F-35 Where do we go from here?

Jan 2007
37,227
8,476
#1
This mega dollar project appears to still be a wreck. Way over cost, under performing, unable to sell it.

This article is a few months old and there are still serious issues.

America's F-35: Coming In for a "Crash Landing"? | The National Interest

The F-35 is double-inferior,” John Stillion and Harold Scott Perdue concluded in their written summary of the war game, later leaked to the press. The new plane “can’t turn, can’t climb, can’t run,” they warned.
 
Last edited:
Jul 2014
38,091
10,074
midwest
#2
This mega dollar project appears to still be a wreck. Way over cost, under performing, unable to sell it.

This article is a few months old and there are still serious issues.

America's F-35: Coming In for a "Crash Landing"? | The National Interest

The F-35 is double-inferior,” John Stillion and Harold Scott Perdue concluded in their written summary of the war game, later leaked to the press. The new plane “can’t turn, can’t climb, can’t run,” they warned.
We go deeper in debt, that's where we go from here. We're buying. We're all in.

It doesn't work very well, it's way over budget, we may not even need it...

What's not to like?

Lots of other big weapons systems have had these same problems in the past, though maybe not on this scale.

Seven other "Partner" countries have already helped fund it and three additional countries have plans to buy it as well.

I doubt it will be cancelled, maybe cut back in numbers.

Already in: Australia, Israel, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Turkey, UK.

Plan to buy: Canada, S Korea, Japan.

Like the big Wall Street banks, the F-35 is too big to fail.
 
Last edited:
Likes: 2 people
Oct 2014
3,901
2,625
North of the Big City
#3
This mega dollar project appears to still be a wreck. Way over cost, under performing, unable to sell it.

This article is a few months old and there are still serious issues.

America's F-35: Coming In for a "Crash Landing"? | The National Interest

The F-35 is double-inferior,” John Stillion and Harold Scott Perdue concluded in their written summary of the war game, later leaked to the press. The new plane “can’t turn, can’t climb, can’t run,” they warned.
Mega dollar project? Try GIGA dollar project.

Thanks a lot, Bush:

The F-35 has cost $400 billion since the program started in 2006, making it the most expensive project in military history.
 
Likes: 3 people
Jan 2007
37,227
8,476
#4
If the plane worked as planned and would add superiority over our potential enemies maybe we could sort of tolerate it.
Many say it won't compete with threats from Russia and China.
 
Likes: spyydrr
Aug 2010
3,278
680
#6
I think they should have not bothered with the short take-off and vertical landing capability. That added a huge element of complexity and cost to the project.

But all in all there are worse ways to spend money.
 
Likes: 1 person
Nov 2007
1,636
265
#7
There is a simple solution.

Buy the latest version of the F/A-18 Super Hornet for the U.S. Navy, Marine Corps, and yes, force the USAF to get enough needed.

Restart F-22 Raptor production for the Air Force AND allow foreign allies to purchase the F-22 if they really want a high end aircraft. The U.S. had forbidden any export of the Raptor because of technological secrets. Time to cut that loose.

Flush the F-35. Too many compromises.
 
Likes: 1 person

Singularity

Former Staff
Oct 2009
32,741
26,891
Kansas
#8
How about those heavy main battle tanks we keep building for an asymmetrical war?

The F-35 might be an expensive boondoggle, but at least it will be a usable platform somewhere, eventually, against foes who can't counter it. At least the military is keen to solve its problems, and apply its (admittedly few) advantages.

These things will just sit in the yard the moment they're finished. The military doesn't even want them.
 
Jan 2014
16,424
6,275
south
#9
I think they should have not bothered with the short take-off and vertical landing capability. That added a huge element of complexity and cost to the project.

But all in all there are worse ways to spend money.
kinda brings the obvious question - if you personally bought this item, would you demand a refund? oh, that's right, we DID buy it.
 
Nov 2007
1,636
265
#10
How about those heavy main battle tanks we keep building for an asymmetrical war?

The F-35 might be an expensive boondoggle, but at least it will be a usable platform somewhere, eventually, against foes who can't counter it. At least the military is keen to solve its problems, and apply its (admittedly few) advantages.

These things will just sit in the yard the moment they're finished. The military doesn't even want them.
There is a reason for that which has nothing to do with military need.