Delete comment from: Elements Of Power
"...If STOVL is needed only 10% of the time, then it is, at best, a secondary capability, and is no longer enough to justify the F-35B variant’s exorbitant cost, both in terms of acquisition ($153 million, without engine, in LRIP Lot 5) and of operations ($41,000 per flight hour). "
Sorry what was your argument against why this was just crazy talk? It seems a reasonable point to me.
And can you clarify what you believe is meant by "STOVL-Mode"? Your point of view seems to be that "STOVL mode" only refers to the landing and take off sections of a sortie wheras the assumption by CAPE that 80% of F35B flight ops would be STOVL mode implies that their modelling assumes that any sortie that involves STOVL capabilities is, by their definition, "STOVL mode" operations.
Could you clarify your position if that is the case and how you arrived at that position?
I mention this because it seems unlikely that the CAPE people are stupid enough to base their calculations on the aircraft hovering 80% of the time.
And if that assuption is correct (about CAPE's "STOVL-Mode" definition) then change in the calculations to 10% STOVL mode would represent a major change in planned F35B operations and would indeed bring into question the need for a STOVL mode at all.
Aug 27, 2013, 1:52:48 AM
Posted to F-35 Cost Estimates Drop; AvWeek Makes Motorboat Sounds