Lockheed Martin Hackers Uncovered

Lockheed Martin have confirmed they have been the subject of yet another network intrusion attempt.

As a result of the swift and deliberate actions taken to protect the network and increase IT security, our systems remain secure. No customer, program or employee personal data has been compromised. Lockheed’s information security personnel are working around the clock to restore employee access to the “information systems network” targeted in the May 21 attack

I have a theory about who is responsible for the network intrusion attempt on Lockheed Martin.

It’s the launch customers, press, blogosphere and almost everyone else on the planet, trying to get an accurate assessment of how much an F35 will cost!

Sorry, couldn’t resist :)

Have a couple of Sunday morning vids to compensate

Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
May 29, 2011 11:48 am

Christine Fox, DoD’s director of cost assessment and program evaluation: $103m in constant dollars, $113m in 2011 dollars. The original target was $69m per plane.

The senate hearing, where the numbers were presented, saw Sen. McCain/AZ saying: “No program should expect to be continued with that kind of track record, especially in our current fiscal climate.”

Which means: bring down the prices, or the program is done. Which in itself leads to the question: Lightning-Plan B of HMG, any?

The USAF expects to bring the unit-cost of the F-35A down to roughly $90m by 2016.

If a second assembly line can be instated for a billion or two, I propose to introduce Northrop-Grumman or BAE as a full secondary supplier. The design of the F-35 is paid for by the US gov and is therefore to be considered property of the US and the partnering nations. So, bring back competition, and you get your $70m.

Jan Guest
Jan Guest
May 29, 2011 1:27 pm

I think it’s unlikely that it will ever cost $70m – it was an over-optimistic brief. If they wanted a cheap and simple aircraft they should have asked for one. With the Raptor cancelled there are limited options to continuing in reality. The only other option is to build more F-16s and Super Hornets which would be an embarrassing clime-down of epic proportions. HMG would have to look at STOBAR Typhoon which it should be doing anyway.

May 29, 2011 1:41 pm

We have been in this project for quite a long time. I think its too late to back out. To be honest, the F35 is a lot more advanced than the Typhoon. We could buy F18s instead, however they still would not be as advanced as F35s. F18s are not going to be good in the long run, due to the fact of advancement, of competitor stealth planes(e.g. PAK-50). The other reason, why it is so expensive, is because of the fact, there was 3 versions. Seriously, I think the F35C and the F35B was enough, or even just one single variant, the f35B would’ve been enough. The f35A is tbh not worth it, since it can only work on land. The C and the B can work both on ground and carriers. Perhaps if, there was just the C model and the B model, the overall cost may have been reduced considerably. Correct me, if I’m wrong, but the C model has a bigger range than the A model.

May 29, 2011 1:45 pm

Bigger range yes, but a smaller operational envelope

paul g
May 29, 2011 4:33 pm

i don’t know you show an intrest in aircraft and the next thing all these blokes in suits are banging on my door!!
With all this interest in how much the F-35 is going to cost is it just a coincedence that SAAB announced the sea gripen design is going to be done in the UK, (i’m just thinking about a plan b) If the Uk was offered a juicy percentage of the build (plenty of room at BAe’s woodford plant now there’s no nimrods clogging up the shopfloor!)
could we say no, i’m not sure is it STOBAR or CATBOR if the former then at least both CVF can operate aircraft.

May 29, 2011 6:02 pm

Of course $69m was always unrealistic you cant even buy the latest F16 will all the toys for $69m. BAE have already turned down the production line the Italians will take that crown interestingly for all european F35 production except that of the UK.

PaulG I think woodford has been sold off. I know there was a worry that they may not get all the MR4 out the door before the bulldozers moved in.

Well saab are looking over the next 18months if its feasible to do a naval gripen after that theyll consider an actual prototype. So theres a while to go yet. I would how ever suggest this typhoon osd is currently 2030 however its always been assumed this will be extended. Say it wasnt and we transition to an F35 high end gripen low end force all single engined thereby reducing thru life costs.

Jan Guest
Jan Guest
May 29, 2011 7:23 pm

The reason for the ‘A’ variant is to lower unit cost for the USAF who will be the biggest customer – it would be silly for them to buy more expensive sea-borne variants when they never go to sea ditto export countries who don’t have any carriers. Without the ‘A’ variant there wouldn’t be a project at all – it’s just no good to the UK. The ‘B’ variant is the one which was over-ambitious imo. An upgraded Harrier would have been a good idea – an aircraft that expected to do everything as well or better than most modern fighters and be STOVL was always going to be hugely expensive and now looks like it may be cancelled after consuming a very large chunk of development funds.

May 29, 2011 7:40 pm

On a brighter note, the videos were great.

Watching that automated line with all the balls going around I couldn’t help but think to myself “The engineering and design are incredibly clever, but has the creator ever seen a woman nude before?”