In article , eponymous cowherd
wrote:

In article C22ih.954$Eo.367@trnddc08,
"Ski" wrote:

f the JSF did not cost three times an F-16 or twice a F-15E then you might
say lets press with the F-35 and let the maturity build up fix all
this, but
with the F-35 is dragging dozens of billions of dollars in investment that
goes into its employment - money i think we can not afford now.

Where are you getting these numbers? The -35 will likely cost less than
either
the -16 or the -15.

Anti-military types in the press and government like to quote the costs
of the
-16 and the -15 based on the last time the USA bought one. The price
keeps going
up since then. I think the last time the USA bought a -15 the cost was $50
million each, when Korea bought them in 01 the cost was $81 million each. A
quick googling shows that the -16s bought by the UAE will cost an
estimated $80
million each. If you use the cost of recent purchases of the -16 and the
-15 you
will see that the -35 will be competitive on cost alone. Since the -15
has two
engines the chances of it being cheaper than any single engine plane are
extremely low.

Don;t disagree in principle, but your comparison is inapt.
UAE bought Block 60s which are much more expensive than the
Block 50s that USAF buys.
Cost comparisons are bogus when just looking at airframe costs
without regard to capability. Any jet with an AESA is far more capable
than one without, but an AESA initial purchase price is higher than
older mechanically scanned radars. You get far more capability
but at higher cost.
System capability must be factored in.

--
Harry Andreas
Engineering raconteur