Lockheed Chief Pledges Lower Costs for F-35 Fighter Jet and Add 1,800 Jobs

A

anatta

100% recycled karma
Lockheed Martin Corp (LMT.N) is close to a deal to significantly lower the cost of its F-35 aircraft, Chief Executive Officer Marillyn Hewson said on Friday after meeting with U.S. President-elect Donald Trump.

"I certainly share his views that we need to get the best capability to our men and women in uniform, and we have to get it at the lowest possible price," Hewson said to reporters in Trump Tower.

Hewson had previously assured Trump she would drive down the cost of the company's fighter jet, after he tweeted last month that he was asking rival aerospace company Boeing Co (BA.N) whether it could offer a cheaper alternative to the F-35.

Trump has threatened and rebuked some of America's largest companies, creating a new business risk for those who have been or fear being targeted.

Costs for Lockheed's F-35 program had escalated to an estimated $379 billion. The program accounted for 20 percent of the company's total revenue of $46.1 billion last year.

Hewson also said Lockheed plans to increase jobs at its Fort Worth, Texas, facility by 1,800, which she said would add "thousands and thousands of jobs" across the supply chain in 45 U.S. states. Lockheed shares were up 1 percent after her comments on Friday.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-lockheed-ceo-idUSKBN14X25E
 
anatta said:
Lockheed Martin Corp (LMT.N) is close to a deal to significantly lower the cost of its F-35 aircraft, Chief Executive Officer Marillyn Hewson said on Friday after meeting with U.S. President-elect Donald Trump.

"I certainly share his views that we need to get the best capability to our men and women in uniform, and we have to get it at the lowest possible price," Hewson said to reporters in Trump Tower.

Hewson had previously assured Trump she would drive down the cost of the company's fighter jet, after he tweeted last month that he was asking rival aerospace company Boeing Co (BA.N) whether it could offer a cheaper alternative to the F-35.

Trump has threatened and rebuked some of America's largest companies, creating a new business risk for those who have been or fear being targeted.

Costs for Lockheed's F-35 program had escalated to an estimated $379 billion. The program accounted for 20 percent of the company's total revenue of $46.1 billion last year.

Hewson also said Lockheed plans to increase jobs at its Fort Worth, Texas, facility by 1,800, which she said would add "thousands and thousands of jobs" across the supply chain in 45 U.S. states. Lockheed shares were up 1 percent after her comments on Friday.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-lockheed-ceo-idUSKBN14X25E
Click to expand...
they should take the f35 budget and build 20,000 "super a10s". another enemy plane would never make it off the ground. jus' sayin'
 
#7

Different birds.
Different design advantages.

#9 elucidates that point.

Lockheed Chief Pledges Lower Costs for F-35 Fighter Jet and Add 1,800 Jobs

More crony capitalism from Trump?
 
Milagro said:
Holy fuck, the A-10 is brilliant at what it does but it is not a fighter and was never designed to be.

Sent from my Lenovo K52e78 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
yess.A-10s advantage is to loiter over a battlefield -tankbusting and such.
did you see the pieve about autonomous drones it was on 60 minutes

http://www.popsci.com/pentagon-drone-swarm-autonomous-war-machines
....Autonomy and swarming are centerpieces in many predictions about the next century of war. The Predator, Reaper, and Global Hawk drones that have so far most embodied how the United States fights wars are big, expensive, and vulnerable machines, with human pilots and sensor operators controlling them remotely. These drones also operate in skies relatively free of threats, without fear that a hostile jet will shoot them down. That’s an approach that’s fine for counterinsurgency battles, an admittedly large part of the wars the Pentagon actually fights, but against a near-peer nation or any foe with sophisticated anti-air or electronic jamming equipment, Reapers are extremely vulnerable targets.

Swarms, where several small flying robots work together to do the same job previously done by a larger craft are one way around that....
 
#11

I saw the CBS-TV 60 Minutes segment on autonomous drones.
Perhaps one of the most interesting facts presented:
that computer autonomy / AI may affect modern weaponry & warfare as much as nuclear weapons did. They are that much of a game-changer.

BUT !!

While the 100 drone swarm was impressive; they don't have the bugs worked out yet.

For one thing, what about jamming? They depend on constant high speed communication with one another to avoid mid-air collisions.

For another, needing to be snared by a net, or crash to land is sub-optimal; PARTICULARLY in context of our developing technology (Elon Musk?) of returning spent lower-stage rockets to a soft landing on a barge.

I don't recall anything in the segment about tank-killing.

BUT !!

When CIA's drones were first deployed, they were not weaponized. They were surveillance drones.
Only later were they weaponized.

888888888888888888888888

I'm curious how long it will take before, instead of launching a Hellfire missile to kill a building, or a truck,
we'll be able to pick one bad guy out of a crowd, and take him out, without splattering blood on those seated next to him.

Progress?

One of the Terminator movies began with scenes of autonomous robots patrolling a post-apocalyptic battle scene.

That's one of the great powers of Sci-Fi. We have been warned.

Will it be a better world, when the United States military (government) can go to foreign lands, and kill those we consider undesirable, without U.S. risking chipping a fingernail, or being late for dinner with the family?
 
Will it be a better world, when the United States military (government) can go to foreign lands, and kill those we consider undesirable, without U.S. risking chipping a fingernail, or being late for dinner with the family?
Click to expand...

Obama has been doing a lot of that.

:dunno:
 
#13

Substantially up-tempo compared to the Republican administration Obama succeeded.

BUT !!

Obama's predator drone operations are not "AUTONOMOUS". They're merely remote-pilot.

There are still humans in the loop in Obama's predator drone regime.
It's those in the loop humans that explain why President Clinton didn't take out UBL when he was out in the open. The collateral damage risk was deemed unacceptable.

Watch the video Bd.

We're about to cross a cybernetic Rubicon.
 
sear said:
#13

Substantially up-tempo compared to the Republican administration Obama succeeded.

BUT !!

Obama's predator drone operations are not "AUTONOMOUS". They're merely remote-pilot.

There are still humans in the loop in Obama's predator drone regime.
It's those in the loop humans that explain why President Clinton didn't take out UBL when he was out in the open. The collateral damage risk was deemed unacceptable.

Watch the video Bd.

We're about to cross a cybernetic Rubicon.
Click to expand...

That right there is almost poetic.
 
Sear 14,

without U.S. risking chipping a fingernail
Click to expand...

Autonomous or not, that statement of yours still holds true with Obama's drone attacks.

I saw the 100 drone air drop on "modern marvels".
 
on the jamming -I would think that would be a problem for any electronic warfare. They didn't gointo it - but maybe variable frequencies - something to keep the defense guessing.

The facial recognition tech is frightening -all of it is frightening. The concept of swarms however is what the Chinese plan to do against the F-35.
Instead of trying to compete with over the horizon stand off tech ( F-35) they plan to overwhelm it's capabilities with "swarms"
( multitude ) of jets,and get in closer for dogfight where the f-35 is slow and ponderous-or simply overwhelm it's defenses.
 
"Autonomous or not, that statement of yours still holds true with Obama's drone attacks." Bd #16

- right -

The difference is with a remote HUMAN pilot there's a human in the loop for the go / no-go kill decision.

Do we really want to live in a world where we leave it up to machines, robots, about how many human beings the U.S. tax payer kills?

Do you really believe the only thing that matters is whether the U.S. has any skin in the game?

How about humanity? How about humanitarianism?

- Q:
What political philosopher or thinker do you most identify with, and why?
- Bush:
"Uh Christ, because he changed my heart."
- Q:
"I think the viewer would like to know more on how he's changed your heart."
- Bush:
"Well, if they don't know it's going to be hard to explain.
Uhm, when you turn your heart and your life over to Christ, when you accept Christ as a savior, it changes your heart. It changes your life; and that's what happened to me."
- WHO-TV Republican Presidential candidate debate / Des Moines, Iowa / December 13, 1999

You really think J.C. would have approved autonomous drone strikes on battlefields of undeclared wars?

Have you forgotten The Ten Commandments?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top