Fluther: Is it time to cancel the F-35 before we squander even ...

Is it time to cancel the F-35 before we squander even more money on this trainwreck of an airplane?

Asked by gorillapaws (30519

) April 3rd, 2017
11 responses
“Great Question” (5

)

I just read a pretty extensive article F-35 Continues to Stumble that goes into some detail regarding all of the problems with the F-35. I knew it was bad, but that article gave me an alarming perspective on the status of the project.

What’s the smart move for America? Cancel the F-35 and replace it with something else? Suck it up and just keep shelling out cash? Something else?

Follow this question

Send to a friend!

Topics: government, defense, budget, military, aviation, security

Observing members: 0

Composing members: 0

Answers

Our country was going to buy a bunch of em as well, but got in trouble with their cost among other things so backed out.
Now they want to buy a bunch of super hornets to replace our aging F-18’s until something better comes along.

SQUEEKY2 (23120

)“Great Answer” (1

)

Apparently the F-35 sensor/data link has unprecedented capability, so would be highly valuable for front line recon. http://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2016/12/10/air_force_tests_f-35_lethal_data_link_capability_110468.html

RocketGuy (15237

)“Great Answer” (2

)

@RocketGuy In the article I linked they discuss many of the problems with the data link. One of which is that it gives away the position of the plane—at least that was my understanding from the article.

gorillapaws (30519

)“Great Answer” (2

)

The F-35 is an employment gimmick for Congressmen who sit on the House Defense Committee. It is a boondoggle.

zenvelo (39429

)“Great Answer” (4

)

The plane flies, has technology to engage the enemies aircraft and missiles, is a stealth unit from RADAR, is fast and maneuverable for the pilot.
I worked on the manufacturing of the engine use on the F-35 almost twenty years ago. That is the biggest rub it is technology from ten or twenty years ago. But the other side is using ten to twenty year old stuff too.

In your eyes @zenvelo the F-117 stealth fighter and the B-2 used in Baghdad, Iraq were a waste of money?

Tropical_Willie (31125

)“Great Answer” (1

)

The program is a cluster f☆☆k…

Unfortunately, this is just one example of a huge R and D project that the US has poured billions into, with almost nothing to show for it.

The truly sad thing, is that countries like China, hack us, and steal what technology was learned, without having to spend the time, or money.

Defense spending ,in the US, is one of the biggest scams in history. Defense contractors rake in countless dollars, and rarely have to conform to any timescale, or expectations.

Uugh. We do need an eventual replacement, all purpose fighter. So, I wouldn’t want to see the project scraped. Especially after all the money invested. The US will make some money back by selling the aircraft to other,ally countries. The more that can be arranged to be sold, the more the costs will come down.

The kinks are many, in part, because the systems are so advanced. In time, the developers will trouble shoot,and correct most issues. How much time,and money, nobody can say…

The M-16 was an advanced weapon when it hit the battlefield. Unfortunately, it was a terrible weapon for anything but ideal weather, and maintenance. Many US troops were found dead (in Vietnam) with full clips, and would have been better off with a spear. The weapon never approached the dependability of the AK-47. The weapon system it was supposed to be better than.

In time, the platform was upgraded. Adding piston driven systems, and teaching proper maintenence helped develope the AR platforms that are less susceptible to conditions of the battlefield , and so desirable today.

Warfare technology is like any other. It takes trial, and error. Hopefully, the F-35 will eventually be polished into what it’s original designers intended.

I wish that we,as a species, would get to a point where diplomatic means were explored as thoroughly as these weapons systems…

MrGrimm888 (19003

)“Great Answer” (4

)

@ Uh… the M-16 of Viet Nam was not the new improved M-16A1 that had features that fixed all the bad points of the first M-16s.
The AK 47 was a reliable weapon because of it’s loose tolerances, unlike the M-16’s tight, precision fitting parts.
All of the problems with the old M-16 have been remedied with the new M-1616, if it ever sees combat.
But you are right that certain problems exist with the F-35 as well as the douchebags who think they know more about battlefield conditions than the soldiers on the ground. How about a replacement for the A-10 Thunderbolt II? Helicopters are too slow and fighter jets are too fast. The Thunderbolt, while an old warhorse, has abilities still needed on today’s armament roster.

kritiper (25757

)“Great Answer” (2

)

^Correct. I was attempting to point out that weapons systems need refinement. But they have to be tested in battle first…

From what I’ve read, the A-10 will probably not be replaced in the near future. It is as close to perfection as the AK-47.

As you mentioned, it is hard to find a suitable replacement. “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it….”

MrGrimm888 (19003

)“Great Answer” (1

)

Agreed.

kritiper (25757

)“Great Answer” (1