• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

F-35 looking more like white elephant

B

beana51

Members +
"WASHINGTON (AFP) – The F-35 fighter jet, set to replace a large part of the US warplane fleet, has become the most expensive weapons program ever, drawing increased scrutiny at a time of tight public finances.
the program is now expected to cost a whopping 382 billion dollars, for 2,443 aircraft.
The so-called 5th generation fighter was built with features designed to help avoid and ensure American supremacy in the skies for decades."


Personally I never met a new fighter Jet I did not like..as the ultimate fighter Jet,is almost in the grasp of our Air Force.......it becomes to rich for their Blood....In a time of austerity,this happens. cutting back! It brings back to me memories,when other Air craft were scraped,only to be brought back.Because we could not do with out them as world situations change!!..I hope its true with this plane also!........its a Beautiful thing!..Hope it lives in our Sim world!!


captphoto_1292428917557-1-0.jpg
 
Yes, the title of the original press report is as usual quite unjustified and I find it as no accident that the release of the articles came on the same day.

As I mentioned over in the F-22 thread, a number of weapon systems that have become targets by some groups and press outlets are no accident. There was much the same in the old 1960's era TFX Tri-Service project which became the F-111. The plane was dropped by the Navy but adopted by the Air Force. The F-111A had plenty of teething troubles and it's first combat mission in Vietnam, Operation Combat Lancer was a disastrous failure with only 2 out of the 6 aircraft being launched making their targets. The truth is that the Ops Plan for Combat Lancer and the 111A were ill conceived to begin with and both crews and jets were rushed into combat. The F-111 in it's various versions had a good and long career with a well establish combat record stretching from Vietnam, Libya, 1991 Gulf War. The plane overcame it's difficult beginnings and trumped critics. But the pattern of criticism will go on against nearly ever Military system which gets introduced. The F-35 will be built and in significant numbers and I have little doubt in the ability of Lockheed Martin to iron out the bugs as they do well. What needs to be fixed is the broken bidding/contract system and changes need to be made in "sole source" procurement regs. We could have what we need when we need it if the Govt would reform their own flawed ways of regulation and oversight themselves better. BTW, maybe the Air Force will get their new Tanker this decade??? I'm not holding my breath on that debacle anymore.

:salute:
 
Really, aren't we spending enough taxpayer's money already. What can the F-35 do that the new generation F-15 SE can't?

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/fighter/a/f15eagle.htm

And the F-15 is already a proven overwhelming winner over any other nation's fighters.

It's just another ho-ha by the corporate/military establishment that gets rich even when a country is losing a war or make that two wars.

Caz
 
Cazzie said:
Really, aren't we spending enough taxpayer's money already. What can the F-35 do that the new generation F-15 SE can't?

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/fighter/a/f15eagle.htm

And the F-15 is already a proven overwhelming winner over any other nation's fighters.

It's just another ho-ha by the corporate/military establishment that gets rich even when a country is losing a war or make that two wars.

Caz
Click to expand...

At one of the last DARPA related meetings I was at, this topic came up as to if we may be better served by canning either the 35 or the 22(keeping one type) for doing high risk missions and once a said battlefield area is mostly clear of high end threats, legacy systems could finish the job. Here's the answer. First of all, the SE isn't even in the same ballpark with the F-35 in many areas and never will be. The current battlefield threats we could face include a variety of threats from both Air to Air, and Surface to Air systems that already render legacy systems at or close to being obsolete in terms of direct attack/penetration role. Truly, the F-22 and F-35 are specifically designed for current and even future projected threats.

Even if we cut the total number of F-35's, and overlap upgraded legacy airframes, the older airframes(specifically fighters) which have shorter airframe life will reach the end of that life cycle not long from now and will need full replacement. We have to keep in mind not just current and future threats, but also what happens when we are out of an already very geriatric fleet of frontal combat aircraft. With planes like the J-20 and T-50 coming into existence and a SAM/PA Radar net never before faced by our combat aircraft, the F-22, F-35, B-2's are a must! It's either that or we'll be a third world air power in the near future with limited to no capability to counter said threats if the need arises. Our enemies and potential enemies would love nothing more than for us to scuttle the F-35 and wire down the F-22. For anyone who thinks we can't afford such systems, this country built the biggest most powerful military machine in history in the midst of the Great Depression and went to war. We not only supplied our needs, but many of our allies. We can and will build this plane even though I expect it to be downsized some and drawn out over a longer production period.

I almost forgot, I read a report a few nights ago about where some of these new Russian SAM systems are starting to show up in uncomfortably close locals & not to mention that interest in the T-50 is in the same region. Food for thought!
 
That's a thoughtful and informative post, deathfromafar. But on the subject of whether we can afford anything, there is at least one difference between now and the late 1930s. In WWII, we borrowed the money from ourselves, through the sale of war bonds. America's government debt was owned by Americans. That's not true anymore, and I'm worried. Weapons are a national security issue, but so is foreign debt. For the last decade, American strategy has been based on being -- and staying -- the only superpower. Question is, can we afford that strategy?
 
The answer is no David, especially if we continue to spend untold billions in Afghanistan and Iraq. We haven't lost those wars militarily, but we are quickly bankrupting ourselves carrying on, just as the USSR did.

Caz
 
Great Comments all pertainate ...yet it begs the question ,what price security for America?..is their a price to feel secure and protected.?can we not afford it?..I remember the same comments in JFKs time.Prior the Moon shot..I do not wish to get Political,This is not the place!..rather ask,generally whats in the best long term interest for our Country and its people.?... the Soviets spurred us on then,but now China is emerging. Gates already mentioned N.Korea,certainty no immediate threat.,but representative of a dangerous world!!I trust our USA,they will do the right thing...there are no alternative's....meanwhile is there a good model for our Sims??..Exciting F-35....Like to take it up for a SPIN or TWO!..Cheers!!

"TO KEEP THE PEACE PREPARE FOR WAR"..
 
The big thing I see at my level being in military aviation is there is a large gravitation away from manned aircraft... Most of these unmanned vehicles do not qualify as a Class A Mishap if there is a total loss of the vehicle in combat, so a lot of people are willing to use them to take risks where you wouldn't conceive of doing so with a regular aircraft. I personally think that the F-35 program is going to be scrapped for an unmanned fighter of some sort. While I think the F-35 could grow up to be an excellent aircraft I truly believe in the legacy systems. Unfortunately though with the ever changing world I am not privy to all the new threats out there. I know my experience with the new cutting edge helicopters has not been a good one. Although I suppose all new types have their teething problems.
 
Someday, I would really like to fly in the Air Force. That's not going to happen, my eyes are too bad. But I don't want to set in a trailer in Arizona or Utah or wherever, to fly a plane that is halfway across the globe. But with all these robots fighting our wars for us, then war is going to be a day to day event. The cost of human lives will drop, and that will lead to more war.
 
dswo said:
That's a thoughtful and informative post, deathfromafar. But on the subject of whether we can afford anything, there is at least one difference between now and the late 1930s. In WWII, we borrowed the money from ourselves, through the sale of war bonds. America's government debt was owned by Americans. That's not true anymore, and I'm worried. Weapons are a national security issue, but so is foreign debt. For the last decade, American strategy has been based on being -- and staying -- the only superpower. Question is, can we afford that strategy?
Click to expand...

The answer is indisputably yes.
Back then, even as the war loomed the entire world was still in the Depression. Foreign Governments borrowed both money and equipment during the Lend Lease program. We were being heavily borrowed from even though were in far worse shape than we are now. Our total Military expenditures including financing of Low Intensity Conflicts(which is what we now fight) don't even come close to making a significant dent in our taxable GDP. Our Military spending at 23% of the annual budget isn't what is causing deficits. The Soviet war in Afghanistan isn't what broke that monster's back either.

You'll hear no argument from me regarding the borrowing of foreign assets when we possess the means and resources to shrug off such a need. There's room for change and then some but that is a discussion for another time and place. Bear in mind that if we fail to sustain the levels of Force Projection needed to counter a major regional threat, then we open ourselves to the very real possibility that any power being either established or suddenly appearing rogues could jump up and disrupt commerce and energy supplies and routes vital to the economic well being of many nations or possibly worse things.

Being prepared is a necessity. Not being prepared risks inviting the worst. Put simply, these new 5th generation gadgets now appearing on the other side of the globe aren't meant for anyone else but us and likely some nations even less prepared than we.
 
Great post James..you made the future a today thing.it has been and still is your spirit of what duty is..involvement,participation,the human factor...for actions to have honor it must be hands on and personnel!...even tho the yet new world to come will be beyond our wildest imagination..cyber warfare and other stuff..Reminds me of an old star Trek Show where War was by Computer..and the Causalitys reported to disintegration centers...cold inhuman,with out feelings..the final destruction of mans dreams...When I was 15,now I'm just about 80 yrs old..One could never consieve of today,man on the moon and all...I think Gen.Douglas Mc Aurthur said it best then,... on May 2nd 1963 at West Point.he said in part..



"You now face a new world -- a world of change. The thrust into outer space of the satellite, spheres, and missiles mark the beginning of another epoch in the long story of mankind. In the five or more billions of years the scientists tell us it has taken to form the earth, in the three or more billion years of development of the human race, there has never been a more abrupt or staggering evolution. We deal now not with things of this world alone, but with the illimitable distances and as yet unfathomed mysteries of the universe. We are reaching out for a new and boundless frontier.
We speak in strange terms: of harnessing the cosmic energy; of making winds and tides work for us; of creating unheard synthetic materials to supplement or even replace our old standard basics; to purify sea water for our drink; of mining ocean floors for new fields of wealth and food; of disease preventatives to expand life into the hundreds of years; of controlling the weather for a more equitable distribution of heat and cold, of rain and shine; of space ships to the moon; of the primary target in war, no longer limited to the armed forces of an enemy, but instead to include his civil populations; of ultimate conflict between a united human race and the sinister forces of some other planetary galaxy; of such dreams and fantasies as to make life the most exciting of all time."..it was for me then and still is for me today,,and it may be for you too tomorrow!...Good Luck James! Vin!!

​
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/douglasmacarthurthayeraward.html
 
UCAV

I think the military is looking at more, less costly UAV's/UCAV's

I am wondering if they are taking a lesson from WWII where it was theorized that if more FW190's, M262's and AR 234's would have been built (rather work on many other more costly and time consuming wonder weapons) ....the outcome might have been different??
(Not that I am upset that it didn't). But the theory is still the same.

We are all essentially, UCAV jock's anyway. I've been a unmanned aircraft flyer since 1997 (when I finally could buy/afford my own PC)

Sign me up!

Just don't give em thier own will............and stay away from lighting.........bad!
 
James said:
Someday, I would really like to fly in the Air Force. That's not going to happen, my eyes are too bad. But I don't want to set in a trailer in Arizona or Utah or wherever, to fly a plane that is halfway across the globe. But with all these robots fighting our wars for us, then war is going to be a day to day event. The cost of human lives will drop, and that will lead to more war.
Click to expand...


Great and thoughtful post, James!

As far as not being able to fly military, don't sweat it too much. The planes are cool, but typically mil pilots don't fly that much, and they spend about 12 hours a day doing additional duties at the squadron or staff level. In the Air Force, you are an officer first and pilot second. My dad finished his AF career at 24 years with 4900 hours, and i've got almost 4 times that much flying in 22 years. AND, it's a one-mistake military...you could be finished before you wanted to be. In commercial flying, you fly alot, and then that's it...no additional duties. Go see the world on your blocks of days off using your pass privelages...or whatever!

My best friend fom college went into the AF and flew fighters. He finished his career with 2600 hours mixed between the F-111 and F-15...not really much flying over 21 years. He worked very hard and pulled some long hours, but it wasn't flying.


The writing is on the wall for piloted tactical platforms. The F-35 is the last hurrah.
 
UCAV ..........flight hours....sim time

I wonder what the average sim time flight hours have been for PC Jocks like the members here?

I wonder if UCAV pilots will be more cost effective......because they can put in more hours with
less training and less down time, pre flight, etc..........

This is why it will be much more cost effective..........

Like I think.........I must have over a bizzillion flight hours.......sitting on my arse.......Gezz

I hate to think of what I could have been doing???
 
F-35

Great thread :)
Lockheed will field a cool jet..they are good at that and the F-35 is cosmic in its systems and growth potential.
The F-35 program was originally sold to the US and allies as a multi-mission machine to replace the legacy F-16 and F-18 primarily, at about 40-60 million USD per copy. U.S. Congressional numbers reveal it is around 155 million USD per jet at this time.
Due to program delays with the F-35, Australia has taken an interim aircraft in the 4.5 generation, F-18F and all reports from crew indicate they are pleasantly surprised by capabilities built in to the coupled advanced crew station platform and its ability to perform several missions including air to air and air to ground, simultaneously. Currently, Boeing is offering the F-18E/F at 42 million USD per jet and smaller F-35 partner-countries are taking a hard look at other options as the F-35 still does not have a definitive end price.

As the United States draws down its legacy fighter fleet, they are in a real cash pickle,having put all their eggs in one basket with the F-35. Ever bought a new house or car without knowing what it will cost ?
An old procurement lesson, learned hard, is still relevant in 2011.

:)
 
...and they've axed the RAH-66 for next to nothing.


It would've made such a good weapons platform...since manoeuverability is next to unimportant when fighting AAA and SAMs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top