Comments on: The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Program – Its Ups and Downs (Update)

By: D. E.Rodriguez

D. E.Rodriguez — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 21:34:19 +0000

Eric:

Some breaking news just came in on the Australian F-35 acquisition. See the "Update"

Dorian

By: D. E.Rodriguez

D. E.Rodriguez — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 20:15:02 +0000

What you're saying has a lot of merit, FT. (trying to make China a genuine ally, and having someone realiable look into Putin's, and his cohorts'eyes), but until then, I believe that we should keep our guard, and our air superiority, up.

Dorian

By: Father_Time

Father_Time — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 18:14:18 +0000

Why are we doing business with China if they are going to be an adversary militarily? Doing business with us and the rest of the world is actually giving China the capability to defeat us in battle. About Russia, didn’t the last president say that he “knew his heart”…? If our president is not worried why should we?

Besides, we would be smart to make China our closest ally. Time to suck up I should think.

By: D. E.Rodriguez

D. E.Rodriguez — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 14:43:59 +0000

Sadly, potential adversaries such as Russia and China do and will dedicate large portions of their GDP, often at the expense of other requirements, to build the weapons they feel are necessary.

By: Don Quijote

Don Quijote — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 12:37:43 +0000

national security and defense experts look not only at the present threats and capabilities, but also at future ones

Make a list of countries that have the aeronautical industry required to build an F15 or the equivalent thereof:
France, Great Britain, Japan, Russia, Germany (maybe)
then make a list of countries that have the funds needed to build such an Aircraft on large quantities:
China (maybe)
and then make a list of countries that fit both criteria and that aren't US allies...
NONE

It's a boondoggle, nothing more than a waste of tax dollars....

By: D. E.Rodriguez

D. E.Rodriguez — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 02:36:18 +0000

DQ:

Again, without defending or supporting the two particular programs (F-22 and F-35), national security and defense experts look not only at the present threats and capabilities, but also at future ones, and probably believe that potential adversaries have and/or are developing aircraft in such numbers and with such advanced capabilitieds, that require us us to develop even better and more aircraft in order to maintain air superiority in any future combat.

Now, as FT mentioned, and I have written before, others, like Gates, believe that more and more we'll be involved in unconventional warfare, face asymetrical threats, where, for example UAVs will play an increasingly more important role.

By: Don Quijote

Don Quijote — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 02:03:02 +0000

Why do we need the F22 or the F35, don't we already have the best and largest Air Force in the world? So Who are we building these planes to go to war against?

By: Father_Time

Father_Time — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 00:00:29 +0000

Well we cannot afford it anymore. Best we can hope to excel in is UAVs. The cost of these advanced technologies are way out there. Our national debt is beyond belief.

By: Eric Palmer

Eric Palmer — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 23:48:58 +0000

Dr. Grants pass works are required reading for anyone wanting to keep up on for example, stealth technology. Her paper "The Radar Game" is 101 on the topic of low observable methods.

The program promises much. And it is that promise that has to produce and not become tired sayings of greatness.

Thanks for your efforts on writing on this topic. I hope to see more.

By: D. E.Rodriguez

D. E.Rodriguez — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 23:37:39 +0000

If you peruse through the dozen or so articles I have written at TMV on both the F-22 and F-35 programs, I hope you'll see that I have tried to stay impartial on both aircraft, and I hope to stay that way.

Although you say that there are no "ups" that are "of any real concrete worth," I am sure one can find plenty elucidated by supporters of the program---just as there are many negative ones by opponents of the program. An example of a positive review, is "F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Remains Good Value for America and Allies," by Rebecca Grant, a fierce supporter of both the F-22 and F-35. There are several others.

Especially when it comes to capabilities and versatility of the F-35, the revolutionary technologies and materials it embodies, and its sophisticated assembly and production techniques and technology, there are many "ups" to be found.

But yes, there are cost, schedule and testing problems.

And, again, your comments are well taken and appreciated.

By: Eric Palmer

Eric Palmer — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 22:45:02 +0000

I would very much like to highlight the “ups”. Unfortunately there are none of any real concrete worth. If we want to improve the air power roadmap of the U.S. and all the money that is put into it, we better all take on board the fact that the F-35 program is in trouble. There is no wondrous groupthink or happy PowerPoint presentations that will get us out of this situation. Ashton Carter will have a lot of work to do to sort this one out.

By: D. E.Rodriguez

D. E.Rodriguez — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 22:23:58 +0000

Eric, as the title says, the F-35 program has had---and is having --its ups and downs."

You have highlighted the "downs."

Thanks for commenting,

Dorian

By: Eric Palmer

Eric Palmer — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 21:17:30 +0000

The F-35 program is in trouble. The LM and gone-native-to-industry DOD F-35 project office are trying to paint a pretty picture on all the delays. For example, painting the JET report as “worst case”. Given the limited scope (timeframe) that the JET report looked at, it may very well be “best case”.
As for Australian Defence chiefs backing the F-35 program, also reported in the news that day-the sun yet again set in the west and Britney Spears lip-syncs parts of her live performance. In other words. No new news. It is the politicians that are not so sure about things and they will probably delay any final procurement decision–just like the rest of the JSF partner nations.
In U.S.fy2009 the F-35 was supposed to have over 300 flight tests. We got a few dozen. In fy2010 the schedule is supposed to have over 1200 flight tests–plus the make up work for 2009. It won't happen. The program if you look into it in detail, is based on spin and sophistry. There is just a bit over 2 percent of the flight testing done. Wouldn't you as a smart buyer, demand more knowns of what constitutes a go-to-war aircraft before we build scores of “mistake jets” produced on very little flight test feedback?