Forum: Program and politics

Quote:

...the controversial Joint Strike Fighter, or F-35, the most expensive fighter in history. Among delays, delays and mistakes, the ill-fated project of the Lockheed has undergone many adjustments in the budget today that each piece should cost 200 million euros. She wanted Italy 131, the program includes a charge of at least 15 billion over twelve years, but the increases are inevitable, given the need for changes to the original design: only last month the commission of the Pentagon is looking at the prototypes of ' F-35 asked 725 corrections, the driver's helmet to suspension in landing that has failed all the field tests.

http://translate.google.com/translate?h ... 7483358%2F

Note that 200 million Euros converts to ~$250 million. And you thought the North American press was full of bad information, half truths and outright lies! OK, it is, but still; that's a whopper.

Everywhere the same wrangling. Economies are hurting, budgets are shrinking, and the F-35 is a big target.

F-16.net Sponsor

More on what it would cost Italy to withdraw from the project, although the government still seems to be firmly committed:
http://translate.google.com/translate?s ... he-se.html

Sloppy F-35 program management gave the critics the ammo. What do you expect?

Or do you think the F-35 has any possibility of being affordable? That and being a "model acquistion program" were some of the main goals when the program was sold to a gullible Congress. Rolling Eyes

Hype critical design review in 2007 then it is discovered:

The hook is in the wrong place for the carrier variant.
Fuel interting can't keep up. (Living up to its name of "lightning")
The helmet DAS fubar
Thermal issues
Over 3 times the software of an F-22.
Paper-thin weight margins (thanks to everyone being married to a STOVL design)
And so much more.

But yeah, it is all the fault of the critics.

As I have said before, it's a good thing it's not going to war now, DUH Wink

It's not like these issues will not (or have not already) been addressed with fixes on the way. I get tired of saying this, but this is what SDD is for (to find the issues and get them fixed before IOC). How did the F-22, EF, or Rafale look at the decade mark?

Btw, 3 times the software of the F-22 is a good thing, not bad. The biggest chunk of that is the ALGS. Throw in all the hardware that the F-22 did not have (radar modes, EOTS, EODAS, Link16, etc) and you begin to see where the extra lines of code come from.

SpudmanWP wrote:

As I have said before, it's a good thing it's not going to war now, DUH Wink

It's not like these issues will not (or have not already) been addressed with fixes on the way. I get tired of saying this, but this is what SDD is for (to find the issues and get them fixed before IOC). How did the F-22, EF, or Rafale look at the decade mark?

Btw, 3 times the software of the F-22 is a good thing, not bad. The biggest chunk of that is the ALGS. Throw in all the hardware that the F-22 did not have (radar modes, EOTS, EODAS, Link16, etc) and you begin to see where the extra lines of code come from.

Which hasn't stopped the F-35 cheerleading community from endless and unproven platitudes.

elp wrote:

SpudmanWP wrote:

As I have said before, it's a good thing it's not going to war now, DUH Wink

It's not like these issues will not (or have not already) been addressed with fixes on the way. I get tired of saying this, but this is what SDD is for (to find the issues and get them fixed before IOC). How did the F-22, EF, or Rafale look at the decade mark?

Btw, 3 times the software of the F-22 is a good thing, not bad. The biggest chunk of that is the ALGS. Throw in all the hardware that the F-22 did not have (radar modes, EOTS, EODAS, Link16, etc) and you begin to see where the extra lines of code come from.

Which hasn't stopped the F-35 cheerleading community from endless and unproven platitudes.

When the F35 is that bad as you think it is, would the US really take the risk going to war with a inferior main fighter and not being able to defend the US anymore?
Would also the other level partners, as well as Israel and Japan, all really are that stupid? Question

elp wrote:

Which hasn't stopped the F-35 cheerleading community from endless and unproven platitudes.

I cannot speak for others, but I have on occasion been the first to report an issue that casts a shadow on the F-35 program. The difference between you and I is that I also look to see what the program is trying to do about it, is it realistic, and what risk is associated with the plan going forward.

ELP reminds me a lot of Newton D. Baker, former U.S. Secretary of War.

Quote:

That idea is so damned nonsensical and impossible that I'm willing to stand on the bridge of a battleship while that nitwit tries to hit if from the air.

— Newton D. Baker, U.S. Secretary of War, regards Billy Mitchell's idea of airplanes sinking a battleship. In July 1921 Mitchell got his experiment and sunk the captured German battleship Ostfreisland. Newton was not on the bridge. 1921.

Some of this reminds me of the 'big bad wolof' who will huff and puff to blow your F-35 house of cards down. I'm still waiting for the end times.... Very Happy

SpudmanWP wrote:

elp wrote:

Which hasn't stopped the F-35 cheerleading community from endless and unproven platitudes.

I cannot speak for others, but I have on occasion been the first to report an issue that casts a shadow on the F-35 program. The difference between you and I is that I also look to see what the program is trying to do about it, is it realistic, and what risk is associated with the plan going forward.

Exactly. Eric OTOH just wants to take cheap shots sourced from whatever nonsense APA provides him this week.

The "helmet fubar" nonsense particularly. The helmet works mostly. Given it is 7 years away from IOC in full Block III capability, VSI has got a bit of time on their side. But that's not good enough for our Eric. Oh no, everything has to be perfect and work straight up or it becomes "Just so Flawed" or some other empty, worthless catchphrase.

The good thing about this though, is that he is just a guy with an opinion as he freely admits. What does it matter what he thinks?

To the USAF, USN, USMC, RAF, RAAF, RCAF, RNLAF, RDAF, RNoAF, AMI, TAF, IASF, JASDF and building to others, it means absolutely nothing at all...

spazsinbad wrote:

Some of this reminds me of the 'big bad wolof' who will huff and puff to blow your F-35 house of cards down. I'm still waiting for the end times.... Very Happy

Oh believe me, if the F-35 program had built up a house of cards, it would have been blown down.

As of now, the F-35 program has built a flyable airframe with lots of software yet to be developed. The F-35 has been sold on its potential worth... all they've built are a bunch of flying airframes loaded with lots of hardware that's worthless until the software is developed.

So forgive people like me who criticize a program that's made lots of promises, and has thus far been slow to deliver on any of them. If Lockheed Martin had met more of its goals on time and more or less on budget, I would have reason to trust the F-35 will come out quite well.

Huff n'Puff.

No need to blow anything down. Your program's already collapsing under its own weight.

As is evident no less. I'm pondering why Japan has just the other day troubled to buy some? Weird huh.

Who do the Italians need to defend against? The Turks will clean the Italian clock, so-to-speak. And there isn't anybody else in the neighborhood the Italians should worry themselves about. Curious. The Italians cannot afford and they do not require F-35. The platform is a waste of money - which they do not have.

Forum: Program and politics

Hit piece on the F-35 in the Italian Press