whitney Military Engines, East Hartford, Conn., is being awarded a $1,122,306,649 not-to-exceed undefinitized modification to a previously awarded advanced acquisition contract (N00019-10-C-0005). A total of $358,597,078 is being obligated at time of award. The contract includes both fixed price incentive and cost plus incentive contract line items. This undefinitized modification provides for the Lot V Low Rate Initial Production of 21 F135 Conventional Take Off and Landing (CTOL) Propulsion Systems for the Air Force; 3 Short Take-off and Vertical Landing (STOVL) Propulsion Systems for the Marine Corps; and 6 Carrier Variant (CV) Propulsion Systems for the Navy. In addition, this modification provides for production non-recurring effort, non-recurring autonomic logistics effort and recurring sustainment effort for the U.S. Services and Cooperative Partner Participants. Work will be performed in East Hartford, Conn. (67 percent); Bristol, United Kingdom (16.5 percent); and Indianapolis, Ind. (16.5 percent), and is expected to be completed in February 2014. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was not competitively procured. This contract combines purchases for the Air Force ($520,650,335; 46.3 percent); Marine Corps ($387,099,090; 34.5 percent); Navy ($166,710,445; 14.9 percent); and the Cooperative Partner Participants ($47,846,779; 4.3 percent). The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Md. is the contracting activity. http://www.defense-aerospace.com/article-view/release_ar/131561/pratt-wins-%241.2-bn-for-30-f_35-lrip-5-engines.html www.defense-aerospace.com/article-view/feature/133433/f_35-unit-cost-tops-%24200m.html
bager1968		#67	[-]
Posts: 7585 Mar 12 12 9:30 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Well, I believe that that "non-recurring cost" contract is for changes found to be needed during testing, and modifications to production methods... which shouldn't appear in any later lots (and may well save money later on). If you remove this from the "normalized" aircraft cost the total is still disappointingly high, however.. Who'd have thought 30 years ago Hermes would still be in active service when Invincible was at the breakers yard?
Anthony58	Cost of refitting Royal Navy aircraft carrier trebles	#68	[-]
Posts: 4099 Mar 13 12 2:55 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	The costs of refitting a Royal Navy aircraft carrier so it can be used by a new generation of fighter jets have more than trebled, defence sources have told The Daily Telegraph. By Thomas Harding, Defence Correspondent 8:05PM GMT 12 Mar 2012 Estimates for adapting HMS Prince of Wales so that it can be used by the Joint Strike Fighter are understood have risen from £500 million to £1.8 billion. Millions have already been spent on studies to look at how to convert the ship after ministers decided to scrap the jump-jet variant of the plane in favour of a conventional take-off and landing model. But so great is the rise in total costs, ministers are considering abandoning the plan and reverting to the Ministry of Defence’s original proposals. Philip Hammond, the Defence Secretary, believes there is not enough money in the budget to afford the £300 million a year to carry out the work over six years. “We are certainly looking at what’s affordable and what can be done in terms of risk and cost,” said an MoD official. “If you have an unaffordable programme you cannot ignore it.” The move is likely to be embarrassing for the Government as the changes were at the heart of the Strategic Defence and Security Review in 2010. It will also heighten criticism of the Government for disbanding the fleet of Harrier jets and selling them to US Marine Corps for “peanuts”. Under the new plans, the Government is expected to choose the jump-jet version of the JSF, even though the take-off and landing model can fly further and carry more bombs. The decision will also mean an end to plans for joint-carrier operations with French and American ships as they are only equipped to handle conventional fighters. To take off and land on HMS Prince of Wales, the vessel needed to be fitted with a catapult system to launch the aircraft and a “trap” to slow planes down and stop them when they land. The MoD has earmarked up to £80 million for the conversion feasibility study and half the money has been spent. Pressure is mounting on ministers to make a decision because of the time it will take to refit the carrier. More than 200 Navy sailors and fliers are about to begin training on US and French carriers to ensure the British ships have qualified crews when launched. Mr Hammond’s decision, expected at the end of this month, could be helped after manufacturers said technical problems with the jump-jet fighter were largely resolved. An MoD spokesman said: “We are currently finalising the 2012-13 budget and balancing the equipment plan. As part of this process, we are reviewing all programmes, including elements of the carrier strike programme, to validate costs and ensure risks are properly managed.” The MoD has spent $2 billion on the JSF development costs and plans to buy 138 more at almost $90 million each. www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/9139029/Cost-of-refitting-Royal-Navy-aircraft-carrier-trebles.html
pfcem		#69	[-]
Posts: 1113 Mar 13 12 8:28 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Thorvicson wrote: BTW it will be more than a couple of years for a CATOBAR carrier and F-35C, we're completely dependent on the USN getting IOC and the F-35C, and with the deferral of 179 F-35s to after 2017 it means the USN program will be delayed also. The knock on effect with the production ramp up being delayed is that the F-35 is just not going to be available in the numbers required until production gets into full swing by 2020 (ish) so all customers are going to be awaiting the bulk of their orders till at least the middle to end of the next decade. The plan was the UK would have 18 by 2020 with 6 earmarked for FAA and the remaining aircraft appearing in the next few years to bring up the first carrier squadron to full strength. Those numbers are going to take a hit now and its the impact of that which is what the govt is looking at now, even an F-35B as an alternative isn't much better as its also effected by the US draw down. IOC is dependent on sofware release. The US will have PLENTY of airframes (even under the latest production ramp up slowdown) and orders from Israel & Japan as well as possibly Korea & one or two more non-partner nations in the new few years will make up for much 'losses' from the latest US production ramp up slowdown. In fact it INCREASES availability as production slots which were previously reserved for US orders are now available for other orders.
pfcem		#70	[-]
Posts: 1113 Mar 13 12 8:30 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Anthony58 wrote: ANALYSIS: F-35 LRIP 5 Contracts: Unit Cost Tops $200M for First Time Cut the number of aircraft from 42 to 30 & the unit cost goes up...
	Remove this ad
eldritch		#71	[-]
Posts: 236 Mar 13 12 10:18 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	This is a perfect example of an MP not keeping up to date,and asking the completely wrong question:- Joint Strike Fighter Aircraft Mrs Moon: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recent estimate he has made of the through-life costs of the carrier variant Joint Strike Fighter; and if he will make a statement. [98538] Peter Luff: We update our through life cost estimates for Joint Strike Fighter annually as part of our departmental planning round process. From Written answers in Parliament 12th March.
Anthony58		#72	[-]
Posts: 4099 Mar 13 12 12:15 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	"Estimates for adapting HMS Prince of Wales so that it can be used by the Joint Strike Fighter are understood have risen from £500 million to £1.8 billion." How can it have grown to such amount, does it also include the cost of converting Queen Elizabeth after commissioning as well (the report may be inaccurate), or is BAE pulling the wool over MOD (possibly with a prod from a senior politician, who is against the programme)? I don't believe it would cost £1.8 billion. I think the MOD should bring in a second opinion, the US Department of Defence with Huntingdon Ingalls. Last Edited By: Anthony58 Mar 13 12 12:20 PM. Edited 1 times.
Anthony58		#73	[-]
Posts: 4099 Mar 13 12 12:22 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	....... "While Ministers decide whether to u-turn on a u-turn Britain is left without aircraft on aircraft carriers at sea," said Murphy. "David Cameron's decision to sell the Harriers cheaply appears reckless if not foolish as there is no apparent policy to end this important capability gap. The country deserves urgent clarity from the government on how carrier strike capability will be delivered with detail on costs, timescale and interoperability with key allies. "Without clarity on the cost of long-term and strategically vital programmes such as this there can be no triumphalism within the MoD on their handling of the defence budget or equipment programme. "This costly confusion has got to come to an end." www.defencemanagement.com/news_story.asp?id=19140
Zx81		#74	[-]
Posts: 573 Mar 13 12 1:49 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Anthony58 wrote: "Estimates for adapting HMS Prince of Wales so that it can be used by the Joint Strike Fighter are understood have risen from £500 million to £1.8 billion." How can it have grown to such amount, does it also include the cost of converting Queen Elizabeth after commissioning as well (the report may be inaccurate), or is BAE pulling the wool over MOD (possibly with a prod from a senior politician, who is against the programme)? I don't believe it would cost £1.8 billion. If I recall, statements were made that original estimates put the cost at £500m-£1.2bn so definitely not a 'tripling' of cost.
cyrilranch		#75	[-]
Posts: 188 Mar 13 12 2:51 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Taken From Pprune thead the MoD's inability to cost defence projects independently (as opposed to relying on industry prices) is what is being exposed here. I repeat, the dollar costs for a shipset of 4 EMALS cats for USS Ford as part of a Firm Fixed-Price Contract are available here on pg 38: http://www.finance.hq.nav.../fmb/13pres/SCN_BOOK.pdf At $1.5 : £1, that's £516M, for the hardware of a four-cat set (based on the higher estimate for CVN79). Given that you're buying half the linear motors, half the power converters and half the power storage devices, you might think £300M was in the ballpark for one two-cat shipset. The advanced arresting gear is at pg 40 and hardware cost is £120M per shipset. Now if you add the full engineering support for each system (also in the data), you get costs for supply of the systems, technical data and engineering support of ~£50M and £20M respectively. So, broadly speaking about £500M for the hardware and support for one ships worth, excluding integration & installation. As noted before, installation is actually quite light on manpower (even if you do need lots of sparkies) and integration into the L3-designed IPMS should be possible for £50M, you're looking at nothing like the numbers being bandied about. I can see that there might be a premium for accelerated delivery (probably needed for PoW), but this is taking the p1ss. Where are these numbers coming from and who is actually marking the homework?
Bledlow		#76	[-]
Posts: 2470 Mar 13 12 2:58 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Anthony58 wrote: "Estimates for adapting HMS Prince of Wales so that it can be used by the Joint Strike Fighter are understood have risen from £500 million to £1.8 billion." How can it have grown to such amount, does it also include the cost of converting Queen Elizabeth after commissioning as well (the report may be inaccurate), or is BAE pulling the wool over MOD (possibly with a prod from a senior politician, who is against the programme)? I don't believe it would cost £1.8 billion. I think the MOD should bring in a second opinion, the US Department of Defence with Huntingdon Ingalls. That puts the price of conversion at not much less than the original price of the whole bloody ship! I thought these ships were supposed to be designed for later conversion. It looks as if someone, somewhere, has cocked up rather badly, if the conversion really is going to cost £1.8 billion. If not, & this figure is inflated, who's inflating it & why?
istobie		#77	[-]
Posts: 2749 Mar 13 12 3:10 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	If accurate, that's a pretty stunning figure. Consider my mind to be boggled
Zx81		#78	[-]
Posts: 573 Mar 13 12 3:18 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Looks like the F35B switcharoo may have some credence as US official is reported to have confirmed it. http://www.bloomberg.com/...-s-official-says-1-.html
Bledlow		#79	[-]
Posts: 2470 Mar 13 12 4:44 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Zx81 wrote: Looks like the F35B switcharoo may have some credence as US official is reported to have confirmed it. http://www.bloomberg.com/...-s-official-says-1-.html Confirmed that he's heard the issue is under consideration, nothing else.
Graeme65		#80	[-]
Posts: 725 Mar 13 12 5:34 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	So if the cost of the Emals from the Pprune post is about right, BAE want 1.3 billion to integrate electric catapults and arrester gear into an electric ship. Surely we should put this out to tender. The French and US yards must be both competant and secure enough to do the work. That figure is probably more design work than it took to design the entire ship and more than a brand new Astute class submarine! Aren't EMALS supposed to weigh less and take up less space than Steam Cats. This is insanity, can it possibly be true?
	Remove this ad

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Yuku free message boards

Letter Raises Possibility U.K. Could Return to STOVL F-35

The costs of refitting a Royal Navy aircraft carrier so it can be used by a new generation of fighter jets have more than trebled, defence sources have told The Daily Telegraph.