(Luft) Lockheed Martin F-35 - Lightning II

[revan]

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3af82483c5-b8ed-474b-bf29-8e2f3ab64db4&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest">http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/de ... d=blogDest</a><!-- m -->

It's That D****h S****l Again


Todd Harrison - senior fellow for defense budget studies at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, a think tank that has a lot of alumni in strategic positions today - had some interesting comments on JSF at the center's pre-budget briefing on Thursday.

First, Harrison said, "it is not realistic to say that we're going to end up buying the full 2,400 aircraft" in view of long-term budget and force structure trends.

But, he added, it "wouldn't be wise to come out and say that, and send a signal to our allies that we're going to cut down on our buys. We don't need them jumping ship on the program - it could send the program into a death spiral."

Harrison added that the US "doesn't have to take a decision until 2017-18" on where JSF peak production rates will settle out.

I pointed out that by then the international partners - if they stay in the program - will be more deeply committed to the program and might not be too happy to find that the numbers are down (and the procurement and upgrade costs are higher) and asked if Harrison had indications that his comments reflected what Pentagon leadership was actually thinking.........

Hier die PDF Datei:

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.afa.org/Mitchell/presentations/041410JSF_tnx.pdf">http://www.afa.org/Mitchell/presentatio ... SF_tnx.pdf</a><!-- m -->