General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsLockheed, Pentagon reach agreement on new F-35 contract
Lockheed Martin and the Pentagon announced a deal Monday on a production contract for the next batch of F-35 fighter jets, which is projected to lower the price per plane by 3.6 percent.
The contract, expected to be finalized in the next several weeks, would cover 43 F-35 aircraft including 29 for the U.S. military, the first two for Israel, the first four for Japan, four for the United Kingdom and two each for Norway and Italy.
Deliveries from what is known as Low-Rate Initial Production lot 8 would begin in 2016. The Pentagon said cost details will be released later, but sources told Reuters last week that it is worth about $4 billion.
In a statement, Lt. Gen. Chris Bogdan, the top Pentagon official over the F-35, said the agreement represents the programs ongoing maturation.
Read more: http://www.star-telegram.com/2014/10/27/6235225/lockheed-pentagon-reach-agreement.html
Turbineguy
(37,291 posts)That's the equivalent cost of a full college education of only 775 people per airplane!
Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)completely useless piece of shit that was obsolete before the first one rolled off the production line
wot a deal
sakabatou
(42,136 posts)KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)Baclava
(12,047 posts)Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)trying to shoehorn ONE aircraft to fit all the niche needs of the Navy/USMC/USAF was ever a good idea...
Baclava
(12,047 posts)Unfortunately, the Office of the Secretary of Defense has reportedly blocked the Navys proposed break in procurement and is insisting that the service continue with previously planned purchases.
This proposal by the Navy to slow acquisition of the F-35 is welcome news to the Project On Government Oversight, which has been raising concerns with the Joint Strike Fighter program for a number of years. POGO, along with Taxpayers for Common Sense, has recommended that the Navy and Marine Corps end procurement of the F-35 and instead purchase additional F/A-18E/F Super Hornets.
And, of course, the Air Force should also terminate procurement of its variant of the F-35 and replace it with lifetime extensions of and upgrades to F-16s, F-15s, and A-10s. All three models of the F-35, not just the Navy and Marine Corps versions, are unaffordable and unacceptable in terms of their performance.
The F-35 has been plagued by development problems, cost overruns, and delays that have left it almost a decade behind schedule. The F/A-18E/F on the other hand is fully operational and can fulfill the Navys performance needs for strike aircraft for the foreseeable future. While the F-35Cs aircraft carrier suitability is a matter of some controversy, as was expressed in the recent report by the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation, the F/A-18E/F has proven its carrier suitability.
The Super Hornet costs far less to procure with a price of around $65 million each compared to as much as $299.5 million per F-35C. The Super Hornet also costs significantly less to operate and maintain than the F-35, which is officially predicted to cost $1.1 trillion to sustain over its entire lifetime.
http://www.pogo.org/blog/2014/02/navy-looking-for-some-f-35-relief.html
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)The Lightning II is a dog...Wasn't even fun to use in Battlefield 3
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)Prices so low, we can't advertise them on the air! It's our wheelin'-est, dealin'-est days, but it ends soon! Israel, Japan, and the United Kingdom can't all be wrong. How many can we put you down for? What will it take to get you to drive this baby off the lot?
It's Crazy Chris Bogdan's! 1400 Defense Pentagon in DC! As always, free balloons and hot dogs for the kiddies, and a free camo wallet with every test drive! Come on down!
n2doc
(47,953 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)KamaAina
(78,249 posts)Hurray!