Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

F-35 looking more like white elephant
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110113/pl_afp/usmilitaryaerospacef35_20110113153609

Posted on 01/13/2011 11:28:42 AM PST by too_cool_for_skool

WASHINGTON (AFP) – The F-35 fighter jet, set to replace a large part of the US warplane fleet, has become the most expensive weapons program ever, drawing increased scrutiny at a time of tight public finances.

Following a series of cost overruns and delays, the program is now expected to cost a whopping 382 billion dollars, for 2,443 aircraft.

...

Defense officials say the original cost estimates have now doubled to make each plane's price tag reach some 92 million dollars.

At the same time, the contract awarded in 2001 had been planned to last 10 years, but has been extended to 2016 because of testing and design issues.

...

Private analysts say the whole F-35 program is becoming a money pit.

"The incredibly unfortunate phrase 'too big to fail' applies to this aircraft more than any other defense program," said Richard Aboulafia, an aerospace industry analyst with the Teal Group.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aerospace; defense; f35; lockheed; missinglink; navair; sourcetitlenoturl
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-58 next last
Lockheed Martin playing the American taxpayer like a fiddle. Business as usual.
1 posted on 01/13/2011 11:28:43 AM PST by too_cool_for_skool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

Kelly Johnson is spinning in his grave.


2 posted on 01/13/2011 11:31:28 AM PST by Tijeras_Slim (Jubtabulously We Thrive!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool; All

Unlike the welfare bums who took more money???


3 posted on 01/13/2011 11:32:14 AM PST by KevinDavis (If you buy a car from GM, you are supporting Obama..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

“Lockheed Martin playing the American taxpayer like a fiddle. Business as usual.”

I don’t know how to assess this. You could find a million articles about the Bradley that read exactly like this. They turned out to be (1) liberal attempts to hurt defense or (2) political crap within the DoD. The Bradley has been a magnificent vehicle for the armed forces.

Why should I give all the F-35 articles any more credence than the Bradley articles were entitled to?


4 posted on 01/13/2011 11:33:06 AM PST by ModelBreaker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

I would bet anything that part of the cost overruns and delays is caused by requirements to make the fighter jets “green”.


5 posted on 01/13/2011 11:33:17 AM PST by Lancey Howard ("Diversity is our strength" lol.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

When they cut the F-22 program last year and I objected, what did I tell folks here?

Folks fell all over themselves to assure me the F-22 was a terrible aircraft and we just had to stop the program. The F-35 could handle everything, and besides it was cheaper.

I predicted that as soon as the F-22 program was destroyed, the F-35 would be next.

Here we are folks. We’re about ten years from our air force not having a fleet of state of the art fighters.

Welcome to exactly what I predicted.


6 posted on 01/13/2011 11:41:17 AM PST by DoughtyOne (All hail the Kenyan Prince Obama, Lord of the Skid-mark, constantly soiling himself and our nation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
I predicted that as soon as the F-22 program was destroyed, the F-35 would be next.

One by one, disarming America's Armed Forces. Considering our current national "leaders" think America is a grossly arrogant bully, this comes as no surprise. We are at the 2-year point of 0bama's occupation of the White House. Six more years of him and our military will barely rival that of Liechtenstein.

7 posted on 01/13/2011 11:44:30 AM PST by ScottinVA (The West needs to act NOW to aggressively treat its metastasizing islaminoma!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

Really?

Has the government changed any of the design or performance requirements since the original award?

Try that with your building contractor and see if the price doesn’t go up and completion schedule get delayed!


8 posted on 01/13/2011 11:45:04 AM PST by G Larry (When you're right, avoid compromise!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ScottinVA

Exactly right IMO.


9 posted on 01/13/2011 11:48:07 AM PST by DoughtyOne (All hail the Kenyan Prince Obama, Lord of the Skid-mark, constantly soiling himself and our nation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ModelBreaker
The Bradley has been a magnificent vehicle for the armed forces.

Same exact thing with the B-1B. It is THE aircraft that has really carried the weight in Afghanistan for the last 10 years, a gift to all of us from Ronald Reagan.
10 posted on 01/13/2011 11:57:27 AM PST by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

If they decided to build 75 more F-22s the unit cost would be $70 million.....would we not be better off doing that?


11 posted on 01/13/2011 11:57:44 AM PST by ontap
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

Hey ! You can pick up a flown-only-once J20 at Wal-Mart for only $999.95 (6,600 yuan),cash and taxi [ caution: product may contain lead or hormones from cows]


12 posted on 01/13/2011 11:58:05 AM PST by bunkerhill7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ModelBreaker

“I don’t know how to assess this. You could find a million articles about the Bradley that read exactly like this.”

I remember the Bradley articles as well. I was a tanker; but, I got to play around on a Bradley a little. I also spent alot of time on the piece of equipment it was meant to replace - the M113.

Bradley - Fast, fires a missile, has a moving turret, powerful gun, and advanced fire control system.

M113 - Slow, giant box, and you can mount a machine gun to it.

I remember being shocked at how good a vehicle the Bradley was, after growing up and seeing countless bad stories about it.

Another piece of equipment I remember getting bad press was the kevlar helmet. 60 minutes did an almost sarcastic piece about it, and how wasteful it was to develop it. I can’t begin to explain how big an improvement it was over the ‘steel pot’....both in comfort and safety.

And my favorite - the M1 tank. The media whined about its cost of course. But, they also were fixated on its range (100 miles..ish). They went on and on and on about this. They never mentioned some of the amazing features that made it without a doubt the best tank in the world at the time, and most likely it still holds that title, although some will argue with me.

I know nothing about this airplane; but, I have a healthy (yet civil of course) skepticism about this article.


13 posted on 01/13/2011 12:03:19 PM PST by lacrew (Mr. Soetoro, we regret to inform you that your race card is over the credit limit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: tanknetter

“Same exact thing with the B-1B. It is THE aircraft that has really carried the weight in Afghanistan for the last 10 years, a gift to all of us from Ronald Reagan.”

Didn’t Carter hold up the AWACS? Another aircraft that is now indespensible.


14 posted on 01/13/2011 12:04:44 PM PST by lacrew (Mr. Soetoro, we regret to inform you that your race card is over the credit limit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

Tri-service aircraft = FAIL.

F-111 (McNamara’s switchblade) Navy gave up and built the F-14.

What will cut next? the Osprey?


15 posted on 01/13/2011 12:08:32 PM PST by ASOC (What are you doing now that Mexico has become OUR Chechnya?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: G Larry

Back when I was a field service engineer I used to try to carry as few heavy tools as possible.
For this reason I had a pair of pliers that would do several jobs, but it didn’t do any of them well.
Unfortunately our procurement of fighter aircraft follows the same logic as my pliers. We make one aircraft, with modifications, that fills the needs of all of the branches of the military, but it doesn’t do it very well.

We should go back to having aircraft with designated roles, interceptor, fighter-bomber, close air support, etc.


16 posted on 01/13/2011 12:08:56 PM PST by Ed Condon (Give 'em a heading, an altitude, and a reason.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool
IMO manned aircraft should have as much weight in strategic air doctrine as a bi-plane. Drones can be safer, faster, more deadly and far cheaper. Keep the pilots on the ground. I don't want the man out of the cockpit, but I do want the cockpit firmly planted, well guarded, and safe. I think it would make us a better force, and take the swagger out of the pilots that have run the Air Force into the ground for the last 20 years.

These daredevils pick toys over boots every time. We're running out of boots and the ones left are doing triple duty, not to mention having to deal with the mountain of regulations, and paperwork, power points, and useless classwork. Time for the former pilots in those brand new glass building learn what they have been doing to the rest of the force.

17 posted on 01/13/2011 12:10:12 PM PST by McCloud-Strife ( USA 1776-2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

“I done seen ‘bout ev’rything
“When I see an elephant fly!”


18 posted on 01/13/2011 12:10:38 PM PST by RichInOC (No! BAD Rich! (What'd I say?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool; Pukin Dog

If this program had been stopped per pukin’s early info we would hopefully have continued production of the F-22 Raptor. These do all aircraft have a lousy history of cost over-runs and limited efficiency.


19 posted on 01/13/2011 12:13:27 PM PST by mcshot (So this is how it feels like to be flushed. The "that's impossible" days are here.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

I think the real problem comes down to one simple thing.

They tried to pack way too many roles into a single design which creates serious compromises on performance.


20 posted on 01/13/2011 12:17:50 PM PST by Proud_USA_Republican ("The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-58 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson