From a fiscal perspective i’d agree
From a technical,perspective its accomplished more than i think most give it credit for. Especally the stovl model the marines use, far better and flyable than the harrier.
China is coming.
Time to tell the whiz kids we’re not made of money! Enough with all the new toys! Stick with what works until a genuine need arises.
The end of a great nation. Currency debasement, rampant inflation, government corruption, moral degradation, unjust laws, erasure of the past, teaching false doctrine. Sound familiar?
Drones. UAVs.
F-35 works with them.
Cheaper jets could too.
Wasn’t the F-35 meant to be the version of the F-22 that’s carrier capable?
Stealth costs a lot to maintain.
Forbes was sold to a Hong Kong company and is now controlled by the Chi-coms.
I get it. Just sold a $40k car and bought a $5k truck. I can buy several more if I want.
Don’t worry. He’ll “clarify” his remarks. They’ve probably got thumbscrews on him now.
Truth is not wanted in 2021 America.
The last three paragraphs are required reading LOL!
“But it’s an open question whether the Air Force will ever succeed in developing a light, cheap fighter...”
Is this another piece of overpriced junk from Lockheed Martin? That company owns Congress.
Pilotless...
(Ducking)
For asymmetrical warfare, piloted aircraft and super carriers are great. For a full on symmetrical war, those two systems will either be hidden, or blown up.
Argue all you want. That’s a fact.
As far as old planes are concerned,I always liked the B-58 Hustler.
We’ve spent the past 20 years fighting people who live in caves. Our toys are nicer than theirs. I suppose we’ve kicked their butts, but we haven’t exactly “won”.
We keep buying new toys. Not really because we need them. Not really because the old toys are bad. We buy toys because that’s what we do.
If China causes trouble, I do not think we will go toe to toe with them. The quality of our planes and our ships is likely to be inconsequential. A missile into the 3 Gorges Dam is likely to do all that we need.
I think this has become a very expensive, silly game.
Forbes would like to continue fighting small wars around the globe. To that end they are right — the USAF would need more “low-end” aircraft to bomb the snot out of the locals. But aircraft like the F-16 would not last in a high-threat environment like Syria, guarded as it is with the latest Russian SAM systems. A squadron of F-16’s would probably last 3 days.
” And now America needs a new fighter to solve that F-35 problem, officials said”
Ummm the F22? Some Politicians / Military Paper Tigers should go to prison for destroying the means to produce more F22’s. McCain is already dead, next?
But we can still sell them all over the globe.
We should be building drone aircraft that can be piloted remotely or within a swarm.
This is a good article, but I disagree with the notion that it is a failed program. It became a bloated program and the price tag is horrific, but the platform has some amazing capabilities.
The past few years our Air Force (including the Israelis) and those of our allies who purchased the F35 have began to talk a lot about one or two F35’s “controlling” larger numbers of older aircraft on strike and air superiority missions. The sensors and software on these things turn them into a QB in the sky and it is very capable of flying far ahead of legacy aircraft in high threat environments, protecting them, and directing their ordnance on to targets at distance minimizing risks.
I was pretty vocal in questioning the wisdom of having a one plane to do everything role and feared the F35 would fail because of it. The aircraft itself is pretty amazing and the capabilities of it are two generations ahead of the F16 and F15 in many ways, but its simply too expensive and the author is right as to why....
This was the same problem the UH60 Blackhawk program and Army aviation had. At some point, “most” missions call for a flying truck and nothing fancy. They packed so much stuff on rotary airframes that the price tag limited the numbers far below what they needed and wanted.
The F15X (Boeing’s new offering) cost almost as much as the F35 (it’s just below 80 million) and it will likely be about 10-15k less a flight hour), but remember that is the sales pitch. The Air Force rarely gets the “expected savings” based on what the manufacturer claims just as the Army rarely sees it in the promises from manufacturers.
At 80 million for an F15EX vs the approximate price of 100 million for the F35 at projected numbers I am not sure the F15EX (as good as it is) is the answer. 20% savings, but you have an aircraft that is much less survivable in a high threat environment against a near peer adversary.
Anyone who thinks the Air Force will end up with a 60 million dollar air-frame to replace the F16 is going to be disappointed. They are incapable of it. Even the proposed drones in the future that will be controlled by the F35 will likely be around that price tag.
The F35 was compromised back in 2009. The WSJ had a story on it. The ChiComs likely have all the secs for the planes, and when we go to war with them after they EMP and bioweapon us to 90% dead in a “surprise” attack, the planes will fall out of the sky with a flip of a switch because Chang will be able to disable the chinese made parts remotely.