The unmitigated 1.7 trillion USD failure of the F35. Time to burn some more money

[Mihalik]

So, it's starting to look like even the Pentagon is getting to the point where it just can't justify spending more money on the F35.

https://www.defensenews.com/congress...ut-our-losses/

The plane is still plagued by endless lists of issues and even when it manages to fly (not something guaranteed with the F35) it apparently costs too much to fly.

So now, after having burned through 1.7 trillion dollars with very little to show for it, the Pentagon is quietly looking to move onto the next endless money hole.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/mil...-new-comments/

I'm sorry, I just don't fucking care that they have a shit plane. I'm just unwilling to accept my fucking tax money being spent on another pie in the sky "space lazor".

What's the fucking guarantee that they won't just burn another couple of trillion dollars on something that turns out to be a piece of shit. Like the F35, the LCS, the Ford class carriers?

[Deus Mortis]

Just scrap the thing and use the tech that is actually in the jet(the electronics and other stuff which is top of the line), and put it into other planes.

[Gaidax]

The thing is, US can afford it. Unlike any other country in the world - US can truly print more dollars and they are not really limited in that in foreseeable future.

- - - Updated - - -

Heck, it's like what 7% GDP? US can take it, if that's what's needed for vast military superiority with no viable counter for now.

[Themius]

The thing is, US can afford it. Unlike any other country in the world - US can truly print more dollars and they are not really limited in that in foreseeable future.

- - - Updated - - -

Heck, it's like what 7% GDP? US can take it, if that's what's needed for vast military superiority with no viable counter for now.

But universal healthcare and free college is worth that

[Gaidax]

But universal healthcare and free college is worth that

Apparently not and that's not going to change anytime soon.

- - - Updated - - -

Might I interest you in: Pentagon Wars?

F35 is just another Bradley that feeds a lot of mouths, builds nice houses for higher ups and there will be more.


That said the plane is actually pretty great, we use it A LOT. Sure some might point out how it's not as agile, loaded or cheap as gen 4 aircraft or how it can't win dogfights (because these are totally a thing with radars and onboard missiles with hundreds of km range). But it has one BIG advantage - there is no viable way to detect it yet that is actually deployed anywhere relevant.

[cubby]

So, it's starting to look like even the Pentagon is getting to the point where it just can't justify spending more money on the F35.

https://www.defensenews.com/congress...ut-our-losses/

The plane is still plagued by endless lists of issues and even when it manages to fly (not something guaranteed with the F35) it apparently costs too much to fly.

So now, after having burned through 1.7 trillion dollars with very little to show for it, the Pentagon is quietly looking to move onto the next endless money hole.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/mil...-new-comments/

I'm sorry, I just don't fucking care that they have a shit plane. I'm just unwilling to accept my fucking tax money being spent on another pie in the sky "space lazor".

What's the fucking guarantee that they won't just burn another couple of trillion dollars on something that turns out to be a piece of shit. Like the F35, the LCS, the Ford class carriers?

I hear you on the F35 - but what are the problems with the Ford Class Carriers? I thought those were doing ok? And the LCS?

[Mihalik]

I hear you on the F35 - but what are the problems with the Ford Class Carriers? I thought those were doing ok? And the LCS?

The Ford still can't reliably launch planes, and it's elevators are still broken.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/mil...rier-problems/

Even assuming that they manage to get the elevators and it's launch system working (which they will eventually), the Navy doesn't seem fully convinced it wants to replace all the Nimitzes with them. They seem to want other smaller designs. https://www.popularmechanics.com/mil...raft-carriers/

The LCS is a complete failure. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Littoral_combat_ship 3 (completely different designs) were built then the entire series got cancelled. They are all being mothballed this year. They ended up buying an Italian designed frigate to replace the entire thing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conste...-class_frigate . Literally nothing worked on the LCSs and they couldn't even come up with refit for using the hull for something.

[Corvus]

People wanted the F22 scrapped as well because it had teething problems. Now they want the F-35 scrapped in favour of the F22. And no doubt there will be calls for the next project to be scrapped as well. And the next. It's the way it has always been when new tech comes along.

The Israelis have been using it over Syria completely unimpeded by Russian systems. It's why Iranian/Hezbollah assets keep randomly blowing up.

[Gaidax]

The Israelis have been using it over Syria completely unimpeded by Russian systems. It's why Iranian/Hezbollah assets keep randomly blowing up.

Oh yeah, F35 work brilliantly for us. There is nothing in Middle East that can counter it and won't be in next 2-3 decades. That's why I would not be rushing to brand it a failure - it does what it's supposed to do very well. Just the budget got way out of hand, but I'm sure the tech will be reused in many other future developments.

[Masark]

That's why I would not be rushing to brand it a failure - it does what it's supposed to do very well.

What it's mostly supposed to do is go toe to toe with Chinese stuff and it remains to be seen if it does that very well.

[Mihalik]

Oh yeah, F35 work brilliantly for us. There is nothing in Middle East that can counter it and won't be in next 2-3 decades. That's why I would not be rushing to brand it a failure - it does what it's supposed to do very well. Just the budget got way out of hand, but I'm sure the tech will be reused in many other future developments.

People wanted the F22 scrapped as well because it had teething problems. Now they want the F-35 scrapped in favour of the F22. And no doubt there will be calls for the next project to be scrapped as well. And the next. It's the way it has always been when new tech comes along.

The Israelis have been using it over Syria completely unimpeded by Russian systems. It's why Iranian/Hezbollah assets keep randomly blowing up.

The US military literally doesn't want to use the F35 for bombing dirt holes because the F35 chews through engines faster than they can replace them. Both the F22 and F35 have this issue. At any given time a third to half the fleet is grounded because they chewed through their engines. Add to that the component that they cost stupid amounts to fly per hour. There is a real ongoing engine shortage.

This is actually a significant readiness issue for the US. A third to half of the 5th gen fighters are constantly grounded because they've been used up bombing dirt hovels and opponents who have nearly no realistic chance to shoot down a 4th gen fighter let alone a 5th gen.

Holding up the F35's ability to evade 40 to 60 year old air defenses in third world countries does not justify the cost of its existence. The F22 and F35 were built to fight near peer or peer opponents. And in that area there are serious doubts about the performance of the F35 due to its limited range and massive logistical issues.

I'd also like to point out that the Russian's unwillingness to shoot down US and Israeli jets in Syria is not an indicator whether they can actually shoot them down or not. Certain EU based defense contractors already proved that radar systems that can catch F35's exist. Russian S400 and the even newer S500 series can probably fairly reliably shoot down things like the F35. Those are systems that Russia never shared with the Syrians or the Iranians, so if any of them exist inside Syria it is in Russian control.

Again the US needs 5th and probably even 6th gen jets, but the F35 has been an unmitigated failure. If the Pentagon wants new jets (and it wants new jets) to replace that piece of crap, it better prove that it first fixed the failures in the contracting process that produced an entire series of completely failed jets and naval ships.

[Kellhound]

The Ford still can't reliably launch planes, and it's elevators are still broken.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/mil...rier-problems/

Even assuming that they manage to get the elevators and it's launch system working (which they will eventually), the Navy doesn't seem fully convinced it wants to replace all the Nimitzes with them. They seem to want other smaller designs. https://www.popularmechanics.com/mil...raft-carriers/

The LCS is a complete failure. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Littoral_combat_ship 3 (completely different designs) were built then the entire series got cancelled. They are all being mothballed this year. They ended up buying an Italian designed frigate to replace the entire thing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conste...-class_frigate . Literally nothing worked on the LCSs and they couldn't even come up with refit for using the hull for something.

The issues with the Ford are being worked out. It can now reliable operate at the same launch/recovery rate per aircraft as a Nimitz.

The SecNav is not the Navy, it is a political position that may or may not have the best interest of the service in mind.

The LCS is not a complete failure. It has some design issues, but it has proven to be capable of performing a significant number of mid to low intensity missions. Only the first four ships (2 of each class) are being retired. The Constellation Class is not replacing them, they are supplementing them.

- - - Updated - - -

What it's mostly supposed to do is go toe to toe with Chinese stuff and it remains to be seen if it does that very well.

They are intended to perform BVR combat, and in that they are clearly superior to their Chinese adversaries.

- - - Updated - - -

The US military literally doesn't want to use the F35 for bombing dirt holes because the F35 chews through engines faster than they can replace them. Both the F22 and F35 have this issue. At any given time a third to half the fleet is grounded because they chewed through their engines. Add to that the component that they cost stupid amounts to fly per hour. There is a real ongoing engine shortage.

This is actually a significant readiness issue for the US. A third to half of the 5th gen fighters are constantly grounded because they've been used up bombing dirt hovels and opponents who have nearly no realistic chance to shoot down a 4th gen fighter let alone a 5th gen.

Holding up the F35's ability to evade 40 to 60 year old air defenses in third world countries does not justify the cost of its existence. The F22 and F35 were built to fight near peer or peer opponents. And in that area there are serious doubts about the performance of the F35 due to its limited range and massive logistical issues.

I'd also like to point out that the Russian's unwillingness to shoot down US and Israeli jets in Syria is not an indicator whether they can actually shoot them down or not. Certain EU based defense contractors already proved that radar systems that can catch F35's exist. Russian S400 and the even newer S500 series can probably fairly reliably shoot down things like the F35. Those are systems that Russia never shared with the Syrians or the Iranians, so if any of them exist inside Syria it is in Russian control.

Again the US needs 5th and probably even 6th gen jets, but the F35 has been an unmitigated failure. If the Pentagon wants new jets (and it wants new jets) to replace that piece of crap, it better prove that it first fixed the failures in the contracting process that produced an entire series of completely failed jets and naval ships.

The F-35 does not fight in a vacuum. SEAD is something that has to be figured in.

[Xeones]

I'm pretty sure I remember hearing people complain about the F35 like 10 years ago. Are we developing this in house or have we been contracting the "defense contractors" to handle it?

[Easo]

Oh look, it is the time to bash F-35 again. Listen, people, it is here to stay. Production rates leaves both Russia and China crying in the corner. It has bunch of international customers and will have new ones/old ones buying more.
Does the program have issues? Yes, for a multitude of reasons. Is USA wasting lifespan of existing airframes by bombing cavemen? Yes, it does. But those things won't change the reality.

But universal healthcare and free college is worth that

For the billionth time - USA has more or less enough money for all that + military, the issue is with how it is spent and mismanagement. Aka classic America.

[Ihavewaffles]

To the guy who said smaller aircraft carriers, yes that is the way to go, u don't want a big target for the enemy to sink. Current sizes are relics, more ships n smaller have a bigger chance to survive n have an operational air force in place than loose it all..

Who knows what n how much iran for example has missiles to zerg us ships..

Better is to have more destroyers n sheit (that actually work, not like zumblaut or whatever its name was

[ati87]

Oh look, it is the time to bash F-35 again. Listen, people, it is here to stay. Production rates leaves both Russia and China crying in the corner. It has bunch of international customers and will have new ones/old ones buying more.
Does the program have issues? Yes, for a multitude of reasons. Is USA wasting lifespan of existing airframes by bombing cavemen? Yes, it does. But those things won't change the reality.



For the billionth time - USA has more or less enough money for all that + military, the issue is with how it is spent and mismanagement. Aka classic America.

If you count the amount of money all these countries put in this plane you could probably buy all of the oil in the ME that the US and co have been terrorizing the ME for at least half a century at this point.

Be honest though te F35 is to big to fail so please don't try to defend this any other way, it really looks silly when people try to defend this project as a nesrine when clearly it isn't. If in 2021 you still can't fully count on the F35 to replace the current F-16 then it really doesn't matter how well it can perform during planned operations.

[Crispin]

I don't see the US selling fighterplanes to intl' customers anytime soon again, if the program is scrapped. in for a pound in for a penny.

[Slant]

So, it's starting to look like even the Pentagon is getting to the point where it just can't justify spending more money on the F35.

https://www.defensenews.com/congress...ut-our-losses/

The plane is still plagued by endless lists of issues and even when it manages to fly (not something guaranteed with the F35) it apparently costs too much to fly.

So now, after having burned through 1.7 trillion dollars with very little to show for it, the Pentagon is quietly looking to move onto the next endless money hole.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/mil...-new-comments/

I'm sorry, I just don't fucking care that they have a shit plane. I'm just unwilling to accept my fucking tax money being spent on another pie in the sky "space lazor".

What's the fucking guarantee that they won't just burn another couple of trillion dollars on something that turns out to be a piece of shit. Like the F35, the LCS, the Ford class carriers?

Um, every fighter jet is plagued by teething problems. The F-35 is a monumental step forward in development. It's not a failure to anyone who understands the point of the jet. It's only a failure to idiots thinking they can replace the A-10 with the F-35. But for anything else, the F-35 is a massive success. You're reading too much popular tech magazines.

The idea to replace the F-16 with the F-35 was equally dumb. It's still a good airplane, what was a failure was the original pitch.

[Kellhound]

To the guy who said smaller aircraft carriers, yes that is the way to go, u don't want a big target for the enemy to sink. Current sizes are relics, more ships n smaller have a bigger chance to survive n have an operational air force in place than loose it all..

Who knows what n how much iran for example has missiles to zerg us ships..

Better is to have more destroyers n sheit (that actually work, not like zumblaut or whatever its name was

Smaller does not mean less targeted. It does mean less capable of surviving a hit and more likely to be hit. The fewer planes on a carrier equals either less planes for CAP or less for strikes. Smaller carriers also have issues with having AEW coverage 24/7.

Destroyers are sitting ducks without air cover. They are capable of defending against submarines, but ASuW missiles pose a huge threat when they are not detected OTH.

- - - Updated - - -

If you count the amount of money all these countries put in this plane you could probably buy all of the oil in the ME that the US and co have been terrorizing the ME for at least half a century at this point.

Be honest though te F35 is to big to fail so please don't try to defend this any other way, it really looks silly when people try to defend this project as a nesrine when clearly it isn't. If in 2021 you still can't fully count on the F35 to replace the current F-16 then it really doesn't matter how well it can perform during planned operations.

The only thing that prevents the F-35 from replacing the F-16 is the same reason the F-16 exists in the first place, cost.

[Gaidax]

To the guy who said smaller aircraft carriers, yes that is the way to go, u don't want a big target for the enemy to sink. Current sizes are relics, more ships n smaller have a bigger chance to survive n have an operational air force in place than loose it all..

Who knows what n how much iran for example has missiles to zerg us ships..

Better is to have more destroyers n sheit (that actually work, not like zumblaut or whatever its name was

Big ass aircraft carriers that carry all that military might are a necessity for US to have presence, seeing America as a continent is thousands kilometers away from just about everything else.

Also nobody crazy enough would attempt to sink it because that would mean all out war vs US - a war that can't be won. You also need actual state actor to be able to do it, it's not going to be sunk by some bearded guys with RPGs and shitty scud missiles.