First F-35 "dropped" in UPT last night

Status
Not open for further replies.
viperdriver said:
Amazing what you can pull of the internet. Everyone that I know who has flown the jet loves it! Let it go cga82.........
Click to expand...
I hear the same thing from the folks at the pointy end of the spear as well, but wolves gotta howl because that's what wolves do. But let's not fool ourselves that the pilots and maintainers are doing cartwheels and throwing parades over every sortie. The program is still a,program in development. They don't have the full capability yet, and issues ARE being discovered that need to be addressed -- this IS very frustrating for the folks operating them TODAY. But the full capabilities will be delivered in a couple of years, and the issues ARE being addressed, and fixed. Reports I get daily are saying that some of the issues that had me worried just a month ago seem to have been solved (and No, I'm not gonna share them due to classification). But guess what? New issues now have me worried. But that's the history of every new program; issues are discovered that eventually get fixed. And for one as complex as this, it is as Pima said -- "it is what it is".
 
Bullet said:
cga82, first let's please try to keep this civil. I appreciate your passion, and honeslyagree with part of your frustration. One of the reasons I was initially hesitant to join this discussion. But I'll gladly conduct a civil debate with you on some of the fallacies of your points
Click to expand...

Bullet, don't talk down to me about keeping it civil here. I think that people are tired of the lies and this is certainly one of those. The fallacies you claim have been backed. The facts that this platform has proven nothing but a big money pit black hole are evident. You created twist and false statements in the past and haven't really proven anything.
 
Bullet said:
Where to begin? Oh yeah, the whole "we're taking money away from the current fight to pay for this POS,leaving our troops underfunded and and prepared, and ultimately putting them at more risk". Nice talking point, but completely false. You do realize that since 2001, Congress has supplemented the DoD's budget with almost $60-80 BILLION EVERY YEAR to not only pay for the current operations, but to replace equipment lost during combat and replenish ammunition used? Please give me an example of when troops in contact were denied the support they need so the money could instead pay for the F-35. Frankly, you can't because it never happened. If the current operation Commander requests something, he gets it. Period. Well honestly, to a certain level, as the Administration has set limits on the numbers of troops involved in the conflict. But to say that the services short-change the current fight to pay for new "toys" is simply wrong, and frankly rubbish..
Click to expand...

Twist it any way you want. The cost of operations has taken from the forces needed. This POS should have been operational and replaced aircraft. There is only so much money--oh sure earmarked for this and that but the pot is a much reduced size and the POS F-35 is in that pot needing it's expenditures ie taking away from other programs. So just malarky. This is what you call paying peter and robbing Paul. Don't tell this is not the case.

Troops are not denied suppor you sayt--- ya I guess you can call this a fallacity (again another untruthful twist) hey guys go get it out of the bone yard but chief there ain't no more bone yard; we are the bone yard!

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...UZlxM6HG71vLrC_7g&sig2=oeJ7sxNKrJLSgOrAFIC0cg
 
cga82 said:
Bullet, don't talk down to me about keeping it civil here. I think that people are tired of the lies and this is certainly one of those. The fallacies you claim have been backed. The facts that this platform has proven nothing but a big money pit black hole are evident. You created twist and false statements in the past and haven't really proven anything.
Click to expand...
Where's that "Three Wolves Howling at the Moon" Tee-shirt when you need it?

I've tried to be civil. But accusing me of lying and provide falsehoods just proves my point -- you made your opinion, and you're just going to accuse anyone of not being 100% behind it are simply lying. So much for a "debate".

Aaahhh-whooooooooo! It's a pretty sound, isn't it CGA?
 
Bullet said:
But to say that the services short-change the current fight to pay for new "toys" is simply wrong, and frankly rubbish..
Click to expand...

Talk about keeping it civil--- I never said new "TOYS". I said POS F-35 is not working and is costing us un-Godly amounts with no return and this money need to be used on failing equipment now.

Nice try and twist---remember keep it civil.
 
Bullet said:
Second, as to the SAR stating that the life cycle cost of the F-35 program has gone up. Well, you explained the reason why in your own post -- the services plan to fly and operate the jet more than what was factored in for previous SARs. If you personally were planning to own and operate your car for 7 years and figured out an estimate on how much it will cost you for fuel and repairs over those 7 years, but now decide to own that car for two more years, don't you expect that your estimate will nopw go up? Then fact of the matter is this is NOT an issue of any development problem, of rising costs to operate the system (but inflation factors for fuel and parts IS considered in the estimate), but an increase in cost due to an increase in use./QUOTE]

The fact is that this Aircraft won't come close to operation to 2070. A drone or some other system will make this cash cow look silly in short order. Again, this POS does nothing to help out the prosecution of the war effort now but siphons off capital and troops who need the help now.

I know how add ons to projects really stick it to Govt. It goes back to the Piss Poor Planning and continued replanning in 2012 and I'm sure another piss poor replan in the future to the black hole.
Click to expand...
 
Bullet said:
Next, your point on the Marines and Navy being forced into this AF program. Actually, it's the other way around. The AF wanted their own separate program for their F-16 replacement, and wanted NOTHING to do with the Navy and Marines in it's design. The whole STOVL capability severely limits any design ( more weight, less room for fuel and weapons, forced the design to have a canopy that hinged from the front versus the back, making the ejection system add risk... The list goes on), and adds levels of complexity that the AF wasn't willing to accept. Having to land on a Carrier also added design requirements in size and weight that limited the AF's design requirements. It was the Office of the SecDEF that ORDERED all three services to share one program with one aircraft in the the early stages of the concept. Please lay your blame on the correct agency that made that poor decision.
Click to expand...

Part correct here the VTOL for the Marines was needed and SECDEF ordered it, but the Navy and Marines didn't like the idea of one shoe fits all but had no choice but to follow suit.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiXt4WojpbMAhXHQiYKHfOnA-4QFggcMAA&url=http://breakingdefense.com/2015/10/f-35c-a-wrong-turn-for-navy-cnas/&usg=AFQjCNG44LCNlKF6GNRDMzV_FsothY5NrA&sig2=CETqto7WOjKoFNQ5UebrXg

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiXt4WojpbMAhXHQiYKHfOnA-4QFggwMAU&url=https://medium.com/war-is-boring/the-u-s-navy-doesn-t-seem-to-care-that-the-f-35-can-t-dogfight-9bebd1cb5e26&usg=AFQjCNEhea5CnsZIAFQ6QxHCBcv7AfwoDA&sig2=vySUqDs140_SrMxBmUaajQ


The Navy—which has always been lukewarm toward the F-35C—could continue to buy advanced derivatives of the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet. In fact, Boeing has already pitched such an aircraft. Longer term, the service could restart a long-range unmanned stealth bomber program. A stealthy long-rangeunmanned strike aircraft is probably what the service needs to defeat the emerging anti-access/area-denial challenge in the Western Pacific.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...gg2Fn1vFNZINU-RkQ&sig2=maEu34z2GWlNiL7PNCqGLw
 
Last edited:
Bullet said:
.

Lastly, the article about the Mariner's F-18 fleet getting more worn out. The Marines fly the oldest variant of the Hornets, and replacing them has been one of their highest priorities. Yes, the delay in getting the F-35 has meant that they have to deal with a rapidly aging (and frankly dieing) Hornet fleet. But ask the Marines why they are still planning to replace their Hornets with F-35Bs -- to them, it was a choice based solely on getting better capability for their TACAIR fleet. They're just getting that replacement later than planned ( but are still accomplishing the mission, because that's what Marines do). BTW, the Marines declared their F-35s as "Initially Operational Capable" last year. Honestly, I didn't agree with their dcisiion. But when I asked my Marine counterpart why, he gave me the same answer that Lt Gen Davis, their head of the Air arm stated to Congress -- "Because they're better TODAY than the jets they are replacing".
Click to expand...

Getting rid of them is note 100% they are smart enough to keep the BLOCK III on the table knowing that the POS won't be able to do the fighting the F-18 can.

Marine do the mission and to just ride it off like ahhh "that's just what they do" my God give them the stuff to prosecute the war. These guys are operational not sitting in a hangar east buffalo state saying next in the hangar. Shameful

You said "the Marines declared their F-35s as "Initially Operational Capable" last year" because everything they have is falling apart and they need it now--of course they will say that. They have no choice didn't I make that perfectly clear in previous post.
 
Bullet said:
Look, I Do get it. There is A LOT of negative press out there about the F-35. Just like there was with the F-15, the F-16, the F-18, and the F-22 during their development stages. And the critics have pretty much been proven fantastically wrong with those early negative assessments. The F-35 has also suffered from those growing pains, and the wolves are howling again. I just choose to listen to those howls and say "Noted, but not compelling" because once again they don't know what they're talking about.
Click to expand...

Well one of your wolfs is telling us something.

But perhaps no one in the aerospace world stands to come out a bigger winner from Monday’s election than Boeing. The manufacturer makes the F/A-18 Hornet jets, which is a cousin of Canada’s current fleet of CF-18s fighter jets. “The cheapest way they could go might be the Gripen, but frankly the biggest potential winner from the election is the Super Hornet,” says Richard Aboulafia, vice president of analysis at aerospace and defense consultants Teal Group. “It fits into their existing fleet, it’s a relatively low-cost option, and it has two engines which Canada has historically preferred.”

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...o07mrUYEWe5wXcx-g&sig2=vGEAs1zXumbLT5yA_laa2A
 
As soon as I see a googled article used to support someone's uninformed point of view..... I stop reading. It's on par with Wikipedia and it's a reach.

My opinion (not entirely based in first-hand experience), DOD can't get out of its own way in the procurement process, so you get C-27s, littoral combat ships, a number of Deepwater assets from the Coast Guard and the F-35.... When entire programs are built on airframes or hulls, and therefore battle to justify their existence.

That's NOTHING new...not in the military and not in the larger population....
 
Wild Blue Yonder said:
Sorry LITS, I just think both Cga and I have pointed out one of the problems with the current political system. It's a good ole boy network that even Trump has admitted to by donating large sums to both parties to get "stuff done". Like I said, I'm on the fence with Trump, but it sure is interesting to see Preibus and the establishment quaking in their boots with his threat. And, My God, how can Bernie garner so much support? shows how sad a shape this country is in.
Sorry for diverting this thread.
Click to expand...

Trump's entire platform is telling you what you want to hear, whether he believes it or not. His favorite book is the Bible? But he can't name a verse. The top three things the government should do are "security, security and security" but when asked for his real top three "Security, healthcare and education." Huh? He was pro-choice until he met the son of a friend who almost had an abortion, and liked the guy, so changed his opinion. Huh? His idea of free trade? Protective tariffs. Huh?

Oh, wait. But he's "the best at 'military'"....

Trump and Sanders attract the same uninformed voting base who like talking points but don't seem to care much for details or reality.
 
LITS, Now you've hit my hot button.
Believe me, I am not an uninformed voter. I take it all in, I've listened to the establishment for all these years and it just seems to get worse and worse. I've given money to the Republican party for a long time and gave them a ton 4 years ago because we HAD TO CHANGE the administration. What a waste, they couldn't beat the worst POTUS of all time, who easily out does Jimmy. Priebus should have been fired the day after the election. And he's still there... makes me sick too that Susan Rice is talking to the cadet wing at USAFA this past week. Probably sounded good to most of those cadets, I bet 95% of them are truly uninformed. The crap the Obama administration came up with about Benghazi is ridiculous, and Romney couldn't even capitalize on that one point 4 years ago, just unbelievable. Politics in DC is so damn corrupt it's shameful, what the hell would would our founding fathers think... The establishment never thought they had to worry about an outsider, but I hope it comes. Maybe not this year, but the sooner the better.
 
Wild Blue Yonder, exactly spot on. Trump has and is the only one who has exposed the establishment. He hit a real nerve and they are afraid of losing their power.
 
So, if you align with conservative ideals (as Republican supporters SHOULD), what Trump "policy" (and I put that in quotations because "I'm going to do it best, trust me, I know many people, I have many friends, I will be the best ever" is not a statement on policy) do you actually identify with? Killing unborn babies until it's not politically viable? Protective tariffs and government intervention in the private sector? Breaking federal law? Attacking U.S. citizen rights?

I honestly understand the discussed with being ignored by what has been a fairly weak center of leadership in the GOP.... but what about Trump seems like the answer? You'd vote for a Democrat with a red tie, but only because he says what makes us laugh and yell "yes, finally someone telling it like it is..."

But that's not a basis to lead a nation.

Sorry, it's not.
 
cga82 said:
Wild Blue Yonder, exactly spot on. Trump has and is the only one who has exposed the establishment. He hit a real nerve and they are afraid of losing their power.
Click to expand...

So has Sanders.... so I'm assuming you'd like to support that goof too...
 
I bet that there will be some other limp wrist excuse or inherent problem before the end of the Fiscal yr. The dates of delivery, operational planes, when they will get into action and cost are all over the place. The best answer is to get a dart board and start throwing.
 
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...Xg42E5yvrJ0FAa5GA&sig2=EIyjhJAKODWJTlpQQTavRw

On top of that, the Pentagon watchdog said operational testing wasn't likely to kick off until May 2018 at the very earliest — nearly 10 monthsafter the current estimated start date. Test pilots likely will not finish up a full series of experiments to see how well the plane can destroy targets in the air and on the ground — called Weapon Delivery Accuracy events, or WDAs — for another three years given existing trends.

"The DOT&E report is factually accurate," Bogdan wrote in his statement, which was an official response to the report. "[But] it does not fully address program efforts to resolve known technical challenges and schedule risks."
 
Bullet said:
Hey! I can post links as well!

http://www.amazon.com/The-Mountain-Three-Short-Sleeve/dp/B002HJ377A

Read the reviews, they're HILARIOUS!
Click to expand...

When I checked in and saw this thread was still going, I thought the same thing as Scout. But bullet, I've to tell you after reading just three of the reviews, checking in made it all worthwhile.

My personal favorite, "Unfortunately I already had this exact picture tattooed on my chest, but this shirt is very useful in colder weather."

Thanks Bullet.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top