Flying Pig

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Navy1960, Dec 15, 2011.

  1. Navy1960
    Offline

    Navy1960 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,821
    Thanks Received:
    1,188
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Arizona
    Ratings:
    +1,189
    The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program -- already the most expensive defense acquisition program in U.S. history -- just got even more costly, to the tune of $771 million.

    The Pentagon informed the Senate Armed Services Committee Monday that the first 28 production models of the F-35, some of the world's most technologically advanced fighters developed by defense contracting giant Lockheed Martin, were going to cost the additional three quarters of a $1 billion, and the government will be picking up part of the tab.
    Lockheed Martin F-35 Fighters to Cost Another $771 M - ABC News

    Dec. 14 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. House of Representatives today passed a $662 billion defense bill that seeks to control rising costs of the Lockheed Martin Corp. F-35 jet, the Pentagon’s most expensive weapons program.

    The bill, endorsed by negotiators from the House and Senate on Dec. 12, also mandates that members of al-Qaeda be placed in military detention and includes a provision passed by the Senate to impose sanctions on Iran’s central bank. The House passed the defense authorization act 283-136.

    The Senate is expected to vote on the bill this week before it goes to President Barack Obama for his signature. The defense authorization act sets military policy and spending targets for fiscal year 2012, which started Oct. 1.

    The negotiators agreed to a provision that directs the Pentagon, in a forthcoming sixth F-35 production contract, to place greater risk on Lockheed Martin to absorb overruns.

    If costs exceed a negotiated target, the company would absorb the entire amount instead of splitting the increase with the U.S. government. The U.S. is negotiating the fifth contract for the F-35. At $382 billion, the F-35 is the Pentagon’s largest weapons program.
    U.S. House Passes $662 Billion Defense Bill Headed for Senate - Businessweek

    First let's get a few things out of the way here, one thing is that the F-25 program has become a deep well in which Lockheed Martin has been drinking from for a long long time. The other thing here is that while there is a need to replace the F-16, F15, and the long retired F14 and AV8, this aircraft performance wise, cost wise, and in terms of it's long term survivability is not it. If people wonder why our nation is in such a hole financially one need only look at the 110 Billion dollars in the recent budget for Afghanistan and Iraq and the years we have spent there as well as this program here as an example of how Govt. not only spends money in an unwise manner but they also are delivering a substandard product to the warfighter.



    Most theoreticians of aerial warfare believe that quantity triumphs over quality: moderately advanced jets with highly trained pilots will generally beat a smaller number of ultra-advanced jets. But the military-industrial complex looks for profits rather than battlefield advantages.
    Israeli News: F-35: Great junk is still junk


    Whats realliy interesting about this aircraft is that originally it was sold as a low cost stealth aircraft that would be a common platform across all services. With cost orverruns and a massive over reach on the part of Lockheed Martin this aircraft has become close in cost to the F22 per unit and is no where near it in terms of performance. So again, when our Govt. complains about debt and spending, keep in mind that more often than not there is a reason other than just the old folks getting Social Secuirty that causes such things.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  2. Steelplate
    Offline

    Steelplate Bluesman

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2011
    Messages:
    7,773
    Thanks Received:
    931
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Central PA
    Ratings:
    +932
    But...but...we NEED it.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. westwall
    Offline

    westwall USMB Mod Staff Member Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2010
    Messages:
    40,948
    Thanks Received:
    7,963
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    Nevada
    Ratings:
    +19,680
    An incredible boondoggle. Almost as bad as the B2 nonsense. Money wise it is far bigger but they might actually have a use if they are ever built. The B2 though is a total waste of time and money.
     
  4. Navy1960
    Offline

    Navy1960 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,821
    Thanks Received:
    1,188
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Arizona
    Ratings:
    +1,189
    The F-16IN Super Viper is a unique new fighter sharing a heritage with the world’s only fifth generation fighters – the F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter and the F-22 Raptor. Evolutionary integration of fifth generation technologies makes the F-16IN the most advanced fourth generation fighter in the world today. This ultimate fourth generation fighter is tailored exclusively to meet or exceed all of India’s Medium Multi Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) requirements.
    F-16IN Super Viper | Defence Aviation

    Same Radar, Same Helmet Cue system, low signature, with supercruise at half the cost of the the F35 and well you guessed right it's no longer in consideration by India or the USAF why you ask? because Lockheed is now offering the F35. Forgive me here, but I've heard these sort of thing before from contractors and the DOD when it came to aircraft and that resulted in the F4 with no guns for air to air combat. While it may sound like I am not a fan of the F35, my feelings are rather numb on the subject, perhaps for a USAF mission this aircraft might fit the bill, but in my humble opinion the Navy would have been off developing a thrust vectored version of the F18 with a helmet cue system and stealth coatings. It already has the AESA radar and the E/F model is faster than the F35 and if for example you added supercruise this aircraft would be far superior than anything in the skies. So when I hear about how much our debt us out of control and I see this sort of nonsense which I have seen for years go on, I tend to shake my head.
     
  5. Navy1960
    Offline

    Navy1960 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,821
    Thanks Received:
    1,188
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Arizona
    Ratings:
    +1,189
    While a beautiful aircraft in terms of its design and engineering, the sheer cost of this aircraft at 2.1 Billion dollars an aircraft make it so expensive that the very loss of one of them which happened in Guam makes them useless. Many people would ask the question why? when such a statement is made and the answer is very simple. the B2 is so expensive that replacing it is more akin to rebuilding a new destroyer for the Navy if one sinks.

    Total cost of the First Arleigh Burke Destroyer, USS Arleigh Burke DDG-51 1.1 Billion Dollars

    Total Cost of B-2 Stealth bomber 2.1 Billion Dollars
     
  6. Dot Com
    Offline

    Dot Com Nullius in verba Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Messages:
    49,233
    Thanks Received:
    7,536
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    Fairfax, NoVA
    Ratings:
    +16,216
    These projects get $ into campaign coffers of the districts where they're produced. Until Citizens United is overturned, I don't see too much happening given the size of these mega- corps at the taxpayer- financed trough.
     
  7. Navy1960
    Offline

    Navy1960 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,821
    Thanks Received:
    1,188
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Arizona
    Ratings:
    +1,189
    Don't misunderstand me I think it's very important that the military have the best systems we can produce and it should be done in a manner that benefits not only the contractor but the warfighter and the American people. These programs that tend are 21 years in R&D before they even deliver a single aircraft into operational service and have cost billions are and should be reformed. If we as a nation can produce and launch a man to the moon in less time that it has taken to deliver an operational F35 then that should give someone some pause. These programs need to be run on a fixed cost and time senstitive basis and be OPEN to competition and all over-runs paid for by the contractor. When this happens a few things will result, one is those that have no business in delivering the right tools to the warfighter will be out of the business of doing so, and the other is the American taxpayer will stop funding these wells of money.
     
  8. Foxfyre
    Offline

    Foxfyre Eternal optimist Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Messages:
    47,641
    Thanks Received:
    10,770
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Desert Southwest USA
    Ratings:
    +14,343
    It really is mnd boggling when you figure that 15 years ago a Virginia class nuclear attack sub cost about $1 billion and today is in the range of $2 billion, it does seem way beyond credibiity that they spend more than that on one war plane.
     
  9. Dot Com
    Offline

    Dot Com Nullius in verba Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Messages:
    49,233
    Thanks Received:
    7,536
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    Fairfax, NoVA
    Ratings:
    +16,216
    The per-unit cost has gotten way out of hand and they have questionable applicability in the asymetric warfare of late. The aging air frames have to be replaced, yes, but w/ something w/ a price-tag in the realm of mere mortals.
     
    Last edited: Dec 15, 2011
  10. Old Rocks
    Online

    Old Rocks Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    46,367
    Thanks Received:
    5,394
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Portland, Ore.
    Ratings:
    +10,245
    While the aircraft of today are magnitudes more complex, one still has to remember that the base plane that the P-51 was based on was 157 days from inception to the first one flying.

    The kind of nonsense that is going on with the F35 is not only counterproductive, but is a detriment to our national security.
     

Share This Page