F-35 Is Now the Air Force’s Second-largest Fighter Fleet

Discuss the F-35 Lightning II
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3363
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post13 May 2021, 23:53

XanderCrews wrote:they've had PR departments since before your parents were even born, I assure you. whether they called them "PR departments" or "the boys in marketing" or whatever. And a lot of what you see is indeed company propoganda, from other aircraft companies and PR depts.


I never meant to imply that LM didn't have a PR department! Sorry if that's the idea that I gave in my previous posts.
What I mean is that the PR by LM around the the F-35 wasn't given much of a thought or attention or didn't have the attention/thought that it should IMO have had specially during the initial stages of the F-35's development.
IMO, a 'proof' of this (take this for what it is) is that LM started to pay far more attention to PR during the later stages of the F-35's development - a more precise example of this would be during the initial stages LM stating that the F-35 doesn't need to dogfight to later staging airshows to show the F-35's agility (and finally countering the "can't turn" statements).


XanderCrews wrote:if the point of "PR" is to sell airplanes, and not warm fuzzies on the internet, then the F-35 has the best out there. Gripen propaganda rarely translates to actual sales, and it actually backfired badly in Switzerland. PR so "good", it lost a sale? count me out.

...

Why do I care if the Gripen looks good on the internet but loses where it matter in official competition? You guys need to learn to pick your battles and count your blessings.


Here it seems clear that you haven't read or fully read my posts in the first page of this thread. In one of those posts you can find the following:
If the Gripen E/F was a better aircraft and with all the PR around it then I'm sure that it would have secured more order than it currently has.


With what I said above I tried to be clear that PR isn't everything (but it can help a lot).
But if an aircraft in this case the Gripen doesn't live to its PR (or hype) - and we know that it doesn't and we've discussed and agreed several times about this in the past - then there's nothing that PR can do!
Basically and since the Gripen doesn't live or match its PR/hype then its obviously that it will be a failure commercially/sales-wise.
The F-35 is basically the opposite of the Gripen! IMO, somewhat poor PR (at least initially) but a great product that matches or even exceeds its planned specifications.

Of course that the situation of the F-35 is much better than the Gripen and like you say, sales say it all.
But if the PR around the F-35 had been better than the F-35 success would be even better and some 'ideas' such as trying to 'cancel' or reduce the F-35 orders probably wouldn't have had surfaced at all. And that's basically my point here.
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7248
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post14 May 2021, 02:12

ricnunes wrote:
I never meant to imply that LM didn't have a PR department! Sorry if that's the idea that I gave in my previous posts.
What I mean is that the PR by LM around the the F-35 wasn't given much of a thought or attention or didn't have the attention/thought that it should IMO have had specially during the initial stages of the F-35's development.
IMO, a 'proof' of this (take this for what it is) is that LM started to pay far more attention to PR during the later stages of the F-35's development - a more precise example of this would be during the initial stages LM stating that the F-35 doesn't need to dogfight to later staging airshows to show the F-35's agility (and finally countering the "can't turn" statements).


The ability to do super airshow routines wasn't a matter of a lack of PR, but a lack of the certicfications required to show off the agile airplane. We've known F-35A was a 9.9G capable airplane since 2011.

We can argue that if the F-35 testing and cert program went better, the airplane would be performing stunts at airshows faster, but then again that probably would have fixed a lot of "PR" problems in the first place-- I can't stress enough how the best PR solution of all, is not needing one in the first place because you created a superior product to begin with.

It wasn't like they were "sitting" on the airshow bada$$ F-35 until "PR" told them to roll it out. They've been wanting to show it off the whole time but had to wait until everything was cleared. The F-22 was the same way.

Theres an extremely bizarre problem wherein the F-35 is "not really meant to dogfight", is the same thing as saying an M27 isn't really meant to be a club... its actually better in fact, so do I sell this M-27 as "truly a leap beyond the club in that its a full auto infantry rifle" or do I try to connect with the serfs by telling them "its actually the worlds greatest club--kill many bad guy!," when they look at it and know its not a club?

Its a crossroads. Dogfighting is the least efficient way of killing enemy airplanes. So why on Earth would I not want to use the more efficient methods of killing the enemy? F-35 is caught in its own "paradigm shift" Yes the F-35 can dogfight. It can pull more alpha than an F-16, and more G than the Hornets. simple as, but its like using an M27 as a club. Why would I do that? and more to the point how god awful would things have to get to the point where I am using the M27 as a club. Its not a good place to be. Yes you can use it as a club, and even mount a bayonet on it--its built for that, but those are usually bad scenarios we try to avoid. If you start talking to me that your rifle's best feature are its bayonet and club like features-- yeah I'm going to seeing red flags everywhere.

So the public wants to hear its a club, but if you say that you look like an idiot to the people in the know.

But if you tell the peasants its amazing long distance killing machine that would slay all other club weilders, but you can't really show them, because its loud, and we need a range and other safety considerations, plus some training... they just hit you with their club and laugh at you. "which better now? club or M27!?"




With what I said above I tried to be clear that PR isn't everything (but it can help a lot).
But if an aircraft in this case the Gripen doesn't live to its PR (or hype) - and we know that it doesn't and we've discussed and agreed several times about this in the past - then there's nothing that PR can do!
Basically and since the Gripen doesn't live or match its PR/hype then its obviously that it will be a failure commercially/sales-wise.
The F-35 is basically the opposite of the Gripen! IMO, somewhat poor PR (at least initially) but a great product that matches or even exceeds its planned specifications.

Of course that the situation of the F-35 is much better than the Gripen and like you say, sales say it all.
But if the PR around the F-35 had been better than the F-35 success would be even better and some 'ideas' such as trying to 'cancel' or reduce the F-35 orders probably wouldn't have had surfaced at all. And that's basically my point here.


Thats a completely hypothetical thing. We have no idea how much "PR" did or did not play with the F-35 based on the several options they had to do PR. You're making assumptions based on things that simply can't be measured. What percentage of F-35 "PR" should I have increased in which dosage or measurement that would have lead to more F-35 sales/production?

The biggest bugaboo with F-35 has been cost. Fix the cost problems and your PR problems disappear. Its like magic.


But beyond even that youre dealing with an airplane that has some pretty advanced, novel, and unconventional problem solving solutions for combat. whats worse, many of them are classified. The plan was seemingly to "sell" the decision makers and the people in the know, that understand this stuff and can properly evaluate it. Which sucks, And I wish that wasn't the case but the simple fact is that might have been the only way to make this work. IF you recall in the Gripen threads my buddy Lukfi thought an integrated sensor and a LANTIRN were the same thing.

F-35 has integrated sensors

So does the gripen!

No it really doesn't. and not in the same way.

What LM seemingly tried to do was sell the airplane to the professionals and the decision makers and let the chips fall where they may. And thats seemingly paid off. South Korea changed their entire Bidding process at the behest of their air force in order to get the F-35. A lot of countries have made similar drastic (albeit not widely publicly reported) changes to their processes especially for industry to get to the F-35 and what it offers. Many nations simply went straight to the sole source and at the time of writing, when it is competed, it has never lost. In South Korea it "lost" and then they changed the rules in order for it to win.

On principal I don't like that "top down" method. But when dealing with these extremely narrow and unique and classified aspects its probably the only way.

Now Canada did it really poorly. This is more political hamfistedness which again, theres no amount of PR to fix. PR is a band aide. A small band aide in fact. So id recommend not self-harming to the point where a band aide can't fix it, but many people do that. There was no amount of PR that could save things from Canadian politics. LM is actually very limited in what it can do and say, and all the subtleties and games therein-- of which there are many. In Canada theres probably only about 10 people who can actually accurately gauge CPFH between airplanes, maybe about as many SMEs in other F-35 heavy subjects like Threat Evaluations/intel and EW.
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

steve2267

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2909
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2016, 17:36

Unread post14 May 2021, 03:00

I'm still trying to figgur out why LM should fund a PR department to defend the specifications specified BY THE CUSTOMER that they built a product to meet.

Did the contract LM signed permit LM to do a lot of PR work and charge it to Uncle Sam (or the F-35 Project Office)? If so, then perhaps they should have gone PR crazy. Something whispers in my ear that this probably was not the case.
Take an F-16, stir in A-7, dollop of F-117, gob of F-22, dash of F/A-18, sprinkle with AV-8B, stir well + bake. Whaddya get? F-35.
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7248
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post14 May 2021, 05:32

steve2267 wrote:I'm still trying to figgur out why LM should fund a PR department to defend the specifications specified BY THE CUSTOMER that they built a product to meet.

Did the contract LM signed permit LM to do a lot of PR work and charge it to Uncle Sam (or the F-35 Project Office)? If so, then perhaps they should have gone PR crazy. Something whispers in my ear that this probably was not the case.


Yup.

as has been alluded to there are certain things that are "not their place" to comment on.

Moreover, despite so many complaints LM is not the prime reason the F-35 ran into trouble, though so many have decided it was all on them. Uncle Sugar did an awful lot to mess things up, and LM like all contractors is in the end at the mercy of the "customer"

the NAVAIR tailhook mistake that LM took the hit for was a great example.
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3363
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post14 May 2021, 12:18

XanderCrews wrote:The ability to do super airshow routines wasn't a matter of a lack of PR, but a lack of the certicfications required to show off the agile airplane. We've known F-35A was a 9.9G capable airplane since 2011.

We can argue that if the F-35 testing and cert program went better, the airplane would be performing stunts at airshows faster, but then again that probably would have fixed a lot of "PR" problems in the first place-- I can't stress enough how the best PR solution of all, is not needing one in the first place because you created a superior product to begin with.


Yes, you're right above.
But there are other ways that LM could show that the F-35 is a very agile aircraft such as showing that it's more agile than a F-16 and than a F/A-18 and this could have been 'shown' without using the aircraft itself in an airshow. This could be done using the PR department to explain that the F-35 is more agile than the F-16 because it is capable of high AoA maneuvers (like the Hornet) while having a similar acceleration (which would be better than the F-16 when both aircraft carry actual weapons) and better than the F/A-18 because its acceleration is much better while retaining the same high AoA maneuver capability or and resuming, explain in a more 'colorful' way basically what we have been stating in this same forum for years and which you also stated in your last post.


XanderCrews wrote:Its a crossroads. Dogfighting is the least efficient way of killing enemy airplanes. So why on Earth would I not want to use the more efficient methods of killing the enemy? F-35 is caught in its own "paradigm shift" Yes the F-35 can dogfight.


I know that, you know what and many (most?) in this forum knows that.
However the general public doesn't know that and with that many of the politicians which are elected by the general public try to capitalize the most on the general public's opinion in order to win votes and all of this can make the diference between for example cancelling a certain program or not.


XanderCrews wrote:simple as, but its like using an M27 as a club. Why would I do that? and more to the point how god awful would things have to get to the point where I am using the M27 as a club. Its not a good place to be. Yes you can use it as a club, and even mount a bayonet on it--its built for that, but those are usually bad scenarios we try to avoid. If you start talking to me that your rifle's best feature are its bayonet and club like features-- yeah I'm going to seeing red flags everywhere.

So the public wants to hear its a club, but if you say that you look like an idiot to the people in the know.

But if you tell the peasants its amazing long distance killing machine that would slay all other club weilders, but you can't really show them, because its loud, and we need a range and other safety considerations, plus some training... they just hit you with their club and laugh at you. "which better now? club or M27!?"


Again this is something that IMO needs to be explained to the general population due to the times (Internet age) that we
in. And this is where PR comes into hand.


XanderCrews wrote:Thats a completely hypothetical thing. We have no idea how much "PR" did or did not play with the F-35 based on the several options they had to do PR. You're making assumptions based on things that simply can't be measured. What percentage of F-35 "PR" should I have increased in which dosage or measurement that would have lead to more F-35 sales/production?


To be more precise, that's completely my own opinion.
So yes, consider it for what it is (hypothetical, assumptions, whatever...)


XanderCrews wrote:The biggest bugaboo with F-35 has been cost. Fix the cost problems and your PR problems disappear. Its like magic.


And that's another example where PR (or LM PR) in my own opinion completely failed. The F-35 "trillion dollar" cost wasn't successfully explained to the general public. Yes, I know that it was explained that the "trillion dollar" cost includes everything including wages of everyone involved with the program and every other possible cost involved in the program until 2070 or so. I know that, you know what and many (most?) in this forum knows that but the general public still doesn't seem to know that and this should be something that PR should have done a better job (again IMO).


XanderCrews wrote:What LM seemingly tried to do was sell the airplane to the professionals and the decision makers and let the chips fall where they may. And thats seemingly paid off.


Indeed.
However in many/most cases the decision makers are not professionals - They are politicians who often capitalize on the general public's opinion to maintain their positions (i.e. win votes). So and during this new 'information era' the need to influenciate the masses (general public) is more important than ever.


XanderCrews wrote:South Korea changed their entire Bidding process at the behest of their air force in order to get the F-35. A lot of countries have made similar drastic (albeit not widely publicly reported) changes to their processes especially for industry to get to the F-35 and what it offers. Many nations simply went straight to the sole source and at the time of writing, when it is competed, it has never lost. In South Korea it "lost" and then they changed the rules in order for it to win.


Which IMO kinda proves my point.
Anyway those that knows a 'little' about the fighter aircraft subject (which is not the general public) knows that the F-35 is by far the superior plane here so why was there the need to let's say 'rig' things in favor of the F-35? I'm sure all the bad press around the F-35 had something to do with it so there was the need to change things so that there's little that can be claimed to counter the decision to go for the F-35.
Again IMO (you may call it hypothetical, assumptions, whatever...) if there was a more effective PR around the F-35 than probably nothing of what you described above would be needed.


XanderCrews wrote:Now Canada did it really poorly.


Let's not get started into Canada because at the moment it sure feels like the USA is doing even worse :wink:


XanderCrews wrote:There was no amount of PR that could save things from Canadian politics. LM is actually very limited in what it can do and say, and all the subtleties and games therein-- of which there are many.


Sorry but I kinda disagree here. The decision of the (idiotic) PM Trudeau when elected back then was solely based on the 'bad press' that the F-35 got at that time. And apparently there wasn't much that LM did at the time to prevent or overcome this same bad press. And again, probably the only thing that LM could have done at the time to overcome this same bad press was a (MUCH) better PR, hence the reason for my arguments here.
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3363
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post14 May 2021, 12:25

steve2267 wrote:I'm still trying to figgur out why LM should fund a PR department to defend the specifications specified BY THE CUSTOMER that they built a product to meet.


Because of the reasons that I stated in my last post.

Moreover it's not like LM had to fund a PR department on purpose because they already have such a department.
IMO, orders should have been given to that same PR department to become more, let's say 'active' regarding the F-35.
In the 'worse case scenario' LM could have (IMO) hired a 'very smart' person to manage all the PR around the F-35.
As you can see nothing too fancy (but that it could make a difference in the end).
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4494
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post14 May 2021, 13:26

Xander Crews: Take any aircraft company and ask them if they wish they had the F-35's order book and guess what theyll say? so thats every company buy LM wishing they were winning like that. In the FBI we call that a clue.

So you are or were FBI, yes?

With respect to who in USAF has offered an effective counter to recent USAF leadership digs at the F-35..... the pilots who fly it. You know, the graphic showing something close to 100% of all F-15C/E, F-16, A-10 pilots who'd rather fly into battle in the F-35, vs. their current platforms?

I'm sure you've seen it. I'd call that a pretty effective counter-argument.
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7248
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post14 May 2021, 18:46

Yes, you're right above.
But there are other ways that LM could show that the F-35 is a very agile aircraft such as showing that it's more agile than a F-16 and than a F/A-18 and this could have been 'shown' without using the aircraft itself in an airshow. This could be done using the PR department to explain that the F-35 is more agile than the F-16 because it is capable of high AoA maneuvers (like the Hornet) while having a similar acceleration (which would be better than the F-16 when both aircraft carry actual weapons) and better than the F/A-18 because its acceleration is much better while retaining the same high AoA maneuver capability or and resuming, explain in a more 'colorful' way basically what we have been stating in this same forum for years and which you also stated in your last post.


A lot of this stuff has been stated by LM many times. I think theres an old quote from the 18th century about bad news and lies traveling around the globe before the truth can put on its boots. LM has done a ton of PR work for the F-35 to say the least, youre upset because you don't realize the limits of PR work, and that its not a magical brainwashing tool-- and it can't control what others say or think, only hope to make an effective counterargument.

I know that, you know what and many (most?) in this forum knows that.
However the general public doesn't know that and with that many of the politicians which are elected by the general public try to capitalize the most on the general public's opinion in order to win votes and all of this can make the diference between for example cancelling a certain program or not.


the Gripen must be doing amazing and the F-35 is struggling to get anything by this measure. We need to throw all the F-35s sales success overboard, and get terrified here. One could look at the glass being completely half full and be amazed the F-35 has done as well as it has despite entire globally concerted efforts to knock it out by inflaming the masses.

One can also take PR too far, if a company goes overboard it has the opposite effect.

Again this is something that IMO needs to be explained to the general population due to the times (Internet age) that we
in. And this is where PR comes into hand.


not even the president of the United States can decide what the media reports on and what it doesn't. the simple truth is that bad news sells, and for every point against the F-35 there is a counterpoint, and that point is made, but it rarely has the same impact and is made after the fact. the F-35 can't dogfight story is an example of this mass of bad news and giving people what they want to hear (you never hear about airplanes landing safely, only crashing-- remember that) and the truth trickles out a few days later. CLAW tests aren't really a dogfight of course, but why let facts get in the way of clickbait journalists?

Herman Kahn wrote about the danger of technology surpassing the public's ability to understand and comprehend it back in 1962, not a new problem.


To be more precise, that's completely my own opinion.
So yes, consider it for what it is (hypothetical, assumptions, whatever...)



Im not unaware that good press is preferable to bad press, hence the naming conventions. My point is that for a controversial program it just magically gets more orders every year. so whats the measure?

In order for your theory to be proven we need to see a PR effect that is so bad it actually harms the F-35 directly, We could argue things could be better, and it would have sold more with better PR. I think it comes down to actual cold hard facts and data, vs spin. Governments are generally making their decisions based on data and not spin. Canada is so far the only nation that's gone full retard. even then the "PR" never got so bad that they pulled out of the program right?

Youre measure is that the PR can be directly tied to manufacturing and aquisition success, (where there is smoke there is fire)

And my measure is that despite all the problems with "PR" the F-35 continues to achieve manufacturing and acquisition success. (there is smoke, but no fire)

The big question, is how much public opinion is influencing military acquisition decisions. And i'm here to tell you, its generally little at all. in fact the public of these "democracies" would be pretty disheartened to see how little their opinion actually matters in these decisions.

One could argue that your opinion of the importance of public opinion is indeed, nothing more than a mirage. if you voted for Trudeau expressly for the idea that he would cancel the F-35 for Canada how do you feel right now? its been 6 years, and its not only still in the running, but if it wins they'll buy even more than Harper wanted.

so how much of all the Trudeau talk in Canada was nothing more than spin and PR, complete hot air to provide cover to eventually buy even more F-35s? how much of it was words, but when the reality of contracts and other actually tangible measurements of leaving f-35 program was it all just bluster?

And that's another example where PR (or LM PR) in my own opinion completely failed. The F-35 "trillion dollar" cost wasn't successfully explained to the general public. Yes, I know that it was explained that the "trillion dollar" cost includes everything including wages of everyone involved with the program and every other possible cost involved in the program until 2070 or so. I know that, you know what and many (most?) in this forum knows that but the general public still doesn't seem to know that and this should be something that PR should have done a better job (again IMO).


submit your application.


Indeed.
However in many/most cases the decision makers are not professionals - They are politicians who often capitalize on the general public's opinion to maintain their positions (i.e. win votes). So and during this new 'information era' the need to influenciate the masses (general public) is more important than ever.


And the F-35 is generally winning that battle, especially lately. This isn't even as bad as its been. do F-35 fans not know how to handle success?




Which IMO kinda proves my point.
Anyway those that knows a 'little' about the fighter aircraft subject (which is not the general public) knows that the F-35 is by far the superior plane here so why was there the need to let's say 'rig' things in favor of the F-35? I'm sure all the bad press around the F-35 had something to do with it so there was the need to change things so that there's little that can be claimed to counter the decision to go for the F-35.
Again IMO (you may call it hypothetical, assumptions, whatever...) if there was a more effective PR around the F-35 than probably nothing of what you described above would be needed.


I really have no control what the public decides to listen to and what it doesn't. let me know when you discover the formula though, because that's knowledge that's worth trillions of dollars and infinite power. Again a glass half full person would see there are actually many people who support the F-35 or at the very least are indifferent to it. for all the Gripen's amazing PR spin its never challenged and beat an F-35 in competition. That was supposed to be an f-35 competitor and its never come close to the point that it actually seems absurd that 10 years ago people thought that was serious.

one can even take the cynical view that so long as the rabble is not rising up with pitch forks, then they're accepting it. I haven't seen an F-35 riot yet, the public "battle" is largely uninformed people whining on the internet which is perfectly acceptable. even trudeau actually shows the limits of how much public voting can actually extract one from the JSF program. Vote left get F-35, vote right get F-35, vote center get F-35, Vote to get out of the F-35, get the F-35.

Image

even our most ardent social lollipop politicians here love the F-35. which makes one wonder if the biggest PR "spin" of all, is that the F-35 is a choice. as of right now, there's seemingly no get out of it no matter the publics opinion, but we like to make them think they could if they just voted hard enough... The illusion of choice is amazing.





Let's not get started into Canada because at the moment it sure feels like the USA is doing even worse :wink:


Well the US if buying 85 F-35 in this years budget, I guess I missed the part where canada had even made a decision let alone placed an order.

the proof is in the pudding, and thats exactly the "PR message" that's being sent.

Sorry but I kinda disagree here. The decision of the (idiotic) PM Trudeau when elected back then was solely based on the 'bad press' that the F-35 got at that time. And apparently there wasn't much that LM did at the time to prevent or overcome this same bad press. And again, probably the only thing that LM could have done at the time to overcome this same bad press was a (MUCH) better PR, hence the reason for my arguments here.


This just shows how amazingly misinformed you are on this entire topic. LM did an amazing job with a special hat tip to Bily flynn, as for a while there LM was the ONLY group in all of Canada doing anything resembling PR in Canada at all since the Harper government completely crapped the bed, and then to boot made it a rule that no one in the RCAF was allowed to comment to the media. Now other than LM doing a hostile take over of the Canadian government, and/or its air force they did what they could. in most normal countries, they were making sure the military got to comment on F-35, and it was generally very positive which was hugely helpful.

I don't know how LM was supposed to save Canada from itself. morevoer there is an important seperation line of PR and reality-- if you make a bad decision, if you screw the pouch, drop the ball, or otherwise make a big mistake, theres simply no amount of "spin" that can cover that up. And make no mistake, the government of Canada screwed up on the F-35. the fact that LM couldn't "rescue" canada from its political infighting, stupidity, and self inflicted wounds is something not even all of Canada could fix. no idea why or even how LM could save Canada from itself. This isn't even Canada's first procurement fiasco. you let me know what defense contractors can do to make life easier in that nation, and I'll gladly pass it on. no other F-35 nation has had the problems Canada has, so its really strange that LM PR seems to work everywhere else but one place...

PR is a collaborative effort. The CSAF went off script and look what happened. Canada never collaborated which left LM to hold the bag. And they did their best and put Flynn (Canadian pilot in a flight suit= credibility) in front of the Camera every chance they got, and he was a one man sales army, but people were quick to point out that Canadian though he is, and competent and brave and even fun, he is still paid by LM, and not the RCAF and he is a "company man" afterall. Can't tell you how far some actual RCAF pilots would have gone to help the PR, but that was never allowed. Harper government botched this badly to the point where Trudeau could help himself get elected on it. Harper did a smart thing ordering the KPMG audit-- however! Since he did it only for the F-35, there was nothing to compare it to. Never did a similiar audit on the Super Hornet (this may not have been allowed, I'm not sure what the rules were for sole-sorcing) and thus the massive F-35 price tag was revealed without comparison.

Im actually amazed that people after 10 years of this are convinced that the F-35 is going to canceled any day. You'd think after 10 years they'd be like "wait a minute!" and conversely with the Gripen E. After over 10 years of hearing about it, its still not in service. You'd think the light bulb would go on, but people wait with baited breath. you could be in a Coma in Canada from 2011 to 2021 and for all the drama, the answer is still the same "Canada remains a partner in the JSF program, and continues to evaluate its options" How exciting. The same answer every day for 10 years but we have to act surprised?

At what point do people start to realize any of this? Watch the same movie 1000 times and still don't know what will happen next?
Last edited by XanderCrews on 14 May 2021, 19:15, edited 1 time in total.
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7248
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post14 May 2021, 18:49

mixelflick wrote:Xander Crews: Take any aircraft company and ask them if they wish they had the F-35's order book and guess what theyll say? so thats every company buy LM wishing they were winning like that. In the FBI we call that a clue.

So you are or were FBI, yes?


sure why not?

With respect to who in USAF has offered an effective counter to recent USAF leadership digs at the F-35..... the pilots who fly it. You know, the graphic showing something close to 100% of all F-15C/E, F-16, A-10 pilots who'd rather fly into battle in the F-35, vs. their current platforms?

I'm sure you've seen it. I'd call that a pretty effective counter-argument.


yes and Brown himself quickly walked back the statements what you didn't see was "LM PR" step all over the general and contradict him, but instead giving him the time and space he needed to walk back the comments, which they knew he would, unless hes completely self destructive. its also budget season and drama is inherent.
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7248
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post14 May 2021, 18:56

ricnunes wrote:
steve2267 wrote:I'm still trying to figgur out why LM should fund a PR department to defend the specifications specified BY THE CUSTOMER that they built a product to meet.


Because of the reasons that I stated in my last post.

Moreover it's not like LM had to fund a PR department on purpose because they already have such a department.
IMO, orders should have been given to that same PR department to become more, let's say 'active' regarding the F-35.
In the 'worse case scenario' LM could have (IMO) hired a 'very smart' person to manage all the PR around the F-35.
As you can see nothing too fancy (but that it could make a difference in the end).



you guys are so concerned about who pulls the strings, you forget who pulls the rope.

Watching people complain here is like seeing someone whine that they won the gold medal, but didn't break a world record. I hate to spoil the ending, but I tend to ignore all the machinations and kabuki theater and just go straight to the results. I save a lot of energy that way and besides the end is all that matters anyway.

Take the Canada comparison you made in the last post. the US has "worse PR" than Canada yet is buying 85 F-35s this year alone despite that. I call that real verifiable strength of the F-35. Its winning despite all the bad press. and Canada in the meantime dithers as it has for nearly the last 10 years,and buy even a single F-35. so the score is 0 to 85. but the PR difference makes that score 0-85. if we factor in the weight of politicians its 0-85. and finally if we weigh the combination of PR/politicians/sub committees we come out to 0-85.

the Gripen PR score vs the F-35 score comes out to

less than 6 for the Gripen last year, and 123 for the F-35.

so 5-123. I'm a little nervous. to win by only 118 is very dicey.

even you admit that the "PR" has vastly improved (its not PR its having F-35s out there doing the things for people to see-- spin free) but even then its improved. And compared to where it was the first half of the 2010s?

This is NOTHING.
Choose Crews
Offline

casador

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 8
  • Joined: 11 Mar 2016, 19:11

Unread post14 May 2021, 19:04

**reposting from another thread, as requested**

casador wrote:Breaking my serene lurkerdom to say two things:

My first point is that the political rhetoric on this forum is getting out of hand. I think a lot of us here need to calm down, take a couple deep breaths, go outside and touch grass.

It's getting bad, and frankly, given the generous expertise, experience, and insight of the contributors here, it's pretty embarrassing. I read these boards every single day, and it seems just as often, another interesting thread spirals into "off-topic", partisan political screeds about one side, or the other.

The mods do a good job of curtailing the most extreme off-topic, baiting, or simply inflammatory posts here, but I've noticed--in the past 3-6 months anyway--it seems the barometer has shifted noticeably, to such an extent where simply debunking the latest bogus news story, or (re-)contextualizing soundbites made by military/industry/political officials gets less traction than yet another dreary Two Minute Hate about Trump/Biden/Liberals/Leftists/Republicans/PC whatever.

Take that to Facebook; this isn't the place for it.

And what seems most crazy and ironical about it to me--is something mentioned before (I wish I could remember to credit), that we're in a period of relative "good" news for the F-35, that is, the vast majority of the F-35's more dishonest and shrill critics have been roundly debunked, have changed their tunes, (or in the instance of David Axe, simply fired), or have moved on to other flamebait. Such that now, Justin Trevithick (sp) and Tyler Rogoway are on the daily, bending over backwards to characterize the program as especially "controversial" or "troubled", Valerie Insinna is *gasp*, actually providing elucidating context for cherry-picked discrepancy/deficiency reports and mis-characterizations, and Dave Majumdar, well. I imagine Dave is somewhere off selling time-shares to septuagenarians or brass bands to small towns, but he's a special case.

Now, I was here for the David Axe/WarIsBoring Pure Fabrication Extravaganza; I was here for Pierre Sprey's outright lies about his own credentials, his past work, and the Can't Turn/Can't Climb/Can't Run Sensation. I remember fondly, Carlo Kopp and Bill Sweetman dynamiting their own careers and credibility over the Gripen and yes, I remember the spectacular Keypubs Meltdown after LM released its F-35 high-alpha maneuvering video, and the Even More Spectacular Keypubs Meltdown after Maj Hanche refuted years worth of their lies, fear-mongering, and propaganda.

It's all funny to think back on, but I remember the (legitimate) frustration and anxiety on these boards back then: a vital program was danger because a lot of well-connected were telling Straight-Up Lies. I get that; I saw it happen. But, this isn't 2015 anymore; all of the significant program milestones have been passed, and the preponderance of those writers have all shifted their positions, or have been thoroughly discredited. However, and I feel I should emphasize this: just because the liars have been proven to be liars, has not meant the lies will ever go away. I, myself up to a few months ago, got into slapfights with doofuses over about easily-searchable, debunked memes, and accused of being a "Lockheed shill" (I don't work for LM) or a "warmongering imperialist" etc. (I'm not in the military just yet :wink: ). It's frustrating, I get it. I also suspect that, the frustrating and hardships of lockdown are getting to people; it sucks and I don't want to minimize that. But at a certain point, you have to see the whole song-and-dance for what it is, and what it isn't, and I honestly think that perspective has been getting lost on this forum recently. It seems

It feels like I'm rambling a bit, but my second point proceeds from this. What you're reading about the F-35 in pseudo-journalistic outlets like The Drive, or Pop Mechanics, or even grandstanding from the HASC Congressman from Washington, it's Content: it's just material put out, to elicit a reaction. "Clickbait" is the term we millennials use to describe the primarily-commercial variety, but in other contexts, it's a kind of theatrical performance, which has little, if any bearing, on anything real.

Example One: in February, David Axe wrote that Gen Brown had declared the F-35 a "failure". This was of course, a lie; General Brown didn't say anything of the sort. The slightest bit of attention into the context--hell, or even the full paragraph of the text--proves that; I don't think I need to go into the particulars. Instead, it's the second-stage reaction I want to look at:

"But why would David Axe do this to us?" you may ask.

My point is, at this stage in the game, you should know. It's because his job isn't (wasn't--I keep forgetting he got fired) to inform and educate people by providing meaningful, if not occasionally ambiguous information context about highly technical and complex issues like aircraft design and procurement. Instead, his job is to Create Content; he's admitted as much on Twitter, and despite his attempts at damage-control distancing, his previous association with the National Interest Content Farm proves this. But I'm not violating my serene lurkerdom to bash David Axe; as my neighbors say, "a fruit that hangs that low is basically a potato".

But, importantly, It's also not because David Axe is an agent of the CCP, or is any kind of left-wing apparatchik working to Destroy America; he's just a(nother) hack with no scruples, who loves attention. I was a (minor) media professional in a past life; I can tell you all about how this game works, but it's more important that you know it is a Game, designed to make money by manipulating your limbic system. Refute and rebut, but please don't stoop to their level--gross politicization and conspiracy; it alienates other members of this thread, and generally degrades the discussion and analysis we all enjoy.

To reiterate: You do not need to react to every "story" that appears about the F-22 or F-35 in the media, and even less so, with wild, conspiratorial accusations. It makes us look bad. And no, I'm not trying to call anyone out, or tell anyone what they should or shouldn't post; its not my call to do that. The mods do well enough at that. Instead, let's just temper our reactions with some perspective--how far this program has come, how desperate the attacks are getting, versus the real, undeniable progress and momentum of the Actual Program in service, versus the Imaginary Program, on the Interwebs.

Example Two: As Actual Journalists have reported, and XanderCrews has mentioned, this year's budget will have 85 F-35s, in line with the previous administration, and likely to be augmented by a corresponding amount in the coming months. Every version of the F-35 has now been deployed; AF/Marine/Navy tactical and operational syllabi are being reorganized. What that means, is nothing short of an Act of God is stopping F-35 production: not the Evil, Fascist, America-Wrecking Trump Administration, or the Evil, Communist, America-Wrecking Biden Administration, not Secret CCP Plant Air Force Gen CQ Brown, not CCP Plant The Honorable HASC Chairman Adam Smith, Whiz Kid Will Roper and his Quantum Century-Series NGAD, not Popular Mechanics, not The National Interest, Zombie Lenin, or even the Vengeful Ghost of David Axe's Career--again, no one is stopping F-35 production. It is quite literally, a Done Deal.

That doesn't mean however, that we are ever going to see the end of "F-35 IN THE CROSSHAIRS?!?!?!ONE" articles—it's just too easy of a Content Creation Model for unscrupulous and lazy editors to pass up. Like Maj "Hasard" Lee said, it's only because of the increased transparency and attention to this program, and the amount of Content (read: $$$) these charades generate, that they're in the public eye, at all; these charades will continue, as long as there are eyeballs to follow them. I predict, When the 2000th F-35 rolls off its assembly line decades from now, there will be a procedurally-generated "F-35 BOONDOGGLE?!?!?!ONE" article ready for it. This is going to happen, and there's no point getting bent out of shape about it.

In the meantime, let's do something else, please.

tl;dr:
https://imgur.com/a/G7TrzZF
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7248
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post14 May 2021, 19:42

Aviation Week suspends Bill Sweetman from F-35 story

By Stephen Trimble on May 10, 2010 3:35 PM

Bill Sweetman notified me this morning that he has been temporarily ordered off the F-35 story by Aviation Week management.

Aviation Week editor Tony Velocci initially told me "no comment", but added: "It was supposed to be an internal personnel matter but I'm really sorry to hear that he's spreading it around."

Sweetman is the editor of Defense Technology International, a monthly magazine published by the Aviation Week Group.

It's not clear what immediately precipitated the decision. But Sweetman is well-known as arguably one of the most outspoken -- and, it should be said, well-spoken -- critics of the F-35 program.

Lockheed Martin denies having any role in Sweetman's removal from the F-35 beat. "I can tell you Lockheed was not behind this," a spokesman says.

Sweetman recently visited Lockheed's F-35 factory in Fort Worth, Texas, along with Velocci and Aviation Week staff writer Amy Butler. On the eve of his visit, Sweetman on 26 April posted a typically droll comment on his private Facebook page:

"Gentlemen, your target for tonight is Fort Worth. Flacks are predicted to be numerous and persistent on the run-in and over the target, and bullshit is expected to be dense throughout the mission. Synchronize watches and good luck."

Full disclosure: Sweetman is a personal friend and former co-worker at Jane's. As a military technology journalist, I have great respect for his vast and detailed knowledge of weapon systems of all kinds.

But Sweetman himself would tell you he approaches F-35 coverage unlike other journalists. I see my role as simply to report the facts offered by both critics and supporters, allowing my readers to draw their own conclusions. Sweetman approaches F-35 coverage from the standpoint of an analyst who has empirically concluded the program is a flop. That position is always going to create a tension with his traditional role as journalist.

Source:
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-d ... l#comments


Update: Lockheed Martin has released a full statement:

"Lockheed Martin has not asked Aviation Week to take disciplinary action against Bill Sweetman nor have we asked that he be removed from reporting on the F-35 program or any other Lockheed Martin program. In fact on April 27 Bill and other members of the Aviation Week staff visited Lockheed Martin facilities in Fort Worth for briefings on the F-35 program. We have a longstanding professional relationship with the entire Aviation Week editorial staff, including Bill Sweetman, and we continue to work openly with them on all programs, including F-35."

Sweetman impaled his credibility on f-35 long ago. Might have been worth it if he had taken any flesh from the program but he never did. Sweetman took his case to many online forums where I can safely say he was bested without his lofty publication perch to keep a distance from the informed masses.

https://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=14017

have we actually bothered to look at how the the PR war is going for the anti F-35 crowd? Must feel like shouting at a wall, endlessly. F-35 has managed to outlast many of its critics, which says a lot. Think about all the Griping that has been done for nothing since internet comments don't control programs


I made the case a long time ago that the internet actually benefited the F-35 by giving it a "rubber room" for people to endless shout about instead of doing things like writing their congressman, or putting together movements that could actually have an effect, or building bombs. its been a spectacular years long time wasting masturbatory affair.

And the F-35 has the advantage since its the status quo. And governments love the status quo. plus its like a fast moving frieght train. all it has to do is maintain momentum and stay on track, while its detractors face the daunting task of stopping or derailing a fast moving freight train. I go on vacation F-35 is still going, I take a year off F-35 still going. Its almost like the whole program doesn't even notice me or my opinion one way or the other, and to think I affect it all is vanity.

every year they complain, every year we build more F-35s. Sounds great. I hope they keep complaining!
Choose Crews
Offline

hkultala

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 71
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2018, 08:02

Unread post14 May 2021, 19:58

ricnunes wrote:
XanderCrews wrote:Its a crossroads. Dogfighting is the least efficient way of killing enemy airplanes. So why on Earth would I not want to use the more efficient methods of killing the enemy? F-35 is caught in its own "paradigm shift" Yes the F-35 can dogfight.


I know that, you know what and many (most?) in this forum knows that.
However the general public doesn't know that and with that many of the politicians which are elected by the general public try to capitalize the most on the general public's opinion in order to win votes and all of this can make the diference between for example cancelling a certain program or not.


I think the best way to explain the dogfighting usefullness to most "general public" people is this clip from an Indiana Jones (Raiders of the Lost Ark) movie:

Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3363
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post14 May 2021, 20:53

@Xander,

It seems that you missed the point of my posts, at least partially.
So and instead of quoting every part of your post in order to counter-argument, I'll just post some points of what I think that you didn't understand on my posts and/or we are in disagreement:

1- My point that LM's PR 'failed' or 'could have been better' (the later is probably a more accurate than the former) was during an initial stages of the F-35 development. During later stages which is where we are now it's obvious that LM improved its PR (Byllie Flynn and F-35 airshow being examples of this). I would say that LM learned the lesson (regarding PR) and of course improved on it. Again my LM PR criticism was during the early stages.
An empirical and personal example of this was when I first followed the F-35 program (after the X-35 was selected) which from most of what I read about the program lead me to believe at that time that the F-35 wasn't going to be a great aircraft. However and fortunately and since I believe I understand a little bit about military aviation together with my will to learn more lead me to dig more about the F-35 and my opinion changed completely and since then I have the opinion that the F-35 is now the best fighter aircraft and it will continue to be into the unforeseeable future. But then again, most of the general population doesn't have this let's say, 'capability' that many of us have in this forum and as such they are at the total mercy of what the media reports and all PR initiatives (including those from competing companies).

2- Of course that Canada is behind the USA since it still hasn't ordered the F-35 while large dozens of F-35s are being produced this year in the USA. But then again the F-35 is an American fighter aircraft made by an American company and thus being build in the USA which means that obviously the F-35 is far more vulnerable to the impact of negative PR and criticism in Canada then it will ever be in the USA. And personally I don't have any doubt that what PM Trudeau said what he said during his election campaign which culminated in the canceling of the F-35 sole sourcing purchase because of all the negative media reports and the PR from competing companies which he foolishly believed in (and/or tried to capitalize votes on the perceived general opinion about the F-35 which at that time was negative).

3- About the "the Gripen PR score vs the F-35 score comes out to", for the 'millionth' time:
The Gripen failed and fails because it's a CRAP, period! It doesn't live or matches its PR and requirements. And with this there's simply NO amount of PR which can ou could 'save' it. As opposed the F-35 is the best fighter aircraft out there which allows it to survive and overcome its critics/criticism.
I hope that this time I made myself clear once and for all!
Last edited by ricnunes on 15 May 2021, 12:51, edited 2 times in total.
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3363
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post14 May 2021, 20:57

hkultala wrote:I think the best way to explain the dogfighting usefullness to most "general public" people is this clip from an Indiana Jones (Raiders of the Lost Ark) movie:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQKrmDLvijo


LoL, you may be right :mrgreen:
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
PreviousNext

Return to General F-35 Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 46 guests