<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/utility/FeedStylesheets/atom.xsl" media="screen"?><feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en"><title type="html">ELP&amp;#39;s Air Power  Blog</title><subtitle type="html">A blog about military air power: The good, the bad and the ugly.</subtitle><id>http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/blogs/elp/atom.aspx</id><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/blogs/elp/default.aspx" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/blogs/elp/atom.aspx" /><generator uri="http://communityserver.org" version="4.1.40407.4157">Community Server</generator><updated>2008-09-28T14:57:00Z</updated><entry><title>Japan's Stealth Fighter Concept (photos)</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/2008/10/13/japan-s-stealth-fighter-concept-photos.aspx" /><id>/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/2008/10/13/japan-s-stealth-fighter-concept-photos.aspx</id><published>2008-10-13T09:30:00Z</published><updated>2008-10-13T09:30:00Z</updated><content type="html">
&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_DfbUPDqtPVI/SPMTgS0s_YI/AAAAAAAAATQ/hFupfWpsZqA/s1600-h/jp1.jpg"&gt;&lt;img src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_DfbUPDqtPVI/SPMTgS0s_YI/AAAAAAAAATQ/hFupfWpsZqA/s400/jp1.jpg" style="margin:0px auto 10px;display:block;text-align:center;cursor:pointer;" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5256566635601132930" border="0" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;

&lt;a href="http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fresponse.jp%2Fissue%2F2008%2F1003%2Farticle114568_1.html&amp;amp;hl=en&amp;amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;amp;sl=ja&amp;amp;tl=en"&gt;Not a perfect translation&lt;/a&gt;, but interesting....
&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
Japan&amp;#39;s model of a concept low RCS fighter jet.
&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
Hat tip: &lt;a href="http://www.alert5.com/"&gt;Alert 5&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href="http://response.jp/issue/2008/1003/article114568_1.html"&gt;Ishida, Shinichi&lt;/a&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/aggbug.aspx?PostID=20965" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>ELP</name><uri>http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/members/ELP/default.aspx</uri></author><category term="Japan" scheme="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/tags/Japan/default.aspx" /></entry><entry><title>DOD's Nohari Window</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/2008/10/11/dod-s-nohari-window.aspx" /><id>/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/2008/10/11/dod-s-nohari-window.aspx</id><published>2008-10-10T22:20:00Z</published><updated>2008-10-10T22:20:00Z</updated><content type="html">
&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;embed src="http://www.thedailyshow.com/sitewide/video_player/view/default/swf.jhtml" flashvars="videoId=186776" mce_src="http://www.thedailyshow.com/sitewide/video_player/view/default/swf.jhtml" quality="high" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer" width="332" align="middle" height="316"&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
DOD has crashed through the &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johari_window"&gt;Nohari Window&lt;/a&gt;. What U.S. weapons system programs will survive after the economic downfall? The USAF is in extremely poor shape in the area of paying for new stuff. Other parts of the DOD aren&amp;#39;t much different even if the U.S. Navy is holding it&amp;#39;s own.  &lt;a href="http://www.easybourse.com/bourse-actualite/dassault-aviation/update-aerospace-sector-will-be-hurt-by-financial-crisis-FR0000121725-539236"&gt;The aerospace industry is wondering too&lt;/a&gt;.
&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
For a better explaination of what the future may hold, I refer to Mr. Donald Rumsfield.
&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;object width="425" height="344"&gt;&lt;param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/_RpSv3HjpEw&amp;amp;hl=en&amp;amp;fs=1"&gt;&lt;param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"&gt;&lt;embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/_RpSv3HjpEw&amp;amp;hl=en&amp;amp;fs=1" mce_src="http://www.youtube.com/v/_RpSv3HjpEw&amp;amp;hl=en&amp;amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="344"&gt;&lt;/object&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/aggbug.aspx?PostID=20939" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>ELP</name><uri>http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/members/ELP/default.aspx</uri></author><category term="U.S. Military Budget" scheme="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/tags/U.S.+Military+Budget/default.aspx" /></entry><entry><title>Bell's ARH-Preparing for the end</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/2008/10/09/bell-s-arh-preparing-for-the-end.aspx" /><id>/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/2008/10/09/bell-s-arh-preparing-for-the-end.aspx</id><published>2008-10-09T10:23:00Z</published><updated>2008-10-09T10:23:00Z</updated><content type="html">
&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/73/Bell_ARH-70-1.jpg/300px-Bell_ARH-70-1.jpg"&gt;&lt;img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/73/Bell_ARH-70-1.jpg/300px-Bell_ARH-70-1.jpg" style="margin:0px auto 10px;display:block;text-align:center;cursor:pointer;width:320px;" alt="" border="0" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
The Bell U.S. Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter project &lt;a href="http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=41154&amp;amp;dcn=e_ndw"&gt;is preparing for death row.&lt;/a&gt;

&lt;blockquote&gt;Army officials acknowledged Tuesday that they are weighing alternatives to Bell Helicopter Textron&amp;#39;s Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter in anticipation of an upcoming Defense Department decision on the troubled program. Speaking at the Association of the United States Army annual meeting, Army officials would not comment on what aircraft they consider viable alternatives to the militarized version Bell&amp;#39;s 407 single-engine light helicopter now under contract. Paul Bogosian, the Army&amp;#39;s program executive officer for aviation, said the service is &amp;quot;gathering data&amp;quot; on possible solutions the Army could consider if the program is canceled. Maj. Gen. Walter Davis, the director of Army aviation, said the internal analysis of ARH alternatives is a prudent measure in the event Pentagon acquisition chief John Young cancels the contract with Bell.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
Within the next several weeks, Young will decide whether to cancel the program or proceed with Bell&amp;#39;s aircraft, which has been plagued by cost overruns. The cost of the plane has risen more than 25 percent -- a violation of the Nunn-McCurdy law that triggers a department review of any program whose price tag exceeds that threshold. Under the law, the Pentagon must terminate any program whose costs grow by more than 25 percent unless the Defense secretary can certify the program is suitable to national security, that no lower-cost alternative exists, that new estimates of total program costs are reasonable and program managers can control costs.
&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;It&amp;#39;s out of our hands,&amp;quot; said Maj. Gen. James Barclay, the head of the Army&amp;#39;s aviation branch. &amp;quot;OSD [office of the secretary of Defense] is working that.&amp;quot; &lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/aggbug.aspx?PostID=20870" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>ELP</name><uri>http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/members/ELP/default.aspx</uri></author><category term="U.S. Army" scheme="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/tags/U.S.+Army/default.aspx" /></entry><entry><title>South Korean Air-to-Ground Weapons Video</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/2008/10/06/south-korean-air-to-ground-weapons-video.aspx" /><id>/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/2008/10/06/south-korean-air-to-ground-weapons-video.aspx</id><published>2008-10-06T07:47:00Z</published><updated>2008-10-06T07:47:00Z</updated><content type="html">&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
Here is a good video of South Korean live fire training showing SLAM-ER, AGM-142, JDAM, and GBU-24.

&lt;object width="425" height="344"&gt;&lt;param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/FkrAMu1PcnY&amp;amp;hl=en&amp;amp;fs=1"&gt;&lt;param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"&gt;&lt;embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/FkrAMu1PcnY&amp;amp;hl=en&amp;amp;fs=1" mce_src="http://www.youtube.com/v/FkrAMu1PcnY&amp;amp;hl=en&amp;amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="344"&gt;&lt;/object&gt;

&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/aggbug.aspx?PostID=20708" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>ELP</name><uri>http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/members/ELP/default.aspx</uri></author><category term="South Korea" scheme="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/tags/South+Korea/default.aspx" /></entry><entry><title>Fake Chinese Chips In U.S. Weapons Systems</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/2008/10/04/fake-chinese-chips-in-u-s-weapons-systems.aspx" /><id>/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/2008/10/04/fake-chinese-chips-in-u-s-weapons-systems.aspx</id><published>2008-10-03T23:16:00Z</published><updated>2008-10-03T23:16:00Z</updated><content type="html">
&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_DfbUPDqtPVI/SOamO9nRH0I/AAAAAAAAAS4/qOc01RVaEjA/s1600-h/knockoffchip.jpg"&gt;&lt;img src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_DfbUPDqtPVI/SOamO9nRH0I/AAAAAAAAAS4/qOc01RVaEjA/s400/knockoffchip.jpg" style="margin:0px auto 10px;display:block;text-align:center;cursor:pointer;" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5253068791361904450" border="0" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;blockquote&gt;&amp;quot;I am very frustrated with the leadership&amp;#39;s inability to react to this issue.&amp;quot;&lt;/blockquote&gt;There are several U.S. weapons systems that have been corrupted by counterfeit computer chips. How? Read the following article in&lt;span style="font-style:italic;"&gt; Business Week&lt;/span&gt;,  &lt;a href="http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/08_41/b4103034193886.htm?chan=magazine+channel_top+stories&amp;amp;chan=technology_technology+index+page_top+stories"&gt;Dangerous Fakes&lt;/a&gt; - &lt;span style="font-style:italic;"&gt;How counterfeit, defective computer components from China are getting into U.S. warplanes and ships. &lt;/span&gt;
&lt;blockquote&gt;Retired four-star General William G.T. Tuttle Jr., former chief of the Army Materiel Command and now a defense industry consultant, agrees: &amp;quot;What we have is a pollution of the military supply chain.&amp;quot; &lt;/blockquote&gt;

Confidence in the supply chain isn&amp;#39;t inspiring after reading parts of the story like this:
&lt;blockquote&gt;
Mariya Hakimuddin owns IT Enterprise, a company she runs with her mother out of a modest one-story house in Bakersfield, Calif. Rosebushes line the street, and a basketball hoop hangs in the driveway. Hakimuddin, who is in her 40s, says she has no college education. She began brokering military chips four years ago, after friends told her about the expanding trade. Since 2004 she has won Pentagon contracts worth a total of $2.7 million, records show. The military has acquired microchips and other parts from IT Enterprise for use in radar on the aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan and the antisubmarine combat system of Spruance-class destroyers.

&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;Hakimuddin says she knows little about the parts she has bought and sold. She started her business by signing up on the Internet for a government supplier code. After the Defense Dept. approved her application, with no inspection, she began scanning online military procurement requests. She plugged part codes into Google (GOOG) and found Web sites offering low prices. Then she ordered parts and had them shipped directly to military depots. &amp;quot;I wouldn&amp;#39;t know what [the parts] were before I&amp;#39;d order them,&amp;quot; she says, standing near her front door. &amp;quot;I didn&amp;#39;t even know what the parts were for.&amp;quot; &lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/aggbug.aspx?PostID=20676" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>ELP</name><uri>http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/members/ELP/default.aspx</uri></author><category term="Avionics" scheme="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/tags/Avionics/default.aspx" /><category term="MRO" scheme="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/tags/MRO/default.aspx" /><category term="Industry Problem" scheme="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/tags/Industry+Problem/default.aspx" /><category term="Supply Chain Problem" scheme="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/tags/Supply+Chain+Problem/default.aspx" /></entry><entry><title>Israeli F-35 Briefing Slides and the M.E. Question</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/2008/10/03/israeli-f-35-briefing-slides-and-the-m-e-question.aspx" /><id>/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/2008/10/03/israeli-f-35-briefing-slides-and-the-m-e-question.aspx</id><published>2008-10-03T12:15:00Z</published><updated>2008-10-03T12:15:00Z</updated><content type="html">&lt;p&gt;Here are some F-35 briefing slides from last year that were used to amaze Israeli journos. Undoubtedly, some or all of these slides (except the last one) were used to show decision makers at all levels of the Israeli F-35 deal.

&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;What is interesting is the last slide from another F-35 brief that was in 2007 which had nothing to do with Israel. I mean literally. Think of it. The last slide shows all the potential F-35 customers worldwide for the life of the program, and the most important one, Israel,&amp;nbsp; is left out. Imagine that.  So when will Saudi Arabia, UAE, Jordan, Bahrain, Kuwait and Egypt get theirs?

&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee54/warpigelp/FlightGlobalBlog/idff351.jpg"&gt;&lt;img src="http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee54/warpigelp/FlightGlobalBlog/idff351.jpg" style="margin:0px auto 10px;display:block;text-align:center;cursor:pointer;width:400px;" alt="" border="0" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;a href="http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee54/warpigelp/FlightGlobalBlog/idff352.jpg"&gt;&lt;img src="http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee54/warpigelp/FlightGlobalBlog/idff352.jpg" style="margin:0px auto 10px;display:block;text-align:center;cursor:pointer;width:400px;" alt="" border="0" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;a href="http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee54/warpigelp/FlightGlobalBlog/idff353.jpg"&gt;&lt;img src="http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee54/warpigelp/FlightGlobalBlog/idff353.jpg" style="margin:0px auto 10px;display:block;text-align:center;cursor:pointer;width:400px;" alt="" border="0" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;a href="http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee54/warpigelp/FlightGlobalBlog/idff354.jpg"&gt;&lt;img src="http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee54/warpigelp/FlightGlobalBlog/idff354.jpg" style="margin:0px auto 10px;display:block;text-align:center;cursor:pointer;width:400px;" alt="" border="0" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;a href="http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee54/warpigelp/FlightGlobalBlog/idff355.jpg"&gt;&lt;img src="http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee54/warpigelp/FlightGlobalBlog/idff355.jpg" style="margin:0px auto 10px;display:block;text-align:center;cursor:pointer;width:400px;" alt="" border="0" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/aggbug.aspx?PostID=20659" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>ELP</name><uri>http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/members/ELP/default.aspx</uri></author><category term="F-35" scheme="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/tags/F-35/default.aspx" /><category term="Arms Sales" scheme="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/tags/Arms+Sales/default.aspx" /></entry><entry><title>The Sale That Isn't</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/2008/10/01/the-sale-that-isn-t.aspx" /><id>/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/2008/10/01/the-sale-that-isn-t.aspx</id><published>2008-10-01T11:03:00Z</published><updated>2008-10-01T11:03:00Z</updated><content type="html">&lt;a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_DfbUPDqtPVI/SONTz-F0KzI/AAAAAAAAASw/Japk9UJyJPs/s1600-h/idflogo.jpg"&gt;&lt;img src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_DfbUPDqtPVI/SONTz-F0KzI/AAAAAAAAASw/Japk9UJyJPs/s400/idflogo.jpg" style="margin:0px auto 10px;display:block;text-align:center;cursor:pointer;" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5252133742749952818" border="0" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;

&lt;div style="text-align:center;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-weight:bold;"&gt;The Sale That Isn&amp;#39;t&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:center;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:center;"&gt;
&lt;span style="font-style:italic;"&gt;How money laundering of U.S. taxpayer funds return back to help a troubled aircraft program.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style="text-align:center;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;
The &lt;a href="http://www.ausairpower.net/jsf.html"&gt;F-35&lt;/a&gt; program needs cash. Major JSF partner nations aren&amp;#39;t buying yet and expenses are getting high. Failure to manage and estimate development costs  and other factors outside the control of the program: Such as a falling U.S. dollar and the rising cost of manpower and material are having a negative effect. So where does Lockmart/Pentagon  search for an infusion of cash to help push it along? Israel.

&lt;a href="http://www.star-telegram.com/metro_news/story/944169.html"&gt;This article&lt;/a&gt; in the &lt;span style="font-style:italic;"&gt;Fort Worth Star Telegram&lt;/span&gt; points it out in very simple language:

&lt;span style="font-style:italic;"&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;span style="font-style:italic;"&gt;-Although Israel is placing the order, Darling said U.S. taxpayers will pick up most of the tab through annual foreign-aid grants targeted specifically to purchases of U.S. weapons systems. U.S. arms aid financing for Israel totaled $2.4 billion in 2008 and will rise to $3.1 billion annually from 2012 through 2018.-&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;
Jackpot. And the stressed out U.S. taxpayer who is already carrying a heavy burden for a seriously in-debt U.S. Federal Government is picking up&amp;nbsp; a large portion of the tab.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
It will be interesting to see what the F-35 in &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_Defense_Forces"&gt;IDF&lt;/a&gt; service will look like. It will need an extreme  overhaul in design to meet the IDF requirements for indigenous weapons, indigenous avionics, indigenous everything.  How will Team JSF countries respond when an IDF F-35 gets certified for tactical nuke stores?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;

It is doubtful that the F-35s are to be used against Iran. Why? While it is a convenient justification, with the U.S. happy to sell arms like JDAMs and advanced air-to-air missiles to Saudi Arabia and other Middle East locales,   the IDF has to keep a full menu of O-Plans in the safe ready to drag out for any number of contingencies. It is the modern air forces with Typhoons, F-15&amp;#39;s, F-16s and cheap all-weather sub 4 meter PGMs that Israel has to game for.

&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Going against Iran while challenging, can be  done just as well with existing strike aircraft  and weapons like &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spice_%28munition%29"&gt;Spice&lt;/a&gt;. It will be a very long time before Iran gets &lt;a href="http://geimint.blogspot.com/2008/03/iran-and-s-300pt.html"&gt;their air defense act together&lt;/a&gt;. This means that the IDF can manage Iranian defenses for some time to come. The Iran issue might be resolved for better or worse by the time an F-35 in Israeli colors reaches IOC.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;

So if Congress approves the  deal and the F-35 program doesn&amp;#39;t encounter serious problems in testing, $15 plus billion spread out over a few years will help keep the program healthy and maybe even cover for any quitters in Team JSF that balk at procurement of the jet for any number of reasons.

&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e3/Spice1.jpg/215px-Spice1.jpg"&gt;&lt;img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e3/Spice1.jpg/215px-Spice1.jpg" style="margin:0px auto 10px;display:block;text-align:center;cursor:pointer;width:331px;height:690px;" alt="" border="0" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/aggbug.aspx?PostID=20561" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>ELP</name><uri>http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/members/ELP/default.aspx</uri></author><category term="F-35" scheme="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/tags/F-35/default.aspx" /></entry><entry><title>USAF under-reported C-130J Cost?</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/2008/10/01/usaf-under-reported-c-130j-cost.aspx" /><id>/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/2008/10/01/usaf-under-reported-c-130j-cost.aspx</id><published>2008-09-30T21:57:00Z</published><updated>2008-09-30T21:57:00Z</updated><content type="html">
&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;img src="http://capitalpr.ca/wp-content/uploads/2007/02/C_2D130J.jpg" title="C-130J" alt="C-130J" width="472" border="1" height="260" /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I saw the early adoption of the C-130J. While a good plane now, it was a disaster the way that it got into service. Real slight of hand stuff. Create a commercial variant (snort guffaw ) so LM can sell it to the DOD as COTS (commercial off the shelf) and well since it wasn&amp;#39;t milspec there was a lot of work to fix them to make them mil friendly. As the Brits said when they got theirs... &lt;i&gt;&amp;quot;It kinda looks like a C-130 but that&amp;#39;s it&amp;quot;&lt;/i&gt;. Which means a lot of the support equipment and maintenance/sustainment processes in place for legacy Herks, won&amp;#39;t do. A very big sad story best for another time. So no surprise here when Stephen Trimble From &lt;i&gt;Flight International&lt;/i&gt; has this &lt;/p&gt;&lt;h1 id="page-title" class="asset-name entry-title"&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2008/09/congress-usaf-underreported-c1.html" title="Flight Global/International"&gt;Congress: USAF under-reported C-130J costs&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/h1&gt;&lt;p&gt;:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;blockquote&gt;Six months later, Abercrombie&amp;#39;s hunch proved right on the mark. The defense appropriations conference report approved by the House last week explains that the twin-engined C-27J costs much less than a four-engined C-130J after all. Here&amp;#39;s the language:
    &amp;quot;The report (H. Rept. 110-652) accompanying the House bill noted that, at the time of the report, the Air Force was reporting a unit cost for JCA of $60.7 million, and was reporting a unit cost for C-130J aircraft of $56.7 million.
    After further discussion with the Air Force acquisition officials and clarification of terminology, we believe that a fairer, apples-to-apples comparison of such costs would raise the comparable average procurement unit cost for a C-130J to $84.2 million, in terms of fiscal year 2007 dollars.&amp;quot;&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/aggbug.aspx?PostID=20550" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>ELP</name><uri>http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/members/ELP/default.aspx</uri></author><category term="C-130J" scheme="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/tags/C-130J/default.aspx" /></entry><entry><title>Nov. Osprey Fire Caused by Hydraulic Failure</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/2008/09/30/nov-osprey-fire-caused-by-hydraulic-failure.aspx" /><id>/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/2008/09/30/nov-osprey-fire-caused-by-hydraulic-failure.aspx</id><published>2008-09-30T11:06:00Z</published><updated>2008-09-30T11:06:00Z</updated><content type="html">&lt;a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_DfbUPDqtPVI/SOIHPAz0cII/AAAAAAAAASo/Ikwtq0xFaB4/s1600-h/ospreyfire.jpg"&gt;&lt;img src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_DfbUPDqtPVI/SOIHPAz0cII/AAAAAAAAASo/Ikwtq0xFaB4/s400/ospreyfire.jpg" style="margin:0px auto 10px;display:block;text-align:center;cursor:pointer;" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5251768069964198018" border="0" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
Christian over at &lt;span style="font-weight:bold;font-style:italic;"&gt;DefenseTech&lt;/span&gt; has a great story about that mishap last November... - Ouch -

&lt;blockquote&gt;I&amp;#39;ve gotten my hands on an investigation report into the fire that nearly destroyed an MV-22 back in November during an NVG training flight near New River, N.C.

Turns out, the fire sparked after the #3 hydraulic system ruptured due to pressure spikes from the engine air particle separator which filters inlet air before it is ingested by the engine. The hydraulic fluid spilled all over the IR suppression system, igniting the left nacelle into a ball of flame. The pilots and crew landed safely but the nacelle was a melted, twisted hulk. It caused $16 million in damages.&lt;/blockquote&gt;
Full Story... &lt;a href="http://www.defensetech.org/archives/004443.html"&gt;Developing: Hydraulic Failure Caused Nov. Osprey Fire&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/aggbug.aspx?PostID=20524" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>ELP</name><uri>http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/members/ELP/default.aspx</uri></author><category term="Osprey" scheme="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/tags/Osprey/default.aspx" /></entry><entry><title>Flanker Development Forks</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/2008/09/30/flanker-development-forks.aspx" /><id>/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/2008/09/30/flanker-development-forks.aspx</id><published>2008-09-30T09:09:00Z</published><updated>2008-09-30T09:09:00Z</updated><content type="html">&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee54/warpigelp/FlightGlobalBlog/J-11B-Flanker-B-PLAAF-1SWinCE.jpg" title="Chinese J-11B Flanker fighter aircraft" alt="Chinese J-11B Flanker fighter aircraft" width="276" align="left" border="1" height="186" hspace="10" /&gt;So what will the Pacific air power threats look like in the coming years? One answer is that the Flanker &lt;a href="http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-SinoFlanker.html" title="Shenyang J-11B " target="_blank"&gt;has taken a fork in it&amp;#39;s development&lt;/a&gt; with the Chinese adding some home equipment for their J-11B. What has started as a knock-off is moving forward based on a domestic manufacturing development spiral. No matter what one thinks of the Flanker, it does have growth room. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The F-22 can&amp;#39;t be everywhere. Which means that in the coming
years, if the U.S. goes on the warpath, it might find some areas a bit
more contested. With words&lt;a href="http://thehill.com/business--lobby/army-secretary-fears-crisis-will-hit-armys-funding-2008-09-29.html" title="Army secretary fears crisis will hit Army’s funding" target="_blank"&gt; like this&lt;/a&gt;
from the U.S. Army it is only a matter of time before the financial
problems of an in-debt U.S. takes it&amp;#39;s toll on U.S. defense procurement
and U.S. recapitalization of modern aircraft.&amp;nbsp; U.S. defense procurement &lt;a href="http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=41063&amp;amp;dcn=e_gvet" title="Pentagon cost overruns defy easy solutions" target="_blank"&gt;has a tradition&lt;/a&gt; of cost over-runs that may have gotten it though the cold war, but will now be faced by an ever less tolerant U.S. Congress trying to pay all the bills. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;With the realities facing the U.S. Air Force, funding everything to do today&amp;#39;s mission isn&amp;#39;t just about fighter aircraft. Not by a long shot. It is now safe to say that&amp;nbsp; over the next 20 years&amp;nbsp; the U.S. Air Force will shrink. There won&amp;#39;t be anything close to the current numbers of U.S. fighter aircraft. The air domination monopoly enjoyed by the U.S. for a very long time may struggle in a future war. Add to this, that the path taken by the U.S. Navy&amp;#39;s future composition of shooter aircraft is not written. Fortunately the U.S Navy, ship building troubles and all, has an &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Hornet" title="F/A-18E/F Super Hornet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia" target="_blank"&gt;inexpensive solution&lt;/a&gt; to put at least something on the deck with a new car smell should other options run into trouble. The U.S. will need a serious rethink on military force composition if they want to be effective in future Pacific Rim security operations. Where will the money come from?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/aggbug.aspx?PostID=20521" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>ELP</name><uri>http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/members/ELP/default.aspx</uri></author><category term="Pacific" scheme="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/tags/Pacific/default.aspx" /><category term="Flanker" scheme="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/tags/Flanker/default.aspx" /></entry><entry><title>Talk of UK F-35 Pull-Out is no Surprise</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/2008/09/29/talk-of-uk-f-35-pull-out-is-no-surprise.aspx" /><id>/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/2008/09/29/talk-of-uk-f-35-pull-out-is-no-surprise.aspx</id><published>2008-09-29T08:50:00Z</published><updated>2008-09-29T08:50:00Z</updated><content type="html">&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;img src="http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee54/warpigelp/FlightGlobalBlog/CVF.jpg" title="UK future aircraft carrier" alt="UK future aircraft carrier" width="400" height="281" /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The Times Online is reporting that the Ministry of Defence and Parliament&amp;nbsp; are up to no good again: Cutting the UK military to the bone. Is that being fair? Yes and no. Yes the MOD and Parliament have shown a trend of cutting the military for a very long time. What is stressing the budget out? Paying for the war. &lt;a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article4837746.ece" title="Britain considers £9bn JSF project pullout" target="_blank"&gt;And it is possible that the UK military may never see an F-35. &lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;All of the forces have been pushed to the extreme. The RAF is putting an unusual amount of flying hours on their aircraft: Both shooters and support. For example Tornados and Herks are burning up flying hours at an alarming rate. There is no end in sight to the consumption of airframe life. Running a war on a military that was already pretty thin has taken it&amp;#39;s toll in other areas too. The Navy and Army have been thinned out to the breaking point. While there are many dedicated servicepeople, the UK military is a shell of what it once was and the situation is getting worse. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Will the UK order F-35B STOVL aircraft? It could go either way. The UK MOD and Parliament are at a fork in the road. Even if the F-35 program goes near perfect and Lockheed Martin gets good news from their suppliers and can offer all JSF Team Partners &lt;a href="http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=46f98e51-019a-45c0-8652-34b609d83f78" title="Fighter manufacturer offers deal if Canada commits to purchase" target="_blank"&gt;an extra good price&lt;/a&gt;, it might already be too late. No&amp;nbsp; matter what price is offered, Humpty Dumpty can&amp;#39;t be put back together again. UK budget planning may well have already gone into the abyss. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Making a naval variant of the Typhoon and converting the planned new RN carriers for catapult and hook landing ops won&amp;#39;t be cheap either. It is unknown what the effect will be on the F-35 program if the UK MOD doesn&amp;#39;t buy. What is guarenteed though is that the MOD and Parliament will keep right on cutting. The war effort is now a bleeding ucler for budget planners. UK military financial problems will get worse before they get better. &amp;nbsp; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/aggbug.aspx?PostID=20476" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>ELP</name><uri>http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/members/ELP/default.aspx</uri></author><category term="F-35" scheme="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/tags/F-35/default.aspx" /><category term="UK" scheme="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/tags/UK/default.aspx" /></entry><entry><title>Possible AIM-9X, Link-16, Radar Upgrades for Saudi Arabia</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/2008/09/28/possible-aim-9x-link-16-radar-upgrades-for-saudi-arabia.aspx" /><id>/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/2008/09/28/possible-aim-9x-link-16-radar-upgrades-for-saudi-arabia.aspx</id><published>2008-09-28T05:10:00Z</published><updated>2008-09-28T05:10:00Z</updated><content type="html">&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src="http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee54/warpigelp/FlightGlobalBlog/aim-9x.jpg" title="AIM-9X air to air missile" alt="AIM-9X air to air missile" width="350" height="184" /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The U.S. Defense Department has notified the U.S. Congress of the possibility of more mil hardware sales to Saudi Arabia.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link_16" title="Link-16 network gear" target="_blank"&gt;Link-16&lt;/a&gt; for &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurofighter_Typhoon" title="EF-2000 Eurofighter Typhoon Fighter Jet" target="_blank"&gt;Saudi Arabia&amp;#39;s Typhoons&lt;/a&gt;. (PDF &lt;a href="http://www.dsca.mil/PressReleases/36-b/2008/Saudi_Arabia_08-101.pdf" title="DSCA Notification PDF file of Link 16 for Saudi Arabian Eurofighter"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;) &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;blockquote&gt;The Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of a possible Foreign Military Sale to Saudi Arabia of Multifunctional Information Distribution System/Low Volume Terminals as well as associated equipment and services. The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as $31 million.
The Government of Saudi Arabia has requested a possible sale of 80 Link 16 Multifunctional Information Distribution System/Low Volume Terminals (MIDS/LVT-1) to be installed on United Kingdom Eurofighter Typhoon aircraft, data transfer devices, installation, testing, spare and repair parts, support equipment, personnel training, training equipment, contractor engineering and technical support, and other related elements of program support. The estimated cost is $31 million.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIM-9_Sidewinder#AIM-9X:_The_next_generation_Sidewinder" title="AIM-9X air to air missile" target="_blank"&gt;AIM-9X&lt;/a&gt; for Saudi Air Force. The jet that will hang these is not mentioned (F-15?) (PDF &lt;a href="http://www.dsca.mil/PressReleases/36-b/2008/Saudi_Arabia_08-88.pdf" title="DSCA notification of possible sale of AIM-9X to Saudi Arabia" target="_blank"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;blockquote&gt;The Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of a possible Foreign Military Sale to Saudi Arabia of AIM-9X SIDEWINDER missiles as well as associated equipment and services. The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as $164 million.
The Government of Saudi Arabia has requested a possible sale of 250 All-Up-Round AIM-9X SIDEWINDER Missiles, 84 AIM-9X SIDEWINDER Captive Air Training Missiles (CATMs), 12 AIM-9X SIDEWINDER Dummy Air Training Missiles (DATMs), missile containers, missile modifications, test sets and support equipment, spare and repair parts, publications and technical data, maintenance, personnel training and training equipment, contractor engineering and technical support services, and other related elements of logistics support. The estimated cost is $164 million.
This proposed sale will contribute to the foreign policy and national security of the United States by helping to improve the security of a friendly country that has been and continues to be an important force for political stability and economic progress in the Middle East.
The sale of the AIM-9X SIDEWINDER missile system will significantly enhance the Royal Saudi Arabia Air Force&amp;#39;s current air-to-air intercept capability. Saudi Arabia will have no difficulty absorbing these additional missiles into its armed forces.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

&lt;p&gt;And finally, upgrades for Saudia Arabia&amp;#39;s &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/FPS-117" title="AN/FPS-117 Early Warning Radar" target="_blank"&gt;AN/FPS-117&lt;/a&gt; early warning radars. (PDF &lt;a href="http://www.dsca.mil/PressReleases/36-b/2008/Saudi_Arabia_08-90.pdf" title="DSCA notification of possible sale of upgrade equipment for AN/FPS-117 radars that belong to Saudi Arabia" target="_blank"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;) &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;blockquote&gt;The Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of a possible Foreign Military Sale to Saudi Arabia of AN/FPS-117 Long Range Radar Upgrade as well as associated equipment and services. The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as $145 million.
The Government of Saudi Arabia has requested a possible equipment upgrade of 17 AN/FPS-117 radars, which includes installation and checkout, engineering, calibration, reintegration, testing, support equipment, spare and repair parts, personnel training, publications and technical data, U.S. Government and contractor technical assistance and other related elements of logistics support. The estimated cost is $145 million.
This proposed sale will contribute to the foreign policy and national security of the United States by helping to improve the security of a friendly country that has been and continues to be an important force for political stability and economic progress in the Middle East.
The proposed upgrade of this radar will extend the operational life of the existing radars and will lower operation and maintenance requirements and lower cost by reducing the number of line replaceable units.&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/aggbug.aspx?PostID=20433" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>ELP</name><uri>http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/members/ELP/default.aspx</uri></author><category term="Arms Sales" scheme="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/tags/Arms+Sales/default.aspx" /></entry><entry><title>Meet DAS</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/2008/09/28/meet-das.aspx" /><id>/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/2008/09/28/meet-das.aspx</id><published>2008-09-28T04:13:00Z</published><updated>2008-09-28T04:13:00Z</updated><content type="html">&lt;p&gt;Cool NG video on the DAS that will be on the F-35. There are some serious holes in the video, but hey it&amp;#39;s the seller hyping their stuff. Fun to watch.&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;object width="425" height="344"&gt;&lt;param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/PxOu8RzmGjQ&amp;amp;hl=en&amp;amp;fs=1"&gt;&lt;param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"&gt;&lt;embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/PxOu8RzmGjQ&amp;amp;hl=en&amp;amp;fs=1" mce_src="http://www.youtube.com/v/PxOu8RzmGjQ&amp;amp;hl=en&amp;amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="344"&gt;&lt;/object&gt; &lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/aggbug.aspx?PostID=20432" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>ELP</name><uri>http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/members/ELP/default.aspx</uri></author><category term="F-35" scheme="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/tags/F-35/default.aspx" /></entry><entry><title>C-17 For Europe Moves Ahead</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/2008/09/28/c-17-for-europe-moves-ahead.aspx" /><id>/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/2008/09/28/c-17-for-europe-moves-ahead.aspx</id><published>2008-09-28T04:04:00Z</published><updated>2008-09-28T04:04:00Z</updated><content type="html">&lt;a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_DfbUPDqtPVI/SN6yDGJmaAI/AAAAAAAAASg/Sk09x6F3nqc/s1600-h/c17usaf.JPG"&gt;&lt;img src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_DfbUPDqtPVI/SN6yDGJmaAI/AAAAAAAAASg/Sk09x6F3nqc/s400/c17usaf.JPG" style="margin:0px auto 10px;display:block;text-align:center;cursor:pointer;" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5250829981820807170" border="0" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;Via Robert Wall and Douglas Barrie of &lt;span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style:italic;"&gt;Aviation Week&lt;/span&gt;, &lt;a href="http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&amp;amp;id=news/C1709268.xml&amp;amp;headline=NATO%20Completes%20C-17%20Agreement"&gt;NATO will go ahead with an agreement&lt;/a&gt; to get &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C-17_Globemaster_III"&gt;C-17s&lt;/a&gt;. NATO will base the aircraft at Papa air base in Hungary.

&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style:italic;"&gt;-The 12 participants so far are: Bulgaria, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Romania, Slovenia, Sweden, and the United States. The Czech Republic is still debating the issue, but chances are seen as slim they will commit. Italy has asked for an extension to sign-up until December.-&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;
Since a C-17 can&amp;#39;t do the big cargo of a &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C-5_Galaxy"&gt;C-5&lt;/a&gt; or an &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An-124"&gt;AN-124&lt;/a&gt;, this agreement won&amp;#39;t take AN-124 rental lift completely  out of the picture.  Of course Sweden and Finland aren&amp;#39;t in NATO. &lt;div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/aggbug.aspx?PostID=20431" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>ELP</name><uri>http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/members/ELP/default.aspx</uri></author><category term="C-17" scheme="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/tags/C-17/default.aspx" /></entry><entry><title>JASSM Survivability, JASSM Cost</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/2008/09/28/jassm-survivability-jassm-cost.aspx" /><id>/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/2008/09/28/jassm-survivability-jassm-cost.aspx</id><published>2008-09-28T03:57:00Z</published><updated>2008-09-28T03:57:00Z</updated><content type="html">&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/3e/Jassm6.jpg/275px-Jassm6.jpg" alt="" /&gt; &lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Around 87% now in scripted range events for the &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-158_JASSM" target="_blank"&gt;JASSM&lt;/a&gt;. Sounds good. But now with the supposed fix of failures from 2007, the JASSM won&amp;#39;t be all that affordable. It was supposed to be around $400-500,000 per missile however paying for the fixes and delays means that cost will increase quite a bit. Then too how many targets are worth that kind of a war shot? Also, what is the shelf life?&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Survivability: Big question. JASSM is supposed to have some stealthy quality to it. The downside of that is that the U.S. can only export minimal stealth technology. When you start looking at other survivability issues it starts to get a bit worrisome. &lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;The missile doesn&amp;#39;t do terrain following like the &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomahawk_cruise_missile" target="_blank"&gt;Tomahawk&lt;/a&gt; cruise missile. It was never a requirement. Something slow and subsonic has to be terrain following in order to take maximum advantage of the radar horizon or these days, the sensor horizon. With infra-red detection and tracking anti-aircraft systems gaining, minimal stealth, not much speed (Mach 0.7) and no terrain following, JASSM might be good vs.  3rd stringers but like aircraft, it will need lots of support from off-board jamming and maybe even fighter escort. &lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Currently there is work being funded by Australia to give it anti-ship ability. With the above mentioned qualities and price, Harpoon and SLAM-ER are a much better value. If you are into government/industry&amp;nbsp; buzz-words like &amp;quot;low risk&amp;quot;, Harpoon and SLAM-ER, especially the latter with proven networking come out on top for a variety of targets that don&amp;#39;t need a gold-plated war shot. Harpoon and SLAM-ER are not cheap, but they carry a lot more value in the long run. Consider that weapons certification for SLAM-ER should show up on the Super Hornet this year for the U.S. Navy. Australia can reap more value from that when their first Super Hornet squadron stands up in the near future. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/aggbug.aspx?PostID=20430" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>ELP</name><uri>http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/members/ELP/default.aspx</uri></author><category term="JASSM" scheme="http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/blogs/elp/archive/tags/JASSM/default.aspx" /></entry></feed>
