Thread replies: 40
Thread images: 15
Thread images: 15
Anonymous
F-35: DoD Forces Lockheed To Accept Its Price For LRIP 9 2016-11-03 01:14:34 Post No. 31884430
[Report] Image search: [Google]
F-35: DoD Forces Lockheed To Accept Its Price For LRIP 9 2016-11-03 01:14:34 Post No. 31884430
[Report] Image search: [Google]
File: F-35-assembly-line-1024x681.jpg (257KB, 1024x681px) Image search:
[Google]
257KB, 1024x681px
F-35: DoD Forces Lockheed To Accept Its Price For LRIP 9
Anonymous
2016-11-03 01:14:34
Post No. 31884430
[Report]
>In simple terms, the Pentagon got sick and tired of talking with Lockheed and told them, here’s how much we’re willing to pay you. Take it or leave it. All terms had been agreed to by both sides except one — the price. This may well be the largest unilateral contract ever issued by the United States government. That’s what I’ve heard from two well informed sources, but we don’t have anything definitive yet.
>“The definitized contract for LRIP 9 announced today was not a mutually agreed upon contract, it was a unilateral contract action, which obligates us to perform under standard terms and conditions, and previously agreed-to items,” Lockheed’s F-35 spokesman Mike Rein said in an emailed statement. “We are disappointed with the decision by the Government to issue a unilateral contract action on the F-35 LRIP 9 contract.”
>Lt. Gen Chris Bogdan, head had indicated some frustration with the slow pace of contract discussions but also said he thought they’d have a deal by the end of the year at the Air Force association’s annual conference in September.
>DellaVedova said the latest contract equated to a 3.7% average reduction in price from LRIP 8 in December 2014.
http://breakingdefense.com/2016/11/jpo-to-lockheed-no-more-talkie-heres-lrip-9-deal/
>>
Lockmart on suicide watch.
>>
So approximately $91.5 million for an F-35A? Lockheed should be happy with that unless they've got absolutely horrific overhead with their subcontractors.
>>
File: f-35-cartoon.jpg (226KB, 610x448px) Image search:
[Google]
226KB, 610x448px
>>31884430
Can we cancel this fucking thing? Accept that stealth is a sham and multirole is retarded?
>>
>>31884576
>Can we cancel this fucking thing? Accept that stealth is a sham and multirole is retarded?
It isn't a sham, it isn't retarded until you go full retard (you pay for it during development), and we shouldn't cancel; it's basically done. Lockheed was playing hard ball with their margins, but I guess the Pentagon is playing harder.
>>
>>31884535
According to a different article, the price difference between what Lockheed wanted and what they got wasn't actually very large. It seems more like the Pentagon is making them pay for parts of development they don't think they should be responsible for.
http://www.defensenews.com/articles/pentagon-moves-forward-unilaterally-on-61b-contract-for-ninth-f-35-lot
>Like DellaVedova, the source suggested that Lockheed believed that the government's contract position did not adequately address a realistic cost per plane or a fee that recognized Lockheed's investments and the requirements for meeting the delivery schedule.
>“While the cost difference was small, the issues were fundamental," he said.
>>
File: JSF-Issues+Problems-2011-Master.png (697KB, 1024x853px) Image search:
[Google]
697KB, 1024x853px
IMO everyone needs to see this video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxDSiwqM2nw
>>
>>31884622
Thanks for the heads up, Anon :)
I can't say I'm too sympathetic to their case after how much they screwed the taxpayer with their ineptitude and mismanagement before Bogden took charge. Bids should be realistic.
>>
>>31884658
Holy shit is there any information in that December 2011 infographic that isn't eight to thirteen years out of date now?
>>
>>31884658
so who paid this clown to have these opinions
>>
File: guesswho.gif (10KB, 600x694px) Image search:
[Google]
10KB, 600x694px
>>31884793
>>31884676
Good little goy! 3 shekels have been deposited into your LockShill credit union account.
>>
TOO many Jews shilling in this thread.
Abandon thread.
>>
File: 1430923975651.jpg (32KB, 408x632px) Image search:
[Google]
32KB, 408x632px
What does not benefit Israel; must be subverted.
Thus we have these posters in this thread.
>>
>>31884849
The infographic is citing information from 2002, 2003, 2004... hell, there's only two pieces of information from later than that (circa 2008 - six years ago), and those are the JSF fuel dump system and F-35C tailhook issues. Both of those issues have been resolved, basically along with everything else.
>>
File: 1477863386878.jpg (76KB, 706x673px) Image search:
[Google]
76KB, 706x673px
>>31884918
>>
File: Rogard.jpg (33KB, 320x240px) Image search:
[Google]
33KB, 320x240px
>>31884918
>six years ago
>tfw you remember 2008 was eight years ago
>>
>>31884918
>>31884931
>Anon points out that anon's source is outdated
>Anon's response is to call him a Jew
Never change /k/
>>
File: 1476373871186.jpg (53KB, 444x467px) Image search:
[Google]
53KB, 444x467px
>>31884658
>Pierre Sprey
LOL it's like you watch Russia Today (propaganda) or something.
>>
File: 1473795536359.png (6KB, 267x189px) Image search:
[Google]
6KB, 267x189px
>>31885043
are racists actually dumb enough to believe the criticism of the F-35?
The F-35 is a good plane, Russian propaganda is to blame for believing it is a "lemon".
>>
>>31884576
>when Pierre Sprey posts
>>
>>31885043
> complaining about being outed as a shil
you're fucking done here, JIDF. no one wants the lies that you're peddling.
>>
>>31884658
lol
Canada's liberals are the worst. They basically hate their country and want it to be completely dependent on America for security. What pathetic, short-sighted losers.
>>
>>31885164
/pol/ pls
>>
>>31885164
How would him being a Jew disprove his point anon?
>>
Good
Lockheed has been being lazy about getting the pice down.
But they means subcontractors like the company I work for will have to reduce prices.
That always ends up with us reducing manpower while also requiring the same Production rate.
>>
>>31885164
>Maybe if I call him a Jew people won't realize that I'm a dumbass
>>
>>31885164
...but in a seriousness the information in that video is essentially ancient when in comparison recent advancements in the plane's development cycle
>>
File: 1464807278294.jpg (111KB, 537x861px) Image search:
[Google]
111KB, 537x861px
>>31885357
...
>>
File: 1352762041065s.jpg (9KB, 250x222px) Image search:
[Google]
9KB, 250x222px
>>31884658
>>31884793
>Sprey
>Paid to have stupid opinions
He's been saying shit like this ever since his very short job in the Pentagon when he met similar dipshits Boyd, Ricioni, and so on. Even after moving into water purification and producing jazz records for the last 40 years.
>>
>>31884430
wtf i hate lockmart now
>>
File: VICTORIA_900.jpg (190KB, 564x900px) Image search:
[Google]
190KB, 564x900px
>>31884576
You seem upset
>>
>>31886170
>producing jazz records for the last 40 years.
Are they any good? Genuinely curious
>>
>>31886181
>usual business between contractors and DoD
>Small difference in desired and final pricing
>>
>>31886198
>His recording with the ARC Choir singing "Walk With Me" appears in Kanye West's hit "Jesus Walks." Sprey said he earned enough royalties from the West song "to support 30 of my money-losing jazz albums."
>>
>>31886214
Sprey should stick to music
>>
>>31886220
What's really funny about that video is that he used to say the exact same shit about the F-16's improvements over the YF-16.
>>
>>31884576
shut up, China, you already have your shitposting thread
>>
>>31884658
Every time I start thinking there aren't people who are stupid enough to post Spreypost unironically here I just take a look at the comments section on that video and that disabuses me of that notion pretty quick.
>>
>>31886689
Wow. Just looked and now i have eye cancer.
Thread posts: 40
Thread images: 15
Thread images: 15