F-35 - why are we still making them????

[dilbert firestorm]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ts-reveal.html


F-35 is a fast fighter but... it can only do it in short bursts.

its stealth coating peels off during high speed.

it also shakes during high speed, stressing its airframe.

so this boondoggle of an aircraft is being manufactured to our allies with major serious flaws..

what's the point of having a fighter aircraft that can't fly very fast at long periods.

its a turd of a fighter that it always was from the beginning.

[The_Waco_Kid]

doesn't mean these issues can't be solved. structural issues are easier to deal with, this is not the first time a fighter has required more structural bracing after flight testing. the stealth coating should also be solvable. while the F-115 is not supersonic mainly due to the aerodynamics required to promote radar deflection, the coating has proved pretty stable. it does require patching however this is minor and easy to do.

the fly-by-wire issue is the most serious as the jet can't be flown to it's full capabilities without it. that also should be solvable. in the meantime it will reduce the plane's abilities.

while the operational requirements are vastly greater today, the B-29 was rushed into service during WWII and it also suffered from design flaws. it's requirements were state of the art at the time, in both payload, altitude, range and of course the first pressurized cabin.

it's main flaw were the engines, which suffered mechanical issues in the early versions. that was fixed of course and had the plane had the proper testing lead time it would have been solved beforehand.

interestingly, three planes had to land in Russia as alternate landing sites. Uncle Joe returned the pilots but not the planes. the Russkis are great at copying things and they reverse engineered the plane, including the engine flaws.

of course in a few years post WWII the jet age rendered the B-29 obsolete.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_B-29_Superfortress

[the_real_Barleycorn]

But back in the day the US produced hundreds and thousands of planes. How many F35s can be sidelined before we have a major hole in our defensive grid?

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

But back in the day the US produced hundreds and thousands of planes. How many F35s can be sidelined before we have a major hole in our defensive grid?

there has always been a "quality vs. quantity" debate in military planning. barring an absolute technological superiority which would have to be in general an order of magnitude in advancement the quantity argument can be made. this was the thinking behind the Sherman tank. interestingly, at the early stages of WWII the Sherman was more than a match for German tanks, which had short barrel cannons designed for mobile infantry warfare .. Blitzkrieg. they were not designed for tank on tank engagements. the Germans realized this and began to design what became the concept of the MBT - Main Battle Tank. at this point the German tanks were superior in firepower. the Sherman was no match one on one. now when the numbers were 5 to 1 the story was different.

the Germans over-designed everything. very elegant track assemblies. fucking Hell to support in the field. they required a large support group to maintain. Not so with the Sherman tank, a much simpler design. the Germans used an interleaved suspension system on their tanks and half-tracks. interestingly, German half-tracks did not have a true 4x4 like front axle. the US half-tracks did. they were superior to the German half-tracks.

what's the point here? a blend is needed. there is a justification for advanced capability. just look at the Air Force F-15 and Navy variant F-14. not one has ever been lost in an actual combat engagement up against foreign counterparts. their advanced air superiority capabilities gave them a serious edge. However these fighters can be overwhelmed by sheer numbers of capable enemy fighters. Just like the US and Russians overwhelmed generally superior German tanks in large battles. the Germans didn't have the numbers and their over-designed track system among other things led to their defeat.

We do need advanced air superiority fighters than can provide stand-off capabilities against larger numbers of enemy fighters. We also need quality lessor fighters for the numbers game.

A blend is needed. What we can't allow is for opposing forces to jump ahead in terms of sheer technologically superior fighter platforms. So if we don't push the tech edge, we don't have them. This is why the F-35 and it's advanced capabilities are needed. Just not in so many numbers given their cost that we ignore the numbers game.

[dilbert firestorm]

air force said the F-35 is now comparable to the F-15 in cost. their claim of course.

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

But back in the day the US produced hundreds and thousands of planes. How many F35s can be sidelined before we have a major hole in our defensive grid?

yeah, but they didn't take 20 fucking years for development to production to front line as with the case with the F-35.

the problems should have been noted during development, not after production.

I'll admit that early aircraft had some problems that were missed during development and were only discovered during operations. so, they came out with variants that fixed the issues.

I notice that they don't add those letters to often. WWII fighters had all sorts of updates.

P-38 Lightning (F-35's namesake; not deserving of the name) went up to something like J version.

just look at the B-52. it last production variant is H version.

its like they don't want the aircraft having letter upgrades as associated with problems.

they use the 'block' usage instead.

[rexdutchman]

To sell of course ,,,,,

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

....This is why the F-35 and its advanced capabilities are needed. Just not in so many numbers given their cost that we ignore the numbers game.

Problem is -- most of the cost is incurred upfront, before the first plane is produced. For things like R&D, testing and prototypes. So the cost per plane is heavily dependent on how many we ultimately churn out. (For those versed in accounting - too much fixed cost, not enough variable.)

We spent $45 billion on the B-2 bomber program to produce 21 planes. That works out to $2.1 billion per bomber. Most of it was for R&D. Actual cost to manufacture the plane was "only" $737 million.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northr...man_B-2_Spirit

The Air Force originally wanted to buy 165 B-2s but those plans were scaled way back when the Cold War ended. Had they ordered the full allotment, the cost per plane would have been at most $900 million instead of $2.1 billion.

I'm sure the same thing is happening with the F-35. As upfront costs overrun, the Pentagon cuts back on how many it will order, which further pushes up the cost per plane.

[gnadfly]

The F-35 is an aircraft for a war that will never happen. IMO, it provides the US with no strategic or tactical advantages. If anything it keeps Lockheed and other manufacturers from going out of business. Like the Abrams tank, which has been marginally overtaking by Russian and German models, there is no reason for a costly incremental better version.

It's more effective to throw money into robots, drones and electronic weapons.

The rail gun is another cash hog that has a very narrow success vector.

Finally about the F35 it's cheaper to fix cosmetic issues than structural issues.

[Jackie S]

"The people who make Radar Guns also make Radar Detectors"

All of this fancy fly by wire stuff is going to be useless if a capable enemy, (China, Russia), can jam it.

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by Jackie S

"The people who make Radar Guns also make Radar Detectors"

All of this fancy fly by wire stuff is going to be useless if a capable enemy, (China, Russia), can jam it.

fly by wire can be jammed?

[gnadfly]

It's shielded from jams. I bet it can't be shielded from EMPs though.

[Jackie S]

Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

fly by wire can be jammed?

The computers that actually run the systems can.

Any electronic device can be rendered useless.

Look at the billions we have spent on Stealth. It is now being reported that China has developed Radar that can detect even the best Stealth technology.

How long untill they sell it to North Korea or the Mulas in the Middle East?

[dilbert firestorm]

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/bu...-fixable-63797


the writer doesn't think its fixable.

[the_real_Barleycorn]

The plot to the reboot of Battlestar Galactica is not that far fetched. The Cylons got into the computers of the defense grid shutting down detection and defense right down to the ultra high tech fighters. They just went dead in space...except for decrepit, self contained Galactica with its museum piece Vipers. How good is your 2 billion dollar plane when someone living in a cave could just turn it off. Kind of like that drone on Obama's watch that just landed in Iran and we never found out why.