Fail! The $400 Billion Military Jet That Can't Fly in Cloudy Weather

[CuteOldGuy]

The F-35 joint strike fighter is an unbelievable failure, and the perfect illustration of everything that's wrong with our military industrial complex.

I thought the only thing they had in Vermont was Ben and Jerry’s, maple syrup, and the Green Mountain Boys. But soon the quaint covered bridges of the state will be rattled by F-35 joint strike fighter afterburners if Senator Patrick Leahy finally gets his way. The rest of the congressional delegation is on board too.

But the weapons system is in real trouble. Why? Because it doesn’t work. It’s terribly over budget. Prospective buyers are backing out. And it’s way behind schedule.

(From Alternet.org)

In January, the Lockheed Martin production facility in Fort Worth, Texas, reported it was well along “in the final phase of building the wings” of the 100th F-35 constructed by the Bethesda, Maryland, company. Of the first 99 F-35s, none are yet operational.

The F-35 isn’t even close to fully operational – it can fly only on sunny days. It can’t fly at night. And it can’t fly in clouds or near lightning. We know this because the Pentagon tells us so, in a report written for the Secretary of Defense by the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation, J. Michael Gilmore, dated February 15, 2013.

It is worth noting that Lockheed (1/2 of Lockheed-Martin which is building the F-35) was bailed out in 1971, the first big bailout in America.

Click here for the article: http://www.alternet.org/fail-400-bil...her?page=0%2C0

[chefnerd]

Don't know what 'GENIUS" came up with the idea of doing development and production side by side but I think they need to castrate the idiot so the real world can not be infected by this person's "genius". The standard of development at ANY level is that you develop prototypes to prove concept. Obviously, that was totally disregarded here and we are and will be paying for some time. DAMN, if someone could figure a way to get federal bureaucrats and greedy contractors on the same page as what is right for the country, we might actually have a contract award system that works and produces what the military needs to protect this country.

[JD Barleycorn]

Maybe we should go back to the World War II method. Private contractors were given the freedom to creat fighters that were faster, tougher, and better than the others they competed against. The winners went to war and the losers went back to the drawing board. The US military went from the P-39 and P-40 to the P-51 and early jet fighters. We went from the fledgling B-17 to the B-29. We went from the Lee and Grant tank (woefully underarmored and armed) to the Sherman (good but not great). The US didn't tell Kaiser how to build ships, they just wanted more Liberty ships. Kaiser came up with modular construction that allowed his shipyards to build a ship every eight days!

[Guest123018-4]

They did not have "computers" back then like they have now that can model and simulate as they design. We all know that we never have a problem with computers..........

[i'va biggen]

Think the Boeing Dream liner has battery trouble also.

[timpage]

It's even more ridiculous than that. Each plane costs $150,000,000. The projected cost of purchase and maintenance/repairs on the aircraft tops a trillion dollars. Insane.

Although, it can do some very cool things:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ki86x1WKPmE

[WTF]

Maybe we could get a "Death Panel" to look at projects like this and shut them down when cost spiral out of control.

No wait, people like COG/JD are aganist that!

[Texas Contrarian]

What a pathetic situation.

Imagine what a serious man like Ike would have to say about this, were he alive today.

Yes, as timpage said, the aircraft can do some pretty cool stuff. But looking out into the future, for what possible mission?

Even if designers and engineers manage to surmount all the technological challenges, this platform is going to be mind-bogglingly expensive. But too many influential people (read: big campaign donors and Pentagon officials) have egos, as well as big dollars, invested in perpetuating the notion that the F-35 program is absolutely essential to our security.

Besides, isn't it likely that manned warplanes -- of any type -- are likely to be completely obsolete within 10-20 years, if not sooner?

[timpage]

That video shows it's vertical landing capabilities....but a Harrier can do the same thing and it costs about $22 million. Seems like a bargain.

Anyway, you're right. It's a weapons system designed for a war that isn't going to happen. Our weapons procurement program is criminal the way it's run.

Originally Posted by CaptainMidnight

What a pathetic situation.

Imagine what a serious man like Ike would have to say about this, were he alive today.

Yes, as timpage said, the aircraft can do some pretty cool stuff. But looking out into the future, for what possible mission?

Even if designers and engineers manage to surmount all the technological challenges, this platform is going to be mind-bogglingly expensive. But too many influential people (read: big campaign donors and Pentagon officials) have egos, as well as big dollars, invested in perpetuating the notion that the F-35 program is absolutely essential to our security.

Besides, isn't it likely that manned warplanes -- of any type -- are likely to be completely obsolete within 10-20 years, if not sooner?

[LexusLover]

[Guest032516]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

That's a drone isn't it?

It doesn't look like a Predator (no rear engine nacelle) and it doesn't look big enough to be a GlobalHawk.

I think I figured it out. It's a Reaper.

But what does that have to do with the F-35?

[CJ7]

watch this documentary, it should answer some of your questions ... btw, I know one of the test pilots. Building birds for the military aint easy.

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/battle-x-planes/