（转帖）英国得到第一架联合攻击机

转自龙腾：http://www.ltaaa.com/bbs/thread-72270-1-1.html


U.K. gets keys to first JSF
英国得到第一架联合攻击机龙腾网版权所有 http://www.ltaaa.com


By Michael Hoffman Wednesday, July 18th, 2012 4:19 pm
Posted in Air, International

地址：http://www.dodbuzz.com/2012/07/18/u-k-gets-keys-to-first-jsf/









U.K. Defense Secretary Philip Hammond will fly to Fort Worth, Texas, Thursday to pick up his country’s first F-35 Joint Strike Fighter from Lockheed Martin’s assembly plant. It marks the first country of the international coalition other than the U.S. to receive one of the fifth generation fighters.
本周四，英国国防大臣菲利普•哈蒙德将飞往德克萨斯州沃斯堡，从洛马手中接收属于英国的第一架F-35联合攻击机。这使得英国成为美国的盟友中第一个获得第五代战斗机的国家。

Hammond met with his U.S. counterpart, Leon Panetta, Wednesday morning at the Pentagon to discuss the F-35 program among other topics. Panetta even awkwardly presented Hammond with a model of an F-35 to open the news conference they hosted Wednesday from the Pentagon press room.
周三上午，哈蒙德同美国防长帕内塔在五角大楼讨论了包括F-35在内的议题。帕内塔甚至在五角大楼的新闻发布会上笨拙地向哈蒙德赠送了一架F-35的模型作为开场。

The occasion marks a milestone for the intensely scrutinized fighter jet as international cooperation has been a hallmark of the program and could very well determine its survival. The U.S. is the largest international JSF buyer, yet, the cost of each jet jumps considerably anytime a partner nation backs out.
这番情景对于这架自从被打上“国际合作”的标记起就饱受争议的战斗机无疑是一座里程碑，并有力地决定了它将继续生存。美国是F-35的最大买家，但每架战斗机高昂的成本使得合作国可能随时退出。

Italy, Canada, Norway, the Netherlands and the U.K. have all either slashed the number of F-35s they plan to buy or considered backing out of the program all together. They’re not alone.
意呆利，加拿大，挪威，荷兰以及英国都削减了原计划采购F-35的数量，或者考虑集体退出这个项目，他们并不是孤军作战。

A column written by Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan Greenert for Proceedings magazine earlier this month was construed as a backpedal by the U.S. Navy in their commitment to the JSF. The U.S. Navy’s top officer questioned the need for stealth aircraft as radar technology rapidly advances.
本月初，美军舰队总司令Adm. Jonathan Greenert为《Proceedings》所写的专栏文章被解读为海军对联合攻击机项目踩了一脚刹车。海军的最高层质疑了在雷达技术迅猛发展的背景下对隐形飞行器的需求。

Of course, the Navy has since made sure to tell anyone that is listening that they are completely behind the program. However, the seed of doubt was most certainly planted.
当然，海军会一如既往地向任何人宣称他们完全支持这个项目。不过，怀疑的种子已然被种下。

So much so that a British journalist asked Panetta at Wednesday’s news conference if the U.S. military is still committed to the Joint Strike Fighter even with the looming budget cuts to include a further $500 billion cut if sequestration is executed. Standing next to Hammond, Panetta made sure to calm those fears to include stating how each one of his services support the program.
正因如此，一名英国记者在周三的新闻发布会上问帕内塔：如果一份近在眼前的包含了5000亿美元的预算削减案被执行，美军是否还会JSF做出承诺。站在哈蒙德旁边，帕内塔必须平息这些忧虑，他说明了他的下属部门是如何为这个项目提供支持的。

“I’ve made very clear that this fighter plane is critical to our future defense strategy,” Panetta said. “We are committed to all of the three variants because we think each of the forces will be able to use that kind of weaponry in the future so we can effectively control the skies.”
“我很清楚，这架战斗机是未来国防战略的关键，”帕内塔说：“我们会致力于F-35的所有三个版本，因为我们认为在未来三军都会能用上这种武器，以确保我们能有效地制空。”

Panetta highlighted the work his team is doing to pressure Lockheed Martin, the prime manufacturer of the plane, to keep costs down. He emphasized the strides the F-35 program has made over the past 18 months to get back on schedule and control a spiraling price tag. But the work toward that goal is not finished.
帕内塔强调他的团队正在进行的工作就是迫使骡马，F-35的主要制造商，把成本降下来。他强调说：F-35的项目在过去的18个月里努力赶上进度并且控制不断上升的价格。但目标仍未达成。

“It is something we have to continue to put pressure on, to maintain cost control on, and we are working with industry to do that because we do want it to be cost effective,” he said.
“我们必须不断地施压，去进行成本控制，我们和工业部门一起努力以达到可取的效能成本。”

For Hammond’s part, he has had his own inner squabbles when it comes to the Joint Strike Fighter. He originally planned to switch the U.K.‘s JSF order from the B-model to the C-model. Hammond has since reversed that decision once the U.K. realized how much it would cost to update their aircraft carriers to accommodate the fighter’s longer range variant.
至于哈蒙德，对JSF他有着自己的内心纠结。他原本希望将英国的JSF订单从B型（海陆型）改为C型（海军型）。但当英国人意识到为了配合战斗机更远的航程，他们改造航母需要花费多少时，哈蒙德取消了这个决定。

Lockheed Martin made sure to include a British pilot when it marched out three F-35 pilots for a panel to discuss the fighter’s capabilities this month at the Farnborough International Airshow. Peter Wilson, a British Harrier pilot who is now a BAE test pilot, was one of the drivers who flew in the recent F-35 sea tests. He had one of the lines of the entire airshow when he described landing the Short Takeoff and Vertical Landing variant as “magic.”
洛马做出保证，在本月的范保罗国际航展上，必定会有一位英国籍的飞行员参与评判F-35的性能。彼得威尔逊，英国鹞式战斗机飞行员，现任BAE(英国航空航天公司)的试飞员，成为了最近进行的F-35海上测试的飞行员之一。当谈到F-35的短距起飞和垂直起落时，他形容道：像魔法一样。

U.S. officials hope to continue to hear rave reviews of the F-35 program because many feared the British military, which is experiencing harsher defense cuts than the U.S., could realistically back out because of JSF’s steep price tag thus putting the F-35 at further risk.
美国的官员们希望能听到对F-35更多的赞美，因为他们中的很多人担心英军——那支正在经历比美军严重得多的国防削减的军队——会真的因为F-35陡升的价格而退出，从而将F-35置于更危险的境地。



评论：

BlackOwl18E
I'm taking bets as to who will back out of the F-35 program first. I currently have $30.00 on the Dutch, but the US Navy is also looking like a good bet as well. After that I'd say Canada is next in line. This jet is just too expensive for us to afford and not everyone is going to purchase them. $400 billion dollars for the acquisition cost to the US alone is obscene.
我们来打赌谁会最先退出F-35项目，我压荷兰30块钱，不过看起来压美国海军也不错。我敢说加拿大会紧随其后。这架飞机实在是坑爹贵，不是所有人能买得起。4000亿美元只够美国的采购成本，这太猥琐了。（不要笑，最后一句话我完全是直译，我也不知道那个4000亿的数字是哪来的）


ghostwhowalksnz
‎I hear some turbo prop trainers all tricked up are cheaper. No other new technology program is going to be cheaper. Remember how the Bush admin spent $7 bill on an 'upgraded' version of an existing bird for a presidential helicopter. Bell couldnt stay within budget for a small improvement of an existing helicopter.
我听说一些螺旋桨教练机看起来很便宜。但没有新技术会是便宜的。还记得布什是如何花掉70亿美元给一个已有型号的直升机“升级”来作为总统座机吗？仅仅是为了升级一架已有的直升机，他就不会遵守预算。


tee
You are right, the Dutch ( will go Gripen NG ) will be First, Canada next, then I think Italy ( they are flat broke ) or Australia. We will see shortly. I think the Navy will pull out after Canada & Australia do ( so they can all keep flying F-18's together ).
你说对了，荷兰会是第一个退出，然后转头去买鹰狮NG，加拿大第二，接下来是已经穷的叮当响的意大利或者澳大利亚。我们很快就会看到。再然后海军也不干了，他们就又可以一起接着玩F-18。


Robert Little
During the original competition, Boeing's model was not able to land or hover due to engine exhaust getting sucked back up into the intake, cutting thrust. It was marginal at best in flight. Boeing's 787, a commercial program was delayed repeatedly and is only now beginning to look good. We seem to be in an era of immense technical challenges when developing new aircraft, and the challenges seem to change during the life of the development, causing even more severe strain on the program. It would seem that the United States is faced with a serious challenge: either to cancel or soldier on. The first option would place our to-date unchallenged air superiority at risk within just five to ten years, and without air superiority, our global military dominance would be either lessened or eliminated. Continuing the program will continue to bleed our defense budget, but should produce a series of planes and a technology base that is at least one generation ahead of the Russian, Chinese and Indian's, as well as the various European efforts that are in any event, less of a challenge to the U.S. One method of measuring the moment that a society ceases to push forward, and becomes reactionary, is this very program. We have seen a steady and in many ways violent rise of the conservative political/social movement in the United States. Historically, that has usually meant that the society ceases to grow and develop, begins to retreat in nearly all areas a society is measured by. If The United States has a future as an economic and cultural power, that future is now being determined - not merely by the JSF, but this program is certainly an important indicator of our future.
在最初的竞争中，波音的模型不能着陆和悬停，因为发动机的废气被再次吸入造成了推力下降，但这对飞行的影响微乎其微。波音787，一个商业项目被再三拖延，直到今天才好起来。在发展新飞行器方面，我们好像进入了一个技术大挑战的时代，而挑战的内容又随着发展的进程在不断变化，这使得项目面临越来越大的压力。看起来美国正面临一个两难的境地：是取消项目还是硬着头皮继续【either to cancel or soldier on，我猜的，求指教】。第一个选项只须5到10年就会将我们所向披靡的空中力量至于险地，没有了空中力量，我们的全球军事优势也会被削弱甚至消失。将项目继续则意味着国防预算将继续大出血，但却能在飞行器和基础技术上保持对俄罗斯、中国和印度领先一代以上，对那些面临重大事件的欧洲国家也一样，减轻了美国所面临的挑战【这句话大大的疑问，as well as the various European efforts是指美国对欧洲也保持优势，还是说拿到35的欧洲国家对俄中印保持优势？好像都说的通。强烈要求指教。】如果想要找一个方法来表明这个社会已经停止前进，变得保守，那么F-35项目就是一个绝佳的例子。我们已经看到了一个缺少变化的，在传统的政治/社会运动中不断出现暴力的美国。从历史的角度看，那通常意味着社会停止前进，在作为社会衡量标准的各个方面都开始衰退。假如美国能有一个作为经济和文化大国的未来，那么这个未来在今天就已经注定了——不仅仅是因为F-35的项目，但这个项目一定会是一个重要的指示灯。


OMEGATALON
The British have been going back and forth on which F-35 to buy; but in actuality, the British government should buy the F-35B and the F-35C as they should equip their carriers for catapult launch to handle the F-35C while the F-35B can do a conventional rolling takeoff. Having both F-35B and F-35C makes sense as the F-35C with it's greater speed and range would be used for air superiority missions while the F-35B would be for ground support like the Harrier it is replacing.
英国人在买哪个型号的F-35上犹豫不决，但实际上，他们B、C应该都买。如果他们给航母装上弹射器，那么在B型进行常规起降的同时也可以将C型弹射出去。B、C都买才明智，C型具有更高的速度和航程将被用来完成制空任务，B型用来进行对地支持正如它所取代的海鹞一样。


Nicky
I think the Dutch will go first and switch to the Gripen NG. The Canadian's will go second and switch to the F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet. Australia will follow Canada an bail out of the JSF and go with the F/A-18 E/F Super Horne and the E/A-18G Growler. Eventually, I think the US, Israel and Japan will be the only ones flying them.
我认为荷兰会最先退出，然后去买鹰狮NG。加拿大第二，改成F/A-18 E/F超级大虫子。澳大利亚第三，改买超级大虫子和咆哮者。最后，就以色列和日本俩干儿子陪着爸爸玩。


BlackOwl18E
‎2012‎年‎7‎月‎19‎日，‏‎11:05:23
I think the F-35A still has a chance of making it, but the F-35C and F-35B aren't really going anywhere and the overall price tag of the A-model is still extremely high. This is my opinion of the most likely order of withdraw and what aircraft they could possibly purchase if they decided to pull out: 1. Dutch (Gripen NG) 2. US Navy (F/A-18E/F Block III) 3. Canada (F/A-18E/F Block III) 4. UK Royal Navy (Rafale M and/or Gripen NG) 5. Italy (Rafale M and/or Gripen NG and/or more Typhoons) 6. Australia (F/A-18E/F Block III) 7. US Marine Corps (F/A-18E/F Block III and/or Gripen NG) I would however like to note that the three parties interested in the F-35B (UK, USMC, and Italy) might want to pursue a Harrier III to compensate for their lack of STOVL fighter capability. The only other option after the F-35B is to ditch STOVL aviation all together. I would also like to note that it is still possible that the international partners could stick with the F-35A until the end and wind up with a small fleet of them.
我认为F-35A还有机会，但B、C就够呛了，虽然A型也是坑爹贵。我想象中的退出顺序和他们可能的采购计划是这样的：1，荷兰，买鹰狮NG 。2美海军，买F/A-18E/F Block III。3，加拿大，买F/A-18E/F Block III。4，英国海军，买阵风M或者鹰狮NG。5，意大利，买阵风M或者鹰狮或者继续买台风。6，澳大利亚，买F/A-18E/F Block III。7，美国海陆，F/A-18E/F Block III或者鹰狮【注：打死我不信美国人会买鹰狮】。不过我想指出的是，对35B抱有兴趣的三方（意大利，美海陆，英国）可能会继续追求海鹞III来弥补他们所缺乏的短距/垂直起降能力。在35B后唯一的选项就是集体放弃短距/垂直起降。我还想指出，这些国际伙伴仍有可能会坚持支持35A，直到最后可以凑一只小舰队。


Guest
@ BlackOwl18E Tom Burbage, the Executive Vice President and General Manager, F-35 Program Integration, Lockheed Martin Aeronautics (a person who had a very successful Navy career and is one of the prime front-men for the F-35 marketing effort), he's nothing but con-artist, crook and an outlier which has surprisingly (or not depending on your view of history) been consistent at making misleading statements to the U.S. Congress and our trusted allies. This includes a recent appearance in front of elected officials where he claimed that weight concerns on the aircraft design were manageable etc etc. These statements are completely false.
To: BlackOwl18E， 汤姆•伯比奇, 洛马的执行副总裁兼总经理（有着成功的海军生涯，现在主要负责35项目市场营销），他根本就是个门外汉，除了花言巧语什么也不会。这种人居然令人惊讶的——你同不同意自己看着办——一直在误导国会和我们的盟友。甚至最近还在选举官员面前声称F-35的飞行器重量“尽在掌握之中”balabala，这完全就是在说谎。


Guest
@ BlackOwl18E I'll also want to see my country (Australia) armed with advanced F-15s as it's F/A-18A/B Hornet replacement. An Australian specialized F-15E+ development program... the F-15AU variant instead of just Super Hornets.
To: BlackOwl18E， 我希望我的国家（奥大梨呀）选择先进的F-15s作为F/A-18A/B的替代品。澳大利亚有一个专门的F-15E+的发展项目，作为F-15AU的改进型替换超级虫子。


majr0d
"A column written by Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan Greenert for Proceedings magazine earlier this month was construed as a backpedal by the U.S. Navy in their commitment to the JSF." Mr. Hoffman who did the construing? (besides Mr. Ewing who wrote two stories that contradicted each other to stir the pot) Journalism used to be reporting the facts. Now it's all about interpreting them for the masses too ignorant to think for themselves and simultaneously fan the flames. Politicians and journalists seem to deserve each other more and more.
“本月初，美军舰队总司令Adm. Jonathan Greenert为《Proceedings》所写的专栏文章被解读为海军对联合攻击机项目踩了一脚刹车。”霍夫曼先生（本文作者），谁得出的这个结论（除了写过两篇相互矛盾的文章的尤因先生）？新闻媒体曾经是报道真相的。但今天他们展现在大众面前的却是对自己愚蠢的一无所知和善于煽风点火。政治家和记者们看起来真是越来越搭。


Yrreiht
The mighty USAF could only be defeated by itself. Any other country failed to weaken the USAF, but by bleeding dry the budget, the JSF is succeeding...
全能的美国空军只会被自己打败。所有试图削弱美国空军的国家都失败了，但是通过榨干预算，JSF却成功的做到了。


voodkokk
‎So no US taxpayers dollars were used to pay for this. Are you saying Lockheed built these on their own dime or did the UK pay for them and that is why they are broke.
没有美国纳税人的钱被用在这里。你是说洛马自己砸锅卖铁造了这些？还是说英国为他们买了单，以至于自己破了产？


Johnny Ranger
OK, will someone please educate a dumb old Army guy? I always read that "this" stealth aircraft has the RCS of a sparrow, or that "that" stealth aircraft has the RCS of a marble...but it DOES have a RCS, right? Which means (again, to a dumb old Army guy) that while the aircraft may not look aircraft-SIZED on a radar screen, it's still a sparrow or a marble that's moving at hundreds of miles per hour. So why wouldn't the bad guys just shoot at anything coming from a threat axis - regardless of size - that's moving faster than the typical sparrow or marble? While you all seem very up to snuff on the technological aspects of stealth and radar, I am, in a word, not, so let me assure you...this is a serious question, not a joke. I'm sure the answer is simple and will make me look like like a cretin for not knowing it...
好吧，有人会去教育之下那个军队里的傻瓜吗？我总是看到有人说：这架飞机RCS（雷达反射截面）像麻雀；那架飞机RCS像大理石...但无论如何，它都有反射，对吗？这意味着（再次强调，这是对军队里的傻瓜说的）无论在雷达显示器上一架飞机看起来多么不像一架飞机，但还是会有一只麻雀或者一块大理石以几百英里的时速朝你飞来。那么为什么不会有坏家伙不看体积，只管朝着你飞来的方向射击呢？只要你飞的比正常的麻雀或者大理石要快。看起来你们都热衷于打破对雷达和隐身的技术崇拜，而我，用一个字来表达，就是“不”。我像你保证，这是一个严肃的问题，绝非玩笑，我确定答案非常简单，会显得我像一个一无所知的白痴一样...【最后这个逻辑真没看懂】


W.D. Southworth
As I have said before; ditch the A model. The AF can use the C model. Like we did the F-4 in & off nam.
我早就说过，抛弃掉A型。空军可以用C型。就像我们曾经开着F-4在越南进进出出。【求指教】


BlackOwl18E
An F-15SE variant definitely would provide for Australia's needs and be a formidable machine if they had to face off against any military powers that threaten their security: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbmvFABNRDA
一个F-15SE的改进型就可以完全满足澳大利亚的需求。当他们面对任何威胁时，它都是令人畏惧的机器。


Eagle Keeper
Please provide an aircraft with 2 (two) engines. F-15, F-18, F-14, F-22, F-4, A-10, F-5, F-111. Don't get me wrong the F-16 is an awsome aircraft, but one bird strike and you better be looking for a safe place to land really soon !!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zN_Zl64OQEw. F-15 Eagle Keeper
我们需要的是双引擎的战斗机，F-15, F-18, F-14, F-22, F-4, A-10, F-5, F-111。不要误会，F-16是令人畏惧的飞机，但一旦撞上一只鸟，你就最好立刻去找安全地带去着陆。。。
转自龙腾：http://www.ltaaa.com/bbs/thread-72270-1-1.html


U.K. gets keys to first JSF
英国得到第一架联合攻击机龙腾网版权所有 http://www.ltaaa.com


By Michael Hoffman Wednesday, July 18th, 2012 4:19 pm
Posted in Air, International

地址：http://www.dodbuzz.com/2012/07/18/u-k-gets-keys-to-first-jsf/









U.K. Defense Secretary Philip Hammond will fly to Fort Worth, Texas, Thursday to pick up his country’s first F-35 Joint Strike Fighter from Lockheed Martin’s assembly plant. It marks the first country of the international coalition other than the U.S. to receive one of the fifth generation fighters.
本周四，英国国防大臣菲利普•哈蒙德将飞往德克萨斯州沃斯堡，从洛马手中接收属于英国的第一架F-35联合攻击机。这使得英国成为美国的盟友中第一个获得第五代战斗机的国家。

Hammond met with his U.S. counterpart, Leon Panetta, Wednesday morning at the Pentagon to discuss the F-35 program among other topics. Panetta even awkwardly presented Hammond with a model of an F-35 to open the news conference they hosted Wednesday from the Pentagon press room.
周三上午，哈蒙德同美国防长帕内塔在五角大楼讨论了包括F-35在内的议题。帕内塔甚至在五角大楼的新闻发布会上笨拙地向哈蒙德赠送了一架F-35的模型作为开场。

The occasion marks a milestone for the intensely scrutinized fighter jet as international cooperation has been a hallmark of the program and could very well determine its survival. The U.S. is the largest international JSF buyer, yet, the cost of each jet jumps considerably anytime a partner nation backs out.
这番情景对于这架自从被打上“国际合作”的标记起就饱受争议的战斗机无疑是一座里程碑，并有力地决定了它将继续生存。美国是F-35的最大买家，但每架战斗机高昂的成本使得合作国可能随时退出。

Italy, Canada, Norway, the Netherlands and the U.K. have all either slashed the number of F-35s they plan to buy or considered backing out of the program all together. They’re not alone.
意呆利，加拿大，挪威，荷兰以及英国都削减了原计划采购F-35的数量，或者考虑集体退出这个项目，他们并不是孤军作战。

A column written by Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan Greenert for Proceedings magazine earlier this month was construed as a backpedal by the U.S. Navy in their commitment to the JSF. The U.S. Navy’s top officer questioned the need for stealth aircraft as radar technology rapidly advances.
本月初，美军舰队总司令Adm. Jonathan Greenert为《Proceedings》所写的专栏文章被解读为海军对联合攻击机项目踩了一脚刹车。海军的最高层质疑了在雷达技术迅猛发展的背景下对隐形飞行器的需求。

Of course, the Navy has since made sure to tell anyone that is listening that they are completely behind the program. However, the seed of doubt was most certainly planted.
当然，海军会一如既往地向任何人宣称他们完全支持这个项目。不过，怀疑的种子已然被种下。

So much so that a British journalist asked Panetta at Wednesday’s news conference if the U.S. military is still committed to the Joint Strike Fighter even with the looming budget cuts to include a further $500 billion cut if sequestration is executed. Standing next to Hammond, Panetta made sure to calm those fears to include stating how each one of his services support the program.
正因如此，一名英国记者在周三的新闻发布会上问帕内塔：如果一份近在眼前的包含了5000亿美元的预算削减案被执行，美军是否还会JSF做出承诺。站在哈蒙德旁边，帕内塔必须平息这些忧虑，他说明了他的下属部门是如何为这个项目提供支持的。

“I’ve made very clear that this fighter plane is critical to our future defense strategy,” Panetta said. “We are committed to all of the three variants because we think each of the forces will be able to use that kind of weaponry in the future so we can effectively control the skies.”
“我很清楚，这架战斗机是未来国防战略的关键，”帕内塔说：“我们会致力于F-35的所有三个版本，因为我们认为在未来三军都会能用上这种武器，以确保我们能有效地制空。”

Panetta highlighted the work his team is doing to pressure Lockheed Martin, the prime manufacturer of the plane, to keep costs down. He emphasized the strides the F-35 program has made over the past 18 months to get back on schedule and control a spiraling price tag. But the work toward that goal is not finished.
帕内塔强调他的团队正在进行的工作就是迫使骡马，F-35的主要制造商，把成本降下来。他强调说：F-35的项目在过去的18个月里努力赶上进度并且控制不断上升的价格。但目标仍未达成。

“It is something we have to continue to put pressure on, to maintain cost control on, and we are working with industry to do that because we do want it to be cost effective,” he said.
“我们必须不断地施压，去进行成本控制，我们和工业部门一起努力以达到可取的效能成本。”

For Hammond’s part, he has had his own inner squabbles when it comes to the Joint Strike Fighter. He originally planned to switch the U.K.‘s JSF order from the B-model to the C-model. Hammond has since reversed that decision once the U.K. realized how much it would cost to update their aircraft carriers to accommodate the fighter’s longer range variant.
至于哈蒙德，对JSF他有着自己的内心纠结。他原本希望将英国的JSF订单从B型（海陆型）改为C型（海军型）。但当英国人意识到为了配合战斗机更远的航程，他们改造航母需要花费多少时，哈蒙德取消了这个决定。

Lockheed Martin made sure to include a British pilot when it marched out three F-35 pilots for a panel to discuss the fighter’s capabilities this month at the Farnborough International Airshow. Peter Wilson, a British Harrier pilot who is now a BAE test pilot, was one of the drivers who flew in the recent F-35 sea tests. He had one of the lines of the entire airshow when he described landing the Short Takeoff and Vertical Landing variant as “magic.”
洛马做出保证，在本月的范保罗国际航展上，必定会有一位英国籍的飞行员参与评判F-35的性能。彼得威尔逊，英国鹞式战斗机飞行员，现任BAE(英国航空航天公司)的试飞员，成为了最近进行的F-35海上测试的飞行员之一。当谈到F-35的短距起飞和垂直起落时，他形容道：像魔法一样。

U.S. officials hope to continue to hear rave reviews of the F-35 program because many feared the British military, which is experiencing harsher defense cuts than the U.S., could realistically back out because of JSF’s steep price tag thus putting the F-35 at further risk.
美国的官员们希望能听到对F-35更多的赞美，因为他们中的很多人担心英军——那支正在经历比美军严重得多的国防削减的军队——会真的因为F-35陡升的价格而退出，从而将F-35置于更危险的境地。



评论：

BlackOwl18E
I'm taking bets as to who will back out of the F-35 program first. I currently have $30.00 on the Dutch, but the US Navy is also looking like a good bet as well. After that I'd say Canada is next in line. This jet is just too expensive for us to afford and not everyone is going to purchase them. $400 billion dollars for the acquisition cost to the US alone is obscene.
我们来打赌谁会最先退出F-35项目，我压荷兰30块钱，不过看起来压美国海军也不错。我敢说加拿大会紧随其后。这架飞机实在是坑爹贵，不是所有人能买得起。4000亿美元只够美国的采购成本，这太猥琐了。（不要笑，最后一句话我完全是直译，我也不知道那个4000亿的数字是哪来的）


ghostwhowalksnz
‎I hear some turbo prop trainers all tricked up are cheaper. No other new technology program is going to be cheaper. Remember how the Bush admin spent $7 bill on an 'upgraded' version of an existing bird for a presidential helicopter. Bell couldnt stay within budget for a small improvement of an existing helicopter.
我听说一些螺旋桨教练机看起来很便宜。但没有新技术会是便宜的。还记得布什是如何花掉70亿美元给一个已有型号的直升机“升级”来作为总统座机吗？仅仅是为了升级一架已有的直升机，他就不会遵守预算。


tee
You are right, the Dutch ( will go Gripen NG ) will be First, Canada next, then I think Italy ( they are flat broke ) or Australia. We will see shortly. I think the Navy will pull out after Canada & Australia do ( so they can all keep flying F-18's together ).
你说对了，荷兰会是第一个退出，然后转头去买鹰狮NG，加拿大第二，接下来是已经穷的叮当响的意大利或者澳大利亚。我们很快就会看到。再然后海军也不干了，他们就又可以一起接着玩F-18。


Robert Little
During the original competition, Boeing's model was not able to land or hover due to engine exhaust getting sucked back up into the intake, cutting thrust. It was marginal at best in flight. Boeing's 787, a commercial program was delayed repeatedly and is only now beginning to look good. We seem to be in an era of immense technical challenges when developing new aircraft, and the challenges seem to change during the life of the development, causing even more severe strain on the program. It would seem that the United States is faced with a serious challenge: either to cancel or soldier on. The first option would place our to-date unchallenged air superiority at risk within just five to ten years, and without air superiority, our global military dominance would be either lessened or eliminated. Continuing the program will continue to bleed our defense budget, but should produce a series of planes and a technology base that is at least one generation ahead of the Russian, Chinese and Indian's, as well as the various European efforts that are in any event, less of a challenge to the U.S. One method of measuring the moment that a society ceases to push forward, and becomes reactionary, is this very program. We have seen a steady and in many ways violent rise of the conservative political/social movement in the United States. Historically, that has usually meant that the society ceases to grow and develop, begins to retreat in nearly all areas a society is measured by. If The United States has a future as an economic and cultural power, that future is now being determined - not merely by the JSF, but this program is certainly an important indicator of our future.
在最初的竞争中，波音的模型不能着陆和悬停，因为发动机的废气被再次吸入造成了推力下降，但这对飞行的影响微乎其微。波音787，一个商业项目被再三拖延，直到今天才好起来。在发展新飞行器方面，我们好像进入了一个技术大挑战的时代，而挑战的内容又随着发展的进程在不断变化，这使得项目面临越来越大的压力。看起来美国正面临一个两难的境地：是取消项目还是硬着头皮继续【either to cancel or soldier on，我猜的，求指教】。第一个选项只须5到10年就会将我们所向披靡的空中力量至于险地，没有了空中力量，我们的全球军事优势也会被削弱甚至消失。将项目继续则意味着国防预算将继续大出血，但却能在飞行器和基础技术上保持对俄罗斯、中国和印度领先一代以上，对那些面临重大事件的欧洲国家也一样，减轻了美国所面临的挑战【这句话大大的疑问，as well as the various European efforts是指美国对欧洲也保持优势，还是说拿到35的欧洲国家对俄中印保持优势？好像都说的通。强烈要求指教。】如果想要找一个方法来表明这个社会已经停止前进，变得保守，那么F-35项目就是一个绝佳的例子。我们已经看到了一个缺少变化的，在传统的政治/社会运动中不断出现暴力的美国。从历史的角度看，那通常意味着社会停止前进，在作为社会衡量标准的各个方面都开始衰退。假如美国能有一个作为经济和文化大国的未来，那么这个未来在今天就已经注定了——不仅仅是因为F-35的项目，但这个项目一定会是一个重要的指示灯。


OMEGATALON
The British have been going back and forth on which F-35 to buy; but in actuality, the British government should buy the F-35B and the F-35C as they should equip their carriers for catapult launch to handle the F-35C while the F-35B can do a conventional rolling takeoff. Having both F-35B and F-35C makes sense as the F-35C with it's greater speed and range would be used for air superiority missions while the F-35B would be for ground support like the Harrier it is replacing.
英国人在买哪个型号的F-35上犹豫不决，但实际上，他们B、C应该都买。如果他们给航母装上弹射器，那么在B型进行常规起降的同时也可以将C型弹射出去。B、C都买才明智，C型具有更高的速度和航程将被用来完成制空任务，B型用来进行对地支持正如它所取代的海鹞一样。


Nicky
I think the Dutch will go first and switch to the Gripen NG. The Canadian's will go second and switch to the F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet. Australia will follow Canada an bail out of the JSF and go with the F/A-18 E/F Super Horne and the E/A-18G Growler. Eventually, I think the US, Israel and Japan will be the only ones flying them.
我认为荷兰会最先退出，然后去买鹰狮NG。加拿大第二，改成F/A-18 E/F超级大虫子。澳大利亚第三，改买超级大虫子和咆哮者。最后，就以色列和日本俩干儿子陪着爸爸玩。


BlackOwl18E
‎2012‎年‎7‎月‎19‎日，‏‎11:05:23
I think the F-35A still has a chance of making it, but the F-35C and F-35B aren't really going anywhere and the overall price tag of the A-model is still extremely high. This is my opinion of the most likely order of withdraw and what aircraft they could possibly purchase if they decided to pull out: 1. Dutch (Gripen NG) 2. US Navy (F/A-18E/F Block III) 3. Canada (F/A-18E/F Block III) 4. UK Royal Navy (Rafale M and/or Gripen NG) 5. Italy (Rafale M and/or Gripen NG and/or more Typhoons) 6. Australia (F/A-18E/F Block III) 7. US Marine Corps (F/A-18E/F Block III and/or Gripen NG) I would however like to note that the three parties interested in the F-35B (UK, USMC, and Italy) might want to pursue a Harrier III to compensate for their lack of STOVL fighter capability. The only other option after the F-35B is to ditch STOVL aviation all together. I would also like to note that it is still possible that the international partners could stick with the F-35A until the end and wind up with a small fleet of them.
我认为F-35A还有机会，但B、C就够呛了，虽然A型也是坑爹贵。我想象中的退出顺序和他们可能的采购计划是这样的：1，荷兰，买鹰狮NG 。2美海军，买F/A-18E/F Block III。3，加拿大，买F/A-18E/F Block III。4，英国海军，买阵风M或者鹰狮NG。5，意大利，买阵风M或者鹰狮或者继续买台风。6，澳大利亚，买F/A-18E/F Block III。7，美国海陆，F/A-18E/F Block III或者鹰狮【注：打死我不信美国人会买鹰狮】。不过我想指出的是，对35B抱有兴趣的三方（意大利，美海陆，英国）可能会继续追求海鹞III来弥补他们所缺乏的短距/垂直起降能力。在35B后唯一的选项就是集体放弃短距/垂直起降。我还想指出，这些国际伙伴仍有可能会坚持支持35A，直到最后可以凑一只小舰队。


Guest
@ BlackOwl18E Tom Burbage, the Executive Vice President and General Manager, F-35 Program Integration, Lockheed Martin Aeronautics (a person who had a very successful Navy career and is one of the prime front-men for the F-35 marketing effort), he's nothing but con-artist, crook and an outlier which has surprisingly (or not depending on your view of history) been consistent at making misleading statements to the U.S. Congress and our trusted allies. This includes a recent appearance in front of elected officials where he claimed that weight concerns on the aircraft design were manageable etc etc. These statements are completely false.
To: BlackOwl18E， 汤姆•伯比奇, 洛马的执行副总裁兼总经理（有着成功的海军生涯，现在主要负责35项目市场营销），他根本就是个门外汉，除了花言巧语什么也不会。这种人居然令人惊讶的——你同不同意自己看着办——一直在误导国会和我们的盟友。甚至最近还在选举官员面前声称F-35的飞行器重量“尽在掌握之中”balabala，这完全就是在说谎。


Guest
@ BlackOwl18E I'll also want to see my country (Australia) armed with advanced F-15s as it's F/A-18A/B Hornet replacement. An Australian specialized F-15E+ development program... the F-15AU variant instead of just Super Hornets.
To: BlackOwl18E， 我希望我的国家（奥大梨呀）选择先进的F-15s作为F/A-18A/B的替代品。澳大利亚有一个专门的F-15E+的发展项目，作为F-15AU的改进型替换超级虫子。


majr0d
"A column written by Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan Greenert for Proceedings magazine earlier this month was construed as a backpedal by the U.S. Navy in their commitment to the JSF." Mr. Hoffman who did the construing? (besides Mr. Ewing who wrote two stories that contradicted each other to stir the pot) Journalism used to be reporting the facts. Now it's all about interpreting them for the masses too ignorant to think for themselves and simultaneously fan the flames. Politicians and journalists seem to deserve each other more and more.
“本月初，美军舰队总司令Adm. Jonathan Greenert为《Proceedings》所写的专栏文章被解读为海军对联合攻击机项目踩了一脚刹车。”霍夫曼先生（本文作者），谁得出的这个结论（除了写过两篇相互矛盾的文章的尤因先生）？新闻媒体曾经是报道真相的。但今天他们展现在大众面前的却是对自己愚蠢的一无所知和善于煽风点火。政治家和记者们看起来真是越来越搭。


Yrreiht
The mighty USAF could only be defeated by itself. Any other country failed to weaken the USAF, but by bleeding dry the budget, the JSF is succeeding...
全能的美国空军只会被自己打败。所有试图削弱美国空军的国家都失败了，但是通过榨干预算，JSF却成功的做到了。


voodkokk
‎So no US taxpayers dollars were used to pay for this. Are you saying Lockheed built these on their own dime or did the UK pay for them and that is why they are broke.
没有美国纳税人的钱被用在这里。你是说洛马自己砸锅卖铁造了这些？还是说英国为他们买了单，以至于自己破了产？


Johnny Ranger
OK, will someone please educate a dumb old Army guy? I always read that "this" stealth aircraft has the RCS of a sparrow, or that "that" stealth aircraft has the RCS of a marble...but it DOES have a RCS, right? Which means (again, to a dumb old Army guy) that while the aircraft may not look aircraft-SIZED on a radar screen, it's still a sparrow or a marble that's moving at hundreds of miles per hour. So why wouldn't the bad guys just shoot at anything coming from a threat axis - regardless of size - that's moving faster than the typical sparrow or marble? While you all seem very up to snuff on the technological aspects of stealth and radar, I am, in a word, not, so let me assure you...this is a serious question, not a joke. I'm sure the answer is simple and will make me look like like a cretin for not knowing it...
好吧，有人会去教育之下那个军队里的傻瓜吗？我总是看到有人说：这架飞机RCS（雷达反射截面）像麻雀；那架飞机RCS像大理石...但无论如何，它都有反射，对吗？这意味着（再次强调，这是对军队里的傻瓜说的）无论在雷达显示器上一架飞机看起来多么不像一架飞机，但还是会有一只麻雀或者一块大理石以几百英里的时速朝你飞来。那么为什么不会有坏家伙不看体积，只管朝着你飞来的方向射击呢？只要你飞的比正常的麻雀或者大理石要快。看起来你们都热衷于打破对雷达和隐身的技术崇拜，而我，用一个字来表达，就是“不”。我像你保证，这是一个严肃的问题，绝非玩笑，我确定答案非常简单，会显得我像一个一无所知的白痴一样...【最后这个逻辑真没看懂】


W.D. Southworth
As I have said before; ditch the A model. The AF can use the C model. Like we did the F-4 in & off nam.
我早就说过，抛弃掉A型。空军可以用C型。就像我们曾经开着F-4在越南进进出出。【求指教】


BlackOwl18E
An F-15SE variant definitely would provide for Australia's needs and be a formidable machine if they had to face off against any military powers that threaten their security: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbmvFABNRDA
一个F-15SE的改进型就可以完全满足澳大利亚的需求。当他们面对任何威胁时，它都是令人畏惧的机器。


Eagle Keeper
Please provide an aircraft with 2 (two) engines. F-15, F-18, F-14, F-22, F-4, A-10, F-5, F-111. Don't get me wrong the F-16 is an awsome aircraft, but one bird strike and you better be looking for a safe place to land really soon !!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zN_Zl64OQEw. F-15 Eagle Keeper
我们需要的是双引擎的战斗机，F-15, F-18, F-14, F-22, F-4, A-10, F-5, F-111。不要误会，F-16是令人畏惧的飞机，但一旦撞上一只鸟，你就最好立刻去找安全地带去着陆。。。