Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

F-35 price tag holding steady..........

Collapse
X
Collapse
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest

    #21
    Originally posted by flex297 View Post
    I have placed a bet few years ago and I am willing to lace more about the actual price of the F-35 being well over $120mil. These projections are made to make it look good, paper can handle pretty much

    Well, the Raptor is going for $133 Million and only "183" are currently projected! So, considering the F-35 was designed with economy in mind and it will be constructed in the thousands! I have seen nothing that gives credence to such an outlandish claim...........So, as its stands today the Lightning should be very competitive! While, being far more capable....:diablo:

    Comment

    • swerve
      Rank 5 Registered User
      • Jun 2005
      • 13610

      #22
      Originally posted by Scooter View Post
      Well, the Raptor is going for $133 Million and only "183" are currently projected! So, considering the F-35 was designed with economy in mind and it will be constructed in the thousands! I have seen nothing that gives credence to such an outlandish claim...........So, as its stands today the Lightning should be very competitive! While, being far more capable....:diablo:
      The APUC of the F-22 is running about $175 million. $133 million is for a bare "flyaway" aircraft. I'm not sure if it's fully-equipped.
      Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
      Justinian

      Comment

      • Sintra
        Rank 5 Registered User
        • Aug 2007
        • 3838

        #23
        I would love to see the original document that Reuters used to write the story.
        So, the USAF just released a document with completely diferent numbers from it´s official budget from February 2008...
        Right, and my name his Napoleon...

        2009 Budget

        http://www.saffm.hq.af.mil/shared/me...080204-081.pdf

        2008 Budget

        http://www.saffm.hq.af.mil/shared/me...070212-004.pdf

        2006 Budget

        http://www.saffm.hq.af.mil/shared/me...070214-050.pdf

        Strange, i would be expecting such a "document" would appear in some specialized press, like "AW", or "Flight Global", but "Reuters"?!!!!
        Last edited by Sintra; 3rd April 2008, 21:00.
        sigpic

        Comment

        • swerve
          Rank 5 Registered User
          • Jun 2005
          • 13610

          #24
          We're talking different price bases here. The "to completion" cost, after low-rate initial production, of $80 mn flyaway, is in "then-year" dollars, & includes a forecast future inflation rate. Therefore, if you buy more early on & few late on, that price is lower than if you buy few early on & more late on. I think that's a silly notion, & it would be better to use constant-price numbers.

          BTW, this is the F-35A. The F-35B & C will be more expensive.
          Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
          Justinian

          Comment

          • Sintra
            Rank 5 Registered User
            • Aug 2007
            • 3838

            #25
            Originally posted by Scooter View Post
            Well, the Raptor is going for $133 Million and only "183" are currently projected! So, considering the F-35 was designed with economy in mind and it will be constructed in the thousands! I have seen nothing that gives credence to such an outlandish claim...........So, as its stands today the Lightning should be very competitive! While, being far more capable....:diablo:

            133 million?
            Here you go, the exact numbers:


            http://www.saffm.hq.af.mil/shared/me...080204-081.pdf (page 55)

            Cheers
            sigpic

            Comment

            • Guest's Avatar
              Guest

              #26
              Originally posted by Portagee View Post
              I think what also has to be taken into consideration is that the overall costs are for the project, and the project is essentially made up of 3 different aircraft with some commonality.
              Those airframes then have to go through some common but lots of individual testing and certification.

              Given that, to then break the overall costs down to $70m a unit isn't actually that bad.

              Especially if compared with the costs of 3 separate designs for the differing roles.

              Really, in todays market $100 Million would not be unreasonable! Especially, considering the Super Hornet is going for 95-105 Million (depending on model) and ~$133 Million for the Raptor.

              Also, regardless of the speculation of the number of F-35 likely to be sold in the near-term. The odds are very much in the favor of the Lightning for the long-term. As the fighter market over the next couple of decades is going to be huge to say the least. With vast fleets of F-16's, F/A-18's, Mirage 2000's, Mig-29's, A-10's, AV-8's, etc. etc. Which, the F-35 will pretty much have to itself! This is clear to everyone as most 4th Generation Types are out of produduction or very close. Further, with the minor exception to the Typhoon current 4.5 Generation Fighters are near a stand still for export orders. As most are waiting on the F-35!


              In short the future of the F-35 Lightning II looks very good..............seems like a good time to go buy LM, BAE, and Northrup Grumman Stock!

              Comment

              • swerve
                Rank 5 Registered User
                • Jun 2005
                • 13610

                #27
                $136.8 million, eh? Or $170.8 million for something usable.

                BTW, the inflation rates assumed in those budget forecasts are here.

                Table 10.1, "Gross Domestic Product and Deflators Used in the Historical Tables: 19402013".

                I think that after 2013 they assume a constant modest inflation rate.
                Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
                Justinian

                Comment

                • Sintra
                  Rank 5 Registered User
                  • Aug 2007
                  • 3838

                  #28
                  Originally posted by swerve View Post
                  We're talking different price bases here. The "to completion" cost, after low-rate initial production, of $80 mn flyaway, is in "then-year" dollars, & includes a forecast future inflation rate. Therefore, if you buy more early on & few late on, that price is lower than if you buy few early on & more late on. I think that's a silly notion, & it would be better to use constant-price numbers.

                  BTW, this is the F-35A. The F-35B & C will be more expensive.
                  Swerve

                  What you are saying his correct, but THAT number (to completion" cost, after low-rate initial production, of $80 mn flyaway) his meaningless.
                  The F-35A production was "caped" by the Congress and the USAF for 48 units a year. That means that the last of those 1763 "lightnings" will be delivered to the USAF in... 2043... Trying to calculate an APUC or an PUAC in that time frame his... well, impossible?!
                  The production can be doubled or tripled, of course, but what are the chances of the Pentagon budget getting a raise in the next few years? And what his the biggest Pentagon Program, and what are the chances of that program getting partly "axed"?


                  Cheers
                  sigpic

                  Comment

                  • Sintra
                    Rank 5 Registered User
                    • Aug 2007
                    • 3838

                    #29
                    Originally posted by swerve View Post
                    $136.8 million, eh? Or $170.8 million for something usable.

                    BTW, the inflation rates assumed in those budget forecasts are here.

                    Table 10.1, "Gross Domestic Product and Deflators Used in the Historical Tables: 19402013".

                    I think that after 2013 they assume a constant modest inflation rate.

                    Thanks

                    Thats very useful information.
                    sigpic

                    Comment

                    • Guest's Avatar
                      Guest

                      #30
                      Originally posted by Sintra View Post
                      133 million?
                      Here you go, the exact numbers:


                      http://www.saffm.hq.af.mil/shared/me...080204-081.pdf (page 55)

                      Cheers


                      Well, thats the price most often quoted for the Raptor and is very close to FY 08/09. I can only assume the price goes up as the Raptor nears the end of production. Of course more orders for the USAF or a possible export contract could change that? Regardless, the Raptor will never be close to the price of its cheaper cousin the F-35.

                      Comment

                      • swerve
                        Rank 5 Registered User
                        • Jun 2005
                        • 13610

                        #31
                        Originally posted by Scooter View Post
                        Well, thats the price most often quoted for the Raptor and is very close to FY 08/09. I can only assume the price goes up as the Raptor nears the end of production. Of course more orders for the USAF or a possible export contract could change that? Regardless, the Raptor will never be close to the price of its cheaper cousin the F-35.
                        Note that before FY 2007 the average flyaway price was $161.6 mn.

                        I think $133 million is probably the lowest price paid for a years production batch, maybe for 2006 (IIRC I read about then that for a few aircraft the price was something like $129 mn, but that price only held for about 3 months), but unfortunately some people have chosen to quote it endlessly as "the" price. Not really honest.
                        Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
                        Justinian

                        Comment

                        • Sintra
                          Rank 5 Registered User
                          • Aug 2007
                          • 3838

                          #32
                          Originally posted by Scooter View Post
                          Well, thats the price most often quoted for the Raptor and is very close to FY 08/09. I can only assume the price goes up as the Raptor nears the end of production. Of course more orders for the USAF or a possible export contract could change that? Regardless, the Raptor will never be close to the price of its cheaper cousin the F-35.
                          Actually, Stephen Trimble from "Flight International" in his Blog "The Dew Line" made a direct quote from the USAF for exactly that situation, the cost of another batch of 20 Raptors being bought after the delivery of the entire 183 F-22 fleet.

                          F-22 = $220 million
                          You knew this would happen eventually: The F-22's program acquisition cost and its numerical designation are roughly in synch.

                          The US Air Force wants to extend the F-22 production line one year past its scheduled closure date at the end of fiscal year 2010.

                          I asked the USAF to tell me how much it would cost. One week later, the response is: $526 million in fiscal year 2009 and $3.892 billion in fiscal year 2010.

                          That adds up to $4.418 billion for 20 aircraft, or exactly $220.9 million per copy, including spares, overhead, etc.

                          I also think it's interesting that the F-22 and the C-17 each cost about $220 million.
                          http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/f22/

                          Cheers
                          sigpic

                          Comment

                          • Sintra
                            Rank 5 Registered User
                            • Aug 2007
                            • 3838

                            #33
                            Originally posted by swerve View Post
                            Note that before FY 2007 the average flyaway price was $161.6 mn.

                            I think $133 million is probably the lowest price paid for a years production batch, maybe for 2006 (IIRC I read about then that for a few aircraft the price was something like $129 mn, but that price only held for about 3 months), but unfortunately some people have chosen to quote it endlessly as "the" price. Not really honest.
                            You are correct, the average flyaway price for the entire fleet of Raptors was 154.267 Million US$, the 133 million$ never happened.
                            sigpic

                            Comment

                            • Guest's Avatar
                              Guest

                              #34
                              Originally posted by Sintra View Post
                              Swerve

                              What you are saying his correct, but THAT number (to completion" cost, after low-rate initial production, of $80 mn flyaway) his meaningless.
                              The F-35A production was "caped" by the Congress and the USAF for 48 units a year. That means that the last of those 1763 "lightnings" will be delivered to the USAF in... 2043... Trying to calculate an APUC or an PUAC in that time frame his... well, impossible?!
                              The production can be doubled or tripled, of course, but what are the chances of the Pentagon budget getting a raise in the next few years? And what his the biggest Pentagon Program, and what are the chances of that program getting partly "axed"?


                              Cheers

                              Personally, I would say the odds are very good that F-35 production will increase well over whats currently projected. As the USAF is retiring its F-16's at a rate of over 115 aircraft per year and everybody knows the problems surrounding the F-15 fleet. That doesn't even include the current issues with the USN Hornets or the USMC Harriers. As a matter of fact there is much talk in Congress of accelerating F-35 production. Maybe even opening up another production line in the UK? That of course is only the tip of the iceberg with many JSF Partners in a similar position! Then you have Non-JSF partners like Israel that want the F-35 like yesterday.............Sorry, but production for the Lightning will be backed up for years to come!


                              As for being "AXED" the odds are about as "NIL" as you can get! Why would the US surrender the largest fighter market since the 1950's. Especially, when its got it cornered!:diablo:

                              Comment

                              • Guest's Avatar
                                Guest

                                #35
                                Originally posted by Sintra View Post
                                Actually, Stephen Trimble from "Flight International" in his Blog "The Dew Line" made a direct quote from the USAF for exactly that situation, the cost of another batch of 20 Raptors being bought after the delivery of the entire 183 F-22 fleet.



                                http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/f22/

                                Cheers


                                Which, is why the US Defense Dept just want to close down Raptor Production and move on to the Lightning.........As the Raptor is just eating up the defense budget!

                                Comment

                                • swerve
                                  Rank 5 Registered User
                                  • Jun 2005
                                  • 13610

                                  #36
                                  Originally posted by Scooter View Post
                                  .... As a matter of fact there is much talk in Congress of accelerating F-35 production. Maybe even opening up another production line in the UK? ...
                                  That isn't up to the US congress. The British government won't pay for a UK production line, & BAe isn't interested (it prefers building some of every F-35 to assembling a few), so unless the US congress decides to vote the money for a new company to be set up, to buy the land, build a factory, pass a law to force Lockheed Martin to subcontract assembly of some aircraft to the new UK factory, etc . . . Somehow, I don't see it. :diablo:

                                  There might, however, be a production line set up in Italy, as some Italian politicians want it, & Alenia is happy to do it as long as it's being paid.
                                  Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
                                  Justinian

                                  Comment

                                  • Guest's Avatar
                                    Guest

                                    #37
                                    Originally posted by swerve View Post
                                    That isn't up to the US congress. The British government won't pay for a UK production line, & BAe isn't interested (it prefers building some of every F-35 to assembling a few), so unless the US congress decides to vote the money for a new company to be set up, to buy the land, build a factory, pass a law to force Lockheed Martin to subcontract assembly of some aircraft to the new UK factory, etc . . . Somehow, I don't see it. :diablo:

                                    There might, however, be a production line set up in Italy, as some Italian politicians want it, & Alenia is happy to do it as long as it's being paid.


                                    Well, I may have to go back and do a little research. As I was sure that secondary production lines were planned for both the UK and Italy if the need arosed......................Which, is looking more likely by the day! Really, I don't see anyway possible for LM in Fort Worth, TX to keep up with demand!

                                    Comment

                                    • gvg
                                      gvg
                                      Rank 5 Registered User
                                      • Feb 2008
                                      • 76

                                      #38
                                      On 30 March 2006 Italy and the Netherlands signed the "IT/NL Production & Sustainment (P&S) MoU". That became effective on 7 Februari 2007 when the Netherlands and Italy signed the PSFD MoU.
                                      On 13 June 2007 a new P&S MoU has been signed, with Norway as a new partner.
                                      At the moment the countries are looking if Turkey can be the next addition.
                                      And the MoU is designed to include other european countries.

                                      The P&S MoU is about supporting the industries of the nations that signed it. It means that the participating countries will work together to get what each nation wants:
                                      * assembly in Italy
                                      * maintenance in the Netherlands
                                      * sub-components maintenance in Norway

                                      Companies from the 3 countries have already made deals with eachother after these MoU's were signed.

                                      I guess the F-16 deal to work together on the european F-16's the (original) european owners have works well and they want to do the same thing for the F-35.
                                      Last edited by gvg; 3rd April 2008, 23:04.

                                      Comment

                                      • Guest's Avatar
                                        Guest

                                        #39
                                        Originally posted by gvg View Post
                                        On 30 March 2006 Italy and the Netherlands signed the "IT/NL Production & Sustainment (P&S) MoU". That became effective on 7 Februari 2007 when the Netherlands and Italy signed the PSFD MoU.
                                        On 13 June 2007 a new P&S MoU has been signed, with Norway as a new partner.
                                        At the moment the countries are looking if Turkey can be the next addition.
                                        And the MoU is designed to include other european countries.

                                        The P&S MoU is about supporting the industries of the nations that signed it. It means that the participating countries will work together to get what each nation wants:
                                        * assembly in Italy
                                        * maintenance in the Netherlands
                                        * sub-components maintenance in Norway

                                        Companies from the 3 countries have already made deals with eachother after these MoU's were signed.

                                        I guess the F-16 deal to work together on the european F-16's the (original) european owners have works well and they want to do the same thing for the F-35.


                                        I remember reading something along those lines just a short while ago. Well, lets hope that it continues to progress.........

                                        Comment

                                        • Curious
                                          Rank 5 Registered User
                                          • Feb 2004
                                          • 367

                                          #40
                                          Actually for the real prices/cost to the taxpayer - the interest on R&D cost has to be capitalised and then the total has to be divided over the airframes.


                                          Though in the long run, fly away marginal unit cost will also have relevance

                                          Comment

                                          Unconfigured Ad Widget

                                          Collapse

                                           

                                          Working...
                                          X