F-35: 'A Trillion Dollar Turd' - Russian Payback For US Crashing Their Economy [Archive]

View Full Version : F-35: 'A Trillion Dollar Turd' - Russian Payback For US Crashing Their Economy

sigma6

13th July 2014, 19:29

F-35 Is Karma Comeback to US Avarice, Arrogance, Denial, Repression

Lockheed Martin lied, then locked themselves in a world of denial then got the congress to take a bite of the apple... and played on the US penchant for programming repression and denial into the public consciousness... (especially when it comes to anything "military")

Denial on Denial... This changes everything... The US has totally dropped the ball... tactically, financially, morally, psychologically...

And there is only one way out, the US Military and Lockheed have to come clean, They have to admit they totally screwed up, and they must now completely drop the F35 and start all over!!!

Or stick to flying dated F-15s, and subsonic Harriers

Lockheed and the US Military are literally trying to make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear... shame... They must be smarting and crying like bad little boys that know they are going to get a spanking when they get home (i.e. if and when the US public wakes up) and they don’t know where to run...

No wonder we have a gay president... LOL... It's a loaded PR trigger, in case they need a mass distraction (how many more have they "built into the system?) This is going beyond bread and circuses... It's now just circuses (and no bread... except for the Military...)

F-35 Lightning Developed From RUSSIAN Yak-141
Blueprints Sold To Lockheed Martin (3:46)
k8QKj4K8Ko4

Avro arrow cheaper and better than F-35 (2:35)
S74zf0YZX20

Russian 1950s Mig-21 Can Kill F-35 In A Dog Fight (2:31)
CqjjHDGWm4Q

F22 Raptor Exposed - Why the F22 Was Cancelled (6:12)
KaoYz90giTk

F35, The Jet That Ate The Pentagon (8:18)
KTF_a1DuIyE

Truth About The Useless F-35 & F-22 (10:00)
27qdB1D0s9M
"...like clubbing baby seals..."

F35 Joint Strike Fighter Is A Lemon (by design) (10:18)
UQB4W8C0rZI
A vulnerable plane, compared to F-105 (aka "the lead sled"...)

F35 JSF Stealth or How the West was Lost (43:37)
pteMgYPm1xM

sigma6

13th July 2014, 21:49

The Russian Story
Best Fighter Aircraft Ever Made (Full Documentary)
IudSJE-TLxk
It’s embarrassing to say, but if you’re honest,
you can’t help but feel admiration for the Russians

The Entire History - Why NO ONE will be buying F35s in the foreseeable future (unless they come out with antigravity :D )
Building The Su 27 – The Best Fighter Jet In The World (2:38:28)
yZvMljUNCeU

Tesseract

13th July 2014, 22:01

sigma6

13th July 2014, 22:40

Last I heard the bill was $400 billion - even at that level, when you work out how many college educations, heart operations or mortgage payments that could have covered - it is incredible. A waste of that much money is a crime in itself.

I heard it was hitting 1.5 trillion, but the problem is it's not buying anything, but a vertical take off flying "brick" that can communicate with other "bricks" in wolf packs.

On top of that everyone is backing out. In Canada, they are backing away, McKay bullsh**ed all the way to the bank. Canadian pilots want a twin engine fighter to cover longer distances and survive engine failures, statistics back up the survivability of twin engines. Australia wants out too, cat's out of the bag. The whole thing is becoming another US MIC Propaganda campaign. The concept was to save money by building a basic framework from which to build various specialized models, like some car manufacturers are doing.

This concept totally self destructs on two fronts. According to some estimates one plane is now costing as much as $350 million. The reusable frame model is dangerous, in that it duplicates any errors into all models, and therefore has to be based on something absolutely fundamentally sound (which this is clearly not) They violated the design protocol RIGHT THERE.

The US is going to build an entire fleet (2400) based a on mini space shuttle? They don't even fly fast. It's completely upside down. It makes no sense whatsoever. The ONLY angle I can see is this is a "make work project" for some 40 states involved in the production of parts. But even so, given the money spent why not go back to the board and build a real jet fighter? This whole thing is a farce about to blow up in someone's face. (guess who..)

Makes one wonder if the Boeing prototype might have been better, the engineering problems during competition were minor imo, and at least they incorporated proper wings into it's design. And we never saw the final prototype.

This whole thing appears to be evolving into a giant con (although I think it may have started out as coveting what they thought the Russians were building, then became bullheadedness and denial and the magical ability of Lockheed to turn a brick into a flying machine with UFO capabilities, which isn't going to happen)

So then maybe they thought they could dump this on the whole world (like their banking model...) The thoroughly rotten to the core US Military Industrial Complex (MIC) would "sell" the world a "space ship" fighter (according to all the "marketing" hype) before anyone realized what they signed onto. If that is the case, it's clearly backfiring now. And this leaves the US holding the bag. A bag with a trillion dollar turd in it... This just so reeks of KARMA.

The timing is not looking good either. No amount of computer programming is going to make this "levitating brick" perform unless they replace the innards with a Star Trek Fusion Drive and create an energy field around it, to protect its delicate innards... :o Technically they euchred themselves in every aspect of design, by trying to do everything, (defying the laws of physics) it doesn't excel in anything!

Meanwhile the Russians (and technically the Chinese) built their fleet around the solid aerodynamics of the SU 27, now in its 5th generation. And the electronics and missile advantage are drawing down, no longer the advantage they once were. If a real war breaks out, it will still get back to good 'ol man to man dog fights. Kill or be killed.

I wouldn't want to be a Lockheed engineer right about now :( This one is so obvious, besides mind control propaganda, how else does one explain the absolute 'mind funk' of an entire nation not being onto this?
FzvKwvpgWOs
Oddly it's making reference to Evolution, but it seems to be a pervasive issue in the New Big Brother State. Another too big too fail (or fly)

BAF9OAO4TtA
What's that saying... "You can't con an honest man"

sigma6

14th July 2014, 19:43

Cidersomerset

15th July 2014, 19:25

In most scenario against third world countries and " terrorists' you do not
need multi billion dollar war planes. The expensive kit could be kept back
for deterrent against the bigger threats thus not wearing out the kit on
tasks cheaper planes or drones could do.

This is a US company......

Though you can't hide Black projects on cheap budgets !!...

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://static.bbci.co.uk/frameworks/barlesque/2.60.9/desktop/3.5/img/blq-blocks_grey_alpha.png

15 July 2014 Last updated at 00:03

Farnborough Airshow: The Scorpion in search of a customerBy Russell Hotten

Business reporter, BBC News, Farnborough

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/76269000/jpg/_76269045_textron_airland_624.jpg

Two US fighter jets were due to make their international debuts this week at the
year's most important aerospace event, the Farnborough Airshow. At the moment,
only one of them is here.

The F-35 may be the world's most expensive, most advanced military jet
programme, but it was a cheap and cheerful budget aircraft that managed the
trans-Atlantic crossing to Farnborough.

The Scorpion costs about $20m (£12m) a throw, is built from off-the-shelf
components, and went from drawing board to first flight in 23 months.

The F-35, costing three times as much and conceived in the early 1990s, is still in
the US while engineers figure out what caused a fire that has grounded the entire fleet.

OK, making comparisons is unfair; the Scorpion and F-35 are lightyears apart in
specification and functionality. But it is still slightly ironic.

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/76205000/jpg/_76205954_scorpion2.jpg
Textron flies over the Isle of Wight during its first appearance outside the US
Whit Peters, part of the company behind the Scorpion, was involved in the F-35
when he was Secretary of the US Air Force in the 1990s.

A few years ago, he and some colleagues had an idea for a new, light tactical
fighter for general security and reconnaissance, positioned between existing
cheaper, but ageing aircraft, and full-on strike fighters.

"We were pretty sure that there was a gap in the market," Mr Peters says. "It was
about building something with enough tactical capacity to satisfy customers, but
that also had low running costs. We are in an era when defence departments are
facing budget cuts."

No customers

His company, AirLand, pitched the concept to manufacturers, but it was Textron,
the US giant behind Cessna corporate jets and Bell Helicopters, that grabbed the
opportunity.

In 2012, Textron AirLand Enterprises was born. "It started with a team of about 10,
a whiteboard and a clean sheet," Mr Peters says.

read more.....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-28260781

DeDukshyn

15th July 2014, 23:10

I think by now it is obvious the whole f-35 deal was a scam from the start. Exactly like those charity fund raisers the elite like to put on --- 95% for us and 5% for the project ...

There are a few men getting filthy stinking rich off this plan ... because suckers are born in "office".

KiwiElf

16th July 2014, 07:50

What's even scarier is that the armed forces who have these lemons are now stuck with them, with ongoing maintenance costs likely to keep them poor (ie, on average, the F-35 has 30 hours of maintenance and fixes for every 1.7 hrs flown). Bring back the Avro Arrow!

Cidersomerset

16th July 2014, 10:13

Russia aims "to spend $10bn over the next 10 years," and "they are going to
develop unmanned combat air vehicles," he says.

A quote from the bottom of this article, whether they do or not
the mil ind complex is going push for defence against it and
the arms race will continues and the corporates will fleece
the taxpayer and the Black projects with cream off their
share and the cycle will continue......

Now it could be Russia and China has to spend that much
to pay for their share of the 'Secret Space programme'
budget ...?? Or it could just be fear porn for the elites
to rip us off and live in luxury with all the power,those
ego centric bastards need, who run this damn
' military computer game' ...LOL...I digress !!

Taranis looks similar to the UFO's described at Roswell...

http://web4.hobbylinc.com/gr/tes/tes555.jpg

====================================

http://static.bbci.co.uk/frameworks/barlesque/2.60.9/desktop/3.5/img/blq-blocks_grey_alpha.png

16 July 2014 Last updated at 00:02

Farnborough: Europe's combat drone challenge By Tim Bowler

Business reporter, BBC News

Taranis UCAV
Continue reading the main story
Aerospace and DefenceThe $20m budget fighter jet
Farnborough Airshow: In pictures
New combat jet fails to take to sky
PM announces £1.1bn defence spending

Taranis, named after the Celtic god of thunder, is easily BAE Systems' spookiest-looking aircraft.

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/76260000/jpg/_76260757_hi009796048.jpg

Sleek, with swept-back wings, the grey, wedge-shaped Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle (UCAV),
or drone, is "the most advanced aircraft ever produced in the UK," says the firm.

Taranis is designed to be the prototype for a combat drone - capable of carrying out long-range
strikes in hostile territory.

With the UK's latest jet fighter, the Typhoon, scheduled to need a replacement by 2030, the
success of this project will help the Royal Air Force make decisions on the future numbers of
manned and unmanned combat aircraft.

Taranis's exact details are secret, but it is roughly the size of the RAF's current jet trainer,
the Hawk - the plane used by the Red Arrows display team.

Hide the engine
Continue reading the main story
“
Start Quote
The development of multinational programmes is politically challenging”
End Quote
Derrick Maple

UAV analyst, IHS

Designed to have a low radar and infrared signature, it has a complex exhaust system
to minimise any tell-tale heat trail from its engines, making it hard to detect or shoot down.

"What we had to do was fully embed and hide the gas turbine in the body of the aircraft,"
says Conrad Banks, Rolls-Royce's chief engineer for research and development - Rolls-Royce
being one of the firms working with BAE on Taranis.

At this week's Farnborough Airshow, BAE was keen to highlight the news from the latest
flight tests at "an undisclosed location" where Taranis demonstrated its advanced stealth capabilities.

"The Taranis project is a tremendous example of how the UK government and industry can
work together," says BAE's Chris Garside, engineering director of future combat systems.

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/76282000/jpg/_76282574_rs13220_dp068498.jpg

Taranis UCAV BAE's advanced Taranis drone - test-flying at an "undisclosed location"
Just don't ask what kind of weapons such a drone might carry: "That is a classified topic area,"
comes the short response.

Taranis is not Europe's only combat drone in development, just across the Channel France's
Dassault Aviation is testing a similar aircraft, called Neuron.

Franco-British collaboration

Neither will see active service - both are designed to flight-test technologies for use in future drones.

On Tuesday at the airshow, France and the UK announced a two-year £120m ($205m) study on
a potential Future Combat Air System, which would combine the lessons learnt from Taranis and Neuron.

Such European collaboration is badly-needed, say some industry insiders, if Europe is ever to produce
its own combat drones on an economic basis, rather than rely on off-the-shelf models from Israel or
the United States, which currently dominate the market.

Last year, even France opted to buy US Reaper drones as a money-saving measure.

Individually, Europe's nations are too small to be an effective market for combat drones. Only if they
can develop a multi-national drone would such a system be economical.

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/76260000/jpg/_76260759__str6215.jpg

Dassault Aviation's Neuron UCAV Preparing Neuron for its maiden flight
A Neuron UCAV and Rafale fighter jet flying in formation In future, manned and unmanned fighters
may fly together Yet it is important to put these combat drones in perspective. There are almost 80
firms with Unmanned Air Vehicles (UAVs) of all shapes and sizes at Farnborough, but most of these
are not designed to carry weapons.

The vast majority are designed for information-gathering and surveillance. The US armed forces,
the world's biggest users of drones, may have 8,000 of them, but only 1% of them are armed.

Continue reading the main story
“
Start Quote
This is about finding cost-effective solutions to enable decisions regarding whether a plane will
fly with or without a pilot”
End Quote
Hakan Bushke

Saab CEO

It's an economic fact of life that building and developing combat planes is expensive, whether
those aircraft are manned or not. Taranis itself has already cost £185m. Yet, despite their rising
costs, drones will continue play an increasingly vital role in air forces around the globe.

Future combat missions

It's easy to see why - as they are good at doing boring, complicated things quickly. Yet what they
are not doing is taking nuanced judgements, so for practical, as well as moral, reasons we are not
going to see them replace manned fighters any time soon.

In the combat of the future, mixed flights of manned and unmanned strike aircraft are likely to be
common, but the challenges of operating such very different systems in close proximity to each
other is only just being worked out.

Earlier this year, Dassault's Neuron achieved an important first for combat drones by flying in formation
with other aircraft, including France's latest Rafale fighter jet.

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/76261000/jpg/_76261515_033iqa_140320_0088r-1.jpg

But unmanned combat aircraft might not look like drones such as Taranis and Neuron - they could
equally be unmanned versions of existing, currently-manned, fighter jets.

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/76282000/jpg/_76282576_hi022309816.jpg

In Sweden, Saab is considering developing an unmanned version of its Gripen multirole fighter.
Saab's reasoning is that it would be cheaper for an air force to operate one type of airframe rather
than a conventional jet fighter and a combat drone.

"This is about finding cost-effective solutions to enable decisions regarding whether a plane will fly
with or without a pilot on various missions," says Saab's chief executive Hakan Buskhe.

And it is not just the Swedes - Boeing is also considering a similar role for its F-16 fighters.

A Saab Gripen fighter Fighter jets like Saab's Gripen could be flown unmanned, in future
Despite the challenges facing Europe's policymakers when it comes to military drones, the overall
global UAV market has been largely immune from the tightening of military budgets in many
countries in recent years.

The market is currently growing at some 5% a year, and this is a growth rate that is likely to continue
for the next 10 years, according to defence and aerospace specialists IHS.

Overall, the market from 2014 to 2023 will total almost $90bn.

Russian and Chinese aims

Crucially, much of this growth will no longer be driven by the huge US defence market which is set to
slow in the short term.

Indeed outside the US, the UAV market's annual growth rate over the next decade is set to be 10% or more.

"Much of this is coming from Russia and China which are both developing their industries," says Derrick Maple,
UAV analyst at IHS.

"Their initial requirement is home-based, but China especially has aspirations to export in the longer term."

Russia aims "to spend $10bn over the next 10 years," and "they are going to develop unmanned combat air
vehicles," he says.

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/76282000/jpg/_76282578_488905087.jpg

Russian T-90 tanks in Red Square in Moscow, on May 9, 2014, during a Victory Day parade Russia has
revamped its armed forces in recent years - and is now investing in drones
Europe 'needs its own capability'

Despite the success of Taranis, it is not yet clear whether European nations will, in the end, plan for their
own combat drones to stand alongside manned fighters, sometime after 2030.

"The development of multi-national programmes is politically challenging," says IHS's Derrick Maple.

"But in my view, overriding this is a need for Europe to develop its own capability - otherwise it will
continue to be dependent on the US and Israel."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-28294239

sigma6

24th July 2014, 16:07

Like we had to wait for them to own up, in order to believe what we could gather from the media and research.

Pentagon Admits The F-35 Fighter Jet is a Failure
Even the designer of the popular F-16 Fighter says that the F-35 is the worst plane ever designed.

http://www.lifeintheknow.com/f-35-joint-strike-fighter/

Designer admits it's crap, US is trying to dump cost by selling it to Allies

idVY2KumIcA

sigma6

1st September 2014, 08:12

Flawed F-35 Fighter Could Suck Up Another 8.3 Billion...
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2014/03/27/Flawed-F-35-Fighter-Could-Suck-Another-83-Billion

The Pentagon’s most expensive weapons system, the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, is facing more delays. Again.
As of last month the aircraft was more than $160 billion over budget and seven years behind schedule. Now that delay is likely to be seven-and-a-half years.
No doubt that is being generous, as if, it's going to be ready in 6 months... baahaahaha

sigma6

1st September 2014, 08:17

DOD Is Stuck with a Flawed $1.5 Trillion Fighter Jet -

http://cdn.thefiscaltimes.com/cdn/farfuture/CZ3-2jpDSuwLGF4ftQ7xeSDLB2Lo3OqvDUwqNcwrfTU/mtime:1378409381/sites/default/files/styles/article_hero/public/articles/02162011_F35_article.jpg?itok=IJX_Zkgq

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2014/02/18/DOD-Stuck-Flawed-15-Trillion-Fighter-Jet

In CBS’s “60 Minutes” on Sunday night, national security correspondent David Martin chronicled the seemingly never-ending list of problems with the Pentagon’s next-generation F-35 fight jet, from cost overruns of $160 billion to technical problems that have plagued the plane’s development.

When asked if the F-35 program, which is expected to cost some $1.5 trillion over the four-decade life of the program, is now under control, the Pentagon’s acquisition chief, Frank Kendall, said, "Yes, it is."

But that commitment came with a warning.

“Long gone is the time when we're going to pay for mistake after mistake after mistake," said Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan, the officer who took control of the F-35 program last year. He added that the planes are necessary, however, to keep pace with the technology being developed by U.S. rivals Russia and China.

... does that even make sense??

sigma6

1st September 2014, 08:20

The Pentagon’s Incredible $1.5 Trillion Mistake

http://cdn.thefiscaltimes.com/cdn/farfuture/pzdIFtmv4yNjCLpUeoNkzxi1DNjvpYFEj8Ci2k9sRmM/mtime:1378409441/sites/default/files/styles/article_hero/public/articles/02252013_f35_jet_article.jpg?itok=5NSTPI2l

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2013/02/26/The-Pentagons-Incredible-1-5-Trillion-Mistake
Late Friday afternoon, less than a week after Defense Secretary Leon Panetta issued dire warnings about the pending defense cuts, the Pentagon announced that it had grounded its next generation F-35 fighter because of engine problems. This was the second time in two months the plane has been taken out of service.

Friday afternoon is Washington’s preferred time to release bad news and hope reporters, already thinking about the weekends, will turn a blind eye. But after this latest failure, the problems with the F-35 are simply too numerous to ignore.

Equally impossible to ignore is the $1.5 trillion price tag for one of the biggest failures in Pentagon history. $1.5 trillion is the cost of operating the air craft for 55 years, an amount that has been consistently increased as the program drags on. It’s the most expensive weapons system the Pentagon has ever commissioned. And as problems mount, there are growing concerns that the F-35 will never fly a combat mission.

“This was a huge mistake. We were warned about it in the 1990s by some prescient people. Those people were ignored,” said Winslow Wheeler, a long-time Congressional staffer who now is the director of the Straus Military Reform Project. “We’re living the consequences of the bad, fundamental design of the airplane and bad, fundamental design of the acquisition plan

As the price soared, the Pentagon in 2010 deemed the program “too big to fail.” Yet it continues to fall short. Recent engine troubles are just the latest in a series of mechanical failures. A pilot was killed when oxygen to the cabin was cut off. The aircraft are running too hot, limiting their ability to operate in warm environments.

But according to Wheeler, lawmakers on Capitol Hill and officials at the Pentagon refuse to acknowledge that they might be throwing money at a program that has not, and might not ever, produce a usable aircraft.

“It’s certainly not too big to fail. It already has failed,” he said. “Cancelling this thing and proceeding with a properly conceived aircraft would be cheaper and better.”

sigma6

1st September 2014, 09:08

How DOD’s $1.5 Trillion F-35 Broke the Air Force

http://social.newsinc.com/media/json/69017/26414786/singleVideoOG.html?type=VideoPla

The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is the most expensive, and possibly the most error ridden, project in the history of the United States military. But DOD has sunk so much money into the F-35 - which is expected to cost $1.5 trillion over the 55-year life of the program - that the Pentagon deemed it “too big to fail” in 2010.

Now, the Air Force has taken steps to make sure that the unmitigated disaster that the F-35 has become does not happen again.

The Air Force, in its 20-year strategic forecast entitled “America’s Air Force: A Call to the Future,” has called for an end to big-ticket programs like the F-35. Instead, it plans to invest in what DOD officials have called more “agile” weapons that can be adapted for multiple uses.

It's about time. And is the first time, they have finally admitted what a huge f*** up this is? That sounds like someone admitting defeat. Too big to fail finally exposed for the oxymoronic statement that it is. And to think they did it by their own hand.

sigma6

23rd November 2014, 07:33

This stuff is everywhere you look... who knew?

Pentagon Downgrades Specs for Its Premier Stealth Jet — Again

http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/dangerroom/2013/02/130201-F-zz999-805-660x346.jpg

Does it get any more bizarre? Lockheed's claims in complete contradiction to specs downgrade??...
I don't suppose trillions of dollars on the line, and liability suits have anything to do with it?...

America’s latest stealth fighter just got heavier, slower and more sluggish.

For the second time in a year, the Pentagon has eased the performance requirements of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF). The reduced specs — including a slower acceleration and turning rate — lower the bar for the troubled trillion-dollar JSF program, allowing it to proceed toward full-rate production despite ongoing problems with the plane’s complex design. Under the old specs, the stealth fighter, due to enter service in 2018 or 2019, probably wouldn’t pass its Pentagon-mandated final exams.

At the same time, newly identified safety problems could force F-35-smith Lockheed Martin to add fire-suppression gear that will only increase the plane’s weight and further decrease its maneuverability. The JSF is meant to be a jack of all trades, equally capable of dropping bombs and fighting other aircraft — the latter requiring extreme nimbleness in the air.

For the pilots who will eventually take the F-35 into combat, the JSF’s reduced performance means they might not be able to outfly and outfight the latest Russian- and Chinese-made fighters. Even before the downgrades, some analysts questioned the F-35’s ability to defeat newer Sukhoi and Shenyang jets. Despite the JSF’s lower specs, Lockheed bizarrely claims its new plane is now more maneuverable than every other fighters in the world except the company’s own F-22.

In short, the F-35 program is losing altitude as Lockheed’s claims grow loftier. The result is a widening gulf between expectations and reality for a jet that’s supposed to represent the backbone of U.S. air power for the next 50 years..

...and now time for a musical interlude... : D

tgKv-6Yyd2g

KiwiElf

24th November 2014, 14:37

Astonishing is that the Australian Airforce still seem determined to purchase these "flying turds" to replace their existing aircraft (ie F-18 Hornets etc), as if totally oblivious of their problems and eventual costs (at least, that was the story in an Ozzie aviation magazine as of 2 months ago!).:confused:

DeDukshyn

24th November 2014, 16:28

sigma6

5th December 2014, 11:42

F-35 Gravy Train Logic - "Big Fat Lumbering... Delusional Stealth...
Monumentally Useless..."
TS7O14nzrzE

Original Winslow T Wheeler on F-35
8kssZua8MVc

Money Blown On F-35 Could Buy All Homeless A Mansion
iKnv4PEQoRw

sigma6

5th December 2014, 12:23

More 'spray' From Pierre Sprey :D
nE7NDEYB5yU
You'd think wars are won purely on BS and politics... maybe they have something there...
When was the last time we have seen fighters in direct combat?
Pierre Sprey... the 'honest man' that can't be conned... (a dying breed apparently)

sigma6

6th December 2014, 07:47

Canada has put them on hold and may well cancel, The US, or rather the people behind selling these have offered Canada the next batch out without payment and they will pick up ours which were slated for 2016 or 2017 where we will pick up the tab on those (I can't recall all the details) - it looks like someone is getting desperate to ensure all western countries are flying these things ... You have to wonder why ...

I think Canada has chosen to upgrade their f-18's for now ...

Well they are paying Israel their 3 bills with a quarter billion left over to buy the first few, essentially paying them to take them... O.o? Maybe they will pay us too! In any event, the Super hornets are definitely the way to go, unless we could get our hands on the Sukhoi 50s, or even the MiG 31s! :( I just don't see anyone buying these things... And I heard the upgraded Super Hornets are awesome, proven, and comparatively way, way cheaper... even the skeptics said they would be good for another 25 years... What the hell is wrong with that? There is no way these toilet paper thin F-35s are going to survive 50 years... That is pure crap... and totally impossible... They're already cracking during flight testing!!

And apparently a rifle shot can take them down... could blow through the gas tanks which surrounds the turbine... ie. these things are very fragile because they are packing so much stuff in them... they had to shave the weight down, so it is essentially armourless, everything rides on this Gretzky effect... ie. the assumption that it will never be involved in direct contact... (good luck in a real war... they will hunt and chase these down if necessary... And what if the drive shaft connecting the turbine to the air blower takes a hit? that will rip through body like butter, or cause a major vibration to shake your teeth out??? ':-O

sigma6

10th February 2016, 08:13

Leaked F-35 Report Confirms Serious Air Combat Deficiencies

http://www.pogo.org/our-work/straus-military-reform-project/weapons/2015/leaked-f-35-report-confirms-deficiencies.html#pq=D75XHd?referrer=http://t.co/c6ucj3MT1W

http://www.pogo.org/assets/images/straus/2015/interiors/f-16-fuel-tanks_670.jpg

[A new leaked test, which was first exposed by War is Boring, provides more evidence that the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter’s demonstrated performance is inferior to the current fighters it is designed to replace. Specifically, the report finds that, in a series of 17 dogfights, the F-35 was consistently outmatched by an aging F-16.

An F-35A test pilot with extensive dogfighting experience in F-16s and F-15s wrote the report, detailing his cockpit observations during the January 2015 maneuvering combat tests of the F-35 against a 30-year-old F-16 at Edwards Flight Test Center in California. The report, marked for official use only (FOUO), highlighted serious concerns about the plane’s performance in this key mission.

One of the significant new issues raised by the report was the F-35’s difficulty in sustaining energy in close-in maneuvering combat—that is, the energy needed to turn and accelerate. The test pilot found this to be “substantially inferior” to older planes like F-15s, F-16s, and F-18s. In the tests, the F-35’s maneuverability against the F-16 was so limited that it could only point quickly enough to achieve a missile shot by executing one specific maneuver. But this move consumed so much energy that if the shot failed the F-35 would “ultimately end up defensive again”—which is to say, at the mercy of any opponent.

The report also homed in on flight control problems in the 20 to 26 degrees angle of attack zone, crucial for hard maneuvering. The pilot described the F-35’s computer-controlled flying qualities as “sluggish” for evasive maneuvering and “not intuitive or favorable.” This echoes information in a recent report from the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E) that described severe flying quality problems in this high angle of attack region—including uncontrollable wing drop and heavy buffeting (shaking) “that degraded the flight control system (two of three flight control channels become disabled), requiring a flight abort.”

Fixing these earlier flight control problems identified by DOT&E required new flight control software modifications that significantly shrank the F-35’s maneuvering limits while slowing control response—leading to exactly the problems uncovered in the recent January dogfight tests. The F-35, like most modern aircraft, uses fly-by-wire technology. Such technology depends on software to translate the pilot’s control stick inputs into flight surface movements. According to the DOT&E report, the F-35’s then-current software limited the maneuverability of the plane in an attempt to avoid placing extreme dynamic stress on the aircraft in flight. The January tests showed the new F-35 software control system changes further limited the flight controls so that the pilot could pull no more than 6.5gs in hard defensive turns, even though the F-35 design and contract specifications call for 9gs...

KiwiElf

10th February 2016, 08:49

Hah... a flying Edsel - why do they persist with it? :thumbsdown:

(I think it was calculated that the dollars spent on this failed aircraft would be enough to put every American in a Mansion!)

The F-35 program has experienced significant system malfunctions, major cost overruns and many schedule delays. It is expected to cost some $1.5 trillion over its 55-year lifespan, making it most expensive weapons program in history.

Quote from article at link below:

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2016/02/08/futuristic-us-fighter-jet-unveiled-during-super-bowl-50-tv-ad/

sigma6

16th February 2016, 22:17

This is an older video and very telling...

The US pilots are very kind (even patronizing) toward their Russian counterparts (they can afford to be, given this was during Russia's breakup/bankruptcy...) They are essentially admitting Russian aircraft and pilots are equal or superior to their own, their admiration and respect is obvious... but still indirectly suggesting they have nothing to worry about... because of their own long range firing technology... I think this was like 1989?

The American premise was based on the assumption of technological superiority of long distance tracking/firing... and stealth, i.e. supposed "invisibility" to any radar/detection technology... thus why the F-35 (still not combat ready) wasn't designed for dog fighting... today those assumptions are totally flawed due to the emergence of technological countermeasures... whereas the Russian design was always premised on brute force reliability, ability to sustain direct attacks, landing without gear, protected intake ports, fuel tanks, etc ...and man to man dog fighting. And now they have equal (if not better) electronics... and there is still no way to prevent being easily detected... except flying low to the ground (which requires high precision control and maneuverability...)

Note: Original YouTube "Russian Fighters vs US Fighters" (or similar...) has "disappeared" (interestingly...) This is the same video under a different name/posting... ';-D

The most advanced Russian Fighter Jets in Aviation History - Military Documentary
b13RuEQSo4s

BMJ

21st February 2016, 07:23

Morbid

21st February 2016, 11:14

yeah this whole saga definitely reeks of black budget rinse. lockhead martin are very closely linked to secret space programme apparently, so there you go really.. regarding the plane itself, i believe that noone can produce a plane to be able to do all tasks and be good at it. thats exactly why we have bombers for bombing, fighters for dog fighting etc. it seems russians are concentrating on electromagnetic tech so they dont even need to blow anything - if a fight between usa and russkies takes place then russians would rather just disable them as they are not that interested in maximum casualties. they attach them devices onto old 50s planes and disable newest us ships these days (donald crook : ) - its cheap and effective. russian military is all about cheap and effective as they know well that in real war that factor is of crucial importance.

sigma6

21st February 2016, 15:16

My personnal opinion is that the F-35 is a TPTB money laundering scam. At the end of the day the F-35 is going to be scrapped, monies developing it non refundable, and countries like Australia and the USA will fall back on aircraft like the F-16 Block 60 something and F-18 second generation aircraft.

Either that or a counter measure strategy to sell to all their allies?... Is it possible that the US is so paranoid (because they are well aware of what they are doing behind everyone's backs... that maybe they saw the day, their own allies would not even trust them?... I think the US is becoming a little too obsessive about their absolute power, and it is now becoming their weakness... and they have shown that they don't even trust their own allies... This may sound insane, but so does their belief in the own propaganda... and nowadays... Military strategy is all based on deceptions on deceptions... so who knows... anything goes...

Also with Russian electronic technology now edging out US (see Syria...)

Russia’s S-400 Missile System Makes The F-35 Stealth Fighter Obsolete
http://yournewswire.com/russias-s-400-missile-system-makes-the-f-35-stealth-fighter-obsolete/

http://cdns.yournewswire.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/russia-S-400-air-defense-system-800x350.jpg

It's all about assymetric warfare

The relatively inexpensive $500 million S-400 missile system has made the trillion dollar F-35 fighter programme obsolete. The sale of the Russian S-400 missile system to China is not only a milestone in the two countries relationship but an example of how an inexpensive missile system can penetrate a trillion dollar project.

Russia & India Report: (http://in.rbth.com/blogs/2015/03/11/how_russias_s-400_makes_the_f-35_obsolete_41895)

In November 2014 Moscow and Beijing inked a $3 billion agreement for the supply of six battalions of S-400 anti-aircraft/anti-missile systems that will significantly boost China’s air defence capability against the US and its allies in the Western Pacific.

With a tracking range of 600 km and the ability to hit targets 400 km away at a blistering speed of 17,000 km an hour – faster than any existing aircraft–the S-400 is a truly scary weapon if you are facing its business end. First deployed by Russia in 2010, each S-400 battalion has eight launchers, a control centre, radar and 16 missiles available as reloads.

Carmody

21st February 2016, 15:48

The only place or planet or logic where this cost per plane makes sense, is if things are as other folks here have suspected:

That the price per plane is artificially inflated by a factor of 10, and 90% of the finances has gone into next level black ops, into the secret space program.

No other scenario makes any remote form of sense. It is so obviously bad, that a 15 year old in high school, with a single one credit course on basic financing, could do a better job of running the program. This tells you that something stinks so badly, that, well.... it's simply insane. Categorically insane.

The Russians can build a superior plane for the equivalent of $25-40 million US each.

Thus, this price of $300 million US per plane has no chance of being even remotely real.

In the next level, it is as if ...there is a 'secret space program' (there have even been conferences on it!) which has a group of countries that are involved in some fashion or another, and they are being forced to pay 'fealty' via 'buying' these non functional turkey planes at $300M US each. Give to the cause!!! Right....

So.... they (contributing countries) don't even get a working plane that can take on a Russian plane, for their 10x price per plane.

There is so much incredibly nonsensical logic written all over these planes and their costing, that it stands no chance of being a pure act of financial rip off, nor a blatant act of being a pay off to a pirate/fascist group or anything like that.

There is enough evidence for a secret space program, and it has been building up to that..since the early 50's.

The 'two tier' public ops vs black ops method of development of technology has been the US military norm since that time period of the late 40's and into the early 50's.

This is now....70 years later.

We most definitely have a two tier black ops vs public ops version of technological development, one that is greatly developed and settled in.

All that is left in the public eye (as forms of evidence that is easily seen and immediately capable of being understood)... is the interface between the two.

In this case, the evidence of the financing, with a cover story of multi-trillion dollar incompetence..that only an inbred illiterate could possibly buy in to.

sigma6

21st February 2016, 21:45

I think that was one of my first posts... but there are many possible permutations... given the time frame it could have evolved into something else... It would have been the ideal breeding ground to exploit the pure greed, avarice and ego of many parties... If you look at Lockheed's history, it does appear their ego outgrew their technological capabilities... the same engineers who started the company I'm sure are long dead and gone, so who's running the show today?... And all the politicians that voted to make parts in their states were in it for the money... it was the perfect sales pitch, with a guaranteed kick back... I think this whole program turned into a ponzi scheme pyramid of kickbacks from top to bottom... during a time when the economy was red hot with no end in sight... and it may have morphed into one giant hot potato after the fact... with the idea of just assuming their marketing team was untouchable as well... Frankenstein come to life... I'm sure there are multiple factors at play... I'm sure it all sounded good on paper, at the time...

It may all seem obvious now... hindsight is 20/20... It's good to keep in mind, much like even considering the idea that all these "wars" might not be such a great idea... the idea of criticizing this program in the past was considered "grounds for treason" or absolute ridicule... (with rare exception) Let's not forget, this is a relatively "new idea" and the "Syrian War Theatre" is only highlighting the glaring self delusion now...

Ron Mauer Sr

21st February 2016, 23:23

sigma6

22nd February 2016, 01:28

Avro Arrow - full ready commercial production design capable of Mach 2 in 1958
production stopped because it was exposing technology too far ahead of it's time...
Does the engineering design look vaguely familiar to any later models?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/86/Avro_Arrow_3-view.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/4Olf0Sn.jpg

http://www.barnstormers.com/eFLYER/2010/135-eFLYER-FA01-01.jpg

http://www.canadaka.net/images/ShiningSwordMk4.jpg

Wide-Eyed

22nd February 2016, 01:57

Another telling interview
Scathing 60 Minutes Interview (almost breaking through the hypnotic suggestion, but not quite being able to unblock the politically correct mind control protocol)

2014 July Breaking News USA Marines resume F-35B flights on schedule to attend England Air Show
T5u1WSag0A0

Is this just to save face?
http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/2016/02/09/bfp-exclusive-report-a-distillation-of-dod-funding-priorities-for-january-2016/ DOD no bid contracts for January 2016http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/2016/02/09/bfp-exclusive-report-a-distillation-of-dod-funding-priorities-for-january-2016/

sigma6

22nd February 2016, 02:59

further support for machiavellian conspiracy suggested previously... They are already officially denying they will support Turkey... Iraq wants Russian assistance... this is all clearly moving in one direction... the US Empire peak is past (tied to their economic peak (and soon to be death spiral)... where the real "roller coaster ride" begins (going down)... more articles like this are popping up everywhere...

ironic, the very thing they were supposed to prevent, they will go down in history being the cause of... inevitable tragic karma... (the proverbial "jig" is up...)

Germany: Thousands Sign Petition Demanding Withdrawal Of NATO Troops
http://yournewswire.com/germany-thousands-sign-petition-demanding-withdrawal-of-nato-troops/

...“The US is implementing aggressive military policies in 124 countries worldwide from Stuttgart in Germany, where they operate various commands such as AFRICOM and CENTCOM.”

He further spoke about how NATO has broken promises that were made and how it spends billions of dollars to destabilize Ukraine in order to get ever closer to Russia’s borders.

The petition calls for putting an end to NATO troops in Germany as the country does not want to be involved in any US-led wars abroad.

“The true interest of Germans and Europeans has changed. These countries want a strong Russia, a country that can contradict and challenge the US, otherwise we will all end up as slaves,” Horstel said...

KiwiElf

22nd February 2016, 06:24

For those who are interested, here is the 2-part mini series about the CF-105 Avro Arrow, starring Dan Akroyd (most of it true), and an old - but very good - documentary about this famous aircraft and just how advanced it really was (and still would be). They also delve into the dirty politics, America's interference and the gross stupidity of the Canadian Government of the time. Every effort was made to make the Arrow "disappear" from ever having existed!

9PMnlnqRex4

7sFRiacvNYo

sigma6

22nd February 2016, 08:01

Pretty soon the world is going to start putting the pieces together...

Serbs protest government’s NATO deal, call to Russia for help
https://www.rt.com/news/333142-serbia-nato-immunity-protest/

Thousands of Serbs marched through the heart of Belgrade to the Russian embassy, in protest at a new co-operation agreement with NATO, and the death of two Serbian hostages during a US air strike in Libya.
Organized by the ultra-conservative, nationalist Zavet and Obraz movements, the march proceeded peacefully, as the demonstrators brandished portraits of Russian President Vladimir Putin in military fatigues, and held placards with the slogan “Expel NATO ASAP.” One banner read “Putin for President,” another “Medvedev for PM,” in reference to the head of the Russian government, Dmitry Medvedev.

KiwiElf

22nd February 2016, 13:40

The Northrop B2 "Batwing" is also another project which I believe includes money laundering on a grand scale - although quite a successful aircraft compared to the F-35, the rumoured costs are 2.3 billion dollars each. (And allegedly capable of sub-orbital flight using advanced technology). To put that in perspective, the latest cruise ships (ie Queen Mary II), cost roughly $500,000 million. How does the US Govt justify that kind of expenditure?

Time for a public and independent audit!

BMJ

22nd February 2016, 16:59

F4S 4EVR
Nostalgia. I loved these aircraft. So good in their day. I was in the first squadron of F4's the Marine Corp had on the East Coast. VMF(AW)-531, 1962.

32878
Mach 2+
16 word records
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_F-4_Phantom_II

Hi Ron,
Righteous praise. A person whom I meet claimed he was ex-SAS he said he flew the F-4 and in our conversations and he could not praise the F-4 enough and could never understand why we insisted on getting the F-111 for the RAAF. Proof's in the pudding the F-4's are still in service today with for example Japan and South Korea. Truly a great fighter plane.

sigma6

8th June 2016, 07:47

Canada speaks out publicly in first main stream media reference to proclaim "the emperor is not wearing any clothes"...

Canada PM Trudeau shows doubts on F-35 fighter jet

http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/789639/canada-pm-trudeau-shows-doubts-on-f-35-fighter-jet

http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/files/2016/06/F-35-Lightning-II-and-F-18-Hornet-620x406.jpg

OTTAWA, Canada — Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau expressed doubts Tuesday about the reliability of the US F-35 stealth fighter, as the government looks to replace its aging fleet of jets.

“For 10 years, the Conservatives completely missed the mark when it came time to deliver to Canadians and our military the equipment they need,” the Liberal prime minister said in parliament. “They clung to a plane that does not work and is far from working.”

Canada had joined the United States and its allies in 1997 to develop the F-35 Lightning II stealth fighter, and later announced it would buy 65 of them for Can$44.8 billion.

But after coming under fire over its spiraling costs and an apparent lack of transparency and competition in the procurement process, the previous Conservative government widened its search for a new fighter jet.

Trudeau campaigned against the F-35 and after coming to power last November ordered a reopening of the bidding process, calling the F-35 buy a boondoggle. This marked the second reboot in three years of the largest military procurement project in Canadian history.

On Monday, the National Post reported that Ottawa was looking to replace its F-18s, which have been flying since 1982, with Boeing’s Super Hornet. Others in the running included the Eurofighter Typhoon, the Dassault Rafale and the Saab Grippen.

Public broadcaster CBC, meanwhile, said the Canadian government had recently missed a Can$32 million payment for its contribution to the development of the F-35.

sigma6

10th June 2016, 13:25

updated: May 26th, 2016...
The excuse that all US fighters go through logistical problems is getting really worn thin... (total BS)... no previous plane was ever selected and sold to the world, before it was designed and tested... Lockheed is either a front or f***ed up... (or maybe both)... no one can perfectly predict technological trends 20 years in advance... and they also now admit to totally underestimating Russia... let alone a Russia/China alliance... and if they lose Japan... (if Fulford is correct, or ever announce which underworld gang will be the dominant group that controls the establishment... which would effectively lock out the US, because South Korea would follow naturally, having more impetus and protection... the US doesn't lose... business will go on as usual... but they won't dictate either...

Pentagon Delays F-35 Tests as Software Glitch Shuts Down Jets Mid-Flight
http://sputniknews.com/military/20160525/1040252715/pentagon-fighter-jet-f35-obama.html

http://cdn1.img.sputniknews.com/images/102145/63/1021456392.jpg

On Tuesday, the Pentagon finally acknowledged that the beleaguered F-35 fighter jet will not be ready for its final test phase until 2018 at the earliest, the latest in a series of setbacks for the expensive next-generation aircraft. The last major test period before full-rate production, the initial operational test and evaluation (IOT&E) examines whether an aircraft possesses the requisite combat specifics, and ensures that a jet can fly operational missions as intended.

Due to software problems in the F-35, Pentagon officials have postponed the test date for six months past the August 2017 target date, out of an abundance of concern that the jet will not be ready. This is the second major delay in flight-readiness testing, placing the fighter jet an entire year behind schedule...

...it seems like the new catch word is "software problems" yeah... it's just "software problems"... somehow... my gut tells me that if all they keep saying is "software problems"... that it is yet another codeword/marketing spin for "something else entirely" problems... if there is one thing the US is #1 at, it should be software and programming code... this just doesn't fly... (pun intended... ;-)

BMJ

8th December 2016, 13:06

Of Topic:
Trump: "Cancel Order" of New Air Force One - Save $4 Billion Dollars - Media Attacks Him For It

xrposIytgoE

Mainstream media is lying about Donald Trump and the cost of a new Air Force One after the President Elect tweeted that he wants to cancel the order which will cost more than $4 billion dollars. Media analyst Mark Dice has the story. Copyright © 2016 by Mark Dice.

Related to the topic:

Hopefully "the Don", will look at cancelling the F-35 black op slush fund run by Lockheed and in doing so starve tptw of more cash.
He might want to then look at reopening the F-22 production line, fix the pilot oxygen supply issue and make available the F-22 to close allies such as Australia, Canada and so on.

KiwiElf

8th December 2016, 13:53

:) not to mention the missing $6.5 trillion the pentagon can't account for; 1/3 of the total US deficit and 3 x the figure presented just before 9/11.

BMJ

24th December 2016, 00:38

The "Don" speaks on the topic:

Based on the tremendous cost and cost overruns of the Lockheed Martin F-35, I have asked Boeing to price-out a comparable F-18 Super Hornet!

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/812061677160202240

BMJ

29th December 2016, 17:13

This is the offical Lockheed colour brochure.

Oops sorry um wrong document this is the glitch list.

Even thou the list is long as pinocchio's nose, the top top secret do-hicky will provide the F-35 the edge over all opponents and at only a slightly more expensive price per aircraft than a F-22 Raptor.

http://networkeditorialssl.newscdn.com.au/multitools/slider/content/1454370716217/1454370826818.jpg

DeDukshyn

29th December 2016, 17:24

BMJ

5th January 2017, 12:16

F-35 May Never Be Ready for Combat
Testing Report Contradicts Air Force Leadership’s Rosy Pronouncements

By: Dan Grazier & Mandy Smithberger | September 9, 2016

Link: http://www.pogo.org/straus/issues/weapons/2016/f-35-may-never-be-ready-for-combat.html

From the article:
The Pentagon’s top testing office warns that the F-35 is in no way ready for combat since it is “not effective and not suitable across the required mission areas and against currently fielded threats.” (Emphasis added) As it stands now, the F-35 would need to run away from combat and have other planes come to its rescue, since it “will need support to locate and avoid modern threats, acquire targets, and engage formations of enemy fighter aircraft due to outstanding performance deficiencies and limited weapons carriage available (i.e., two bombs and two air-to-air missiles).” In several instances, the memo rated the F-35A less capable than the aircraft we already have.

BMJ

9th May 2019, 02:25

Unbelieveably such an expensive piece of military hardware as the F-35 needs to be mollycoddled.

The question is how on earth would this delicate flower fair in combat and from a forward airbase away from all the pampering. Would it still need its entourage during war?

Key points:
- A KPMG report shows corrosion risks from salt to 72 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters at the Williamtown RAAF base
- The report warns aluminium parts are susceptible, and recommends full-time dehumidification
- The fighters are the largest acquisition in the Air Force's history, costing $17 billion

F-35 Joint Strike Fighters at Williamtown RAAF base susceptible to 'intergranular corrosion', KPMG report finds

Auditing and consulting firm KPMG was tasked with doing a report on the "intergranular corrosion mitigation options" for the 72 F-35A fighter jets, bought by the Australian Defence Force for $17 billion.

Concerns over the risk of metal stress and cracking were raised in 2017, the year before the next-generation fighters were due to come to Australia.

The FOI report obtained by the ABC said of the three bases where the jets would be based, only Williamtown, near Newcastle, had been identified as having potential problems.

The risk is posed by salt and other climatic conditions.

What's intergranular corrosion?

Intergranular corrosion occurs as a chemical reaction between metal and the environment.

"It can degrade the material properties causing stress cracking and cause tensile stress which can impact adjacent components", the report said.

The report points to Aluminium Alloy 7085, used in the construction of the F-35 — the first time the material had been used in widespread production of a military aircraft.

"AA 7085 is reported to have increased susceptibility to intergranular corrosion," the report said.

The jets will also be based at Luke Airforce Base in the US state of Arizona, and the RAAF base at Tindall in the Northern Territory.

"While up to 54 of the fleet of 72 aircraft can be housed at Williamtown at any one time, all aircraft will be rotated through Williamtown and are therefore susceptible to intergranular corrosion," the report said.

As a result, KPMG recommended the full-time use of mobile dehumidification units, in conjunction with other systems.

The projected costs for the infrastructure have been redacted in the KPMG report released through FOI.

When the first of the next-generation fighter jets arrived at Williamtown RAAF base in December 2018, the Defence Minister Christopher Pyne said each plane cost $124 million and represented good value for money.

"This is the largest acquisition of the Air Force's history, $17 billion, and arguably the most lethal in the Air Force's history, certainly of its time," Mr Pyne said.

But the Joint Strike Fighter has been plagued by delays and cost overruns in the United States and concerns ranging from overheating to unreliable software platforms.

Link: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-07/williamtown-joint-strike-fighters-susceptible-to-corrosion/11085220

KiwiElf

9th May 2019, 02:34

BMJ

9th May 2019, 02:51

Unbelieveably such an expensive piece of military hardware as the F-35 needs to be mollycoddled.

Didn't you know that the govt/military (used to) pay $40,000 for a spanner? (now what movie did I get that from? :sherlock: (and it's true!!!!) ... muahahahaha) ;) (I'd guess that kind of "laundering" will soon be "past tense"?). :)

EDIT: The Canadian Avro Arrow of the 1950's was better!!!!! :silent: (This thing is a ... :flypig:)

That's not your ID4 movie quote is it, I think it was a toilet seat they where talking about. :sun:

This whole issue of the F-35 has turned into a religion for the military. The military have this blind faith in the F-35 regardless of all its flaws and believe in its mystical powers all to the detriment of our national security.

So instead of wasting 17 billion Australian dollars on the F-35, Australia should gift the cash to China when they final decided to invade or the Clinton Foundation, that way at least someone will be getting some use out of the cash.

Maybe it is time for the military to call it a day, swallow their pride and accept the F-35 for what it is a :flypig:

Then instead for the same price we could purchase 140 Boeing F-18F Super Hornets now that would be an excellent investment and deterrent.

https://media.defenceindustrydaily.com/images/AIR_F-18F_RAAF_Rollout_lg.jpg

KiwiElf

9th May 2019, 03:00

Heh, I think you're right (haven't watch ID4 for ages - you just reminded me! It was a toilet seat!!!) :)

Just had a flick back through the thread; very interesting how many videos have now disappeared. That Arrow movie is still up and well worth the watch, IMO. ;)

9PMnlnqRex4

Also, have a bit of a dig as to how development of the Harrier 2, which would have been supersonic as well as VTOL - and the whole Harrier program - was canned in the UK a few years ago in favour of the F-22/F-35 replacing it. (bad decision!) :sherlock:

Didgevillage

10th May 2019, 00:48

Russia still is a poor country and life there would be much easier, if the country needed not to spend so much money and resources to counter the US and NATO build-up based on the imaginary "Russian threat"

BMJ

11th May 2019, 15:00

Who would have thought.

The lack of the US Air Forces faith in the F-35 is telling as the US Air Force is eyeing the upgraded proven and highly capable Boeing F-15 Eagle proposal to replace it's current tired fleet of F-15, instead of buying more F-35's.

The upgraded F-15 would be the excellent F-15EX, and possibly the proposed and excellent F-15 Eagle 2040C (an upgraded F-15C).

Lockheed Martin slashes price of F-35 as Pentagon eyes competitors

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/08/Edsel_Pacer_2-Door_HT_1958.jpg
Above the budget variant the F-35A

Defense giant Lockheed Martin has offered to discount its F-35 jet fighter by over 10 percent, as the US Air Force weighs an offer from Boeing. The stealth fighter project has been plagued by reliability issues and cost overruns.

Lockheed is offering to sell 100 F-35As – the cheapest variant of the jet – to the Department of Defense for under $80 million each, according to a report from Defense One. The variant previously came with a price tag of $89.5 million, under a deal inked last September.

The discounted jets would be shipped to the Air Force, while Lockheed would also provide two other lots of the more expensive F-35Bs for the Marine Corps and F-35Cs for the Navy, and an assortment of variants for allied forces.

The price cut comes as the Air Force mulls purchasing Boeing’s upgraded F-15 Eagle fighters in a bid to replace its existing but aging fleet of F-15s. Pentagon budget documents revealed this plan in March. Although an upgraded Cold War-era airframe, the F-15 is slightly cheaper than the next-generation F-35.

Lockheed, however, has pitched the F-35 as a more cost-efficient solution, given the recent price drop. (Really????)

“This represents equal or less than the procurement cost of legacy jets, while providing a generational leap in capability,” a spokesman told Defense One.

‘Cost efficient’ is not a term commonly applied to the F-35. Since Lockheed won the contract almost 20 years ago, the F-35 has become the most expensive military program ever, with the total price tag expected to hit $1.5 trillion by 2070, the projected end of its service life. Cost overruns and delays have plagued the program, which was already $163 billion over budget and seven years behind schedule by 2014.

Although the USAF deployed F-35s on their first combat mission earlier this month, reports of technical and safety flaws have repeatedly surfaced. A 2018 Government Accountability Office report revealed more than 960 “open deficiencies” that needed to be resolved, while a separate Pentagon report published in February found more issues with the plane, including problems with its gun and a shorter than projected operational lifespan.

A Japanese F-35A crashed into the Pacific Ocean during a training exercise last month. The defense ministry in Tokyo later revealed that five F-35s of the Japan Air Self-Defense Force have had to make emergency landings in the two years before the crash, and that the jet had been bugged with cooling and navigation issues.

Link: https://www.rt.com/usa/458830-f35-cost-drop-boeing/

Related Articles:
US Defence Acquisition Summary, (see Page 14 and 39)
Link: https://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/45/Documents/defbudget/fy2020/fy2020_Weapons.pdf

Japan’s crashed F-35 had navigation & cooling faults, whole fleet forced into 7 emergency landings
Link: https://www.rt.com/news/456862-japan-f35-emergency-landings/

BMJ

21st May 2019, 10:13

DeDukshyn

21st May 2019, 23:53

The new Liberal government says there is no commitment on these, but they're not yet off the table for Canada. The government wants a full review of the f-35s and competitive bids from other builders - they will then choose the best from the selection presented - the way such a decision should be made. This is what they say they will do anyway ... but it appears the new government is aware of the "turd" status, or at very least is well aware that the method in decision making on the F-35s by the previous government had some stinkiness to it.

In response to your post, but off topic.

Which is exactly the way a competent selection process should occur.

Canada in the meantime are acquiring 18 and this has been revised to 25 ex Australian classic F-18 Hornets. The first two arrived at Canadian Forces Base Cold Lake in Alberta on the 17 February 2019. See video below.

First 2 Australian F/A-18 Hornet arrive in Canada

OLF5s5Pq6wo

contactpublishing
Published on Feb 17, 2019
The first two Royal Australian Air Force F/A-18A 'Classic' Hornets to be sold to the Royal Canadian Air Force have been delivered to Canadian Forces Base Cold Lake in Alberta, Canada.
The pair – tail numbers A21-53 and A21-55 – had just completed participating in Exercise Red Flag 19-1 in Nevada, USA.
They landed in Cold Lake on Saturday and were formally accepted at an indoor ceremony on Sunday.

Related Article: http://www.contactairlandandsea.com/2019/02/18/first-2-raaf-hornets-delivered-to-canada/

There's some people unhappy with us still buying those "old, used" FA18's -- but its what we already have (majority of our fleet is customized Hornets), we already know how to maintain and fly and train to fly them and have all the infrastructure for such, so there's massive cost savings right there.

Sure they might not have the "latest and greatest" tech (and probably need a ton of initial maintenance), but these planes upgrade quite well (current fleet went through complete modernization a few years ago), and any plane has ~50 year lifespan with proper maintenance. So I see this decision as an acceptable one until we can decide who to award the next contract to ... hopefully in a proper manner. Didn't know we were buying 25 though - that seems excessive ... some for spare parts? lol ...

Just for fun ... here's Japanese Motorcycle racing ... notice the guy in yellow in the vintage hardtail keeping up with all the modern crotch rockets. :)
dEYEn_fpv-4