First F-35 "dropped" in UPT last night

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sorry guys for getting this stirred up...
Anyway, from my small company supplier point of view there are several problems with the military acquisition system.
There is so much bloat in the large defense contractors' world it's not even funny. (I worked for one of them out of college years ago and would be retiring with a full pension in 2 months had I stayed:() Anyway, I still visit several of those large guys on a regular basis with my current job and it's unbelievable to see how damn slow they move. I think half the employees do about 8 hours of actual real work in a week, just incredible.
And yeah, friggin politics is a big problem too. No wonder the establishment is afraid of wild cards like Trump. I'm still on the fence with him, but somebody like him might just provide the shakeup needed in DC to get us back on track.
Forget political correctness and all the other BS, let's just do what's right...
 
And you think Trump will do what's right? I'm not even sure if he's campaigning for the political party he actually identifies with.
 
Sorry guys for getting this stirred up...
Anyway, from my small company supplier point of view there are several problems with the military acquisition system.
There is so much bloat in the large defense contractors' world it's not even funny. (I worked for one of them out of college years ago and would be retiring with a full pension in 2 months had I stayed:() Anyway, I still visit several of those large guys on a regular basis with my current job and it's unbelievable to see how damn slow they move. I think half the employees do about 8 hours of actual real work in a week, just incredible.
And yeah, friggin politics is a big problem too. No wonder the establishment is afraid of wild cards like Trump. I'm still on the fence with him, but somebody like him might just provide the shakeup needed in DC to get us back on track.
Forget political correctness and all the other BS, let's just do what's right...

Wild Blue you didn't stir anything up. It is just so wrong from 2006 until 20.....whenever to keep throwing money at a flawed project from the get go and hear a Tout of oh boy isn't it great when we should be saying what in the world and why in the world are we putting up with bag of crap when our men/women and taxpayers are oblivious to this ....mess.

Trump is the only one calling stuff out like this. He wouldn't normally be my pick but something has got to get this Country back from the Bush/Clinton continuance Regime of the same good ole boys/gals walking down the same path of American destruction. He's the only one in the mix that appears to be exposing these Regimes and they are getting scared that they will lose their hold on power over Americans.
 
Hmmmmm, hesitant to jump in here for a number of reasons. Let me just say, as someone who HAS flown the Full Mission Sim on multiple occasions, who gets the daily reports from the Test Pilots flying the jet daily, who speaks with the engineers on the line, and the engineers whose responsibility is to evaluate the program, and as someone who actually KNOWS what the jet can do today, what it will be capable doing next year, and exactly what IS going on with all the earlier issues mentioned.... Well, let's just say there is A LOT of misinformation going on both here and the rest of the internet. ON BOTH SIDES OF THE DEBATE. It happens, especially for a program getting the amount of attention it has (rightfully) been getting for a lot of those issues. And especially when most of those talking the loudest have no clue as to what they're talking about or what the jet is capable of.

Is the amount of both time and money it has taken to this point, with a program still yet to complete, disappointing? Sure it is. In fact, it's infuriating! But I will say this. Since the program restructured in 2012, it has remained within a few months of being on track of it's development schedule. The issues that have plagued it before have been overcome (true, new ones ARE being discovered as new capabilites are added, but they also are on track to be fixed), and the guys flying it like what they see so far (with some frustrations on not having some capabilities still in development). Heck, it IS the most advanced weapon system ever developed, so I'm guessing here (no, I'm not guessing) that development of this jet is just a tad more,complex than developing the original F-16 or F-18.

Frankly, the jet will be very capable when development finishes next year. The real question will be affordability. A jet this complex costs a LOT of money to buy (but less than an F-22, or a Silent Eagle) and a LOT of money to operate. But for quite a bit of the future air superiority missions, we WILL need them. We need to ask now, can we afford to buy and operate a lot of them. THAT is the million dollar question.
 
To Cga and Bullet, I am on track with both of you. This subject is a hot button for sure. I think we need to fix the root cause of the problem to begin with...
 
And you think Trump will do what's right? I'm not even sure if he's campaigning for the political party he actually identifies with.
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.
 
Hmmmmm, hesitant to jump in here for a number of reasons. Let me just say, as someone who HAS flown the Full Mission Sim on multiple occasions, who gets the daily reports from the Test Pilots flying the jet daily, who speaks with the engineers on the line, and the engineers whose responsibility is to evaluate the program, and as someone who actually KNOWS what the jet can do today, what it will be capable doing next year, and exactly what IS going on with all the earlier issues mentioned.... Well, let's just say there is A LOT of misinformation going on both here and the rest of the internet. ON BOTH SIDES OF THE DEBATE. It happens, especially for a program getting the amount of attention it has (rightfully) been getting for a lot of those issues. And especially when most of those talking the loudest have no clue as to what they're talking about or what the jet is c.

Lets just say that if there are so many bad reports on this topic then why is it that we don't we hear anything good? Why don't our top Brass (who make these reports public-on numerous occasions) just give us the straight truth - or tell us that they need to make a huge correction to these articles? Something smells here and to play with this much money since 2006 and with no end in sight in a nice way of saying "just flat out stinks". Please show me/us any great proof of this platform (not your hearsay or opinion). I see and hear none. I believe that the sophistication is certainly with no doubt out there but the fragility (Temperament and extent of mission it replaces have yet to show evidence) will always be a problem--still putting 15lb's of crap in a 5lb sock. The cost and continued cost over-runs has no end in sight. This supposedly misinformation should be very easily shown by some report-should it not?
 
Last edited:
Is the amount of both time and money it has taken to this point, with a program still yet to complete, disappointing? Sure it is. In fact, it's infuriating! But I will say this. Since the program restructured in 2012, it has remained within a few months of being on track of it's development schedule. The issues that have plagued it before have been overcome (true, new ones ARE being discovered as new capabilites are added, but they also are on track to be fixed), and the guys flying it like what they see so far (with some frustrations on not having some capabilities still in development). Heck, it IS the most advanced weapon system ever developed, so I'm guessing here (no, I'm not guessing) that development of this jet is just a tad more,complex than developing the original F-16 or F-18.
.

It is more than disappointing-It has been stated by the Brass that it's toooo late to turn back now --kinda like TOOoo Big to fail-- this has cost lives and continues to cost our forces to use old worn out equipment to prosecute wars and put themselves in crappy positions. Your 2012 track doesn't jive with reports only a few weeks ago. New problems arise --- how long do you stomp on a fire before you notice that a forest fire is raging. Yup the F-18 works fine and with a few cheaper upgrades it would be the state of the art as one article explains. We got sold a bag of crap. A newF-18 Block III would do the trick..
 
Last edited:
Frankly, the jet will be very capable when development finishes next year. The real question will be affordability. A jet this complex costs a LOT of money to buy (but less than an F-22, or a Silent Eagle) and a LOT of money to operate. But for quite a bit of the future air superiority missions, we WILL need them. We need to ask now, can we afford to buy and operate a lot of them. THAT is the million dollar question.

Again the MONEY or as you call it Affordability. No the question is-- what good is a plane that can't and may not be able to prosecute a mission that needs to be done right now? The gazillion dollar question is that how many more inadequate forces are going to be left behind because we don't know about a future of a maybe F-35 frickin mix breed platform? We would be better off using Drones.
 
Lets just say that if there are so many bad reports on this topic and why is it that we don't we hear anything good? Why don't our top Brass (who make these reports public-on numerous occasions) just give us the straight truth - or tell us that they need to make a huge correction to these articles? Something smells here and to play with this much money since 2006 and with no end in sight it flat out stinks. Please show me/us any great proof of this platform. I see and hear none. I believe that the sophistication is certainly with no doubt out there but the fragility (Temperament and extent of mission it replaces show no evidence) will always be a problem--still putting 15lb's of crap in a 5lb sock. The cost and continued cost over-runs has no end in sight. This supposedly misinformation should be very easily shown by some report-should it not?
Then you're not looking hard enough, or just searching internet blogs and getting "Arm-chair QB" assessments. Try Googling "F-35 SAR 2016", which is the Selective Acquisition Report that was just released weeks ago. Pretty accurate description of the current state of the program right there in the Executive Summary-- the program is transitioning from making slow and steady progress to a rapidly growing and accelerating program, but some risks remain. Schedule estimates show no further, or only minor, delays from when the program was re-baselined in 2012? Costs are steady for the most part, and have in fact decreased slightly in some estimates.

So, why doesn't the DoD leadership get out there and say this? Well, they do. But the internet arm-chair QBs usually drown them out with more accusations of being "brought by the Defense Industry" and lying. And frankly, it's not their job o get into internet debates, nor is it mine. It's usually a"no-win" situation, as the other side refuses to actually "debate", and it's typically impossible to change a mind that is already set in concrete on their views.
 
Please, you using an article on aircraft capabilities from Dave Mujambar as your "expertise"? Please see my post above about "internet arm-chair QBs". Dave is a classic example. Then ask yourself, if the jet is such a failure in doing it's job, and if it really doesn't have a mission, then why have so many countries besides the US decided to purchase this "loser with no mission"? Korea, Japan, and Israel have all recently JOINED the original group of 8 countries BESIDES our three services (AF, Navy, and Marines) that sign up for the jet originally. It takes an awful complex conspiracy theory to get that many counties to align in a "boon-doogle" just because the US said "pretty please".
 
Again the MONEY or as you call it Affordability. No the question is-- what good is a plane that can't and may not be able to prosecute a mission that needs to be done right now? The gazillion dollar question is that how many more inadequate forces are going to be left behind because we don't know about a future of a maybe F-35 frickin mix breed platform? We would be better off using Drones.
Guess we should cancel all submarines, and Air Defense units like the Patriot, and ice breakers, and the ENTIRE NUCLEAR TRIAD, as their not in the current fight either. You know, because EVERY fight the US will be involved in from this point on will be EXACTLY like the one were currently in.
 
Then you're not looking hard enough, or just searching internet blogs and getting "Arm-chair QB" assessments. Try Googling "F-35 SAR 2016", which is the Selective Acquisition Report that was just released weeks ago. Pretty accurate description of the current state of the program right there in the Executive Summary-- the program is transitioning from making slow and steady progress to a rapidly growing and accelerating program, but some risks remain. Schedule estimates show no further, or only minor, delays from when the program was re-baselined in 2012? Costs are steady for the most part, and have in fact decreased slightly in some estimates.

So, why doesn't the DoD leadership get out there and say this? Well, they do. But the internet arm-chair QBs usually drown them out with more accusations of being "brought by the Defense Industry" and lying. And frankly, it's not their job o get into internet debates, nor is it mine. It's usually a"no-win" situation, as the other side refuses to actually "debate", and it's typically impossible to change a mind that is already set in concrete on their views.


Thanks for the "F-35 SAR 2016" report but it shows that you are wrong.

"The good news for the program is the 2015 Selected Acquisition Report (SAR) shows the F-35 total acquisition cost decreased from $391 billion in 2014 to $379 billion in “then-year” dollars, or when adjusted for inflation. This is a drop of $12.1 billion, according to a Pentagon-issued summary."

"But the SAR’s estimate for the cost to operate and support the F-35’s over its service life has increased by $107.3 billion in then-year dollars. The 2014 estimate for the 55 years of expected F-35 service to 2064 was $1.017 trillion; the now 60-year estimate to keep F-35s flying until 2070 is $1.124 trillion."

Do you really think that this POS will fly until 2070? I guess if you can chuck enough money at it. What a bunch of bologna. You can make any numbers look good with the right set of X's, Y's and Z's as parameters. The fact is this Multi-Airplatform is a jack of all trades Master at none. A classic short arm syndrome- can't reach your wallet to pay for anything especially when your pants are on the ground from embarrassment. The Navy and the Marines will be the ones who really take it in the shorts for the missions that they will prosecute yet not to mention again the cost taken away to use on our Forces needed right now. -Classic hurt your Troops while we play around with a system that might work and has cost 1 arm and 1 leg and will come back in the future to get the other arm and leg.


"The F-35 joint strike fighter will fly until 2070, reflecting a decision by the US armed services to extend the operational life of the fleet by six years.
All three services that operate the F-35 — the US Air Force, US Navy and US Marine Corps — increased the total flight hours for the fleet by 1.6 million, F-35 Joint Program Office Chief Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan told reporters March 24 at the Pentagon. Of the total, the Air Force added 1.3 million flight hours, while the Navy added 300,000 flight hours, according to the JPO."

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...LLGfE_svZKAjP7QGA&sig2=nXYL9Yo_-IFlTvlbfs-B_w
 
Guess we should cancel all submarines, and Air Defense units like the Patriot, and ice breakers, and the ENTIRE NUCLEAR TRIAD, as their not in the current fight either. You know, because EVERY fight the US will be involved in from this point on will be EXACTLY like the one were currently in.

I guess we should just say the Hell to our forces right now with the Equipment failures and lack of personnel and support. Kinda like walking around D.C. with the beautiful Cherry Blossoms while the men and women are scrapping in the field to keep their butts alive and safe because we won't spend the money on new equipment because we are playing with a wishful multi-jack of all trades platform hoping that the 5lb sack will hold that 15lbs of everything (a multi-one stretchable shoe that fits all concept). Shameful
 
Please, you using an article on aircraft capabilities from Dave Mujambar as your "expertise"? Please see my post above about "internet arm-chair QBs". Dave is a classic example. Then ask yourself, if the jet is such a failure in doing it's job, and if it really doesn't have a mission, then why have so many countries besides the US decided to purchase this "loser with no mission"? Korea, Japan, and Israel have all recently JOINED the original group of 8 countries BESIDES our three services (AF, Navy, and Marines) that sign up for the jet originally. It takes an awful complex conspiracy theory to get that many counties to align in a "boon-doogle" just because the US said "pretty please".

Don't forget stellar countries like Turkey. Oh boy why don't we just give everyone our secrets and capability. Hell ya count X country in I want the Hillary Top Secret deal too. Give me a break! The Navy and Marines had no choice and you know it. It like the Poles choosing between Russia and Germany.
 
Pima Bullet tell these Marines how to Arm Chair Quarterback. Give em the ole "Do more with Less" theory.....

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiluLm975XMAhUC6CYKHYhpCWkQFggfMAA&url=http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/04/15/budget-cuts-leaving-marine-corps-aircraft-grounded.html&usg=AFQjCNEvZU10jbQQfUZlxM6HG71vLrC_7g&sig2=oeJ7sxNKrJLSgOrAFIC0cg

And we play with a forced POS Platform that will cost us not only unspeakable amounts of cash but will give everyone an inside to our technology/capability/secrets -just wonderful.

BTW, this confirms what I'm hearing from Marines and Navy personnel I know.
 
Last edited:
Amazing what you can pull of the internet. Everyone that I know who has flown the jet loves it! Let it go cga82.........
 
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.

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.

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.

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.

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".

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.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top