|
F35 - The White Elephant
|
|
Topic Started: Jul 27 2015, 05:14 AM (340 Views)
|
|
George K
|
Jul 27 2015, 05:14 AM
Post #1
|
- Posts:
- 88,967
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #249
- Joined:
- August 4, 2005
|
Throwing Good Money after Bad- Quote:
-
The F-35 program could cripple U.S. defense for decades to come.
“You could argue it [the F-35] was already one of the biggest white elephants in history a long time ago,” stated former U.K. defense chief Nick Harvey in a May interview. Harvey then doubled down, saying there is “not a cat in hell’s chance” the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) would be combat-ready by 2018. While it is noteworthy that a person of Harvey’s stature would level such harsh criticisms, his statement merely reflects the conclusions of reports by the U.S. Defense Department’s Director of Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E), the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the Congressional Research Service, and various independent air-power analysts: The F-35 program is a mess; it is unaffordable and will not be able to fulfill its mission.
Indeed, it could be argued that the biggest threat the U.S. military faces over the next few decades is not the carrier-killing Chinese anti-ship ballistic missile, or the proliferation of inexpensive quiet diesel-electric attack subs, or even Chinese and Russian anti-satellite programs. The biggest threat comes from the F-35 — a plane that is being projected to suck up 1.5 trillion precious defense dollars. For this trillion-dollar-plus investment we get a plane far slower than a 1970s F-14 Tomcat, a plane with less than half the range of a 40-year-old A-6 Intruder, a plane whose sustained-turn performance is that of a 1960s F-4 Phantom, and a plane that had its head handed to it by an F-16 during a recent dogfight competition. The problem is not just hundreds of billions of dollars being wasted on the F-35; it is also about not having that money to spend on programs that would give us a far bigger bang for the buck.
|
A guide to GKSR: Click
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.
I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles. - Klaus, 4/29/18
|
| |
|
jon-nyc
|
Jul 27 2015, 05:26 AM
Post #2
|
- Posts:
- 54,364
- Group:
- Moderators
- Member
- #119
- Joined:
- April 22, 2005
|
As Eisenhower warned us.
|
|
In my defense, I was left unsupervised.
|
| |
|
TomK
|
Jul 27 2015, 07:37 AM
Post #3
|
- Posts:
- 12,869
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #53
- Joined:
- April 19, 2005
|
Then there's this:
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/don-t-think-the-f-35-can-fight-it-does-in-this-realistic-war-game-fc10706ba9f4
It say in new style combat the plane really works.
|
|
|
| |
|
John D'Oh
|
Jul 27 2015, 08:48 AM
Post #4
|
- Posts:
- 53,798
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #276
- Joined:
- October 19, 2005
|
- TomK
- Jul 27 2015, 07:37 AM
Basically, they're saying the plane is good based on playing a computer game. I'm not absolutely 100% convinced they're qualified to make that call.
- Quote:
-
In this test we are role-playing the “battlespace commander” with a top-down view of the air battle rather than the individual pilot
I think they may be getting a little hyped up on Red Bull with their "hyper-realistic tactical PC simulation/war game" (available at all good retailers for $79.99)
|
|
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
|
| |
|
Aqua Letifer
|
Jul 27 2015, 08:52 AM
Post #5
|
- Posts:
- 45,862
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #262
- Joined:
- September 22, 2005
|
Is this the same computer simulation that they use to determine Super Bowl winners, war outcomes, Stock Market forecasts and Nostradamus prognostications?
|
|
I cite irreconcilable differences.
|
| |
|
George K
|
Jul 27 2015, 08:53 AM
Post #6
|
- Posts:
- 88,967
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #249
- Joined:
- August 4, 2005
|
- John D'Oh
- Jul 27 2015, 08:48 AM
Basically, they're saying the plane is good based on playing a computer game. I'm not absolutely 100% convinced they're qualified to make that call. Exactly.
Granted, from what I've read elsewhere (and I think someone, RR?, posted a link) that the F35 has been "crippled" in its real world tests, and we should disregard them.
Move along, nothing to see.
- Aqua
-
Is this the same computer simulation that they use to determine Super Bowl winners, war outcomes, Stock Market forecasts and Nostradamus prognostications?
No, it's the one they use for climate models.
Edited by George K, Jul 27 2015, 08:54 AM.
|
A guide to GKSR: Click
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.
I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles. - Klaus, 4/29/18
|
| |
|
John D'Oh
|
Jul 27 2015, 09:06 AM
Post #7
|
- Posts:
- 53,798
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #276
- Joined:
- October 19, 2005
|
There's a reason they run multi-million dollar hardware tests rather than rely on the decision-making abilities of a bunch of computer gamers, who's typical response to performance issues is to ask whether you've upgraded your video card drivers.
|
|
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
|
| |
|
TomK
|
Jul 27 2015, 09:11 AM
Post #8
|
- Posts:
- 12,869
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #53
- Joined:
- April 19, 2005
|
The problem is they don't know what a dogfight of the future looks like.
|
|
|
| |
|
JBryan
|
Jul 27 2015, 09:27 AM
Post #9
|
- Posts:
- 28,082
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #32
- Joined:
- April 19, 2005
|
In an environment where missiles could be flying in from out of nowhere it is bound to look different.
|
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne
There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it".
Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody.
Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore.
From The Lion in Winter.
|
| |
|
John D'Oh
|
Jul 27 2015, 09:30 AM
Post #10
|
- Posts:
- 53,798
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #276
- Joined:
- October 19, 2005
|
- TomK
- Jul 27 2015, 09:11 AM
The problem is they don't know what a dogfight of the future looks like.
That's a valid concern.
I suspect there's an awful lot of politicks involved with people who are criticizing the F35 so heavily, as well as with those who are defending it.
|
|
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
|
| |
|
George K
|
Jul 27 2015, 09:45 AM
Post #11
|
- Posts:
- 88,967
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #249
- Joined:
- August 4, 2005
|
- John D'Oh
- Jul 27 2015, 09:30 AM
I suspect there's an awful lot of politicks involved with people who are criticizing the F35 so heavily, as well as with those who are defending it. Ya think? - JBryan
-
In an environment where missiles could be flying in from out of nowhere it is bound to look different. Wasn't that one of the points in the design of the F4? The original was not equipped with a gun, because the designers thought that all combat would be beyond line-of-sight, and a gun was unnecessary. The pilots disagreed, iirc.
|
A guide to GKSR: Click
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.
I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles. - Klaus, 4/29/18
|
| |
|
John D'Oh
|
Jul 27 2015, 10:27 AM
Post #12
|
- Posts:
- 53,798
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #276
- Joined:
- October 19, 2005
|
- JBryan
- Jul 27 2015, 09:27 AM
In an environment where missiles could be flying in from out of nowhere it is bound to look different. So, the lamers at 'War is boring' should have played Missile Command instead of the game they did play?
According to my extensive research, the war of the future is going to mostly consist of me wearing this really awesome suit that lets me go invisible and stealth-snipe 12-legged aliens from the top of the Empire State building.
I cannot freaking wait.
|
|
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
|
| |
|
Axtremus
|
Jul 27 2015, 10:39 AM
Post #13
|
- Posts:
- 35,678
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #15
- Joined:
- April 18, 2005
|
Nah, the war of the future will be code hacking and deciphering, wrecking the other side's public utilities, transportation, and financial markets ... geek stuff.
If you really want to fight aliens from outer space ... well, there is this new Adam Sandler movie that came out, called Pixels. It's also geek stuff.
|
|
|
| |
|
TomK
|
Jul 27 2015, 10:49 AM
Post #14
|
- Posts:
- 12,869
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #53
- Joined:
- April 19, 2005
|
- Axtremus
- Jul 27 2015, 10:39 AM
Nah, the war of the future will be code hacking and deciphering, wrecking the other side's public utilities, transportation, and financial markets ... geek stuff.
If you really want to fight aliens from outer space ... well, there is this new Adam Sandler movie that came out, called Pixels. It's also geek stuff. That is probably true.
|
|
|
| |
|
Aqua Letifer
|
Jul 27 2015, 11:14 AM
Post #15
|
- Posts:
- 45,862
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #262
- Joined:
- September 22, 2005
|
- Axtremus
- Jul 27 2015, 10:39 AM
Nah, the war of the future will be code hacking and deciphering, wrecking the other side's public utilities, transportation, and financial markets ... geek stuff.
If you really want to fight aliens from outer space ... well, there is this new Adam Sandler movie that came out, called Pixels. It's also geek stuff. Thanks for letting me know that violence will be obsolete soon. Do you have any stock tips you'd like to share also?
|
|
I cite irreconcilable differences.
|
| |
|
Jolly
|
Jul 27 2015, 11:15 AM
Post #16
|
- Posts:
- 47,520
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #30
- Joined:
- April 19, 2005
|
- Axtremus
- Jul 27 2015, 10:39 AM
Nah, the war of the future will be code hacking and deciphering, wrecking the other side's public utilities, transportation, and financial markets ... geek stuff.
If you really want to fight aliens from outer space ... well, there is this new Adam Sandler movie that came out, called Pixels. It's also geek stuff. Hard to hack anything, entombed in rubble.
|
|
The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros
|
| |
|
George K
|
Aug 15 2015, 12:53 PM
Post #17
|
- Posts:
- 88,967
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #249
- Joined:
- August 4, 2005
|
More bad reviews:
- Quote:
-
The study by the National Security Network states the jet, the most expensive weapons system in U.S. history, will not only be outmaneuvered and outgunned by Russian and Chinese aircraft but will also be limited in range and its stealth capabilities will be easily overcome.
“The F-35 will find itself outmaneuvered, outgunned, out of range, and visible to enemy sensors,” the report states. “Going forward, full investment in the F-35 would be to place a bad trillion-dollar bet on the future of airpower based on flawed assumptions and an underperforming aircraft.”
Rather than continue with the program, with its already sizeable $400 billion price tag, Congress and the Defense Department “should begin the process of considering alternatives to a large-scale commitment to the F-35,” it adds. The lifetime program cost for the plane is expected to surpass $1 trillion. ... The NSS study compared all three F-35 variants to foreign fighters -- Russia’s MiG-29 and Su-27 -- and found it came up short in a variety of key areas, including acceleration, combat radius and payload. Such deficiencies would seriously hamper the U.S. jet in a dogfight.
The F-35’s “short range means that it will be of limited use in geographically expansive theaters like the Asia-Pacific or against so-called anti-access threats whereby adversaries can target forward airbases,” according to the report.
The Pentagon in recent years has put great emphasis on what it calls “anti-access/area-denial” from potential adversaries, especially those in the Asia-Pacific. China has invested heavily in such technologies and thus could make the risk, or cost, “too high” for the U.S. to engage with the F-35, Press said.
He added that China and others have the ability to challenge U.S. mid-air refueling efforts, potentially further limiting the jet’s combat range.
Meanwhile, the F-35’s stealth avionics and sensors might not make much of difference against the fighters operated by Russia and China, since those countries have made strides in radar, computing, and infrared sensor technology, the NSS report states.
Press said “given the scale” of the problems with the F-35, the program requires “careful study” about coming up with an alternative platform.
|
A guide to GKSR: Click
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.
I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles. - Klaus, 4/29/18
|
| |
|
Jolly
|
Aug 17 2015, 06:41 AM
Post #18
|
- Posts:
- 47,520
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #30
- Joined:
- April 19, 2005
|
If there is anything to be learned from WWII, long legs (fuel consumption) and the ability to operate from primitive forward bases or off of aircraft carriers is a big deal in the Pacific.
It's beginning to look like the F-35 is a Swiss Army knife with dull blades.
|
|
The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros
|
| |
|
JBryan
|
Aug 17 2015, 07:18 AM
Post #19
|
- Posts:
- 28,082
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #32
- Joined:
- April 19, 2005
|
Kind of looks like those old printer/copier/fax machines of old that seemed to bear out the principle that a device designed to do many things doesn't do any of them very well.
|
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne
There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it".
Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody.
Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore.
From The Lion in Winter.
|
| |
|
Mikhailoh
|
Aug 17 2015, 07:45 AM
Post #20
|
If you want trouble, find yourself a redhead
- Posts:
- 92,804
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #181
- Joined:
- April 26, 2005
|
- Jolly
- Jul 27 2015, 11:15 AM
- Axtremus
- Jul 27 2015, 10:39 AM
Nah, the war of the future will be code hacking and deciphering, wrecking the other side's public utilities, transportation, and financial markets ... geek stuff.
If you really want to fight aliens from outer space ... well, there is this new Adam Sandler movie that came out, called Pixels. It's also geek stuff.
Hard to hack anything, entombed in rubble. Stick with the classics. You can't go wrong.
One wonders about the Tianjin explosion.
|
Once in his life, every man is entitled to fall madly in love with a gorgeous redhead - Lucille Ball
|
| |
|
Klaus
|
Aug 17 2015, 08:20 AM
Post #21
|
- Posts:
- 19,373
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #350
- Joined:
- May 21, 2006
|
We've now listed all the things the F35 is bad at.
But surely there must also be some things it is good at, no?
|
|
Trifonov Fleisher Klaus Sokolov Zimmerman
|
| |
|
Copper
|
Aug 17 2015, 08:43 AM
Post #22
|
- Posts:
- 29,872
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #426
- Joined:
- February 14, 2007
|
I wouldn't mind having one.
And the people who built it seem to like it.
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/07/f-35-project-team-says-dogfight-report-does-not-tell-whole-story/
- Quote:
-
F-35 project team says bad dogfight report “does not tell whole story”
Older F-35 didn't bring "A" game, and besides—plane isn't supposed to dogfight.
In a release posted today to Lockheed Martin's F-35 program website, a spokesperson for Lockheed Martin and the Department Of Defense's F-35 Joint Program Office (JPO) responded to this week's media coverage of a leaked F-35 test pilot report. The test pilot's assessment of the performance of the F-35 in mock combat encounters with an F-16D in January, which was published by David Axe of War is Boring, was that the F-35 was at a distinct disadvantage against the F-16. This despite the F-16 carrying two wing fuel tanks that give it inferior aerodynamics.
The author of the Lockheed Martin/JPO response wrote that the War is Boring post "does not tell the entire story. The F-35 involved was AF-2 [the second F-35 airframe]...designed for flight sciences testing of the aircraft. It is not equipped with a number of items that make today's production F-35s 5th Generation fighters."
The tests that the report was based on were intended "to test the flying qualities of the F-35 using visual combat maneuvers to stress the system, and the F-16 involved was used as a visual reference to maneuver against," the response said. "While the dogfighting scenario was successful in showing the ability of the F-35 to maneuver to the edge of its limits without exceeding them and handle in a positive and predictable manner, the interpretation of the scenario results could be misleading."
The explanations offered up in the release included that the AF-2 : •"Does not have the mission systems software to use the sensors that allow the F-35 to see its enemy long before it knows the F-35 is in the area." •"Does not have the special stealth coating that operational F-35s have that make them virtually invisible to radar." •"Is not equipped with the weapons or software that allow the F-35 pilot to turn, aim a weapon with the helmet, and fire at an enemy without having to point the airplane at its target."
Of course, stealth coating and mission systems software are not as essential when combat happens in visual range. And given that the pilot reported having difficulty turning his head to track the F-16 during the mock dogfights because of the constraints of the F-35's canopy and the size of the helmet, the ability to "aim a weapon with the helmet" may not apply either.
But that's all fine because as the spokesperson noted, the F-35 isn't supposed to get into within-visual-range dogfights to begin with. "The F-35's technology is designed to engage, shoot, and kill its enemy from long distances, not necessarily in visual 'dogfighting' situations," the spokesperson wrote. And in four-on-four mock battles between F-35s and F-16s, "the F-35s won each of those encounters because of its sensors, weapons, and stealth technology."
One should hope so, given that the F-16D's price tag was $18.8 million in 1998 dollars (about $27.3 million today when adjusted for inflation) and costs about $24,000 per flight hour to operate. By comparison, the current official unit cost of the F-35A is $98 million, and the cost per flying hour has been $31,900. Doing the math, perhaps a fairer matchup in financial terms would be four F-35As against a dozen F-16Ds. That number might be higher considering that the F-35 has a history of occasionally catching fire during take-off.
The Lockheed Martin/JPO response also noted that "the release of this FOUO report is being investigated," and "candid feedback provided by our test community is welcomed because it makes what we do better. The disclosure of this report should not discourage our warfighters and test community from providing the Program Office and Lockheed Martin with honest assessments of the F-35's capabilities."
Update: The mock combat between the F-35 and the F-16 was publicly reported by Aviation Week in April, at which time Lockheed Martin's F-35 lead test pilot David "Doc" Nelson told Aviation Week, "The door is open to provide a little more maneuverability." The combat maneuvers were the first time the F-35 was put into a dogfight-like situation. “When we did the first dogfight in January, they said, ‘you have no limits.' It was loads monitoring, so they could tell if we ever broke something. It was a confidence builder for the rest of the fleet because there is no real difference structurally between AF-2 and the rest of the airplanes.”
F-35 program Director Rod Crieger told Aviation Week the flight "was an early look at any control laws that may need to be tweaked to enable it to fly better in the future. You can definitely tweak it—that's the option."
|
The Confederate soldier was peculiar in that he was ever ready to fight, but never ready to submit to the routine duty and discipline of the camp or the march. The soldiers were determined to be soldiers after their own notions, and do their duty, for the love of it, as they thought best. Carlton McCarthy
|
| |
|
John D'Oh
|
Aug 17 2015, 10:18 AM
Post #23
|
- Posts:
- 53,798
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #276
- Joined:
- October 19, 2005
|
- Mikhailoh
- Aug 17 2015, 07:45 AM
One wonders about the Tianjin explosion. Not if one has tried imposing safety restrictions on Chinese companies.
|
|
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
|
| |
|
Mikhailoh
|
Aug 17 2015, 12:28 PM
Post #24
|
If you want trouble, find yourself a redhead
- Posts:
- 92,804
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #181
- Joined:
- April 26, 2005
|
Good point.
|
Once in his life, every man is entitled to fall madly in love with a gorgeous redhead - Lucille Ball
|
| |
|
George K
|
Sep 18 2016, 04:51 AM
Post #25
|
- Posts:
- 88,967
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #249
- Joined:
- August 4, 2005
|
- Klaus
- Aug 17 2015, 08:20 AM
We've now listed all the things the F35 is bad at. Apparently not ...
- Quote:
-
Less than two months after declaring the controversial F-35 Joint Strike Fighter ready for combat, the Air Force on Friday announced that it was temporarily grounding 15 of the jets after it discovered that insulation was “peeling and crumbling” inside the fuel tanks.
The setback is the latest for the $400 billion system, the most expensive in the history of the Pentagon. The problem comes as the program, which for years faced billions of dollars in cost overruns and significant schedule delays, had begun to make strides. Last year, the Marine Corps had declared its variant ready for combat. In July, the Air Force gave a similar blessing to its variant.
Along with the manufacturer, Bethesda-based Lockheed Martin, Pentagon officials had declared that the long troubled program, derided as the “plane that ate the Pentagon,” had turned a corner. In testimony before Congress earlier this year, Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan, the program’s executive director, said the fighter is “at a pivot point” as production is about to ramp up. He said while 45 aircraft were manufactured in 2015, that number should grow to more than 100 in 2018 and up to 145 by 2020.
Even though the jet was declared combat-ready, Air Force officials warned this summer that it remains in development and that they could continue to find problems. The fact that the Pentagon committed to the aircraft before it was fully tested has been one of the chief criticisms of the program — a violation of procurement mantra: “Fly before you buy.”
“While nearing completion, the F-35 is still in development, and challenges are to be expected,” Air Force spokeswoman Ann Stefanek said in a statement. “The F-35 program has a proven track record of solving issues as they arise, and we’re confident we’ll continue to do so.”
In a statement, Lockheed Martin said that “the issue is confined to one supplier source and one batch of parts.” It emphasized that “this is not a technical or design issue; it is a supply chain manufacturing quality issue.” That last paragraph was reassuring, no?
|
A guide to GKSR: Click
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.
I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles. - Klaus, 4/29/18
|
| |