How does R&D $$$ get assigned between F-22 and F-35?

On Tue, 06 Jan 2004 13:06:28 -0800, Hobo wrote:


The F-22 and the F-35 are similar planes that share at least the engine
and maybe more. How do the R&D costs get divided between the two
programs? If the F-22 gets killed, will its R&D get moved over to the
F-35 and increase its price?

There is very little that the planes actually have in common. The F-22 is not
going to be "killed", but if the program was terminated it would have very
little effect on the F-35 program

Al Minyard

"Alan Minyard" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 06 Jan 2004 13:06:28 -0800, Hobo wrote:


The F-22 and the F-35 are similar planes that share at least the engine
and maybe more. How do the R&D costs get divided between the two
programs? If the F-22 gets killed, will its R&D get moved over to the
F-35 and increase its price?

There is very little that the planes actually have in common. The F-22 is
not
going to be "killed", but if the program was terminated it would have very
little effect on the F-35 program

tic toc ...

In article ,
"Tarver Engineering" wrote:

"Alan Minyard" wrote in message
...

There is very little that the planes actually have in common. The
F-22 is not going to be "killed", but if the program was terminated
it would have very little effect on the F-35 program

tic toc ...

Funny, you were claiming back in 1998 that it was just a matter of a
couple of years.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
. com...
In article ,
"Tarver Engineering" wrote:

"Alan Minyard" wrote in message
...

There is very little that the planes actually have in common. The
F-22 is not going to be "killed", but if the program was terminated
it would have very little effect on the F-35 program

tic toc ...

Funny, you were claiming back in 1998 that it was just a matter of a
couple of years.

Yes and Lockheed is stall facing the same structural and avionics issues
they were then as well. At least now there seems to be a tendancy to admit
there was a problem, if not a little lie about now.

In article ,
"Tarver Engineering" wrote:

"Chad Irby" wrote:

Funny, you were claiming back in 1998 that it was just a matter of a
couple of years.

Yes and Lockheed is stall facing the same structural and avionics issues
they were then as well.

Well, according to *you*, anyway. Not according to anyone sane.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
. com...
In article ,
"Tarver Engineering" wrote:

"Chad Irby" wrote:

Funny, you were claiming back in 1998 that it was just a matter of a
couple of years.

Yes and Lockheed is stall facing the same structural and avionics issues
they were then as well.

Well, according to *you*, anyway. Not according to anyone sane.

Acording to Congress.