Posted on 07/04/2017 9:19:38 AM PDT by Kaslin
The people working on various aspects of the F-35 fighter program must be very frustrated. The program is still highly classified, so that much that is taking place within the program is simply not available for discussion. And yet, the F-35’s critics are baying and howling and often deliberately misrepresenting the program and its products.
The F-35 program is not one program. It is several. Its products are three different aircraft and several brand-new, and highly innovative, technologies. It provides quantum leaps in aviation technology in many different areas. Simultaneously achieving all these technical breakthroughs has obviously proved difficult. But that is not surprising -- it is the norm in innovative engineering.
The program is producing three very different aircraft: the F-35A is a conventional takeoff aircraft for the Air Force. The F-35B is a vertical takeoff and landing capable aircraft for the Marine Corps. The F-35C is a catapult takeoff and carrier landing aircraft for the Navy. From a distance, the aircraft look alike and inside they share much avionics and the core of the engine. But don’t be fooled. These are very different aircraft.
The F/A-18 Hornet and the F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet also look like they are the same aircraft. But they are really two completely different aircraft. The Hornet was developed in the 1970s and was manufactured in the 1980s. The Super Hornet was developed in the 1990s and was in production after 2000. The Super Hornet is 20% larger, up to 15,000 pounds heavier, has 40% greater range and 50% greater endurance. They look alike simply because the Super Hornet borrowed excellent aerodynamic design from the Hornet. Time and money saved.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Therein lies the problem, trying to force fit one airplane into missions that are vastly different for three services.
Last time we did this was the F111 program which resulted in a less than adequate strategic bomber, a very tough and fast, but extremely limited tactical aircraft, and a naval version, so deficient that it caused the Navy to reach out to Grumman and develop the Tomcat
F18 Hornet
Concept: 1973
Deployment: 1983
10 years
F15 Eagle
Concept: 1967
Deployment: 1976
9 years
F35 Lightning:
Concept: 1997
Deployment: 2018?
21 years AND COUNTING
Any questions?
Just one: why did you leave out the timeline for the F-22?
Not a fighter, but you also could have mentioned the timeline of the V-22 as well.
For three different aircraft that isn’t bad actually. That only seems long. That was the point of the article anyway.
Lockheed Martin should never be allowed to bid on a military contract ever again. Forever!!!
The flying moonpig is awesome. Other than turning ability, acceleration, top speed, range and weapons load, its the best fighter ever!
Oh, and no fair comparing it to an F-16 or F-15.
Therein lies the problem, trying to force fit one airplane into missions that are vastly different for three services.
That's assuming the aircraft are not superior aircraft.
The F-35A is an outstanding strike fighter and the STOVAL F-35B is a breakthrough aircraft technology that so outclasses the AV-8B it replaces that there is no comparison.
The jury is still out on the F-35C Navy variant but it should be much better than the F-18 it replaces.
Put that Distributed Aperture System in our tanks.
Do it now.
Therein lies the problem, trying to force fit one airplane into missions that are vastly different for three services.
In the past those efforts have generally failed.
This time one of the failures, IMHO was the shutdown of production of the F-22 so as not to potentially impede the acceptance and production of the F-35.
My working theory is that Lockheed got so mad after the F-22 was cancelled after 187 planes (and they missed out on millions in sales) that they decided to recoup their losses with the overruns on the F-35.
Time is gonna have to tell but planes designed to be the do-all-end-all planes usually aren’t.
I would assume that you have eons of experience in government contracting given the statement. Perhaps you could enlighten us with original arguments instead of dogma.
I’m an old flight-test guy.
The F-35 is a complicated platform and will have lots of problems to be highlighted before it eventually makes it to the battlefield as an effective fighting tool.
It is also pointless to claim that the USAF does not lie, cheat, steal to keep new aircraft platforms when similar avionics upgrades (for instance) could be fit into existing or cheaper platforms.
It is also pointless to pretend that the revolving door from high-level brass in the US Military to high-level, highly paid positions with defense contractors is not a factor when awarding contracts for new aircraft and when deciding to defund existing aircraft that may be more cost effective for the same mission.
The military is part of the corrupt swamp that needs to be drained.
Nobody in the military procurement chain should be able to work for a contractor in the same program for which they made procurement decisions.
But it happens all the time, and our senior officers too often lie, cheat, and steal because they are mostly corrupt and dishonest people. It gets worse as the military becomes more political and politically correct.
So, what does that mean for the F35? It means that it will probably become a usable platform with the sufficient application of money approved by present senior military officers who are soon to be senior executives at aerospace contractors.
My opinion is that the majority of our senior military leadership would sell out this country (and many already have) for their own personal gain.
It’s past time that this nonsense stops, but it won’t until we have a fighting war and we get our asses handed to us because our military leadership was too busy doing things that have nothing to do with defense of our country.
UCAVs are the future, anyway.
VMFA-121 received its first F-35B in November 2012, well ahead of the Marine Corps’ announcement of initial operational capability for the program in July 2015. First Marine Corps F-35 Squadron Deploys to Japan. (Jan 2017)
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2017/01/10/first-marine-corps-f35-squadron-deploys-japan.html
I used to criticize the F-35 for its cost. Trump has jawboned the cost down significantly. Trump has largely rescued this weapon system and our country from the worst weapons deal in history.
With regard to the capabilities of the plane:
The Navy version has severe limitations as the mainstay of our attack carriers. For example, its range is so short that it takes away the carrier’s advantage of standoff. The Navy is reconsidering whether the F-35 is to replace the F/A-18 or take a place along side it.
The Marine version is also in flux. The Marines need an attack aircraft. The F-35 is an air dominance fighter. If you’re going to attach ordinance and fuel tanks onto the outside of the plane, it is nothing more than an enormously more expensive fourth-generation attack fighter.
The UK seems to be in a box, with its smallish aircraft carriers coming on line, and no good alternative to the Marine version of the F-35.
It could be that the assumption that the same basic plane can serve across the services and thus achieve economies of scale, has been proven false. The air dominance mission is critical. But the Air Force itself has other missions not well served by this plane, and the other services have yet other missions.
Economies of scale in production turned out to be a mirage. The several versions of the plane make the versions effectively other planes. If other planes had been designed, bottom-up, for their missions, they would be both more capable and less expensive.
I will end by saying that quantity has a certain quality of its own. The President needs options. If we are to show force in several places in the world, backed up by the enormous power only we can project, we need numbers. This means we have to look at cost.
It also means we have to be nimble. We cannot allow ourselves to get sucked into every puissant outbreak of civil war and ethnic or religious violence in the world. And, that when we do loose the hounds of war, we win and go home. Trump is doing great in the Middle East, kicking ISIS ass in Syria and Iraq, relying primarily on indigenous fighters backed up by our strengths. I believe we will soon be done with this untidiness left over by the prior two administrations.
An all purpose jet by committee. Its a total waste of money with the F 22 already flying and perfectly capable of the mission the F 35 is being built for. Shame!
You forgot the F 22 which is a superb plane already flying and discontinued.
The F-35b is not what the Marines need. It’s a platform basically designed and optimized for everything -except- CAS.
This will cause it to be peeled away by a theater commander for deep missions, SEAD, and numerous other duties than have nothing to do with CAS. It’s gun exhausts it’s entire 180 round ammo load in 3 seconds.
Bottom line, the 35B wasn’t meant to help grunts, it was designedto help the USA and Lockheed on the unit price. That’s it.
Grunts
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.