Wait... a plane which has just been delivered a few months back might not be fully combat ready?

(Also: durr let's bog down our new design for the air force with stupidity like vtol for the marines)

I call shenanigans. On source and reportage

But but jerbs...

A virtual flying piano, the F-35 lacks the F-16's agility in the air-to-air mode and the F-15E's range and payload in the bombing mode, and it can't even begin to compare to the A-10 at low-altitude close air support for troops engaged in combat

Is that because it wasn't designed to do any of those things?

I'll just assume all the money spent on these planes was sensibly spent and reasonably distributed, and that lobbying and aerospace industrial politics and backroom dealings with unnecessarily inflated costs are just nasty lies.

:-\

Back when Eisenhower was the President,
Golf courses was where most of his time was spent.
So I never really listened to what the President said,
Because in general I believed that the General was politically dead.
But he always seemed to know when the muscles were about to be flexed,
Because I remember him saying something, mumbling something about a Military Industrial Complex.
Americans no longer fight to keep their shores safe,
Just to keep the jobs going in the arms making workplace.
Then they pretend to be gripped by some sort of political reflex,
But all they're doing is paying dues to the Military Industrial Complex.
The Military and the Monetary,
The Military and the Monetary,

Gil Scott Heron, this is the full audio version

I wasn't aware the Pentagon was in the plane building business. I thought they were in the defense and killin business and the planes were something they bought as a tool.

so the air force can't count to potato?

The F-35 can do the jobs of several other planes but poorly and far more expensively than all those planes combined.
It's the ideal plane to defend the Canadian arctic if you are a DND procurement officer with visions of lucrative post career consulting contracts.

So far it's not quite as good as some hoped and not quite as bad as some hoped. Once it gets an A or C or XL slapped on it im sure it will be quite formidable.

What happens if another country just spends 1/20th of the F35's budget on equipping their F16 equivalents with F35 detection systems? We're totally farked, aren't we?

You want to know why the F-35 is the way it is? Go read about the Pontiac Aztecs design process, what it first looked liked, what 100 + "senior managers" input did, and the final cost/outcome. Its the exact same problem.

What is wrong with a flying piano? Sounds pretty cool to me.

Marcus Aurelius: elkev: A virtual flying piano, the F-35 lacks the F-16's agility in the air-to-air mode and the F-15E's range and payload in the bombing mode, and it can't even begin to compare to the A-10 at low-altitude close air support for troops engaged in combat

Is that because it wasn't designed to do any of those things?

The F-35 is designed to replace the F-16, F-18, and the (now defunct) Harrier jump jet. I'm assuming they're throwing the F-15 on the scrap heap as well.

Isn't that the problem? The F-35 is supposed to replace damn near every aircraft in the military.

elkev: A virtual flying piano, the F-35 lacks the F-16's agility in the air-to-air mode and the F-15E's range and payload in the bombing mode, and it can't even begin to compare to the A-10 at low-altitude close air support for troops engaged in combat

Is that because it wasn't designed to do any of those things?

It can't really do anything else well, either.

That's kinda the problem with multi-role fighters: even if trying to make it do many things at once didn't make it impossibly complex and incredibly difficult to maintain, it'd still be inferior at a given task to an aircraft 1/20th the price that specialized in it.

Whether it's true or not, there goes my Lockheed Martin stock (all 4 shares of it). Thanks, jerk writers.

I don't know much about the F35, but the Stealth Bomber was criticized as an extravagant, useless toy by many.

The A10 Warthog was first delivered in 1976. The Air Force didn't want it then, as loitering close-in air support wasn't what they did. It was relatively slow and absurdly cumbersome. Then they wanted to replace it with an F16 variant designed for the close-in air support. Didn't see combat until Gulf War 1991, when they realized it was the king of a modern battlefield.

The SR71 Blackbird would be easy to criticize too. I mean, such a piece of junk, it leaks fuel all over the runway because it can't seal its own airframe when cold. It lacks the technology of a $10 jerry can. So a person could readily conclude it's an ill-designed piece of junk that was never designed to actually be USED.

LarryDan43: So far it's not quite as good as some hoped and not quite as bad as some hoped. Once it gets an A or C or XL slapped on it im sure it will be quite formidable.

It's been in development for what, 16 years? And it can't beat an exponentially cheaper plane designed 40 years ago in a dogfight? A plane we've already sold to a quarter of the goddamned globe?

That is just super. I'm sure glad we're targeting Medicare for cuts instead of this useless piece of crap.

Who cares? The F22 and F35 are just stop gaps between the old fleet and the new unmanned fighters.

Clemkadidlefark: I call shenanigans. On source and reportage

Me, too. On the other hand, if it is all true, I blame Republicans, since this fark-up no doubt involves defense contractors and campaign contributions.

Lucky for us the military industrial complex is the real enemy to the nation and they go to war by stealing tax money so the problems with the jet will never be exploited by someone shooting at them.

But you have to admit, they both look really cool.

And you can't put a price on that, right?

Bet it was designed and engineered by committee.

I can't fathom why they're retiring the A-10 in favor of this thing.

If anything, we should be SPECIALIZING in A-10 type support vehicles instead ones designed for air-to-air engagements, which are a relic of the past.

/surprised this took so long to pop up

otto the bull: What is wrong with a flying piano? Sounds pretty cool to me.

I'm waiting for the Flying Piano II. Rumors are that's when they'll have an attached piano stool and a better resolution camera.

Nice to see another ten billion dollars shoved down the crapper.

BigBooper: Marcus Aurelius: elkev: A virtual flying piano, the F-35 lacks the F-16's agility in the air-to-air mode and the F-15E's range and payload in the bombing mode, and it can't even begin to compare to the A-10 at low-altitude close air support for troops engaged in combat

Is that because it wasn't designed to do any of those things?

The F-35 is designed to replace the F-16, F-18, and the (now defunct) Harrier jump jet. I'm assuming they're throwing the F-15 on the scrap heap as well.

Isn't that the problem? The F-35 is supposed to replace damn near every aircraft in the military.


So, the F-35 is the Red Mage of air planes?

elkev: A virtual flying piano, the F-35 lacks the F-16's agility in the air-to-air mode and the F-15E's range and payload in the bombing mode, and it can't even begin to compare to the A-10 at low-altitude close air support for troops engaged in combat

Is that because it wasn't designed to do any of those things?

So it wasn't designed to fight air to air, it isn't designed to attack ground targets, it isn't designed to support ground troops? What is left? Photo ops?

Riothamus: What happens if another country just spends 1/20th of the F35's budget on equipping their F16 equivalents with F35 detection systems? We're totally farked, aren't we?

America is already totally farked. They have to borrow from their adversaries in order to maintain the military. How's that going to work out in a global conflict?

Strolpol: I can't fathom why they're retiring the A-10 in favor of this thing.

If anything, we should be SPECIALIZING in A-10 type support vehicles instead ones designed for air-to-air engagements, which are a relic of the past.

Exactly, and the reason these planes have any fault at all is because we aren't trying to shoot anyone else's planes out of the sky.

Strolpol: I can't fathom why they're retiring the A-10 in favor of this thing.

If anything, we should be SPECIALIZING in A-10 type support vehicles instead ones designed for air-to-air engagements, which are a relic of the past.

Because the A-10 won't make Lockheed Martin a shiat ton of money?

Shenanigans. When was the last time Mother Jones wrote an impartial anything

It's design by committee, what'd you expect?

otto the bull: What is wrong with a flying piano? Sounds pretty cool to me.

It's been done, sorta: Link

azazyel: Back when Eisenhower was the President,
Golf courses was where most of his time was spent.
So I never really listened to what the President said,
Because in general I believed that the General was politically dead.
But he always seemed to know when the muscles were about to be flexed,
Because I remember him saying something, mumbling something about a Military Industrial Complex.
Americans no longer fight to keep their shores safe,
Just to keep the jobs going in the arms making workplace.
Then they pretend to be gripped by some sort of political reflex,
But all they're doing is paying dues to the Military Industrial Complex.
The Military and the Monetary,
The Military and the Monetary,

Gil Scott Heron, this is the full audio version

Thank you for linking this.