www.portierramaryaire.com

Chema escribió:KINTA, pero puede ser que la NAVY decida comprar el A400

Monday, 28 October 2019
...
Eight Belgian companies signed the agreement: Asco Industries, Coexpair, Feronyl, Sabca, Safran Aero Boosters, Sonaca, Thales Belgium et Solvay.

“This agreement aims to promote research and innovation in Belgium in the field of advanced composite materials for the aerospace industry,“ said Ilham Kadri, CEO of Solvay.

The agreement was signed as part of the so-called Belgian ‘ESI measures’ (essential security interests) related to the Belgian contract for the F-35 program.
...
In this context, Solvay will make its brand new ‘Customer Engagement Center’ available, dedicated to the development of high-performance polymers and thermoplastic composites.
...

Tercio norte escribió:http://galaxiamilitar.es/los-f-35-de-australia-lecciones-de-una-compra-problematica/

Lo bueno que tienen los Australianos es que reparten cera sin importar el fabricante..... le pegan un repasito al f35, especialmente eso de que "no sera capaz de entrar en un espacio defendido más allá de 2030"

14yellow14 escribió:

Tercio norte escribió:http://galaxiamilitar.es/los-f-35-de-australia-lecciones-de-una-compra-problematica/

Lo bueno que tienen los Australianos es que reparten cera sin importar el fabricante..... le pegan un repasito al f35, especialmente eso de que "no sera capaz de entrar en un espacio defendido más allá de 2030"

Eso lo dice la USAF no la RAAF... Los de Galaxia Militar ya que ponen artículos traducidos podrian al menos ponerlos enteros.

Tercio norte escribió:

14yellow14 escribió:

Tercio norte escribió:http://galaxiamilitar.es/los-f-35-de-australia-lecciones-de-una-compra-problematica/

Lo bueno que tienen los Australianos es que reparten cera sin importar el fabricante..... le pegan un repasito al f35, especialmente eso de que "no sera capaz de entrar en un espacio defendido más allá de 2030"

Eso lo dice la USAF no la RAAF... Los de Galaxia Militar ya que ponen artículos traducidos podrian al menos ponerlos enteros.

En el articulo, o copia y pega, ya dejan claro que lo dijo la usaf en 2017

The Air Force’s projected force structure in 2030 is not capable of fighting and winning
against this array of potential adversary capabilities. Developing and delivering air superiority
for the highly contested environment in 2030 requires a multi-domain focus on capabilities and
capacity. Importantly, the rapidly changing operational environment means the Air Force can
no longer afford to develop weapon systems on the linear acquisition and development timelines
using traditional approaches. Air superiority capability development requires adaptable,
affordable and agile processes with increasing collaboration between science & technology
(S&T), acquisition, requirements and industry professionals. Failure to adopt agile acquisition
approaches is not an option. The traditional approach guarantees adversary cycles will outpace
U.S. development, resulting in “late-to-need” delivery of critical warfighting capabilities and
technologically superior adversary forces.

champi escribió:Al parecer, la jefa de adquisiciones del Pentágono, Ellen M. Lord ha dicho en rueda de prensa que se espera bajar el coste de hora de vuelo del F-35 a $25.000 en 2025: https://twitter.com/rachelkaras/status/ ... 9532874753

Por su parte, se espera el ALIS 3.5 para septiembre de 2020.

"Timely delivery of spare #F35 parts to maintainers is at the heart of high maintenance costs. #ALIS...hard to use, especially at remote locations and by Navy personnel on large deck amphibious warships"

In its tug of war with Lockheed, Lord said the Pentagon also identified about $3,000 per flight hour that it couldn’t figure out where the cost was coming from. DOD hopes to drive down the cost of flying the F-35 from $44,000 per hour to $25,000 per hour by 2025, though others in the department think that goal may be too lofty.