Pentagon’s big budget F-35 fighter ‘can’t turn, can’t climb, can’t run’

[Ichingcarpenter]

SNIP....


All that thrust results in extreme levels of stress on engine components. It’s no surprise, then, that the F-35 frequently suffers engine malfunctions. Even with that 20 tons of thrust, the new radar-dodging plane is still sluggish. The F-35 “is a dog … overweight and underpowered,” according to Winslow Wheeler, director of the Straus Military Reform Project at the Project on Government Oversight in Washington.

In 2008, two analysts at the RAND Corporation, a California think-tank that works closely with the military, programmed a computer simulation to test out the F-35′s fighting ability in a hypothetical air war with China. The results were startling.

“The F-35 is double-inferior,” John Stillion and Harold Scott Perdue concluded in their written summary of the war game, later leaked to the press. The new plane “can’t turn, can’t climb, can’t run,” they warned.

Handout photo of workers on the moving line and forward fuselage assembly areas for the F-35 JSF at Lockheed Martin Corp's factory located in Fort Worth, TexasYet the F-35 is on track to become by far the military’s most numerous warplane. It was designed to replace almost all current fighters in the Air Force and Marine Corps and complement the Navy’s existing F/A-18 jets. The Pentagon plans to acquire roughly 2,400 of the radar-evading F-35s in coming decades, at a cost of more than $400 billion.


http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2014/07/14/pentagons-big-budget-f-35-fighter-cant-turn-cant-climb-cant-run/

[sakabatou]

1. In other words, a fucking boondogle

[delrem]

2. Maybe. Depends on how many NATO and wannabe NATO countries buy in.

Look, nobody ever expect any of these jets/weapons to actually be operating in dogfights in full-scale combat.
What a fucking laugh.

Be honest on the topic -- how many decades has it been since that kind of scenario was even remotely likely?

No. Those scenarios are for war junkies to buy combat sim vids designed and produced by the defence dep't. You can buy them online, if you think you need that kind of fix.

But those vids aren't connected to reality.
Just ask: how are these weapons used nowadays, in actual fact?
Were there dogfights over Libya? Iraq? heheh.
Are there dogfights over Gaza? double-heh.

[sakabatou]

3. If I remember, the last time the US had gone into a dogfight was in the first gulf war

I'm probably wrong, so please correct me if I am.

[delrem]

4. Hey, the first gulf war was pretty fun. Don't you think?

The US sure had a problem there! But a dogfight did it.
Heh. Were those the flights to Iran?

[DetlefK]

9. But who builds a fighter when he wants a bomber?

Sure, there were no dogfights over the last decades because the air-superiority was clearly lopsided in the conflicts, but you don't know what will be in 20, 30 years.

Will China and Japan actually go to war over some islands?
Will China attack Taiwan?
Will Saudi-Arabia and Iran start a war over the remains of Iraq?
Will Russia invade Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and force NATO to act?
Will Israel and Turkey go to war over whether Turkey should supply the islamist insurgents in Syria or not?


What about Cavalry? The last cavalry-attacks of note were before WWI. But nowadays Cavalry would be perfectly suited to combat insurgents in remote locations far away from infrastructure. What do you think why the US-military is developing robotic donkeys to carry stuff in difficult terrain?

You never know when a military needs a particular tactic, that's why it's important to keep the ability to fight aerial dogfights.

[delrem]

12. Absolutely! I, too, am for a hugely inflated "defence" budget!

In fact I think the more inflated the defence budget is, the more glorious it is!

[DetlefK]

15. It's not about the size, it's how you use it.

Catapults and rams were replaced with one weapon: the bomb.
Arquebuses, longbows, swords, pikes were replaced with one weapon: the rifle.

It's about versatility. Gaining new tactical options without giving up old ones.

And btw, the accounting and supply-management system of the Pentagon is a cruel joke. Once they get that in order (don't worry, they have been working on it since the mid-90s and they will be ready any decade now) they will be able to cut huge amounts of waste.

[Dustlawyer]

16. I think the last REAL good dogfights were in the movie Top Gun!

Maybe they didn't do a sequel because our planes suck now!
Maybe we don't have dogfights because the other countries saw Top Gun!

All Humor aside, if the Navy has a good fighter jet use that. Don't we already have stealth fighters? Is this plane needed or can we update older proven planes with new technology? I don't know so I am asking.

For the record, I am in favor of closing many overseas bases and cutting military in half so we spend more than the next biggest military spender, but not the next 17 countries combined! With that money we could afford everything else and not have deficit spending. It is OUT OF CONTROL!

[IDemo]

18. OK, forget the dogfights

The F-35 is incapable of operating at the low and slow speeds which define the A-10 in ground support, one of the planes slated for the scrap heap because of the supposed superiority of the F-35. Heh heh.

[littlemissmartypants]

5. Where is the food for starving children

Stored in the galley? That's all I care about.
Love, Peace and Shelter. Lmsp

[OldRedneck]

6. As I recall reading here on DU . . .

As I recall reading here on DU . . . maybe as recently as yesterday . . . The Dick Cheney told us we shouldn't spend money on roads, airfields, bridges, power grids, food stamps . . . instead, we should pour all our $$$ into "national defense."

Is this what he meant?

[Pholus]

7. One key designer of the F-16/A-10 doesn't have much nice to say about the F-35...

The summary: The criteria to make it all-things to all services means the design is compromised and not truly exceptional at anything.

The best quote: "So what is the point of this plane? The point is to spend money. That is the mission of the airplane. It's for the US Congress to send money to Lockheed." It does seem to excel at that: at a cost of 1.42 trillion dollars, the F-35 is responsible for almost 10% of our current national debt (17.6 trillion dollars).

[Historic NY]

8. The bottomless pit of the MIC/

[TRoN33]

10. Imagine if F-117 can turn tighter than F-35, it would be historical scandal for LockMart.

[sakabatou]

13. Heh, considering the F-117 isn't even a fighter.

[Scuba]

11. If we can't afford to educate our children, to heal our sick or care for our elderly ...

... just what is it the defense budget is defending?

[CottonBear]

14. All Democrats should ask this question.

This should be a question that EVERY Democratic congressman & senator should ask.

[Lurks Often]

19. Democrats are part of the problem

Do you really think the Congressional delegation of Connecticut is going to vote for canceling the F-35 when CT based Pratt & Whitney is the only company making the engine for the plane?

It's amazing how bi-partisan Democrats and Republicans get when a major company's product or military base in a state has it's funding placed in jeopardy. I watched the Republican governor of CT work very hard with the Democratic Senators when they tried to close the New London naval base.

[n2doc]

17. Trillion dollars for garbage

Imagine the incredible outrage if, say, Acorn had received these funds and squandered them. Or if food stamp recipients had received them and bought megatons of lobster tails. Or illegal immigrants had been housed in government built luxury hotels.

Of course, one can't really imagine those things, because they would never happen in the first place. Only the military gets to waste money on this scale.

[jeff47]

20. You know, the F-35 isn't the only aircraft we have...

In a hypothetical air war with China, we won't be sending in F-35s first. We'll be sending in F-22s. It's designed to excel in air-to-air combat. The F-35 is a "generalist" so it's not going to be anywhere near as good as the F-22 in air-to-air....but it can actually carry bombs.